|
|
Post by Faelcind on Mar 11, 2005 17:50:23 GMT -5
At last you start to see reason. Could the sudanese influence in the south make them less like AE's sure but you could just as easily say that the Arabic and other west asian and southern european influences in the north bias that sample too personally i think the evidence indicates as the first article stated that their has more been more gene flow north south over the last 2000 years and so upper egyptians are better repesentation of AE's then northern egyptians. As for mixed call it what you will its all relative, but its not just Y chromsomes and not having being part of that 13.9 percent doesn't mean you don't have some level of admixture. I would guess that on average SSA admixture is 20 to 30 percent in the far south 5 to 10 in far north. Though that very crude way to look at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Mar 11, 2005 17:52:17 GMT -5
At last you start to see reason. Could the sudanese influence in the south make them less like AE's sure but you could just as easily say that the Arabic and other west asian and southern european influences in the north bias that sample too personally i think the evidence indicates as the first article stated that their has more been more gene flow north south over the last 2000 years and so upper egyptians are better repesentation of AE's then northern egyptians. As for mixed call it what you will its all relative, but its not just Y chromsomes and not having being part of that 13.9 percent doesn't mean you don't have some level of admixture. I would guess that on average SSA admixture is 20 to 30 percent in the far south 5 to 10 in far north. Though that very crude way to look at it. You could be right for the far south. THere is no way Negroid admixture is even remotely that high in the coastal north. |
|
|
|
Post by Faelcind on Mar 11, 2005 18:04:04 GMT -5
I don't know with any certainty it could be lower in the far north but I would be suprised at all if it were that high, and have not seen any evidence to deny that level which would be logical to assume based on simple gene flow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Mar 11, 2005 20:15:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Faelcind on Mar 11, 2005 21:16:52 GMT -5
He starts by quoting Coon, and you want us to take him seriously? Racialreality is probably the most biased mediscist blogger I have seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Mar 13, 2005 16:04:42 GMT -5
Not at all and dont bi-pass truth.He quotes Coon to disprove the idiots who twist his work.Sides you can skip that and go straight to the Genetic tests.
You are just dumbfounded by the reality of the situation.
RacialReality is a moderator of this board anyway,so you can take up your issues with him at anytime.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodona Underground on Apr 2, 2005 17:59:40 GMT -5
Bravo. Egyptians are 13.9% SSA instead of 8%! My God, that's almost 6 entire percentage points. I'm glad that you guys invested so much time looking up sources and posting them in acrimonious posts: It was all worth it. 13.9% SSA is extremely high and is very close to the Portuguese national level and to Heather Locklear. In fact I think we can now say that, racially, the ancient Egyptians are much like white Americans. That is, the civilization of ancient Egypt was neither an African nor an Asian nor a Western civilization but indeed a proto-American one.
|
|
