SomaliNet Forums

King of Jordan is J1 (L859) and they are one of the most authentic Qurayshis walking on this earth. What the HECK their nasab was protected even by caliphates LOOOOOOL @ this guy. Some Qurayshis are well-known for certainty, they way we are certain that Adam (as) is our ancestor. You seem kind of hurt man, some of these qurayshis NEVER left the land of their ancestors, they even live in some of those lands today!!! Well-known fact.

AlHatimiWalShashi wrote:X.Playa Sem, Ham and Japeth are not mythical dude please. This was known for THOUSANDS of years and a random guy comes to belie their existence? This was agreed upon by even Jews, Christians and other nations. This is concrete FACT. http://islamqa.info/en/130293

That's Jewish myth borrowed from the Babylonian flood story of Noa, the story of the flood and ark predated Arabs and Jews. The Arabs borrowed the myth of Noa and his sons from the Jews who borrowed it in turn from the Babylonians when the Jews were exiled to Babylon during the period called the Babylonian Exile where and when the Jews wrote both their Tora and Talmud.

AlHatimiWalShashi wrote:King of Jordan is J1 (L859) and they are one of the most authentic Qurayshis walking on this earth. What the HECK their nasab was protected even by caliphates LOOOOOOL @ this guy. Some Qurayshis are well-known for certainty, they way we are certain that Adam (as) is our ancestor. You seem kind of hurt man, some of these qurayshis NEVER left the land of their ancestors, they even live in some of those lands today!!! Well-known fact.

Any source? Typical Arab exaggeration, everything is a FACT and Well Known, as though its written on the sky.

Xplaya not only has DNA disproved the claims of the pastoral clans to hashimite ancestry, but to any arab ancestry at all. Autosomal testing shows Somalis having less than 3% arab dna. Numerous members of qureysh in Saudi Arabia have taken the test and they are J1 by a large margin. If you are not J1 you are not a hashimite.

Al Saud and Al Sabax are not qureysh, they are part of Anizah which is part of Rabicah. Totally unrelated, so their results do not matter.

X.Playa wrote:Kabashada cilmiga gaaban was lagu kadeedmaaye

First you used haplotypes to debunk Isxaaq and Daarood tradition saying since somalis are of tow haplotypes and since non of these haplotypes is Semitic ( J1) then therefore their tradition is mythical.

After having argued that you began your T haplogroup crusade and equated that haplotype with your imaginary ancestor Dir and claimed any Somali carrier must have belonged to that imaginary Dir using subclass M-70, which is now appears to be shared haplotype with many nations.

Now you again moved the goal post by claiming what you mean and cling to now is the most recent ancestor and not the M-70 mutations.

Now tell me the name of this most recent common ancestor the Somalis share that proves it is Dir and not Isxaaq the ancestor .

Wallahi, you are either trolling or it is hard to swallow the truth.

I didn't personally debunk anything, science did.

Read my posts again please because you clearly have comprehension issues or are trolling.

I never argued that Dir are the only carriers of haplogroup T in the world. All I have argued that there is a trend among Dir clan members to be haplogroup T1a.

I never moved the posts son, was merely enlightening you how Sanchez et al found that Somali T haplogroup carriers TMRCA is roughly two thousand years thus highlighting that they are closely related.

In regard to your last question, one of the T haplogroup samples used by Sanchez was an exact match to a HY sample and another was an exact match to my own Surre test result. Look it up on James Dahl's spreadsheet if you do not believe me.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl= ... utput=html

Hence, there is no getting away from the fact that the HY individual is no different than the Surre individual in having a native Somali ancestry and not some Bani Hashim bed time story. Or maybe they are Both Bani Hashim .

لا حول و لا قوة الا بالله

The story of the flood is in the Quran.

إن بعض الناس يظنون أن قيمة هي في نسب و قبيلة لما ينسب الرجل ما هو كلام صحيح اسمعو لقول هذ الرجل هل من مساعدة؟

zumaale wrote:

X.Playa wrote:Kabashada cilmiga gaaban was lagu kadeedmaaye

First you used haplotypes to debunk Isxaaq and Daarood tradition saying since somalis are of tow haplotypes and since non of these haplotypes is Semitic ( J1) then therefore their tradition is mythical.

After having argued that you began your T haplogroup crusade and equated that haplotype with your imaginary ancestor Dir and claimed any Somali carrier must have belonged to that imaginary Dir using subclass M-70, which is now appears to be shared haplotype with many nations.

Now you again moved the goal post by claiming what you mean and cling to now is the most recent ancestor and not the M-70 mutations.

Now tell me the name of this most recent common ancestor the Somalis share that proves it is Dir and not Isxaaq the ancestor .

Wallahi, you are either trolling or it is hard to swallow the truth.

I didn't personally debunk anything, science did.

Read my posts again please because you clearly have comprehension issues or are trolling.

I never argued that Dir are the only carriers of haplogroup T in the world. All I have argued that there is a trend among Dir clan members to be haplogroup T1a.

I never moved the posts son, was merely enlightening you how Sanchez et al found that Somali T haplogroup carriers TMRCA is roughly two thousand years thus highlighting that they are closely related.

In regard to your last question, one of the T haplogroup samples used by Sanchez was an exact match to a HY sample and another was an exact match to my own Surre test result. Look it up on James Dahl's spreadsheet if you do not believe me.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl= ... utput=html

Hence, there is no getting away from the fact that the HY individual is no different than the Surre individual in having a native Somali ancestry and not some Bani Hashim bed time story. Or maybe they are Both Bani Hashim .

So what if some hy dude scored close to your DNA,? That's family and individual case. My concern is while you are solidifying your mythical Dir claim using the same test you are asking and arguing that the hy should relinquish his genealogy, an insidious motive. How come the possibility that your Dir could've been a mere subclan of Isxaaq never occurred to you? In most cases minor clans like yours have long ago splited from major once and not visa versa.

For those who don't know Arabic, the statement in Arabic that I wrote above ^ was not about the Quran. In case someone mistakes it for the Quran Alkarim which has no equal.

I'm exhausted from this guy he just wouldn't accept the truth. He is one of those people that even if you give him 1000 reasons to prove his wrong and only 1 reason to prove his right, he will cling to that 1 reason even though in this case there isn't any.

الله المستعان

The prophet (My Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) had thousands of companions (RA) probably around 120,000. Do you x.playa believe that all these companions (RA) could not preserve their lineages and teach it to their children? The qurayshis are well-documented, their lineages preserved except some of those who migrated to different parts of the world (which you are not part of).

X.Playa wrote:

zumaale wrote:

X.Playa wrote:Kabashada cilmiga gaaban was lagu kadeedmaaye

First you used haplotypes to debunk Isxaaq and Daarood tradition saying since somalis are of tow haplotypes and since non of these haplotypes is Semitic ( J1) then therefore their tradition is mythical.

After having argued that you began your T haplogroup crusade and equated that haplotype with your imaginary ancestor Dir and claimed any Somali carrier must have belonged to that imaginary Dir using subclass M-70, which is now appears to be shared haplotype with many nations.

Now you again moved the goal post by claiming what you mean and cling to now is the most recent ancestor and not the M-70 mutations.

Now tell me the name of this most recent common ancestor the Somalis share that proves it is Dir and not Isxaaq the ancestor .

Wallahi, you are either trolling or it is hard to swallow the truth.

I didn't personally debunk anything, science did.

Read my posts again please because you clearly have comprehension issues or are trolling.

I never argued that Dir are the only carriers of haplogroup T in the world. All I have argued that there is a trend among Dir clan members to be haplogroup T1a.

I never moved the posts son, was merely enlightening you how Sanchez et al found that Somali T haplogroup carriers TMRCA is roughly two thousand years thus highlighting that they are closely related.

In regard to your last question, one of the T haplogroup samples used by Sanchez was an exact match to a HY sample and another was an exact match to my own Surre test result. Look it up on James Dahl's spreadsheet if you do not believe me.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl= ... utput=html

Hence, there is no getting away from the fact that the HY individual is no different than the Surre individual in having a native Somali ancestry and not some Bani Hashim bed time story. Or maybe they are Both Bani Hashim .

So what if some by dude scored close to your DNA,? That's family and individual case. My concern is while you are solidifying your mythical Dir claim using the same test you are asking and arguing that the by should relinquish his genealogy, an insidious motive. How come the possibility that your Dir could've been a mere subclan of Isxaaq never occurred to you? In most cases minor clans like yours have long ago splited from major once and not visa versa.

I never said he scored close to my my DNA, are you retarded. I stated that the samples they used to estimate the TMRCA contained exact matches of Surre and HY test results.

I am not arguing anything, science is proving it with facts and putting to bed mumbo jumbo fairy tales created in the 19th century.

By your logic, the Ciises and Gurgura split off from Isaaq too because it was found among Dire Dawa Somalis in a study conducted by UCL . Where is my nigga Jabutaawi to put another nail in the coffin.

Sorry mate but you cannot join this group . https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Qu ... fault.aspx

AlHatimiWalShashi wrote:The prophet (My Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) had thousands of companions (RA) probably around 120,000. Do you x.playa believe that all these companions (RA) could not preserve their lineages and teach it to their children? The qurayshis are well-documented, their lineages preserved except some of those who migrated to different parts of the world (which you are not part of).

yawn-----zzzzzzzzz

Here's my kinsmen 'Arab' genealogists talking about the DNA of authentic Qurayshis. You probably don't know Arabic but here it goes...

Zumaale do you think this guy is serious? Or is he trolling us? If he is trolling us then he surely done a good job.

LOOL @ those suggesting the Qurayshis today in Arabia are unreliable sources. I have the best proof ever... The holders of the key to the Ka'ba belongs to the same family of the sahabi at the time of the prophet SAW. You think 120,000 sahaba can't preserve their lineages? Most Qurayshis until this day live in MECCA they are still the biggest tribe there. You think they randomly vanished over the years? Or do you think they were driven out of their homes by invisible forces? Wow @ the one who says the DNA of Hijazi Qurayshis cannot be relied on lmao. These peoples lineages were preserved the way a mother looks after her baby.