|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 9:17:58 GMT -5
What’s next?!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 9:18:47 GMT -5
Is it environmental adaptation or genetic drift. Or a combination of both. What is throwing me off (2nd guessing drift vs environmental adaptation)is the high AKA-Mbuti segments in the distant Melanesian population.
DNATribes July 2014 Article is really baffling. I sense utter desperations by the EuroCentric. It is really amazing how they have ignored the obvious.
I am not sure what DNATribes is thinking. Really!. It looks like they used the Lazaridis data (or their data which agrees with Lazaridis then gave the 5 clusters a different name ie LABEL). Eg Basal Eurasian is now the “Basque cluster” Anyhow but dataset corraborate, Lazaridis and DNATribes. DNATribes data also shows that ALL 5 clusters are found in the tropical rainforest of Africa. Now they are arguing or seem confused suggesting that Basque, Native American, South Chinese and Dravidians “back-migrated’ into West Africans.
Seriously, that is their explanation for the 5 clusters found in tropical African populations.
The interpretation of the data is entering the realm of the twilight zone. It is bordering on comical. This is really hilarious. All OOA population including Native Americans “back-migrating” into the tropical forest of Africa. Really?! This is a clear sign of DESPERATION. Come on DNATribes.!!!
This reads like a very bad fiction novel. ===== Background: Deep Ancestry Expressed in Five Isolated Clusters
Looking at this chart key things to look are:
1. ALL Africans contain ALL segments 2. Berbers contain a high percentage of Mbuti. 3. The South Chinese component is higher in Tropical Africa compared to North Africa. This is synominous to drift ot the East. Why the Basque/Basal Eurasian compnets drifts in the North West.
Africa is the source for ALL. Native Americans, Dravidians, Basque, and South Chinese did not back-migrate into Africa. This is simple drift and/or environmenta adaptation.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 9:19:06 GMT -5
Pictures to come…..
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 10:27:55 GMT -5
In this edition. DNATribes seems to have “righted the ship”. In the previous articles their charts showed Basal Eurasian and other “OOA” components leaving Africa. In this edition they are reversing their point of view. Speculating that Chinese, Basque, Native American and Dravidians entered Africa. LOL!
They are seeing a high level of Dravidian/South East Asian componenets in West Africans. Now they are waffling and trying to come up with theories on how it got there. What did they come up with…Neanderthal/Denisovan entry INTO Africa. LOL! Really?
Guess which European population has the hightest Mbuti segments. If you guesss the Peninsular Europeans your are correct. Spanish, Sicilians/Italians and Greeks!!
====
Here is more….Quote
Conversely, Basque (core Mediterranean) percentages in Africa are highest in the Berber-North African (57.1%) and Red Sea Yemen-Egypt (56.5%) clusters, in which Basque is the highest core component expressed. Basque percentages are also relatively high in the Horn of Africa (31.9%) cluster, perhaps also due to early contacts between African and Eurasian populations via the Red Sea and Arabian Peninsula (perhaps including Basal Eurasian expansions predicted by recent models of human population history).2 In contrast, Basque percentages are lowest (but not absent) in the Aka-Mbuti-Hadza (2.2%) and Khoisan (3.2%) clusters
Traces of another unexpected Eurasian component, South Chinese (core Asian-Pacific), are also expressed at low levels in some parts of Africa. South Chinese percentages are highest in Omotic-Ari Ethiopia (3.5%) and West African (2.9%) clusters and lowest in Red Sea Yemen-Egypt (0.6%) and Aka-Mbuti-Hadza (0.7%) populations. This pattern contrasts with the distribution of Basque and Dravidian core components in Africa, which might reflect different or more ancient expansions (possibly including Eastern Non-Africans or early archaic hominin expansions pre-dating the Paleolithic Out of Africa migrations).4
Within Europe, Aka-Mbuti (core Sub-Saharan African) percentages are highest in the Sephardic Sicilian (6.1)%, Ashkenazi Jewish (5.0%), Spanish-Portuguese (4.2%), and Aegean-Balkan-Italian (3.1%) clusters{/b], all associated with Mediterranean related cultures, including both Afro-Asiatic speaking (Hebraic and Phoenician) and Indo-European speaking societies (in particular the expansionary Greco-Romans) of the ancient Mediterranean.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 12:34:45 GMT -5
Table 8 shows West Africans are 20% “admixed” with “OOA” genetic component. Really?! Said another way, 20% of Bantu West African genes came from back-migrants from Dravidians, Europeans, South Chinese and Native Americanss. Africa is a cosmopolitan melting pot!!!!! Really!? What is perplexing is if they believe the BS they write. Their proposal defy logic That is what is really “baking my noodles”. Are they really that delusional? This is a losing battle. What the DNATribes chart and Lazaridis chart has shown is that Racialism has ended but their write-upcontinue to perpetuate the Racism in the mind of the people in charge(Euros) irregarless of the facts right in front their eyes.
Any one can see, without any sophisticated computer program, the process.
1. Orange/brown(Basque/Basal Eurasian) gradually increase from Central Africa to North Africa then Europe. 2. Green(Dravidian) increase from central Africa through East Africa into South Asia. 3. Yellow(South Chinese) increases from Central Africa across Asia and reachees highest frequency in South East Asia. There is a drastic drop of this component in Europe. 4. Red has higest frequency in Central Africa and decrease outwards into Europe and Asia. 5. Blue(Native American) starts in Central Africa and increases Eastwards with low frequency in Europe(North). It gradually increases Eastwards into East Asia and reaches highest frquency in MesoAmerica. Even the Melanesians have such a high frequency of the “blue”/Native American component.
All the above is consistent with genetic drift. A fool can understand that. What is perplexing is the high frequency of red in Melanesians. Some of this components may be restricted by the environment. This is borne out in the other populations close to the Melenesians which also have a high frequency of “red”.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 14:06:31 GMT -5
The pattern mimics the spread of mtDNA macro groups M and N. M migrating to the East while N and the subclades migrating to the North. With minute cross-over suggesting a central source for both.. The source being somewhere in Africa. ALL Macro-groups originating in Africa. The SNP data shows it the MtDNA data corroborates it.. This is not rocket science. No sophicated high tech computer software is needed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2014 18:57:48 GMT -5
Is it environmental adaptation or genetic drift. Or a combination of both. What is throwing me off (2nd guessing drift vs environmental adaptation)is the high AKA-Mbuti segments in the distant Melanesian population. DNATribes July 2014 Article is really baffling. I sense utter desperations by the EuroCentric. It is really amazing how they have ignored the obvious. I am not sure what DNATribes is thinking. Really!. It looks like they used the Lazaridis data (or their data which agrees with Lazaridis then gave the 5 clusters a different name ie LABEL). Eg Basal Eurasian is now the “Basque cluster” Anyhow but dataset corraborate, Lazaridis and DNATribes. DNATribes data also shows that ALL 5 clusters are found in the tropical rainforest of Africa. Now they are arguing or seem confused suggesting that Basque, Native American, South Chinese and Dravidians “back-migrated’ into West Africans. Seriously, that is their explanation for the 5 clusters found in tropical African populations. The interpretation of the data is entering the realm of the twilight zone. It is bordering on comical. This is really hilarious. All OOA population including Native Americans “back-migrating” into the tropical forest of Africa. Really?! This is a clear sign of DESPERATION. Come on DNATribes.!!! This reads like a very bad fiction novel. ===== Background: Deep Ancestry Expressed in Five Isolated Clusters Looking at this chart key things to look are: 1. ALL Africans contain ALL segments 2. Berbers contain a high percentage of Mbuti. 3. The South Chinese component is higher in Tropical Africa compared to North Africa. This is synominous to drift ot the East. Why the Basque/Basal Eurasian compnets drifts in the North West. Africa is the source for ALL. Native Americans, Dravidians, Basque, and South Chinese did not back-migrate into Africa. This is simple drift and/or environmenta adaptation. The 5 "core" clusters/segments are not absent from any population. All populations are mixed (but to various degrees). Europeans, East Asians and Mesoamericans contain all segments as well, so some one could equally argue Europe, East Asia or the Americas is the source for all genetic variation. That is the stupidity of your argument.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 22:34:48 GMT -5
The pictures... Africans carry ALL clusters.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 22:36:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 22:37:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jun 30, 2014 22:39:04 GMT -5
Time you came around. So you agree with me and the title of the thread...there is no race Is it environmental adaptation or genetic drift. Or a combination of both. The 5 "core" clusters/segments are not absent from any population. All populations are mixed......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2014 23:41:55 GMT -5
check the data to the pictures. There is no "core" cluster/segment absent from any population. When it doesn't show up on a pie chart, it doesn't mean it is absent, only too small to show (e.g. 0.3%).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 0:49:36 GMT -5
Time you came around. So you agree with me and the title of the thread...there is no race The 5 "core" clusters/segments are not absent from any population. All populations are mixed..... As I said, each population has different mixture. What population geneticists study is the different frequencies of these ancestral-informative markers (AIM's) in populations, which have been called ''races'', "groups" or "clusters" for convenience: At the end of the day there are still different populations with seperate frequencies of AIM's. This is no different how someone looks at a skeleton by using a different combination of features and decides their ancestry.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 1, 2014 4:44:43 GMT -5
Table 8 shows West Africans are 20% “admixed” with “OOA” genetic component. Really?! Said another way, 20% of Bantu West African genes came from back-migrants from Dravidians, Europeans, South Chinese and Native Americanss. Africa is a cosmopolitan melting pot!!!!! Really!? What is perplexing is if they believe the BS they write. Their proposal defy logic That is what is really “baking my noodles”. Are they really that delusional? This is a losing battle. What the DNATribes chart and Lazaridis chart has shown is that Racialism has ended but their write-upcontinue to perpetuate the Racism in the mind of the people in charge(Euros) irregarless of the facts right in front their eyes.
Any one can see, without any sophisticated computer program, the process.
1. Orange/brown(Basque/Basal Eurasian) gradually increase from Central Africa to North Africa then Europe. 2. Green(Dravidian) increase from central Africa through East Africa into South Asia. 3. Yellow(South Chinese) increases from Central Africa across Asia and reachees highest frequency in South East Asia. There is a drastic drop of this component in Europe. 4. Red has higest frequency in Central Africa and decrease outwards into Europe and Asia. 5. Blue(Native American) starts in Central Africa and increases Eastwards with low frequency in Europe(North). It gradually increases Eastwards into East Asia and reaches highest frquency in MesoAmerica. Even the Melanesians have such a high frequency of the “blue”/Native American component.
]b\All the above is consistent with genetic drift. A fool can understand that. [/b]What is perplexing is the high frequency of red in Melanesians. Some of this components may be restricted by the environment. This is borne out in the other populations close to the Melenesians which also have a high frequency of “red”.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 1, 2014 7:37:51 GMT -5
I know some of this is difficult to follow. But stick with it. It is not as simplistic as you think. High frequency does NOT equate to “origin”. Basques did not back-migate to Central Africa. South Chinese did NOT back-mugarte to Central Africa, Native American did NOT back-migarte to Africa. Sorry.
Same applies to SLC24A5. Euroepans have a higher frequency , yes. But weren’t you the guy who argued for SLC45A2 instead. Now you are on the SLC24A5 bandwagon after I pointed it out to you that SLC24A5 is a better indicator of light skin. See “white West African thread” Anyways. You still did not fully undertand how it works. Frequency does not tell the full story. Analysis of the “promoter region” gives a strong indication of “origin”. Your simplistic mind would not grasp that. That is why Shriver suggested OOA left Africa with “light” skin. That is why L-Fox et al looked at the region for La Brana man, and that is why all aDNA disclosed thus far show Europeans were black until very recently. The gene entered Europe only about 4000Bc from Neolithic farmers(eg Stuttgart woman) who has genetic links with…….Africans.
….Hope you understand.
|
|