tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post6510213089854042918..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: R-V88 and migration of Chadic speakers across the SaharaDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-39742803938571172912011-08-02T20:52:59.093+03:002011-08-02T20:52:59.093+03:00Mathilda: glad to know you are still alive and kic...Mathilda: glad to know you are still alive and kicking. :)<br /><br />However I can hardly agree with your hypothesis for Afroasiatic expansion. I am quite convinced that Afroasiatic has an origin in the Nile Basin, that its expansion is related to that of E1b1b1a1-M78 (and J1 in at least certain areas). <br /><br />You have a complex theory that claims an origin in Anatolia, related to Pre-Pottery Neolithic B but that does not match with the genetic track, nor the linguistic diversity clues. <br /><br />The origin is in the Nile and, for Semitic (proto-Semitic if you wish) in the Circum-Arabic Pastoralist complex, which is related to PPNB but not the same (has origins in Harifian-PPNA). <br /><br />"Chadic shows its male ancestry directly traces back to neolithic Asian pastoralists"...<br /><br />You cannot affirm that. R1b1a in Africa surely has roots in Sudan (not yet demonstrated but likely) or at most Upper Egypt. It is indeed ultimately related to R1b1a in Italy, etc. but that is deep Upper Paleolithic stuff, not the Chadic founder effect. <br /><br />"Plenty of linguists support an Asian neolithic origin for PAA".<br /><br />Only because of racist prejudice, which is sadly too common. There's absolutely nothing to support such claim other than racist stubbornness: neither linguistic, nor genetic, nor archaeological.<br /><br />And you know that. <br /><br />"An African origin for PAA would require a LUDICROUSLY old time frame"...<br /><br />Which is consistent with the ages estimated for AA of at last 10 Ka (maybe more). It is the oldest dated linguistic family I am aware of - the differences between AA subfamilies are so brutal that some people even question the whole assumption of a single AA family. AA is borderline the age for recognition of linguistic affinity, which is probably slightly above 10 Ka (Starostin dixit). <br /><br />"We can be pretty sure PIE and PS were neighbours".<br /><br />We can be pretty sure that they were not. They have absorbed some common wanderworts from the Neolithic cradle languages (What did PPNB people spoke? Hurro-Urartean?, Hattic?, Tyrsenian? IDK but not Semitic and not IE).Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-9680418792710637402011-08-02T20:11:54.929+03:002011-08-02T20:11:54.929+03:00Ehret's assessment of Nilotic henotheistic arc...Ehret's assessment of Nilotic henotheistic archetype is correct also.<br /><br />http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2011/07/nilotic-kushitic-celestial-archetypes.htmlAlice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-51864598268664095452011-08-02T16:51:34.516+03:002011-08-02T16:51:34.516+03:00Maju, one expansive dialect can totally wipe out a...Maju, one expansive dialect can totally wipe out all the accumulated diversity of any language family, and Arabic is the poster boy for that. One agressive culture wiped out Afro Asiatic dialiects from Syria to the Sahara, and we have a written records of it doing so. The only reason there's more diversity in Africa is that Sub Sharan African AA speakers didn't get overwhelmed by Muslim invaders. If they had, there'd be no diversity there either. And Omotic is NOT widely regarded as an ancient AA language. A mix of NS and later AA nouns mixed in, or an offshoot of East African AA. Definijtely NOT a pre Agricultural AA langauge to root PAA in Africa.<br /><br />Chadic shows its male ancestry directly traces back to neolithic Asian pastoralists; you can even trace its arrival down the Nile and across Wadi Howar with the ceramics and domesticated animal bones tying Chadic neatly to the arrival of the R1b and Asian culture.<br /><br />Plenty of linguists support an Asian neolithic origin for PAA. Don't make out I'm some kind of lone 'racist' voice claiming this. PAA recons with neolithic Asian animals and crops. PS has loan words into PIE which places PS in Eurasia about 9/6 k bp. PAA also matches the neolithic expansion into Asia. All points make numerous times by multiple qualified linguists and archaeologists.<br /><br /><br />"There's no way that Semitic genesis, much less all the Afroasiatic one, can be placed in Anatolia as you claim."<br /><br />An African origin for PAA would require a LUDICROUSLY old time frame for PAA (older than is possible). And there's a lack of loans from PAA into PNS, which was probably the language of the Holocene Sahara before Afro Asiatic arrived in the Neolithic.<br />I put proto Semitic as a Syrian area language. I just said it needed to be NEAR the neolithic precursor to PIE in Anatolia in order to loan words to it. <br /><br />We can be pretty sure PIE and PS were neighbours. This really puts the onus on anyone claiming an African origin for PAA to explain just what expansion came out of Africa 10k ago carrying it, when all the expansions in the Holocene to neolithic go into Africa from Asia.<br /><br />Also, alter Ehret's dates to match his later work and his max age for PAA works out to be about 10k too. He recently slashed the age for PS to about 6k, which as much as admitted the vast time depth he was claiming before was just wrong. His dates were about 35/40% over estimated before (he's removed the old pdfs with the super old dates now).mathildahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06682429587184048584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-8294778742040331652010-05-07T14:01:38.549+03:002010-05-07T14:01:38.549+03:00Interesting!
Mathilda and I had a conversation ab...Interesting!<br /><br />Mathilda and I had a conversation about this also. I concede that the African connection is tenuous. That theory was not well considered on my part and rather peripheral to my point.<br /><br />Looking at number systems to make links between peoples is helpful, but has limits since all of these peoples were watchers of the heavens with its seven visible planets, Sun, Moon, etc. I think an argument can be made for some universal patterns because of this.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-88841970509656380152010-05-06T20:38:09.016+03:002010-05-06T20:38:09.016+03:00Oh, and another clue would be that the Olmec numbe...Oh, and another clue would be that the Olmec number system was base 60, like the Babylonians/Sumerianspconroyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10312469574812832771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-37258581313850365952010-05-06T20:26:21.637+03:002010-05-06T20:26:21.637+03:00Alice,
In term of your Olmecs = Sub-Saharan Afric...Alice,<br /><br />In term of your Olmecs = Sub-Saharan African theory (SSA)<br /><br />Let me add a few comments. The successor civilization/culture to the Olmecs were the Maya, and I've been in the Maya lowlands and seen the Olmec and Maya statues and anthropomorphic art, and I saw nothing that looked clearly SSA. I even saw first hand some of the ones I had read about in books as looking SSA, and they didn't. They did have fuller lips than Europeans, but then so do most NA's. Most lips are depicted downturned, which is not a SSA feature at all, but found in the Americas, and East and South East Asia.<br /><br />I also saw the Olmec heads with their distinctive helmets - that some have compared to Carthaginians. They wore them to protect their heads when playing their ballgame - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_ballgame<br /><br />Now having said all that the question of whether Olmec/Maya have any external input, apart from NA, still remains. But here's the thing, when I compare myself (Irish) on DeCodeMe's global similarity map, I am of course closer to other Europeans first, then Middle East/West Asia, then Yakuts, and Northern Asian groups, then MAYA, then most other Asian groups, then Native Americans, Papuans, SSA's.<br /><br />So this is interesting, as it suggests a European/West Asian input to the Maya!pconroyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10312469574812832771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-59777148489898764352010-05-06T19:47:42.763+03:002010-05-06T19:47:42.763+03:00The word "biblical" gets you every time!...The word "biblical" gets you every time! : )Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-77010177253109948192010-05-06T19:06:25.296+03:002010-05-06T19:06:25.296+03:00"... key cognates can be traced across the an..."... key cognates can be traced across the ancient Afro-Asiatic world, which extended from west central Africa to Nepal".<br /><br />I'm not aware that any AA language was ever spoken east of Iraq, except for the Arabic pockets in Iran, which are all modern. <br /><br />"Kano (biblical Kain)"<br /><br />Ok, I've read enough nonsense. Goodbye.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-47268147459915319172010-05-06T18:37:48.655+03:002010-05-06T18:37:48.655+03:00Good points, Maju.
You wrote that "whichever...Good points, Maju.<br /><br />You wrote that "whichever languages were primary in Neolithic" must surely all be dead by now. That is correct, however using comparative linguistics, key cognates can be traced across the ancient Afro-Asiatic world, which extended from west central Africa to Nepal. <br /><br />Sarki, is an example. It means ruler among the people of Kano (biblical Kain). Sarki reside in west central Africa which is where Noah and his ancestors lived according to the Genesis genealogical data. Sarki are also a people group living in the Orissa Province of India. This connection between India and Nigeria has to do with the ruler-priests, called Harwa, who spread the Afro-Asiatic worldview. They even went to Nepal as evidenced by the existnece of Sarki who live as ‘Haruwa’ in the Tarai region of Nepal. The word Haruwa is equivalent to the ancient Egyptian word ‘Harwa”, meaning priest.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-6727793943056697492010-05-06T18:10:07.293+03:002010-05-06T18:10:07.293+03:00"Mathilda's conjectures on Afroasiatic be...<i>"Mathilda's conjectures on Afroasiatic being Asian are totally baseless"<br /><br />(...)<br /><br />Pretty offended now.</i><br /><br />I'm sorry if you're offended. But it's quite clear that there is no chance that AA is of Asian origin (where's the diversity?) <br /><br /><i>I find the 'racist' bit particlulary offensive Maju</i>...<br /><br />That's healthy, I guess. The case is that the only reason to think that AA has Asian origins and not African ones can be of such racist nature. For the racist white mentality accepting that peoples from Sudan (or somewhere nearby, probably quite black) spread into "white lands" is disturbing. <br /><br />Not sure about you but there is a lot of people in this planet with hidden racist ideas that manifest when you expect less. It's a burden of our recent history. <br /><br />As for the genetic side of the issue, it's clear to me that J1 means a pre-AA scatter, probably from the times of the colonization of West Eurasia and that what really indicates the spread of AA is the penetration of E1b1b1 into West Asia (and also Europe). <br /><br />We have already discussed on your site about the genesis of Semitic and it's clear to me that the language is related to PPNA (in particular the pastoralist peoples of Negev and Sinai, clearly influenced by Egypt) and the circum-Arabic pastoralist complex (CAPC) that remained after the PPNB flow. <br /><br />There's no way that Semitic genesis, much less all the Afroasiatic one, can be placed in Anatolia as you claim. There's a lot of confusion caused by the fact that whichever languages were primary in Neolithic (surely all dead by now) influenced other peripheral language families such as AA and Indoeuropean. These loanwords from extinct languages are now re-interpreted by lazy linguists as loanwords from AA to IE or viceversa, what is a total nonsense. <br /><br />In any case they are just a handful of specialized loanwords, nothing else. It'd be like relating all existing human languages to ancient Greek based on words like "telephone"!Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-50337479161673282562010-05-06T16:06:12.062+03:002010-05-06T16:06:12.062+03:00Mathilda, It is so good to hear from you! I hope ...Mathilda, It is so good to hear from you! I hope you are doing better.<br /><br />I'm curious about how we are to explain the presence of Sudanese in Southern India where they are called the "Sudra". Any thoughts on this?Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-55855974794794165542010-05-06T14:57:16.970+03:002010-05-06T14:57:16.970+03:00BTW, anyone reading Alice's posts should look ...BTW, anyone reading Alice's posts should look her up..<br /><br />http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2009/03/afro-asiatic-dominion.html<br /><br />And know not to take her seriously.<br /><br />She's insisting the Olmecs were Negroid... a hint as to why she's so insistent the R1b is African in origin.<br /><br />To quote...<br /><br />"The Olmecs were racially negroid, but they likely inter-married with non-negroid peoples. They have a rather unusual system of writing that suggests mixed influences. It isn't uniquely African."<br /><br />Pretty offensive to native Americans. Also claiming African artifacts in China ;)mathildahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06682429587184048584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-21154818501268826712010-05-06T14:49:29.927+03:002010-05-06T14:49:29.927+03:00The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9200–5...The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9200–5600 kya<br /><br />Would allow for teh R1B to come into Africa with the Neolithic from Asia. <br /><br /><br />"Mathilda's conjectures on Afroasiatic being Asian are totally baseless"<br /><br />There are about a dozen phds who share this opinion, mainly due to the fact that proto Afro Asiatic reconstructs to show neolithic Asian agriculture and animals, and that Ehrets dates are impossibly old. <br /><br />I find the 'racist' bit particlulary offensive Maju, as I actually accepted the Ehret/Keita impossibly ancient claims for an African origin of AA languages based on the m78 Y chr distribution until I did some reading up on AA languages, and this entry can still be found on my blog.<br /><br />I'm siding with an Asian origin as the genetics and archaeology don't support any movement that could be related to AA languages doing anything but moving into Africa from Asia at the relevant time, and proto Semitic has been shown to be a very close neighbour (in a new publication) to Indo European and Sumerian. So you'd need some movement OOA from 10k to 6k ago to make an African origin possible, and the only known cultural traffic in that 4k time span was into Africa. <br /><br />Pretty offended now.<br /><br />Mathilda.mathildahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06682429587184048584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-5577890125831736592010-01-19T03:42:59.419+02:002010-01-19T03:42:59.419+02:00"what you mean by 'religious attitudes..."what you mean by 'religious attitudes'". <br /><br />The attitudes that are providing the justification for random bombings through much of the Middle east (and other egions) at present. They believe they are doing 'God's work'. And the Bible itself records genocides on a scale very seldom approached today. All in the name of 'God'. <br /><br />"unscrupulous rulers" <br /><br />Even the so-called sophisticated USA fell for George Bush's appeal to religious difference when he set about promoting his invasion of Iraq. That's pretty unscrupulous. <br /><br />"extermination" <br /><br />Many Sunni Muslims would be very happy if the Shiites were exterminated. And it seems many Jews would love to 'dissappear' the Palestinians. All in the name of religion. And I haven't even begun to consider Hindus. <br /><br />"cities dedicated to the moon god Sin". <br /><br />It's very interesting that some religions regard the sun as male and others the moon as male. I suspect the moon as male is the older belief, and associated with bull worship. This has an ancient and widespread history through Anatolia, the Middle East and into the Aegean. I also suspect there is a connection between the bull's horns and the crescent moon. <br /><br />"The human impulse toward that which is greater than ourselves, reflected in artifacts, philosophy, literature, etc". <br /><br />I play and teach music for a living, and I used to draw and paint. I don't need to believe in a god to do that.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-2933395816843508752010-01-18T17:13:59.223+02:002010-01-18T17:13:59.223+02:00Terry, You're well versed in atheism's lin...Terry, You're well versed in atheism's lingo. We might do well to unpack what you mean by "religious attitudes" and "unscrupulous rulers" used to justify "extermination". Many unexamined assuptions here. <br /><br />What interesting parts? The human impulse toward that which is greater than ourselves, reflected in artifacts, philosophy, literature, etc.<br /><br />Judaism and Christianity are indeed owing to ancient Egytpian religious belief and practice and to that of ancient Sudan. They observed that the Sun is the source of light whereas moon's light is refulgent. Basic science there. That's the basis of the Bible's criticism of Mesopotamian's moon worship and why Abraham's father (Terah) was regarded an an idol-worhsiper since he maintained households in Ur and Haran, cities dedicated to the moon god Sin.<br /><br />They are not listed because Genesis 1-12 is a record of Abraham's ancestors who were African. Abraham's mother was a Horite from Canaan. The Horites were devotees of Horus, who was called "Son of God." Their totem was the falcon so the oldest altars were built in the shape of the falcon. These have been found wherever the Sudra (Sudanese) established themselves.<br /><br />For all your concern with science, I'd expect you to provide me with facts, research and authoritative sources. All I'm reading here is bias and emotion.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-76573112511826372022010-01-18T08:56:23.649+02:002010-01-18T08:56:23.649+02:00I find atheism boring as it necessarily excludes m...<i>I find atheism boring as it necessarily excludes most of the interesting parts of history, philosophy, ethics, science, literature, anthropology, etc.</i><br /><br />A bit OT - but that sounds to me like a complete misunderstanding of what science is about. I only need to understand why people believe in something to study it - I don't have to believe in it myself; that would be utterly impractical and ridiculous.<br /><br />And in the "hard" sciences, do I need to believe in the ether to study early 20th century physics? Or in environmentally acquired inheritance to study Russian horticulture? In fact, I readily admit it may be advantageous to have strong convictions or a good intuition in science - but I would never call that "belief" - except in non-serious jargon, as in "I believe the so-called Celts in Southern Germany spoke a proto-Germanic language."eurologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03440019181278830033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-16852531432588967002010-01-18T05:33:45.947+02:002010-01-18T05:33:45.947+02:00"I find atheism boring as it necessarily excl..."I find atheism boring as it necessarily excludes most of the interesting parts of history, philosophy, ethics, science, literature, anthropology, etc". <br /><br />What interesting parts? The religious attitudes that unscrupulous rulers used to justify their attempted extermination of conquered people? <br /><br />"The ancient Greeks were aware of and enamoured with ancient Egyptian religion". <br /><br />And Judaism (and so Christianity) owes a great deal to the contemporary Egyptian religion. Along with lashings of Mesopotamian religions. That's what I find interesting about 'history, philosophy, ethics, science, literature, anthropology, etc'. <br /><br />"All listed there are Afroasiatics". <br /><br />Is that because most of the ones they were aware of were Afro-Asiatics? But what about Hittites? And the Persians. Are they not listed?terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-73197622338624521802010-01-17T14:11:32.055+02:002010-01-17T14:11:32.055+02:00Dear Gioiello, I find atheism boring as it necessa...Dear Gioiello, I find atheism boring as it necessarily excludes most of the interesting parts of history, philosophy, ethics, science, literature, anthropology, etc.<br /><br />The ancient Greeks were aware of and enamoured with ancient Egyptian religion. One of the reason Jacques Derrida was so interested in Plato was that he, as an Arabic-speaking Jew from North Africa, recognized the validity of so-called "platonism." Do you actually believe that Plato invented the concept of Forms?<br /><br />As for ancient DNA, I refer you to Lycotte's study of the ancient Nubians. There has been virtually no immigration into the lower Nubia area from Asia according to the Y chromosome study done by Lucotte.<br /><br />Then there is the evidence of cave art. The red ochre plaque of the Blombos Cave predates all other cave art by about 35,000 years.<br /><br />Please don't misunderstand my point. I do not see evidence for monogenesis. That surprises people, since I'm a Biblical Anthropologist. Many assume that I must believe that all evolved from Adam and Eve (mythological first parents). Genesis makes it clear that there were other origins besides Africa. This is evident in a study of the "nations" (Gen. 10). All listed there are Afroasiatics.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-27016609341862703292010-01-17T11:38:04.381+02:002010-01-17T11:38:04.381+02:00Dear Alice, if you interpret the tremendous 19th c...Dear Alice, if you interpret the tremendous 19th chapter of Genesis like a “figura” (symbol: but read the great works of Erich Auerbach) of the Trinity probably it is because you use allegory: God and the two Angels. It is a rather forced interpretation. But allegory was born from Alexandrian philologists and extended to the Bible by Philo, then it is something born in the history and used largely during the Middle Age and today without value at all. Nothing to do with the thinking created by Ancient Greeks and took to the modern science by Galileo. You all have the right to spend your life as you prefer.<br />We atheists, we rationalists, know that life was born by chance and we are forms that we’ll be destroyed for generate other forms. In the meanwhile we are trying to understand what has happened to little things: R1b1b2 did come from Western Asia or from Italy? There are proofs that will be able to demonstrate which hypothesis is right and which is wrong? When the scholars will do a test on ancient DNA of Oetzi or of an European skull of 15,000 years ago, which Y-haplogroup will they find?Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00999270356447668208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-71657882008614860272010-01-17T02:02:09.892+02:002010-01-17T02:02:09.892+02:00Gioiello, I have no wish to disparage your life-lo...Gioiello, I have no wish to disparage your life-long labors. No doubt they are valuable. I can't judge since I have not read them.<br /><br />I'm interested in what you wrote: "Jews, because I have always said that they have nothing (or a little bit) to do with Abraham." Here we might agree. Abraham and his people weren't Jews. They were likely Horites, a group portrayed badly by Judaism. I find it ironic that the Jews claim Abraham yet reject Abraham's experience of God in 3 Persons (Gen. 19).Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-89047791037645365652010-01-17T01:03:13.541+02:002010-01-17T01:03:13.541+02:00Argiedude, I have said to you in the past that I h...Argiedude, I have said to you in the past that I have one name, mine, and don’t accept to change it to subscribe to a forum from where I was banned by one, Jules Van Laar, I thought and think a greenhorn, I who have behind me many tens of years of studies in many fields. Of course behind Van Laar there were many people who were disturbed from my ideas: Jews, because I have always said that they have nothing (or a little bit) to do with Abraham (now all these ideas are written in a great historic work like that of Shlomo Sand I reviewed on Amazon.com). There was Vizachero, who probably was the responsible of my banishment: you know he has always supported positions very different from mine about the origin and diffusion of R1b1b2 and you can see this also in these last postings here and on Worldfamilies.<br />The path of all this is traced in the thousands of posts I wrote on these forums and before on “Genealogy-dna”, from where I was banned by Bullock, Bullock Bullock, with the stupid pretext I had written a letter in Italian to an Italian friend! <br />To Alice I can say that I have ideas opposite to hers and I have used with her my Tuscan irony I used with others. If she disproves my banishments it goes to her honor and probably she is better than her positions would make me think.Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00999270356447668208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-46850028576281827872010-01-16T22:28:18.019+02:002010-01-16T22:28:18.019+02:00I can't imagine why you would be banned, Gioie...I can't imagine why you would be banned, Gioiello.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-54278672789225738222010-01-16T22:28:12.882+02:002010-01-16T22:28:12.882+02:00Can you sign up to dna-forums under some other nam...Can you sign up to dna-forums under some other name? I'll go look at worldfamilies, now. If you really can't see the dna-forums stuff, then I'll post it all on worldfamilies.aargiedudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02885756901119408472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-11080937665513884962010-01-16T20:38:58.985+02:002010-01-16T20:38:58.985+02:00Argiedude, as you know I haven't access to &qu...Argiedude, as you know I haven't access to "dna-forums" because I was banned, but I'd read willingly your contributions. If you could send them to me, I'd be very grateful to you. About these "Rozen's SNPs" I have written much on "worldfamilies", where you have access, under the thread “Let’s reconsider the Cantabrian Refugium” (R1b1b2).<br />I haven’t the paper, which isn’t free, but we can download the supplements and I wrote to Prof. Rozen and he was so kind to answer me.<br />If you go on “worldfamilies, read also “Cruciani 2010 paper on R1b in Africa” (Y haplogroup).Gioiellohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00999270356447668208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-52757678402917307902010-01-16T20:10:25.265+02:002010-01-16T20:10:25.265+02:00Gioiello, I've posted a lot of observations ab...Gioiello, I've posted a lot of observations about this study in dna-forums. By the way, what are the Rozen SNP's? What's that all about?aargiedudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02885756901119408472noreply@blogger.com