PDA

View Full Version : Laz 2014 or 15 Predicting Competition



Fire Haired14
27-10-14, 07:22
I'd like to make this use this thread for people to post their predictions on what Laz 2014 or 2015 will reveal as a competition. I'd suggest preparing with research for the new Laz paper.

While asking David Reich to reveal insights he and his team have learned about the genetic-makeup of inhabitants of Samara and Karelia Russia from the Mesolithic-copper age and the contribution of the Yamna culture(believed to be the proto-Indo Europeans) to the ancestry of modern people, he told me their paper will hopefully be ready to submit in a few months, so hopefully it will be published before the spring. Because of this, I'd like to use this thread for people to post their predictions on what Laz 2014 or 2015 will reveal as a competition. I'd also suggest preparing with research for the new Laz paper.

The tweets made about Iosif Lazaridis's 15 minute speech at ASHG revealed some important information. Such as Yamna could fit as a 50/50 mix of Mesolithic Karelians and modern Armenians, that Corded ware in Germany was ~36% Mesolithic Karelian and 73% Yamna which is more than any modern Europeans have, Yamna-related ancestry in Europe today from highest to lowest is Balts-north/central/east Europeans-south Europeans-Sardinians(who were said to have very little), South Asians are can't be model for Yamna ancestry because there are no ancient genomes(pre-Indo European) sampled yet from south Asia.

I learned by emailing David Reich that his team has not been able to find a way to estimate the amount of ANE ancestry in Mesolithic Karelians. This means they were probably not a simple WHG-ANE mix like Mesolithic Scandinavians, but also have east Asian ancestry, which mtDMA from Karelian hunter gatherers from previous studies suggest.

Because we know Corded ware had ~73% Yamna-related ancestry and they have more than Balts, who have ~18-20% ANE ancestry(assuming, Reich's model assumes all ANE in Europe is from Yamna), this means Yamna had at least 25-30% ANE, and that Karelian HGs had at least around 50% ANE. Also, because Yamna could fit as 50% modern Aremians, they would score well over 50% EEF(Armenians have more basal Eurasian than Stuttgart) in Laz terms. There's room for 10-30% WHG(In Laz terms), and there's a chance they had less than 10%(In Laz terms).

John Doe
27-10-14, 10:04
I hope they will also analayze a full genome of a Neolithic farmer from the Fertile crescent and/or Anatolia.

epoch
27-10-14, 10:16
I learned by emailing David Reich that his team has not been able to find a way to estimate the amount of ANE ancestry in Mesolithic Karelians. This means they were probably not a simple WHG-ANE mix like Mesolithic Scandinavians, but also have east Asian ancestry, which mtDMA from Karelian hunter gatherers from previous studies suggest.

Because we know Corded ware had ~73% Yamna-related ancestry and they have more than Balts, who have ~18-20% ANE ancestry(assuming, Reich's model assumes all ANE in Europe is from Yamna), this means Yamna had at least 25-30% ANE, and that Karelian HGs had at least around 50% ANE. Also, because Yamna could fit as 50% modern Aremians, they would score well over 50% EEF(Armenians have more basal Eurasian than Stuttgart) in Laz terms. There's room for 10-30% WHG(In Laz terms), and there's a chance they had less than 10%(In Laz terms).

Fire, What exactly did David Reich tell about the inability of finding ANE in the Karelian HG? I'm quite curious.

Yetos
27-10-14, 18:34
Karelian?

ok if I am dump as a rhino, can you make it more simple to stupid guys like me, who did not come to class?

plzzzzzzzzzz

Robert6
27-10-14, 21:14
Karelians are Finno-Permic people
President Putin is from Russian town Tver
The "Tverians" came from Karelia.
Tolkien(Lord of the Rings) wrote and used some myths and songs from Karelian people for his book, (the Elvish language is Karelian-Finnic).

But we talking about Mesolithic Karelians so....

epoch
27-10-14, 21:43
Karelian?

ok if I am dump as a rhino, can you make it more simple to stupid guys like me, who did not come to class?

plzzzzzzzzzz

Area near the border of South-Finland. A number of mesolithic HG's have been found there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia

Fire Haired14
28-10-14, 00:26
Fire, What exactly did David Reich tell about the inability of finding ANE in the Karelian HG? I'm quite curious.

He said they have "lots' of ANE but his team has not been able to create a model they're confident with to predict a percentage of ANE ancestry. It was evry easy for them to predict ANE in Swedish hunter gatherers, so this probably means Karelian(and also probably Samara) hunter gatherers had some type of non-west Eurasian ancestry(most likely east Asian). I guess the east Asian ancestry of eastern hunter gatherers(EHG) trickled down from Yamna to modern Europeans that it's almost impossible to identify.

We know because of a few clues they given in the ASHG conference that the Karelian hgs were over 50% ANE, but not 100%. Remember the southern Swedish hgs were about 19% ANE and 81% WHG, late Neolithic hgs from Gotland were ~15% ANE and maybe 85% WHG, and hunter gatherers in Luxembourg, northern Spain, and Hungary were ~100% WHG. Southern Scandinavian hgs were obviously of mostly western European hg decent, with a little but of east European hg.

Modern Europeans have decent from at least EHG(eastern) and WHG(western), mostly western. WHG throughout Europe especially in northern Europe seems to have made a huge comeback at the end of the Neolithic(it's as high as 49% in Balts). There are two Hungarian genomes separated by only 800 years the youngest is ~35-40% WHG and the oldest ~5-10% WHG, the youngest also had 5-15% ANE, while the oldest completely lacked ANE.

Right after a WHG rise in most of Europe the Indo Europeans from the Pontiac steppe who can be fit as 50% EHG and 50% modern Armenian spread across Europe making some Europeans probably over 50% Yamna. Therefore mainland Europeans can be explained as a mix western EEF and WHG and eastern EEF and EHG.

motzart
28-10-14, 01:58
I bet they find some more I2a just like every other study lol.. but on a more serious note... I hope that the 3 population theory gets debunked because just by looking at Y DNA you can tell there were many more than 3 distinct migrations of humans into Europe. I don't see why everyone thinks the ANE/WHG/EEF theory is so groundbreaking when it is just a regurgitation of a theory that has been around for 100 years by another name (Alpine/Nordic/Mediterranean).

Fire Haired14
28-10-14, 02:40
Motzart, you're coming off arrogant and should suggest ideas not make big conclusions. Y DNA is just a paternal lineage. There have been multiple migrations, founder effects, whatever of Y DNA in Europe, but just about all was 100% WHG-EEF-ANE. Early European farmers were mostly G2a and Iraqis are mostly have J, but they're both mostly ENF. According to the best in the business what is called EEF-WHG-ANE can explain Europeans, and close to 100% of west Asian's blood too.

Nordic represents northern-type which I guess when talking about skeletal features and maybe others(not pigmentation) is most like WHG. Mediterranean is defintly very similar in physical features to EEF, Sardinians are pretty much 100% EEF. EEF Hungarians though had a much higher percentage of light eyes than Sardinians and Gok2 had light eyes, and one Neolithic Hungarian had light-brownish hair and another was a carrier of a mutation known to give yellow hair.

There are no very good representatives of ANE, and alpine defiantly is not it. In Europe ANE peaks in Balts and Finno-Urgics and Turks in NE Europe(not in the Alps), at only around 20%. Today it's overall highest in native Americans, and then next south-central Asians. The last Mal'ta-based population were Mesolithic people in east Europe and probably central Asia, but they're blood is very diluted now a days.

Balts have over 50% European WHG and combined with related near eastern WHG, they're over 70%, so they might have some very similar facial features to Mesolithic western Europeans.

Fire Haired14
28-10-14, 02:41
The Neolithic Hungarian; NE7, had I2a2a2. That's actually the 2nd I2a2 found in stone age western Europe, plus I1 and I2c have been found. I2a1-P37 was not alone at all.

motzart
28-10-14, 04:14
The Neolithic Hungarian; NE7, had I2a2a2. That's actually the 2nd I2a2 found in stone age western Europe, plus I1 and I2c have been found. I2a1-P37 was not alone at all.

Try reading my post again.

Fire Haired14
28-10-14, 06:24
I'm not claiming you said they all had I2a1-P37. I'm just making the point that not all had I2a1-P37.

motzart
28-10-14, 07:44
Motzart, you're coming off arrogant and should suggest ideas not make big conclusions. Y DNA is just a paternal lineage. There have been multiple migrations, founder effects, whatever of Y DNA in Europe, but just about all was 100% WHG-EEF-ANE. Early European farmers were mostly G2a and Iraqis are mostly have J, but they're both mostly ENF. According to the best in the business what is called EEF-WHG-ANE can explain Europeans, and close to 100% of west Asian's blood too.

Nordic represents northern-type which I guess when talking about skeletal features and maybe others(not pigmentation) is most like WHG. Mediterranean is defintly very similar in physical features to EEF, Sardinians are pretty much 100% EEF. EEF Hungarians though had a much higher percentage of light eyes than Sardinians and Gok2 had light eyes, and one Neolithic Hungarian had light-brownish hair and another was a carrier of a mutation known to give yellow hair.

There are no very good representatives of ANE, and alpine defiantly is not it. In Europe ANE peaks in Balts and Finno-Urgics and Turks in NE Europe(not in the Alps), at only around 20%. Today it's overall highest in native Americans, and then next south-central Asians. The last Mal'ta-based population were Mesolithic people in east Europe and probably central Asia, but they're blood is very diluted now a days.

Balts have over 50% European WHG and combined with related near eastern WHG, they're over 70%, so they might have some very similar facial features to Mesolithic western Europeans.

I don't think it is arrogant to suggest the 3 way model is insufficient, there is already another thread on here about a 4 way model. R1b and R1a both carried very different admixtures when they arrived in Europe (Gedrosia vs Caucauses and Siberian), so its inaccurate to lump them together under ANE. Likewise lumping G2a/J2/J1/E1b together as "EEF" is also not sufficient. G2a diverged from the rest of these groups a very long time before IJ split with K making the first Neolithic farmers to arrive in Europe probably a group worth their own designation. G2a farmers seem not to have mixed much with other humans before their arrival in EUrope because in all the European ENE finds to date we only find G2a and I. I would even guess that G2a farmers are as much diverged from the rest of the Neolithic populations as WHGs were.

Maybe the only way a 3 way model will work is if we can sequence a Cro Magnon to contrast against Malta, Afonta Gora, and Ust-Ishim. Then we can see what they have in common and what they both lack and define the lacking as EEF. I don't think it will ever work from analyzing admixture in Neolithic and Bronze age samples though, with these there is no certainty.

Sile
28-10-14, 08:27
The Neolithic Hungarian; NE7, had I2a2a2. That's actually the 2nd I2a2 found in stone age western Europe, plus I1 and I2c have been found. I2a1-P37 was not alone at all.

he is 70% EEF
Y-Haplogroup is I-L1228
Mtdna = N1a


close ....I am 69,4 EEF:eek2:

sparkey
28-10-14, 16:27
The Neolithic Hungarian; NE7, had I2a2a2. That's actually the 2nd I2a2 found in stone age western Europe, plus I1 and I2c have been found. I2a1-P37 was not alone at all.

Very interesting about NE7, I hadn't seen that yet. Where does it say that? Are we talking SNP L1228? That's a pretty rare one.

By the way, I've pretty much given up on the idea that we can say with any confidence that Ajvide 52 was I2a2a1, as Genetiker says. The defining SNP, CTS616, has come up as a false positive for both KO1 and IR1, which indicates that we can't rely on it at all. And CTS616 is pretty much all we had to go on for Ajvide 52. So I'm thinking that NE7 may be the first I2a2 found in stone age western Europe.

Sile
28-10-14, 20:09
Very interesting about NE7, I hadn't seen that yet. Where does it say that? Are we talking SNP L1228? That's a pretty rare one.

By the way, I've pretty much given up on the idea that we can say with any confidence that Ajvide 52 was I2a2a1, as Genetiker says. The defining SNP, CTS616, has come up as a false positive for both KO1 and IR1, which indicates that we can't rely on it at all. And CTS616 is pretty much all we had to go on for Ajvide 52. So I'm thinking that NE7 may be the first I2a2 found in stone age western Europe.

It seems Felix is re-running all the old ancient finds in his site....Ajvide52 was re-run and I notice he has placed it as


Ajvide52 (http://www.y-str.org/2014/10/ajvide52-dna.html)
Sweden
Male
HIJK-F929
HV0a
5000 years


NE7 below

http://www.fc.id.au/search/label/Genealogy

Greying Wanderer
01-11-14, 00:06
My guesses:

1) some trace components are messing with the results: some African traces in some EEF and some in WHG along the south and west coasts confusing the signal between those two and also some East Asian traces in some WHG and in some ANE (with the trace in WHG coming into the Baltic from the north rather than the east imo) confusing the signal between the ANE and WHG them on the northern and eastern edges

2) ANE originally represented a widely spread HG population that existed over a wide range and although one segment of that group became the IE and spread dramatically over most of that range some of the surviving ANE scattered around northern Eurasia dates from before that event so there is both an IE version of ANE and a pre-IE version.

3) R1b and R1a partly representing two different waves

4) There's a Cucuteni shaped piece missing in the current model

Fire Haired14
01-11-14, 04:45
The new Laz paper should be out around Christmas time. I miss interpreted Riech, he said in another email(to someone else) it should be published in a couple months at biorXiv. I don't think you guys realize how big of a deal this paper is. Think about it if you predicted correctly about their what this new paper will revel, you can hold on to that for the rest of your life. The years and years and years and years and years of debating about PIE genetics will pretty much be over a few months, and you only have that amount of time to be correct about them. The Indo European language family is one of the biggest deals and mysteries in human history, and it's spread was an incredible phenomenon.

arvistro
01-11-14, 11:06
The new Laz paper should be out around Christmas time. I miss interpreted Riech, he said in another email(to someone else) it should be published in a couple months at biorXiv. I don't think you guys realize how big of a deal this paper is. Think about it if you predicted correctly about their what this new paper will revel, you can hold on to that for the rest of your life. The years and years and years and years and years of debating about PIE genetics will pretty much be over a few months, and you only have that amount of time to be correct about them. The Indo European language family is one of the biggest deals and mysteries in human history, and it's spread was an incredible phenomenon.
I predict it only covers part of the story. The Satem IE (r1a) story. I think Yamna was ancestor for Slavs, Balts, Indo-Iranians.
Through Corded it also impacted Germanic.

Aberdeen
01-11-14, 21:14
I predict it only covers part of the story. The Satem IE (r1a) story. I think Yamna was ancestor for Slavs, Balts, Indo-Iranians.
Through Corded it also impacted Germanic.

R1a would undoubtedly be the primary haplotype of the more northern contribution to the Yamna mix - I don't know whether EHG would be accurate but I certainly dislike the term "Mesolithic Karelian" because the Karelians are a modern linguistic group whose proto-language probably didn't yet exist at that point. However, there is also the Armenian part, and modern Armenian Y DNA consists of about 28% R1b (but not the European subclades), 22% J2, 11% J1, 11% J2, 11% G and a number of other types. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the three most common Yamna Y DNA types, in descending order, will be R1a, J2 and G2. I'd consider R1a to almost certainly be the most common. The other two are likely to be there but I don't know in what frequency and I admit there could also be R1b, J1 and T, but I'm going to go with J2 and G2 being the second and third most common.

Fire Haired14
02-11-14, 00:14
Aberdeen people call La Brana-1 a Mesolithic Spaniard even though the Spanish language began to evolve 5,000 years after him. It's used for geographical reasons.

Aberdeen
02-11-14, 01:23
Aberdeen people call La Brana-1 a Mesolithic Spaniard even though the Spanish language began to evolve 5,000 years after him. It's used for geographical reasons.

Although "Mesolithic Iberian" would be more correct, the remains were found in what is now Spain, whereas I very much doubt that the probably EHG like folks who united with the Armenian like folk to become the Yamna came from what is now Karelia (i.e., the Russian Republic of Karelia, the Russian Leningrad Oblast and the North and South Karelia regions of Finland). The portion of the pre-Yamna folk who weren't "Armenian-like" would have been from central Russia, IMO, so "Karelia" fails as a geographic term.

Edit: While I was out socializing with friends this evening, not even thinking about this issue, a sudden thought popped into my head - if such smart people are using the term Karelian, is it because Y haplotype N and maybe I was found with Yamna? I doubt it myself, but that's the only way it would make any sense to apply "Karelian" to those people, if they were a mixture of R1a and N1c and maybe some I1. Not likely though, IMO.

MOESAN
02-11-14, 20:23
Karelians are Finno-Permic people
President Putin is from Russian town Tver
The "Tverians" came from Karelia.
Tolkien(Lord of the Rings) wrote and used some myths and songs from Karelian people for his book, (the Elvish language is Karelian-Finnic).

But we talking about Mesolithic Karelians so....



it's a bit off topic but if 'elvish' is for Elfs language, it seems wrong to me: Tolkien took help rather on welsh language, I think?
maybe I'm wrong???

Robert6
02-11-14, 21:14
it's a bit off topic but if 'elvish' is for Elfs language, it seems wrong to me: Tolkien took help rather on welsh language, I think?
maybe I'm wrong???


Bilbo's translation of Elven (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf_(Middle-earth)) histories and legends: The Silmarillion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Book_of_Westmarch


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion
J.R.R. Tolkien (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.R.R._Tolkien) claimed The Kalevala as one of his sources for The Silmarillion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalevala

Robert6
02-11-14, 21:27
There are two languages (that were most popular) among Elves the Sindarin and the Quenya
The Quenya is partly based on Finnish-Karelian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quenya

Aberdeen
04-11-14, 05:22
There are two languages (that were most popular) among Elves the Sindarin and the Quenya
The Quenya is partly based on Finnish-Karelian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quenya

In that case, my guess is that the Y haplotype type most common among the Quenya would be N1c and among the Sindarin it would be the DF 27 and 152 subclades of R1b.

Angela
04-11-14, 16:43
Although "Mesolithic Iberian" would be more correct, the remains were found in what is now Spain, whereas I very much doubt that the probably EHG like folks who united with the Armenian like folk to become the Yamna came from what is now Karelia (i.e., the Russian Republic of Karelia, the Russian Leningrad Oblast and the North and South Karelia regions of Finland). The portion of the pre-Yamna folk who weren't "Armenian-like" would have been from central Russia, IMO, so "Karelia" fails as a geographic term.

Edit: While I was out socializing with friends this evening, not even thinking about this issue, a sudden thought popped into my head - if such smart people are using the term Karelian, is it because Y haplotype N and maybe I was found with Yamna? I doubt it myself, but that's the only way it would make any sense to apply "Karelian" to those people, if they were a mixture of R1a and N1c and maybe some I1. Not likely though, IMO.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if N is a part of the mix. Look at IR1.(The ancient distribution of N might have stretched all the way toward central Russia, as you pointed out. In fact, it might have reached the far northeast later.) I also think that we now know that J2 is part of the mix too. Then, there's that northern European (and northern Italian) younger cluster of G2a to consider as well. (which might be the royal lineage of France) It's actually R1a and R1b that suddenly seem a little iffy to me. What if R1a, in particular, wasn't actually "Indo-European" to begin with, but instead was Indo-Europeanized after the first stage?

There's that WHG jump that still has to be explained, among other things. What if the Cucuteni Trypillian culture, itself an offshoot of Vinca and Cris, absorbed some of the "R" lineages as it expanded east, and some WHG as well, more than was the case for the farmer cultures further west like LBK? This all took place during a warm period when the area would have been very suitable for agriculture. It happened with I1 after all, where a pre-Neolithic lineage was absorbed into the Neolithic culture,and then underwent its big expansion, probably becoming part of TRB.

(I posted the link to this Wiki article on the thread about the Trypillian temple, but I think it has implications for this discussion as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture)

Then, as happened enumerable times in eastern Europe, nomads from Asia appeared on the scene. That's what happened with the Huns, let's not forget, whose invasion caused the Germanic tribes to flee west into the Roman Empire, ultimately bringing about its downfall. In this particular case, perhaps there was a period of stasis, when "Kurgan" culture diffused west, in effect Kurganizing these people, but with very little gene flow. The following period would be more in the nature of a conquest, forcing the abandonment of the Cucuteni-Trypillian sites as people fled west and south, taking some metallurgy and other elements of the Kurgan culture with them. I think Greying Wanderer was implying something like this as well. Could this possibly explain the presence R1b in the west, at least, and a sample like BR1 which would be the product of this kind of mixing?

Perhaps R1a was in a slightly different area. It might have been further north, and spread both west along the northern tier, and east and then south and ultimately into Asia.

The inroads from the steppe proper would have continued in the Late Bronze Age, and further.

The other possibility is that R1b and R1a were always part of the mix, perhaps moving from the area of the Caspian onto the steppe (as Jean Manco and even Dienekes, I think, have always maintained), and joined perhaps by some J2, and G2a and meeting N there. Even if that's the case however, if the people of the western steppe, as well as the people of Samara, can be modeled as half "Ancient Karelian like" and half "Armenian like", how did the extra WHG become part of the mix? I suppose in that case either the western steppe had a lot more WHG, of unknown y lineage, or there was an increase of WHG just before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans, and perhaps then mixing with them. The WHG marginalized in the far northwest and far northeast or even scattered in between the farming settlements (why isn't there a map showing the number and size of both farming and HG sites in central Europe in the Middle Neolithic, for example?) may have finally adopted agriculture through the "Indo-European" invasions and then undergone their population expansion. (I believe Dienekes hypothesized that something like this might have happened, if I recall correctly.) I still think it's more likely that there wasn't all that much HG survival in central Europe. If we look at mtDna frequencies, the only WHG mtDna is basically U5 isn't it, and only some subclades of U5 at that? The U4 came from the east later.

Of course, one other possibility is that central Europe, as the result of repeated population crashes, was rather low in population of any kind at the time of the Indo-Eurpean arrivals. I know there was a recent paper about it. Someone should take a look at the specific dates.

Ed. Well, I dawdled on the way to the Italian bread display at my Italian supermarket last night because I suddenly started thinking about J2 migration paths, and some sneaky, aggressive Wall Street type in a Brooks Brothers suit snatched the last Brick Oven loaf right out from under my nose. It's dog eat dog out there. http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/smilies/main/laughing.gif Seriously, I'm thinking about this way too much,even when I don't mean to do it!

Robert6
04-11-14, 16:43
Quenya would be N1c
Quenya->Kalevala
->Land of Kalevia
(Kalevia ~ Karelia)
Karelians have 57 of 140, 40,7% R1a
Possibly Karelians are R1a from late Mesolithic

Robert6
04-11-14, 16:55
Karelians have 57 of 140, 40,7% R1a
Possibly Karelians are R1a from late Mesolithic
4000-6000 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit%E2%80%93Comb_Ware_culture
Pit–Comb Ware culture

existed from around 4200 BC to around 2000 BC

Aberdeen
04-11-14, 18:57
You raised some interesting points, Angela, but I think that R1a was part of it and N1c arrived later, mostly because N1c is rare outside Russia and the Baltic states, whereas R1a is found throughout western Europe, although at somewhat low levels. And I think that can be explained by the fact that the main genetic impact of the Indo-European expansion would have been in eastern Europe, the Balkans and the route followed by the Hallstatt expansion. And while I think the D27 subclade of R1b probably arrived in Europe during the late Neolithic and the U106 subclade could have moved up from the Balkans into central Europe during the late Neolithic or Copper Age and only expanded into places like Britain during the Germanic expansion, I think the U152 subclade of R1b was either part of the original IE group or more likely was located in the western Ukraine or the northern Balkans at the time of the IE expansion and was one of the first groups to adopt the IE language and lifestyle, following the alpine meadows from Austria into Switzerland and northern Italy and eventually into France. But I could be wrong. We'll get some definite answers about the IE folk soon enough, I guess.

Angela
04-11-14, 19:35
You raised some interesting points, Angela, but I think that R1a was part of it and N1c arrived later, mostly because N1c is rare outside Russia and the Baltic states, whereas R1a is found throughout western Europe, although at somewhat low levels. And I think that can be explained by the fact that the main genetic impact of the Indo-European expansion would have been in eastern Europe, the Balkans and the route followed by the Hallstatt expansion. And while I think the D27 subclade of R1b probably arrived in Europe during the late Neolithic and the U106 subclade could have moved up from the Balkans into central Europe during the late Neolithic or Copper Age and only expanded into places like Britain during the Germanic expansion, I think the U152 subclade of R1b was either part of the original IE group or more likely was located in the western Ukraine or the northern Balkans at the time of the IE expansion and was one of the first groups to adopt the IE language and lifestyle, following the alpine meadows from Austria into Switzerland and northern Italy and eventually into France. But I could be wrong. We'll get some definite answers about the IE folk soon enough, I guess.

It's fun to speculate, though, isn't it?

I actually don't think we disagree that much, except perhaps about N1c. I think it's more likely that R1a, at least, was part of the original group (the "Asian" clade, however) and that some R1b was in the western part of the Pontic Caspian steppe, whether as part of the "original" Indo-Europeans, or as a Kurganized group

arvistro
04-11-14, 21:17
Quenya->Kalevala
->Land of Kalevia
(Kalevia ~ Karelia)
Karelians have 57 of 140, 40,7% R1a
Possibly Karelians are R1a from late Mesolithic
Do you know Karelian subclades of R1a?

Robert6
04-11-14, 21:40
Karelians
23 16,4% Z282*
19 13,6% M458
14 10,0% M558
1 0,7% Z95

it is in new workUnderhill et al. 2014

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg201450a.html

arvistro
04-11-14, 22:35
Wow, indeed old R1As, z282*. I know only the story of Corded folk that initially created camps also in boreal forests area, but did not survive there culturally, got assimilated by other cultures.
But earlier origin probably is also possible.

Greying Wanderer
05-11-14, 05:50
Although "Mesolithic Iberian" would be more correct, the remains were found in what is now Spain, whereas I very much doubt that the probably EHG like folks who united with the Armenian like folk to become the Yamna came from what is now Karelia (i.e., the Russian Republic of Karelia, the Russian Leningrad Oblast and the North and South Karelia regions of Finland). The portion of the pre-Yamna folk who weren't "Armenian-like" would have been from central Russia, IMO, so "Karelia" fails as a geographic term.

Edit: While I was out socializing with friends this evening, not even thinking about this issue, a sudden thought popped into my head - if such smart people are using the term Karelian, is it because Y haplotype N and maybe I was found with Yamna? I doubt it myself, but that's the only way it would make any sense to apply "Karelian" to those people, if they were a mixture of R1a and N1c and maybe some I1. Not likely though, IMO.


"if such smart people are using the term Karelian, is it because Y haplotype N and maybe I was found with Yamna? I doubt it myself, but that's the only way it would make any sense to apply "Karelian" to those people, if they were a mixture of R1a and N1c and maybe some I1"

I think it's quite likely that the Karelian-like segment had a similar autosomal component though not necessarily the male half. If the ANE existed west-east along one latitude band and there were other peoples west-east in the tundra zone above them then there might well be bride-swapping along the border.

edit: initially at least. if there was a kind of east to west steppe conveyor belt effect then ydna N would eventually get pulled in as well. if so then the early groups like Yamnaya might not have ydna N while the later groups do.

Greying Wanderer
05-11-14, 05:53
it's a bit off topic but if 'elvish' is for Elfs language, it seems wrong to me: Tolkien took help rather on welsh language, I think?
maybe I'm wrong???

being a nerd and already mentioned but IIRC the analogy is Quenya -> Sindarin is like the elf version of Latin -> French with Sindarin being the Welsh-like one.

motzart
06-12-14, 22:18
I bet they find some more I2a just like every other study lol

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/

"Patterson said that linguistic evidence has tracked the ancestral language, called “late proto-Indo-European” to about 3,500 years ago in the Caucasus, among a people who had wheeled vehicles at a time when they were just being put into use.

Genetic evidence ruled out one likely related group in the region, the Yamnaya, because their DNA showed the group had hunter-gatherer ancestry, which is inconsistent with the fact that two Indo-European groups, Armenians and Indians, don’t share it, Patterson said. That made Patterson look south, to the Maikop civilization, which likely had significant contact with the Yamnaya, as a plausible culture where Indo-European languages originated. Samples have been obtained from Maikop burial sites, but the DNA work to test that proposal is pending, Patterson said."


Did I just win this competition?

Krefter14
06-12-14, 23:22
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/

"Patterson said that linguistic evidence has tracked the ancestral language, called “late proto-Indo-European” to about 3,500 years ago in the Caucasus, among a people who had wheeled vehicles at a time when they were just being put into use.

Genetic evidence ruled out one likely related group in the region, the Yamnaya, because their DNA showed the group had hunter-gatherer ancestry, which is inconsistent with the fact that two Indo-European groups, Armenians and Indians, don’t share it, Patterson said. That made Patterson look south, to the Maikop civilization, which likely had significant contact with the Yamnaya, as a plausible culture where Indo-European languages originated. Samples have been obtained from Maikop burial sites, but the DNA work to test that proposal is pending, Patterson said."


Did I just win this competition?

You didn't mention any of that in your post. Besides what Patterson is saying is just theory, none of it is proven. None of what he said about ancient DNA is new info.

Indo European speakers in Asia may very well have EHG(East European Hunter gatherer) ancestry, just it's very minor. There are no ancient genomes from west and south Asia like there are from Europe. Reich, Laz, and Patterson have been able to break down European's ancestry very cleanly because of ancient genomes and can see clear EHG-type ancestry in modern ones, but they can't do that with west and south Asians, and so we can't say whether they have EHG ancestry or not.

Reich and Laz are supportive of the idea that Yamna-type people brought Indo European languages to Europe, and so it would be strange if a different people brought the same language family to Asia at the same time.

Indo Iranian languages(includes, Hindi) used to exist from Siberia to eastern Europe, and so it's very wrong to treat it as a west and south Asian language family. Plus Indo iranians share a R1a brother-clade to east Europeans, which is very likely derived of Yamna, and suggests Indo Iranian took a route through the steppe not Caucasus.

motzart
06-12-14, 23:42
You didn't mention any of that in your post. Besides what Patterson is saying is just theory, none of it is proven. None of what he said about ancient DNA is new info.

Indo European speakers in Asia may very well have EHG(East European Hunter gatherer) ancestry, just it's very minor. There are no ancient genomes from west and south Asia like there are from Europe. Reich, Laz, and Patterson have been able to break down European's ancestry very cleanly because of ancient genomes and can see clear EHG-type ancestry in modern ones, but they can't do that with west and south Asians, and so we can't say whether they have EHG ancestry or not.

Reich and Laz are supportive of the idea that Yamna-type people brought Indo European languages to Europe, and so it would be strange if a different people brought the same language family to Asia at the same time.

Indo Iranian languages(includes, Hindi) used to exist from Siberia to eastern Europe, and so it's very wrong to treat it as a west and south Asian language family. Plus Indo iranians share a R1a brother-clade to east Europeans, which is very likely derived of Yamna, and suggests Indo Iranian took a route through the steppe not Caucasus.

Why would he totally rule them out though if they were mixed ancestry? Armenians and Indians have ANE

Goga
06-12-14, 23:55
Reich and Laz are supportive of the idea that Yamna-type people brought Indo European languages to Europe, and so it would be strange if a different people brought the same language family to Asia at the same time.

Indo Iranian languages(includes, Hindi) used to exist from Siberia to eastern Europe, and so it's very wrong to treat it as a west and south Asian language family. Plus Indo iranians share a R1a brother-clade to east Europeans, which is very likely derived of Yamna, and suggests Indo Iranian took a route through the steppe not Caucasus.Not when proto-Iranians that invaded northern parts of India came from the Iranian Plateau (between Kurdish Zagros Mountains or Elbruz Range). The diversity of R1a* is the highest in West Asia and NOT in the Pontic Caspian Steppes NOR in the eastern Europe. Aryans that invaded India were J2a & R1a-Z93 folks. Aryans that belonged to J2a & R1a-Z93 had nothing to do with the Pontic-Caspian Steppes, because they arrived in SouthCentral Asia from a different place, namely the Iranian Plateau. There are many links between the Sumeria-Mesopotamia civilizations and the ancient Aryans...

Goga
07-12-14, 00:10
But 'Aryans' (J2a & R1a-Z93) were NOT the same as proto-Indo-European speakers at the first place. Proto-Indo-European speakers predated those so called 'Aryans' who invaded Northern India by thousands of years...

Goga
07-12-14, 00:17
The Kurgan theory by Gimbutas is from the fifties of the past century which became popular after the Nazi Germany and the WW2, this theory is very outdated. And with the current new archeological evidences (like Leyla Tepe, oldest Kurgans are in West Asia) of the past decennia and DNA science (like evidence that R1b* is from Asia), this idiotic so called 'Kurgan'-theory should be buried a very long time ago.

Krefter14
07-12-14, 02:29
The Kurgan theory by Gimbutas is from the fifties of the past century which became popular after the Nazi Germany and the WW2, this theory is very outdated. And with the current new archeological evidences (like Leyla Tepe, oldest Kurgans are in West Asia) of the past decennia and DNA science (like evidence that R1b* is from Asia), this idiotic so called 'Kurgan'-theory should be buried a very long time ago.

Goga you as an amateur can't just spit in the face of mainstream theories and throw out your own ideas, and expect people to take you seriously. You're coming off as very arrogant. I'm not your enemy, and don't take what I'm saying as an attack. I think you need to do alot more research before coming to such strong conclusions.

Krefter14
07-12-14, 02:32
Goga, no one is attacking west Asians. Your opinon should not be formed because you feel west Asians are being attacked or because of ethno-centrism.

Goga
07-12-14, 03:20
Goga, no one is attacking west Asians. Your opinon should not be formed because you feel west Asians are being attacked or because of ethno-centrism.Who is saying that I believe anybody is attacking me? I'm following and I'm reading about this topic for at least 13 years. Sure, I never studied genetics, but I did different studies (on university) that are related to history. I'm just using archeology. After a flood of new evidence people are still ignorant. It's actually very ridiculous. Because they just can't accept the reality. It has nothing to do with ethnocentrism or nationalism or even racism, but just telling the truth and nothing but the truth. It is what it is, nobody can change the reality.

Goga
07-12-14, 03:30
Goga you as an amateur can't just spit in the face of mainstream theories and throw out your own ideas, and expect people to take you seriously. You're coming off as very arrogant. I'm not your enemy, and don't take what I'm saying as an attack. I think you need to do alot more research before coming to such strong conclusions.
I may sound arrogant because I'm 1000% sure I'm right. I'm reading about this for at least 15 years, since the time I was just a teenager and every time I find new evidences about my established perception. Why am I intersted in this topic? Well it is very simple because I LOVE history, I'm a history geek. I'm an Ezdi Kurd. I'm fascinated by my origin and the history of my 'Aryan' ancestors, the Medes. My native language is Kurdic which belongs to a west Aryan stock. I love to find out more details about my ancestors and about things they did. To better understand yourself, to be prepared for the things to come (future), one should know his own history. History makes human human. And it seems that my Aryan language is part of a greater Indo-European language family, that's why I'm followig this issue (about PIE) for many years...

Goga
07-12-14, 03:48
I do admit, I don't understand much about how people extract human genetics from DNA and make models out of it. I don't really understand this process, because I never studied it, and I don't want to study it anytime soon. But I think I do know enough to understand the migration of human Y-DNA haplogroups. I believe that I'm not that ignorant to understand that R* rose somewhere in the East and migrated into Europe as R1a and R1b through the Iranian Plateau. So this is a very first sketch of this puzzle. It migrated from the East to West. Why did R1* migrated through the Iranian Plateau and not the steppes, well because there are many ancient traces of BOTH R1b* and R1a* that have been found all over the Iranian Plateau and not the Steppes. Also the archeology does support the migration waves from East to West. From West Asia to Europe and India. The most ancient civilizations have been found around the Mesopotamia and the Iranian Plateau. And it seems that ALL current human civilizations are influenced by the Mesopotamian/Sumerian civilizations. Many WESTERN scholars draw many migrations patters and found out that people from Mesopotamia / the Iranian Plateau migrated into the Caucasus. There're archeological evidences for it. AND also genetic evidences for it. J2a, R1b* etc. in the Caucasus are from the South. They tested many skeletons around the Maykop horizon and found that that those folks came from the South, and were West Asian kind of folks. They studied their culture (ceramics, burials etc) and found out that their culture is also from the South.

Goga
07-12-14, 04:06
Uruk migrants in the Caucasus

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/05/uruk-migrants-in-caucasus.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/05/uruk-migrants-in-caucasus.html)


Stanislav Grigoriev's "Ancient Indo-Europeans"

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/05/stanislav-grigorievs-ancient-indo.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/05/stanislav-grigorievs-ancient-indo.html)


Analysis of Maikop crania (Kazarnitsky 2010)

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/06/analysis-of-maikop-crania-kazarnitsky.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/06/analysis-of-maikop-crania-kazarnitsky.html)


Craniological and dental signatures of Out-of-Armenia

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/07/craniological-and-dental-signatures-of.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/07/craniological-and-dental-signatures-of.html)


Origin of Early Transcaucasian Culture (aka Kura-Araxes culture)

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/07/origin-of-early-transcaucasian-culture.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/07/origin-of-early-transcaucasian-culture.html)


Origins of the Maykop phenomenon

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/05/origins-of-maykop-phenomenon.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2013/05/origins-of-maykop-phenomenon.html)


Proto-Indo-Europeanand North Caucasian

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/07/proto-indo-european-and-north-caucasian.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/07/proto-indo-european-and-north-caucasian.html)


4,000-year old chariot burial from Georgia

http://www.dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/06/4000-year-old-chariot-burial-from.html (http://www.dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/06/4000-year-old-chariot-burial-from.html)


Dark pigmentation of Eneolithic and Bronze Age kurgan groups from eastern Europe

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/03/dark-pigmentation-of-eneolithic-and.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/03/dark-pigmentation-of-eneolithic-and.html)


A solution tothe problem of Indo-Aryan origins (part 2)

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2011/05/solution-to-problem-of-indo-aryan.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2011/05/solution-to-problem-of-indo-aryan.html)


Major new article on the deep origins of Y-haplogroup R1a (Underhill et al. 2014)

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/03/major-new-article-on-deep-origins-of-y.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/03/major-new-article-on-deep-origins-of-y.html)


A common ancestor of Indo-European and Hurrian

http://dienekes.blogspot.be/2011/02/common-ancestor-of-indo-european-and.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.be/2011/02/common-ancestor-of-indo-european-and.html)


Y-DNA R1a spread from Iran

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com.tr/2014/03/y-dna-r1a-spread-from-iran.html


The Indo-European invasion of the Baltic

http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/10/the-indo-european-invasion-of-baltic.html

Goga
07-12-14, 04:22
Russian ACADEMIC Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov about PIEans from West Asia, so not really ethnocentric, is it? :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKlGCc0xhv8




Also NOTICE that Göbekli Tepe and Leyla Tepe culture were discovered after Gimbutas Kurgan theory. Actually, the last decades archaeologists discovered much more new evidences what makes the Kurgan theory of Gimbutas very outdated! I'm not even speaking about the genetics.


Leyla Tepe linked to the Sumerians (Ubaid) AND the Maykop !!!!



Leyla Tepe culture

The Leyla-Tepe culture is a culture of archaeological interest from the Chalcolithic era. Its population was distributed on the southern slopes of the Central Caucasus (modern Azerbaijan, Agdam District), from 4350 until 4000 B.C . Similar amphora burials in the South Caucasus are found in the Western Georgian Jar-Burial Culture.
The culture has also been linked to the north Ubaid period monuments, in particular, with the settlements in the Eastern Anatolia Region. The settlement is of a typical Western-Asian variety,with the dwellings packed closely together and made of mud bricks with smokeoutlets.
It has been suggested that the Leyla-Tepe were the founders of the Maykop culture . An expedition to Syria bythe Russian Academy of Sciences revealed the similarity of the Maykop and Leyla-Tepe artifacts with those found recently while excavating the ancientcity of Tel Khazneh I, from the 4th millennium BC.
In 2010, nearly 200 Bronze Agesites were reported stretching over 60 miles between the Kuban and Nalchik (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalchik) rivers, at an altitude of between 4,620 feet and 7,920 feet. They were all "visibly constructed according to the same architectural plan, with an oval courtyard in the center, and connected byroads."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maykop_culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maykop_culture)



Moooore :

"Can we finally identify the real cradle ofIndo-Europeans?"

http://new-indology.blogspot.in/2014/10/can-we-finally-identify-real-cradle-of.html (http://new-indology.blogspot.in/2014/10/can-we-finally-identify-real-cradle-of.html)

Krefter14
07-12-14, 04:57
I may sound arrogant because I'm 1000% sure I'm right.

That is arrogance. I'm not 100% sure about anything to do with history, but I'm confident about several subjects. It's okay to say you tend to think one theory is right, but to say you're 100% sure a theory is right, is being arrogant.


Why am I intersted in this topic? Well it is very simple because I LOVE history, I'm a history geek. I'm an Ezdi Kurd. I'm fascinated by my origin and the history of my 'Aryan' ancestors, the Medes. My native language is Kurdic which belongs to a west Aryan stock. I love to find out more details about my ancestors and about things they did. To better understand yourself, to be prepared for the things to come (future), one should know his own history.

I'm became interested in history for the same reasons. I think the same is true for most people on these online blogs.

You're right that knowing history helps us understand our own time, and has many other benefits.


I do admit, I don't understand much about how people extract human genetics from DNA and make models out of it. I don't really understand this process, because I never studied it, and I don't want to study it anytime soon. But I think I do know enough to understand the migration of human Y-DNA haplogroups.

Human genetics is the greatest tool next to archaeology to understanding who our pre-historic ancestors were. It's very important to understand. It is not very difficult to get useful information out of "human genetics".

If you don't understand human genetics how do you know enough to understand the migrations of human Y DNA?


The most ancient civilizations have been found around the Mesopotamia and the Iranian Plateau.

That has nothing to do with Indo Europeans. It's like if 5,000 years from now there was a debate on where Islam began and someone said Europe because that's where the most advanced people were living in the 1500-2000's.


They tested many skeletons around the Maykop horizon and found that that those folks came from the South, and were West Asian kind of folks.

When you say test do you mean DNA? If so, there was one mtDNA sample taken from Maykop, last year, and that's it so far.

Krefter14
07-12-14, 05:05
Goga, everything can't come from west Asia. I used to be very ethnocentric and I can see many of my old traits in you.

Also, you should not come to such big conclusions without being an academic and without a lot of evidence. I remember I used to make my conclusions before I even saw evidence then forced the evidence to favor my theory. It seems that's what you're doing. You should look at the evidence and let it speak for it self. Be ready to change your opinion as the evidence reveals it self.

Saying a certain haplogroup, language, or culture originated in a certain region doesn't make it superior in any way to another. I used to be 100% against anyone saying anything in Europe could possible come from west Asia, because I felt that somehow made Europe inferior. I feel you're the same way with west Asia as I was with Europe.

Instead of repeating the same west Asian-origin theory you should look over all the evidence and wait and simply discuss ideas instread of putting your whole-heart for one theory.

Goga
07-12-14, 05:42
If you don't understand human genetics how do you know enough to understand the migrations of human Y DNA?By following and find patterns in human genealogy, family tree etc. By following the migration of a lineage from a place of origin to a current location. Comparing it with other genealogies and again finding patterns. By studying human Y-DNA you can describe the movement of specific haplogroups from A to B. Patterns, it's all about the patterns!


That has nothing to do with Indo Europeans. It's like if 5,000 years from now there was a debate on where Islam began and someone said Europe because that's where the most advanced people were living in the 1500-2000's.Lol, since when is Islam an advanced religion? Only such a backward place like Arabia could produce such a religion.


When you say test do you mean DNA? If so, there was one mtDNA sample taken from Maykop, last year, and that's it so far.Well, culturally Maykop is linked to the Sumerians (Uruk) and Leyla-tepe


Goga, everything can't come from west Asia. I used to be very ethnocentric and I can see many of my old traits in you.

Also, you should not come to such big conclusions without being an academic and without a lot of evidence. I remember I used to make my conclusions before I even saw evidence then forced the evidence to favor my theory. It seems that's what you're doing. You should look at the evidence and let it speak for it self. Be ready to change your opinion as the evidence reveals it self.

Saying a certain haplogroup, language, or culture originated in a certain region doesn't make it superior in any way to another. I used to be 100% against anyone saying anything in Europe could possible come from west Asia, because I felt that somehow made Europe inferior. I feel you're the same way with west Asia as I was with Europe.

Instead of repeating the same west Asian-origin theory you should look over all the evidence and wait and simply discuss ideas instread of putting your whole-heart for one theory.WIth ALL due respect, I'm not you and you're not me. We are both different individuals!

And yes, not everything is from West Asia, but most of the things in Europe ARE actually from West Asia. Maykop culture was located in West Asia and influenced by Mesopotamian cultures, religion Christianity is from SouthWest Asia, agriculture, metallurgy, algebra, policy (politics) are from West Asia etc, etc. Some folks like it or not, Europe has always been a backyard of West Asia!

And you're missing the point completely. For me it doesn't have anything to do with superiority, but the truth, the reality. I know that a conception 'reality' is a human construction, think about ontology & epistemology. But some things you just can't change. You just can't deny the place of origin of some cultures and races. No matter what some say, earth, land, people are material, they exist because you think you can 'touch' it. You CAN'T change your inner self if you change history just by words. You can only change presence if you have a time machine...

I don't care about superior-inferior nonsenses. There is no such thing as a superior 'culture', because there is always something better in other cultures. We humans witnessed many great civilizations. Not only in Europe or West Asia, but also in India and China. It's all about human perception. Many believe that thousands of years non-stop Chinese civilization is the most superior one to any other civilization!

It's not about me vs. the universe, but I do care about the truth and reality that truly existed! My parents gave me brains, so I do let my brains work for me and think...

Krefter14
07-12-14, 06:06
Europe and west Asia are man made ideas. You could group both together if you'd like. There's a lot that has come from west Asia into Europe, but there's no law that says developments have to follow that direction. Developments have gone from Europe into west Asia in recent centuries. Unless pre-hisoric people understood north, south, west, east, map making, and whatever else, people movements could have been largely random(they didn't know where they were going, and it was very gradual).

Indo European languages in Europe did not come directly from west Asia, or from a genetically west Asian-like people. This has been proven with ancient DNA. Indo european languages came to Europe with people similar to steppe people who were members of the Yamna culture. Whether the Indo European language came from west Asia before that or not is up to debate, but genetically speaking when it came to Europe they weren't west Asian-like.

Goga
07-12-14, 06:16
Indo European languages in Europe did not come directly from west Asia, or from a genetically west Asian-like people. This has been proven with ancient DNA. Indo european languages came to Europe with people similar to steppe people who were members of the Yamna culture. Whether the Indo European language came from west Asia before that or not is up to debate, but genetically speaking when it came to Europe they weren't west Asian-like.Last centuries, Europe influenced West Asia, It's like the son influencing his own father. And there was no progress in West Asia at all, due to all those wars AND Islam. Because of the Mongols (Turks) and the Arabs. They stopped progress in West Asia. But Ancient Europe was formed & MADE by West Asia. Ancient Rome, Greece was made by philosophy how to govern from West Asia, from the times of the Sumerians. Also, don't forget that most progression (like banking system, science) in Europe was caused by the JEWS!!!
And you're making a mistake here. Europeans were NEVER Indo-Europised by race, only by language. But Europeans came actually from West Asia thousands of years ealier as agriculturists/farmers from Near East. Most of the modern Europeans are only Indo-Europised by language & culture and not by race. Racially speaking the Italians and Greeks are racially the most Indo-European Europeans.

LeBrok
07-12-14, 06:20
By following and find patterns in human genealogy, family tree etc. By following the migration of a lineage from a place of origin to a current location. Comparing it with other genealogies and again finding patterns. By studying human Y-DNA you can describe the movement of specific haplogroups from A to B. Patterns, it's all about the patterns! Yes it is, but unfortunately you concluded that you are good in it.


Lol, since when is Islam an advanced religion? Only such a backward place like Arabia could produce such a religion.
This is coming from the same guy who said this:


I don't care about superior-inferior nonsenses. There is no such thing as a superior 'culture', because there is always something better in other cultures.

Can you see the contradiction in your statements? And don't make me going through all you post to cite sentences bursting with your superiority complex and hyper nationalism.

LeBrok
07-12-14, 06:24
Last centuries, Europe influenced West Asia, It's like the son influencing his own father. And there was no progress in West Asia at all, due to all those wars AND Islam. Because of the Mongols (Turks) and the Arabs. They stopped progress in West Asia. But Ancient Europe was formed & MADE by West Asia. Ancient Rome, Greece was made by philosophy how to govern from West Asia, from the times of the Sumerians. Also, don't forget that most progression (like banking system, science) in Europe was caused by the JEWS!!!
And you're making a mistake here. Europeans were NEVER Indo-Europised by race, only by language. But Europeans came actually from West Asia thousands of years ealier as agriculturists/farmers from Near East. Most of the modern Europeans are only Indo-Europised by language & culture and not by race. Racially speaking the Italians and Greeks are racially the most Indo-European Europeans.

I can see some pattern in your posts. You always mix some facts with a lot of nonsense.

Goga
07-12-14, 06:33
This is coming from the same guy who said this:Huh? Well, only this summer Daesh (ISIS), SUNNI MUSLIMS, committed a genocide against my people in the name of Islam. FACT!!! How do you think my position should be toward, Muslims, Islam, Turks and Arabs? I love my people, and I'm proud, but I'm not a nationalist. I'm, like French say it, a chauvinist! I'm a friendly guy in real non-virtual world and cause no damage toward or harm anybody / anything. And will NEVER do. But I have a some kind of fetish for the truth. Justice is very important for me. Live and let live! But those unjust people who don't let me live in justice & truth will be opposed by me as long as I can and want!

Goga
07-12-14, 06:46
I can see some pattern in your posts. You always mix some facts with a lot of nonsense.Recognizing patterns and mathematical equations were always my strongest point. But I'm a good fella, so I'll explain what I mean. I don't think that R1b was the only marker of proto-Italo-Celts. I believe that J2a was also among the Maykop folks who linguistically Indo-Europised Europe. Italians and Greeks have lots of West Asian aDNA, they have also lots of Y-DNA hg. J2a. According to me J2a was part of the original proto-Indo-European Speakers who migrated into the Maykop. J2a is still dominating that area (Northern Caucasus). And of ALL Europeans, Italians, Greeks and maybe some folks close to Black Sea have the most of J2a.

Krefter14
07-12-14, 06:46
Last centuries, Europe influenced West Asia, It's like the son influencing his own father.

Like I said before Europe and west Asia are man made ideas. I doubt the Greeks saw themselves with Germans as European, and saw Jews and Persians as West Asians. The concept of West Asia and Europe probably weren't used till recent times. The phrase near east(near Europe) for example was obviously created by Europeans in recent years, and an ancient near eastern would not identify as near eastern.

I would bet money Greeks weren't seen as "European" by near easterns, but were simply seen as Greeks.


But Ancient Europe was formed & MADE by West Asia. Ancient Rome, Greece was made by philosophy how to govern from West Asia, from the times of the Sumerians. Also, don't forget that most progression (like banking system, science) in Europe was caused by the JEWS!!!

I'm not disputing that west Asia, and people with a high amount of middle eastern-specfic ancestry(defined by "basal Eurasian") have made a big impact on Europe's history.


And you're making a mistake here. Europeans were NEVER Indo-Europised by race, only by language. But Europeans came actually from West Asia thousands of years ealier as agriculturists/farmers from Near East. Most of the modern Europeans are only Indo-Europised by language & culture and not by race. Racially speaking the Italians and Greeks are racially the most Indo-European Europeans.

Europeans are a mix of native-European hunter gatherers and middle eastern-type people. Native-ME ancestry varies in Europe, an average European will literally be an about 50/50 mix.

Ancient DNA has proven that a big chunk of modern Europeans ancestry derives from Yamna-type people. Also, that it arrived with the CWC culture, who like Yamna is suspected to be Indo European.

Italians and Greeks have around the lowest amount of Yamna-type ancestry in Europe.

Krefter14
07-12-14, 06:50
Goga being a nationalist isn't bad. Being a supremacist is bad. It's good that you're proud to be Kurd and west Asian. But don't worry about people trying to make your people appear inferior or less great than you think they are with history and DNA, because they're aren't trying to do that.

Goga
07-12-14, 06:54
Italians and Greeks have around the lowest amount of Yamna-type ancestry in Europe.See my post above your post, I gave explanation why I think that Italians and Greeks are the most Indo-European Europeans. While other native Europeans just were linguistically influenced by the original Indo-Europeans.
ME ancestry in modern European population is mostly from the farmers, while West Asian ancestry in Italians and Greeks is also from the original proto-Indo-European speakers. There's a lot of Indo-European J2a in Italy and Greece. Greeks have always been living next to other Indo-Europeans, like the Hittites, Lydians, Mittani, Medes (Aryans), Persians, Armenians and all other ancient Indo-European folks in West Asia..

Goga
07-12-14, 07:02
But don't worry about people trying to make your people appear inferior or less great than you think they are with history and DNA, because they're aren't trying to do that.LMAO. I love you too. And don't worry, I don't see you inferior (being & mind) to me either...

Krefter14
07-12-14, 07:10
See my post above your post, I gave explanation why I think that Italians and Greeks are the most Indo-European Europeans. While other native Europeans just were linguistically influenced by the original Indo-Europeans.
ME ancestry in modern European population is mostly from the farmers, while West Asian ancestry in Italians and Greeks is also from the original proto-Indo-European speakers. There's a lot of Indo-European J2a in Italy and Greece. Greeks have always been living next to other Indo-Europeans, like the Hittites, Lydians, Mittani, Medes (Aryans), Persians, Armenians and all other ancient Indo-European folks in West Asia..

I was talking about Yamna. I tend to think their decendants brought Indo European languages to most of Europe.

Maleth
07-12-14, 07:50
I would bet money Greeks weren't seen as "European" by near easterns, but were simply seen as Greeks.



EUROPA


GENDER: Feminine
USAGE: Greek Mythology (Latinized) (http://www.behindthename.com/names/usage/greek-mythology)
OTHER SCRIPTS: Ευρωπη (http://www.behindthename.com/support/transcribe.php?type=GR&target=Eurwph) (Ancient Greek)

Meaning & History
Latinized form of Greek Ευρωπη (http://www.behindthename.com/support/transcribe.php?type=GR&target=Eurwph) (Europe), which meant "wide face" from ευρυς (http://www.behindthename.com/support/transcribe.php?type=GR&target=eurus) (eurys) "wide" and ωψ (http://www.behindthename.com/support/transcribe.php?type=GR&target=wp-s) (ops) "face, eye". In Greek mythology (http://www.behindthename.com/glossary/view/mythology)Europa was a Phoenician princess who was abducted and taken to Crete by Zeus (http://www.behindthename.com/name/zeus) in the guise of a bull. The continent of Europe is named for her. This is also the name of a moon of Jupiter.
Related Names

VARIANT: Europe (http://www.behindthename.com/name/europe)

http://www.behindthename.com/name/europa

Krefter14
07-12-14, 09:16
Maleth, I understand the word Europe derives from Greek. But they didn't think of Europe and the west in the same contex we do today. If you asked an everyday Greek in 100 BC is Greece in Europe, Asia, or Africa I highly doubt they'd know what you're talking about. Just because an educated Greeks did doesn't mean the common people understood the concept like we do. The Persians the Jews or whoever else didn't use the terms Europe, Asia, and Africa. This is even more true for people in 3000BC who had far less knowledge of geography than Greeks who lived a couple thousand years ago.

The Maykop people would not say"We're west Asian". The continent borders we use today are to clean cut and oftnly confuse people. The Greeks were not aware of eastern Asia, and so Europeans later on just called everything east of Greece Asia. But many modern Americans assume there's a river of fire between "continents", and that "continents" define genetics. So, Iraqis and Chinese are both called Asian, as if they're closely related.

Maleth
07-12-14, 09:39
Maleth, I understand the word Europe derives from Greek. But they didn't think of Europe and the west in the same contex we do today. If you asked an everyday Greek in 100 BC is Greece in Europe, Asia, or Africa I highly doubt they'd know what you're talking about. Just because an educated Greeks did doesn't mean the common people understood the concept like we do. The Persians the Jews or whoever else didn't use the terms Europe, Asia, and Africa. This is even more true for people in 3000BC who had far less knowledge of geography than Greeks who lived a couple thousand years ago.

The Maykop people would not say"We're west Asian". The continent borders we use today are to clean cut and oftnly confuse people. The Greeks were not aware of eastern Asia, and so Europeans later on just called everything east of Greece Asia. But many modern Americans assume there's a river of fire between "continents", and that "continents" define genetics. So, Iraqis and Chinese are both called Asian, as if they're closely related.

Agree totally, but it seems this is the most passable theory of the Asian appendix to the West has taken its name probably many many years after it was concocted by the Phoenicians / Greek (Roman expansion perhaps?)

Goga
07-12-14, 12:09
I was talking about Yamna. I tend to think their decendants brought Indo European languages to most of Europe.
But then again, you're just missing a small detail here. And that's it that Indo-European R1b (and J2a) in modern European population is originally not from Yamnaya folks but folks more from more to the south...

LeBrok
07-12-14, 19:42
Huh? Well, only this summer Daesh (ISIS), SUNNI MUSLIMS, committed a genocide against my people in the name of Islam. FACT!!! How do you think my position should be toward, Muslims, Islam, Turks and Arabs? As an intelligent man you should have learned by now that it is not the smartest thing to judge whole group by deeds of few. As you mentioned yourself, in every country or culture we will find good and evil people.


I love my people, and I'm proud, but I'm not a nationalist.
I'm, like French say it, a chauvinist! Love to own country and people doesn't need to mean degrading other nationalities.




I'm a friendly guy in real non-virtual world and cause no damage toward or harm anybody / anything. And will NEVER do. That's not nice to be rude to people who can't see you. Perhaps in real life you need to be pretentious, but in virtual one all your true self is free to act without restrictions?

motzart
07-12-14, 20:11
There was actually a really interesting discussion point here I brought up before this stupid flame derailed it into nonsense.

Patterson from the Reich lab is saying that the Yamnaya were not the PIE speakers because they have HG ancestry, lets get back to that. What do you think this implies about their findings?

Aberdeen
07-12-14, 20:20
There was actually a really interesting discussion point here I brought up before this stupid flame derailed it into nonsense.

Patterson from the Reich lab is saying that the Yamnaya were not the PIE speakers because they have HG ancestry, lets get back to that. What do you think this implies about their findings?

I think it implies that, for once, the Reich lab is off course, if that is what they've concluded. The one Y haplotype that seems to be most associated with the IE expansion, not the only Y haplotype but probably the most common one, is R1a, which seems to be associated with HG. A lot of people are betting on IE being Yamnaya not only because of the archeological evidence but because it provides a likely scenario for R1a to link with more "southern" haplotypes, such as J2.

arvistro
08-12-14, 20:55
I dont see a problem: Yamna still can be and probably was mother of Baltic, Slavic and most likely Germanic.

Greying Wanderer
10-12-14, 13:01
There was actually a really interesting discussion point here I brought up before this stupid flame derailed it into nonsense.

Patterson from the Reich lab is saying that the Yamnaya were not the PIE speakers because they have HG ancestry, lets get back to that. What do you think this implies about their findings?

I think it implies there was a transition zone between the steppe zone (EHG) and the forest zone (WHG) on the edge of the steppe and and the western branch was mixed WHG/EHG and the eastern branch was EHG and one branch went west and the other branch went east.

MOESAN
11-12-14, 21:25
I predict it only covers part of the story. The Satem IE (r1a) story. I think Yamna was ancestor for Slavs, Balts, Indo-Iranians.
Through Corded it also impacted Germanic.

late maybe (i've not red all the late posts) BUT Corded have no sure direct link with future Germanics - they maybe were already 'satem' biased... they could just have been (perhaps) the vectors of some similarities between germanic and slavic-baltic concerning vocabulary - I believe Corded had a very strong impact in Norway and N-E Germany but less among other today germanic populations - speculations it's true because I would like have more ancient Y-DNA of diverse "corded" places -

MOESAN
11-12-14, 21:52
Last centuries, Europe influenced West Asia, It's like the son influencing his own father. And there was no progress in West Asia at all, due to all those wars AND Islam. Because of the Mongols (Turks) and the Arabs. They stopped progress in West Asia. But Ancient Europe was formed & MADE by West Asia. Ancient Rome, Greece was made by philosophy how to govern from West Asia, from the times of the Sumerians. Also, don't forget that most progression (like banking system, science) in Europe was caused by the JEWS!!!
And you're making a mistake here. Europeans were NEVER Indo-Europised by race, only by language. But Europeans came actually from West Asia thousands of years ealier as agriculturists/farmers from Near East. Most of the modern Europeans are only Indo-Europised by language & culture and not by race. Racially speaking the Italians and Greeks are racially the most Indo-European Europeans.



Truth is between, I think:
the I-Ens of the Chalco to Iron Ages were not a monolithical population but they hare surely some common mixes with certain %s of genetical components and their successive intrusions (and sometime waves) have been weighty enough to change the genetic previous landscape of Europe, roughly said a bipolar distributions with EEF's and HG's - the ANE distribution among modern populations, if light enough, is nevertheless stronger than in past and its almost LEVEL distribution in Europe shows us (I think) yhis ANE is not due to later steppic invasions (Huns, Magyars, Mongols) - and these I-Eans for me was not only ANE so their weight is surely stronger than said by someones here and there...
so, Yes, I-Eans were not a "pure race", they were not 100% the same mean mix in every tribe, they incorporated other people on their way, but they are not only a languge passers group - their way of life was not the better way to acculturate other people only culturally - SO I don't agree the restrictive theory of ONLY a cultural domination without blood and bones - surely the %s of I-Ean "blood" is unleven, but not so abruptly - the fact seems be they found different mixtures pf componentsamong the diverse populations they colonized.

MOESAN
11-12-14, 21:54
I add I think the most of them came from the Steppes whatever the very geographical origin ot hte first P-I-E speakers