Sepukku:


We are done yet Jacey, grab a seat and wait till the end before waving your flag of victory. Its only just started.

LMAO you are having a hard time.

JaceBlaze:


LMAO you are having a hard time.

Please Jace. You know this subject matter is way above your intelligence level.

Sepukku:


Please Jace. You know this subject matter is way above your intelligence level.

Okay,Kwerekwere

JaceBlaze:


Okay,Kwerekwere

Proud kwerekwere here as opposed to confused Bantus!

Lets go!

Sepukku:


Proud kwerekwere here as opposed to confused Bantus!

Lets go!

Alright,at least you own it😜

JaceBlaze:


Alright,at least you own it😜

The etymolgoy of the word "kwerekwere" in your country simply means the person is "kwekwekwekwewkwererere" i.e. talking to fast and therefore you cannot comprehend them so why should I not own it.


I talk to fast for ya'll to understand.

Sepukku:


Do I force you to respond?

You have your picture spamming thread, don't you?

Wasn't even talking to you knucklehead, stay in your lane and keep it moving

Sepukku:


The etymolgoy of the word "kwerekwere" in your country simply means the person is "kwekwekwekwewkwererere" i.e. talking to fast and therefore you cannot comprehend them so why should I not own it.


I talk to fast for ya'll to understand.

Like I said,I appreciate that you own it.We also call them grigambas

Sepukku:


Abstract
Within-population genetic diversity is greatest within Africa, while between-population genetic diversity is directly proportional to geographic distance. The most divergent contemporary human populations include the click-speaking forager peoples of southern Africa, broadly defined as Khoesan. Both intra- (Bantu expansion) and inter-continental migration (European-driven colonization) have resulted in complex patterns of admixture[b] between ancient geographically isolated Khoesan and more recently diverged populations. Using gender-specific analysis and almost 1 million autosomal markers, we determine the significance of estimated ancestral contributions that have shaped five contemporary southern African populations in a cohort of 103 individuals. Limitedby lack of available data for homogenous Khoesan representation, we identify the Ju/'hoan (n = 19) as a distinct early diverging human lineage with little to no significant non-Khoesan contribution. In contrast to the Ju/'hoan, we identify ancient signatures of Khoesan and Bantu unions resulting in significant Khoesan- and Bantu-derived contributions to the Southern Bantu amaXhosa (n = 15) and Khoesan !Xun (n = 14), respectively.

Our data further suggests that contemporary !Xun represent distinct Khoesan prehistories. Khoesan assimilation with European settlement at the most southern tip of Africa resulted in significant ancestral Khoesan contributions to the Coloured (n = 25) and Baster (n = 30) populations. The latter populations were further impacted by 170 years of East Indian slave trade and intra-continental migrations resulting in a complex pattern of genetic variation (admixture). The populations of southern Africa provide a unique opportunity to investigate the genomic variability from some of the oldest human lineages to the implications of complex admixture patterns including ancient and recently diverged human lineage.

Author Summary
The Khoesan have received recent attention, as they are the most genetically diverse contemporary human populations. However, Khoesan populations are poorly defined,[/b]while archeological evidence suggests a once broader dispersal of click-speaking southern African foragers.

[b]Migrations into the regions populated by contemporary Khoesan involved agro-pastoral Bantu around 1,500 years ago, followed over a millennium later by the arrival of European colonists establishing a halfway station for a maritime route between Europe and the East, which led to unions between diverse global populations. Using almost a million genetic markers for 103 individuals, we confirmed a significant Khoesan contribution to five southern African populations. The Ju/'hoan show genetic isolation (early divergence from all other modern humans), carry no significant non-Khoesan contributions, and unlike most global populations lack signatures of gene-based adaption to agriculture. The !Xun show two distinct Khoesan prehistories; while comparable to the female-derived Khoesan contribution to the amaXhosa Bantu, the male-derived Bantu contribution to the !Xun most likely represents cultural-driven gender-biased gene-flow. Emanating largely from male-derived European ancestral contributions, the Basters showed the highest maternal Khoesan contribution, while the Coloured showed the largest within population and regional-associated variability. The unique admixture fractions of the two latter populations reflect both early diverged and recently diverged human lineages.

Are you trying to sabotage me here friend? . All this information for a pea-brained saffa? . I thought you'd give me information that was within my intelligence level, this will surely burst my brains.
From what my weak brain cells could decipher from some of what you posted , I have to make sure that I have interpreted the work correctly or that you approve of my interpretation of what is being said , being that you're my educator . So before we move onto the next stage of our debate , I need to make sure we're on the same page about the following:

1. The main groups under study are Xhosa, coloured and Basters from Namibia ?

2. The above group's DNA were compared to the Xun and Ju/'hoan to determine every participant's Khoe-San genetic contribution?

3. The coloured participants were from district 6? The Xhosa people were from the EC and the Basters from Namibia?

4. There were 103 participants ( combined number from all the participating groups)

5. Help me if I missed it, was there any mention of how little the contribution of the non Khoe-San Genes on the bloodline of the Ju/'hoan? And who was the contributor?

6. The author states that the Ju/'hoan were selected as the likely representation of a homogeneous Khoe-San ancenstral lineage? And it is also stated that the
Khoe-San are the most genetically diverse group of people, right ?

7. During the time of the study , there were was no existing datasets of the homogenous Khoe-San group?

8. A lot of the data pertaining to the Khoe-San lineage was predicted using and not limited to already published work?

9. At the time the final study was submitted there was limited largely gender-specific analyses performed of the Xhosa group. But extensive gender- specific analyses for the coulreds had focused on non regional sub structure?

10. It is stated that on the questionnaire the participants were asked to fill in their places of birth, is this information Available on this study ?also they self- identified?

11. So they were able to predict the contribution of the bantu and European lineages into the studied groups by taking already published data stored as property of certain organisations? And they have no confidence on the accuracy of the Khoe-San genetic contribution to the studied groups? Basically there was little diverse Khoe-San genetic data available during this study ?

12. So they are saying one of their limitations and biases in this study was the limited availability of well- characterised subjects? .

As I indicated in my earlier posts, I wont have much time on my hands to reply to your posts this week, especially today but I'll definitely reply whenever I get the chance even if its tommorow. Just leave your reply here, I'll attend to it when I get the chance . And I might also add more questions as well.

Sepukku:


Terrible analogy. Nobody paid anybody for scientific studies. Most graduates who specialize in genetic studies obtain their PHD's when they are published and peer reviewed. This is why there a piles and piles of studies we can reference to when speaking about these sorts of studies.

This is conspiracy theory.



You are stuck in that Apartheid mindset. Only Afrikaaners perpetuated that myth. Most genetic, linguistic and anthropological studies support complex migratory patterns dating back to about 2000 years these include early migrations by pro bantu peopls and late migrations by your comtemporay Nguni- bantu peoples.

This is why I tell you to read neh!


Jaceblaze come and carry your sister from here. Her heart is filled with hate for the White man that she cannot think objectively outside of these biases

Nope those PHD candidates don't get paid for their studies But their work has to go through the selection process before getting published, and the head of faculty or department has to first find the work " acceptable and up to standard " . Ofcourse that also means it must be in line with the politics and interests of the biggest donors of that university of facility. For instance ,You can't be doing research about the bad effects of alcoholic ciders like Savannah dry on one's health, violence etc ( assuming that you can link the effects to the drink ofcourse) and think that nonsense will get published by University of stellenbosch . With Johann Rupert all over the management of that institution? You play too much. I repeat , no institution fcks with the sponsor's pockets. They might allow research talking about the effects of alcohol in general ofcourse (minimal damage), but never hit close to home or your work will go through the dustbins of history faster than you can spell dust lol. I'm not saying that this is the case here , but you cannot downplay the influence of economics on politics , justice ,education , media, medicine etc.

LMFAO, I told you calling me names, demonising and branding me a lazy illeliterare , conspiracy theorists and now a racist suffering from apartheid hangover won't rubbish any of the points I raised , rather stick to the discussion at hand with some dignity ,and stop getting all worked up over other people's bloodline lol. One would swear that you have something to lose when it comes to the bloodline of SA black people . something about this topic really gets to you and for years I've noticed this( even when you're not discussing with SAs but you always have to touch on this matter). So it has gone beyond obsession, I don't know what to call it. But one thing is for sure , you will reveal your true lineage one day ( not the adopted nairaland one)and my suspicions will be proven right about you. You're fast getting there, age , ego and deep hatred and resentment of our 1% possession of Khoe-San blood will make you slip up. I'll be here for it lol. And please don't hide this obvious hatred and obsession with " I study every global population especially the Africans " lol . No , something about black SA deeply wounds you, that's why 99.9% of your posts on this forum are either attacking or talking about black SA . No other group seems to bother you as much as we do , one would even be left to think that we were a threat to your longtime existence

You're the one who was dangling that rotten fish on my face remember? I never brought up white settlers in this discussion, but you thought you'd impress me with what you thought I'd want to hear, and you don't want to admit you made a wrong call , so now you're back to your lame tactic....character assasination. Have some dignity Sir, you're not going to distract me by dragging into a mudslinging contest. Lets stop with the sly innuendos and stick to the subject matter .......Khoe-San lineage contribution in Black SA people genetic makeup .

Sepukku:


What do you mean by the bolded. That there are clans of Xhosa who are 100% Khoi"? 50% Khoi? How did you determine, by looking at the phenotype?




There varying degrees of admixtures that will exist "within" any given population that have encountered each other. This is not the point. The point is when a study states that "Bantu peoples have Khoi ancestry at "mean" levels of 25%, what this indicates is there has been an admixture to a given population but that population genetically remains "predominantly" what it was before the encounter with different populations. I gave you this example using African Americans.



Then it is irrelevant to my assertion since this "small sample" is of no significance to a population study.



This is why we use confidence intervals and standard deviations when analyzing sample sizes. The greater the sampling the higher the confidence interval. Ergo if I have a 65% confidence interval when testing a sample size it is more than sufficient to make a clear and objective statement when speaking about the varying degrees of genetic make up witin a group of people.

I don't need to sample the entirety of the African American population to determine that on average they cary 15-25% European genetic makeup in them. If I travelled to a region in new orleans for example which has a predominance of "creo" peoples. The information would be skewed and the confidence interval lower therefore I would not be able to make a definitive statment.

These tests on Southern African DNA are derived from a data base of genomic information collected from several subjects over a span of many years stored at centers in labs in the Human genomic research centers. As more samples become available the confidence intervals better for each subsequent research that is done.



Hence the fact that they are derivatives of the same Bantu peoples, diverging only in dialect and not genetics.





irrelevant to the point being made Linguistic similarities are a clue to genetic similarities but are not a "definer"



Your history lesson has no bearing on the subject matter other than the groups aforementioned originate from a founder "bantu" population and are therefore inter-raleted

Don't have time to reply to this, but I know all the points you raised will be touched on on the reply to the numbered post.

"When you pray for rain you better be prepared to deal with the mud too" ,said Denzel Washington in the[i]The Equalizer[/i]

@Sepukku got himself into more than just mud and he don't know how to drag his ass out😆😆😆 ...and I'm enjoying all of it

JaceBlaze:
"When you pray for rain you better be prepared to deal with the mud too" ,said Denzel Washington in the[i]The Equalizer[/i]

@Sepukku got himself into more than just mud and he don't know drag his ass out😆😆😆 ...and I'm enjoying all of it

waphapha that's his problem

KingCold:
waphapha that's his problem

And now he's in trouble... AGAIN

JaceBlaze:


And now he's in trouble... AGAIN

Serves him right, uyaspita shem umjita

KingCold:
Serves him right, uyaspita shem umjita

Especially when he sees the words "South" & "Africa"

Lionessza6:


Nope those PHD candidates don't get paid for their studies But their work has to go through the selection process before getting published, and the head of faculty or department has to first find the work " acceptable and up to standard " . Ofcourse that also means it must be in line with the politics and interests of the biggest donors of that university of facility. For instance ,You can't be doing research about the bad effects of alcoholic ciders like Savannah dry on one's health, violence etc ( assuming that you can link the effects to the drink ofcourse) and think that nonsense will get published by University of stellenbosch . With Johann Rupert all over the management of that institution? You play too much. I repeat , no institution fcks with the sponsor's pockets. They might allow research talking about the effects of alcohol in general ofcourse (minimal damage), but never hit close to home or your work will go through the dustbins of history faster than you can spell dust lol. I'm not saying that this is the case here , but you cannot downplay the influence of economics on politics , justice ,education , media, medicine etc.

LMFAO, I told you calling me names, demonising and branding me a lazy illeliterare , conspiracy theorists and now a racist suffering from apartheid hangover won't rubbish any of the points I raised , rather stick to the discussion at hand with some dignity ,and stop getting all worked up over other people's bloodline lol. [b]One would swear that you have something to lose when it comes to the bloodline of SA black people . something about this topic really gets to you and for years I've noticed this( even when you're not discussing with SAs but you always have to touch on this matter). So it has gone beyond obsession, I don't know what to call it. But one thing is for sure , you will reveal your true lineage one day ( not the adopted nairaland one)and my suspicions will be proven right about you. You're fast getting there, age , ego and deep hatred and resentment of our 1% possession of Khoe-San blood will make you slip up. I'll be here for it lol. And please don't hide this obvious hatred and obsession with " I study every global population especially the Africans " lol . No , something about black SA deeply wounds you, that's why 99.9% of your posts on this forum are either attacking or talking about black SA . No other group seems to bother you as much as we do , one would even be left to think that we were a threat to your longtime existence[/b]

You're the one who was dangling that rotten fish on my face remember? I never brought up white settlers in this discussion, but you thought you'd impress me with what you thought I'd want to hear, and you don't want to admit you made a wrong call , so now you're back to your lame tactic....character assasination. Have some dignity Sir, you're not going to distract me by dragging into a mudslinging contest. Lets stop with the sly innuendos and stick to the subject matter .......Khoe-San lineage contribution in Black SA people genetic makeup .

We living rent-free which is so weird because you can spend a whole lifetime in Makoko without ever sighting a South African there but we are always on their minds...VERY WEIRD🤔🤔

JaceBlaze:


Especially when he sees the words "South" & "Africa"

Yoh bafo!! That's a yin to his yang

Lionessza6:


11. So they were able to predict the contribution of the bantu and European lineages into the studied groups by taking already published data stored as property of certain organisations? And they have no confidence on the accuracy of the Khoe-San genetic contribution to the studied groups? Basically there was little diverse Khoe-San genetic data available during this study ?


12. So they are saying one of their limitations and biases in this study was the limited availability of well- characterised subjects? .

As I indicated in my earlier posts, I wont have much time on my hands to reply to your posts this week, especially today but I'll definitely reply whenever I get the chance even if its tommorow. Just leave your reply here, I'll attend to it when I get the chance . And I might also add more questions as well.

The experiment has stated its limitations based on the lack of availability of a data for a "homogenous" Khoesan group that genetically represents the most ancient of Khoe peoples however the group they identified were the most "isolated" and therefore were used as a "substitute" because they had "negligeable" gene inflows from other groups and thus were used as the best representation of a homogenous group.

This does not invalidate the results/outcomes of the study.

JaceBlaze:
"When you pray for rain you better be prepared to deal with the mud too" ,said Denzel Washington in the[i]The Equalizer[/i]

@Sepukku got himself into more than just mud and he don't know drag his ass out😆😆😆 ...and I'm enjoying all of it

Yes ,because the best you two idi.ots can do is make side comments and really have nothing to contribute because of the limitations of your brain capacities.

Stop acting like two boesman!

Stay tuned neh. I know you are becoming smarter just by listening to me so don't be bashful.

JaceBlaze:


And now he's in trouble... AGAIN

If I say point to the "trouble" I am in now you will dance around in circles and call me kwerekwere to divert away from the question but I already know you DJ jazzy Jaceblaze.

Lionessza6:


Nope those PHD candidates don't get paid for their studies But their work has to go through the selection process before getting published, and the head of faculty or department has to first find the work " acceptable and up to standard " . Ofcourse that also means it must be in line with the politics and interests of the biggest donors of that university of facility. For instance ,You can't be doing research about the bad effects of alcoholic ciders like Savannah dry on one's health, violence etc ( assuming that you can link the effects to the drink ofcourse) and think that nonsense will get published by University of stellenbosch . With Johann Rupert all over the management of that institution? You play too much. I repeat , no institution fcks with the sponsor's pockets. They might allow research talking about the effects of alcohol in general ofcourse (minimal damage), but never hit close to home or your work will go through the dustbins of history faster than you can spell dust lol. I'm not saying that this is the case here , but you cannot downplay the influence of economics on politics , justice ,education , media, medicine etc.

You are allowed your opinion however you cannot parade this on here as "fact" based.

Lionessza6:

LMFAO, I told you calling me names, demonising and branding me a lazy illeliterare , conspiracy theorists and now a racist suffering from apartheid hangover won't rubbish any of the points I raised , rather stick to the discussion at hand with some dignity ,and stop getting all worked up over other people's bloodline lol. One would swear that you have something to lose when it comes to the bloodline of SA black people . something about this topic really gets to you and for years I've noticed this( even when you're not discussing with SAs but you always have to touch on this matter). So it has gone beyond obsession, I don't know what to call it. But one thing is for sure , you will reveal your true lineage one day ( not the adopted nairaland one)and my suspicions will be proven right about you. You're fast getting there, age , ego and deep hatred and resentment of our 1% possession of Khoe-San blood will make you slip up. I'll be here for it lol. And please don't hide this obvious hatred and obsession with " I study every global population especially the Africans " lol . No , something about black SA deeply wounds you, that's why 99.9% of your posts on this forum are either attacking or talking about black SA . No other group seems to bother you as much as we do , one would even be left to think that we were a threat to your longtime existence

I would advice you to attack the "information" that is presented and not any idea you have of my identity or past experiences. If you peruse through many of my posts, I have not hidden the fact that I have lived in many a Southern African countries on my journey of understanding my continent and have been much interested in genetic studies of many a peoples on the continent. I actually started many years ago on Egyptology, the Natufian cultures and Ethiopian genetic variations before moving down south.

My particulars of SA have to do with its very peculiar history as compared to most other African nations, nothing more and owing to the fact that some of the oldest people on earth and their descendants continue to reside there.

Stop digressing.

Lionessza6:

You're the one who was dangling that rotten fish on my face remember? I never brought up white settlers in this discussion, but you thought you'd impress me with what you thought I'd want to hear, and you don't want to admit you made a wrong call , so now you're back to your lame tactic....character assasination. Have some dignity Sir, you're not going to distract me by dragging into a mudslinging contest. Lets stop with the sly innuendos and stick to the subject matter .......Khoe-San lineage contribution in Black SA people genetic makeup .

Yes lets do that , shall we. When you are ready with rebutts let me know. I have time.

JaceBlaze:


Especially when he sees the words "South" & "Africa"

i am bored by a lot of topics on nairaland here with the amount of time I have been here I have pretty much done e almost all the popular sections.. The religion, cultural and politics used to my favorites but now it feels like regurgitation now so I pretty much come on here to bother you mofos cause I feel like it from time to time. Don't pat yourselves on the back neh!

What is your reason for being here?

Lionessza6:



Are you trying to sabotage me here friend? . All this information for a pea-brained saffa? . I thought you'd give me information that was within my intelligence level, this will surely burst my brains.
From what my weak brain cells could decipher from some of what you posted , I have to make sure that I have interpreted the work correctly or that you approve of my interpretation of what is being said , being that you're my educator . So before we move onto the next stage of our debate , I need to make sure we're on the same page about the following:

1. The main groups under study are Xhosa, coloured and Basters from Namibia ?

and Khoisan groups. Ya!

Lionessza6:


2. The above group's DNA were compared to the Xun and Ju/'hoan to determine every participant's Khoe-San genetic contribution?

No the study is identifying admixture levels for those identified groups.

Lionessza6:


3. The coloured participants were from district 6? The Xhosa people were from the EC and the Basters from Namibia?

Yes.

Lionessza6:


4. There were 103 participants ( combined number from all the participating groups)

The article said so

Lionessza6:


5. Help me if I missed it, was there any mention of how little the contribution of the non Khoe-San Genes on the bloodline of the Ju/'hoan? And who was the contributor?

No. In my estimates neglieable would be anyting below 0.2 to 1%.

Lionessza6:


6. The author states that the Ju/'hoan were selected as the likely representation of a homogeneous Khoe-San ancenstral lineage? And it is also stated that the
Khoe-San are the most genetically diverse group of people, right ?

There is more than one author.

Yes.

Yes. Khoesan are the most genetically diverse people on the planet.

Lionessza6:


7. During the time of the study , there were was no existing datasets of the homogenous Khoe-San group?

No.

Lionessza6:


8. A lot of the data pertaining to the Khoe-San lineage was predicted using and not limited to already published work?

I have no idea what you mean by "predicted" Clarify?

Lionessza6:


9. At the time the final study was submitted there was limited largely gender-specific analyses performed of the Xhosa group. But extensive gender- specific analyses for the coulreds had focused on non regional sub structure?

Yes.

Lionessza6:


10. It is stated that on the questionnaire the participants were asked to fill in their places of birth, is this information Available on this study ?

No. I would question the relevance of your question but you are going to tell me anyways so lets see where you want to go with that.

Lionessza6:


also they self- identified?

Yes.

Lionessza6:


11. So they were able to predict the contribution of the bantu and European lineages into the studied groups by taking already published data stored as property of certain organisations? And they have no confidence on the accuracy of the Khoe-San genetic contribution to the studied groups? Basically there was little diverse Khoe-San genetic data available during this study ?

No. This is incorrect.

Lionessza6:


12. So they are saying one of their limitations and biases in this study was the limited availability of well- characterised subjects? .

Yes.

Lionessza6:


As I indicated in my earlier posts, I wont have much time on my hands to reply to your posts this week, especially today but I'll definitely reply whenever I get the chance even if its tommorow. Just leave your reply here, I'll attend to it when I get the chance . And I might also add more questions as well.

Anytime you are ready. please come back I will be here.

Sepukku:


i am bored by a lot of topics on nairaland here with the amount of time I have been here I have pretty much done e almost all the popular sections.. The religion, cultural and politics used to my favorites but now it feels like regurgitation now so I pretty much come on here to bother you mofos cause I feel like it from time to time. Don't pat yourselves on the back neh!

What is your reason for being here?

huahahaha

Sepukku:


and Khoisan groups. Ya!



No the study is identifying admixture levels for those identified groups.



Yes.



The article said so



No. In my estimates neglieable would be anyting below 0.2 to 1%.



There is more than one author.

Yes.

Yes. Khoesan are the most genetically diverse people on the planet.




No.




I have no idea what you mean by "predicted" Clarify?




Yes.



No. I would question the relevance of your question but you are going to tell me anyways so lets see where you want to go with that.



Yes.





No. This is incorrect.



Yes.



Anytime you are ready. please come back I will be here.

The study is identifying admixture levels in the studied groups, using who as the basis of comparison?

Why were the coloureds selected specifically from district 6 not the Western Cape in general ?

Ok, so you're speculating about the level of contributed non Khoe-San ancestry on the chosen representation of the Khoe-San, and they also didn't reveal the source groups or group of this negligent admixture ?I thought for any academic work to be taken seriously, transparency should be key in order to minimise any doubts and biases?

I think I acknowledged that the study was conducted by multiple individuals by the consistent use of " they" .

So you expect the study to have credibility when there's limited data on the diverse studied ancestry ? I have constantly argued with you that the San and Khoe people were family, yes but each group had its distinguished genetic features . The evidence of this is on the traits carried by the different groups of people who carry Khoe-San genes, I will narrow it down to just Xhosas , Tswanas and coloureds because these are the most mentioned groups when it comes to this genetic * controversy * lol.

The Xhosa people have a very distinct facial structure, yes some Tswanas and coloureds do as well but I'm talking prevalence here. I can bet that one in three Xhosa people carry this genetic feature , and 1 in 50 tswanas do and 1 in 30 coloureds. And the coloureds with this genetic feature are mostly found in the Eastern Cape and some parts of the Western Cape. The ones whose general phenotype resembles the Khoe-San more than any other group ( the Northern Cape coloureds) surprisingly also don't seem to have high prevalence of this feature. I see you're desperately trying to downplay the link between phenotype and the degree of admixture. No one can look and Nelson and Winne and think Winnie has more San acenstry than Mandela. One thing that is consistent with( my own personal experiences) is that the more one looks San- nish, the higher the admixture compared to those with a more bantu- like phenotype. So answering your question from the other post, yes it is possible that there are Xhosa clans with 50% San ancestry, afterall there are individuals with more than 60% admixture.

Now back to the AmaMpondo and the others I mentioned before, they don't carry the same physical features as others in the Province. They look more like other SAns than specifically Xhosa, so its likely that their level of San admixture is in the same range with others like AmaZulu. Infact I'm inclined to think that AmaMpondo would come out having more European ancestry than San( just a hunch) based on the number I've seen carrying around Jew8sh looking noses and glassy semi- coloured eyes. This is where the relevance of the place of birth comes in. Someone born in that region of the province wouldn't be a good representative of Xhosa people in general as these groups have largely isolated themselves ( very little inter marriages with other Xhosa people, and consequently genetic sharing would be minimal.). They are as related to us as the Zulus, Swatis etc are ( our common shared Bantu ancestry ties us all together as black SA) , but the differencuating factor from one group to the other is the degree of Khoe-San ancestry and others ofcourse.

The troubling thing with regards to the obsession or should I call it interst that certain people have with our bloodline is that everytime they study us , there are always more obvious biases towards those with Bantu lineage in comparison to those with European lineage. They make it look like it's one of those things that people shouldn't dwell too much on, but it is very DELIBERATE and CONSISTENT from one " study" to the other. If truly you want to compare two products, you list all the factors to be studied and you gather all the needed data for both of the products, you don't don't submit your work until yo have exhausted all your options ( in search of the needed data) . It's even laughable when the subjects under scrutiny are in millions, why would they perform less gender- specific analysis on group but go all out for the other ? . Another troubling thing is that all these people of European descent who seem so obsessive over " interested " on the genetic makeup of Xhosa people , never specifically study Xhosa people and spend their resources and energy on this ( to make sure there is less biases and limitations) , I wonder why is that. Why not go to the Eastern Cape and find representation from each clan atleast 20 each , including the groups I mentioned. Why di they seem to shy away from this exercise so much, because I'd think there would be so many studies out there about this particular tribe just as there are coloured -specofic studies but .....nope!!!!!. Weird!!. The people who are obsessed with this genetic lineage have all the resources and institutions at their disposal, so they would embark on this if they truly wanted to but there seems to be no appetite in putting magnifying glass on Xhosa people ....I wonder why .

I only have time for this for now,when I get the chance,I'll coming back to attend to the other points raised and give you my final opinion of the study.

Sepukku:


You are allowed your opinion however you cannot parade this on here as "fact" based.



I would advice you to attack the "information" that is presented and not any idea you have of my identity or past experiences. If you peruse through many of my posts, I have not hidden the fact that I have lived in many a Southern African countries on my journey of understanding my continent and have been much interested in genetic studies of many a peoples on the continent. I actually started many years ago on Egyptology, the Natufian cultures and Ethiopian genetic variations before moving down south.

My particulars of SA have to do with its very peculiar history as compared to most other African nations, nothing more and owing to the fact that some of the oldest people on earth and their descendants continue to reside there.

Stop digressing.


Yes lets do that , shall we. When you are ready with rebutts let me know. I have time.

LMFAO, you go explain tire

Lionessza6:



The study is identifying admixture levels in the studied groups, using who as the basis of comparison?

You do know that there are specific genes that are geographic and "race" specific right?


If I wanted to determine if someone was part white and part black the basis for this would be structured around genes that were 'race specific ergo this study would base the comparisons on genes that are identifed as African (Khoisan, Bantu), European and Asian.

SMH?

Lionessza6:

Why were the coloureds selected specifically from district 6 not the Western Cape in general ?

I wouldn't know for sure why that is. My best guess would be this group would show the most divergent genotypes since urban areas tend to attract a mix of people. You'd have to channel those specifics to the authors.

Lionessza6:

Ok, so you're speculating about the level of contributed non Khoe-San ancestry on the chosen representation of the Khoe-San, and they also didn't reveal the source groups or group of this negligent admixture ?I thought for any academic work to be taken seriously, transparency should be key in order to minimise any doubts and biases?

You are just reaching here Lionessa. What is your point?

In most DNA results I have seen, a European person for example could have results as follows; 50% Iberian penninsula, 30% Scandanavian, 10 % Askenazi jew, 5% Middle eastern, 4 % Irish ,0.8% Mediterenan and 0.2% sub saharan in them.

A negligeable amount in the above case in my opinion would be the 0.2 % sub saharan which means this person is essentially a European by by genes and most likely by appearance. I am assuming this is the case here. There are charts in those studies that depict these.

Please don't tell me to post them for you.

Lionessza6:

So you expect the study to have credibility when there's limited data on the diverse studied ancestry ? I have constantly argued with you that the San and Khoe people were family, yes but each group had its distinguished genetic features . The evidence of this is on the traits carried by the different groups of people who carry Khoe-San genes, I will narrow it down to just Xhosas , Tswanas and coloureds because these are the most mentioned groups when it comes to this genetic * controversy * lol.

How can you prove the above, from our aunties and uncles?


Genetic evidence/studies continue to indicate that the Khoi/khoe and the San are barely indistinguishable genetically. hence their combined grouping.

Any two related groups can have phenotypical appearances that are different from one another, this does not mean they are genetically different.

I think I will stick with these "fact" based studies. If you wish to dismiss these or challenge them,You can actually write to these authors directly on these specific issues you have. They will be able to clarify for you.

Lionessza6:

The Xhosa people have a very distinct facial structure, yes some Tswanas and coloureds do as well but I'm talking prevalence here. I can bet that one in three Xhosa people carry this genetic feature , and 1 in 50 tswanas do and 1 in 30 coloureds. And the coloureds with this genetic feature are mostly found in the Eastern Cape and some parts of the Western Cape. The ones whose general phenotype resembles the Khoe-San more than any other group ( the Northern Cape coloureds) surprisingly also don't seem to have high prevalence of this feature.

Your "betting" is all opinion not fact based. You have a right to your opinion but don't parade this as anything factual. You are shooting yourself in the foot.

Lionessza6:

I see you're desperately trying to downplay the link between phenotype and the degree of admixture. No one can look and Nelson and Winne and think Winnie has more San acenstry than Mandela. One thing that is consistent with( my own personal experiences) is that the more one looks San- nish, the higher the admixture compared to those with a more bantu- like phenotype. So answering your question from the other post, yes it is possible that there are Xhosa clans with 50% San ancestry, afterall there are individuals with more than 60% admixture.

In the case of appearance, Phenotype does not necessarily inform genotype. It is a clue but is by no means a definer therefore your "opinions" above are nothing more that such.

Case in point the below football players Ryan giggs and Ashleigh plumptre are both approximately 25% black African with one having Sierra leonean and the other Nigerian ancestry respectively. How can you tell this by their appearance, SMH?

Lionessza6:

Now back to the AmaMpondo and the others I mentioned before, they don't carry the same physical features as others in the Province. They look more like other SAns than specifically Xhosa, so its likely that their level of San admixture is in the same range with others like AmaZulu. Infact I'm inclined to think that AmaMpondo would come out having more European ancestry than San( just a hunch) based on the number I've seen carrying around Jew8sh looking noses and glassy semi- coloured eyes. This is where the relevance of the place of birth comes in.

Again all conjecture, no hard evidence. I can as well propose to you that the high incidence of light skinned "igbo's" of Nigeria is as a result of sexual encounters with european missionaries. Without the most concrete of DNA evidence my assertions like yours fall flat. I hope you understand this neh!

Lionessza6:

Someone born in that region of the province wouldn't be a good representative of Xhosa people in general as these groups have largely isolated themselves ( very little inter marriages with other Xhosa people, and consequently genetic sharing would be minimal.). They are as related to us as the Zulus, Swatis etc are ( our common shared Bantu ancestry ties us all together as black SA) , but the differencuating factor from one group to the other is the degree of Khoe-San ancestry and others ofcourse.

Suggestive, no hard evidence for your proposition.

Lionessza6:

The troubling thing with regards to the obsession or should I call it interst that certain people have with our bloodline is that everytime they study us , there are always more obvious biases towards those with Bantu lineage in comparison to those with European lineage. They make it look like it's one of those things that people shouldn't dwell too much on, but it is very DELIBERATE and CONSISTENT from one " study" to the other. If truly you want to compare two products, you list all the factors to be studied and you gather all the needed data for both of the products, you don't don't submit your work until yo have exhausted all your options ( in search of the needed data) . It's even laughable when the subjects under scrutiny are in millions, why would they perform less gender- specific analysis on group but go all out for the other ? . Another troubling thing is that all these people of European descent who seem so obsessive over " interested " on the genetic makeup of Xhosa people , never specifically study Xhosa people and spend their resources and energy on this ( to make sure there is less biases and limitations) , I wonder why is that. Why not go to the Eastern Cape and find representation from each clan atleast 20 each , including the groups I mentioned. Why di they seem to shy away from this exercise so much, because I'd think there would be so many studies out there about this particular tribe just as there are coloured -specofic studies but .....nope!!!!!. Weird!!. The people who are obsessed with this genetic lineage have all the resources and institutions at their disposal, so they would embark on this if they truly wanted to but there seems to be no appetite in putting magnifying glass on Xhosa people ....I wonder why .

Of all the bantu peoples The Xhosa probably represent the highest level of admixture with Khoi peoples and would be a good sample when doing any admixture studies in South Africa.

Lionessza6:

I only have time for this for now,when I get the chance,I'll coming back to attend to the other points raised and give you my final opinion of the study.

I am happy you are realizing that these are opinions and not fact. I am here waiting.

JaceBlaze:


Like I said,I appreciate that you own it.We also call them grigambas

Call them whatever you want, "on average" they tend to be much more intelligent than your average Saffa.

Sepukku:


Call them whatever you want, "on average" they tend to be much more intelligent than your average Saffa.

Explain their intelligence??🤔

JaceBlaze:


Explain their intelligence??🤔

If I tried you wouldn't comprehend seeing that you have a lower IQ. Your image of Nigerians has been skewed by the poor representation of the stock you have in your country.

Por brecito,

Sepukku:


You do know that there are specific genes that are geographic and "race" specific right?


If I wanted to determine if someone was part white and part black the basis for this would be structured around genes that were 'race specific ergo this study would base the comparisons on genes that are identifed as African (Khoisan, Bantu), European and Asian.

SMH?



I wouldn't know for sure why that is. My best guess would be this group would show the most divergent genotypes since urban areas tend to attract a mix of people. You'd have to channel those specifics to the authors.



You are just reaching here Lionessa. What is your point?

In most DNA results I have seen, a European person for example could have results as follows; 50% Iberian penninsula, 30% Scandanavian, 10 % Askenazi jew, 5% Middle eastern, 4 % Irish ,0.8% Mediterenan and 0.2% sub saharan in them.

A negligeable amount in the above case in my opinion would be the 0.2 % sub saharan which means this person is essentially a European by by genes and most likely by appearance. I am assuming this is the case here. There are charts in those studies that depict these.

Please don't tell me to post them for you.



How can you prove the above, from our aunties and uncles?


Genetic evidence/studies continue to indicate that the Khoi/khoe and the San are barely indistinguishable genetically. hence their combined grouping.

Any two related groups can have phenotypical appearances that are different from one another, this does not mean they are genetically different.

I think I will stick with these "fact" based studies. If you wish to dismiss these or challenge them,You can actually write to these authors directly on these specific issues you have. They will be able to clarify for you.



Your "betting" is all opinion not fact based. You have a right to your opinion but don't parade this as anything factual. You are shooting yourself in the foot.



In the case of appearance, Phenotype does not necessarily inform genotype. It is a clue but is by no means a definer therefore your "opinions" above are nothing more that such.

Case in point the below football players Ryan giggs and Ashleigh plumptre are both approximately 25% black African with one having Sierra leonean and the other Nigerian ancestry respectively. How can you tell this by their appearance, SMH?



Again all conjecture, no hard evidence. I can as well propose to you that the high incidence of light skinned "igbo's" of Nigeria is as a result of sexual encounters with european missionaries. Without the most concrete of DNA evidence my assertions like yours fall flat. I hope you understand this neh!



Suggestive, no hard evidence for your proposition.



Of all the bantu peoples The Xhosa probably represent the highest level of admixture with Khoi peoples and would be a good sample when doing any admixture studies in South Africa.



I am happy you are realizing that these are opinions and not fact. I am here waiting.

No, I think that if Mandela's body was found floating somewhere in the waters of the USA and everyone was curious as to who and where this skeleton originated from . The anthropologists who would examine the body would record him as a possible Congolese or Cameroonian and not a possible South African, Motswana, swati , Namibian or Mosotho .

Mr , I asked you a simple question. Who where the Basters, coulreds and Xhosas genetically compared to ? I dont need all that grammar , just answer the question.


I don't know the authors of this sham of a study and why their half- baked study was even published. But as someone who has gone through their work and believes in it, I'm allowed to interrogate you , afterall I'm not having this debate with them. If that was why they chose district 6 for the coloureds then I'd think Mdantsane ( 2nd biggest township in SA) and a place where you're likely to find all sorts of Xhosa clans . But hey.......they chose the "Eastern Cape ". Very fair and competent lot

I'm not looking for your opinion here , you've rubbished mine, so why should I take yours into consideration?. This is supposed to be a scientific and factual study , so I don't expect such levels of recklessness and ineptitude. That 0.0001% of African blood is always mentioned by competent academics with no hidden agendas, because where you want to make conclusions about people's identity you don't leave out any information you have at your disposal, you want your work to be as accurate and less questionable as it possible can.

You are yet to show me any genetic evidence that would propell me to change my position. So yes, the information and " stories" I get from my uncles and aunties are still more believable that this " fact" based study. Scratch that "fact" part for me though because this study is far from being anything factual.

I never parader my opinions as " fact" , that's why I state them as such; betting, view , observation etc. But anyone who knows Xhosa, Tswana and coloured people will tell you about the skeletal features of the Xhosa people in comparison to the two other groups. You cannot miss this feature, because........well.......it's in your face . This definitely proves that there were distinguishable genetic features between the San and the Khoeanas. If not then Xhisa people would look more like the other two especially the Tsanas since we also share strong Bantu lineage with them ,but that's not the case .

What do we have here ? People with 25% non European blood but still looking more European, but Xhosa proppl with the said 20 % San blood look way different from people in west and central Africa. I'd think our said little admixture wouldn't affect our phenotype to the extent that we have more Xhosa women going around looking like Sarah Baartman than we have those who look like Genevieve Naiji.

By just looking at Igbos, one can tell that they have more European blood than other Southern Nigerians, but the degree of admixture will differ from one region to the other. The same could be said about the Fulanis not just the ones in Nigeria, these people obviously carry non African blood in them( in varrying degrees ofvourse) , their phenotype tells me this( in comparison to the typical west african phenotype). Buhari vs Goodluck Jonathan things, I hope you understand neh!!