Right
Amazigh Berber chick takes a DNA test
- Thread starter Karb
- Start date
Right
AndroidHero
Superstar
Yes Berber have significant Eurasian admixture, they always did, but that admixture is very ancient and part of back migration into Africa that occurred thousands of years ago and it didn't come from Arab conquest.
Damn aint nothing but bones left in this thread 
.....everybody done picked over all the good points
.....everybody done picked over all the good points
AndroidHero
Superstar
CAC Alert(In form or functuion)
You are a hotep, I don't converse with hoteps.
Yooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This was the chick I was having that debate/discussion with.While she did believe she was African she didnt believe she was "black" and so I had to educate her on how North African genetics work. On one of her videos(which was from Ancestry.com) she scored 75% African DNA!
But I was right that there was something wrong because Ancestry.com does not take into account the Eurasian admixture in their North African sample. Anyways shes
Yeah some of these Berber chicks can get it.
I dont find her face attractive tbh, but cool video.
Actually it also happened recently in the medieval era. Look at Berber Eurasian H for example which is associated with European women. Berbers did not always have significant Eurasian admixture and your confusing the ancient Berber population with the Ancient Maghrebi population. People have to understand that they were TWO DIFFERENT populations.
Same with Horners
Berbers do have recent European admixture though in addition to ancient West Eurasian. They've absorbed large groups of Europeans who came as settlers (Romans, Greeks, Vandals) as well as millions of northern European slaves.
There are plenty of Cac Berbers breh. Like this Algerian Berber
"Berber" is just a culture at this point.
The thing is these so called back migration "Eurasians" did not resemble Caucasoids like Eurocentrics want them to but dark skinned Africans during that era.
The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other. When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of human populations are used to generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other. The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. Basques and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it.
The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
And this is just the neolithic which is later than those supposed Eurasian back migrants. If the Neolithic Europeans and Middle Easterners are phenotypically distant from their modern populations then there is no way in hell that those Eurasian back migrants into Northwest Africa or the Horn resembled anything close to modern day Middle Easterners. Anyone trying to say otherwise is just living in some Eurocentric fantasy world.
The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other. When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of human populations are used to generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other. The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. Basques and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it.
The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
And this is just the neolithic which is later than those supposed Eurasian back migrants. If the Neolithic Europeans and Middle Easterners are phenotypically distant from their modern populations then there is no way in hell that those Eurasian back migrants into Northwest Africa or the Horn resembled anything close to modern day Middle Easterners. Anyone trying to say otherwise is just living in some Eurocentric fantasy world.
^I've said this before but most people just assume that West Eurasian genes = whiteness which is just ridiculous especially given the fact that we're dealing with pre-agriculture. It's super Ancient.
Well then theres going to be a shyt fukk ton of bad news for them considering Europeans(who we associate with whiteness) were "black" as recent as the bronze age! This is why I never associate Horner "features" with light skin modern Caucasoids.
AndroidHero
Superstar
There are some European admixture in Berbers true but are still largely a mix of ancient west asian like you said, this ancient west asian was part of back migration into Africa from middle east and they of course have African ancestry.
This is a lie. The bulk of their Eurasian admixture is European. The Ancient Middle Eastern component you keep bringing up from an Ancient migration(which happened around 30k years ago) isn't even West Asian anymore but a local adaption that was most likely already in place since the Neolithic. Thats like trying to claim E-V13 in Southeast Europeans is still African.
So you're saying I'm not 40% cac? :Bruhwtf:
And all this time I was telling girls I'm mixed race :Mjwtf:
I've been living a lie :Coleworld: