|
Post by Abubakari on Jan 2, 2005 15:31:41 GMT -5
Eh... East Africans are not Negroid. You are. Deal with it. if they aren't a subtype of Negroid then what are they? You that they are NOT but you haven't said what they are. You are a big dummy. moron, I never said they were, I said that from the descriptions given of the Mesolithic crania they were not pure Caucasoids but a heterogenous group. liar, E3b in East Africa is of East African origin stop telling lies moron We obtained an estimate of 25.6 thousand years (ky) (95% CI 24.3–27.4 ky) for the TMRCA of the 509 haplogroup E3b chromosomes, which is close to the ky estimate for the age of the M35 mutation 306 reported by Bosch et al. (2001) using a different method. Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b—that is, it had (1) the highest number of different E3b clades (table 1), (2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity, and, finally, (3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup. Our data show that haplogroup E3b appears as a collection of subclades with very different evolutionary histories. Haplogroup E-M78 was observed over a wide area, including eastern (21.5%) and northern (18.5%) Africa, the Near East (5.8%), and Europe (7.2%), where it represents by far the most common E3b subhaplogroup. The high frequency of this clade (table 1) and its high microsatellite diversity suggest that it originated in eastern Africa, 23.2 ky ago (95% CI 21.1–25.4 ky). www.familytreedna.com/pdf/hape3b.pdf#search='E3b%20East%20Africa'
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Jan 2, 2005 19:21:55 GMT -5
Do you ever read the stuff that you post? The article about E3b you posted says the same thing I do.
Any other off-topic post made in this thread will be deleted.
|
|
|
Post by Svarog on Jan 8, 2005 15:16:18 GMT -5
You have a 100% probability of being Caucasoid and a 0% probability of being Negroid. Well, that's what I expected in the first place  Not many Negroids in Krayina  .
|
|
|
Post by tatc on Jan 12, 2005 0:29:41 GMT -5
I´m white! Thank god, that took a load of my mind  Actually I already knew that but what the heck!
|
|
|
Post by Brazuca on Jan 20, 2005 8:55:22 GMT -5
I'm black and in my opinion physical anthropology is by and large a dying science. Most of its living practicioners are quite old, raised in a time when race was thought to be a provable biological variable. Those who are not old are almost all forensicists, working with a priori definition of race. After all, what race is depends on cultural and philosophical considerations, like zodiac signs. The fallacy of race (when defined as sub-species) lies in the existance of natural and objective human types.
A quote from a physical Anthropologist:
The meaning of race is contextual. It's not something objective (not in the way you define it), like say, the periodic table or the planetary system.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Mar 17, 2005 1:50:40 GMT -5
Has anyone else gotten a 0% for both readings: Caucasoid and Negroid? --I did! My wife measured me with a tape-measure [used for infants in hospitals]. Perhaps we did the measurements wrong. In any case, for the "strictly-Caucasian" calculator, I correctly came out "Mediterranean". On the "black-or-white calculator," by contrast, I came out as 0% Caucasoid, 0% negroid. So . . . er . .. uh . . . am I Chinese? Austroloid? Eskimo? It's clear we're doing the measurements wrong somewhere [since my ancestry is almost wholly Iberian].
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Apr 1, 2005 21:21:35 GMT -5
In any case, for the "strictly-Caucasian" calculator, I correctly came out "Mediterranean". On the "black-or-white calculator," by contrast, I came out as 0% Caucasoid, 0% negroid. That is technically impossible, unless there is a bug in the code. You can e-mail me your measurements if you're interested in what might be going wrong.
|
|
|
Post by MyName on May 28, 2005 12:09:47 GMT -5
I find this very cool.
|
|
|
Post by yigal on Aug 2, 2005 9:37:01 GMT -5
What can i use to measure and how do i measure
|
|
|
Post by pacificrim on Dec 8, 2005 20:48:51 GMT -5
You have a 0% probability of being Caucasoid and a 100% probability of being Negroid.
I'm an east asian! I always thought mongoloids were closer to caucasoids!
|
|