User Tag List

Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16 24 25 26
Results 251 to 257 of 257

Thread: Afro-Asiatic urheimat3515 days old

  1. #251
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist BerberWarrior's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2012-03-04
    Posts
    1,225
    Gender
    Amazigh

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctoris Scientia View Post
    Semitic speaking SW Asians (Assyrians likely adopted a Semitic language, so need for any fuss from Elias and the like) possess non-trivial amounts of NE African admixture; this apparent African admixture is then assimilated into the "SW Asian" cluster, or any other equivalent Arabian-like cluster identified by STRUCTURE at higher K Levels. Treemix identified non-trivial amounts of East African-like admixture in some notable Western Eurasian clusters from Dodecad; for example, about 18% of the "SW Asian" cluster is derived from a population similar to the modern inhabitants of NE Africa, in addition according to Treemix about 7% of the "Caucasus" and "Atlantic-Med" clusters is similarly "East African".
    I know that the SW Asian component among Arabian & Bedouin populations actually hides East African admixture due to bottleneck, that is logical since populations of the Arabian peninsula were historically very isolated from foreign influences untill very recently and that traditionally Bedouin people were edomagous , becoming isolated even if living near to different genetically Near Eastern peoples , this all explains why the isolation of the SW Asian make it hide the African affinities. It is quite funny to me , that you can't stand people speaking about the West Eurasian impact on the Horn of Africa , yet , you totally feel right to say modern Europeans have 20% East Eurasian or that East African admixture is common in West Eurasia. That is double standard. Try to be more objective at times. It's pretty obvious Egptian/Arabian and Horner populations have heavily mixed with each other , probably that they had already similar Afro-Asiatic cultures.

    According to various anthropological studies on the Natufians, they were the likely products of an immigrant African group via Egypt and indigenous SW Asian populations; over time, the African component clearly observant in the earliest stages of the Natufian culture become less and less apparent, i.e. watered down, primarily due to the assimilation of indigenous populations in the region. Regardless, the Natufians, Semitic, and E-M78 in SW Asia is due to the assimilation of a relatively small, but successful, African immigrant group into an already existing indigenous Western Eurasian population.

    E-M78 in Europe is clearly due to founder effect, so therefore the lack of apparent African admixture is understandable.
    Let us see those various anthropological studies. According to you Egypt before the Ptolemaic dynasty was free of any Western Eurasian genetic affililation , it was a pure African land , despite landing in between the already very West Eurasian Berber , and the Levantine and Arabian worlds. I don't think there is any study indicating the Natufians were early on an African population , it's rather that they had an African component. Here we make speculations , not affirmations , especially when there is no edvidences of anything, for instance , no edvidences show us that your small but succesful African population carriying EM78 , was not already West Eurasian admixed either at all.
    Last edited by BerberWarrior; 2012-10-01 at 23:32.
    Windows 7 Chrome 12.0.742.112


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to BerberWarrior For This Useful Post:

    EliasAlucard (2012-10-01)

  3. # ADS
    Advertisement bot
    Join Date
    2013-03-24
    Posts
    All threads
       
     

  4. #252
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,691
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Y-DNA
    J1a2a1a2-P58+
    mtDNA
    H5a
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Alpinid
    Metaethnos
    proto-Semitic
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian/Armenian
    Politics
    Environment, Cannabis
    Religion
    Secular Agnostic
    Assyria Assyria 1913-1923 Armenia Lebanon Sweden Greece

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctoris Scientia View Post
    Semitic speaking SW Asians (Assyrians likely adopted a Semitic language, so need for any fuss from Elias and the like) possess non-trivial amounts of NE African admixture

    ...

    Regardless, the Natufians, Semitic, and E-M78 in SW Asia is due to the assimilation of a relatively small, but successful, African immigrant group into an already existing indigenous Western Eurasian population.

    E-M78 in Europe is clearly due to founder effect, so therefore the lack of apparent African admixture is understandable.
    Nice hypothesis, it sounds plausible, but it just doesn't hold if you take into consideration all the facts. The last thing Assyrians did is to adopt a language from a minority Negroid population. Why? Simply because the linguistic palaeontology profile of proto-Semitic, indicates proto-Semitic originated in the northern Levant. And also because there's clearly strong linguistic evidence of proto-Afro-Asiatic having evolved entire in the Fertile Crescent, in between its southern neighbours the proto-Sumerians and its northern neighbours the proto-Kartvelians, and the proto-Elamites to the south-east of Semites.

    Sorry, but when proto-Afro-Asiatic had a strong symbiotic relationship with Elamite, Sumerian and Caucasian, there's simply no way you can argue that the proto-Afro-Asiatics came from Ethiopia and imposed their language on Assyrians. And considering the ties PAA has to Elamite, Sumerian and Caucasian languages, I'd say northern Mesopotamia is arguably one of the best geographic hot spot for proto-Afro-Asiatic

    Oh and by the way, as for Y-DNA, I'd say, the proto-Afro-Asiatics carried originally mostly or only R1b, and later on, after they had mixed with Caucasus-related tribes, J1 males spread Semitic south into the Arabian peninsula. E1b males were mostly influenced by R1b/J1c3 males, rather than E1b being the original proto-Afro-Asiatic group.

    By the way, Lol_Race, I'm not expecting Bass and Doctoris to understand the linguistic evidence (I'm predicting they'll just ignore it and go on with their stupid bullshit, as usual), but what's your view on proto-Afro-Asiatic now, given its Middle Eastern linguistic palaeontology profile?
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2012-10-02 at 07:33.
    ReactOS <--- support this project so that we can get rid of Windows!
    Ubuntu MATE 16.04.1 LTS | PRISM-Break! | Windows7sins

    “A wise man makes his own decisions; an ignorant man follows public opinion.” ― Chinese proverb

    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” ― H. L. Mencken

    “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” ― Socrates

    “Damnant quod non intelligunt.” ― Latin proverb

    Quoted for truth:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaron View Post
    Anatolian Urhemait supporters are mostly butthurt Meds.
    For the lulz:
    Quote Originally Posted by drgs View Post
    Poland is a misunderstanding. It is a country which lies on the frontier between western and slavic world, and which combines elements of both.
    In fact, they are not even the Europeans in strict sense, meaning European as in bearing the responsibility and understanding of European interests. Poland has always been an subordinate country, on one side sucking German dick, on the other side -- Russian one, some kind of "novice" europeans, who are full of inferiority complexes, hysteria and obsessity neuroses. This is also true for all Baltic countries
    Windows 7 Firefox 15.0.1


  5. #253
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist BerberWarrior's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2012-03-04
    Posts
    1,225
    Gender
    Amazigh

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lol_Race View Post
    I wouldn't say the Natufians would necessarily have been similar to modern Egyptians, they may have been quite different.

    We don't know how much of an impact ancient Northeast Africans, carrying Y-DNA E1b1b1, had on West Eurasians. Just like we didn't know anything about the East Eurasian affinities of early Europeans until recently (and, still, we know very little), we don't know why exactly Middle Easterners without recent admixture are closer to Africans than any other Eurasians. Actually, that African affinity exists in all West Eurasians, but modern Europeans derive a large part of their ancestry from the Middle East; they're slightly less similar to Africans, in accordance with part of their ancestry tracing back to pre-Neolithic Europeans who were more similar to East Eurasians, and hence less similar to Africans. In the recent study on H. pylori structure (see this map), the authors suggested that the Northeast African links of West Eurasian H. pylori lineages may be a result of Neolithic expansions from the Middle East, originating in a population with East African admixture. As you may be aware, the Natufians have been suggested to have played an important role at the beginning of the Neolithic.

    The only work on Natufian physical anthropology I am aware of is Brace's study, which seems to show links to modern SSA populations.
    Another hypothesis (since we are only , pages after pages , on hypothesis) , would be that Natufians were indeed a sort of Northeast African population , that mixed up with native SW Asians , then came back to Africa , settling throughout the Nile valley till down the Horn of Africa , meeting there again native Africans. This however kills Doctoris's thesis of a mostly African pre-Ptolemaic Egypt and would confirm an ancient bi-directional gene flow in between West Eurasia and East Africa.
    Last edited by BerberWarrior; 2012-10-01 at 23:58.
    Windows 7 Chrome 12.0.742.112


  6. #254
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist
    Last Online
    2013-08-30 @ 20:26
    Join Date
    2010-06-30
    Posts
    3,382
    Gender

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BerberWarrior View Post
    I know that the SW Asian component among Arabian & Bedouin populations actually hides East African admixture due to bottleneck, that is logical since populations of the Arabian peninsula were historically very isolated from foreign influences untill very recently and that traditionally Bedouin people were edomagous , becoming isolated even if living near to different genetically Near Eastern peoples , this all explains why the isolation of the SW Asian make it hide the African affinities. It is quite funny to me , that you can't stand people speaking about the West Eurasian impact on the Horn of Africa , yet , you totally feel right to say modern Europeans have 20% East Eurasian or that East African admixture is common in West Eurasia. That is double standard. Try to be more objective at times. It's pretty obvious Egptian/Arabian and Horner populations have heavily mixed with each other , probably that they had already similar Afro-Asiatic cultures.
    So you aren't object to my previous assertion that most Semitic speaking SW Asians possess non-trivial amounts of NE African admixture? Are you therefore admitting that your earlier statement is wrong?

    I believe that Tishkoff et al. 2009 Global run provided the scientific community the (one) most reliable results in respect to the genetic history of East Africa. According to that particular study, Eastern Sudanese-Eritrean-Northern Ethiopian groups were collectively approximately 30% Western Eurasian or 1/3-1/4 non-African. That is pretty significant, is it not? So how I'm I denying the existence of Western Eurasian admixture among modern NE Africans?

    Are you referring to the phenotypic question? In that case, I don't think Western Eurasian admixture played that much of a role in modifying the generic Aethiopian phenotype; simply considering the existence of the Tutsi and other similar groups who due to excessive Bantu and/or Nilotic admixture are less similar to Western Eurasian populations, i.e. possess little to no Eurasian admixture, yet continue to exhibit an Aethiopian phenotype.

    Let us see those various anthropological studies. According to you Egypt before the Ptolemaic dynasty was free of any Western Eurasian genetic affililation , it was a pure African land , despite landing in between the already very West Eurasian Berber , and the Levantine and Arabian worlds. I don't think there is any study indicating the Natufians were early on an African population , it's rather that they had an African component. Here we make speculations , not affirmations , especially when there is no edvidences of anything, for instance , no edvidences show us that your small but succesful African population carriying EM78 , was not already West Eurasian admixed either at all.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16371462

    Anthropologist C. Loring Brace in a study on cranial metric traits, was able to identify a "clear link" to North African populations for early Natufians based on his observation of gross anatomical similarity with extant populations found mostly in the Sahara. Brace believes that these populations later became assimilated into the broader continuum of Southwest Asian populations.

    Most studies on the subject have largely emphasized the archeological evidence of an African incursion into the Levant. Ofer Bar-Yosef and Christopher Ehret are two primary authors that come to mind when discussing the origins of the Natufians and their link to Africa.

    According to you Egypt before the Ptolemaic dynasty was free of any Western Eurasian genetic affililation , it was a pure African land , despite landing in between the already very West Eurasian Berber , and the Levantine and Arabian worlds.
    That's not true. My opinion on Ancient Egypt is that while Western Eurasian gene-flow played a role in Ancient Egypt, modern Egypt is significantly more Eurasian than it's ancient predecessor. This belief does not require any significant historic admixture into the region; the fact that Egypt has undergone a significant demographic shift in the past two millenniums supports the rationality of my perspective on the situation. According to archeologists, the majority of Egypt's inhabitants resided in between what is now Aswan (Nubia) and Luxor in southernmost Egypt, secondly, the minority ancient Lower Egyptian population (second largest segment of the Ancient Egyptian population) was located in the area south of Cairo in the general vicinity of the Faiyum and Minya in what is now "Middle Egypt"; interestingly, the Delta was only sparely populated by people who could or couldn't have been considered "Egyptian" by the two southern, riverine population centers. On the other hand, about 65% of modern Egypt's 82 million people reside in either the Delta or the Sinai, about 1/5 are resident in the governorates surrounding the Faiyum, and lastly Aswani-Luxorians are only approximately 6% of the entire contemporary Egyptian population.

    http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/early_hydraulic.pdf

    http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Pyram.../dp/0500285470

    "Karl Butzer has estimated that two areas of greatest population
    density in dynastic times were between Luxor {Waset} and Aswan
    {Elephantine} at the first cataract,and from Medium at the Fayum
    entrance northwards to the apex of the Delta.
    IN between was Middle Egypt,a geographic buffer zone with a lower
    population density. It is worth bearing in mind that the total
    population of Egypt at the time the Giza pyramids were built is
    estimated to have been 1.6 million,compared with 58 million in Ad
    1995."

    Page 7

    Mark Lehner

    The Complete Pyramids

    Butzer’s (1976) figures demonstrate that throughout the dynastic period the Egyptian population numbers were denser between Aswan and Qift, and between the Faiyum and the head of the Delta. The Delta and the southern wide floodplain were more sparsely populated.

    The modern inhabitants of Aswan-Luxor are likely much more similar to groups in the immediate Sudan than they are to their Egyptian counterparts in the Delta; therefore an Egypt predominantly populated by the likes of these people (below) would be an entirely different place than the modern Arab Republic of Egypt.

    http://img1.photographersdirect.com/...m/pd757474.jpg
    http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/a...16fb7186-1.jpg
    http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/259/b129oa.jpg
    http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/a...2880df3abc.jpg
    http://wfcycq.bay.livefilestore.com/...ans.jpg?psid=1

    Not to say that the aforementioned peoples lack Eurasian admixture, but that in contrast to Delta Egyptians, they're likely predominantly African. So while Delta Egyptians are approximately 1/3 African, people from southernmost Egypt would be around 2/3 African. So we kinda agree, don't we? Bi-directional geneflow shaped both North Africa and SW Asia to a significant degree.

    So therefore, the ancient Delta population could have logically resembled modern coastal North African Berbers or the modern Delta Egyptians, but demographically they were a small fringe minority in comparison to the dominant southern riverine populations bordering Nubia/Sudan.

    I don't think there is any study indicating the Natufians were early on an African population , it's rather that they had an African component. Here we make speculations , not affirmations , especially when there is no edvidences of anything, for instance , no edvidences show us that your small but succesful African population carriying EM78 , was not already West Eurasian admixed either at all.
    No one made any such a statement. What I and others have stated in the past was that the Natufians were partially African, and that they likely descended from an earlier African immigrant population that was subsequently assimilated into an indigenous Levantine population.

    On the contrary, I actually believe that the African population that preceded the Natufians were at the most partially Eurasian; simply considering the likelihood that the Erythrean branch of the Afroasiatic phylum had assimilated a resident Eurasian admixed population while in Egypt (explaining the minor Eurasian component in Somalis for example). The fact that Semitic was likely introduced into the Middle East during this era supports the aforementioned; I definitely see a link, loose or otherwise, between E-M78, NE African admixture, Semitic, and the Natufians during that crucial time frame some 10.000 years ago.
    Last edited by Doctoris Scientia; 2012-10-02 at 04:26.
    Windows XP Firefox 10.0.4


  7. #255
    Established Member
    Evolutionary Biologist
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-12-30
    Posts
    3,483
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    E1b1b1a1a2
    mtDNA
    T1a8b

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    By the way, Lol_Race, I'm not expecting Bass and Doctoris to understand the linguistic evidence (I'm predicting they'll just ignore it and go on with their stupid bullshit, as usual), but what's your view on proto-Afro-Asiatic now, given its Middle Eastern linguistic palaeontology profile?
    I still believe Northeast Africa (north of Ethiopia) is the most parsimonious location, with the Middle East as a strong second candidate. You may not admit it, but the lack of diversity of Asian Afroasiatic poses a big problem for a Middle Eastern Afroasiatic homeland, although it doesn't exclude one. On the African side of the Red Sea, we have Omotic, Cushitic (with Beja almost being a branch of its own), and Ancient Egyptian. On the Asian side, Semitic does not appear older than a single one of the African branches. If anything, it may be the opposite.

    So if Afroasiatic did indeed originate in the Middle East, it should at least have been in an area closer to Africa. I'm not very familiar with Militarev's work, but I presume this may be one of the reasons why Militarev places PAA in the Natufian culture of the Levant. North Mesopotamia seems too peripheral; the Semitic ancestors of north Mesopotamian Assyrians (Akkadians and Arameans) are known to have spread from farther south. Also keep in mind that Militarev is a Nostraticist, which is a rather dubious grouping, particularly when it includes Afroasiatic. That may affect his views on proto-Afroasiatic.

    About the linguistic paleontology, there is no common Afroasiatic farming vocabulary according to Ehret, that can only be reconstructed within the major branches. This would support that Afroasiatic itself may predate farming. Omotic supposedly predates the spread of Middle Eastern agriculture. It's already well-established that North African agriculture descends from the Middle East, but what happened may have been that the previous inhabitants (such as the hunter-gatherers of the Capsian culture 10,000-6,000 B.C., or the natives of the Nile Valley) were already Afroasiatic-speaking before adopting agriculture and mixing with the incoming farmers.

    I don't think an Afroasiatic stratum in Sumerian really supports a Middle Eastern origin over a Northeast African one. If it was the other way around, and there was a Sumerian stratum in Afroasiatic, that would be a different story.
    Windows 7 Firefox 15.0.1


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Lol_Race For This Useful Post:

    pgbk87 (2012-10-02)

  9. #256
    Established Member
    Yo soy indio BootyMan's Avatar
    Last Online
    2014-08-20 @ 08:39
    Join Date
    2010-07-03
    Posts
    1,397
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Race
    Negroid
    Metaethnos
    Black
    Ethnicity
    Black
    Phenotype
    Africoid
    Politics
    Left
    Religion
    You Know It
    Barbados Haiti

    Default

    Semitic languages are the youngest of the branches of Afro-Asiatic, if AA originated in the Middle East why no traces of any other AA languages there even extinct branches in the same sense like Ancient Egyptian?
    Windows 7 MS Internet Explorer 7.0


  10. #257
    Senior Moderator
    Plant of Life = Biological Magic 麻 EliasAlucard's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2009-10-22
    Posts
    14,691
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Y-DNA
    J1a2a1a2-P58+
    mtDNA
    H5a
    Race
    Caucasian
    Phenotype
    Alpinid
    Metaethnos
    proto-Semitic
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian/Armenian
    Politics
    Environment, Cannabis
    Religion
    Secular Agnostic
    Assyria Assyria 1913-1923 Armenia Lebanon Sweden Greece

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BootyMan View Post
    Semitic languages are the youngest of the branches of Afro-Asiatic, if AA originated in the Middle East why no traces of any other AA languages there even extinct branches in the same sense like Ancient Egyptian?
    You obviously haven't been reading the linguistic evidence I've been including in my recent posts in this thread; there are traces of PAA in non-AA languages of the Middle East. Not to troll you or anything like that, you know I like you Booty, but your understanding of the world, is inferior:

    This Video Will Shock South African people... wmv: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17m8OnHC7dQ



    I'm closing this thread for now, since I don't want two active Afro-Asiatic threads. I'll re-open this thread later on, but for, we'll continue the discussion in the new Afro-Asiatic thread:

    http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...-%28Mashriq%29

    Lol_Race, I answered your post in the new thread.

    //mod
    Last edited by EliasAlucard; 2012-10-02 at 14:05.
    ReactOS <--- support this project so that we can get rid of Windows!
    Ubuntu MATE 16.04.1 LTS | PRISM-Break! | Windows7sins

    “A wise man makes his own decisions; an ignorant man follows public opinion.” ― Chinese proverb

    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” ― H. L. Mencken

    “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” ― Socrates

    “Damnant quod non intelligunt.” ― Latin proverb

    Quoted for truth:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alaron View Post
    Anatolian Urhemait supporters are mostly butthurt Meds.
    For the lulz:
    Quote Originally Posted by drgs View Post
    Poland is a misunderstanding. It is a country which lies on the frontier between western and slavic world, and which combines elements of both.
    In fact, they are not even the Europeans in strict sense, meaning European as in bearing the responsibility and understanding of European interests. Poland has always been an subordinate country, on one side sucking German dick, on the other side -- Russian one, some kind of "novice" europeans, who are full of inferiority complexes, hysteria and obsessity neuroses. This is also true for all Baltic countries
    Windows 7 Firefox 15.0.1


Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16 24 25 26

Similar Threads

  1. Afro- Caribbean (African Caribbeans)
    By windie in forum Americas
    Replies: 338
    Last Post: 2016-06-03, 00:18

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
<