The Celts of Iberia

Status
Not open for further replies.
PicardDoubleFacepalm-1.jpg

History shows that a cluster of celtic tribe came on to turkey, sparkey said turks have celtic heredity. Or let me understand you have celtic heredity and turks not. ¿Why do you have it and they don't? A tribe of them came on spain (celtiberians) same way a tribe came on turkey ¿what's the difference? Other tribe came on to Romania ¿do romanians aren't celtic heredity? Or you have it just because "gods" decree. It's so peculiar.
 
Iberia was defitively not Celtic in Antic times.
sources, plase.
Just military and aristocratic occupations, strong minorities or not.
Sources, again please-
And all those rantings about genetics are just laughable.
Right. Science is laughable. Because it doesn't suit your agenda.

Even I understand that it is hard to admit for some peoples.
I understand it is hard for you to admit the celticity of Iberia.
 
Iberia was defitively not Celtic in Antic times. Not more than the Russian peoples belonged to the mongol culture in late middle-age. Just military and aristocratic occupations, strong minorities or not. And all those rantings about genetics are just laughable.

Even I understand that it is hard to admit for some peoples.

Yes I understand so. Actually I think is something invented by franco. It's laughable to see tha mimic. Years ago I watched a BBc Show that established that celtiberians were exterminated by romans then modern spaniards have not celtic heredity. Best regards.
 
Yes, this is the right word (or maybe "borrow from", he he...). Galician seem to me very ridiculous when they try to mimic the Scottish or Breton folklore.

+1..

i think they borrowed folcloric music from the north of europe, in order to hide their truth folclore influenced by the moors.
 
History shows that a cluster of celtic tribe came on to turkey, sparkey said turks have celtic heredity. Or let me understand you have celtic heredity and turks not. ¿Why do you have it and they don't?
Because in Turkey the celts were just a small spot area, while in Iberia they occupied 3/4 of the territory, and genetically they are not related with any europeans.
A tribe of them came on spain (celtiberians) same way a tribe came on turkey ¿what's the difference?
What's the difference ? That in Iberia the celts were the majority, while in Antaolia a very small minority, and that genetically the Turks don't cluster autosomally with any western-europeans, but rather with Levantines, Georgians, Armenians, etc
 
Because in Turkey the celts were just a small spot area, while in Iberia they occupied 3/4 of the territory, and genetically they are not related with any europeans.

What's the difference ? That in Iberia the celts were the majority, while in Antaolia a very small minority, and that genetically the Turks don't cluster autosomally with any western-europeans, but rather with Levantines, Georgians, Armenians, etc

It's seems to me a weak argue. ¿Where can I found out data about the number of members of tribes came on spain and turkey?
 
moors were in the iberian peninsula for 800 years, and they weren't totally undefeated until 1492... when were the celtics supposed to be in iberia? before the roman empire?

you can't expect anyone to believe that iberians have more of celtic origin than of magrebian.
 
Because in Turkey the celts were just a small spot area, while in Iberia they occupied 3/4 of the territory, and genetically they are not related with any europeans.

What's the difference ? That in Iberia the celts were the majority, while in Antaolia a very small minority, and that genetically the Turks don't cluster autosomally with any western-europeans, but rather with Levantines, Georgians, Armenians, etc

1- E-Keltoi is really not a reliable source : how can they advance 3/4, majority..Bullshit. Celtic culture disappear southern of the Garonne river, it has no reason that it suddenly re-appears in Iberia, by magy...In "non-celtic" France too (southern of the Garonne river) , there was a Celtic print, but not enough to call them "Celtic peoples".
2 - Links between genetics and culture has never been proved. They are just extrapolations.
 
2 - Links between genetics and culture has never been proved. They are just extrapolations.

We have a substantial amount of ancient DNA, but most is mtDNA, which tends to be more apparently ancient and well-admixed in Europe, and hence maps more poorly to culture. But so far, the little ancient Y-DNA that has been collected has turned out about as we expected. For example, we expected the Lichtenstein Cave (3000 years ago) to have I2b, R1b, and R1a individuals, with probably higher relative I2b concentrations than seen today. And, the result was mostly I2b2, with a little R1a1 and R1b. Ta-daa. Not much, but indicates that we're more likely on the right track than the wrong track.
 
Several of my friends are Turks that offered me their friendship when I moved from Russia to Germany.

What is then the problem with Turks here?
 
Census-precision data isn't available, but we have artifacts and place names: http://www.wales.ac.uk/Resources/Documents/Research/TheCeltsInTheEast.pdf

I am curious if anybody knows the levels of S116 amongst modern Turks. Turkey is 15% R1b, but I have to imagine that almost all of that is S116-.
Actually not, most of their R1b is specific of that area, with levantines also

moors were in the iberian peninsula for 800 years, and they weren't totally undefeated until 1492... when were the celtics supposed to be in iberia? before the roman empire?
LOL is this a serious question ?
And no, the moors were not in Iberia for 800 years, only in Granada they lasted 781 years, there rest is much less than that, even though the moors were always a minority, and their impact in the genetic-pool of spaniards was minimal, as seen in autosomal tests.

you can't expect anyone to believe that iberians have more of celtic origin than of magrebian.
ok, whatever dude, prove it.
 
Why are so many t.rolls concentrated here in this thread ?? LOL, this speaks volumes..this topic hits lots of nerves..
 
Actually not, most of their R1b is specific of that area, with levantines also

I think you misread that, I said S116 negative, which you seem to agree with. Have data available? I can't find any, probably because S116 is insignificant in Turkey anyway.
 
I think you misread that, I said S116 negative, which you seem to agree with. Have data available? I can't find any, probably because S116 is insignificant in Turkey anyway.
Yes, I believe they have mainly R-M73 (R1b1b1)
 
Yes, this is the right word (or maybe "borrow from", he he...). Galician seem to me very ridiculous when they try to mimic the Scottish or Breton folklore.

That's fine, but do not handle the issue.

Creature, if you have negative beliefs about Spain, came to say he had been a third world country, it is logical for thinking that the Celtic Spain did not exist, you are very consistent with itself and its misconceptions about Spain.
 
1- E-Keltoi is really not a reliable source : how can they advance 3/4, majority..Bullshit. Celtic culture disappear southern of the Garonne river, it has no reason that it suddenly re-appears in Iberia, by magy...In "non-celtic" France too (southern of the Garonne river) , there was a Celtic print, but not enough to call them "Celtic peoples".
2 - Links between genetics and culture has never been proved. They are just extrapolations.

I absolutely agree. I believe too links between genetics and culture are so weak. I like extrapolations term clears up this topic. Best regards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 1021428 times.

Back
Top