User Tag List

Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 20 28 29 30
Results 291 to 299 of 299

Thread: Are Negrid genes really that dominant?3390 days old

  1. #291
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist Ether's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2014-04-13
    Posts
    586
    Gender
    Metaethnos
    Kang

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truthcentric View Post
    Don't Central African "pygmy" people like the Mbuti have lighter skin than neighboring, later-arriving Bantu speakers? I believe they have a creation myth that they were created from red clay, the Bantu from black clay, and Europeans from white clay. I presume that this would have evolved independently as an adaptation to the rainforest environment (since rainforests have thick treetop canopies as well as a lot of cloud cover).

    Has anyone looked in this genetics behind pygmy coloration?
    Pygmies are not that light, only marginally lighter than Bantus.

    The real stark skin tone difference is found with the Khoisan who selected for light skin after receiving those alleles from Eurasian admixed pastoralists.

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

    KING OF KUSH (2019-04-17)

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

  4. #292
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist NassBean's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 17:58
    Join Date
    2018-02-10
    Posts
    644
    Gender
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Phenotype
    Berberid
    Religion
    Agnosticism

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Game Theory View Post
    The North African Arabs are definitely drunk off of/highly influenced by Euroclown racial typology. basically, any black african with sharp features or lighter skin they explain it as an artifact of admixture, but explain how Aframs, who average 10-30% European mixture, still look very "Negro" and dark for the most part.
    yeah arab :



    and after that you dare to call us racists and disrespectful and just read the title of this thread to have your answer it's all about negroid genes being dominant

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to NassBean For This Useful Post:

    Dohan. (2019-04-16), Targum (2019-04-17)

  6. #293
    Established Member
    Dope Boy Fresh Tsarcastic's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2014-01-29
    Posts
    524
    Location
    Florida
    Gender
    United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by El-Maestro View Post
    So you're basically saying that I'ma keep it short and sweet... I won't even address the circular reasoning.
    That woman is Zaghawa... Outside of the Hausa people that live in Sudan, the Zaghawa are probably the best population to represent a Nilotic->Atlantic west African transition... They typically show negligible/weak signs of "Non-African" admixture.

    I can show you many examples of Africans who are lighter, or have variable features but the fact of the matter is it would be a waste of breath cuz you set the parameters very thin, but then you're generalizing the result lol. There aren't many examples of Africans who lack Either Holocene North African or Forager Admixture from a San-like source. The closest example of that are Nilotes, and the next best population to relate to bantu with minimal Forager (including rain forest HGs) Admixture are unadmixed Chadians. Which is why I posted that woman...
    Frankly, I wasn't aware of her specific ethnicity, I mainly watched the start of the video, and up to the point where she revealed her results.

    You're also not understanding what I'm saying. Most niger-kordofanians with low frequencies of admix, tend to still look niger-kordofanian, and more often times will lack any discernible modification. For the most part, these people look similar enough to one another. But they do have outliers within their communities that express traits reminiscent of a relict admixture event. I don't think light skin (outside of albinism) is a trait that is endemic of niger-kordofanians/nilo-saharans.

    To gain greater perspective in my thought process. I don't even believe that certain phenotypic traits are endemic to anatomically modern humans AT ALL (prior to younger subsets intermixing with archaic humans). Long prominent or exaggerated nasal structures, and prominent nasal bridges are more than likely a parting gift, groups of archaic humans left behind. So are things like excessive body hair (being "gorilla wolfman" hairy), and having straightish hair. YET, modern humans carry very little archaic human admixture at all (the most relevant figures are found in australo-melanesian populations of the south pacific).

    I believe the reason some of these traits became expressed more frequently amongst modern humans, is related to sexual bias in the mating patterns of that small out-of-Africa bottleneck (some other traits are naturally related to inbreeding). For the most part, I doubt niggas wanted their women to have schnozes like this? But they may have wanted them to have straighter hair? And/or long noses may have been seen as being more masculine-looking, among sub-sets of out-of-Africa males? So certain traits eventually became more observable among these out-of-Africa subsets, or among some early modern humans that had come into contact with neanderthal (within Africa---along the mediterranean coastline).

    This is ofc all purely theoretical, but the dinka are a great example of a population that does not display any of these "alien" traits. The only thing that's clearly adaptive, and that was probably a SIGNIFICANT shift from early modern humans, is their extremely dark skin color. I don't think early modern humans were as dark as the dinka, nor as light as SOME southern african khoe-san are today (at least, there doesn't appear to be evidence to support either narrative). That said I'm not implying that light skin color is foreign to humans/was inherited from archaic humans. Like extremely dark skin, it was probably adaptive.

    Quote Originally Posted by El-Maestro View Post
    ...Khoisan lightskin alleles that coalesce with non-Africans was introduced within the last 2000 years,
    Several east african groups with substantial west eurasian admix seem to have relatively high frequencies of SLC24A5, compared to some populations of southern african foragers; inversely, some west african groups (hausa and mandenka) with very low/negligible levels of west eurasian admix, more comparable to khoe-san, and who also appear to have notable frequencies of the A111T mutation, don't come out as consistently light as namibian san. This, despite one group (horners) tends to carry higher frequencies of the allele, or another (mandenka) carries roughly comparable levels. It would be interesting to see the frequencies detected in fulani and tebou (afaik, no peer-reviewed data exists regarding this). I suspect that despite they are substantially more west eurasian admixed, and probably carry the allele in either comparable to higher frequencies (potentially), neither group appears to come out as consistently light-skinned.

    Ask yourself this: Why is there greater variability among non khoe-san populations (in terms of light and dark skin), BUT much lower incidence overall of light skin in groups carrying niger-kordofanian like ancestry, or nilo-saharan like ancestry (WITH comparable or EVEN much HIGHER frequencies of west eurasian)? Think about how isolate khoe-san groups (like namibian san---with low frequencies of non khoe-san ancestry) are coming out LIGHTER than populations carrying substantially higher levels of the allele and/or its mutation. What this tells me, is that khoe-san were probably already noticeably lighter than either niger-kordofanians/nilo-saharans, and became even lighter (like east asian folk light) after minor to moderate geneflow contribution from cushitics.

    Also keep in mind, that even within khoe-san populations, who carry significant non khoe-san ancestry (from other sub-saharan africans), there is more variabilty, but these groups are observed to NOT be as consistently light-skinned.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlessedbyHorus View Post
    Or it can be because they are still largely living how they do today and NOT modernizing? Most isolated/hunter gatherer groups are small in numbers. Why not the same concern for the Hadzas? The same can be said about heck even the Sentinelese people who been MORE isolated than the Khoisan and they number only 500.
    Not true at all. Australo-melanesians number at some ~15 million when you combine the large communities found in New Guinea, and the small communities in Australia/Torres Strait (who are mostly admixed), Fiji, New Caledonia, Solomon, and Vanuatu. Ofc, some of these communities have modernized (and so have some khoe), but I'd say the vast bulk, especially on NG, Solomon, and Vanuatu, still have a stone age culture.

    That's not to imply that I don't believe EVENTUAL modernization is necessary in order for them to reach their fullest potential as a community. But the older gen who grew up on foraging do not have the mental capacity to "modernize," and you clearly can't JUST force a culture that is completely alien to a majority of them, on their children... Farming is the lifeblood of all large civilizations, so that would be the next step in their evolution, but the process of cultural diffusion needs to be measured and very progressive, as opposed to rushed and uncalculated.

    As for the aboriginal communities in the Andaman islands, it truly is unfortunate. But I'm not south asian, I care about Africa and that's it (the way it works in descending order: me>my immediate family>my extended family including wider community of folk like me>wider Africa). The african community on the precipice are khoe-san, so it would make sense to think of a strategy that could benefit them from dying out.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlessedbyHorus View Post
    [B]Also why don't you share this same energy with the Europeans who INTENTIONALLY tried to exterminate them.

    Like I said you guy's have an agenda.
    Actually no. I've always acknowledged that europeans, and eurasians in general, have historically been invasive groups. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy, given ALL anatomically modern humans most likely are/have been at some point. I'm pretty sure we're the reason there are no other extant species of humans alive today.

    More importantly, nothing can be done about what either the bantus/europeans did in the past. But what effective conservation plans do we have in place today, to keep a community on the verge from completely disappearing? Even if blacks in southern Africa are trying to come up with conservation strategies, they can barely help their own/effectively run their own state of affairs at the moment. This isn't a troll, or me trying to take anything away from blacks over there (it's just a sad reality). You seriously expect them to help another group when they have their own myriad struggles to figure out? Think about that rationally, what do they tell you on the plane? Help yourself first, before attempting to help anyone else. The truth is, southern african blacks aren't in any position right now to help anyone BUT themselves.

    Anyways, when you factor the current state of affairs, that small extant community of europeans that resides there (that y'all dislike so much), is LARGELY on its way out. Only the truly poor and destitute will stay behind, or those that are stubborn and refuse to give up without a fight. Those groups will be massacred/absorbed by the greater populace (like what happened in Haiti). Quit worrying about them. They're a non-factor at this stage.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlessedbyHorus View Post
    Not a strawman. If you lived in states/cities with a significant population you'll see that what I am saying is not taboo. I been to Orlando many times and I never seen a big African community like those in the tristate, Houston, Chicago or even ATL. Fl seems to be more of a Caribbean stomping ground. If you been down to Houston you'll see many redbone complexioned Igbos.
    It's a strawman because I never implied that FL had a LARGE sub-saharan african community (like that of e.g., NYC's or Houston's), so either you're intentionally misrepresenting my argument, or misinterpreting something within it, that wasn't being implied by me. Additionally, and more importantly, the fact remains that you know nothing about me, OTHER than that you know that I live in FL. You don't know that I MAY originally be from Atlanta, Washington DC, east Texas/north Texas, or even the northeast US (I'm not from any of those places for the record---but it's the principle). You don't know my travel history or my work history either (this is important as I have quite a bit of both in varying locales, within and outside the US---furthest south I've ever gone in Africa, is Mauritania though). You also don't know what communities I've consistently crossed paths with while in FL.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlessedbyHorus View Post
    Any discussions relating to Black people you try your bests to take away any positive feats. And already refuted. Those groups were already small living in sparsely populated areas to begin with.
    If I do, it's mainly because I'm not impressed by either the achievements of north africans/sub-saharans compared to europeans+east asians. Both groups have significantly CONTINUED to advance in the modern day (the only thing destroying the west is liberalism---asians don't have to deal with that problem NEARLY as much as europeans do). In any case, that's what matters to me (advancement). I'm not impressed by simple achievements or moral victories, e.g., a very large force of enslaved black saint-domingueans, vanquishing a very small force of conscripted french+white saint-domingueans. Yeh, when the ratio is like 15:1, I'd hope to fucking god the bigger force wins (especially in the days of swords and muskets ).

    Quote Originally Posted by BlessedbyHorus View Post
    But not all Niger-Kordofanians are "blurple" lol... And why do you keep including Nilo-Saharans with Niger-Kordofanians? And I KNOW light skin is recent my thing is you and others who constantly talk about how distant the Khoisan are from Niger-Congo people mainly stems from how light they are compared to most Niger-Congo speakers which is why I brought up the Hadza.
    I'm not suggesting they're one in the same today. But both groups are unequivocally considered "black" by most people (including themselves). One is west african "black" (niger-kordofanians), and the other is east african "black" (nilo-saharans).

    As for hadza and sandawe, they carry notable admixture unrelated to forager/hunter-gatherer ancestry. E.g., they carry afro-asiatic pastoralist (both related to cushitic and omotic---may have derived from the same source population); eurasian admixture (also probably related to the cushitic expansion); and niger-kordofanian ancestry related to the bantu expansion. To be fair, it's only been limited genotyping (several samples for both), so isn't nearly as comprehensive an analysis of their genome as let's say the one Tishkoff et al, did on african americans back in 2009.

    Anyways, no one said they're not important. It's just that khoe-san isolates (with low levels of non khoe-san ancestry) are better models to regrow khoe-san numbers imo. It would be like if you had the option between a relatively pure amerindian isolate versus an admixed group scoring notable non-amerindian. Who would you pick?
    Last edited by Tsarcastic; 2019-04-16 at 21:22.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Tsarcastic For This Useful Post:

    Targum (2019-04-17)

  8. #294
    Established Member
    Dope Boy Fresh Tsarcastic's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2014-01-29
    Posts
    524
    Location
    Florida
    Gender
    United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dohan. View Post
    No. Taforalt had Ancestral Northern African ancestry, not Niger-Kordofian. Ancestral North African are not more related to Niger-Kordofians than to Khoisans in the African genome wise. They are also the closest African clade to Eurasians. There is a wide scale in which ancient African and modern African Populations cluster vis-a-vis Eurasians. Ancestral North African and Mota (Mesolithic Ethiopian) were closer to Eurasians and the OOA event than other Africans were (geographical logics) . They were in North Africa before back-into-Africa Eurasian geneflows, and so Taforalt sprung from Western Eurasian and Ancestral North African mixing...
    From what I remember, the ancient north african lineage in taforalt was BEST approximated by a mixture of genetic components associated and preserved in present-day west africans and east Africans. If I'm not mistaken, west african ancestry, like that observed in mende and yoruba were the components it responded to the most. However, when comparing them to ancient south africans and mbuti pygmies, taforalt came out more closely linked to both than either yorubas (no shit), and ancient natufians (who had already localized outside of Africa). Ultimately, it was determined that NONE of the modern or holocene proxies (for west, east, central, or southern african ancestry) were good enough models for this unknown ancestry(???) it basically had affinities to MANY sub-saharan african populations. Taforalt's african component is likely heterogeneous (probably related to how ancestral it is), but for now seems to respond best to west african/east african ancestry than anything else. It's definitely a local/aboriginal component though.

    Edit: @Dohan

    For the record, I suspect ANA responds better to west africans, because the divergence/split time between ANA and the ancestors of west africans was a more recent episode, than the split time between ANA and the ancestors of southern african HGs which probably occurred earlier. Think how europeans/west asians are both closer to africans, than australo-melanesians are; but both groups split off from an ancestral african population, just at earlier versus more recent points in modern human history. Basically, ANA is closer to ancestral southern african than west africans would be, but is also closer to modern west africans than ANA would be to modern southern african HGs, because modern west africans are descended from a population that split off more recently.

    There's definitely a connection between modern west africans and ANA.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dohan. View Post
    ...Also Taforalt people contributed ancestry to Western Africans (during their ethnogenesis), this is why they carry some Neanderthal genes. So western Africans are part Taforalt too among many other things they are made of.
    Yeh, like ~13% in yoruba or some shit like that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dohan. View Post
    What do you mean by the greater part of their ethnogenesis? Berbers didn't appear untill the middle Neolithic with a huge amount of Iberian- related Neolithic and Levantine Neolithic ancestry, even additional Bell Beaker ancestry and Phoenician admixture from the Iron Age. So Taforalt aren't Berbers, it's kinda anachronic, they didn't speak Berber nor were culturals. They are just Mesolithic Maghreb folk. Berbers in their modern genomic form already existed during Roman and Punic eras, which is pretry much the time period they appeared in history. Although older Egyptian temples already displayed paintings of many Libyans with tatoos and a quite modern Berber appearance.
    I'm not talking about berbers (berbers and proto-berber populations are more recent). I'm talking about continuity between maghreb populations of the LSA (taforalt) and early neolithic (IAM), and discontinuity from those two groups observed in KEB (a late neolithic/bronze age maghreb culture) related to neolithic iberian dispersals. All of these events helped contribute to coastal maghrebi ethnogenesis and the berber identity in the present-day.
    Last edited by Tsarcastic; 2019-04-16 at 23:00.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Tsarcastic For This Useful Post:

    Roseai (2019-04-17)

  10. #295
    Wiki Editor
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist Targum's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 17:26
    Join Date
    2016-05-17
    Posts
    444
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    E-M5021
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Phenotype
    Arabid
    Phenotype
    E Med + Arabid
    Israel Star of David United States

    Default Habbani Jewish bride( Israel)

    Bruh your picture reference is a Habbani Israeli Jewish bride in Bareqet Village in Israel. This village was founded in 1949 by Jews from Hhabban (today Shebwa province ) in South Yemen.they are distinct from Yemenite Jews and I think this bride is gorgeous.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habbani_Jews

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Targum For This Useful Post:

    Meygaag (2019-04-17), NassBean (2019-04-17)

  12. #296
    Established Member
    Evolutionary Biologist El-Maestro's Avatar
    Last Online
    2019-04-20 @ 21:17
    Join Date
    2017-06-25
    Posts
    299
    Location
    N.Y.
    Gender
    Age
    26
    Race
    Negroid
    Phenotype
    Elongated -_-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tsarcastic View Post
    Frankly, I wasn't aware of her specific ethnicity, I mainly watched the start of the video, and up to the point where she revealed her results.

    You're also not understanding what I'm saying. Most niger-kordofanians with low frequencies of admix, tend to still look niger-kordofanian, and more often times will lack any discernible modification. For the most part, these people look similar enough to one another. But they do have outliers within their communities that express traits reminiscent of a relict admixture event. I don't think light skin (outside of albinism) is a trait that is endemic of niger-kordofanians/nilo-saharans.

    To gain greater perspective in my thought process. I don't even believe that certain phenotypic traits are endemic to anatomically modern humans AT ALL (prior to younger subsets intermixing with archaic humans). Long prominent or exaggerated nasal structures, and prominent nasal bridges are more than likely a parting gift, groups of archaic humans left behind. So are things like excessive body hair (being "gorilla wolfman" hairy), and having straightish hair. YET, modern humans carry very little archaic human admixture at all (the most relevant figures are found in australo-melanesian populations of the south pacific).

    I believe the reason some of these traits became expressed more frequently amongst modern humans, is related to sexual bias in the mating patterns of that small out-of-Africa bottleneck (some other traits are naturally related to inbreeding). For the most part, I doubt niggas wanted their women to have schnozes like this? But they may have wanted them to have straighter hair? And/or long noses may have been seen as being more masculine-looking, among sub-sets of out-of-Africa males? So certain traits eventually became more observable among these out-of-Africa subsets, or among some early modern humans that had come into contact with neanderthal (within Africa---along the mediterranean coastline).

    This is ofc all purely theoretical, but the dinka are a great example of a population that does not display any of these "alien" traits. The only thing that's clearly adaptive, and that was probably a SIGNIFICANT shift from early modern humans, is their extremely dark skin color. I don't think early modern humans were as dark as the dinka, nor as light as SOME southern african khoe-san are today (at least, there doesn't appear to be evidence to support either narrative). That said I'm not implying that light skin color is foreign to humans/was inherited from archaic humans. Like extremely dark skin, it was probably adaptive.
    Tsarcastic, I mean, you're talking out of both sides of your neck.
    Archaic introgression happened prior to selection of many of the OOA populations traits you speak of, and we don't know to which extent Africans have recombined with early humans to achieve their levels of phenotypic variance. I mean, Balito bay pushes back human divergence... South African HGs resemble Early OOA humans like ust Ishim and Pestera cu Oase for a reason.

    Khoisan, are the best representatives of early AMH variation, not the Dinka. The majority of Habitable landmass in early AMH history were in UV-intense areas, which'll result in skin darkening, but darker skin has a multitude of selection pressures in both tropical landmasses and dryer climate such as the ability to fight of infection. It's been shown that the Dinka selected for darker skin, and rain forest HGs have unconventional variation in pigment related genes.

    Anyways, I try to avoid talking about about pigmentation... Cuz outside of academia, there's really nothing I can gain from these convos anymore, being that I had to extensively study melanin for my dissertation. Fact of the matter is, intrinsic diversity is very hard to capture because the pathway to create Melanin, is very fickle and convoluted. The handful of genes that captures all of Europes variation in skin color can not be superimposed on African populations. There's African exclusive phenomena like ROCA and BOCA for example which'll lead to lightened skin.... These mutations while classified as albinism are fundamentally indifferent (in functionality) from the most common skin color Mutations outside of Africa and within.

    a popular example of variations of this nature are solomon Islanders who exhibit blonde hair traits without genotypic overlap with Europeans. If that can happen in melenasia, why do you think it's appropriate to take the 2nd most genetic diverse people over an expansive area of landmass and pigeon whole them into singular dichotomy. Not to mention SSA's have the greatest range in pigmentation, partially due the the amount of shades we can cover by just tanning.

    But skin color aside... I don't understand your point, when all NK populations have non NK ancestry...


    "You're also not understanding what I'm saying. Most niger-kordofanians with low frequencies of admix, tend to still look niger-kordofanian, and more often times will lack any discernible modification. For the most part, these people look similar enough to one another. But they do have outliers within their communities that express traits reminiscent of a relict admixture event. I don't think light skin (outside of albinism) is a trait that is endemic of niger-kordofanians/nilo-saharans.
    "
    ^^^
    How can you substantiate this thought process knowing the history of NK African (stated above) and more importantly without a reference population. Who are the most pure NK's to which you can state all NK share variation with? In other words what truly is THE pure "NK" look?





    At first glance can you honestly tell which of these two women physically highlights relicit non NK admixture? I bet you wouldn't even be able to tell the non NK population to have contributed the latent admixture in the "purer" of the two.

    In this video of Jola women singing you can see intrinsic variation, Some of these women are light brown(1:21) and some have thin noses and or higher bridges(0:07 center). The Jola are the purest Available sample of Atlantic Sahelians (Form their own structural clade)

    This is the typical range in skin color of Ghanians in Ghana,, here's a couple from a Northern region, moreso Look at the phenotypic variance of the Dogon.
    The three aforementioned ethinic groups form a structural clade indicative of the other Core NK West African population. Speculation aside, these are examples of the most pure NK's you can have genetically.

    Shifted slightly toward the Jola from Akan, Mossi & Dogon are the Bambara, who can look like this to this.

    This is variation I see on a weekly basis, and then some. Your ideology is the same BS that motivate people to assume I'm mixed with something (on a personal level), Which irks me now more than ever since now I know that I'm pretty much completely NK...
    Forum biodiversity is awesome!


    Quote Originally Posted by Polako View Post
    Depends which prehistoric North Africa you mean. There's a preprint here saying that Neolithic North Africans (you know, the ones who replaced the hunter-gatherers there), were fully West Eurasian. Makes sense.

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/09/21/191569

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to El-Maestro For This Useful Post:

    Game Theory (2019-04-17)

  14. #297
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist THELOVEBELOW's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:29
    Join Date
    2015-08-17
    Posts
    1,394
    Location
    The Dirty South
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    I2a1a
    mtDNA
    L3e1a2
    Metaethnos
    New World Black / AA
    Ethnicity
    African American
    Phenotype
    Black /Griffe
    Religion
    Universal Love
    United States Nigeria Benin Togo Nigeria England

    Default





    I know there are different definitions of light skin, but to me this is not light skin. When I was a kid, beige or lighter, was considered light skin. These people were medium brown. Lighter than dark brown, but darker than yellow beige. I know it's all subjective, so if you don't agree, I'm cool with that. A lot of the very high-toned light-skinned African-American families, have become browner or darker over the generations, by marrying and producing, with darker and browner tone African Americans, who have more West Central African DNA on average, so the looser hair types, 2a to 3c, thinner facial features, and sometimes lighter colored eyes, are not as common in the general African American population, and it was never common in the beginning, but some, or many, do carry these traits. The vast majority of the people who carried these features, were multi-generational mulattos, and quadroons to an extent. A lot of black families who are descended from free people of color, or Creole New Orleans families, typically have a lot of these features, and I'm not saying all Creole families. Every once in a while, you'll see some common African Americans with these features, because we do descend from mulattos as well, but don't carry enough mixed DNA, to look mulatto on average, or biracial passing. I have 4a-3c hair, which is kinky curly. Both of my grandfathers looked mulatto, my grandmother's didn't, and I'm pretty sure they were 95% African, or in the 90's range. My grandfather's were more in the upper 60's, or no more than 65-68% Sub-Saharan African, which is a guesstimate, but they did have a lot of mixed ancestry. I'm 82-86% Sub-Saharan African, as of now with DNA tests. I believe that both of my grandmothers, and both of my grandfathers, would have similar DNA results. I am on my mobile so forgive me for typos.
    Last edited by THELOVEBELOW; 2019-04-19 at 07:07.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to THELOVEBELOW For This Useful Post:

    NassBean (2019-04-19), Roseai (2019-04-19)

  16. #298
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist THELOVEBELOW's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:29
    Join Date
    2015-08-17
    Posts
    1,394
    Location
    The Dirty South
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    I2a1a
    mtDNA
    L3e1a2
    Metaethnos
    New World Black / AA
    Ethnicity
    African American
    Phenotype
    Black /Griffe
    Religion
    Universal Love
    United States Nigeria Benin Togo Nigeria England

    Default

    Steph Curry's mother is not bi-racial. She descends from free people of color, so she does have significant mixed ancesty, that has been carried on, from generation, to generation. She is heavily mixed raced, like Beyonce's mother is. His mom's roots are from Virginia. His dad has mixed ancesty as well, but not as much to her extent.

  17. #299
    Established Member
    Molecular Biologist TheMask's Avatar
    Last Online
    2019-04-19 @ 16:10
    Join Date
    2015-03-12
    Posts
    1,815
    Gender
    Age
    25
    Race
    Negroid
    Metaethnos
    Black
    Ethnicity
    Black American
    Politics
    SJW Mangina
    Religion
    Agnostic Occultism
    United States African Union(OAS)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlessedbyHorus View Post
    But... The thing you're not getting is that like I said NO Niger-Kordofanian group is pure! And so you guy's arguments with this "true negroid" shit is fallacious at best. Bantus a subgroup of Niger-Kordofanian who are the more famous all have some type of non Niger-Kordofanian admixture.

    And the bolded is reaching. It depends on the ethnic group. I already answered you guy's request countless times which you all side stepped. Light skin? Already answered that with both the Igbos and Cameroonians. Narrow noses? Many Niger-Congo groups have that although a majority have broad. It depends on region and ethnic group. Soft hair? I said already that its not indignous to Niger-Congo people. And since you're including Nilo-Saharans for some reason MANY Nilotic people do have narrow like noses...









    Nilotic & Senegalese skin tones are so cool i remember on youtube of a nilotic lady (i think she the sister of ducky thot) taking a dna test saying she is 20% middle eastern. but then again dna test are at best guessing your genes
    "A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots." - Marcus Garvey

    "The most disrespected woman in America, is the black woman. The most un-protected person in America is the black woman. The most neglected person in America, is the black woman" - Malcolm X

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to TheMask For This Useful Post:

    THELOVEBELOW (2019-04-19)

Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 20 28 29 30

Similar Threads

  1. OCA2 and HERC2 genes (eye colour), let's compare
    By EliasAlucard in forum General Genetics Discussion
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 2015-11-04, 01:53
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2009-11-30, 05:50
  3. Dominant and Recessive Characteristics.
    By Wulffie in forum General Genetics Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2009-11-20, 23:54

Posting Permissions

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