tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post2065592478712234781..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: Archaic admixture in modern humans? (Wall et al. 2009)Dienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-7368757265458323122014-09-08T03:44:24.856+03:002014-09-08T03:44:24.856+03:00Wow! Amazing how racist you people are. "Gree...Wow! Amazing how racist you people are. "Greeks are part negroid" "dark and unattractive" "Egyptians do not look black" "Egyptians look like Afro-Americans"...blah blah blah. As if there is something not quite 'good' or 'kosher' about being black, African or whatever so-called title you folks want to put on the richly-hued humans who happen to be ALL of our ancestors and who happen to be the originators of the human race. Much of this dna blog sounds like a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, pseudo-science, Nazi eugenic bull-crap! ALL HUMANS ORIGINATED IN AFRICA PERIOD! The first people on earth were AFRICAN, i.e. BLACK. So just get over it!WingsMassageBdwhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00395280246503244023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-79551397542443139162009-05-16T22:51:00.000+03:002009-05-16T22:51:00.000+03:00"One East Asian M has an est age of 87k, if I reme..."One East Asian M has an est age of 87k, if I remember right". <br /><br />I don't think that the most ancient reckoning for Y-haps goes back that far. Suggests the women in India were having children with someone else at that date. Possibly 'modern humans' but not with haplogroups belonging to C, D, E or F.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-65984910132029433222009-05-16T20:57:00.000+03:002009-05-16T20:57:00.000+03:00Well what could have caused the split between nort...Well what could have caused the split between north europeans and south europeans? Its very obvious when you see the differences between north europeans and south europeans.The Vikinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17702095811775741038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-75192268802841425822009-05-16T18:41:00.000+03:002009-05-16T18:41:00.000+03:00" Indeed, this very paper finds evidence of archai..." Indeed, this very paper finds evidence of archaic admixture in Africa itself".<br /><br />Didn't Hammer find evidence for that on the X chromosome? Something about one of the pygmy groups having an archaic X chromosome. Wouldn't surprise me if some sub species got isolated in West Africa and then got absorbed when the modern population expanded over their territory.<br /><br />Terry, the mtDNA age for India aren't that far off fitting a 100k exit for the M there. One East Asian M has an est age of 87k, if I remember right.mathildahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06682429587184048584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-28614340662979554912009-05-15T07:45:00.000+03:002009-05-15T07:45:00.000+03:00"suggesting that admixture between diverged homini..."suggesting that admixture between diverged hominin groups may be a general feature of recent human evolution". <br /><br />Apart from creationists, who believe in the total separateness of humans from all other species, I find it amazing that so many are so vehemently opposed to even considering the possibility. Sure the evidence in favour of admixture is circumstantial, just some hybrid-looking individuals and the odd gene that seems too early to have come 'out of Africa'. And mtDNA and Y-chromosomes argues against admixture, but we know that these haplogroups do not tell the full story. On the other hand many working in the field of evolutionary biology are quite prepared to accept the possibiliy for admixture, because that's how evolution works for many species. But a surprising number of others are extremely reluctant to entertain the thought, even for as long as a minute. I'd be very surprised if some concrete evidence for admixture does not emerge in the near future. <br /><br />"40k out of Africa... someone tell people there were modern humans in Oz over 55k ago. An absolute minimum OOA date is 70k. And aren't there signs of habitation under the Toba ash layer in East Asia? So 90k min". <br /><br />And modern humans appear in the Levant about 100k, but the current zeitgeist states that this is too old to fit the Y-chromosome evidence. However it is congruent with the mtDNA evidence, as long as we're prepared to accept the possibility that the mtDNA introgressed into a modern human/Neanderthal hybrid population somewhere round the Zagros Mountains, or further north on the Iranian Plateau, and later spread from there. There is then no need to assume the presence there of modern human Y-chromosomes at a date when the evidence suggests they were still confined to Africa, or hadn't even yet appeared.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-28847541814977475512009-05-12T20:45:00.000+03:002009-05-12T20:45:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-68972431201336312252009-05-12T20:23:00.000+03:002009-05-12T20:23:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05835658821471365567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-58967295001504917352009-05-12T20:21:00.000+03:002009-05-12T20:21:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05835658821471365567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-66289226087937473012009-05-12T20:20:00.000+03:002009-05-12T20:20:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05835658821471365567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-8051841592855214342009-05-12T19:24:00.000+03:002009-05-12T19:24:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-52981692403121780672009-05-12T18:55:00.000+03:002009-05-12T18:55:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09452772942599904709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-53707463595532772562009-05-11T20:39:00.000+03:002009-05-11T20:39:00.000+03:00E1b1b may be ultimately black African in origin, b...E1b1b may be ultimately black African in origin, but the long isolation of its Caucasoid subclades from the other black-originated haplogroups makes them very different from any black-originated haplogroup. <br /><br />BTW, R most probably originated in Central Asia, not India.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-1486051151745496512009-05-11T19:23:00.000+03:002009-05-11T19:23:00.000+03:00Onur: all those clades make up a single haplogroup...Onur: all those clades make up a single haplogroup, E1b1b-M215; its "brother" is E1b1a-M180 is the most commom male haplogroup in Tropical Africa, together with other lineages of that same E super-haplogroup (E1a, E2).<br /><br />E is African and, if you push me on where: Black African by origin, and if you push me in where in Black Africa, I'd say, roughly, Sudan-Ethiopia, the area that also produced Eurasians and that can to a large extent be considered the ancestral homeland of Humankind (maybe to the exception of Khoisans??). <br /><br />You can say almost the same of E1b1b, as diversity is concentrated around the Nile. It is maybe less clearly "Black African" but it is not clearly "white" either. I normally think in colorless terms, as there are no true barriers but rather flows. But if you have a problem with some nordicist bonehead, you can always remind them that R is "Indian" and IJ "Jewish" - that will piss him off a lot. Alternatively, I guess you can go eugenic and make a small favor to humankind's mental and genetic health by supressing nazi idiocy... but I digress. <br /><br />Now that we have clarified that haplogroups have no color, maybe we can get on topic again...Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-65589547444832546652009-05-11T10:54:00.000+03:002009-05-11T10:54:00.000+03:00Greeks do not look Swedes. You can see they are he...<I>Greeks do not look Swedes. You can see they are heavily admixed</I>.<br /><br />LOL. So Swedes are now the archetypical aboriginal European, the perfected Caucasoid archetype... or whatever. <br /><br />Nordics are a rather recent evolution from more basic Caucasoid types much better represented by Greeks than by Swedes surely. They are extremophyles, so to say.<br /><br /><I>BTW, E1b1 is surely Caucasoid. Its presence in the Horn of Africa can only demonstrate the Caucasoid admixture in those populations, which is known for a long time</I>.<br /><br />Haploid lineages are not races. You can perfectly be black and have "white" both Y-DNA and mtDNA. And vice versa. It is not very likely but can happen. <br /><br />Now, E is a lineage quite clearly of African (probably NE African) origin. By NE Africa here I mean the aera between Egypt and Somalia, which has some marked continuity, specially in regard to Y-DNA. <br /><br />The area of origin of Y-DNA E and also E1b1 and "Caucasoid" E1b1b is precisely the "border" (never well defined) between "Caucasoid" North Africans and "Negroid" Tropical Africans. It is certainly the area of most intense contact between these two "races", because of the Nile and (secondarily) the Red Sea waterways. Arguing wether these lineges are black or white is like arguing about the sex of angels, so to say. It has no valid answer, as it will necesarily depend on all the other ancestors. <br /><br />Now, if you go by the KKK one-drop rule, then we are all Blacks: everybody without exception has some ancestors in Tropical Africa.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-67637478123449713462009-05-11T05:04:00.000+03:002009-05-11T05:04:00.000+03:00BTW, E1b1 is surely Caucasoid. Its presence in the...BTW, E1b1 is surely Caucasoid. Its presence in the Horn of Africa can only demonstrate the Caucasoid admixture in those populations, which is known for a long time.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-10617010751474895822009-05-11T04:51:00.000+03:002009-05-11T04:51:00.000+03:00Magnessan,
Primary distinguishing factor between ...Magnessan,<br /><br />Primary distinguishing factor between European ethnicities is by far the different distributions of <B>Caucasoid</B> haplogroups among various populations. A secondary distinguishing factor is the notable presence of some Y-DNA Mongoloid haplogroups among some North Eastern European populations and almost total lack elsewhere. Negroid haplogroups are very marginal in Europe, and they are not a distinguishing factor as they may seldom pop up - if ever - anywhere in Europe.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-68785515961725270382009-05-11T03:15:00.000+03:002009-05-11T03:15:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917111422346278809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-34559852126924068602009-05-11T03:14:00.000+03:002009-05-11T03:14:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917111422346278809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-3058062557447563602009-05-10T22:58:00.000+03:002009-05-10T22:58:00.000+03:00Greeks do not look Swedes. You can see they are he...<I>Greeks do not look Swedes. You can see they are heavily admixed. </I>Find another venue for your trolling.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-89025790366441772322009-05-10T22:35:00.000+03:002009-05-10T22:35:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453888132317203861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-66471218457465099092009-05-10T22:34:00.000+03:002009-05-10T22:34:00.000+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453888132317203861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-77281004094496700422009-05-10T20:15:00.000+03:002009-05-10T20:15:00.000+03:00maybe, the frizzy hair of Sarkozy is of African as...<I>maybe, the frizzy hair of Sarkozy is of African ascent</I>It might have come via Sarkozy's maternal grandfather, who was a Sephardic Jew.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-87544247781873032472009-05-10T18:24:00.000+03:002009-05-10T18:24:00.000+03:00Both Upper Egyptians and Lower Sudanese are Negroe...<I>Both Upper Egyptians and Lower Sudanese are Negroes. This means they are subsaharans. In fact, many of them look exactly like Afro Americans</I>.<br /><br />No, by no means. And your tone sounds nazi/KKK, what says nothing good about you and will surely make me drop this conversation at the slightest further racist word.<br /><br />Egyptians cannot be considered black people. Just make a tour through the country: they may have some admixture (logically). Lower Sudanese (Nubians) are more the mixed kind, though maybe they were darker in the past. <br /><br />Whatever the case they do not look like Afroamericans because Afroamericans originated at the West half of the most diverse continent on Earth. The Tropical conncetion among Afroasiatics (and E1b lineages in general) would be with NE Africa, going as as far south as Ethiopia maybe.<br /><br />Egypt is not south of the Sahara in any case.<br /><br /><I>Therefore by your own words you provide proof that Greeks and other mediterraneans are partial negroes</I>. <br /><br />And all other Europeans if you go by the "one drop rule". E1b is found in all Europe. We are all negroes if you go so extremist, even the Finns. E1b is not that rare in places like Britain or Denmark and is quite common in Central Europe anyhow (about 10% in Hungary or Slovakia). So yeah, maybe, the frizzy hair of Sarkozy is of African ascent, but his Dracula look is 100% European. ;)Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-18020362190720511642009-05-09T20:13:00.000+03:002009-05-09T20:13:00.000+03:00No you cannot just tell by looking at them and the...No you cannot just tell by looking at them and there's no clear evidence of any "subsaharan" component among Europeans (the occasional erratic even as north as Norway, that's all). Greeks and other Europeans do have an African component clear in Y-DNA genetics (E1b1 - nothing in the rest of ancestry) but this component is North African, not Tropical African, by origin. E1b1 probably diverged, long ago, at Upper Egypt (or maybe lower Sudan), which is in the northern half of the Sahara and by no means "subsaharan" (damn, I really hate that word: south is not "below" = "sub", that's just a cartographic convention).Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-74459812015593024522009-05-09T19:21:00.000+03:002009-05-09T19:21:00.000+03:00So that is where the ancient and current Greeks go...So that is where the ancient and current Greeks got their admixture from. I knew they had subsaharan African admixture.<br /><br />You can just tell by looking at them.magnessanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06317013453785077429noreply@blogger.com