PDA

View Full Version : Another N1C here



blueridge
09-09-13, 03:04
Hey everyone, we're a smaller group but you have one more member here now.

I'm N1C1.

Fire Haired
09-09-13, 03:42
It does not matter if u are from North Carolina. what matter is were ur direct father line is from in the old world. That is were u get ur N1c1.

Here is a map of it in europe
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-N.gif

It is connected with the spread of Uralic languages and spreading to Europe with Kunda and comb cermic cultures 6,000-8,000ybp. U should look at eupedia Migrations maps click here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml). This Y DNA N is Mongliod. It is the brother of O (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O-M175) dominte in east asia and couins of Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242) and R (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R-M207). It is why Finnish and other Uralic speaking Europeans have so much higher Mongliod admixture in aust dna than other Europeans who have about always 0%.(click here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2)). my Y DNA haplogroup also was originally Mongliod I have Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1 L11 (X R1b1a2a1a1 S21, X for Italo Gaulish R1b1a2a1a2b S28, X for mainly Insular Celtic R1b1a2a12c L21).

Y DNa R was orignally Mongliod estimated to be about 30,000 years old. It somehow mixed with Caucasians. Which is why R2 exists in Caucasins mainly around Afghanstian Iran area. But R1 actulley also exists in Native Americans and Siberians. But R1a and R1b all in Caucasins both are estimate to be about 18,000 years old. I dont know the full history but R1b seems to have orignated around the mid east. Where it punched around for thousands of years. All i know is that R1a1a M17 originated around Russia and Ukriane or somewhere else in Europe. Then R1a1a1 M417 spread with INdo European languages same with R1b1a2a L51 learn more here (Y DNA spread by Indo Europeans (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91971-Y-DNA-spread-by-Indo-Europeans-(R1a1a1-M417-R1b1a2a1-L51)-(R1b1a2a-L23-R1b1a1-M73-Etc-))). So because of INdo Europeans became dominate in many people around the world.


U should look at Eupedias Y DNA pages on the Genetics section.

adamo
09-09-13, 05:16
N lineages are Mongolid? Your flawed understanding of this disturbs me. Mongolians are predominantly C with a very minor O substratum....where do you see N? Mongols are like 55% C and what? 10% O and N about, 10% each.

adamo
09-09-13, 05:17
N lineages are Siberian; not Mongolid, nor East Asian.

Twilight
09-09-13, 06:02
I think he meant race classification

adamo
09-09-13, 06:21
Races don't exist; Mongolid is a useless term that denotes nothing at all; as is the entire concept of "Race".

adamo
09-09-13, 06:22
Race is simply a form of visual classification; scientifically, it represents nothing.

Fire Haired
09-09-13, 06:32
N lineages are Mongolid? Your flawed understanding of this disturbs me. Mongolians are predominantly C with a very minor O substratum....where do you see N? Mongols are like 55% C and what? 10% O and Nabout, 10% each.

Mongliod are not one Y DNa haplogroup. and yes look at human y dna tree on wikpedia and studies yes y dnja n was orignally mongliod. Y DNa is just a direct male line it does not tell full ancestry. 50% of Europeans have Y DNA R1 which was orignally mongliod but u find almost no traces of Mongliod in aust dna which tells full ancestry.

Fire Haired
09-09-13, 06:35
Race is simply a form of visual classification; scientifically, it represents nothing.

That is actulley very un true. click here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?84356-Human-family-tree-Discovered-through-DNA). There are hUman familes Sub Sharen African, Oceania Mongliod, and Caucasin. The reason i dont call it Negriod like scientist in the 1800's did for sub sharen Africans black skin. Is because it also exists in the Oceania branch of Mongliod Oceania. Orignally before DNA testing people thought totally sub sahraen looking Oceania people were most related to them. But Aust dna, Y DNa, and mtDNa has shown they are very closely related to Mongliods and not to Sub Sahren africans.

There are human families and they do have distinct features.

blueridge
10-09-13, 04:25
What is up with this website>> I keep getting:

An error has occurred blueridge! You must have 10 posts in order to post links. Your current post count is 5.

I'm not trying to post any links at all !

uguner
10-09-13, 04:29
Race is simply a form of visual classification; scientifically, it represents nothing.

I agree. Your sentence reflects the truth.

blueridge
10-09-13, 04:55
I'll take the quick route and just work around this error..

3

blueridge
10-09-13, 04:55
2................

blueridge
10-09-13, 04:56
...and....1...while I wait 30 more seconds.. :)

blueridge
10-09-13, 04:59
Thanks, this particular migration map, as well as the long range historic origin of the N designations is not new to me. I'm sure it will be refined with more research and testing and this science is still in it's infancy.

The various admix utilities at Gedmatch, Ancestry.com, FTDNA, and 23andme are interesting but that is based on the autosomal data I have uploaded or had tested. I have close to 10% of SE Asian on Gedmatch but the amount depends on which utility and test I look at. The other site tests are very basic and tell me nothing other than I'm @96% European.


It does not matter if u are from North Carolina. what matter is were ur direct father line is from in the old world. That is were u get ur N1c1.

Here is a map of it in europe
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-N.gif

It is connected with the spread of Uralic languages and spreading to Europe with Kunda and comb cermic cultures 6,000-8,000ybp. U should look at eupedia Migrations maps click here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml). This Y DNA N is Mongliod. It is the brother of O (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O-M175) dominte in east asia and couins of Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242) and R (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R-M207). It is why Finnish and other Uralic speaking Europeans have so much higher Mongliod admixture in aust dna than other Europeans who have about always 0%.(click here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2)). my Y DNA haplogroup also was originally Mongliod I have Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1 L11 (X R1b1a2a1a1 S21, X for Italo Gaulish R1b1a2a1a2b S28, X for mainly Insular Celtic R1b1a2a12c L21).

Y DNa R was orignally Mongliod estimated to be about 30,000 years old. It somehow mixed with Caucasians. Which is why R2 exists in Caucasins mainly around Afghanstian Iran area. But R1 actulley also exists in Native Americans and Siberians. But R1a and R1b all in Caucasins both are estimate to be about 18,000 years old. I dont know the full history but R1b seems to have orignated around the mid east. Where it punched around for thousands of years. All i know is that R1a1a M17 originated around Russia and Ukriane or somewhere else in Europe. Then R1a1a1 M417 spread with INdo European languages same with R1b1a2a L51 learn more here (Y DNA spread by Indo Europeans (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91971-Y-DNA-spread-by-Indo-Europeans-%28R1a1a1-M417-R1b1a2a1-L51%29-%28R1b1a2a-L23-R1b1a1-M73-Etc-%29)). So because of INdo Europeans became dominate in many people around the world.


U should look at Eupedias Y DNA pages on the Genetics section.

I will have a better idea once I get my final Y-DNA67 results back. With that more specifically defined I should have a better idea about my N1C1 Y line. Their Y projects groups there will also help I think.

My paternal name is "Minich" which typically is considered German, but I think that is either more recent (last 300 years) or possibly a NPE from a few hundred years back...who knows at this point?

I am also doing full MtDna testing at FTDNA on my J1C8 maternal side and will be glad to share anything there in the other sections. I have much better referenced sources on that side of my family and am pretty confident on my research up to my current "dead end" immigrant to the US at @ 1720 from Tyrone, Ireland...and that's not to say J1C8 originated in Ireland as opposed to earlier migrations there either..but that's for another discussion.

Please carry on, an interesting debate regardless :)

adamo
10-09-13, 07:14
C3 is the "Mongolid" marker, as this is the subclade of C found among the central Asians that possess C.

Sile
10-09-13, 09:04
It does not matter if u are from North Carolina. what matter is were ur direct father line is from in the old world. That is were u get ur N1c1.

Here is a map of it in europe
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-N.gif

It is connected with the spread of Uralic languages and spreading to Europe with Kunda and comb cermic cultures 6,000-8,000ybp. U should look at eupedia Migrations maps click here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml). This Y DNA N is Mongliod. It is the brother of O (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O-M175) dominte in east asia and couins of Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242) and R (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R-M207). It is why Finnish and other Uralic speaking Europeans have so much higher Mongliod admixture in aust dna than other Europeans who have about always 0%.(click here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2)). my Y DNA haplogroup also was originally Mongliod I have Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1 L11 (X R1b1a2a1a1 S21, X for Italo Gaulish R1b1a2a1a2b S28, X for mainly Insular Celtic R1b1a2a12c L21).

Y DNa R was orignally Mongliod estimated to be about 30,000 years old. It somehow mixed with Caucasians. Which is why R2 exists in Caucasins mainly around Afghanstian Iran area. But R1 actulley also exists in Native Americans and Siberians. But R1a and R1b all in Caucasins both are estimate to be about 18,000 years old. I dont know the full history but R1b seems to have orignated around the mid east. Where it punched around for thousands of years. All i know is that R1a1a M17 originated around Russia and Ukriane or somewhere else in Europe. Then R1a1a1 M417 spread with INdo European languages same with R1b1a2a L51 learn more here (Y DNA spread by Indo Europeans (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91971-Y-DNA-spread-by-Indo-Europeans-(R1a1a1-M417-R1b1a2a1-L51)-(R1b1a2a-L23-R1b1a1-M73-Etc-))). So because of INdo Europeans became dominate in many people around the world.


U should look at Eupedias Y DNA pages on the Genetics section.

There are many N1 marker in the croatian island of Hvar....it matches the map. Some say its part of the amber trade which began around mid bronze-age times.

Petter
17-09-13, 08:20
There are probably several waves behind N in Europe.

1. An ancient migration wave of unknown people before 6000 BC, perhaps connected to the Comb-Ceramic culture. This is the reason N is so widespread in Europe, and some of the local branches are very old, too old to be connected to 2. or 3. below. The race of this people is unkown.

2. A migration of predominately Caucasoid Uralic-speaking peoples from their Urheimat in the Volga-Ural region. The proto-Uralic language is close to proto-Indo-European, and for some reason, the Uralic group became very expansive and successful, just like its "big brother" Indo-European. This is why Latvians and Finns are so N-rich.

3. Admixture with Siberian peoples in Eastern Europe. This is how Saami have gotten their Siberian admixture, and they have in turn given it to the Finns. These Siberian people were also N-rich, further raising N in Finland.


It is connected with the spread of Uralic languages and spreading to Europe with Kunda and comb cermic cultures 6,000-8,000ybp. U should look at eupedia Migrations maps click here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml). This Y DNA N is Mongliod. It is the brother of O (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O-M175) dominte in east asia and couins of Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242) and R (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R-M207). It is why Finnish and other Uralic speaking Europeans have so much higher Mongliod admixture in aust dna than other Europeans who have about always 0%.(click here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2)).

Siberian (not East Asian) admixture in Finns is only about 6%, while N accounts for 60% of Finnish lines. It is therefore wrong to say that the Siberian admixture is connected to high N. The Siberian admixture comes from a now vanished unrelated local Siberian population, which also happened to have high N.

Fire Haired
18-09-13, 00:33
What test are u talking about when u say east asian not siberian. There is no doubt Y DNA N1c1c in Finnish is connected with their mongliod aust dna results that other Europeans dont have. I know 60% of their paternal lines which is direct father line is N1c1 so what. Like i was saying before oirgnally 30,000ybp Y DNA R1 was Mongliod about 50% of Europeans have it so what. The only Y DNA haplogroup that probably originated in Europe is hg I. Y DNA N1c1 is very popular in most Urlaic speakers. It defintley is connected with Kunda and Conb Cermic cultures. Also even Hungarian Uralic even though they inter married with atives two Y DNa samples from the middle ages of their high ranking people who would have kept a more pure Uralic paternal line they had N1c. So it deifntley is also connected with Uralic languages

Petter
20-09-13, 09:00
There is no doubt Y DNA N1c1c in Finnish is connected with their mongliod aust dna results that other Europeans dont have. I know 60% of their paternal lines which is direct father line is N1c1 so what. Like i was saying before oirgnally 30,000ybp Y DNA R1 was Mongliod about 50% of Europeans have it so what. The only Y DNA haplogroup that probably originated in Europe is hg I.

It is a fairly established theory that the Siberian admixture in Finland came from proto-Saamis, who had gotten it from some other Siberian people. The admixture date is also quite recent, 1000 BC -0, as evident from linkage disequilibrium, while N is much, much older. As I wrote above Siberian admixture is only 6%, while N is as high as 60%. N is also very common in the Baltic states which constitute North European gene refugia (like Finland) with little if any Siberian admixture. All in all this shows that N does not directly correlate with Siberian admixture.

Of course, the recent Siberian admixture in Finns has brought in a little N, as the Siberian people was probably also N-rich, but its highly implausible that this would account for the whole 60%. That would be assuming an enormous genetic drift.


Like i was saying before oirgnally 30,000ybp Y DNA R1 was Mongliod about 50% of Europeans have it so what.

Either I dont really understand you or you are contradicting yourself - if R1 originally came from Mongoloid people and then was spread by Caucasoids, then it is exactly like N in Europe.


It defintley is connected with Kunda and Conb Cermic cultures. Also even Hungarian Uralic even though they inter married with atives two Y DNa samples from the middle ages of their high ranking people who would have kept a more pure Uralic paternal line they had N1c. So it deifntley is also connected with Uralic languages

"Definitly" is too strong, but is likely, yes. Like I wrote in my first post above, there has probably been multiple Westward migrations waves of N - for example first original N, then Comb-Ceramic, then Uralic.