Despite the refusal of the Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities, Zahi Hawass, to release any DNA results which might indicate the racial ancestry of Pharaoh Tutankhamen, the leaked results reveal that King Tut’s DNA is a 99.6 percent match with Western European Y chromosomes.
The DNA test results were inadvertently revealed on a Discovery Channel TV documentary filmed with Hawass’s permission — but it seems as if the Egyptian failed to spot the giveaway part of the documentary which revealed the test results.
Hawass previously announced that he would not release the racial DNA results of Egyptian mummies — obviously because he feared the consequences of such a revelation.
On the Discovery Channel broadcast, which can be seen on the Discovery Channel website here, or if they pull it, on YouTube here, at approximately 1:53 into the video, the camera pans over a printout of DNA test results from King Tut.
Firstly, here is a brief explanation of the results visible in the video. It is a list of what is called Short Tandem Repeats (STRs).
STRs are repeated DNA sequences which are “short repeat units” whose characteristics make them especially suitable for human identification.
These STR values for 17 markers visible in the video are as follows:
DYS 19 – 14 (? not clear)
DYS 385a – 11
DYS 385b – 14
DYS 389i – 13
DYS 389ii – 30
DYS 390 – 24
DYS 391 – 11
DYS 392 – 13
DYS 393 – 13
DYS 437 – 14 (? not clear)
DYS 438 – 12
DYS 439 – 10
DYS 448 – 19
DYS 456 – 15
DYS 458 – 16
DYS 635 – 23
YGATAH4 – 11
What does this mean? Fortunately, a genius by the name of Whit Athey provides the key to this list. Mr Athey is a retired physicist whose working career was primarily at the Food and Drug Administration where he was chief of one of the medical device labs.
Mr Athey received his doctorate in physics and biochemistry at Tufts University, and undergraduate (engineering) and masters (math) degrees at Auburn University. For several years during the 1980s, he also taught one course each semester in the electrical engineering department of the University of Maryland. Besides his interest in genetic genealogy, he is an amateur astronomer and has his own small observatory near his home in Brookeville, MD.
He also runs a very valuable website called the “Haplogroup Predictor” which allows users to input STR data and generate the haplogroup which marks those STR data.
For those who want to know what a haplogroup is, here is a “simple” definition: a haplogroup is a group of similar haplotypes that share a common ancestor with a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) mutation.
Still none the wiser? Damn these scientists.
Ok, let’s try it this way: a haplotype is a combination of multiple specific locations of a gene or DNA sequence on a chromosome.
Haplogroups are assigned letters of the alphabet, and refinements consist of additional number and letter combinations, for example R1b or R1b1. Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups have different haplogroup designations. In essence, haplogroups give an inisight into ancestral origins dating back thousands of years.
By entering all the STR data inadvertently shown on the Discovery video, a 99.6 percent fit with the R1b haplogroup is revealed.
The significance is, of course, that R1b is the most common Y-chromosome haplogroup in Europe reaching its highest concentrations in Ireland, Scotland, western England and the European Atlantic seaboard — in other words, European through and through.
So much for the Afro-centrists and others who have derided the very obvious northwestern European appearance of a large number of the pharonic mummies. It seems like March of the Titans was right after all…
RELATED ARTICLES
- Researchers Warn Vaping is just as Harmful as Cigarettes
- DNA test to be added to Covid screening
- Justice in Corrupt Germany: 8 out of 9 Immigrants who Gang Raped Minor Girl in Park ON VIDEO, set Free
- FDA says Targeted Gene Therapy may CAUSE Cancer instead of Curing it
- Canada Confirms Undisclosed Presence of DNA Sequence in Pfizer Shot
Loading ...
It may be too soon to twin Ely with Mecca.
Robert E Lee with Osama B Laden is a Jewish-American thing.
It was a time of Irony.
Maybe she was an Arab sent as a token of goodwill from one of the Caliphate of the time,could be.
I see on some coins the horse,the barley and quite possibly the cherries.
All neccessary for transporting the Kriek of the time.
She wrought considerable Justice upon the unbelievers,so much so it disrupted an occupiers narrative all the way back to Rome and beyond.
Maybe Boudicca was one of these Irish Arabs.
Industani
Most likely, they were Arab semitic White, NOT, Indo european Aryan White – there were some – Cleopatra – Greek.
CN
White-Semitic-Arabs?
Arabization of Egypt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_Arabic
A little bit of honest history goes a long way….
“The Egyptians slowly adopted the Arabic language as a written language following the Arab-Muslim conquest of Egypt in the 7th century AD. Up till then, they were speaking Egyptian in its Coptic form. For more than three centuries, there existed a period of Coptic-Arabic bilingualism in Lower Egypt. This trend would last for many more centuries in the south. Arabic may have been already familiar to Egyptians through pre-Islamic trade with Bedouin Arab tribes in the Sinai and the easternmost part of the Nile Delta. Egyptian Arabic seems to have begun taking shape in Fustat, the first Islamic capital of Egypt, and now part of modern-day Cairo.”
Historical facts of Palestinian Jews, Palestinian Christians and Palestinian Arabs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_people#cite_note-WKhalidi32-38
“Baruch Kimmerling and Joel S. Migdal consider the 1834 revolt of the Arabs in Palestine as constituting the first formative event of the Palestinian people. Under the Ottoman rule (1516-1917), Palestine’s Arab population mostly saw themselves as Ottoman subjects. In the 1830s however, Palestine was occupied by the Egyptian vassal of the Ottomans – Muhammad Ali – and his son Ibrahim Pasha. The revolt was precipitated by popular resistance against heavy demands for conscripts, as peasants were well aware that conscription was little more than a death sentence. Starting in May 1834 the rebels took many cities, among them Jerusalem, Hebron and Nablus and Ibrahim Pasha’s army was deployed, defeating the last rebels on 4 August in Hebron. [37] Benny Morris argues that the Arabs in Palestine nevertheless remained part of a larger Pan-Islamist or Pan-Arab national movement. [38] Conversely, according to Walid Khalidi, Palestinians in Ottoman times were “[a]cutely aware of the distinctiveness of Palestinian history …” and “[a]lthough proud of their Arab heritage and ancestry, the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from ARAB CONQUERORS OF THE SEVENTH CENTURY but also from indigenous peoples who had lived in the country since time immemorial, including the ancient Hebrews and the Canaanites before them.”
Revisionist History, Khalidi, 1997, p. 149.
Khalidi writes:
‘As with other national movements, extreme advocates of this view go further than this, and anachronistically read back into the history of Palestine over the past few centuries, and even millennia, a nationalist consciousness and identity that are in fact relatively modern.’
So, what Egyptian Arabs are you talking about, when history records no such Arabi influence before say 600 AD? Khedive Pasha of the Ottoman Empire was not an Arab and he was appointed by the French government by the way.
Palestinian facts page – http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/chronology/14001962.htm
Arabization of Sudan –
The Journal of North African Studies, powered by Google Docs, p. 350-351
“…, Ibn Khaldun differs little from many writers who preceded him. Consistent with the theory of climes, Northern Europeans are marked out for equal approbation. But Ibn Khaldun was also acquainted with the fact that there were people in sub-Saharan Africa who did not fit his descriptions of barbarism. He had close contacts with the Malian ruler Mansa Musa during his fourteenth-century pilgrimage, and he was well aware of past polities such as Ghana that were described in positive terms by writers such as al-Bakri. Since the first descriptions of Ethiopia, whose king had helped the early Muslims and who had followed a revealed religion (Christianity), Muslim geographers had been faced with a similar challenge to the theory of climes. Ibn Khaldun attempted to solve this problem by arguing that there were differences between the savages of the furthest reaches of the First Clime and the more advanced ‘Blacks’ who lived in closer proximity to the temperate zones in the Second Clime,
‘On account of their distance from temperate regions, the characteristics of their constitutions and manners are close to the characteristics of dumb animals and they are proportionately far from humanity. The features of their religion are the same; they are not acquainted with prophethood and do not submit to any revealed law except for such of them as are near to regions of temperateness, which is uncommon.’ ”
…But whereas writers such as al-Dimashqi had attributed the lack of revealed religion in the “Black” regions to the very climatic factors that produced their barbarism, Ibn Khaldun argued that this barbarism was redeemable through the adoption of a revealed religion, as had happened in a number of cases in Africa. As such, Ibn Khaldun argued that the real touchtone of civilisation is not geneaology or climate, but religion….
What is the difference between truth and faith?
Ma’at is truth and justice. Faith is religion.
The White-Semitic-Arabi religion has no Ma’at in it therefore the culture of the so-called Egyptians could never have come from the mind or the heart of a white-semitic-arab.
Peace.
Probably these ancients did not live in the middle east and were not yanks.
The Skeptic
Guess you are NOT familiar with Arab Semitic whites – see what Arabs of the Middle East look like.
The above response is mine to Cos Seven – accidently typed his name in.
Your error in thinking,is that it is fromBlack people – it is from a common ancestor , NOT Black people – set aside your Afrocentric thinking. A gene mutation created the changes in eye, hair, and skin colors about 13,000-15,000 years ago. I LISTED the Blacks that have Blond hair – QUOTE, “Blond hair is exceptionally rare among those without European heritage, however the Melanesians of New Guinea are one of the few non-European races and the only black race known to have a high blonde hair rate. This is because the Papuans/Melanesians have the highest rate of the newly-evolved ASPM haplogroup D, at 59.4% occurrence of the approximately 6,000-year-old allele. Sub-saharan African has the lowest while the caucasian race has the second highest of 50% which may also account for their wide range of hair colors.”I listed oxidation as the cause for your Uncles hair color change – sunlight is NOT necessary, but, it speeds up the process – the structure of Caucasood and Negroid hair structure is retained – this can be discerned under the microscope as well as DNA testing – hearsay no longer has an grounds anymore – all is scientifically proven – go back and read the links I provided in my earlier response – do you own back tracking.
Your argument embodies true ignorance. First off Blond hair comes from recessive genes that originate in so called Black people. In other words the first blond was born to “black” parents. To this day there are blond babies being born to “black” parents. I last read of 2 nigerian parents who gave birth to a “caucasian” baby.
And secondly, my uncles hair that had turned red was never in the sun. It was in an envelope in a box and had been packed away for about 50 years. Never sat in the sun. Most of the “science” you cite will soon be proven quackery. I hope you dont get too attached to your ideas.
You use terms like European and caucasian like they have some intrinsic value. You overlook the fact that “melanesian” “australians” etc were on earth before the first “white” person ever was and their hair was straight and blond the whole time arguably. They had no “caucasian” ancestors that gave them that trait.
Cos Seven, how old is your uncle?
Hair color changes after time:
The hair color of mummies or buried bodies can change over large time periods. Hair contains a mixture of BLACK-BROWN-YELLOW eumelanin and RED pheomelanin. Eumelanin is less chemically stable than pheomelanin and breaks down faster when oxidized…. The color of hair changes faster under extreme conditions. It changes more slowly under dry oxidizing conditions (such as in burials in sand or in ice) than under wet reducing conditions (such as burials in wood or plaster coffins).[http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/Human_hair_color]
In other words black-brown hair will lose its black-brown pigment and the red color is evident.
The natural color of the eyes can also change after death to a grey to blue to greenish-brown….The wadjet Eye is green…just for cultural context.
“The name Wadjet is derived from “wadj” meaning “green” hence “the green one” and was known to the Greeks and Romans as “uraeus” from the Egyptian “iaret” meaning “risen one” from the image of a cobra rising up in protection.[The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, George Hart ISBN 0-415-34495-6]
Now think how Iaret was translated and applied to the European concept of resurrection and why Jesus The Christ was intended for European salvation?
Peace.
Hair types – Indices : http://wysinger.homestead.com/hair2.html
“The cross-section of a hair shaft is measured with an instrument called a trichometer. From this you can get measurements for the minimum and maximum diameter of a hair The minimum measurement is then divided by the maximum and then multiplied by a hundred. This produces an index. A survey of the scientific literature produces the following breakdown:
San, Southern African 55.00
Zulu, Southern African 55.00
Sub-Saharan Africa 60.00
Tasmanian (Black) 64.70
Australian (Black) 68.00
Western European 71.20
Asian Indian 73.00
RAMESES II 74.00
Navajo American 77.00
Chinese 82.60
If you honor the science of the hair index then Rameses II is three steps from the European and only one step from Asia Indian. Today, Afrikan American women use Asian-Indian human hair for extentions, weaves, braids, etc., as well as synthetics. The royal women of the 18th dynasty wore what is called “Nubian style” wigs, so hair was likely part of the trade between India and the Nile Valley civilization.
Look at one type of Asian Indian hair – http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zy74_ieaZCM/TZDIP9lXcBI/AAAAAAAAAfM/eccEzfYv5Ts/s1600/article-ethnic-hair-2.jpg
White History – Ramses II –
http://www.white-history.com/earlson/rameses.htm
Indian Hair types – http://dvahair.com/hair-shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=67&zenid=2422daba5521c65881ae48501fdcaced
The point is, Rameses II at 74 is not European at 71 and is appreciably closer to Asian-Indian.
My personal opinion ? Qemi Ta-Seti Ama Su Nesi Sa’Ara Mesu was Sudenese – Drava (Indi) ! Afro-Asiatic and not one drop of so-called Arabi – Semitic blood!
Cos Seven
First – Ramses’s hair is Caucasoid NOT Negroid, under microscopic study – that does NOT change – hair can under go oxidation – many medium black or brown hair fades with exposure to the son – giving it a reddish appearance.Two types of pigment give hair its color: eumelanin and pheomelanin. Pheomelanin colors hair red. Eumelanin, which has two subtypes of black or brown, determines the darkness of the hair color. A low concentration of brown eumelanin results in blond hair, whereas a higher concentration of brown eumelanin will color the hair brown. High amounts of black eumelanin result in black hair, while low concentrations give gray hair. All humans have some pheomelanin in their hair.
Pheomelanin is more chemically stable than black eumelanin, but less chemically stable than brown eumelanin, so it breaks down more slowly when oxidized. This is why bleach gives darker hair a reddish tinge during the artificial coloring process. As the pheomelanin continues to break down, the hair will gradually become orange, then yellow, and finally white.
Blond hair is exceptionally rare among those without European heritage, however the Melanesians of New Guinea are one of the few non-European races and the only black race known to have a high blonde hair rate. This is because the Papuans/Melanesians have the highest rate of the newly-evolved ASPM haplogroup D, at 59.4% occurrence of the approximately 6,000-year-old allele. Sub-saharan African has the lowest while the caucasian race has the second highest of 50% which may also account for their wide range of hair colors.
I was cleaning out my uncles apartment and found an envelope containing hair from his first haircut, His hair is kinky like a curly “black” persons hair. and its black in color. Anyway the hair was red. It immediately made me think of the mummy of Ramses whose hair also is red. It looked exactly the same. What do you make of that? My Uncles hair was never red.
My friend who works in the lab. Said, “Tut was a Paternal Haplogroup:T” So whats the big deal?
I know for i told me so..
Sigh….
The Skeptic
I don’t think you understand what you are copying and pasting – YOUR information backs what I said – L3 is restricted to ONLY Blacks – the others are present in ALL ethnic groups . This is NOT my opinion. People are descended from a common ancestor, NOT from Black people as you are attempting to articulate, but since you do NOT understand what you are copying, and, pasting – that can be forgiven.
All people ascend from the humble Mudskipper.
Sigh…
CN
Your opinion:
“Your mistake, all along, is attempting to claim that all people are descended from Black people – I do not know why you are making such a claim – all ethnic groups branced from there, but not all were considered Black. L3 is a sub clade restricted to Blacks – L2and K3 are in all groups. NOT all gruopes”
Haplogroup L
Time of origin 151,600–233,600 YBP [1]
Place of origin Eastern Africa[2]
Descendants L0, L1-6
mtDNA L
Macro-haplogroup L’s origin is connected with Mitochondrial Eve, and thus, is believed to suggest an ultimate African origin of modern humans. Its major sub-clades include L0, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6, with all non-Africans exclusively descended from just haplogroup L3.
“Haplogroup L3 descendants notwithstanding, the designation “haplogroup L” is typically used to designate the family of mtDNA clades that are most frequently found in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, all non-African haplogroups coalesce onto either haplogroup M or haplogroup N, and both these macrohaplogroups are simply sub-branches of haplogroup L3. Consequently, L in its broadest definition is really a paragroup containing all of modern humanity, and all human mitochondrial DNA from around the world are subclades of haplogroup L. Haplogroups M and N are sometimes referred to as haplogroups L3M and L3N respectively. Mitochondrial Eve is defined as the female human ancestor who is the most recent common ancestor of the most deep-rooted lineages of humanity: haplogroups L, L0 and L1-6.”
mtDNA L1 –
“Though it is typically used to refer to a family of lineages found in Africa, L1 is sometimes referred to as haplogroup L1-6, which is the macrohaplogroup that includes the majority of African lineages and all non-African lineages. Haplogroup L1-6 is the macrohaplogroup that includes subclades L1, L2, L4, L5, L6, and also L3 which gave rise to the two non-African haplogroups M and N. Haplogroup L1 is therefore in the paragroup of haplogroup L1-6. Haplogroup L1-6 and its only sibling haplogroup L0 are united by the matrilineal most recent common ancestor, (MRCA) of all living humans, Mitochondrial Eve. The existence of these two lineages, implies that Mitochondrial Eve had at least two daughters, one of whom is the maternal common ancestor of haplogroup L1-6 lineages.”
233,600 – 129,600 = 104,000 YBR
mtDNA L3 ancestor of M in Afrika and Asia –
Possible time of origin 84,000 to 104,000 YBP [1]
Possible place of origin East Africa[2]
Ancestor L3’4
Descendants L3a, L3b’f, L3c’d’j, L3e’i’k’x, L3h, M, N
L3 TREE is Phenotypically Black – African –
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L3_%28mtDNA%29
“According to Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), “L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2”.[7] L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside of Africa derive.[8] — almost an accurate statement –
L3a – East Africa. Ethiopians.[4]
L3b’f
L3b – West Africa.
L3f – East Africa
L3f3 – Chad Basin. Central Africa[9]
L3c’d’j
L3c – East Africa. Ethiopian Jews,[4] Yemeni Jews.[4]
L3d – West-Central Africa. Among the Fulani,[4] Chadians,[4] Ethiopians,[10] Mozambique,[10] and Yemen.[10]
L3j – East Africa. Sudanese.[4]
L3e’i’k’x
L3e – West-Central Africa. It is the most common L3 sub-clade in Bantu-speaking populations.[11] L3e is suggested to be associated with a Central African origin and is also the most common L3 subclade amongst African Americans, Afro-Brazilians and Caribbeans.[12]
L3e1 – Central Africa origin and is found in Algeria, Cameroon, Angola,[13] Mozambique, Sudanese and Kikuyu from Kenya as well as in Yemen.
L3e5 – Originated in the Chad Basin but found in Burkina Faso, Nigeria, South Tunisia, South Morocco and Egypt.[14]
L3i
L3i1 – East Africa. Ethiopians.[10]
L3i2 (former L3w) – East Africa. Ethiopians.[10]
L3k – North Africa. Lybians,[4] Tunisians.[4]
L3x – East Africa. Ethiopian Oromos,[10] Somalis[15] and Egyptians[Note 1][16]
L3h – East Africa. Ethiopians.[10]
Compare Afrikan lineage to non-Afrikan lineages. Non-Afrikan are those lineages that ultimately became descendants of L3 and were phenotypically Afrikan for thousands of years until the termination of L and the beginning of the M, M1, M1a, etc. mutations.
104,000 – 44,000 = 60,000 YBP –
Possible time of origin 60,000 years before present
Possible place of origin Asia[1][2][3][4][5] or Africa[6][7]
Ancestor L3
Descendants M1, M2, M3, M4’45, M5, M6, M7, M8, M9, M10’42, M12’G, M13, M14, M15, M21, M27, M28, M29’Q, M31’32, M33, M34, M35, M36, M39, M40, M41, M44, M46, M47’50, M48, M49, M51, D
mtDNA D –
Possible time of origin 40,000 – 60,000 YBP
Possible place of origin East Asia
Ancestor M
Descendants D4, 16189
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_D_%28mtDNA%29
There are two principal branches:
D4 (3010, 8414, 14668): Spread all over East Asia, Southeast Asia, Siberia, Central Asia and indigenous peoples of the Americas.
D5’6 (16189): Mainly in East Asia and Southeast Asia.[5] Lower in Siberia, Central Asia and East India.
mtDNA EVE L3 minimum 85,000 YBP, European D minimum 40,000 YBP. That is a 45,000 year span of time for significant Afrikan specific genotype-phenotype to develop into non-Afrikan-specific types.
I hope this helps you to better understand the facts of the origin of humanity and the several and differing genotypes-phenotypes of the human family and the time involved in the differentiations.
Geographical specifics of genetics having an origin in East Africa –
“East Africa or Eastern Africa is the easterly region of the African continent, variably defined by geography or geopolitics. In the UN scheme of geographic regions, 19 territories constitute Eastern Africa:[1]
Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi – members of the East African Community (EAC). Burundi and Rwanda are sometimes considered part of Central Africa
Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Somalia (which includes Somaliland[2]) – collectively known as the Horn of Africa[3][4][5][6][7]
Mozambique and Madagascar – often considered part of Southern Africa. Madagascar has close cultural ties to Southeast Asia and the islands of the Indian Ocean.
Malawi, Zambia, and Zimbabwe – often included in Southern Africa, and formerly of the Central African Federation
Comoros, Mauritius, and Seychelles – small island nations in the Indian Ocean
Réunion and Mayotte – French overseas territories also in the Indian Ocean.”
By the way, I will not do your homework any longer. This will be my last post, but thanks for getting all of this on the record to counter opinion based genetics.
Whether you call these Afrikan specific types Black depends upon the semantics of your racial sensibilities.
Peace.
The Skeptic
Your mistake, all along, is attempting to claim that all people are descended from Black people – I do not know why you are making such a claim – all ethnic groups branced from there, but not all were considered Black. L3 is a sub clade restricted to Blacks – L2and K3 are in all groups. NOT all gruopes
And yet still there can be no telling who is Hyperborean.
Cactuar
The Hyperborea(misinformation), has been sufficiently challenged.
What of Hyperborea?
CN
L3 is Afrikan Eve – 150,000 years ago
“According to Toomas Kivisild (2003), “the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N in India and among non-African mitochondria in general suggests that the earliest migration(s) of modern humans already carried these two mtDNA ancestors, via a departure route over the Horn of Africa.”
You have a problem. You stated,
“Do you read/understand what you are posting? FIRST – all humans are descended from a common ancestor, Homo habilis,the first, humanoid, NOT from Black people – of course, branching from there, it would be reasonable to assume some characteristics are common to all humans – L12 and L2 are subclades Blacks do NOT have – Blacks have L3. Subclade M, N are common to all ethnic groups, but certain M and, N subclades ONLY occur in Blacks…” and this, of course is your opinion as you contradict yourself with… M, N are common to all ethnic groups, but certain M and, N subclades ONLY occur in Blacks…” and you tie yourself in knots to ignore my use of the term phenotype as L3 mutated to M, M1, M1a regarldess of a back migration to Afrika, the step of L3 to M even in first in Asia/India means M1 in Afrika was phenotypically unchanged.
You offered that,
“The Asian M subclade is older than any M subclades found in Africa, hence, to date, Asians actually predate out of Africa evolution.” Again, this is your own opinion, as the science clearly states,
Possible time of origin – 60,000 years before present
Possible place of origin – Asia or Africa
Ancestor – L3 – [Phenotypically Afrikan specific – my addition]
Descendants – M1, M2, M3, M4’45, M5, M6, M7, M8, M9, M10’42, M12’G, M13, M14, M15, M21, M27, M28, M29’Q, M31’32, M33, M34, M35, M36, M39, M40, M41, M44, M46, M47’50, M48, M49, M51.
Descendants – M1 – Africa and Asia
“It is generally accepted that haplogroup M evolved shortly after the emergence of its parent clade haplogroup L3. Apart from haplogroup M and its sibling haplogroup N, the numerous other subclades of L3 are largely restricted to Africa, which suggests that L3 arose in Africa. In Africa, haplogroup M, specifically its subclade M1, has a fairly restricted distribution, being found mainly in East and North Africa at low to moderate frequencies. The limited distribution of haplogroup M in Africa and its widespread presence outside Africa, suggests that this lineage emerged very close to the time of the Out of Africa migration, either shortly before or shortly after the exit from Africa.”
But you miss the point that M is the descendant, that is the downstream marker of Afrikan specific L3.
You keep missing the point, because you are basing the age of M as older in Asia rather than acknowledging the M1 was the first to walk out of Afrika still phenotypically Black – Afrikan specific.
Cosseven,
My opinion, or that which I do not write in my own words, is based on the science, therefore, my position is the established hierarchical sequence of haplogroups, paragroups, clades and subclades as phenotypes before mutation and after. My opinion is based on this science.
If you are presented with an algorithm the answer can be endless or terminating. Genetics is terminating from one ancestor to the next. It is based on original phenotypes that identify the construct of races. In Afrika the phenotype was specifically and typically Black / dark complexioned – wooly hair – tropics adapted body types, regardless of your attempt to confuse the evolution of apes – habilis with sapiens – humanity. That is not the debate in this webpage !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype-phenotype_distinction
What is a phenotype?
“The genotype–phenotype distinction is drawn in genetics. “Genotype” is an organism’s full hereditary information, even if not expressed. “Phenotype” is an organism’s actual observed properties, such as morphology, development, or behavior. This distinction is fundamental in the study of inheritance of traits and their evolution.
The genotype represents its exact genetic makeup — the particular set of genes it possesses. Two organisms whose genes differ at even one locus (position in their genome) are said to have different genotypes. The transmission of genes from parents to offspring is under the control of precise molecular mechanisms. The discovery of these mechanisms and their manifestations began with Mendel and comprises the field of genetics.
It is the organism’s physical properties that directly determine its chances of survival and reproductive output, while the inheritance of physical properties occurs only as a secondary consequence of the inheritance of genes. Therefore, to properly understand the theory of evolution via natural selection, one must understand the genotype–phenotype distinction.”
What about the age and prevalance of M1 in India/Asia?
“Based on the high frequency and diversity of haplogroup M in India and elsewhere in Asia, some authors have suggested (versus [3]) that M may have arisen in Southwest Asia [16,17,31]. Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 in Africa as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3]. Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N (indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent with the African launch of haplogroup M. On the other hand, one also observes that: i) M1 is the only variant of haplogroup M found in Africa; ii) M1 has a fairly restricted phylogeography in Africa, barely penetrating into sub-Saharan populations, being found predominantly in association with the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum – a finding that appears to be inconsistent with the distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths. — Mait Metspalu et al.”
http://exploring-africa.blogspot.com/2008/01/response-to-ana-m-gonzalez-et-al-2007.html
Yet…
“… as other M lineages are devoid of M1 coding region motifs, not to mention the M1 HVS-I package. The above does demonstrate, how M lineages likely arose on an African ‘background’ by single-event substitutions in the designated African ancestral counterparts. The ancestral transition of 10873C is substituted by 10873T in non-African non-M haplogroups, while the 10400C transition was substituted in M lineages by 10400T; that ancestral state of 10873C remains at large in the M macrohaplogroup, unlike the so-called non-African & non-M haplogroup counterparts.”
http://anthropology.net/2008/08/12/dravidian-korku-people-of-india-maybe-descendants-of-middleearly-upper-paleolithic-settlers/
Phenotype of South Asia and the Dravidians –
“Because of the persistence of the M2 lineage and its alignment to the L3 macrohaplogroup, the authors believe that the Dravidian people and the Korku represent modern variants of earliest settlers of India. That’s because these people do not exhibit such a high frequency of Eurasian specific mtDNA haplogroups, as other Indian population. Furthermore, there are not any significant M2 signatures in Tibetan nor Burmese people, suggesting that these populations have remain relatively isolated both genetically and linguistically.”
Source 2 –
http://www.cell.com/AJHG/retrieve/pii/S0002929707623532
Current time applications of R1 phenotype in South Asia:
“The ages of accumulated microsatellite variation in the majority of Indian haplogroups exceed 10,000–15,000 years, which attests to the antiquity of regional differentiation. Therefore, our data do not support models that invoke a pronounced recent genetic input from Central Asia to explain the observed genetic variation in South Asia. R1a1 and R2 haplogroups indicate demographic complexity that is inconsistent with a recent single history. Associated microsatellite analyses of the high-frequency R1a1 haplogroup chromosomes indicate independent recent histories of the Indus Valley and the peninsular Indian region. Our data are also more consistent with a peninsular origin of Dravidian speakers than a source with proximity to the Indus and with significant genetic input resulting from demic diffusion associated with agriculture. Our results underscore the importance of marker ascertainment for distinguishing phylogenetic terminal branches from basal nodes when attributing ancestral composition and temporality to either indigenous or exogenous sources. Our reappraisal indicates that pre-Holocene and Holocene-era—not Indo-European—expansions have shaped the distinctive South Asian Y-chromosome landscape.”
http://arutkural.tripod.com/tolcampus/drav-african.htm
How did the Central Afrikan Y-DNA R1 and the East Afrikan mtDNA M get to south India?
“——-. Southern India is in the same latitude as Senegal, Mali, Niger, Chad, Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia. More than this, only the Indian Ocean separates the eastern coast of Africa from the south of India. As a matter of fact, geologists maintain that the Indian sub continent was formerly attached to East Africa. In this respect the findings of marine biology are of outstanding importance.”
Cos seven,
For, the record, these are my opinions but expressed in words that are scientifically measured. So contrast your OPINION with mine to the known facts of M1 in Asia.
Cos seven, you wrote,
“CopyPasting a page of some pseudoscientific gibberish does not constitute providing evidence. The face that you arent putting your position in your own words to justify your argument shows that you dont really have an understanding of the matter only a position to defend, using selected “science” as a shield.”
Opinion, when measured by science is the point. If your opinion matters more than the information you call pseudo scientific gibberish, then you really are all about mental masturbation just like CN and there is no point to my continuing to impart the opinion of the scientific community.
Peace.
Cos Seven
I agree with you about The Skeptic.
The Skeptic – only L3 is a Black haplomarker – NOT the others – they are NON Black haplomarkers.
Brian – 20% of the Arab Semitic Whites have characteristics of Northern Europeans WITHOUT mixing with the Europeans – otherwise, I agree with what you said. Incidentally, the only Europeans in Egypt were, the Southern Europeans – Southern Greeks, Turks, Tamils( people of India/Pakistan, Persians/Iranians for very brief periods.Irishare Indo European Aryan Whites along with the others.
Oh, yeah that really works.
Peace.
CopyPasting a page of some pseudoscientific gibberish does not constitute providing evidence. The face that you arent putting your position in your own words to justify your argument shows that you dont really have an understanding of the matter only a position to defend, using selected “science” as a shield.
CN
Regarding mtDNA M:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_M_%28mtDNA%29
“There is an ongoing debate concerning geographical origins of Haplogroup M and its sibling haplogroup N. Both these lineages are thought to have been the main surviving lineages involved in the out of Africa migration (or migrations) because all indigenous lineages found outside Africa belong to either haplogroup M or haplogroup N. Yet to be conclusively determined is whether the mutations that define haplogroups M and N occurred in Africa before the exit from Africa or in Asia after the exit from Africa. Determining the origins of haplogroup M is further complicated by the fact that it is found both in Africa and outside of Africa.[3]
It is generally accepted that haplogroup M evolved shortly after the emergence of its parent clade haplogroup L3. Apart from haplogroup M and its sibling haplogroup N, the numerous other subclades of L3 are largely restricted to Africa, which suggests that L3 arose in Africa. In Africa, haplogroup M, specifically its subclade M1, has a fairly restricted distribution, being found mainly in East and North Africa at low to moderate frequencies. The limited distribution of haplogroup M in Africa and its widespread presence outside Africa, suggests that this lineage emerged very close to the time of the Out of Africa migration, either shortly before or shortly after the exit from Africa.” If the Afrikan specific L, L1, L2, L3 had not existed there would be no M to M1 to M1a to mutate into.
Regarding the Dravidians:
The point was not to have you find an article to support the racial contention they are European, but to correlate the phenotype as specifically Asia having mutated from the Afrikan specific phenotype. In other words two separate trees on the R* tree !
Until this is resolved your opening statement is incorrect as…
regarding homo habilis as a species of the genus Homo, which lived from approximately 2.3 to 1.4 million years ago at the beginning of the Pleistocene period.[1] The discovery and description of this species is credited to both Mary and Louis Leakey, who found fossils in Tanzania, East Africa, between 1962 and 1964.[2] Homo habilis (or possibly H. rudolfensis) was the earliest known species of the genus Homo until May 2010, when H. gautengensis was discovered, a species believed to be even older than H. habilis.[3] In its appearance and morphology, H. habilis is thus the LEASE SIMILAR to modern humans of all species in the genus (except possibly H. rudolfensis). H. habilis was short and had disproportionately long arms compared to modern humans; however, it had a less protruding face than the australopithecines from which it is thought to have descended. H. habilis had a cranial capacity slightly less than half of the size of modern humans. Despite the ape-like morphology of the bodies, H. habilis remains are often accompanied by primitive stone tools (e.g. Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania and Lake Turkana, Kenya).
Homo habilis has often been thought to be the ancestor of the more gracile and sophisticated Homo ergaster, which in turn gave rise to the more human-appearing species, Homo erectus. Debates continue over whether H. habilis is a direct human ancestor, and whether all of the known fossils are properly attributed to the species. However, in 2007, new findings suggest that the two species coexisted and may be separate lineages from a common ancestor instead of H. erectus being descended from H. habilis.[4]”
Before you start screaming foul check yourself, dude!
Brian
LOL !
Ordinarily, I’d stay out of nonsense like this, but the opportunity to troll black nationalists and white supremacists is just too great… because I can’t imagine a more ridiculous answer to the idiotic debate over whether the Egyptians are black, white, or whatever than the terrible truth that is being unveiled thanks to modern science!
Let’s review the evidence:
1) Many pharoahs had RED hair
2) King Tut’s y-chromosome is identical to that of practically half the population of County Tyrone
3) The Egyptians were famous for moving heavy objects to build pyramids. Today Irish people dominate the business of moving heavy objects!
http://images.talkingphonebook.com/images/timesunion/media_library/305/724/media3.jpg
3) The Egyptians were famous for DRINKING BEER
What more evidence do you need? The Egyptians weren’t black. They weren’t white. They were IRISH.
bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha HA HA HA HA HA…
People didn’t have lard-asses in those days,no borders either,only game and a few outposts of civilisation.
Nothing to stop us from moving about the world and bringing our neandertalism to a wider audience.
Some of these Africans today also show no evidence of these other hominids we are extant hybrids of.
Their loss,no wheel for them.
The Skeptic
The more Caucasian features of many Sudanese, Ethiopians, and Somalis is due to admixture with Arabs – the Northern half of Sudan is Arab, the Northern 1/3 of BOTH Somalia, and, Ethiopia, is Arab – NOT Phenotypical variation – Sudanese – the late Anwar Sadat – Arab father/Black Sudanese mother,model Iman – Arab father/ Black Somalian mother, and, model Liya Kebede,Arab father/Black Ethiopian mother.
The Skeptic
Do you read/understand what you are posting? FIRST – all humans are descended from a common ancestor, Homo habilis,the first, humanoid, NOT from Black people – of course, branching from there, it would be reasonable to assume some characteristics are common to all humans – L12 and L2 are subclades Blacks do NOT have – Blacks have L3. Subclade es M, N are common to all ethnic groups, but certain M and, N subclades ONLY occur in Blacks – the Asian M subclade is older than any M subclades found in Africa, hence, to date, Asians actually predate out of Africa evolution.
From Wiki, QUOTE,”The genetic views on race differ in their classification of Dravidians. According to population geneticist L.L. Cavalli-Sforza of Stanford, based on work done in the 1980s, Indians are genetically Caucasian, but Lewontin rejects the label Caucasian. Cavalli-Sforza found that Indians are about three times closer to West Europeans than to East Asians.[9] Dr. Eduardas Valaitis, in 2006, found that India is genetically closest to East and Southeast Asians with about 15% more genetic similarity than to Europeans; he also found that India could be considered very distinct from other regions.[10] Genetic anthropologist Stanley Marion Garn considered in the 1960s that the entirety of the Indian Subcontinent to be a “race” genetically distinct from other populations.[9][11] Others, such as Lynn B. Jorde and Stephen P. Wooding, claim South Indians are genetic intermediaries between Europeans and East Asians.[12][13][14]
While a number of earlier anthropologists held the view that the Dravidian peoples together were a distinct race, some comprehensive genetic studies have challenged this view. The genetic studies also indicated that the origin of both Dravidian and Indo-Aryan speakers is the Indian subcontinent.[15][16][17] (The situation is similar to Western Europe, where the Basques are racially similar to the surrounding Romance language speakers.) Recent studies of the distribution of alleles on the Y chromosome,[15] microsatellite DNA,[16] and mitochondrial DNA [17] in India have cast overwhelmingly strong doubt for a biologically identifiable “Dravidian race” distinct from non-Dravidians in the Indian subcontinent.
In a 2009 study of 132 individuals, 560,000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in 25 different Indian groups were analyzed, providing strong evidence in support of the notion that modern Indians (both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian groups) are a hybrid population descending from two pre-historic, genetically divergent populations[citation needed], one of which, referred to as the ‘Ancestral North Indians’, 40,000 years ago and the other, called the ‘Ancestral South Indians’, 60,000 years ago. The intermingling of ANI’s and ASI’s happened in the same period as the ANI’s first appeared, 40,000 years ago.[18] The study also holds, that the caste system grew out of tribal-like organizations of the Indian society. In another study of 2009 conducted among 10 Asian countries, Dravidian peoples showed similarities with north Indians as well as peoples of Malaysia, Singapore and China.[19]”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_people
Some definitions: According to the United Nations geographical region classification,[2] Southern Asia comprises the countries of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Maldives, Afghanistan, Iran and Sri Lanka. By other definitions and interpretations (see below), Myanmar and Tibet are also sometimes included in the region of South Asia.
The UN subregion of Eastern Asia and other common definitions[3] of East Asia contain the entirety of the People’s Republic of China[10] (including all SARs and autonomous regions), Republic of China[11] (commonly known as “Taiwan”), Japan, North Korea, South Korea, and Mongolia[3].
Chinese-speaking regions (including the cultures of mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan), Japan, Korea, and Vietnam are commonly seen as being encompassed by cultural East Asia:[12][13][14][15]
[edit] Alternate definitions
There are mixed debates around the world whether these countries or regions should be considered in east Asia or not.
Vietnam (considered either East Asia or Southeast Asia—here the primary question is geographic due to it being part of the Sinosphere)
Siberia in Russia[16] (considered either East Asia or North Asia—here the primary question is political, with culture and geography also at issue)
In business and economics, East Asia has been used to refer to a wide geographical area covering ten countries in ASEAN, People’s Republic of China, Japan, South Korea, and the Republic of China (Taiwan)[11] for the purpose of economic and political regionalism and integration.[citation needed] United States foreign policy under the Obama administration considers Southeast Asia a part of East Asia.[17] The tendency of this usage, perhaps, started especially since the publication of World Bank on The East Asian Miracle in 1993 explaining the economic success of the Asian Tiger and emerging Southeast Asian economies (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand).[citation needed]
In addition, this usage has also been driven[says who?] by Asia-wide economic interconnectedness since the co-operation between ASEAN and its three dialogue partners was institutionalized under the ASEAN Plus Three Process (ASEAN+3 or APT) in 1997. The idea of East Asian Community arising from ASEAN+3 framework is also gradually shaping the term East Asia to cover more than greater China, Korea, and Japan. This usage however, is unstable: the East Asian Summit, for instance, includes India and Australia.
East Asia is considered to be a part of the Far East, which describes the region’s geographical position in relation to Europe rather than its location within Asia. However, in contrast to the United Nations definition, East Asia commonly is used to refer to the eastern part of Asia, as the term implies. Observers preferring a broader definition of ‘East Asia’ often use the term Northeast Asia to refer to the greater China area, the Korean Peninsula, and Japan, with Southeast Asia covering the ten ASEAN countries. This usage, which is increasingly widespread in economic and diplomatic discussion, is at odds with the historical meanings of both ‘East Asia’ and ‘Northeast Asia’.[18][19][20] The Council on Foreign Relations defines Northeast Asia as Japan and Korea.[6]
Western Asia, West Asia, Southwest Asia or Southwestern Asia are terms that describe the westernmost portion of Asia. The terms are partly coterminous with the Middle East, which describes a geographical position in relation to Western Europe rather than its location within Asia. Due to this perceived Eurocentrism, international organizations such as the United Nations,[2] have replaced Middle East and Near East with Western Asia. This region and Europe are collectively referred to as Western Eurasia.
Your, and, Cos Seven’s explanation of Caucasian features is in error – Blacks only have genes for black or, brown eyes, and, hair, NO OTHER – if there is a mutation , or, White(Semitic/Indo European Aryan) , then the ADMIXTURES will have different eye, and, hair color – the only way for NOW. Again – you grasp at straws to claim King Tut was Black.
For example,the transference of genetic structures via viral transmission.
There is no up,no down,no sideways and no stream.
It’s no ones fault but their own.
If it were not for LSD there would be nothing at all.
Huh? try downstream?
http://www.dnahaplogroups.org/ydnaHaplogroup.php?page=2&__atoken=__NONE__
SNP subclade testing – confirming your Y-DNA Subclade
Once your haplogroup is determined, you can refine it further with SNP subclade testing in order to determine your Subclade. Each haplogroup can be further subclassified into numberous sub-branches called subclades. Subclade analysis examines SNP markers downstream of your haplogroup and allows you to discover your subclade and further fine tune your placement in the Y-DNA haplogroup tree.
http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_Glossary.html
A term used in association with a haplogroup or phylogenetic tree to designate the relationship between two SNPs or two branches or two clades, with downstream being the descriptor for the object that succeeds the first. The downstream item cannot exist without the existence of the upstream item.
It’s a common failing as racialism and Negroe owning were common among early scientists and is still present today in archaeologists who parrot their forbears possibly without understanding what it is they meant.
You know,evolution and the ascent of mankind.
In you hypothesis you fail to acknowledge that humans do not descend from apes.
You really should try upstream.
Cosseven, ou wrote,
“Similarly the fact that european features are known to be recessive genes found in african populations also makes the idea of a european “marker” not european at all. On the one hand these scientists want to acknowledge a “common ancestor” not describing it, yet they want to draw arbitrary lines between these genetic markers. Since “african” parents are capable of generating every type of human in existence it seems clear that the premise behind these labels and attributes is merely a political device, as is race itself. Races and nations.”
This is precisely what is totally wrong about the claim that King Tut is predominately European, since the original genetic markers were phenotypically Black-Afrikan to begin with and the mutations arose to develop the downstream groupings we call and recognize as racial types. It is inconceivable to me that an Afrikan-American male could be classed as European by markers that did not mutate. For instance DYS 10831.1 + (positive) and 10831.2+ (positive) makes this male Haplogroup BT. For the European, the DYS 10831.1 and 10831.2 must be negative to be either R1b or R1a ! So R1-M173 of The Sahel, Cameroon, Central Afrika is not European specific if the marker 10831.2 is positive !
10831.1 and 10831.2 as positive or negative are the other markers for King Tut that we have no knowledge.
CN
In the case of mt-DNA M, here is a clear scientific reference just in case you have issues with wikipedia:
“Family Tree DNA’s haplogroup description of M:
Haplogroup M cluster has been characterized as generally of east Eurasia— a geographic region that includes south Asia, east Asia, and Australasia. One of the two deep roots of the mitochondrial tree of haplogroups found in Asia, haplogroup M dates to approximately 70,000 years ago. Interestingly, one of the sub-haplogroups of the M cluster, haplogroup M1, is found primarily in northern Africa, suggesting either a very early divergence from the root of haplogroup M or even migration back to Africa after the original dispersal into Eurasia. Future work will further document the historical distribution of this root haplogroup and closely related haplogroups within the M cluster…
ADDITIONAL SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES Genetic Affinities of the Andaman Islanders,a Vanishing Human Population by K. Thangaraj, et al. EXCERPT: “The present-day Andamanese, bar the four Jarawa, were tested for the presence of the intergenic 9-base pair (9-bp) deletion common in Asian populations [11] and for their allelic status at position 10400, a C to T transition that defines the major “Asian” haplogroup M [12]. None of the Andamanese exhibited the 9-bp deletion. All but two of the Andamanese had the 10400T substitution, indicating that they belonged to haplogroup M. Seven of the Andamanese (four Onge and three Great Andamanese) were analyzed further by DNA sequencing of selected mtDNA coding sites to investigate their affinity to previously identified subclades of haplogroup M, characterized by substitutions at the following sites: positions 6446, 6680, 12403, and 14110 [13], which define the M1 haplogroup in Ethiopia; position 11946, which defines the M1 and M2 haplogroups in India and the Philippines [13]; sites 153 and 3394 (M9), 4715 and 15487 (M8), 4833 (G), 5178 (D), 9824 (M7), and 10646 (M10), which define various M subgroups (shown in parentheses) observed in Han Chinese [14]; sites 7598, specific to haplogroup E of Borneo and Malaysia, and 16144, which defines haplogroup Q, a subclade of M common in Papua New Guinea. The seven Andamanese were identical to the mtDNA reference [15] at these sites and lacked the substitutions known to define previously observed M subclades”. Pg 2 [2002] http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/CB_2002_p1-18.pdf Mitochondrial haplogroup M discovered in prehistoric North Americans by R. Malhi, et al. [2006] Italian mitochondrial DNA database: results of a collaborative exercise and proficiency testing by C. Turchi, et al. EXCERPT: “Two Asian hg [45, 46] were also discovered: hg M (0.25%) and D (0.75%)”. Pg 5 [2006] A database of mitochondrial DNA hypervariable regions I and II sequences of individuals from Slovakia by I. Lehocky, et al. Pg 4 [2008] SEQUENCES: M* 223-362 73-207-263-309.1C-315.1C M* 223-362 73-263-309.1C-315.1C M5 129-223-291 73-263-309.1C-315.1C M5 129-223-291-298 73-263-309.1C-315.1C M5 129-223-291-298 73-263-309.1C-309.2C-315.1C.”
The Andamanese :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andamanese
“The Andamanese people are the various aboriginal inhabitants of the Andaman Islands, which is the northern district of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands union territory of India, located in the southeastern part of the Bay of Bengal. They include the Great Andamanese, Jarawa, Onge, Sentinelese, and the extinct Jangil. Anthropologically, they are usually classified as Negritos (sometimes also called Proto-Australoids), represented also by the Semang of Malaysia and the Aeta of the Philippines. Their ancestors are thought to have arrived in the islands 60,000 years ago from coastal India (or crossed over a land bridge from Burma during a glacial period) as part of the first human peopling of India and Southeast Asia, in the initial Great Coastal Migration on what is now the Continental shelf of the northern Indian Ocean that was the first expansion of humanity Out of Africa that began 60,000 years ago.”
THE CASE OF Y-DNA L:
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/M%20mtDNA%20Haplogroup/default.aspx
“In human genetics, Haplogroup L (M20) is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup.
This haplogroup is associated with South Asia. It has also been found at low frequencies among populations of Central Asia, Southwest Asia, and Southern Europe along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. It is a descendant haplogroup of haplogroup K, and is believed to have first appeared approximately 30,000 years ago…”
Subgroups
The subclades of Haplogroup L with their defining mutation(s), according to the 2006 ISOGG tree:
L (M11, M20, M22, M61, M185, M295) Typical of populations of Pakistan.
L*
L1 (M27, M76) Typical of Dravidian castes of India and Sri Lanka, with a moderate distribution among Indo-Iranian populations of South Asia.
L2 (M317) Found at low frequency in Central Asia, Southwest Asia, and Southern Europe.
L2*
L2a (M274)
L2b (M349)
L3 (M357) Found frequently among Burusho and
Pashtuns, with a moderate distribution among the general Pakistani population.
L3*
L3a (PK3) Found among Kalash
http://familypedia.wikia.com/wiki/Haplogroup_L_%28Y-DNA%29
Who are the Dravidians?
Excerpt:
“The origins of the Dravidian languages, as well as their subsequent development and the period of their differentiation are unclear, partially due to the lack of comparative linguistic research into the Dravidian languages. The Dravidian languages have remained an isolated family to the present day and have defied all of the attempts to show a connection with the Indo-European tongues, Mitanni, Basque, Sumerian, or Korean. Rasmus K. Rask (1787–1832) considered Dravidian as belonging to the “Scythian” languages referring to Scythians as non-Semitic and non-Indo-European peoples and languages of Eastern Europe and Western Asia sometimes also termed “Hyperborean”.[Kamil Zvelebil (1990). Dravidian Linguistics. Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture. p. 99.].”
More?
CN
Thanks but no thanks.
“In human mitochondrial genetics, Haplogroup M is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup. An enormous haplogroup spanning all the continents, the macro-haplogroup M, like its sibling N, is a descendant of haplogroup L3.”
Irrespective of how old mt-DNA M is outside of Afrika, it is a descendant of the Afrikan (Black) specific L3. Afrika has more of the clades that developed M than is found in Asia. In other words, this is another chicken and egg scenario better re-worked as the Out of Afrika M groups would not have developed-mutated-existed without the Afrikan specific L* to L3.
Additionally, since L* – L3 is the ancestor to M, the Out of Afrika theory is sustained and substantiated, as the only way M could have become M was that L3 mutated as it walked out of Afrika .
L3 is the last common ancestor of M !
M1, M2, M3, M4’45, M5, M6, M7, M8, M9, M10’42, M12’G, M13, M14, M15, M21, M27, M28, M29’Q, M31’32, M33, M34, M35, M36, M39, M40, M41, M44, M46, M47’50, M48, M49, M51, D(?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_M_%28mtDNA%29
“It is generally accepted that haplogroup M evolved shortly after the emergence of its parent clade haplogroup L3. Apart from haplogroup M and its sibling haplogroup N, the numerous other subclades of L3 are largely restricted to Africa, which suggests that L3 arose in Africa. In Africa, haplogroup M, specifically its subclade M1, has a fairly restricted distribution, being found mainly in East and North Africa at low to moderate frequencies. The limited distribution of haplogroup M in Africa and its widespread presence outside Africa, suggests that this lineage emerged very close to the time of the Out of Africa migration, either shortly before or shortly after the exit from Africa.”
Next?
EVERYONE – here is a reconstruction of the ancestor of all humans – Homo habilis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Homo_habilis.JPG
There are two subspecies of humans, now extinct – Homo sapiens Idaltu in Africa – has features that appear to be Negroid although NOT labeled as Black – MUCH like the modern Masai of Africa, and, Homo sapiens Cro-Magnonensis in Europe – has features that that appear to be Caucasoid although not labeled as White MUCH like the modern Danes/Finns of Europe. There is NO indication of where the two split off in Africa, IF they did – to me, this indicates a separate starting point, around the same time, on different continents. Also, Asian haplomarker M is MUCH older than any found in Africa – blowing the “Out of Africa” theory out of the water. Personally, I still prefer the OLD theory – the different ethnic groups started on different continents at the same time – of course, there was genetic mixing and back flows.
Told you so-Enoch Powell
The Skeptic
You presented NO evidence that DYS 438=12 predominates in Black people – it does NOT.
Cos Seven
Visit this link – thoroughly discussed by BOTH experts and NON experts: http://naturescorner.wordpress.com/2008/12/13/where-the-ancient-egyptians-black-or-white/
ETHNIC Haplomarkers:
ETHNIC HAPLOMARKERS
Caucasoid – E (only subclade E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker-all other sublades of E are Negroid haplomarkers), F(Semites), H, I, J (Semites-1 & 2), K, L3 (Semites), T, U, V (Semites), W, X, Y
Mongoloid(anthropologists now include American Indians (Red) and Malaysians (Brown) ethnicities in this group – C, D, F, G, O, Q, S- American Indians also have A, B, and, X
Negroid – A, B , E (except for subclade E1b1b which is a Caucasoid haplomarker), L1 & L2, M & N – all groups have these, but certain subclades are restricted to Blacks – presence of N in Blacks is not clearly defined and is possibly considered due to genetic back flow rather than present normally
M, N – is present in ALL ethnicities, but certain subclades are restricted to only Blacks
P, R, Z – Caucasoid and Mongoloids only, not Blacks
Whether, or, NOT, you want to accept there are ethnic constructs – DNA shows there are – we all can tell these five ethnic categories apart – Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, White – admixtures become harder – DNA can definitely indicate ethnic groupings.To deny this, is redundant – as is to make false claims of superiority. Fact is, by DNA – Modern, and Ancient Egyptians are Arab Semitic White – the builders of the Pyramids, using Black slave, paid free Nubians, paid Jews(NOT slaves, common misconception – the Jews actually outnumbered the Ancient Egyptians, pror to the Exodus), and, paid Ancient Egyptians – there is NO denying a high admixture – – 30% were Black, Black/Arab(Semitic White) mixes – Hamites(50%-50%) Moors, and Berbers – Mostly Arab – 8-15% Black, some mixing of Indo European Aryan White, and very small amount of Asian). R1b originated in the Middle East – different subclades also exist for some Sub Saharan Blacks, and, Indo European Aryan Whites. DNA shows all this.(Take NOTE: King Tut’s DNA is Western European « Geoff’s Blog).
King Tut’s DNA is Western European « Geoff’s Blog
See above as well as previous answers and links – R1B ORIGINATES in the Middle East, NOT Europe.
Cactuar
Not sure where he got jis misinformation from – he did NOT present any evidence – just wishful thinking.
You see,it’s okay,he saw it on the television.
Im no genetic scientist nor do i pretend to be able to recognize dna blotches or whatever. I do think that one issue with this discussion is that the premise of history and origins of peoples is flawed.
its arguable that the origin of Irish, british and all other european nations is what you call ‘black.’ scientists have found that ‘white’ features could only have evolved in isolation. Going back in time its possible that at one time in parts of europe there were “white” people but its documented in many places that African people colonized all of the mediterranean region and as far as the Black Sea and the Euphrates river. Far enough back in time to make the presence of certain genes or “haploid markers” that you call African, black or whatever present in various parts of europe PRIOR to any supposed slave trade.
Similarly the fact that european features are known to be recessive genes found in african populations also makes the idea of a european “marker” not european at all. On the one hand these scientists want to acknowledge a “common ancestor” not describing it, yet they want to draw arbitrary lines between these genetic markers. Since “african” parents are capable of generating every type of human in existence it seems clear that the premise behind these labels and attributes is merely a political device, as is race itself. Races and nations.
What you call asian features, round face, high cheekbones, slanted eyes with a hooded eyelid… all those features are found in East Africa and even South Africa. Its been shown that the Cambodian region was settled long ago by the Mons who traveled on the Monsoon. Its arguable, in fact Chinese geneticists have acknowledged that their ancestors were “black.”
So it stands to reason that the Asian appearance is the result of East Africans who migrated North for whatever reason, adapting to a cold climate. Its recognized that straight flat lying hair is best for holding heat while kinky hair is best for allowing cool air to reach the scalp while raising the hotter part off it. So on with the noses and lips.
some “white” people are so invested in the phrenology era mentality that they cant acknowledge real history and so construct fabulous theories and pseudoscientific platforms to rationalize what makes them feel superior. Its like a child from an appalachian family goes on to become an oxford educated aristocrat in england. He then tells his peers that his family died and that they were something they werent because hes ashamed of what his peers would think of him.
The truth is that the first civilizations were most likely created by people who were far from “white” semitic or what have you. I think their appearance ranged from that of the so called aboriginees and indians (note: the native americans prior to euromixing were very dark, dark enough to make columbus think he was in south India or Bharata) to that of the Twa people and the “Ethiopians” and Kushites who by the way have the same physiques as the “egyptians”
DYS 438=12 is predominately Afrikan is not false. However, because some Black Irish carry it this is evidence of Negro ancestry by at least 10%. Whether you regard the Nubian as Black Afrikan depends upon the semantics of your racial sensibilities.
I do not need to check out other sources that support the predominate European genetics of King Tut. As I stated already, this is becoming unproductive and until the facts are published its an endless round robin.
You can have it your way just like Burger King!
Peace.
The Skeptic
First off, there was NO REASON to add a FALSE piece in the first place. Second, in some way, you are trying to rationalize the Ancient Egyptians as Black/Black Nubian which they were NOT – I am of the opinion King Tut was mixed – Arab Semitic White(mainly)/Black Nubian/Asian(very little).Visit this link if you have not already: http://naturescorner.wordpress.com/2008/12/13/where-the-ancient-egyptians-black-or-white/
I found an Irish woman whose brother was DYS 438=12, and the DNA report stated he was at least 10% Sub-Saharan Afrikan ancestry on her father’s side. This was attributed to the “Black Irish” so I suppose it is possible that 12 is not predominately Black Afrikan.
However,Tut’s DNA remains an argument from silence until we have the final determination. Oh, and yes, I did add (12 is predominately Afrikan_ to the row of 438=12 for Tut — it was an obvious insertion and not an attempt to claim it was part of the screen shot!
I think your comment was totally off subject but feel free to go off on tangents to fill the space with unrelated information.
I am not interested in proving to anyone that King Tut was Black Afrikan since, by keeping it simple, the R1* of Central Afrika is thousands of miles closer than the European R1s.
Until we have the truth – we are only engaging in pointless mental masturbation that feels good at first but becomes juvenile very quickly leading to extreme self-interest that does not allow for meaningful intellectual intercourse between mature two people.
I will not play the fool. I will await the release of the results….
peace out !