I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians

Nik said:
Ghegide, lol. Chilling too much with Greeks? Simply Gheg would suffice.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Ghegide is an early exonym given by Western travelers in Albania when they studied the populations of the Balkans.

I can see however, you have been chilling out too much with Slavs. Perhaps you are one yourself.
 
Trojet said:
@Nik, I don't have time to be repeating myself over and over. Please read my numerous posts again in this thread, if you didn't pay close attention.

In short: It matters less which "Dinaric" cluster (North or South) is more common in the Balkans or East Slavs. Percentages are meaningless. What matters is both are present in considerable amounts in East, West, and South Slavs. Considering that North of the Carpathians there is many samples who are ancestral to the "Dinaric" clade (I-CTS10228), and nowhere south of the Carpathians, it's origin must lie North of the Carpathians. And also considering it's young TMRCA, it expanded as a part of Slavic migrations. I have nothing else to say.

If you're one of the Albanians who carries this clade, you have nothing to worry about, as it by no means changes your ethnic identity. Afterall the Y-DNA represents the origin of only one of your many ancestral lines. Although my Y-DNA and maternal Y-DNA are not I-CTS10228, I'm sure this clade will show up in one of my many other ancestral lines if I test them. The Slavs have been living among us for the last 1500 years. So it is to be expected that we have some genetic input. But in the end it doesn't change our ethnic identity. Just like the Slavs have a considerable amount of Pre-Slavic Y-DNA, but in the end they are still Slavs. There is no present Balkan population that is genetically 100% the same as Pre-Slavic Paleo-Balkan populations. However, considering the data, the Gheg Albanians are to the closest thing we have.
Click to expand...
Nobody asked u to repeat urself. If ur tired u can leave, its not a classroom. I asked u some direct questions and expected u to answer each of them with a Yes or No.

Anyway, I have read everything u have said and understood ur point long before I knew u existed. Obviously u learned all these from other posts just and articles just like I did. It seems ur not getting my point.

Are you saying that the Slavic homeland is exactly where I2a-Din was formed? Because from my knowledge it isnt and even if it is, haplogroups are shared by several neighbouring ethnicities.

In the case of the area around the North Carpathians, I'm sure u know there were Dacians, Scythians, Goths, Sarmatians, Slavs, Balts, etc. there, right?

And as for me being I2a-Din, lol. That's why all of u are reacting so negatively? The explanation u made should be actually directed to Balkanite because he seems like the type to offended by the change of having I2a admixture.

No, I'm not I2a and although I haven't tested myself, its highly unlikely that I am I2a. U know me from another forum and you're waiting for me to test myself ;)
 
Fatherland said:
Wrong. Ghegide is an early exonym given by Western travelers in Albania when they studied the populations of the Balkans.

I can see however, you have been chilling out too much with Slavs. Perhaps you are one yourself.
Click to expand...
Just tell me where u r from Bato. Albanians never called themselves Ghegides and the ending is Greek, just like Toskides, Liapides, Tsamides, no matter who used that version. Well what do u know, u just learnt smth.
 
Nik said:
Just tell me where u r from Bato. Albanians never called themselves Ghegides and the ending is Greek, just like Toskides, Liapides, Tsamides, no matter who used that version. Well what do u know, u just learnt smth.
Click to expand...
Strawman arguments after one another.

I am what I am. No need for u to complicate it any further.
I suggest u check with ur I2a-Slav relatives since u don't answer what ​u are asking.


Stop coping, you're not worth wasting my time on with your unintelligent posts.
 
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179474

For Haplogroup I2 breakdown, it is much higher in Turkish Cypriots than Greek Cypriots.

For Turkish Cypriot I2, the number is 26

1. I-P37: 18
2. I-L596: 4 (I2c)
3. I-M223: 4

For Greek Cypriot I2, the number is 9

1. I-P37: 6
2. I-L596: 2 (I2c)
3. I-M223: 1

Essentially they both look the same except Turkish Cypriots have 3x the amount of I2.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...priots-have-common-paternal-roots!-(new-study)
 
Alexander Varzari, V. Kharkov, Wolfgang Stephan, V. Dergachev, V. Puzyrev, E. H. Weiss, and Vadim Stepanov. "Searching for the origin of Gagauzes: inferences from Y-chromosome analysis." American Journal of Human Biology 21:3 (May-June 2009): pages 326-336. Excerpts from the Abstract:
"[...] The origin of the Gagauzes is obscure. They may be descendants of the Turkic nomadic tribes from the Eurasian steppes, as suggested by the "Steppe" hypothesis, or have a complex Anatolian-steppe origin, as postulated by the "Seljuk" or "Anatolian" hypothesis. To distinguish these hypotheses, a sample of 89 Y-chromosomes representing two Gagauz populations from the Republic of Moldova was analyzed for 28 binary and seven STR polymorphisms. In the gene pool of the Gagauzes a total of 15 Y-haplogroups were identified, the most common being I-P37 (20.2%), R-M17 (19.1%), G-M201 (13.5%), R-M269 (12.4%), and E-M78 (11.1%).


Ivan Nasidze, Dominique Quinque, Irina Udina, Svetlana Kunizheva, and Mark Stoneking. "The Gagauz, a Linguistic Enclave, are Not a Genetic Isolate." Annals of Human Genetics 71(Part 3) (May 2007): pages 379-389. First published online on November 28, 2006. This study examines uniparental DNA. Gagauzians are more closely related to their non-Turkic neighbors in southeastern Europe than to Anatolian Turks. Table 3, "Y chromosome SNP haplogroup frequencies in Moldavians and Gagauz, and their geographic neighbours", reveals the following frequencies for Gagauz people according to the 49 Gagauzians sampled:
20.4% in E-YAP,
2% in F-M89,
4.1% in G-M201,
32.7% in I-M170,
14.3% in J2-M172,
2% in K-M9,
2% in P-M45,
8.2% in R1-M173,
14.3% in R1a1-M17.

http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/gagauzians.html
​
 
gyms said:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179474

For Haplogroup I2 breakdown, it is much higher in Turkish Cypriots than Greek Cypriots.

For Turkish Cypriot I2, the number is 26

1. I-P37: 18
2. I-L596: 4 (I2c)
3. I-M223: 4

For Greek Cypriot I2, the number is 9

1. I-P37: 6
2. I-L596: 2 (I2c)
3. I-M223: 1

Essentially they both look the same except Turkish Cypriots have 3x the amount of I2.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...priots-have-common-paternal-roots!-(new-study)
Click to expand...

None of the I2 are I2a-Din. So this post is not even relevant to this thread
 
@nik
You shouldnt be calling people ignorant when you are still writing "u" and "ur" like a fifth grader.

Move on and let the men do the talking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nik said:
It saddens me to see that some Ghegs have degraded to the level of homosexual nerds who masturbate while reading the history of their forefathers. YOU must be one of those Kosovo or Montenegro immigrants softened by the Western culture, so YOU can put that J2b2 of yours wherever it pleases YOU ;)
Click to expand...
I'm not opening the door for foreign and modern haplogroups into Ancient Illyrian or Thracian genepool like some fantasy action story.

I'm not the one who masturbates to Ancient people and supposed haplogroups in them like you do, your avatar and posting history gives great hints to that.

I saw your previous posts, they are laughable.

Like I said, don't be a hypocrite.

Reported by the way. This is unacceptable behavior for a member that has been here since 2010.
 
Nik said:
1) Romanians have R1a and I2a-Din too and those haplgroups are not exclusive to Slavs. They could have been Dacian, Scythian, Bastarnae, Sarmatian, Balts, East Germans.
Click to expand...

Yes, we have enough evidence about this.

Objectively, who wants facts (no politics, no ideology) older clades of I-CTS10228 were in Western and Northern Europe. After bottleneck very probably I-CTS10228 emerged in any eastern German tribe, and in this topic one member suggested it is Bastarnae. And Bastarnae had Sarmatian and Thracian (Getae-Dacian) influence too.

If we see tribes in present-day areas Eastern Slovakia, South-East Poland, Northern Romania, Western Ukraine, Northern Moldavia and beyond we can say:

I-CTS10228 was in genetic fund of Thracians (Getae-Dacians), and some Germans and Sarmatians after bottleneck, 300 (or more years) BC.

Can anyone dispute this anymore.

Authors calculated TMRCA differently, between 2300 and 3000 ybp, but it doesn't matter, if someone likes Nordtvedt and Klyosov and their methods we will take 2300 ybp as referent calculation.

It means in that time, German, Thracian and Sarmatian people were carriers of this haplogroup. Thracian and German (Gothic) tribes carried this haplogroup to the south e.g. Balkans and Sarmatians carried this haplogroup to the East and North.

If this is factual situation therefore it is ridiculous that someone calls I-CTS10228 Slavic marker, it doesn't matter if he or she is Pan-Slavist, or Albanian nationalist, or from Mars, etc.
 
I-CTS10228 is exclusively Slavic while R1a is not.

I-CTS10228 is how the Slavic ethnogenesis came about.

Deal with it, regardless if you have been a member here propagating fantasy stories since 2010.
 
Nik said:
Uuuuu an internet bully. I feel abused. Disgusting softened mama's boys.

By the way, u said shouldnt instead of shouldn't. Ha ha
Click to expand...

It is easy for you to act tough online my slavic friend
 
Nik said:
The doors are not urs to open in the first place. Ur just some haplogroup enthusiast so dont give urself so much credit.

My avatar? What does that have to do with anything? Usually I put Pyrrhus of Epirus but that was taken from another member.

My posts are laughable? Give examples or dont bother at all like an angry kid bringing up avatars and previous posts into the conversation.

Everything we claim at this point is a theory and only the ancient dna will be the judge of who's theory was right and who was fantasizing. So stop speculating and calling my theory a fantasy action story boy. But then again, a true Gheg knows that patience is a virtue of real men, not westernized pidh mashkull wannabes like urself. Now go complain to mama or some moderator in this case. I'm done with scum.
Click to expand...

You're offending here. This in unacceptable.
 
Delete....
 
Fatherland said:
I-CTS10228 is exclusively Slavic while R1a is not.

I-CTS10228 is how the Slavic ethnogenesis came about.

Deal with it, regardless if you have been a member here propagating fantasy stories since 2010.
Click to expand...

No, the opposite, I-CTS10228 originally nothing to do with Slavs.
...

Anyone who really wants to follow back until to Loschbour (Luxemburg) and Motala (Sweden) will notice areas in Europe where older clades could be.

Follow forward, since its creation, I-CTS10228 barely survived and after bottleneck it could emerged most probably in some German tribe, spreading to Thracians (Getae-Dacians) and Sarmatians.
 
Nik said:
Give me ur real name in private and I'll add u as a friend on Facebook immediately. From then on arrange a meeting with me anytime u come to Albania (unless ur from Kosovo).
Click to expand...


Why are you so angry dude? No need for personal threats! Just because you're I2a doesn't mean youre not Albanian, only that generations ago you had a Slavic great grandfather.
 
Nik has gone bye-bye. Anyone else who posts foul, disgusting insults and threats will do the same.

Am I clear?
 
We can locate wider area where I-CTS10228 could emerge after bottleneck, 300 BC.

What do we have?

This is based on Ptolomey's book.

europe08sarmatia.jpg


What do we see?

German, Thracian (and Sarmatian) tribes in areas where I-CTS10228 emerged. For example:

Bondini, Geurini, Peucini, Carpani, Basternae, Tagri, Tyrangetae etc.


Look carefully and tell:

Where are Slavs?

...

I-CTS10228 didn't emerge after bottleneck in 300 BC among Slavs.

I-CTS10228 is not Slavic marker.

I-CTS10228 can be German or Thracian (Getae-Dacian) marker or mixed German/Thracian marker if it is impossible precisely determine.
 
Last edited:
I feel this thread will go on forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 574478 times.

Back
Top