|Forum||Europe Travel Guide||Facts & Trivia||Genetics||History||Linguistics|
|Eupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum|
Surely, all Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups present in modern Europeans are African Homo Sapiens in origin, rather than Neanderthal. That puts a limit on the amount of autosomal DNA Neanderthals could have introduced, especially considering that mtDNA in particular has a relatively low bottlenecking rate and little selection pressure. I don't discount the hypothesis that certain autosomal traits could have been introduced via Neanderthal interbreeding and then selected for, but the total autosomal input can't be nearly as high as you're suggesting.
According to Ken Nordtvedt, probably the most active yDNA hg I researcher:
We have never found a single haplotype of IJK, IJ, or I* And a very long time goes by between the IJK nodeman and the earliest clades of I that we see --- perhaps the I2* and I2a1 M26+ clades. We're talking several tens of thousands of years.
A few corrections:
Cro-Magnon only existed in Europe. Cro-Magnon looks like a modern European (except larger brain the modern Europeans and a bit more robust). The Cro-Magnon seems to be the result of a gentic bottleneck with homo erectus (or related) ancestors. That's where modern Europeans came from- Cro-Magnon. The "Nordic" racial type is nothing but a less robust cro-magnon, which again probably originated from a small tribe that genetically drifted/mutated a bit into modern Nordic features and spread due to adaptability.
Cave Paintings along with flutes, advanced religion, knowledge of astronomy etc. is assocaited with cro-magnon early on and with no other human species at this time.
Physcially the "Kazar" racial type (often associated with Ashkenazi Jews) is the closest modern physical resemblance to a Neanderthal. From what I've read though there was some interbreeding and some small percentage of neanderthal in modern Europeans. Yet this is maybe 2%. Pretty much all the mutations associated with modern Europeans occured in cro-magnon. Neanderthal might have contributed something though.
Jotuns are the equivalent of Greek Titans and Norse mythology doesn't vary much from other Aryan mythologies.
From Indian (Aryan-Vedic) records we have an understanding of Aryan mytholgoy in which the Asuras (Aesir) are assocaited with "heaven". These are astrological gods which progenated the "Aryan" race. The Aryan race has light feature as a result, namely blue eyes. The story is also in the Bible (influenced by Aryan mythology) when the sons of god mated with the sons of man to great the nephilim- giants of old.
This is where the concept of "white devil" or "blue eyed devil" comes from. According to this line of thought Aryans are aliens to this planet and non-Aryans are the natives. Is it supposed to be a literal story? It comes down in fragments. The "Gods" are planets- mars, mercury etc. could be simply that Aryans had a knowledge of astrology and associated themselves with being the "sky people". In India you see the gods depicted as blue skinned (like the sky) elves are known as "the shining ones- brighter than the sun" blond hair shining like the sun etc. it's all associated with sky.
Surely he was joking... I'm unrestrained by orthodoxy as they come, but THIS guy, wow!! Nordics are CMs who are like Ashkenazi Jews who are like Neanderhtals who are like Greek Titans and Aryan deities?! Because they have blue eyes? and are "sky people"?
That guy is going to be passing out the green kool-aid and selling tickets for the next comet any day now... He's pretty hard-core. That one is gonna be hard to top...
OK so ? What does cro - means and what does magnon - means ??
I think that was just to harsh towards a boy, oh well. Btw what does Cro-magnon means ??
That's the thing; they can't make up their mind what Cro-Mag means, they did decide that it means something else for Europeans than it means for everyone else, then they decided that it wasn't an actual scientific distinction at all. I'm not sure what the current designation it is for the term. If I had to guess I'd say it's probably now categorized as a "social construct".
How I traced my ancestry back to the Stone Age
As genome research continues at a greater pace than ever before, sometime in the next decade the cost of having your whole genome sequenced - all three billion letters of the code - will become affordable. When that happens, it will change genetic genealogy all over again, the experts I talked to say.
"What you'll be able to do is look at an individual's genome and say, all right, they have this mutation, which arose in a particular village in the south of France, for example," says Harvard genetecist expert Joe Pickrell.
"You'd be able to say with nearly 100% certainty that you have some ancestor who came from that particular village."
I heard some people methoded this thing in college, but I doubted
Gender equality was absolute in celtic societies and was never completely lost. The english imposed it more on the cymry and irish than they ever practiced it themselves.
edit: The funny thing about him getting banned is if he replaced aryan (ancient name for persian) with Indo European "race" then it would fit almost exactly with what maciamo claims happened with indo europeans. Though I'd say this clearly didn't really happen anyway, and these r1b have been all over a long time and the gedrosian marker is simply invalid. You can't choose a marker and assume it's got no selection on it when the population you study is nearly homogenous. That means it's in a selective sweep. Invalid methodology, end of story. You can only get some kind of info out of autosomals when they are relatively rare remnants that are obviously not under selection, like when looking for introgression of ancient hominids.
I also can't see any support to say neanderthal features are primarily nordic. It's just not true. Basque, Irish, and certain jews and nonjew ukrainians(the real khazarian type that is not that common any more, often with red or reddish hair, blue eyes and large skull) show much more neanderthal features than any other populations. Only similarity to neanderthals and nordics is a longer skull, front to back, but that exists in some black africans, too. With no occipital bun it's clearly not neanderthal in origin.
Last edited by Noman; 30-08-13 at 23:11.
Modern Europeans have much "Indo-europeean" heritage. The persians are mostly arabic/semitic with small procent of aryan admixture.
You talk much shit to be hounest. I can tell your a superculturemarxist.
And i dont even bealive Northeuropeans are superior. I am italian myself - I just dont like the idé of Indians and Persians to be some civilisation starters. Becuse thats a pure LIE.
Sorry for my bad english.
I think it likely there were other archaic introgressions in addition to the one in the middle east that created "Basal" and the one involving Denisovan connected to East Asians. I and J seem like the most plausible candidates for this - J in the Caucasus maybe and I in the Balkans or Scandinavia. I wouldn't say the haplogroups were necessarily archaic in themselves but I wonder if the process of introgression has a tendency to create ydna mutations for some reason.
Also if I understand it right then the calculated percentage of Neanderthal dna is based on one Neanderthal genome so if there were multiple Neanderthal (or other archaic) populations and multiple admixture events and we have c. 4% from one of these events then populations that are the product of multiple such events over time might have a larger total percentage.
deleted by poster
deleted by poster