Transcription
[Music] He. [Music] He. [Music] [Music] 2018 in Science magazine. All right, again, H group E changed the world from the Near East. In the present work, we focused on the structure of the Hao group E1 B1 or EP2 within Hler group E, which is represented of the majority of the Y chromosomes found in Africa. You know, um, and this, this, this is a big thing to us, believing the document and the tradition of our ancestors. Because according to them, Abraham was, uh, thec was going to be like the sand of the sea, you know. And, um, I'm not saying that everyone this E1 B1A descends from Abraham, because again, we got something that's before he existed, or, um, from E1 B1B. But it, it, it really leans to this EP2 lineage being, you know, flourishing the way it is. And we know that major population growth didn't really happen on this planet till around the first century AD. Because, uh, I think it was like a couple million people in all of Africa. And Africa is huge. It was like a couple million people in Africa in the first century AD. More, it's more people in the United States than it was in Africa in the first century AD. So a lot of this population boom that happened happened after, after that time period. And I'm just saying, like, you know, sand to the sea, it's pretty obvious. Again, um, three lineages: E1 B1A, which is EM2, E1 B1B, EM215, and E1 B1C, which is EM329. Which we will find out E1 B1C is really a brand, which is will be E1 B1A2. That's what they'll really find out. That is, we included in the geology presented by Kett to gain a better understanding of the structure of the complicated Hao group. We performed a high-resolution analysis by sequencing on the average 5.4 kilobytes in each of the 13 E E1 B1 Y chromosomes, incorporating the information obtained from the analysis into the previously reported tree produced by exclusively revised philosophy of the Hler group E1 B1, resulting in 52 distinct Hao groups. So this, this one Hao group had 52 distinct subclades. The, uh, is, is almost running with the F lineages, huh? N, it ain't, it ain't messing with the F lineages. Got, got a, a whole damn phylogenetic tree to itself. The phylogeny of the Hao group, uh, EP2 without the A and with the B, the newly characterized SNPs is shown in Figure One. Uh, two SNPs, V43 and V95, turned out to be phenotypically equivalent to the previously characterized mutation defined by H group E1 B1A1 or M2. However, incorporating the remaining 10 mutations into the tree, resulting in important changes compared with the previously established phylogeny.
Now, this right here highlights the changes. Compared, the graph is the initial graph where you can see right here, EM329, which is E1 B1C, is found down here. It's independent, as its own branch of EP2. But up here, you'll find it right here as a branch of E1 B1A or EV13, which makes the E1 B1A2. A lot of these are highlighted in red where a lot of these were moved around. But I wanted to just point this out to go a little bit deeper into EP2, E1 B1A, and E1 B1B, because we postulate these being the descendants or Hao groups that the descendants of Abraham would have. Hao Group EP2, which is characterized by a high degree of internal diversity, is the most representative Y chromosome in Africa. Here, we report the characterization of the 12 of the 12 mutations within this H group. 11, which were discovered in the course of a resequencing and genotyping project performed in our laboratory. There are several changes compared to the most recent published Y chromosome tree. Hler group E1 B1 now contains two basal branches, EV38, EM25, with EV38 and EV100 joining the two previously separated lineages, EM2 and EM329. Each of these two lineages has a peculiar geographic distribution. EM2 is mostly, is the most common Hler group in sub-Saharan Africa, with frequencies peaking in Western Africa, which of course is E1 B1A, and Central Africa. We know that from the Bantu expansion, the same Hler group is also present in North Africa, although at a low frequency, usually below 10%. Hler group EM329, which is E1 B1A2, on the other hand, was observed almost exclusively in Eastern Africa, where EM2 is virtually absent. The second basal branch of P2, EM25, which is E1 B1B, has a broad geographic distribution through South Europe and Northern and Eastern Africa, where it has been proposed to have originated. The new typography has reported has independent implications as to the origins of the Hao group EP2. Using the principle of the phenetic parsimony and the resolution of the E1 B1B trifurcation in favor of a common ancestor of EM2 and E329, strongly supports the hypothesis that Hital group EP2 originated in Eastern Africa, as previously suggested. Which, you know, we have other, which even if EM back migrated, which I don't really have an issue with them saying EM back migrated into Africa and then, uh, migrating in EP2. I don't really have an issue with that because, whether you argue East Africa or the Levant, it's the same damn region, just a hop, skip, and a jump away. Arguing over that is really petty to me. As previously suggested, so frequently observed in sub-Saharan Africa, trace their descent to a common ancestor present in East Africa. Within EM35, where a striking parallel between the two Hler groups, EV68 and EV257, both contain a lineage which has been frequently observed in Africa, EM78, 81 respectively, and a group of undifferentiated chromosomes that are mostly found in Southern Europe. The expansion of EM35 carriers, possibly from the Middle East, as proposed by other authors, and split into two branches separated by geographic barriers of the Mediterranean Sea, would explain the geographic pattern. However, the absence of EV68 basal and EV257 basal in the Middle East makes the maritime spread between North Africa and Southern Europe a more plausible hypothesis. And I, and I, I know that, um, a lot of people, well, in our tradition, I won't say that. In our tradition, we hypothesized that the Sea Peoples actually came from, uh, Northeast Africa, dealing with, uh, MIM and other peoples. If you deal with Josephus, Josephus hypothesizes that the Amalekites were in this region. So, I, I just, uh, I look at that because I, I lean towards, uh, the Amalekites or prominent members of Edom holding E1 B1B. That's my personal leaning toward us. I'm not saying that everyone that carries E1 B1B is an Edomite. Very open to Israelites carrying E1 B1B too. But I do think, think for sure that our E1 B1B, doing, due to, uh, what we know about Alexander the Great, about, uh, the E markers moving into that region and conquering that region during the, um, the Bronze Age, when you start talking about the Battle Axe cultures and stuff like that. So, and this right here article is a new typology for human Y chromosome EP2 revealed through the use of duly characterized B polymorphism. And the reason for going through this is to establish a basal ancestor in accordance with the information about the Ibero-Maurusian, because they're saying they're sitting at a position intermediate to both of these. And we know that they initially tried to give E1 B1A2 its own branch, and it was actually the closest related to the Topo sample, which means it's very close to EP2, which makes me believe that EP2 is the most likely culprit for this ancestry. We report genome-wide data from Near Easterners ranging in time between 12,000 to 1400 BCE, from hunter-gatherers to Bronze Age farmers. We showed that the earliest populations in the Near East derive about around half their ancestry from a basal Eurasian lineage lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each other. Which goes into what a lot of these other articles were saying. And we know that that, that deeply highlights Ean us, because we have little if any Neanderthal ancestry and our DNA literally fights it all. So they seem to clearly be connected with us. We obtained the highest estimates in the earliest populations from both Iran, Mesolithic Iran sample, which, uh, I'm going to go into, you know what, I'm going to skip ahead in my presentation to drop this one right here, because I, I think this, because this right here blew, blew me and JHU. We was just talking about it beforehand. Right here, you can see this right here is 12,000 to 8,000 BCE, which we'll say 10,000 years ago, in the Belt Caves of Iran, in the Mesolithic. Like he just said, about 10,000 years ago. Like he just said, look over here in Pakistan. This is not in Pakistan, my bad. In the Alburz MZ cave, this is in Iran. E1 B1A1. That's West African. Why is it in Iran 12,000 years ago? Can anybody explain that to me? Since they always yelling, "Pull us some DNA from the Near East." That's, that's West African. Well, here you go. The earliest DNA we find in Iran is, is E1 B1A1. That would, that's modern population West Africa. Come on, man. You don't have to step it up. They, they messing with people who actually study for real, though. Let me get back to my chart. So, we know that that Mesolithic sample, or one of them, is E1 B1A. And the Levant in the Epipaleolithic Natufians, showing that basal Eurasian ancestry was widespread across the Near East. And what do we also find amongst the Natufians? We don't just find E1 B1A, we find EP2. Which again, I'm positing that this is that basal ancestry. And this is the, and it is also basal Eurasia, which they are constantly trying to separate us from the Near East by postulating some basal West African lineage, which we can't find nowhere in West Africa. Western Eurasian harbor significantly less Neanderthal ancestry than East Asians, which would be explained if Western Eurasians have partial ancestry from a source diluting their Neanderthal inheritance. And that's coming from us. E markers, man. Supporting this theory, we observe a negative correlation between basal Eurasian ancestry and the rate of shared alleles with Neanderthals. By extrapolation, we infer that the basal Eurasians had lower Neanderthal ancestry than non-basal Eurasian populations, and possibly none, 95% confidence interval to 0%. The findings of little if any Neanderthal ancestry in basal Eurasians would be explained if the Neanderthal admixture into modern humans 50 to 60,000 years ago largely occurred after the splitting of basal Eurasian from other [Music] non-Africans.
Now, again, these are the charts that I shown before, but I love to hammer in that even scholars say the Paleo-Africans are A and B. They are not E. E falls into the Out of Africa lineages or the Eurasian lineages. All right. Still on the Hao group E, changing it. It is striking that the highest estimates of basal Eurasian ancestry are in the Near East, given the hypothesis that it was there that most admixture between Neanderthals and modern humans occurred. This would be explained if basal Eurasians thoroughly admixed into the Near East before the time of the samples we analyze, but after the Neanderthal admixture. Alternatively, the basal ancestors of basal Eurasians may have always lived in the Near East, but the lineage of which they were part did not participate in the Neanderthal admixture. Now, I want to go back to our tradition again. Before the flood, in our tradition, they speak of these Sons of God. I know some people postulate that these were the sons of Shem. I don't, um, I think there were multiple types of human populations made. And that that serpent in the garden was an actual human population that was made that the Most High didn't want us to deal with. Because we know trees are representative of people's roots, branches. That the Most High didn't want us to deal with. But we went learned from some of their ways, which end up causing us to end up becoming, uh, herdsmen. Because I think what we did was we started hunting and eating meat. I think that's what it was. We started following their ways. When our ancestors didn't eat meat in the garden, we ate vegetables, fruits, and things like that. That's my opinion. Alternatively, the ancestors of basal Eurasians may have always lived there and not participated in the Neanderthal admixture. And what I was saying about that is because I believe these Sons of Gods were the anog. These were, uh, peoples whose cultures that they were taken. And went. And that when Cain, in our culture, who would have been the first quote-unquote hunter and gatherer from our lineage, went out and mixed with these Neanderthals when he was, you know, banished. He went to Europe, mixed with these Neanderthals. That's how you start getting these Cro-Magnon with J markers and these European markers before the last glaciation due to that Neanderthal admixture with that, uh, basal, uh, human lineage. A population without Neanderthal admixture, basal to other Eurasians, may have plausibly lived in Africa. Craniometric analogies have suggested that Natufians may have migrated from North or sub-Saharan Africa. As a result of these findings, some support the Y chromosome analysis that shows that the Natufians and the successor Neolithic populations carried Hao group E of likely ultimate African origin, which has not been detected in other ancient males from Eurasia. However, no affinity of Natufians and sub-Saharan African is evident in our genome-wide analysis. Now, we just finished showing how the link between them is the Toufa out samples. We just finished showing that, but they're making it seem like there's no genetic connection at all. That's why you have to be careful when you're reading this. As present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians. So that doesn't mean that there's no connection. That means the connection isn't as close directly between Natufians and the Neanderthals as it is with them and other Eurasians. Because most Natufians were E1 B1B, so they wouldn't show that close affinity with E1 B1A like that, unless it was a more basal branch of E1 B1A, like E1 B1A2, which would be intermediate to the two, which would be closer to the Natufians, as it said. So, I mean, again, you got to be careful when you're reading the data. Because if you're not, if you're running with one article and not reading all the articles, something like that will slip you up and you'll be caught out unawares. And again, the reason I'm going into it, reading it, is because when people start saying, "Y'all go and use this information and y'all talking to someone, y'all, even if y'all just watching the YouTube video, y'all need all the pertinent information. Y'all need to have that conversation." So that's what I'm trying to give you the idea of the Natufians as a vector of the movement of basal Eurasian ancestry into the Near East is also not supported by our data. As basal Eurasian ancestry in the Natufian, 45%, about, is consistent with stemming from the same population as that in the Neolithic and Mesolithic populations of Iran. So they both stem from an earlier population. We just seen what the Mesolithic population of Iran once it was E1 B1A1 or EM2. So something that's more basal or something that stems from E1 B1B and E1 B1A, or something that is before that, is EP2, which I keep arguing and pushing for. It is not greater than in those populations. Further insight into the origins and legacy of the Natufians could come from comparison of the Natufians from additional sites into ancient DNA from North Africa. Yeah, because I was reading another, um, couple of studies about some more ancient studies of different Natufian sites, and the craniometry is different in different sites. Some of them are more mixed with Caucasian hunter-gatherers or those European lineages. Some of them look more of a pure lineage and, uh, SAR, you know, admixed between the two. So, I mean, uh, uh, when we're talking about what's before those admixtures, I think it would be a pure lineage again. And I'm always pushing for EP2, our ancestral group, because again, that's what the evidence says. And we even find EP2 amongst the not. Our data document continuity across the hunter-gatherer and farming transition separately in the southern Levant and in the southern Caucasus, Iran Highland. Qualitative evidence from this is that principal component analysis, admixture, and outgroup F3 analysis cluster 11 hunter-gatherers, Natufians, with 11 farmers and Iranians, and Caucasus hunter-gatherers with Iranian farmers. We confirmed that in the 11th in the Levant by showing that its early farmers share significantly more alleles with Natufians than with the early farmers of Iran. The statistic F4 is significantly positive. The early farmers of the Caucasus Iran Highlands similarly share significantly more alleles with the hunting gatherers of the region than with the early farmers of the Levant. Again, they share more or less with the Caucasian hunter-gatherers than the Levant. Why? Because these are the J markers that were coming down into the region. These were those those European markers that were coming down to the region. It's significantly positive among first farmers. Those of the Levant trace two-thirds of their ancestors to people related to Natufian hunter-gatherers and one-third of their ancestry related to Anatolian farmers. Like I just said, Western Iranians' first farmers cluster with the likely Mesolithic Hoto 3B, which is basal J individual, more remotely with hunter-gatherers from the southern Caucasus. I know E, Yesu, and I have been beating this into y'all heads, but I need all these Afrocentrics and these Christian Urban apologists to get this through their damn heads. J markers is European. Give it up. And shares the alleles at an equal rate with Anatolian and Levant time early farmers, highlighting the long-term isolation of Western Iran. Why? These are the Mesolithic. That's what our tradition says, and the DNA points that out. During subsequent millennia, the early farming population of the Near East expanded in all directions and mixed. As we have only modeled populations of the Chalcolithic and subsequent Bronze Age having ancestry from two or more sources. The Chalcolithic people of Western Iran can be modeled as an admixture of the Neolithic people of Western Iran, the Levant, and Caucasian hunter-gatherers. Consistent with the position of the principal component analysis, admixture from populations related to the Chalcolithic people of Western Iran have a wide impact, consisting of contributing 44% of the ancestry of Levantine Bronze Age populations in the South and 33% of the ancestry of Chalcolithic Northwest Anatolians in the West. Our analysis show that the ancient populations of Chalcolithic Iran, Armenia, Bronze Age Armenia, and Chalcolithic Anatolia are all composed of the same ancestral component, albeit in slightly different proportions. The population structure of the ancient Near East was not independent of that of Europe, as evidenced by the highly significant statistics which suggest gene flow from Northeastern Neolithic Iran and Eastern hunter-gatherers, which is again pointing out the J and southern Western Levant and Western hunter-gatherer interaction. Spares this interdependence of the ancestry of Europe and the Near East may have been mediated by unsampled geographically mediated populations that contribute Houston ancestry to both regions. They're saying that they may take some samples of other bodies they found and find something different, but right now, this is what they got. This right here shows you that H2, H23 is actually basal J, which can give rise to either of the J2 lineages. And that right there says IR23B. And this is from the genetic structure of the world's first farmers, published in 2016 by Yosef Lazarus, Danny Nadal, and others. Again, still on H group E, changing the world through the Near East. Second, we observe that all three Natufian individuals that could be assigned to a specific Hler group belong to Hao groups E, EP2. So all, all of them, they got blown EP2. This is thought to have an East African origin. And a 45,000-year-old individual from Ethiopian Highlands belongs to it. An African origin of Natufians has been proposed based on their sub-Saharan cranial morphology in comparison with latter West Eurasian samples. It may be because, you know, the Toufa out folks, that may be why they have this sub-Saharan cranium. However, when we test whether present-day sub-Saharan Africans share more alleles with Natufians than they do with other Western Eurasian individuals, we do not find the expected asymmetry. If Natufians have ancestry related to present-day sub-Saharan Africa, the existence of Hler group EP2 in ancient East Africa and the nearby Levant in the two earlier samples from both regions raises questions about its ultimate origin. This Hler group continues to exist in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period but is not documented in ancient Europe or in the ancient Near East outside the Levant, which I just showed is not technically true, or at least one of the subclades. Because we have that 10,000, well, between 12,000 and 8,000, so let's say 10,000 BCE in Iran, E1 B1A1. This appears to be consistent with EP2 being intrusive to the Near East from nearby Africa rather than its having a long-term presence in the region. An association of EP2 migrants from Africa with basal Eurasian ancestry is possible. Let me say that one more time: an association of EP2 migrants from Africa with basal Eurasian ancestry is possible. Basal Eurasians are so named because of their phenetic position, basal to other Eurasians, not for their geographical prominence. African migrants that did not participate in the Out of Africa expanse would occupy such a basal position to other Eurasians. So EP2 would occupy that basal position, which is what I've been arguing through all the slides I've been presenting so far. However, such ancestry is not limited to the Levant but also expands to the whole of the Near East, which I just pointed out. Whereas EP2 chromosomes have not been detected except what I pointed out. Thus, we think that both the late entry of basal Eurasian ancestry into the Near East associated with gene flow from Africa or its prior existence in anatomically modern humans from the Levant and Arabia before 100,000 years ago are still plausible. In the Levant, we have several samples of both the Neolithic and the Natufian population, both from Iran. We possess a single individual of probable Mesolithic date, Iran Hotu 3, from the Hotu Cave. This makes emphasis about population continuity and change in the region more tentative because these people came into the region and pushed out a lot of the E's that was there previously. However, it is clear from the principal component analysis and admixture analysis that the Neolithic of Iran from DAD clusters more closely with the likely Mesolithic individual. Both are likely different from all 11 individuals and cluster more remotely with the later Chalcolithic samples from Iran, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Armenia, and with the recently described Caucasian hunter-gatherers from Georgia. Again, I just said that that whole two-thirds individual was basal J and from Georgia, the Caucasus. Other authors have pointed out the association of populations in the Near East speaking Semitic languages with the parental clades of J1 M267 and J2 M172, which have also been associated with the adoption in the Near East of agriculture as a subsequent strategy in the Neolithic. In Semitic populations throughout the Near East and the Horn of Africa, graduates of varying frequencies of paternal Hler groups E1 B1B and J1 can be observed. It has been proposed that Y chromosomal HPO group J1 spread during two distinct phases: during the expansion of hunter-gatherers after the late Pleistocene cooling, and during the mid-Holocene displacement of foragers after the desiccation of rainfall across the Sahara and the Arabian Peninsula. If the Y chromosome HPO group E1 B1B, or one of its subclasses, represents the original paternal signature marking the primordial spread of Afroasiatic, then the various J lineages may have been introduced into early pastoral Semitic populations by males from early civilizations of the Near East. This is saying your J lineages are culture vultures, came in and adopted our culture, man. And this is from the ethnolinguistic prehistory, which I got from my brother Josu, may I add, the peopling of the world from the perspective of language, genes, and material culture by George Van Drain. Hler Group G, culture vultures of the Near East. Let's get it, man. The G, the Gil and the Mazandarani occupy the South Caspian region of Iran and speak languages belonging to the Northwest branch of Iranian languages. It has been suggested that their ancestors came from the Caucasus region, perhaps displaying an early group in the Caspian in the South Caspian. Linguistic evidence supports this scenario in that the Gilaki and the other languages, but not other Irani languages, share certain typological features with Caucasian languages. We analyze patterns of mitochondrial and Y chromosome variation in Gilaki and Mazandarani based on mitochondrial HV1 sequences, and they, I'm just going to say they for now on, I ain't going to keep saying this, mostly most closely resemble their geographic and linguistic neighbors, namely the Iranian groups. However, their Y chromosome types most closely resemble those found in groups from the southern Caucasus. So there, there these men who are carrying these Caucasian Y chromosomes, they're speaking Afroasiatic languages. But the other brothers speak Indo-European languages. What they mean? They adopting another culture. Seven Y-SNP Hler groups were found in Gilaki and 10 groups were found in the other one. H group basal J2 was found in high frequency in both groups, as well as Hler group basal R1, which we find R1 following what E1 B1B in West Africa, even found following E1 B1A into, I mean, not into East Africa, E1B, but E1 B1A in West Africa. This is, this is evidence. Together, these two H groups account for more than 50,000 of the two Y chromosomes. Increasingly, the frequency of Hler group basal J2 in these groups is more similar to the frequency in the southern Caucasus group than in other Iranian groups. Moreover, this right here is our boy Kevin G's Hler group. Basal E is found in high frequency in Iranian groups from Tehran and Isfahan, but is absent in these two, and is in low frequency in the South Caucasus group. So his brother Clay is even found in these regions. Come on, man. Can't get around this. Most Y chromosome Hler group diversity in Africa. However, is most, Y chromosome Hler group diversity in West Africa has been presented in macro Hler group E. It is seen to have appeared in 21,000, 32,000 years ago, somewhere between the Red Sea and Lake Chad. The proto-Afroasiatic group carrying the EP2 mutation. Hey, you can't make this up, bro. They, he spent the whole day arguing with us about this, but you can't make this up, man. This is what the article say. The EP2 mutation may have appeared at this point in time and subsequently gave rise to the different major population groups, including current speakers of Afroasiatic languages and pastoralist populations. Polymorphisms from biallelic mutations associated with the male-specific Y chromosome portion are important tools to prove essential in addressing aspects of human ancestry, migration episodes, and testing coalescent processes. Interestingly, more biallelic markers of the Y chromosome not only have geographically defined distributions but are also associated with certain facets of human culture like languages and practices of pastoralism, all of which contributed to the phenomenon of genetic drift, probably the most single key element of shaping population genetic structures. We're talking about globally, bro. Like, like, come on, man. Farming was spread by us for the to the globe. You can't get around that, bro. But we have people who descend from EP2 denying this ancestry. Why? Oh, my bad. Justu, we know why it is because they don't descend from EP2. That's Hler group I and R. All they just descend from ancient Europeans. And they, they not liking what they see. You know, they've been grew up learning that Indo-Europeans civilized every damn thing. You know what I'm saying? They responsible for doing everything. But now we finding out, hold up, it's these, it's the ancestors of these people you've been telling that have been living in bushes, doing nothing, not developing civilization, brought them over here, enslaved and told them you saved them by enslaving them. They the ones who actually saved your asses. Okay, let's move on to the next one, man. I think I'm, we did enough here. It is further inferred that the high frequency of EM81 in North Africa and its association with Berber-speaking populations may have occurred after the splitting of that early group, leading to local differentiation and flow of some markers as far as Southern Europe. And this right here came from Y chromosome haplogroups: their distribution and implication to the origin of Afroasiatic languages and pastoralism, Kevin G. And this right here is also by our boy Mesar Ibrahim, who does great, great work in this field. And this was published in the European Journal of Human Genetics, all right, in 2014, volume 22, baby. They, they, they, they exposing C right now. All right, Hler group J, culture vultures again. Now, this is going back to that graph I showed y'all earlier. I put it over here to the side, and we're going to talk about it after we go here. Three H groups were found in high frequency in those two groups: R1, G, and J2. All of these are European lineages. My lines, you show these all go back to F lineages, right? All European Japhetic lines. Just checking. And to further investigate the relationship of these groups based on these three Y-SNP Hler groups, we typed nine Y loci in individuals with these Y-SNP Hler groups and compared the results. The same set of loci on the same Y-SNP background round that we that were typed previously in the group from the South Caucasus and Iran. Reduced median networks of Y-SNP half groups further indicate a closer relationship between the two, which is again because we're saying the European thing. But look over here again. Let's go 35 to 45,000 years ago, all these groups, which all they're talking about right here, were way up here in Europe, up here in Europe. Then 34 to 15, they start moving a little bit towards this way, moving over here with Malala, moving over here into the Americas. Again, by 14,000, 7.5,000 years ago, they done slipped, their sneaky asses, down here into our territory right here. And then what, what are we finding where they at? We finding R1, G's basal J's, all this right here is coming from these groups, ancient Europeans, Japhetic lineages. The mitochondrial and Y chromosome data give convincing views on the relationships of the South Caspian groups. The mitochondrial DNA suggests that they were closely related to their geographic neighbors linguistically. I think I did read this one already. Let me skip this. Yeah, this is the part I really need to get to. Indeed, the typological analysis of the two groups' languages does indicate some sharing of features with Southern Caucasus languages, while the processes of language replacement may have been completely independent of the ingression of mitochondrial types. It is tempting to speculate that they were in fact related. The influx of local women speaking the local Iranian language may have caused or accelerated the replacement of the original Caucasian language of the ancestors of the groups. Thus, the concomitant replacement of both the language and the mitochondrial types of the ancestors of the Caspian groups may have been the result of the incorporation of local females under the influence of patrilocality. Which is pretty much saying that they were men who came into the area and took our women. Which we know how they got down everywhere else they went. They raped, robbed, and pillaged. So it seems to me they came into our area, took our women, and started reproducing with our women. And what happens? While the men are out raping and robbing, the women raised the children. So what the children grow up speaking the language of their mother, which was the indigenous language, and not these Caucasian languages. So Kevin G, this is how your boys got Afroasiatic languages. They came into the region, took our women, and forced them to raise their kids and speak their those women's languages, bro. That's just, that's just it, man. This right here came from the concomitant replacement of language and mitochondrial DNA in South Caspian populations of Iran by Ivan, the Department of Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary for Evolutionary Anthropology, and in the map over here to the left, you can see the area we're talking about. You can see, oh, my bad, I went forward. See the area they talking about, right here. These are the areas right here, not too far right here from these damn Caucasus where they came and drifted their ass down into these regions, including Tehran, which is the modern-day capital, drifted down into these regions and started taking over. And right here, you can see they didn't bring much of their mitochondria into the area. They brought ours, or they came down there and took our women's. All right, group E, back to changing the world from the Near East. Hlo group E, mainly represented. This right here was another source. I always give a shout out to my brother when he give me something good from my brother JHU. Hlo group E, mainly represented by E1 B1A, I mean, I say E1 B1B or EV13 to be simplified, displayed intermediate frequencies in Corsica compared to Tuscany and Provence. EV13 was thought to have initiated a pan-Mediterranean expansion 7,000 years ago, starting from the Balkans, and its dispersal to the north shore of the Mediterranean Basin is consistent with the Greek Anatolian expansion and the Western Mediterranean characteristic of the region surrounding Araria, and consistent with the most recent common ancestor date in Corsica for this haplogroup. A few E1 B1A or EV13 chromosomes are also observed in the same regions. That's plural, as EV13, which we always point out means where you see E1 B1B, E1 B1A is right there too. And this explains why the Torro is in this intermediate position. The Torro samples was likely able to give to either E1 B1B or E1 B1A due to its intermediate position and likely being EP2. And this is from prehistoric migrations through the Mediterranean basin shaped Corsica's Y chromosome diversity. Now, J, I want to say this. We, we done brought up one this one right here about 7,000 years ago. We done brought up one 12,000 years ago. Can they give us one, one from Africa at these time periods? Just one from West Africa, bro. I've been asking for that forever, man. I ask Dagger Frauds, I ask my brother En Goie, no one can give me that. It don't exist. That's what it seemed like. Hey, and ain't the article saying, didn't the recent article from Harvard say, hold up, we thought they was here, but they ain't nowhere to be found in West Africa? Yep. That's, that's from my boy David Wright. Hey, hey, this is what the scholars look. We going to all the Gen, all the top geneticists. We pulling them out. All of them that's doing breakthrough work in the fields. We pulling them out. And they saying what we saying, not what these naysayers and these haters saying. Just because they don't want to accept that due to from the biblical model, we are the House of Shem. Facts. Demonstration beats conversation, all the time, all the time. All right, again, Hler group E, from Bronze Age to Iran. We report 69 ancient individuals between 2300 and 1400 BCE from four urban sites of the BMAC culture and its intermediate successors. The great majority of individuals fall in a genetic cluster that is similar, albeit being not identical, to the preceding groups in Iran and harboring a large portion of early Iranian agriculturist related, which means E markers ancestry, 60% in the BMAC, with smaller components of Anatolian agriculturalist ancestry and West Siberian hunter-gathering ancestry. Which means guess who's sitting on our coattails? These damn M's living in the house in the tents of Shem, trying to take over. Suggesting that the main BMAC cluster coalesced from preceding pre-urban populations in Iran, which in turn likely derived from earlier eastward spreads from Iran. The absence in the BMAC cluster of the steep ancestry that is ubiquitous in South Asia today, along with the analysis of ruled out BMAC as a substantial source of ancestry in South Asia, suggest that while the BMAC was affected by the same demographic forces that later impacted South Asia, the southward movement of Middle and Late Bronze Age steep pastoralists described in the next session. It is also bypassed by members of these groups who hardly mixed with BMAC people and instead mixed with peoples further south. In fact, the data suggest that instead of the main BMAC population having a demographic impact on South Asia, there was a larger impact of gene flow in the reverse direction. Remember we said E came from South Asia? They say it was a larger gene flow from the reverse direction. As the main BMAC genetic cluster is slightly different from the preceding Teran ancestry and harbors 5% of their ancestry from the ancient, man, it's, I forget what that is. That's the ancient, damn, I think it's ancient South Asian. Yeah, the ancient South Asian people. And again, this right here shows again, um, who these early ones were. Because we can go 12,000 years ago in Iran and we can find E1 B1A1, that's EM2, that's us. We can find that in Iran. And this right here is from the genomic formation of South Asia from Priyamvada Moriani from the Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, and Yosef Lazar, Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School. And this right here is from the supplementary. This chart right here is from the supplementary data of that. Any of y'all can go into the supplementary data, click on the, the Excel, click on the Excel, pull this up in your phone or whatever, and go through and look at these H groups. Because this right here is a treasure trove of information about people who was in the ancient Middle East that these scholars don't talk about. They just like, if you read these papers, they just call them outliers, just simple outliers. They don't tell you they E1 B1A. They don't tell you that there's some A markers. They don't tell you that there's some B markers, which are indigenous. They don't tell you none of that. They just tell you, "Oh yeah, some outlier groups there that are more ancient and go to the indigenous group." So you have to dig through the supplemental, supplementary information like we always say to find a lot of this stuff. This is why a lot of people we argue with about these articles, they don't really know sometimes what we're talking about, because we done went to the supplemental information and got the deeper understanding of it, while they just trying to fist through the article and piece stuff together. But I think I'm going to, uh, close off this presentation right here tonight, Justu, and then pick up on the other one probably in a week, a week or so, pick up on the rest of it and close it out dealing with that South Asia and Indus Valley. Because, um, I do, I think I want to add to it and make it a lot bigger than what it is. Because a lot of studies have been showing that the Indus Valley civilization gave rise to Ur, which is said to be where Abraham is from. And when we know we have E rising from that area, D rising, branching in that area, it gives a lot of credence to what we're saying about the E markers. When we see what we just read before that says actually was a reverse gene flow from South Asia up into the BMAC culture. This also highlights, okay, that's why we see this E1 B1A1 when they dealing with the wormian bones that we're going to find in India. We know the only populations on in the Old World that got wormian bones is sub-Saharan Africans and Indians and people in India. So these are going back to E markers, though. So we're going to have to get into that, you know what I'm saying, and explore that in the next presentation, man. But I think I think this is enough fuel on the fire right now, man. Man, this is overkill. Overkill, bro. Great presentation. Powerful information, as always, coming from James, the argument king. Like I said, man, powerful. Uh, the highlights were amazing. Yeah, that part about the 11 component amongst the Bantu expansion, checkmate. Yeah, checkmate. They always are. We should see it. We should see it. What? There it is. Yeah, it's over. It's over, man. [Music] [Music] He. [Music] N. [Music] [Music] Oh.