|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 1, 2016 5:00:11 GMT -5
My job here is to educate the ignorant. You know what the actual data shows? Here! The light skin gene was brought from OUTSIDE Europe. I hope the ignorant understands this. KOS14 was a Dravidian. I will post the data when I get around to it. It was posted here already and on ES many times. I posted it. Bottom line ancient Europeans were Dravidian type blacks. I will educate the white racist and afro-centrics. That is my job here.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 1, 2016 5:07:48 GMT -5
What does this chart show. The Neolithics are Africanize people. European civilization COINCIDES with the arrival of these Africanized people. Bottomline.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 1, 2016 5:13:44 GMT -5
KOS14!!!!!! He is NOT related to modern Europeans
|
|
|
Post by thamm1 on Apr 1, 2016 5:16:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Apr 1, 2016 12:01:38 GMT -5
I dunno, ssmbody got tired of his BS I guess? Or maybe didn't wanna waste resource on 'oh no not again' topics, etc. Anyway, I thought the title was most variation not origin of variation. I'm not prepared to buck you on that. I'll take your word. Only on the 'net have I seen blue eyed African descent blacks. Read 19th century explorer accounts of such n individuals scattered from the Tropic of Capricorn to the equator. Existent though rare as hen's teeth. You don't get it Sage. it is not about "be like". It about "where" it came from. These frequency is highest IN Europeans, yes. Does it exist in Africa...YES!! and not due to admixture. This is what the genetics data show. get it? That is my point. I am not sure why the member was deleted....so soon. He just cited outdated stuff.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 1, 2016 13:52:16 GMT -5
I am not disputing that highest frequency of light hair and light eyes is found in Northern Europe. I am disputing that the mutation occurred IN Europe and Europeans are the source of these genes. The very nature of "isolation by distance' predicts this phenotypic pattern. Shriver et al concluded, without the advantage of aDNA that light skin probably originated in Africa. Source cited on this forum. We now know that through aDNA Europeans were black skinned about 5000ya. These are facts and not afro-Centric dogma. Relethord confirms that modern Africans(SSA) carry the most variation in skin color. In my OP in "Bantu's with Blue Eyes" Wasserman et al observed that indigenous Africans carry light color eyes no admixture needed. Yes, it is as rear as "hen with teeth". But Blue eyes is also indigenous to Africa. As a matter of fact this is something I would like to look more into. The Wasserman study was the first and only study that talks about what first European observed as the travelled through the virgin continent. If you can point to me some books you speak about here. I would like to see through their eyes what they saw. In that thread created by Swenet/Doug. He sourced some books about the variation of skin tones of the "negro" tribes by European "explorers". I find those books fascinating since they are most likely untouched and unbiased. I dunno, ssmbody got tired of his BS I guess? Or maybe didn't wanna waste resource on 'oh no not again' topics, etc. Anyway, I thought the title was most variation not origin of variation. I'm not prepared to buck you on that. I'll take your word. Only on the 'net have I seen blue eyed African descent blacks. Read 19th century explorer accounts of such n individuals scattered from the Tropic of Capricorn to the equator. Existent though rare as hen's teeth. You don't get it Sage. it is not about "be like". It about "where" it came from. These frequency is highest IN Europeans, yes. Does it exist in Africa...YES!! and not due to admixture. This is what the genetics data show. get it? That is my point. I am not sure why the member was deleted....so soon. He just cited outdated stuff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 16:41:55 GMT -5
xyyman, you're making stuff up out of desperation. From the study you got that PCA (450,206 SNPs): "K14 was also found to fall outside the range of contemporary European variation, but was distinct from MA1, clustering most closely with Central Asian populations. (Fig. S21-S23)" Dravidians are not Central Asia. In the second PCA (S23) you can see the population labels a lot clearer. K14 plots closest to Central Asians as the authors of the study themselves have pointed out: Note also European Mesolithic/Neolithic specimens cluster or show closest genetic affinity to modern Europeans. Now what? The data debunks your lunacy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 16:55:06 GMT -5
Its no big deal k14 is not closest to modern euros but central Asians. Russia after all isn't really in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 1, 2016 20:08:52 GMT -5
First off, what is your argument or point on KOS14?
My point is KOS14 cluster FIRST with Black Asians like Sindhi, Makrani and Dravidians and NOT modern Europeans. So claiming some how KOS14 has close affinity to modern Europeans is delusional and a lie
I never claimed KOS14 has closer affinity to modern Africans. YOU are the one claiming somehow KOS14 is a modern European. And he is NOT!!!
So we are making the same claim, KOS14 is NOT related to modern Europeans. IIRC KOS14 has greater affinity to La Brana and other ancient Euroepans meaning that this population occupied and dominated far regions into Iberia.
If I am a betting man, KOS14 has greater affinity to Khoi and Pygmy than YRI. But these people are not included as "Africans' in these studies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 21:19:45 GMT -5
K14 doesn't cluster with those South Asian populations you mentioned, but Central Asians. Even the authors of the study clarify this: "clustering most closely with Central Asian populations (Fig. S21-S23)". Secondly, the same PCA (Fig. S23) shows Mesolithic/Neolithic European specimens cluster with modern Europeans. Your attempt to insert 'black Asians' into European history just completely fails. It is not supported by the data. Furthermore, even if you were correct, those South Asian populations you mentioned like the Sindhi are not even 'black'. What's black about the Sindhi?
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 2, 2016 7:04:19 GMT -5
I am not into picture spamming. " I show you mine you show me yours" lol! Selective Google pics is for the intellectually challenged. This is who KOS14 cluster with Makrani and Sindhi etc.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 2, 2016 7:12:25 GMT -5
See how stupid it is to google and post selective pictures. If you want to discuss research papers I am game. But don't waste my time with picture spamming. KOS14 is a black Asian that has no relation to modern Europeans. IIRC You do know his morphology was described as "NEGROID"? Do the research clown. Otherwise talk to the hand
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 2, 2016 7:42:53 GMT -5
KOS14???
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Apr 2, 2016 7:43:40 GMT -5
BTW Blue eyes is found all over the globe in All populations. Europeans are NOT unique like that. It is probably not of European origin same as light skin. You delusional racist do not know what the @@@@ you are talking about. Come back at me when you know what you are talking about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2016 10:34:52 GMT -5
lol @ black supremacist buffoon.
You're totally clueless. Can you even read basic population genetics?
The PCA you post is closest to Central Asian populations. Look at the population centroids, not (outlier) individuals.
"K14 was also found to fall outside the range of contemporary European variation, but was distinct from MA1, clustering most closely with Central Asian populations. (Fig. S21-S23)" (Seguin-Orlando et al. 2014)
|
|