|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 1, 2017 11:24:27 GMT -5
It certainly appears that it will. At least the results from aDNA is correcting history and mis-conceptions. And many people don’t want to see the status quo change. Ancient Genetics takes us back in time….. How Genetics Is Rewriting History www.wnyc.org/story/brief-history-everyone-who-ever-lived-stories-our-genes/If you think of DNA simply as a data storage device, the data it stores is biological information. In us, it’s three billion letters of individual code, or 20,000 genes. Paleogenetics is the study of our DNA from things that have been dead for a long time—paleo simply means old. It’s new because we’ve only invented the technology to do it in the last 10 years and, in a serious way, in the last five years. In many ways, genetics makes a mockery of race. The characteristics of normal human variation we use to determine broad social categories of race—such as black, Asian, or white—are mostly things like skin color, morphological features, or hair texture, and those are all biologically encoded. But when we look at the full genomes from people all over the world, those differences represent a tiny fraction of the differences between people. There is, for instance, more genetic diversity within Africa than in the rest of the world put together. If you take someone from Ethiopia and someone from the Sudan, they are more likely to be more genetically different from each other than either one of those people is to anyone else on the planet! news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/genetics-history-race-neanderthal-rutherford/HOW ANCIENT DNA IS REWRITING HUMAN HISTORY We thought we knew how we'd been shaped by evolution. We were wrong. There is no question that most human evolutionary history took place in Africa. But by one million years ago—long before modern humans evolved—archaic human species were already living throughout Asia and Europe. By 30,000 years ago, the archaic humans had vanished, and modern humans had taken their place. How did that happen? From the results of early DNA studies in the late 1980s and early '90s, scientists argued that anatomically modern humans evolved in Africa, and then expanded into Asia, Oceania, and Europe, beginning about 60,000 years ago. The idea was that modern humans colonized the rest of the world in a succession of small founding groups—each one a tiny sampling of the total modern human gene pool. These small, isolated groups settled new territory and replaced the archaic humans that lived there. As a result, humans in different parts of the world today have their own distinctive DNA signature, consisting of the genetic quirks of their ancestors who first settled the area, as well as the genetic adaptations to the local environment that evolved later. psmag.com/environment/ancient-dna-rewriting-human-history-90578---- My Comment: There is an underlying theme here. Something happened in Africa 5000-10000ya(at the source of the Nile-Great Lakes). That event transformed the world. That event is tied to the domestication of animals and farming. It may have started even sooner because we see in ancient Scandinavian dogs and their genetic tries to West African dogs. We see that also within Iberian ancient cattles being African and not to European wild cattle. So whatever happened Africans took their methodology and technology and animals with them. They did NOT use the local animals. As can be seen in the piece above. 5000years ago in China the African donkeys arrived and was used preferentially over the local asses. They survive to this days. Now who brought these African animals? I still don’t think it is Africans “migrating” in the traditional sense. I still believe the only reasonable explanation is a land connection across the Indian Ocean. BUT the Facts are what they are. African cattles, dogs, pigs, chicken etc leaving Africa 1000’s of years ago hitting Europe and Asia. These are the FACTS!!! We can hypothesize till the cows come home …on why and how. “recent” African human genes and animals are found to China. Don’t forget Cambodians carry an unexplained high frequency of recent African autosomal markers. Pinhansi et al. In TreeMix there is an event/line from the root of the African branch straight to Cambodia. Remember Populations in the African Indian Ocean like Seychelles, Madagascar etc carry both Asian and African markers which is NOT found in Saudi Arabia the supposed path(southern route) OOA. It is as if these Africans “teleported” or sailed 4000miles across the Indian Ocean to setup shop in the Far East. I don’t think so. I May be wrong. Sundaland? Also keep in mind Malawi_Hora-8100BP(Greta Lakes) carried ONLY African and Sardinian ancestry, no East Asian(Japanese).
|
|
|
Post by clydewin98 on Dec 3, 2017 21:55:50 GMT -5
Genetics can not tell us anything about history. Every question you are asking about the presence of Africans and their flora and fauna in Eurasia is explained by the Kushite expansion. This has been known for 200 years by Europeans, but,because the Kushites were Black the status quo has withheld this knowledge from the general public. Geneticists have learned this truth and you know they are lying about history too.
Genetics , at first , offered promise in making inroads in refining our understanding of phylogeography. But once Geneticist discovered V88 in Chad the jig was up. They finally had to admit that there was no such thing as a set of unique Eurasian genes. They had successfully brainwashed people to believe mtDNA M1 was non-African, but the find of R1b in Africa proved that the European male line was definitely African. This ruined their plan to make the Bell Beaker, Kurgan folk etc. Indo-Europeans, when their true origins as proven by linguistics, anthropology and archaeology was in Africa.
They are still moving forward with this plan and they may succeed if we keep placing any credibility on the false science of genetics.
We have to stop pretending that genetics research is improving our knowledge about history when it is not.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 4, 2017 8:33:31 GMT -5
Quote "We have to stop pretending that genetics research is improving our knowledge about history when it is not".
I disagree... The advantage genetics have over "written" history is ..it takes us back in time. Look at genetics as the "time machine". One cannot falsify genes. One cannot falsify science.
That is the beauty of science. What these Euros do is either "spin" the interpretation or play the SELECTIVE sampling game. Or do a mix-marsh of archeology and genetics and "label" games. eg Eurasian=Caucasian! Same game different name. The theme is consistent. Even amongst the "liberals" like Skonglund and Babujani and Kivilsild. Reich, Paabo and Haak are off the reservation. Eg Henn chose Qatar and labelled them Near East or Middle East with the purpose of giving you a visualization of modern "Arabs". What the readers don't know is Qatar is about 1/3 indigenous African type people. 1/3 South Asians and 1/3 North African. Of course there is a connection between Qatar and North Africa. Then Henn further said to confirm her theory deep analysis is needed. But we know deeper analysis shows Qatar and South Arabia are DEEPLY diverged from North Africa. Eg E1b1b-V123 etc. With the source population for BOTH being along the Great Lakes.
So yes, genetics has answered many questions on our history and pre-history. Eg we now know that The Amarnas are indeed from the South(inner Africa). Even the Abusir mummies are definitely related to South Sudanese and Kenyans etc. and not "back-migrants" as believed by pop culture. That is why the population that carried the ancestral forms of the haplogroup found in the Abusir were not included in the Abusir study. That is why the STR autosomal profile was not released like with the Amarnas. That is why only 3 of 96? Male lineage was released. That is the game being played.
Yes, genetics should and will re-write history. How long will they keep up the lies? DNATribes exposed the lie...someone like maybe a DNAConsultant may be next. Or a kid with his computer in his mother basement. Lol.
These Researchers are not very smart. Dishonest people cannot be......
The question is will it make a difference ? will anyone care? We have seen how little impact the truth may have on perception. Like The Tudors not being rightfully heirs to the throne...no one cares.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 4, 2017 11:42:10 GMT -5
We also now know that Late Stone Age(LSA) Malawi African Hora 8100BP Carried "Eurasian" ancestry. In fact Early Neolithic 3100BC African carried as much as 40% "Eurasian" ancestry forcing to the authors to admit the indigenous population in the Levant may be of recent African origin because of the timeline.
Understand the game! And trickery. Use logic.
They first admitted that Mota carried "Eurasian" ancestry then later came out and declared they made a mistake. lol!
Now Skunglund is finding as much as 40% "Eurasian" in Great Lake Africans(Mota's homeland) dating before Mota. So who is lying?
The first rule of thumb..."EUROPEANS ARE COMPULSIVE LIARS". Understand that and you will be awright. The Native Americans had it correct.. "forked tongue".
|
|
|
Post by kel on Dec 15, 2017 18:10:05 GMT -5
´´The question is will it make a difference ? will anyone care? We have seen how little impact the truth may have on perception. Like The Tudors not being rightfully heirs to the throne...no one cares. ´´ it does matter and people do care...........hence the extensive effort to create and maintain the lies in the first place. power, wealth, and legitimacy are at stake. Do you think Prince Harry marrying the mulatto girl is just coincidence
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 16, 2017 11:55:46 GMT -5
^ Yeah! I am trying to get my head around what is up with that. What is the motive. The mother was playing around with an "Arab" and rumor is she was disliked because of it.
Now her son is going to "marry" a half black person. Will it go through. He seems to be extremely popular over his elder brother.
|
|
|
Post by kel on Dec 17, 2017 12:49:50 GMT -5
´´What is the motive.´´
The motive is clear as day. As more and more information and truth comes out people are forced to react to that truth. The facts are that whites are highly inbred ( especially the royal families) and genetically weaker. So both Harry and William have married non royals and brunettes. They are making a bid at healthier genetics.
Furthermore, White lies are being exposed and a power shift ... however subtle is occurring. The smart move is to get out ahead of changes as opposed to pretending that they are not coming.
We know that the current royal family is not legit and that somewhere along the line there appears to have been population replacement and usurping by white barbarian invaders.......(wasnt Richard the III showing genetics from Yemen/middle east ??)
In the same way many that formerly black Euro elites may have been forced to become white in order to survive the onslaught of white population (Mike theory), the current white ones may be forced to become black ( or more black) in order to maintain legitimacy in a Europe and Britain that is becomming increasingly black and brown. William and Harrry's marriage is a signal to the British and Euro elites ..... it's time to become black/brown.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 17, 2017 20:38:12 GMT -5
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/02/king-richard-iii-dna-cousins-queen-ancestryThe bones of the king under the car park have delivered further shocks, 527 years after his death and more than two years after his remains were discovered in Leicester: Richard III was a blue-eyed blond, and the present Queen may not be descended from John of Gaunt and Edward III, the lineage on which the Tudor claim to the throne originated
|
|
|
Post by melanitex on Dec 18, 2017 4:19:28 GMT -5
Quote " We have to stop pretending that genetics research is improving our knowledge about history when it is not". I disagree... The advantage genetics have over "written" history is ..it takes us back in time. Look at genetics as the "time machine". One cannot falsify genes. One cannot falsify science. That is the beauty of science. What these Euros do is either "spin" the interpretation or play the SELECTIVE sampling game. Or do a mix-marsh of archeology and genetics and "label" games. eg Eurasian=Caucasian! Same game different name. I 100% agree Genetics is helping us in a BIG WAY take Morocco for example. If it wasn't for genetic and DNA testing I would have believed as many others (especially white supremacists) they were simply just "Arabs" since many of them look very phenotypically close to Levantine Arabs. However as we all know from the historical records Moorish men took White females as slaves from the Iberia which gave rise to large portions of the mixed Morrocan population we see today. DNA evidence has now shown this be true. Without it we would still have euronuts going around saying whites like the Kabyle and Arabs are indigenous to North Africa.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 18, 2017 13:42:45 GMT -5
Quote " We have to stop pretending that genetics research is improving our knowledge about history when it is not". I disagree... The advantage genetics have over "written" history is ..it takes us back in time. Look at genetics as the "time machine". One cannot falsify genes. One cannot falsify science. That is the beauty of science. What these Euros do is either "spin" the interpretation or play the SELECTIVE sampling game. Or do a mix-marsh of archeology and genetics and "label" games. eg Eurasian=Caucasian! Same game different name. I 100% agree Genetics is helping us in a BIG WAY take Morocco for example. If it wasn't for genetic and DNA testing I would have believed as many others (especially white supremacists) they were simply just "Arabs" since many of them look very phenotypically close to Levantine Arabs. However as we all know from the historical records Moorish men took White females as slaves from the Iberia which gave rise to large portions of the mixed Morrocan population we see today. DNA evidence has now shown this be true. Without it we would still have euronuts going around saying whites like the Kabyle and Arabs are indigenous to North Africa. You are still not getting it. DON’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ!!!!! Ancient genetics takes us back in time to correct the LIES told to the world by modern Europeans. That includes what is “written’ in history books. First there were no white European women as slaves!!! Stop the “jungle fever” thing. Modern European mtDNA is a SUBSET of North Africans. mtDNA-H is OLDER in Africa than Europe and the Middle East. Stop perpetuating the lies. Here is an example on Richard III. Look at his DNA below. The “media” says he had blond hair and blue eyes but his PUBLISHED DNA tells us a different story. The media maintain the lies. Trump has a point. “Fake News” 1. They left out the most important marker….SLC24A5 @ rs654!!! Why? Because that is the final gene needed to contribute to light skin. He is not white because he does not have that mutated gene!!! Instead they focus on other mutations that contribute to pigmentation. The other key gene is SLC45A2. But look at the data table. SLC45A2 rs1982 is inconclusive!!! PCR is very unreliable. The more accurate method is screwed up because it gave TWO alleles(*), meaning they are not sure. That is what the *means using probes. That is why many of the genes are inconclusive using PCR. It is not very accurate!! But they use that ONE flawed result of a comparatively insignificant gene to make up the lie. Understand how these Europeans work! And how they spin their lies. 2. You see they threw that out their not realizing there are black people out there who can read and challenge their lies. Some of use do understand this stuff. 3. Look the genotype of Richard III and the cumulative effect of ALL the genes. He did not have white skin. He had black skin and maybe light eyes…..just like La Brana? He carried mostly genes for black skin and the one questionable one is inconclusive. 4. Was this a palace coup? 5. Keep in mind his uniparental markers were unlike modern Europeans on BOTH the male and female lines. A black foreigner to the throne of England. Black rulers being exterminated 6. So are blacks returning to the throne? Her son is continuing where his mother left off?
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 18, 2017 13:43:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 18, 2017 13:49:41 GMT -5
This was done several years ago when I had more time and painsaking went through each SNP. Nothing has changed except I know understand the "*" and a little more about the specific genes
|
|
|
Post by melanitex on Dec 18, 2017 14:11:46 GMT -5
I 100% agree Genetics is helping us in a BIG WAY take Morocco for example. If it wasn't for genetic and DNA testing I would have believed as many others (especially white supremacists) they were simply just "Arabs" since many of them look very phenotypically close to Levantine Arabs. However as we all know from the historical records Moorish men took White females as slaves from the Iberia which gave rise to large portions of the mixed Morrocan population we see today. DNA evidence has now shown this be true. Without it we would still have euronuts going around saying whites like the Kabyle and Arabs are indigenous to North Africa. You are still not getting it. DON’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ!!!!! Ancient genetics takes us back in time to correct the LIES told to the world by modern Europeans. That includes what is “written’ in history books. First there were no white European women as slaves!!! Stop the “jungle fever” thing. Modern European mtDNA is a SUBSET of North Africans. mtDNA-H is OLDER in Africa than Europe and the Middle East. Stop perpetuating the lies. Hmm....I honestly didn't know about the Haplogroup H in Africa being older then Europe and the Middle East I'll have to look into that. I always believed Haplogroup U6 and L3 were the indigenous maternal haplogroups within North West Africa. Anyway regardless there is still significant modern European admixture within the modern population of Morocco, Tunisia etc. Can we at least agree to that and many of them still carry paternal M81 but maternal H so it seems to make sense to me....
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 18, 2017 14:28:24 GMT -5
PCR - --
ne major limitation of PCR is that prior information about the target sequence is necessary in order to generate the primers that will allow its selective amplification.[44] This means that, typically, PCR users must know the precise sequence(s) upstream of the target region on each of the two single-stranded templates in order to ensure that the DNA polymerase properly binds to the primer-template hybrids and subsequently generates the entire target region during DNA synthesis.
Like all enzymes, DNA polymerases are also prone to error, which in turn causes mutations in the PCR fragments that are generated.[45]
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 18, 2017 14:36:17 GMT -5
“Hmm....I honestly didn't know about the Haplogroup H in Africa being older then Europe and the Middle East I'll have to look into that. I always believed Haplogroup U6 and L3 were the indigenous maternal haplogroups within North West Africa. Anyway regardless there is still significant modern European admixture within the modern population of Morocco, Tunisia etc. Can we at least agree to that and many of them still carry paternal M81 but maternal H so it seems to make sense to me....”
No and no!
1. I cannot agree to lies 2. And it makes absolutely no sense.
What is the “European” DNA in North Africa? Read Kefi et al before you get nack to me. She is “North African”. I assume you are North African. Take it from her…and then we can talk. Read her word then we can have an intelligent discussion. Everything is on here at ESR. Your one-stop-shop!!
Not only is mtDNA H OLDER in North Africa but some populations in the Sahara has a higher frequency that Europe. Keep in mind mtDNA R0 and N iareNOT found in North Africa but in the Sudan Great Lakes area. Do you understand the significance?
The genetic evidence show that the male population changes over much more frequently and continuously compared to the males. Female dominated society?
|
|