World History And Anthropology: Are Austronesian, Melanesian etc black... what does dna say? The Ancient Greeks were black, world history and anthropology ~~~~

Tuesday, 11 February 2014

Are Austronesian, Melanesian etc black... what does dna say?



Your comment of genetic difference is demonstrably false. Madagascar is in Africa, they are close genetically to Austronesians. You also ignored all the surrounding island that are still part of africa and have the same haplogroup. Further showing me a picture and insisting the person is mixed with asian is irrelevant because I already demonstrated the so called asian features occur independently in groups of south africa like the khoisan and west africans who have high cheeks bones and slanty eyes.

However the name New Guinea would later be used by Westerners starting with Spanish explorer Íñigo Ortíz de Retes in 1545, referring to the similarities of the indigenous people's appearance with the natives of Guinea region of Africa.[
Singh, Bilveer (2008). Papua: geopolitics and the quest for nationhood. Transaction Publishers. p. 26.

Further, I don't believe race was classified entirely upon genetics. If that is the case it doesn't make sense how we are grouping races in the social sense. There needs to be a single objective standard applied blanketly. If your going to say that polynesians aren't black because they are different genetically you need to explain why people from different haplogroups in africa like a, b, d r and e should still count as black but the o africans shouldn't. Then you need to explain why alot of asians aren't o but should count as closer genetically. Strangely, I have yet to hear why Nigerians and Cameroonians shouldn't be classified as white or vice versa western european classified as black because they are r1 at high rates in both instances. I have yet to hear the white man argue that irish, english and poles are closer to nigerians than nordics who are mostly I haplogroup and therefore not white.

I am waiting for an explanation for why Finnish people who are 50% N, the asian haplogroup and surrounding nations should be counted as white when they are genetically closer to asians than white. Or perhaps it is the nordic people in ssweden and norway with their unique I haplogroup who are not really white, you tell me who is the real white and imposter white?

Of course you won't have an answer that meets the standard you set out to deny black asians as being black.

Genetic distance is a function of time seperation and does not always reflect racial differences from our concept of race. Unless of course you are ready to tell me which group is the true white the norwegian, the finnish or the english. Because dna wise they are all very different (I, N and R1) and the finnish N is asian and the english r1 is african.

Finally delving into mtdna of australian and polynesians,well mtdna m and N both originate from africa or black african populations. There does exist some debate if N actually arises in africa or outside but it doesn't really matter because the populations would have been black anyways and they would not have had enough to time to undergo the broadspread racial mutuations nor would the climate have been conductive of it as arabia is hotter than tropical africa.

[quote]However in the middle east and south asia, the west african affiliation reaches levels that are so high that even with low sample sizes we can show statistical significance. The geographical proximity of these regions to Africa suggest relatively recent population expansions or migrations. Other lines of evidence lend support for this finding... 1. Underhill et al. (2001) showed that the frequency of the YAP+Y haplogroup commonly referred to as haplogroup E or (III) is relatively high (about 25%) in the middle east and mediterranean. This haplogroup E is the major hplogroup found in sub-saharan africa (over 75% of all y chromosomes). Specifically Europeans contain the E3b subhaplogroup which was derived from haplogroup E in subsaharan africa and currently is distributed along the north and east of africa[/quote]
Molecular Photofitting: Predicting Ancestry and Phenotype Using DNA
By Tony Frudakis, Ph.D
p 326-327

Human Genome Diversity Project by Reich et al. detected a West-to-East gradient of Bantu related ancestry across Eurasia. The authors suggest that after the Out of Africa migration, there was most likely a later Bantu-related gene flow into Europe
Reich D, Price AL, Patterson N (May 2008). "Principal component analysis of genetic data". 

Long story short australoids and polynesians share a common mtdna with africans and are part of subgroups and subclades of the superclade L3. They also share a common O with africans. While they are genetically similar and alike it is not really necesary for them to be. The different white groups often viewed of the same strand like nordics/northern europeans are different genetically. With Finns being N, Norge and swedes being I, West euros being r1. Some turks and even iranians want to claim being white today and they are majority J which is another different ball game of haplogroups.

No comments :

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.