Eurogenes ANE K7 - post your results

I'm guessing East African is very ancient and represents something Arab, not Negroid. Kind of like the Red Sea component. If these calculators are really as ancient as they say they are. The mongrelization of East Africa is a rather recent occurrence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanielJ1eH

I'm guessing East African is very ancient and represents something Arab, not Negroid. Kind of like the Red Sea component. If these calculators are really as ancient as they say they are. The mongrelization of East Africa is a rather recent occurrence.

---

East Africans are about 50% Negroid 50% Caucasoid today by blood, though it varies by tribe. However, the blacks were there first. Sorry.

It's quite inaccurate to think of components as racial categories because phenotype changes very quickly. ANE people like Mal'ta had some quite clear mongoloid features but most modern Europeans don't display mongoloid traits, even in Northeastern Europe.


There's also a very serious possibility that all West Eurasians are African-admixed, which would explain why 45,000 years old Ust'-Ushim , while being an undifferentiated Eurasian, has a closer affinity to East Asians and not Europeans. Could also be Basal Eurasian if it's not African, but it's the same logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

East Africans are about 50% Negroid 50% Caucasoid today by blood, though it varies by tribe. However, the blacks were there first. Sorry.

---

If this calculator is the most correct of them all, which I doubt due to my results in the East African category being inconsistent, then I am very surprised I scored LESS than the Anglo-Saxon examples Graham posted. I think this calculator is still in its infancy. Even on the Africa9 calculator it was all NW_African.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...ps4425dd6d.jpg

Dodecad Africa9:

Population
Europe 58.95%
NW_Africa 12.61%
SW_Asia 28.44%
E_Africa -
S_Africa -
Mbuti -
W_Africa -
Biaka -
San -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gaston

There's also a very serious possibility that all West Eurasians are African-admixed, which would explain why 45,000 years old Ust'-Ushim , while being an undifferentiated Eurasian, has a closer affinity to East Asians and not Europeans. Could also be Basal Eurasian if it's not African, but it's the same logic.

---

Probably correct. I don't think anythings waterproof. Especially DNA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

East Africans are about 50% Negroid 50% Caucasoid today by blood, though it varies by tribe. However, the blacks were there first. Sorry.

---

No. Early Skulls from East Africa have no affinity to modern Negroids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deidara

No. Early Skulls from East Africa have no affinity to modern Negroids.

---

Correct. This is what I was mentioning earlier. I think East_African could very well be North_African/Middle Eastern-esque which explains the high amount for Anglo-Saxons which I thought was bizarre.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

East Africans are about 50% Negroid 50% Caucasoid today by blood, though it varies by tribe. However, the blacks were there first. Sorry.

---

Non-sense. They were still swinging from trees and flinging poo at each other in West Africa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanielJ1eH

Correct. This is what I was mentioning earlier. I think East_African could very well be North_African/Middle Eastern-esque which explains the high amount for Anglo-Saxons which I thought was bizarre.

---

I don't know what it is, I only know that prehistoric East Africans had nothing in common craniofacially with modern subsaharans. Neither did ancient Egyptians. These genetic components don't necessarily correlate with Racial features.

Users with the highest Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) ancestry:

No specific order.

Jusarius 20.78% (Finnish)

Albannach 21.93% (North British and Irish)

Bravado 20.17% (Mexican)

Sehnsucht 20.81% (German American)

Not a Cop 20.13% (Russian, German)