Hello everyone. As the title states, I do not believe we have Eurasian DNA. I'm not an Afrocentricist. I just find the following weird:
1. The paternal lineage of the Natufians are not related to Cushitic speaking groups. It's E3B yes, but it's e1b1b1b or e1b1b undifferentiated or e1b1 undifferentiated. They don't have E-V32 (e1b1b1a1a1b), E-V12 or e1b1b1a. So how can they be our ancestors?
2. The Natufians only act as a best representation of a component of autosomal DNA Somalis and other Cushites have currently. This is due to available genetic material from archeology. If an archeological study of e1b1b1a representatives from Northeastern Africa were available, those components would fit better. So why should we accept Natufians being our supposed Eurasian ancestors, when they're just the best fit right now?
3. E1b1b1a seems to be found more commonly in Egypt and Libya. Also, that region seems to be a launching point for other descendents of that lineage. Cushites seem to have a particular one, which is from E-V12 going to E-V32 (the common Cushites paternal marker). So, why don't we simply conclude that a back migration from North Africa to East Africa occurred, and then a moment of intermixing with indigenous East African people, which formed the Cushitic speaking people today?
Just wondering if anyone else has any information that can justify why we should take a connection with the Natufians seriously.
1. The paternal lineage of the Natufians are not related to Cushitic speaking groups. It's E3B yes, but it's e1b1b1b or e1b1b undifferentiated or e1b1 undifferentiated. They don't have E-V32 (e1b1b1a1a1b), E-V12 or e1b1b1a. So how can they be our ancestors?
2. The Natufians only act as a best representation of a component of autosomal DNA Somalis and other Cushites have currently. This is due to available genetic material from archeology. If an archeological study of e1b1b1a representatives from Northeastern Africa were available, those components would fit better. So why should we accept Natufians being our supposed Eurasian ancestors, when they're just the best fit right now?
3. E1b1b1a seems to be found more commonly in Egypt and Libya. Also, that region seems to be a launching point for other descendents of that lineage. Cushites seem to have a particular one, which is from E-V12 going to E-V32 (the common Cushites paternal marker). So, why don't we simply conclude that a back migration from North Africa to East Africa occurred, and then a moment of intermixing with indigenous East African people, which formed the Cushitic speaking people today?
Just wondering if anyone else has any information that can justify why we should take a connection with the Natufians seriously.
Last edited: