I believe if you are as knowledgeable about the case as you claim.. you already then know that the MTdna Hg's are drawn from heavily damaged DNA in this case..
there are repeated examples of researchers publishing spectacular claims about the population genetics their results 'discovered' right before they were up for a grant consideration, funding review..???
We have had the aimsbury archer, africans, roma gypsies, etc.. all these were published as legitimate and then later we find the DNA was heavily damaged, and the results are 'interpreted' from what could salvaged..
it would be interesting if true, but making spectacular claims and then alter ...''well this COULD BE the results, we cant say for sure, the dna was too degraded''... no if you ken what you were talking about you would not be so quick to jump at these claims unless they can be confirmed in a double-blind test. These are results that no one can disprove are possible,so they make them and the news-story omits the part about how heavily degraded the sample was..
this is now one time too many for this same nonsense