Bosnians/ ethnic groups there

What is needed is an Anti nationalistic Balkan movement. By Artist, politicians and others.

I agree with this, but look what happened with the partition of kosovo from serbia. It showcased to the entire region what happens if you try to be culturally accommodating. The same is going on within FYR Macedonia with the large albanian presence there, and the republic of serbska within bosnia. Skopians claiming neighbours lands because of their invented nationality is another example.

There is no insentive to be accommodating in that region, which isn't the fault of the politicians in the balkans but the big powers outside of it.
 
I agree with this, but look what happened with the partition of kosovo from serbia. It showcased to the entire region what happens if you try to be culturally accommodating. The same is going on within FYR Macedonia with the large albanian presence there, and the republic of serbska within bosnia. Skopians claiming neighbours lands because of their invented nationality is another example.

There is no insentive to be accommodating in that region, which isn't the fault of the politicians in the balkans but the big powers outside of it.

Bosnia exist and so does the Bosnian people, accept it or not thats your own problem.

Macedonians and Macedonia exist and Greece have 51% of Macedonia that is occupied land of original Macedonia which was resettled by Turks of christian faith, but there lives alot of real Macedonians that have no right to self-determination.
Greeks are a bunch of liars and fabricators who are supported by (EU) the creators of the fake land called Greece (Biggest artificial country in Europe ever) with a non-greek population who are acctually a bunch of christian Turks mixed with Arvanites and Vlachs. Genetics prove that Greeks are Sub-saharans a non-european population. Accept this facts and tell the truth before you are talking about others.
 
Genetics prove that Greeks are Sub-saharans a non-european population.

I'm not going to wade into which ethnic groups are legitimate heirs to which land in Greece and the Balkans, but you're not going to get away with this kind of statement on this forum. In terms of Y-DNA, Greeks have effectively 0% recent Sub-Saharan African-origin haplogroups. They do have a lot of Y-DNA that originated from the Neolithic Expansion, including the haplogroup that is probably confusing you, E1b1b.
 
I'm not going to wade into which ethnic groups are legitimate heirs to which land in Greece and the Balkans, but you're not going to get away with this kind of statement on this forum. In terms of Y-DNA, Greeks have effectively 0% recent Sub-Saharan African-origin haplogroups. They do have a lot of Y-DNA that originated from the Neolithic Expansion, including the haplogroup that is probably confusing you, E1b1b.

HAVE YOU DONE A RESEARCH? IF YOU DONT KNOW, WHY DO YOU MAKE ANY STATEMENT ABOUT IT?
HERE ARE THE REAL FACTS!


The Greek Europeans?

Ann Hum Biol. 2010 Jul 29.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20666704

Abstract
Background: The HLA polymorphism is a powerful genetic tool to study population origins. By analysing allele frequencies and haplotypes in different populations, it is possible to identify ethnic groups and establish the genetic relationships among them. Aim: The Berber (endogenous Tunisians) HLA class I and class II genotypes were analysed and compared with those of Mediterranean and Sub-Saharan African communities using genetic distances, Neighbour-Joining dendrograms, correspondence and haplotype analysis. Subjects and methods: One hundred and five unrelated Berbers were typed for HLA class I (A, B) and class II (DRB1, DQB1) gene alleles using reverse dot-blot hybridization. Results: High frequencies of A*0201 (24.76%), A*3402 (22.38%) and B*44 (32.85%) alleles were recorded for Berbers, the highest recorded for Mediterranean and North African populations. This study shows a close relatedness of Tunisian Berbers to other Tunisians, North Africans and Iberians. Conclusion: The apparent relatedness of Tunisian Berbers to present-day (North African) Tunisians, Algerians and Moroccans suggests that the Arab invasion of North Africa (7(th)-11(th) centuries AD) did not significantly impact the genetic makeup of North Africans. Furthermore, Tunisian Berbers appear to be closely related to Iberians (Spaniards and Basques), indicating that the 7(th) century AD gene flow of invaders was low in Iberians and that the main part of their genetic pool came after the Northward Saharan migration, when hyper-arid conditions were established in Sahara (before 6000 BC). Other studied populations belong to the old Mediterranean substratum, which has been present in the area since pre-Neolithic times. This study indicates a higher proportion of Iberian than Arab ancestry in Tunisian Berbers, which is of value in evaluating the evolutionary history of present-day Tunisians. Greeks seem to share genetic HLA features (Chr 6) with Sub-Saharans. The relatedness of Greeks to Sub-Saharans has been confirmed by other studies based on chromosome 7 genetic markers.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11260506?dopt=Abstract.
Villena 2001 claims that Macedonians are one of the most ancient peoples existing in the Balkan peninsula, probably long before arrival of the "Mycaenian Greeks",Greeks are genetically related to sub-Saharans... Hajjeja 2005 also claims that "Our study shows that the Greeks are separate from other Mediterranean populations and tend to cluster with Sub-Saharans (Figs. 2 and 3). This result confirms the Sub-Saharan origin of Greeks". Di Giacomo 2003 reported for Y Hg A found in Mitilini-Greece. Al-Zahery 2003 also separates the Macedonians/Europeans from the Greeks.....or vice versa.
HLA%20genes%20in%20Southern%20Tunisians%204a.jpg


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16473309
HLA genes in Southern Tunisians (Ghannouch area) and their Relationship with other Mediterraneans.
A. Hajjej a, S. Hmida a,*, H. Kaabi a,A. Dridi a,A. Jridi a, A. El Gaa1ed b, K. Boukef a
a National Blood Transfusion Centre, Tunis, Tunisia
b Laboratory of Immunogenetics, Department of Biology, University of Tunis, El Manar

Y-Chromosome Haplotypes in the Greek–Turkish Area
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h347402u768310m3/

Measuring European Population Stratification with Microarray Genotype Data
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852743/
 
I'm not going to wade into which ethnic groups are legitimate heirs to which land in Greece and the Balkans, but you're not going to get away with this kind of statement on this forum. In terms of Y-DNA, Greeks have effectively 0% recent Sub-Saharan African-origin haplogroups. They do have a lot of Y-DNA that originated from the Neolithic Expansion, including the haplogroup that is probably confusing you, E1b1b.

That doesn't matter to him. In his mind he's decendend from the macedons and is not slavic. This whole "Turkish Christians" is funny aswell if you know what the punishment is if you switch religions from islam to another during the ottoman empire :LOL:, read the Quaran and you'll find out (y) Considering most of turks were christian romans who switch for several reasons during turkish occupation your arguement is very ignorant Dejavu!

Vardarska for the Vardarskans! :LOL:
 
Objectivity is one of the most important values that a scientific study should abide to and an academic researcher should follow. On the contrary, prejudice can often elude the design of a research study, the interpretation of the findings and may stigmatize a researcher's reputation in the scientific community. The motifs behind prejudice in science can be personal, financial or, even worse, political.
In 2001, Arnaiz-Villena and coworkers published a series of scientific articles, where, among other claims, he concluded that the Hellenic (Greek) population stems from sub-Saharan Africa. These authors have used a questionable experimental approach with too few genetic markers from the DRB1 HLA gene, to show that the Hellenic population, rather than belonging to the "older" Mediterranean populations, are genetically closer to sub-Saharan populations, namely Ethiopian and western Africans. These authors interpreted their findings by claiming that some sub-Saharan populations had migrated to Greece during antiquity, but not to Crete.

Unfortunately, the study conducted by Arnaiz-Villena and coworkers has a number of serious flaws. First of all, they based their study on very few genetic markers to reach scientifically sound conclusions on the genetic distance of human populations. Several studies, using multiple genetic markers are available in the literature, indicating that the Hellenic population is genetically closer to the rest of the European populations, while in no single study the results from the Arnaiz-Villena and coworkers study have ever been reproduced. Proper population genetics studies should employ between 20-100 autosomal genetic markers, many Y-chromosomal markers as well as markers from mitochondrial DNA.
Also, studies pertaining to the genetic heterogeneity of inherited disorders, e.g. β-thalassemia, cystic fibrosis, documented in the FINDbase worldwide database of genetic variants allele frequencies indicate that the mutational spectrum of common disorders in European populations is more closely related to each other than to sub-Saharan populations.
Furthermore, not only had Arnaiz-Villena and coworkers misused the genetic approach but also falsified historical perspectives to base their hypothesis. Their conclusions suffer from misquotations of scientific and historical citations as well as inaccurate statements without any historical and ancient documentation. The misquotation of Herodotus by these authors is notable and really unfortunate.
As a result, the Arnaiz-Villena and coworkers study was totally discredited by the scientific community to the extent that is used as a textbook definition of subjective and arbitrary interpretation of study results and it is not surprising that this study has finally retracted from the scientific literature. From an editorial perspective, such offense is even graver than plagiarism, since it attempts to elude and to falsely create a wrong impression to the scientific community.
Overall, this example clearly shows that the scientific community critically stands against such efforts to intentionally falsify history, to abuse scientific methodology and to subjectively interpret experimental results. Such studies should be immediately retracted from the scientific literature not only to protect science from misuse but also to discourage similar attempts in the future.

George P. Patrinos
Assistant Professor of Pharmacogenomics, University of Patras,
School of Health Sciences, Department of Pharmacy, Patras, Greece;
Communicating editor, Human Mutation;



Alot of his co-workers happened to be "macedonians", lol coincidence?

Vardarska for the Vardarskans!
 
Good refutation by Elias2. I also can't find a single source that clusters Greeks with Sub-Saharan Africans. This website has a good compilation of charts with autosomal tests (although I can't attest to that site's reliability beyond the charts it includes, which seem to check out). Greeks apparently cluster with North Africans a little better than South Slavs do, but no monumental differences that would point to the kinds of conclusions you're drawing. Again, everything I see about the Greeks points to a large Neolithic Expansion influence.
 
Continue with your lies and denial it wont help you, if you look at the last test its done by "National Blood Transfusion Center, Tunis, Tunisia."
and there is no Macedonians from FYRO Macedonia but its same result again for the Greeks. Just accept what you are and be proud of it.


Ann Hum Biol. 2011 Mar;38(2):156-64. Epub 2010 Jul 29.
HLA class I and class II polymorphisms in Tunisian Berbers.

Hajjej A, Sellami MH, Kaabi H, Hajjej G, El-Gaaied A, Boukef K, Almawi WY, Hmida S.
National Blood Transfusion Center, Tunis, Tunisia.

This study indicates a higher proportion of Iberian than Arab ancestry in Tunisian Berbers, which is of value in evaluating the evolutionary history of present-day Tunisians. Greeks seem to share genetic HLA features (Chr 6) with Sub-Saharans. The relatedness of Greeks to Sub-Saharans has been confirmed by other studies based on chromosome 7 genetic markers.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20666704



Eur J Med Genet. 2006 Jan-Feb;49(1):43-56. Epub 2005 Feb 10.
HLA genes in Southern Tunisians (Ghannouch area) and their relationship with other Mediterraneans.

Hajjej A, Hmida S, Kaabi H, Dridi A, Jridi A, El Gaa l ed A, Boukef K.
National Blood Transfusion Centre, Tunis, Tunisia.
Abstract

South Tunisian HLA gene profile has studied for the first time. HLA-A, -B, -DRB1 and -DQB1 allele frequencies of Ghannouch have been compared with those of neighboring populations, other Mediterraneans and Sub-Saharans. Their relatedness has been tested by genetic distances, Neighbor-Joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. Our HLA data show that both southern from Ghannouch and northern Tunisians are of a Berber substratum in spite of the successive incursions (particularly, the 7th-8th century A.D. Arab invasion) occurred in Tunisia. It is also the case of other North Africans and Iberians. This present study confirms the relatedness of Greeks to Sub-Saharan populations. This suggests that there was an admixture between the Greeks and Sub-Saharans probably during Pharaonic period or after natural catastrophes (dryness) occurred in Sahara.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16473309


GREEKS CANT READ????? DO YOU SEE WHAT IS WRITTEN HERE???
GREEKS ARE SUB-SAHARANS. FACT!
 
Please tell me dejavu when did these south saharan people enter greece?

Concidering everything you write is complete lies why should I believe anything you post? You're not macedonian, your bulgarian, or south slavic if you want to be very general.

"and there is no Macedonians from FYRO Macedonia" We have progress!
 
Please tell me dejavu when did these south saharan people enter greece?

Concidering everything you write is complete lies why should I believe anything you post? You're not macedonian, your bulgarian, or south slavic if you want to be very general.

Ask your mom, when they entered :) it flows in your genes.
I got links to the evidence. You are just a peasant with big words and empty statements.
 
Ask your mom, when they entered :) it flows in your genes.
I got links = evidence. You are just a peasant with big words and empty statements.

lol links does not mean evidence, you must not have gone far in school (unless you went to school in FYR Macedonia, then you are a scholar!) (y)

I found this VERY facsinating!

FYROM:
"About 50 per cent of high school students want to leave their country for good, a survey carried out by a local youth NGO reports."

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/survey-macedonia-s-youth-wants-to-leave-country

With all the "macedonians" leaving, and albanians growing, in 20 years there won't be a FYROM for us to talk about (y)

Greeks arn't your enemy, but you insist it to be this way! oh well.
 
I’m HebedeDabe pure Neanderthal and I find the presence of you African homo-sapiens offensive. You have destroyed Europe it was so nice and peaceful before you came with you wars and hate… please go back to Africa you dirty homo-sapiens.

How’s that? Non of you belong here you are all African immigrants.
 
hey, I've been doing some research but I can't find how Bosnians look like. Sorry for my ignorance people, but I'd really like to know and I hope you can help me out. Just physical appearance in general, and it would also be good if you told me about Croatians and Serbians appearance too. thanks! :) (and sorry for my english)
 
hey, I've been doing some research but I can't find how Bosnians look like. Sorry for my ignorance people, but I'd really like to know and I hope you can help me out. Just physical appearance in general, and it would also be good if you told me about Croatians and Serbians appearance too. thanks! :) (and sorry for my english)

Croats and Bosnians look is blond to light brown. Serbs look about the same but they range from blond to Mediterranean look an average would be a bit darker then the 2 former..
 
Croats and Bosnians look is blond to light brown. Serbs look about the same but they range from blond to Mediterranean look an average would be a bit darker then the 2 former..

thank you! so originally there are no redheads? (I was wondering that, actually) I imagined there wouldn't, but I couldn't find any page with specific info about Bosnians appearance and I wanted to be sure. thanks again :)
 
thank you! so originally there are no redheads? (I was wondering that, actually) I imagined there wouldn't, but I couldn't find any page with specific info about Bosnians appearance and I wanted to be sure. thanks again :)

There are just not common like northern Europe. Well I have seen redhead Albanians can’t remember seeing it with the others. But I would imagine there if there are among the Albanians.
 
One thing people seem to get stuck in is borders and cultural groups. In the case of the Bosnian cultural self identity started to branch out under ottoman rule. Just because a nation did not exist does not mean that a cultural identity wasn’t there.

The concept of National identity is new in terms of human history. The common peoples self identity was smaller.

I’m rather fascinated with the development in the Balkan area. The way national self identities are forming and shifting. The fall of the Ottoman Empire, ww1, ww2, Formation of Yugoslavia and in relation to the break up Yugoslavia.

One interesting thing is that as Ottoman Empire played a key part Bosnian self identity they don’t demonize them compared to the other groups that were Vassals and or occupied by the Ottomans.

Branching out and converging of cultures happens all the time. Today we see a branching of Italy happening from the north and south and other countries like Belgium. All it takes is a group of people to convince the people that they are better and make the other group bad.

That’s what happened in Yugoslavia. Small groups of intellectuals started a new self identity that cascaded and spread.

The wars have built larger walls and added new layers of self identities to the groups.

Even on this thread, the forum in general, you se examples of reinforcement of self identity by demonizing the others.

simply you are out side balkans, and you are far from Balkan History,

As an example, you your own said that Bosnian is a new tradition and culture that became a nation,

what did I say?
I said that ex one language bigger wide nation broke to 3,
is that wrong? where am I wrong?

simply at times of ottoman empire, local people change religion and converted to islam,
that slowly created a new culture,
whatwrong did I say?
nationality bosnians are south slavs, in fact for me, as also genetic proves they are same with serbs, once almost a nation, but religion divide them to 2
where the wrong in what i said so to to answer me me like that,
in balkans who have the phenomenon that politician are paid by foreigners to divide more,
As an example Fyrom, a culture?
of whom? turks? bulgarins? serbs? greeks? that became a state, and demands history and lands of other nations,
in 100 years many new nations due to religion, language, economy, or political issues,
a different culture that is new imported does not make another nation, but divides one,
as an example we call them all germans,
but Bayern, with north east Germany what common?
different culture, yet we say that are 1 nation although genetically are tottaly different,
so becarefull when you read and when you mention with word nation,
a political movement does not make a nation, as also a small culture difference,
there many nations divided either by politicians either by religion,
and slowly the are pushing that division by imput new customs and words etc,

SO PLZ DON'T PLAY THE GAME OF A POLITICIAN,
part of fyrom part of kossyfo , almsot serbia (not the north) and most of bosnia is the same Nation, simply divided by religion, politics economy, and rulers ambitions,

as most of kossyfo with north albania is almost same nation,

besides Pontic Greeks lived west of kaukasus,
cretans live in Crete,
But linguistic and genetical similarity proves that are a nation although different culture, due to Venice occupation the last and ottoman the 1rst.


a nation has not to do with politics

in fact Bosna is a true yugo-slav (south slav) country, with only difference the religion,

and since islam is new to balkan comparing christianity, we use the older terms to compare a nation,

that is why we are comparing with serbs and say they are same nation, and we don't say serbs are bosnians,

hope i make my self clear and understood.
 
Dejavu

you are the dumpest Y-dna i have ever seen

you have a G2a3b like me,

you know that this mainly Smyrna's and minor Asian Greek probably from Hettit of Akkadian etc, and also found in Jews eskenazi i think,

and you are telling me that you are a makedonian, when the spot location of G is Thessaly area from were Argeiad family was,
seems like you must find who was your father, cause probably have same Y-Dna with Alaxander, but you speak another language, a language that is more baltic, less thracian, and almost zero the language of Alexander,

The dumpest G I have seen,
 
simply you are out side balkans, and you are far from Balkan History,

As an example, you your own said that Bosnian is a new tradition and culture that became a nation,

what did I say?
I said that ex one language bigger wide nation broke to 3,
is that wrong? where am I wrong?

simply at times of ottoman empire, local people change religion and converted to islam,
that slowly created a new culture,
whatwrong did I say?
nationality bosnians are south slavs, in fact for me, as also genetic proves they are same with serbs, once almost a nation, but religion divide them to 2
where the wrong in what i said so to to answer me me like that,
in balkans who have the phenomenon that politician are paid by foreigners to divide more,
As an example Fyrom, a culture?
of whom? turks? bulgarins? serbs? greeks? that became a state, and demands history and lands of other nations,
in 100 years many new nations due to religion, language, economy, or political issues,
a different culture that is new imported does not make another nation, but divides one,
as an example we call them all germans,
but Bayern, with north east Germany what common?
different culture, yet we say that are 1 nation although genetically are tottaly different,
so becarefull when you read and when you mention with word nation,
a political movement does not make a nation, as also a small culture difference,
there many nations divided either by politicians either by religion,
and slowly the are pushing that division by imput new customs and words etc,

SO PLZ DON'T PLAY THE GAME OF A POLITICIAN,
part of fyrom part of kossyfo , almsot serbia (not the north) and most of bosnia is the same Nation, simply divided by religion, politics economy, and rulers ambitions,

as most of kossyfo with north albania is almost same nation,

besides Pontic Greeks lived west of kaukasus,
cretans live in Crete,
But linguistic and genetical similarity proves that are a nation although different culture, due to Venice occupation the last and ottoman the 1rst.


a nation has not to do with politics

in fact Bosna is a true yugo-slav (south slav) country, with only difference the religion,

and since islam is new to balkan comparing christianity, we use the older terms to compare a nation,

that is why we are comparing with serbs and say they are same nation, and we don't say serbs are bosnians,

hope i make my self clear and understood.

My impression is from reading the threads here that you fall under the category of a national extremist. You seem always to be blind to any information anyone gives that does not fall in your own national romantic identity.

First off All national identities are artificial before 1800 the common people didn’t see them selves as being any thing ells then being owned by nobles and kings. And borders are just as artificial and were formed by power struggles and not according to cultural groups. To the common man it didn’t mean anything, land and people changed hands all the time, they just got a new owner. Only thing they cared about is that the new owner would not treat them to bad.

And your Greece is also a modern construction. Yes even your precious Greece. From 1823 there has gone a lot of work in making the Modern Greek identity. Even though you like to believe its all Hellenic and you guys are pure and direct descendants of the ancient Greeks. But, anyone with basic knowledge of history does not believe this. The Modern Greek state was formed just like FYROM is forming today. It is not my impression that anyone sees Modern Greek nation as having much to do with ancient Greece.

All nations have myths and legends. Most civilized nations se them as myths and legends and don’t believe in them as historic fact. Problem with you my Balkan brothers and sisters is that you guys believe in them as if they are imperial proven facts.

In Denmark: The myth about how Danish flag came to the Danish people. That it fell from the sky to a king on a campaign in the Baltic area. All know this but no one believes it. Because when we get taught history the first thing we learn is the difference from myth, legends and historical facts.

Also as a side note. Here in Denmark in the academic community Greeks are considered ultra nationalistic and if one does field work one need to consider this. We are advised to keep our opinions to our selves if they don’t fit in with Modern Greek identity.

What you need to do is learn the difference between legend myth and historical facts. And learn that just because something writes and does historical research it does not destroy you myths and legends. Because that’s what they are just good stories.

Another interesting fact. A good friend of mine who is Danish. After he was soldier in Bosnia and Kosovo he started his academic carrier as a European Ethnologist. After he traveled to islands and mainland Greece. He was utterly shocked to the core: Saying that even the x-Yugoslavs people didn’t seem that national fanatics.
 
Bosnia and Bosniaks existed in history and thats a fact with evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina

Bosnian Kingdom


Macedonia existed all the time but there was no countries like Albania (Shqiperia) , Bulgaria (New name on Thracian territory) or Greece (only tribes not as a country). If there is anything that did not exist are your fake countries made up by western european elite?. Kosovo did not exist as a country but was created by western europeans? - again for their purpose "divide and conquer". Last person to speak about original ethnicity is a Shqiptar (Albanian - modern and fake way to call and identify them).


There is no evidence that haplogroup G is or have anything to do with ancient Macedonians or ancient Greek tribes.

iGenea - My Primitive tribe is Celtic or Vikings.
Region of origin: Southwestern Europe.
 

This thread has been viewed 199169 times.

Back
Top