MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,917
- Reaction score
- 1,313
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
The reason why you didn't post any of the Iran_Neo samples was because you know exactly what this would mean for your theory and you are trying too hard to deceive the people. That is not the fine English way.
Here is an Iran_Neo samples used with K14 Neolithic.
Population
N_Amerindian - Afansievo_Yamnaya 24.30 Kalash 14.55 Siberian - S_Amerindian - Sub_Saharan 0.23 SE_Asian - E_African - SW_Asian 25.53 Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers 16.88 SHG_WHG - Early_European_Farmers - S_Indian 18.51 Papuan -
This calculator doesn't have an Iran_Neo or CHG component simple as that. Therefore the Iran_Neo component get split up in other "likely categories".
And Yamnaya is just possible shared ancestry.
In fact from Iran_Neo to Armenian EBA and Anatolia_CHL the "Steppe" admixture shrinks rather than rises. This is why Armenian EBA samples are basically a mixture of Iran_CHL and Anatolian_Chl. And Anatolian_CHL itself is Anatolian_Neo with Iran_Neo admixture. No Steppes or anything akine there.
I agree in some way.
All these auDNA autopsies mixing "basic" componants of different ages are beginning to bore me; they mix arbitrary theorical componants (not without value it's true) with real historical pops, not always of the same time and they do magy; even scientists don't produce the same results for the same pops because they use some pops as unbroken componants to evaluate (break) other pops; by instance in K14 'afanasyevo/yamana' is ancient pop, kalash is a modern pop, SW Eurasian an articifial modern componant (I suppose at least): what a mess; everybody will keep on arguing on until the coming centuries? LOL; shared ancestry from ancient pops doesn't tell us which precise ancestry is shared without help of IBD. It's true graphics without precise explanations are confusing...