Printable View
I don't know about language. But appearance and genetics tells us more in my humble opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
If you consider the Y-haplogroups, it seems plain truth that SE is an ancestral population of han chinese.
Korean and Japanese in genetics do not cluster with han chinese, that's very strange. The hypothesis of han chinese origin in south east asia is more plausible than your unsupported theory.
Trust me .... PURE native SE Asians HAVE INDIGENOUS LOOKS,entirely different from Han Chinese and blood-siblings Japanese or Koreans.
I am a full blood ETHNIC Chinese from former S Vietnam,I can attest to this FACT.
You are talking about the outliers in each population, and does not fit the sound statistical models to construct the phylogeny. If you mean the statistical averages in each subpopulation, you could identify that 80% of han chinese and south east asian are closer in looks than to korean or japanese.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
That's ********* !Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
A salad bowl of cheap lies.
No PURE Vietnamese,Thais,Laotians, Burmese, Cambodians, Malaysians, Indonesians look a bit Han Chinese for we LOOK VERY ORIENTALS as are Japanese and Koreans who SHARE SAME HERITAGE in culture,history,plus genetics which is extremely painful for Viets to accept as THE TRUTH.
I presume that both japanese and korean have different perspectives. It seems that Han chinese out of South East Asia theory is well accepted by internet community, but it is not me who propagated that "not-far-from-true" hypothesis.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
WHAT internet community .... YOU ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
You mean a few DEDICATED VICIOUS Viet-trolls and SPITEFUL unltra-nationalist S Koreans SPREADING THIS FICTITIOUS THEORY.
Many EUROPEAN FORUMERS plus pure-blood Japanese here FULLY ACCEPTED Japanese,Koreans,and Han Chinese SHARE SAME HERITAGE .... PERIOD
I caught you pulled that map from MekongDragon's post from JT forum minutes ago.I bet you're ONE-MAN OPERATION with multiple usernames.
[QUOTE=Grimmo
Korean and Japanese in genetics do not cluster with han chinese, that's very strange. The hypothesis of han chinese origin in south east asia is more plausible than your unsupported theory.[/QUOTE]
************************************************** *******
There are many Koreans and Japanese DNA experts FULLY ACCEPT Han Chinese shared ALL Y-chromozones among yellow race.
WHAT is strange .... a socially REJECTED hurtful Viet like yourself making time to AIR FICTITIOUS THEORY not merely accepted by HEALTHY-MINDED people.
WHAT is Viets ultimate pain,EXCLUDED from the prestige NE Asian club ?
As a side note,I very much DOUBTED you or any Viet knows " the true definition " of Han Chinese.
I often come to Japantoday forum for reference. Believe me, many frequent posters here are also in JT forum. There are not many asia-related web sites on the web, and most who are interested in the origin of ** knows the hypothesis conjectured by "hypes", who is misterious, and excessively prolific.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
Oddly though,all your postings here CENTERED ON " origin " of Han Chinese.
Your mission gets SO FANATIC,you even didn't forget to spread your FICTITIOUS THEORY in thread titled " origin of Japanese people " which is IRRELEVANT to the subject.
Strangely,you make time to air Chinese origin CRAP here and several other Japanese-oriented forums.What's your point,you need to educate Japanese people who are the Chinese ?
That hypes Viet-troll was you,so is MC420 @ CHF plus iamchinaman and MekongDragon @ JT forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
You have been actively WORKING THOSE Asian forums to air your FICTITIOUS THEORY OF Chinese origin which IS MEANINGLESS at best.
Many people here do know Chinese race has many many ethnicities.
That's because of another chinese poster, who posts in that thread. I believe before commenting on the origin of other races, chinese should settle down their roots. Unless chinese people cannot logically and scientifically refute the hypes' argument, any claims on ancestral relationship to korean and chinese should be deemed unconvincing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
Why don't you come back to your forum, and defeat hypes by civilized and rational disputation? I think it' really a waste of time you are coming here to complain about hypes, because I am not him, and so is, i think, MC420, as I can see the differences in our writing styles, and focuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
That's BIG LIE ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
I know Minty from CHF,she vigorously refuted your FICTITIOUS THEORY of Han Chinese is of SE origin in fact we are mainly of North Eastern Asian stock.
It seems,IT'S YOUR OBSESSION plus a handful psycho-pathe Viets as for majority of internet junkies DON'T GIVE A **** about Chinese people in general.
There seems to be some unhealthy chinese individuals who think fine to come into Japan related web sites, and complaining about chinese issues to somebody who merely quoted some of the useful links found in other japan related web sites.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
That Viet-troll hypes IS BANNED from JT forum,I am BATTLING your username MekongDragon there right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
A fellow CHF member could even recognized you months ago,for fiercely wallpapering Asian forums with Chinese genes/origin crap talks.
What kind of claim is this? Seriously, you should leave the forum before breaking your countrymen's credibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
Good luck!:chinese:Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
Oh .... a confession,you're INDEED MekongDragon @ JT plus MC420 @ CHF vigorously spread FICTITIOUS THEORY of Chinese generic race " origin ".Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
Your deflection is totally unjustifiable. JREF is for mostly moderate people who doesn't fit in the wickedness and brutality required for these forums. Please go back to your holes. Your attempt and obsession overstripps the civilized bounds. Get a life.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
I am not here to defend hypes' thesis. He indeed copied several materials from me, and I asked
if I can get some materials from him, and he didn't reply anything, so this mean that I am not hypes.
I had a name of "Gantz" in JT, and that's the only id I had.
Serious MENTAL PROBLEM .... talking to yourself for you do have " multiple personalities or identities " on the internet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
Trust me,nearly ALL find those posts ARE COMICAL AT BEST as I've read other members discussed it on a different Asian forum for some of them believed it's " work of EXTREMIST ".
Are you by chance talking to yourself?:blush:Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
You do not seem to be good-termpered. Don't get excited in the internet forum, it's just a virtual reality, okay?
Oddly enough,you've never posted on a topic other than " origin " of Chinese generic race since you activated the account here 6 months ago.
Your BEHAVIOR is identical to MC420 @ CHF and hypes/iamchinaman/MekongDragon @ JT,with nearly ALL POSTINGS centered on Chinese origin.Co-incident,I don't think so.
That's your problem. Just because my interests may step in your garden, you don't have to name-call other posters.
As far as i can keep track of basic literature, some of the materials were posted in the yahoo anthoropology group, and you can join if you want, but I won't tell you which "anthoropology group". If you are geneticist, you probably already know this, but if not, it's a useless newsgroup.
One European administrator of this forum fully acknowledged Japanese and Koreans SHARED SAME FAMILY ROOTS with Han Chinese historically,culturally and genetically in many posts.
Majority of internet surfers aren't as ignorant as you think.
I don't think you can have a look, because you need a permission from administrator, and the majority of forumers are based around US, and Australia.
So which "antholopogy" forum did you go? I can probably help them to share our ideas with "your" forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
Also, your reply do not make much sense. How will the one person's view reflect the overall majority of internet population? I cannot make any comments, because I don't think I've been to your "forum" (I mentioned "group", didn't I?) yet.
What " anthropology ",as you know nothing of it.
No Europeans,Japanese,and majority healthy-minded S koreans take interest in the FICTITIOUS THEORY of Han Chinese of blah blah blah origin,it's A NOW GENERIC RACE relates to many nationalities on this earth including Arabs and Europeans plus Jews.
One recent news article reported Chinese race has 12% CAUCASOID BLOOD.
What " hypothesis ",AFRICA for where all humans originated IS THE TRUTH not just far from true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
Some Japanese scientists in the 1980's BELIEVED Japanese ancestors were from this one " tattoo'ed " tribe in Burma of SE Asia.So what,we Chinese and Koreans ARE CULTURALLY,HISTORICALLY AND GENETICALLY RELATED TO Japanese regardless as for you Viets are of TRUE SE Asian indigenous origin same as blood-siblings Thais,and Laotians plus beloved half-lings Cambodians.
What internet community .... YOU and a few spiteful S Koreans ?
Funny,you talked as if you've successfully " duped " ignorant internet junkies with relentless constantly postings of repeated message like " Han Chinese came from SE Asia " all over Asian forums.Trust me,very few people take interest in it.This world has over 6 billion people,those several Asian forums you've been working get total of a few thousand active members with a fraction care to know about Chinese origin.
Believe me,I know you're a Viet as only Viets HATING Chinese for social rejection as equals.It's EXTREMELY PAINFUL for Viets to witness we Chinese generally EMBRACE CLOSENESS toward Japanese and Koreans,for Viets never want to associate with own blood-siblings Thais,Laotians,Cambodians plus a few southern Chinese aboriginal minorities out of DESPISE OWN HERITAGE.
If I may interrupt here, please. . .
With all due respect for both parties in the discussion at the moment, I wish to ask that we spend a little time to at least try to think about the concept that the other party is presenting, making every attempt to look at it from that angle (not meaning agreeing or accepting, necessarily) IN ORDER to keep the emotional element as low as possible.
I really hope that the discussion can go more smoothly and with greater empathy, yet will admit (of course and honestly) that it is only my concern--not that I am in any position of authority. MM
Question is .... what does Chinese origin have to do with this thread ?
Nearly ALL POSTS written by him CENTERED ON " Chinse origin " in the last 6 months since he signed up here.
I didn't think you're in GermanyQuote:
Originally Posted by Grimmo
Hello again ricecake san. I understand your concern. The topic could be mentioned within the framework of the thread's theme, as in your post #17, but I agree with you in that it is not something to be harped on under this OP.Quote:
Originally Posted by ricecake
Somehow, Grimmo san had picked up on your post, which revived this thread after it had been dead for a good long while, and then it just got stuck.
In order to make it smoother, it may be good to let it go more slowly and with less 'heat'--if you catch what I mean. I do hope you'd agree that there is no reason to get worked up over whatever theories there may be regarding origins.
Thanks for you listening ear !! :-)
Mars Man, thank you for your friendly moderation,
Let me point out one thing, itīs him who first name-called
me as the MC420 in the china history forum, in another
thread regarding the origin of japanese people.
I guess his only intention seemed to obscure the
discussion on this forum. One thing I am sympathetic about
him is about on-going china bashing in another chinese
related forum. But thatīs his issue, and he should settle
out them with rational argument, and as you said, without heats.:cool:
Chinese decended from heavenly dragons.
:-p
Three major lineages of Asian Y chromosomes: implications for the peopling of east and southeast Asia
Journal Human Genetics
Publisher Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
ISSN 0340-6717 (Print) 1432-1203 (Online)
Subject Biomedical and Life Sciences and Medicine
Issue Volume 110, Number 1 / January, 2002
Category Original Investigation
DOI 10.1007/s00439-001-0651-9
Pages 80-88
Online Date Thursday, February 19, 2004
http://www.springerlink.com/content/.../fulltext.html
abstract:
DNA variation on the non-recombining portion of the Y chromosome was examined in 610 male samples from 14 global populations in north, east, and southeast Asia, and other regions of the world. Eight haplotypes were observed by analyses of seven biallelic polymorphic markers (DYS257108, DYS287, SRY4064, SRY10831, RPS4Y711, M9, and M15) and were unevenly distributed among the populations. Maximum parsimony tree for the eight haplotypes showed that these haplotypes could be classified into four distinct lineages characterized by three key mutations: an insertion of the Y Alu polymorphic (YAP) element at DYS287, a C-to-G transversion at M9, and a C-to-T transition at RPS4Y711. Of the four lineages, three major lineages (defined by the allele of YAP+, M9-G, and RPS4Y-T, respectively) accounted for 98.6% of the Asian populations studied, indicating that these three paternal lineages have contributed to the formation of modern Asian populations. Moreover, phylogenetic analysis revealed three monophyletic Asian clusters, which consisted of north Asian, Japanese, and Han Chinese/southeast Asian populations, respectively. Coalescence analysis in the haplotype tree showed that the estimated ages for three key mutations ranged from 53,000 to 95,000 years, suggesting that the three lineages were separated from one another during early stages of human evolutionary history. The distribution patterns of the Y-haplotypes and mutational ages for the key markers suggest that three major groups with different paternal ancestries separately migrated to prehistoric east and southeast Asia.
Please also see:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJH...338/42338.html
This study is using outdated methodology. Researchers, all chinese, adopted the study method of Cavalli Sforza and microsatellite, which has been obsolete by recent advancement and findings.
Vol. 95, Issue 20, 11763-11768, September 29, 1998
Genetic relationship of populations in China
J. Y. Chua,b, W. Huangb,c, S. Q. Kuangc, J. M. Wangc, J. J. Xud, Z. T. Chua, Z. Q. Yanga, K. Q. Lina, P. Lie, M. Wuf, Z. C. Gengg, C. C. Tang, R. F. Dud, and L. Jing,h,i
a Institute of Medical Biology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Kunming, People's Republic of China; c Rui-Jin Hospital, Shanghai Second Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China; d Institute of Genetics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, People's Republic of China; e Department of Biology, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, People's Republic of China; f Institute of Cancer Research, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People's Republic of China; g Institute of Genetics, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China; and h Human Genetics Center, University of Texas-Houston, Houston, TX 77225
Contributed by Jiazhen Tan, June 26, 1998
http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p...1882403002.jpg
Fig. 2. Hypothetical ancestral migration routes to the Far East. Refer to Table 1 for names of the numbered populations.
Here is one interesting paper about regional variations of autosomal DNA among Han Chinese. It shows that the genetic diversity in Guangdong is greater than for all the other Han Chinese provinces combined.
This other study shows genetic structure of East Asia. Han Chinese are closer to the Koreans and the Japanese than to non-Han Chinese from Yunnan or northern Manchuria.