or maybe I am still missing something.


>>Ok my mistake. But how does this study prove the present
>day
>>Jews, Arabs, and Phoenecians aren't converts to the
>religions
>>of Judaism and Islam but the originals peoples of these
>>religions?
>
>for example the Aramaeans of Syria, they even still speak
>Aramaic. They are a distinct group but are genetically related
>to the other middle eastern populations as well. If these
>other populations were converts from outside the region they
>wouldn't be so closely related to the original populations
>genetically.
>
Nothing in the on the chart, at the link you provided, says anything about Aramaens of Syria. It does say Syrians. I'll assume that is what you are referring to since otherwise the mentioning of Aramaeans would be irrelevant and I know you are too intelligent for that. So, with that said. The point that is being made is that these folks are not the original populations. The arabs of Egypt are not the original population of Egypt. The area called the Middle East is a pretty big area. Why is Iraqis and Iranians not included in this chart.

All this proves is that these people who now call themselves jews are closely related to the peoples occupying that area now genetically. The point is these are not the original population but migrants who have moved into the area and converted to these religions. I am curious to know how closely, genetically, they are related to Afghanis and Pakistanis as well. Look how closely related they are to Turks and how close Saudi Arabians are to Europeans in that chart.

I'm sorry I don't see how this proves these people are not converts, are the original populations, or Jesus not being an African.

-----------------------------------

"...you cats are undercover like GAY rappers dealing with MYSTERY." -Talib Kweli This means you, from Reflection Eternal

"I don't blame Tiger Woods, but I overstand the mental poison that's even worse than drugs" -nas poison