R-V88 Among Europeans

8,000 years ago seems reasonable. Would they be like La Brana man or Loschbour man? If they were; did they have Blue eyes too? Where did the Blue eyes go to? Did they become extinct after breeding with the African natives?

Natural selection to suite the environment? besides we are not even sure if they had lighter eyes when there was a split
 
So you are saying that these R1b-V88 men may have looked like Levantine people? Or maybe Egyptians?

Last time I checked; Chadic people were extremely dark-skinned Africans. One of the darkest African phenotypes I've ever seen. Even darker than African Americans; [whom some may have some white ancestors as well.] So where did the fair-skin go to? Wouldn't it make sense that these V-88 people were originally, and totally Negroid?

How do we know they were Pastoral people? Or the same pastoral V88 people? They could have been a separate migration?

Did you know N1c is a subclade of haplogroup N? Yet it is prevalent in both Europeans (Finnish) and Mongoloid East Asians (Yakuts). Yet, they both look nothing like each other.

No, it wouldn't make sense.

Let's say that you move to Senegal tomorrow for work. While there you meet and marry a local Senegalese woman. Your son and his son and his son and his son going forward for six to eight generations each marry and have offspring with native Senegalese women. At the end of that time your descendents will not bear any resemblance to you whatsoever. Now, in this case, it would have been a tribe, but they would still have been totally outnumbered, and eventually the resemblance would be gone, except perhaps for traces.

The Fulani are a case in point. Those Fulani (Fulbe) who believe they are more "pure" than the servant class believe that they look "different" from said servant class, because of their noses and other features. I have no idea if that would be borne out in autosomal testings, but some Fulani do indeed look somewhat different from other SSAs. It remains to be seen how precisely the admixture occurred. However, you can see the same phenomenon in East Africa, where a back to Africa migration of people from the Levant is also proposed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fula_people#Genetics

When I was still a new-comer in the Area, people would ask me: Can you tell Fulɓe and Rimayɓe apart? (aDa waawi sendude Pullo e maccuDo na?). Sometimes, the question would be put to me, upon my arrival at a gathering of people whom I didn't know, and I would be asked to point out the fulɓe and the Maccuɓe, or to say which was which between two men seated next to each other. At the time, I thought of this as a test of my knowledge, since people knew I was studying the language and life of the people. But on reflection, I see that it was also a test of themselves, which was meant to confirm, that even to a fairly ignorant foreigner, the Fulɓe and maccuɓe were easy to differentiate as types. The main differences I was supposed to notice were visual. The ideal is that Fulɓe are tall, slim, and light-skinned; They have thin straight noses, and their hair tends to be long and curly. In contrast, the rimmaybe are stocky, tending towards corpulence, dark-skinned with flat 'squashed' noses, and short kinky hair.
 
Researchers suggest that human populations over the past 50,000 years have changed from dark-skinned to light-skinned and vice versa as they migrated to different UV zones,[4] and that such major changes in pigmentation may have happened in as little as 100 generations (~2,500 years) through selective sweeps

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skin_color#Age
 
No, it wouldn't make sense.

Let's say that you move to Senegal tomorrow for work. While there you meet and marry a local Senegalese woman. Your son and his son and his son and his son going forward for six to eight generations each marry and have offspring with native Senegalese women. At the end of that time your descendents will not bear any resemblance to you whatsoever. Now, in this case, it would have been a tribe, but they would still have been totally outnumbered, and eventually the resemblance would be gone, except perhaps for traces.

I disagree with this analysis. Look at the Hispanics/Mestizo people. They are a mix of European Spaniards and indigenous Native American indians. While their skin is obviously more fairer than Native Americans' skin, they still have tan skin; not skin that is very fair at all. There are also (although rare) there are also Hispanics who have blonde hair; from the European admixture. But it is darker than the blonde hair seen in European white people; and is more of a light brown.
 
They could looking even like Chinese but they were asimilated by locals, that's all.



The same as above.
Ha! You're dreaming.

Unless you want to get into the argument that Finnish people are mixed with Mongoloid Asians; which explains their N1c. Is that what you are suggesting?

Looking Chinese right? So R1b Mongoloids mixing with an African population sounds interesting; but the chances of that seem pretty low. But I still believe my theory is the most logical; and holds the most weight. These R1b-V88 men to me, were absolutely Negroids.

The R1b-V88 men that stayed in the Levant during the Mesolithic/Neolithic developed fair-skin. This is also where agriculture and farming first originated:

Europe-diffusion-farming.jpg
 
the genetic split can be much older than the geographic split, they don't have to coincide

Of course!
But offten many do this error, when no one knows, when and where did it happend. :)

Unless you want to get into the argument that Finnish people are mixed with Mongoloid Asians; which explains their N1c. Is that what you are suggesting?

Yeah.
 
Why is it so hard to believe that R1* men in Central Asia may have been Negroid? Haplogroup R1 is almost about as old as the European Y-DNA Haplogroup I. And as we all know, Loschbour man (Y-DNA I2) had dark skin, right? So this must mean that the original R1a and R1b men may have also been Negroid too, right?

Would it make sense that these R1a and R1b peoples eventually developed fair-skin in Eastern Europe and Central Asia; by mixing with the women of slain I2 and G2a men?

Your Y-DNA haplogroup may be R1a or R1b; but you cannot deny that you may have had male ancestors who carried I1, I2 and even G2a at one point.
 
Oh really! I am really interested in hearing this. So Finnish people are mixed with Nordic Germans and Mongoloid Asians? Finns will disagree with you on this one; with a clenched fist. lol
 
I disagree with this analysis. Look at the Hispanics/Mestizo people. They are a mix of European Spaniards and indigenous Native American indians. While their skin is obviously more fairer than Native Americans' skin, they still have tan skin; not skin that is very fair at all. There are also (although rare) there are also Hispanics who have blonde hair; from the European admixture. But it is darker than the blonde hair seen in European white people; and is more of a light brown.

It's not something with which you can disagree. It's what happens with admixture.Everything depends on the numbers involved, as well as the degree of intermarriage and whether the incoming group brought their own women. In genetics parlance, the question is whether it was an elite male migration again. Let's give it one more try...

Every situation is specific. In north America, the indigenous peoples were not very numerous. In addition, they fell prey to European specific diseases, and many of them were killed in conflicts with the settlers. There was some intermarriage despite all of this. Those admixed children who were absorbed by the Europeans look European. Those who remained with the indigenous peoples look "mostly" indigenous, but their dna tells the story. Perhaps it was that dna which protected them against these diseases.

In countries like Bolivia and Peru where the indigenous tribes remained isolated, the intrusive "West Eurasian" haplotypes indeed appear, but the people still look very indigenous.

In countries like Mexico, the indigenous people were very numerous. Most Mexicans are "mixed", anywhere from 40-60% European from what I can remember from genetic studies. They look what they are...mixed...both in features and in pigmentation. Of course, in the upper classes there will be people who are predominantly European. In the lower classes there will be people who are predominantly "Indian". In out of the way areas like the Yucatan, they will be predominantly "Indian" in genetic markers and appearance. In a country like Argentina or in pockets of Brazil, you still have people who are either 100% European or 90% European, and they look it.

The same rules hold true for African Americans. The amount of SSA ancestry can range from a few percent to about 20% as an average, although some have close to 50% European ancestry. Vanessa Williams and Dr. Gates obviously have a lot, and it shows. As it does in Cory Booker. Dr. Gates, indeed, has both a European yDna marker (R1b) and a European mtDna marker.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71zDtevrYsL._SL290_.jpg

http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_Party_Photo/2009/07/20/gates1__1248117974_8015.jpg

http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/CoryBooker.jpg

The African ancestry in most African Americans is from Nigeria.
http://www.okayafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/nigeria-student-protest-2012-6-1-11-1-56-620x413.jpg

This isn't rocket science Melancon, which leads me to ask about the purpose of these posts.

If you're truly interested, there are a number of recent papers on the subject. The largest on admixture in new world populations is this one from 23andme.
http://blog.23andme.com/23andme-research/dna-usa-2/
 
I think 8000 years ago.
Here are the first herders from Asia in Africa :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabta_Playa

There may have been cattle as well.

2 groups of herders made into sub-Saharan Africa : T and R1b-V88.
IMO 2 different groups, but around the same age, when the Sahara was still a savanna.
They ousted the Bantoe HG to the west.

they are farmers

A migration to Northeast Africa from this area occurred by T1a-Page21* males with a coalescence age of 14 kya.
A similar migration was by T1a1b-P77 males with a coalescence age of 7.6 kya (Mendez et al. 2011).
These lineages may well have entered Northeast Africa during the same migration shortly after 7.6 kya as a group of distantly related male farmers. Haplogroups R1b1c-V88 and T1
a-Page21* thus inform of relevant male migrations to Northeast Africa


A group of R1b1c-V88 trveled along the north african coast and established the huge wheat farms of Algeria, which by the time the Romans destroyed the carthagians, this wheat area supplied 60% of Rome with its wheat.
 
Ha! You're dreaming.

Unless you want to get into the argument that Finnish people are mixed with Mongoloid Asians; which explains their N1c. Is that what you are suggesting?

Looking Chinese right? So R1b Mongoloids mixing with an African population sounds interesting; but the chances of that seem pretty low. But I still believe my theory is the most logical; and holds the most weight. These R1b-V88 men to me, were absolutely Negroids.

The R1b-V88 men that stayed in the Levant during the Mesolithic/Neolithic developed fair-skin. This is also where agriculture and farming first originated:

View attachment 7172

Please post papers or data to the effect that R1b V88 is old enough to have moved to Cameroon before the Mesolithic/Neolithic. Otherwise, your argument is fantasy.

The most reasonable theories are for migrations in the Neolithic or the early Metal Ages. By that time there were no "Negroid" Levantines. Also, for the umpteenth time, while early West Eurasians may have been dark, they were not "Negroid". That is a modern designation, even if a poor one, for a modern group of people.
 
Oh really! I am really interested in hearing this. So Finnish people are mixed with Nordic Germans and Mongoloid Asians? Finns will disagree with you on this one; with a clenched fist. lol

Are you unfamiliar with autosomal testing?
resnorm chart Lazardis and Haak.JPG

Finns are best modeled with 9.3% Nganasan.
 
This isn't rocket science Melancon, which leads me to ask about the purpose of these posts.

If you're truly interested, there are a number of recent papers on the subject. The largest on admixture in new world populations is this one from 23andme.
http://blog.23andme.com/23andme-research/dna-usa-2/
If your argument is proving anything; it's proving that I am still correct. BTW Vanessa Williams has blue eyes. Do you see the Levantine features in the Chadic people who have R1b-V88?

If the original R1b-V88 men were looking like Levantine people; then wouldn't the Africans with R1b have lighter skin than they already have? And yet; the Ouldeme people (highest tribe of SSA with R1b-V88 frequency) have extremely dark skin:

3448484539_b822c7986a.jpg

two Oulderme (R1b-V88) people playing flutes

3448496009_56cbcc9dac.jpg

An Oulderme man.

Looks just like any other African group; don't they?
 
Are you unfamiliar with autosomal testing?
View attachment 7173

Finns are best modeled with 9.3% Nganasan.
We've been over this argument already. And I ended up getting infractions from it. And I was the one who was skeptical of Finns being white Europeans that time; now I'm not. I believe that N1c purely developed with the rest of the European race.

9.3% Siberian admixture isn't much; and it could have come from the Saami people; who are already known to be mixed-race.
 
Please post papers or data to the effect that R1b V88 is old enough to have moved to Cameroon before the Mesolithic/Neolithic. Otherwise, your argument is fantasy.

The most reasonable theories are for migrations in the Neolithic or the early Metal Ages. By that time there were no "Negroid" Levantines. Also, for the umpteenth time, while early West Eurasians may have been dark, they were not "Negroid". That is a modern designation, even if a poor one, for a modern group of people.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#Africa

"Like its northern counterpart (R1b-M269), R1b-V88 is associated with the domestication of cattle in northern Mesopotamia. Both branches of R1b probably split soon after cattle were domesticated, approximately 10,500 years ago (8,500 BCE). R1b-V88 migrated south towards the Levant and Egypt. The migration of R1b people can be followed archeologically through the presence of domesticated cattle, which appear in central Syria around 8,000-7,500 BCE (late Mureybet period), then in the Southern Levant and Egypt around 7,000-6,500 BCE (e.g. at Nabta Playa and Bir Kiseiba). Cattle herders subsequently spread across most of northern and eastern Africa. The Sahara desert would have been more humid during the Neolithic Subpluvial period (c. 7250-3250 BCE), and would have been a vast savannah full of grass, an ideal environment for cattle herding."
 
Fins are white Europeans, but male ancestors of 60% of them were not.
Do you see a diffrence?
No offense; but you're totally ignorant on the matter. You do know that Finns also have the highest abundance of blonde hair in their population in the world; as well?

N1c as well as R1b and R1a all descend from Haplogroup F. If all descendants of haplogroup F were Negroid; and they took European women that were Negroid; then they would have easily developed fair-skin, wouldn't they? Simultaneously with people who have the Paleolithic European Y-DNA I1 and I2. It could be that the first Finnish people were Y-DNA I men; but their women were taken by N1c men. Just like the R1a and R1b men killed the I2a and I1 men and took their women.
 
Please post papers or data to the effect that R1b V88 is old enough to have moved to Cameroon before the Mesolithic/Neolithic. Otherwise, your argument is fantasy.

The most reasonable theories are for migrations in the Neolithic or the early Metal Ages. By that time there were no "Negroid" Levantines. Also, for the umpteenth time, while early West Eurasians may have been dark, they were not "Negroid". That is a modern designation, even if a poor one, for a modern group of people.
Uh, no? You do realize that the Australian Aboriginals and the Dravidian people of India have been there since before the first Ice Age? Yet they are still Negroid people. Negroids are not a modern people...they've been around for tens of thousands of years. Probably around 30,000-50,000 years old.

In theory; there were two migrations Out of Africa. One occurred before the Ice Age. The second occurred during the Last Glacial Maximum; and these people turned into Caucasoids and Mongoloids.
 
Uh, no? You do realize that the Australian Aboriginals and the Dravidian people of India have been there since before the first Ice Age? Yet they are still Negroid people. Negroids are not a modern people...they've been around for tens of thousands of years. Probably around 30,000-50,000 years old. In theory; there were two migrations Out of Africa. One occurred before the Ice Age. The second occurred during the Last Glacial Maximum; and these people turned into Caucasoids and Mongoloids.
Dravidians and native Australians aren't negroid, they're Australoid. Dark skin doesn't equal negroid, that term describes a set of craniometric and facial features. And what does that have to do with V88 in any case? You're confused.
 

This thread has been viewed 114167 times.

Back
Top