>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.

No, that was from another study.

>So, with that said. The point that
>is being made is that these folks are not the original
>populations.

None of them? How do you know that?

>The arabs of Egypt are not the original
>population of Egypt.

So where did the original population of Egypt go?

>The area called the Middle East is a
>pretty big area. Why is Iraqis and Iranians not included in
>this chart.

Iraq was under sanctions at the time so travel there was prohibited I thought, and it's probably pretty difficult for American scientists to do research in Iran as well.

>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.

But the people who now call themselves Jews were in Europe for almost two thousand years. How are they genetically related to the peoples occupying that area now if neither population is originally from there?

>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.

Well if they'e all converts how do you explain the above question.

And I didn't present this as evidence of Jesus not being an African. But seeing as how he was from the original population of that region, you would have to answer the above question and explain why those populations are distinct from African populations.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Nurse Roberts: She googled your ass.

Dr. Kelso: Don't you use your street lingo on me!