If those populations weren't white, they were black?You STUPID MUTHAFUKKA NONE OF THOSE POPULATIONS WHERE "WHITE",
THEY COMBINED SPECIFIC GENES THAT LED/CREATED "WHITENESS", YOU LAZY MF
GO LOOK IT UP
wtf are you talking about. For a so called expert you have no idea how to explain things. Its been an awful experience trying to learn from you
If those populations weren't white, they were black?
I dont even watch him, why you lying? Liars and ppl of mysterious origin- that's who we're arguing against.
If none of yall can answer my questions without AI or getting emotional its no reason for me in this thread. Everybody else leftYOU AIN'T TRYING TO "LEARN" SHYT, FUKK OUT OF HERE.
YOU are trying to "DEBUNK" some shyt YOU ARE FUKKIN CLUELESS ABOUT.
TROLL ELSEWHERE!
If none of yall can answer my questions without AI or getting emotional its no reason for me in this thread. Everybody else left
When he started that series the science was still in its early stages.DNA testing and research has provided some data about the extent of Native American ancestry among African Americans, which varies in the general population. Based on the work of geneticists, Harvard University historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr. hosted a popular, and at times controversial, PBS series, African American Lives, in which geneticists said DNA evidence shows that Native American ancestry is far less common among African Americans than previously believed.[71]
Their conclusions suggested that while almost all African Americans are racially mixed, and many have family stories of Native heritage, usually these stories turn out to be inaccurate,[72][73][74] with only five percent of African American people showing more than two percent Native American ancestry.[72] Gates summarized these statistics as follows: "If you have two percent Native American ancestry, you had one such ancestor on your family tree five to nine generations back (150 to 270 years ago)."[72] Their findings also concluded that the most common "non-Black" mix among African Americans is English and Scots-Irish.[74] Some critics thought the PBS series did not sufficiently explain the limitations of DNA testing for assessment of heritage.[75]
Another study, published in the American Journal of Human Genetics, also indicated that, despite how common stories of Native American ancestry are within African-American families, relatively few who were tested actually turned out to have detectable Native American ancestry.[76] A study reported in the American Journal of Human Genetics stated, "We analyzed the European genetic contribution to 10 populations of African descent in the United States (Maywood, Illinois; Detroit; New York; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Baltimore; Charleston, South Carolina; New Orleans; and Houston) ... mtDNA haplogroups analysis shows no evidence of a significant maternal Amerindian contribution to any of the 10 populations."[77] Despite this, some still insist that most African Americans have at least some Native American heritage.[78] Henry Louis Gates, Jr. wrote in 2009,
Black Indians in the United States - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I was perfectly clear in stating my concerns about DNA. The problem is the inconsistencies. Henry Louis Gates, Mr. African American DNA himself, can't even keep his story straight. One minute, only 5% of AAs have over 2%; the next, only 5% of AA's have over 12.5%. Which one is it? Was nobody in between? No 9%'ers?
Then, the vast difference between .8%- 2%- 12.5%? AI tells me that .8%= 5-7 gens ago. It also says that 2%= 5-6 gens ago. Which one is it?
There's an astounding lack of clarity but we're just expected to go along with it or be ridiculed by the very social scientists studying the topic. It's ridiculous.
Further, the historical record is well-documented. They did not import African slaves at a 50-50 gender ratio. Native Americans (mostly women, presumably the men were killed fighting the wm) were, in fact, enslaved side by side with us and did, in fact, reproduce. So where did ALL those people go? They weren't all absorbed into free people of color. The black-ish looking ones were, in fact, readily enslaved in perpetuity. So where did the genome go???
These are the basic questions I've been left with in my quick perusal of the matter. Ftr, yes, my family also has a NA myth, my paternal grandfather's grandmother. How many generations is that? It falls right into that 5-7 generations area, don't it? So many questions were raised that, when I shared what I found with my mother, she decided to get her DNA done, a thing she has always refused.
Ai Gemini:They didn't co-exist. The "white barbarians" killed them off like the savages they are. There's a reason Cheddar Man and his ilk re not represented in modern British DNA.
The skeletal remains date to around the mid-to-late 9th millennium BC, corresponding to the Mesolithic period, and it appears that he died a violent death.
Cheddar Man - Wikipedia
AI:
Genetic legacy in modern Britons
In summary, while modern British people share a genetic link to the broader population group to which Cheddar Man belonged, they are not direct descendants due to significant population replacements and intermixing throughout British history.
- Modern British people do not descend directly from Cheddar Man, but they do share a portion of ancestry with the larger Western European Mesolithic hunter-gatherer population he belonged to.
- This ancestry, representing around 10% of modern British genomes (for those without recent immigration history), was likely carried into Britain by the later migrations, rather than solely originating from Britain's Mesolithic population.
- The Y-DNA haplogroup of Cheddar Man (I2a2) is still present in the modern British Isles and other parts of Europe, but this represents only a small part of the genome and doesn't signify direct descent from him.
- While a direct lineage hasn't been established, a distant matrilineal relationship between Cheddar Man and a modern-day resident of Cheddar village was found through mitochondrial DNA analysis.
Dark skin does not equal black person. Remember Kamala?
If you go back far enough everybody had dark skin, even white people. Its an adaptation to the environment. Cheddar man was dark skin with blue eyes, he was in the beginning stages to adapt and become white. People further north already adapted quicker to a colder environment and were able to migrate south into Europe and replace the future cacs who were too slow to change.
I've moved on from cheddar man, and I agree with Ty on many things. We all know the original people in Africa were black until tens of thousands of years ago.
On ES I went hard against these mockups. I recall them presenting this ridiculous thing in front of Hoda Kotb.
You ever notice how a lot of these reconstructions look like they got botox? That's because they're using European tissue measurements on 'African' skulls. Like this one, for example.
That's supposed to be Nefertiti!She look crazy and so do Cheddar Man. It's because they're trying to hide African high cheek bones within a European phenotype.
Yall really need some more education on this topic. @Ty Daniels is right, you don't know enough. (@Ish Gibor might, but he's too trusting of the wm imo)
defendernetwork.com
Native Americans come in many different complexitions from light to dark skinned, but with a reddish undertone.
Spring 1867, Portrait of Chief Satanta (White Bear) Wearing Peace Medal, Leather Bag, Blanket, and Military Jacket.
Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, In: Wilbur Sturtevant Nye, Plains Indian raiders : the final phases of warfare from the Arkansas to the Red River, with original photographs by William S. Soule. University of Oklahoma Press, 1st edition, 1968, ISBN 0806111755, p186.
Science Vol. 362, No. 6419 - Early human dispersals within the Americas
