|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Mar 2, 2014 22:30:51 GMT -5
Ha! Ha!
Still don't get it. This is ESR, not ES so I will try to be nice.
Paleolithic Europeans were chosen because Barbujani wanted to get a snap shot back in time.
He wanted to test the hypothesis that Paleolithic Europeans were fxxxking Neandertal. After all they lived roughly around the same time. If any group of humans will evidence Neandertal mtDNA it would be the people doing the fxxxking. Right?! Get it? You know the result..drift? Ha!
Quote: If some modern populations of Southern Asia and Papua New Guinea are descended from people who left Africa without crossing Palestine, we see no way that their ancestors could have met, and hybridized with, Neanderthals.
His conclusion: Therefore, their genetic affinities with Neanderthals must have a different origin.
BTW: You do know the Neandertal Admixture hypothesis is based upon AMH leaving Africa through the Levant and NOT the Horn? And you know the basis of the Hypothesis?
Answer: Because Neandertal never reached Arabia. Therefore that is the only way their rediculous admixture hypothesis can have credibility.
You know..square peg in a round hole. LOL!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Mar 2, 2014 22:31:38 GMT -5
look man...I am wasting my time.
You people and your rediculous mass hysteria sound bites. "I have Neandertal admixture" Get a life!
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Mar 12, 2014 23:20:56 GMT -5
Barbujani (2011) didn't have access to the latest studies on Neanderthal nuclear DNA. There are no studies post-2011 that deny interbreeding occurred.
Wrong. Actually 2 come to mind.
Gokcumen et al 2012. Balancing Selection on a Regulatory Region...;
"These results mimic signatures of recent Neandertal admixture contributing to this locus. However, an in-depth assessment of the variation in this region across multiple populations reveals that African NE1 haplotypes, albeit rare, harbor more sequence variation than NE1 haplotypes found in Europeans, indicating an ancient African origin of this haplogroup and refuting recent Neandertal admixture."
-------------------------------------------
Eriksson and Manica (2012) Effect of ancient population structure...
"To investigate this problem, we take Neanderthals as a case study, and build a spatially explicit model of the shared history of anatomically modern humans and this hominin. We show that the excess polymorphism shared between Eurasians and Neanderthals is compatible with scenarios in which no hybridization occurred, and is strongly linked to the strength of population structure in ancient populations. "
Both dispute and/or refute your claim that there are no post-2011 studies denying Neanderthal interbreeding. Game over- indeed...
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Mar 13, 2014 17:48:16 GMT -5
Fist thump!
I dont have time to answer unsubstantiated or unresearched claims!!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Mar 13, 2014 17:48:58 GMT -5
That is the problem with some of you. You regurgitate and repeat things that makes absolutely no sense. Why? Because you won't think for yourselves. Typical pop culture idiots.
A good eg is the Neanderthal admixture hypothesis. Some of you are advocate of the Neanderthal admixture theory but don’t understand how it works. What are the assumptions made for the theory to have legs to stand on.
1. AMH need to leave Africa ONLY through the Levant and NOT the common held view of the southern coastal route through the horn of Africa into Arabia.
2. “ALL” AMH females that left Africa had to be ufgk AND impregnated by a Neanderthal before continuing on their way into Asia and Europe.
3. There was only ONE wave of AMH leaving Africa. Of a small number. There was NO later migration.
If you believe all of the above then you can believe in the Neanderthal admixture theory.
You cannot believe that AMH left Africa in several waves, you cannot believe in the southern coastal emigration route.
You cannot believe in “back migration. Why? Because West African and other SSA populations with haplogroups like M1, E, U, R-V88 etc which is omnipresent through Africa would also be admixed with Neanderthal.
In other words you cannot believe in BOTH hypothesis because one contradicts the other.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 9, 2014 20:49:08 GMT -5
DNA analysis of an early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, China - Paabo, Fu et al
Abstract
Hominins with morphology similar to present-day humans appear in the fossil record across Eurasia between 40,000 and 50,000 y ago. The genetic relationships between these early modern humans and present-day human populations have not been established. We have extracted DNA from a 40,000-y-old anatomically modern human from Tianyuan Cave outside Beijing, China. Using a highly scalable hybridization enrichment strategy, we determined the DNA sequences of the mitochondrial genome, the entire nonrepetitive portion of chromosome 21 (∼30 Mbp), and over 3,000 polymorphic sites across the nuclear genome of this individual. The nuclear DNA sequences determined from this early modern human reveal that the Tianyuan individual derived from a population that was ancestral to many present-day Asians and Native Americans but postdated the divergence of Asians from Europeans. They also show that this individual carried proportions of DNA variants derived from archaic humans similar to present-day people in mainland Asia.
====
Ok Paabo. a 40,000ya AMh and modern humans carry the same quantity of "Neanderthal" DNA. Why do you think that is?
Answer: because there is no admixture.!!!!! As Barbujani pointed out. If there was admixture the quantity of "Neaderthal" DNA is a 40.000yo human would be higher and not the same as moderns. Let's see how long he is going to keep his up.
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Apr 9, 2014 22:54:39 GMT -5
DNA analysis of an early modern human from Tianyuan Cave, China - Paabo, Fu et al Abstract Hominins with morphology similar to present-day humans appear in the fossil record across Eurasia between 40,000 and 50,000 y ago. The genetic relationships between these early modern humans and present-day human populations have not been established. We have extracted DNA from a 40,000-y-old anatomically modern human from Tianyuan Cave outside Beijing, China. Using a highly scalable hybridization enrichment strategy, we determined the DNA sequences of the mitochondrial genome, the entire nonrepetitive portion of chromosome 21 (∼30 Mbp), and over 3,000 polymorphic sites across the nuclear genome of this individual. The nuclear DNA sequences determined from this early modern human reveal that the Tianyuan individual derived from a population that was ancestral to many present-day Asians and Native Americans but postdated the divergence of Asians from Europeans. They also show that this individual carried proportions of DNA variants derived from archaic humans similar to present-day people in mainland Asia. ==== Ok Paabo. a 40,000ya AMh and modern humans carry the same quantity of "Neanderthal" DNA. Why do you think that is? Answer: because there is no admixture.!!!!! As Barbujani pointed out. If there was admixture the quantity of "Neaderthal" DNA is a 40.000yo human would be higher and not the same as moderns. Let's see how long he is going to keep his up. Would love to see you and him in a live debate..keep bringing it Xyyman.
|
|
|
Post by azrur on Apr 9, 2014 23:29:02 GMT -5
what about denisovan
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 10, 2014 20:12:45 GMT -5
Yeah what about Denisovan...All questions are answered. QUOTE by DNATribes March 2014. This unexpected result might reflect ancestry from Non-African populations that were separate from the Basal Eurasians in Lazaridis’ tree model (see Background), such as Eastern Non-Africans (ENA). However, another possibility is that these shared African and Asian-Pacific genetic components might reflect contacts with Denisovan related archaic hominens in Africa.8 However, additional research would be needed to explore this further. Read more: egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/1595/dnatribes-right-african-origins-europeans#ixzz2yXHIBExO
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 10, 2014 20:19:50 GMT -5
It all BS....by Paabo. AMH left Africa with so called "Denisovan" and "Neanderthal" genes. Called sub-struucture. This is a war between geneticists. On one side are those who don't care much about the truth, their role is to de-enfranchise Africans and maintain the status quo. Then there are those interested in disclosing the truth of our humanity.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 10, 2014 20:28:41 GMT -5
Denisovan...any questions
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 10, 2014 20:32:55 GMT -5
When archaic DNA is found IN Africa it is played out as "back-migration". Typical delusional mind-game. Yet North Africans have more archaic DNA than Europeans. Asians also have more archaic DNA. The games these people play
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 11, 2014 10:21:27 GMT -5
I need to follow up this....But the head line is now Neanderthal genes found in the dreaded Yoruba(YRI).
==== Quote: Or so it seemed at the time. Now it appears that the Back to Africa migration 3000 years ago carried a weak Neanderthal genetic signal deep into the homeland. Indeed one of Reich's analyses, published last month, found Neanderthal traces in Yoruba DNA (Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature12886).
====
Paabo is probably having a hissy sissy fit. LOL!.
ALL genes is African!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 11, 2014 10:32:25 GMT -5
Looks like someone is NOT playing ball....lol!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 11, 2014 10:53:41 GMT -5
From the Media report.
Dr. Winters may find this intesrting…..with the Khoisan being in Southern Europe. Again we are back to the two European points closest to Africa. LOL! Yet they still call it Neanderthal?Eurasian DNA. They can’t help themselves. Delusion.
Quote: According to conventional thinking, the Khoisan tribes of southern Africa, have lived in near-isolation from the rest of humanity for thousands of years. In fact, the study shows that some of their DNA matches most closely people from modern-day southern Europe, including Spain and Italy. Because Eurasian people also carry traces of Neanderthal DNA, the finding also shows – for the first time – that genetic material from our extinct cousin may be WIDESPREAD in African populations
|
|