|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 18, 2017 15:50:01 GMT -5
To those who can understand this stuff. Probe=NGSS? PCR=old unreliable method invented in the 1990’s. The NGSS is more modern, faster and accurate.?
Yet, the delved into this obscure genes with unreliable results using the new NGSS and concentrated on the PCR results because it is more favorable to their hypothesis and lies. Note: *- likely DNA damage in the sequence= they are not sure! Lol! SMH man, these lying Europeans!
|
|
|
Post by melanitex on Dec 18, 2017 16:13:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kel on Dec 18, 2017 20:03:31 GMT -5
Richard III 'He had Black Skin, Hair and Light Eyes ? wow !
|
|
|
Post by kel on Dec 18, 2017 20:10:28 GMT -5
the modern population of North Africa particularly the Northern tips is heavily mixed with non Africans
´
Proof ?? picture spamming isnt sufficient ....at least not for us here.
|
|
|
Post by melanitex on Dec 19, 2017 6:28:08 GMT -5
the modern population of North Africa particularly the Northern tips is heavily mixed with non Africans ´ Proof ?? picture spamming isnt sufficient ....at least not for us here. I posted the autosomals before I posted the pictures of the women you blind homie?
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 19, 2017 8:51:32 GMT -5
Look. I am beyond selective picture wars. Googling picture and posting is beneath me. Maybe someone else can take on that task. If you do not understand genetics or you don’t want to learn you should not be in this conversation or thread. For instance, this is an African or is this an African? You see how useless picture spamming is? SMH! siiiigh! My point “ I only debate my equals all others I teach”.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 19, 2017 9:19:41 GMT -5
Just so the newbies know. The picture is NOT an image of Richard III. It is posted everywhere like museums but I only found out recently that it was “painted” ~150years AFTER his death. Now, think about that! How can an image be painted of a man 150 years after his death back in the 1200AD or whatever? It is not like they went through the family album and chose a picture to paint. All his contemporaries were also dead so they could not do a “composite sketch” like they do now. Lol! In others words this NOT an image of Richard III. It is from the IMAGINATION of an artist who never saw or knew him!!!!!!!! Another lie by Europeans. We have to start question everything thing they tell us. EVERYTHING!!!! We have to be smart, we have to be diligent! Look at what I found out about Christopher Columbus. There is no body of him. Also think about that. Did he exist? How the f…can the body of a man of that status be “lost” I always believed he existed and he discovered the New World. Now I have my doubts. As they say in Law..no body no crime?! Did Christopher Columbus exist? Was he a European “passenger” on the ships piloted and captained by Moors? Was a story spun and fabricated to the unsuspecting? We see through DNA that the early “European” inhabitants of the first colonies(Puerto Rico and Hispanola) were not Europeans but North Africans/Berbers/Canary Islanders and some West Africans who were probably Moors. They were NOT European Spaniards!!! Were the Moors “bred” out in the new colonies? Were they exterminated when the Europeans came in droves? We need the YDNA of these Puerto Ricans or the early “European” inhabitants. Man genetics is fascinating and may rewrite the historical lies we have been told. BTW – to the newbies to Melanitex question. I hate replying to idiotic quotes but I am forced to because there are new readers. We have to rethink what is “Eurasian” DNA. Why? Stone Age Africans like Malawi-Hora-81000BP carried “Eurasian” DNA. It is NOT Eurasian it is also African. It is given the label “Eurasian”. Eurasian ancestry has been in Africans long be humans left Africa(or there were Eurasian). Once you understand that then you will understand how misleading the label “Eurasian” is.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 2, 2018 8:40:11 GMT -5
I tend to stay away from certain discussion primarily because it is a waste of my time if I get involved. I avoid getting caught up in hypotheticals arguments. We will go in circles forever. Not worth it. I tend to stick to the FACTS as much as possible….as published by research scientists . And of course the study must be relevant and CURRENT. We have to understand that many of these researchers are racialist and INFER the data from the study based upon their bias and prejudice. Some do it deliberately (Paabo, Reich , Tishkoff) and others do it to make a name for themselves. Few do it reluctantly in the name of science, progress and unraveling population history(eg Henn, Malmstrom).
Most if not all of the DNA data published is consistent with Isolation by Distance(IBD) with an equiCenter in Africa. There is no origin of “Eurasian DNA” in Eurasia. It cannot be. Because “Eurasian” DNA exist throughout Africa and originated IN Africa. Some scientist also makes it clear that “Eurasian” is only a label and probably originated IN Africa. Lazaridis made it clear than “Basal Eurasian” MOST probably originated in Africa. We as laymen get caught up in the labels and assign racial meaning towards it. But the label is deliberate..with the intent to feed our racial prejudice. Now Eurasian=Caucasian. Many of these researchers know better . They know that there is no Eurasian DNA originating in Eurasia. Their job is to feed the beast we call racism.
A clear example is Mota. He was first assigned having “Eurasian” DNA then they later “corrected” that saying he did NOT have Eurasian DNA. Now we have all these pre-historic ancient Africans from the same general area as Mota ..in fact older than Mota and originating further south in sub-saharan Africa Tanzania and Malawi who not only carried Eurasian DNA but more specifically European DNA. Some as much as 60% European DNA!!!!!!!!!!! And virtually no Asian(East Asian) DNA..consistent with 2 OOA event.
SKunglund was forced to admit that Eurasian DNA “possibly” could have originated in Africa.
|
|