Theory: I1 originally from Paloithic Cro magnon central Europe not Scandinavia

[Balder]

I1 originated in the belly of a star, are you happy now?

 

[nordicwarrior]

nordicquarreler isn't solutrean just a style of sprea making and making of other tools. That existed around France and Spain 22,000-17,000 We don’t really know exactly who they were genetically. Of course we know they were western Caucasians so European-mid eastern type of people because of their skull shape and the two mtdna samples we have. European people are a ethnic group that was formed way way back in the Paleolithic so Solutrean were almost defintley European. All the aust DNA tests I have looked at they say they found the Paleolithic European group they call it north euro, north east euro, or atlantic Baltic. Orignally before farming spread Europeans would have had 100% north Euro I think it should be called Paloithic European or just European. So if we can some how find European blood in some native americans and be able to proof it is from before it is very ancient then that is huge evidence either Solutrean or another group of Europeans came over. Maybe we can find some North Euro in native American tribes that have no records of inter marrying with Europeans. What I think would really proof it is if Native Americans had their own subclade of Y DNA I2a I guess it would be called I2a3. Or if they had another hg I subclade.

Native American meta-myth teaches that the land was already occupied by red hair giants and that the Indian warriors slew the male giants and mated with their women. The European haplogroup that "proves" this theory (yes I know this is highly controversial) is maternal X2 centered around New York state into southern Canada. The age of X2 in the Americas matches Solutreans proposed Atlantic voyage. Ice Age conditions would have made this journey much easier due to pack ice and the seal/sea-lion populations. Plus we have the matching projectile technology of Clovis and Solutreans (which according to those "fluent" in this field-- is no small feat.)

 

[Fire Haired]

I doubt that story of red haired giants means anything. The soplutreans almost defintley would have been white skinned just like mod euro's but i doubt any red hair. The history of red hair is extremely mysterious. All i have been able to come up with is it was spread to west euro by Germanic Italo Celts with R1b L51-L11 from Russia starting 5,000ybp. Also Indo Iranians who spread all over Asia had high amounts of red hair. Then the udmurts in central Russia so red hair defintley was popular in Russia 10,000-20,000ybp but i dont know if it existed any were else. The red hair maps i have seen only count areas with 1% or more since red hair is so recessive it does not really show exactly how red hair is spread out. I have met Redheads from Moscow, Sicily, and Romania all those areas have less than 1%. Most Indo Iranian speaking countriues or ethnic groups like Iran, Kurds, Kalash, Pashuten have at least some red hair. Red hair also exists in the Kablye berbers(second biggest berber ethnic group) in the atalas mountains of Mooroco. There was someone from my church who went there and the non Kablye thought he was a kablye because he had pale skin. Some Kablye groups have 18% blonde hair so there was European inter marriage at some point.I know that Finnish and Balto Slavs have the highest amount of fair hair and eyes but under 1% red hair but maybe they have red beards which shows the gene is there. There are even some Samartien redheads the Samartiens are mentioned in the new testament they are like fake jews. They left the Jewish faith well they think they are right and they only breed with each other. There are only 700 left there have been aust dna tests on all of them not one drop of European blood they are typical people from the area of Syria and Palestine. Most have brownish skin but i saw pictures of them during passover they look extremely European and some did have red hair and freckles. So i dont know it is defintley possible there was some red hair in solutreans.Even if the solutrean thing is true or that another group of Europeans brought X2 to North America 15,000-20,000ybp. They were no there before Native Americans ancestors because new DNA studies have shown their ancestors probably arrived 20,000-35,000ybp. some of the oldest human remains in north america some people said looked like Caucasians turned out to have specifically native american y dna and mtdna haplogroups. So if if Europeans went over there 15,000-20,000ybp there probably would have already been native Americans in that area. If a group of Europeans went over i doubt many survived the journey. I guess it may have taken 100's or 1,000's of years so they could have kept reproducing it was not one group. There still would have been alot less than Indians i guess if those spear points really are solutrean then they were kind off successful.'Why would they leave only mtDNA X2 which had just arrived from the mid east. Two solutrean mtDNA samples from Spain had U and at least RO or one of its descendants. They were probably mainly U5, H(later formed into H1 and H3), and HV(later formed into V) so why dont we find native american U12 and H25. Maybe there was like a bottle neck and the group of solutrean that went to North america had vast majority X2. Since there would be a obvious phiscal difference between Solutrean people and native Americans and solutreans would have been a super small minority. Maybe the Solutreans were assimilated or out numbered by alliances of Indians who killed them off.

 

[Noman]

But if that were true we come to another nonsensical thing in the mass migration west before history. Well first off the fact that in the times you're talking about you still have r1a right where it is now and then some. And of course there's not that much r1a in europe and it doesn't have that kind of east west spread.

But more than that if you look at where red hair is, it is almost all above the 45th parallel.

And of course it all centers around the west except tiny patches here and there. So it looks very much like something that originated in that area and has been there a very very long time.

Then there's also the issue that I has mixed in to r1a WAY more than r1b has (itself a baffling contradiction), and there's no almost no red hair among I-dense countries, and it only came to be there in numbers at all in historic times.

R1b had some recent big migrations but in neolithic and before that the people who've migrated a whole lot are the I not the r1b.

The places with recent germanic r1b introgression in england also have the least red hair. Wales is similar to ireland in numbers, but in the NW of Ireland there was historically way more, and most of ireland has been quite washed out; there's more irish people and irish features per capita in the USA than in ireland itself these days. So again we see features pushed to the edges that any germanics just didn't have.

So obviously this celtic r1b comes from somewhere else or it's been in the vicinity a very long time. I'm guessing basically it was all along eurasia running west to east from around ireland at some point. That's why you hear descriptions of red hair in khazars, tarim, troy, etruscans, etc., in places it virtually doesn't exist today.

Below 45th parallel it starts to be a curse instead of a blessing due to skin cancer, and since it's so recessive it just had to be hugely widespread to get so many acient sources for it. Which again points to it being just as I said from start, R group spread out and was always dominant over eurasia ever since ice age broke. Then it lost major ground to incursions of farmers who had much huger populations, and it slowly absorbed most of them by integrating in to their societies or conquering them, taking on a lot of features like darker hair and eyes.

 

[Fire Haired]

R1a maybe existed 17,000-22,000ybp it defintley was not popular anywhere it could have originated in Europe but we dont know. Indo European R1a1a1 M417 spread out of around Ukraine before Indo European expanision of R1a it was not that spread out and probably very rare except in Ukriane. I realy really really doubt any solutreans had R1a.what evidence do u have that R1a has mixed more with hg I than R1b. U have to realize hg I is not unifed hg I1 and hg I2a1b lineages split over 20,000 years ago do u really think nordic's felt a connection with eastern European I2a1b. They had no cultural connections the hg I people were not a unified group of people at all. hg I does not tell ur full ancestry actulley all Europeans trace most of their ancestry to a hg I people it is the only for sure Paleolithic European paternal lineage. hg I2a1b people in Yugoslavia have much higher amounts of med in globe13 aust dna test which most likely came in the neloithic and they have alot higher southwest Asian and west asian than I1 Scandinavians. That could be a reason why they have so much more dark hair. hg I is just a direct male lineage if u want to get full ancestry look at austmol dna. U are coming up with quick conclusions. No matter how u but it red hair in Europe orignally came from a hg I people the red hair that seems to have spread with Indo Europeans probably comes from a Paloithic - Mesloithic I2a1b people. red hair itself though might bo back 50,000-60,000ybp in the mid east since smartiens who dont have a drop of European blood according to aust dna some have red hair and freckles.When u say R1b what R1b are u talking about. Nota ll R1b people were unifed almost non were u need to start naming subclades. R1b L51 and L51 seems to have spread in the early bronze age starting 5,000ybp to west Europe with Germanic Italo Celtic languages and possibly red hair. The R1b people in turkey 5,000ybp did not give a crap what people with R1b were doing in Germany they were not unified u need to get that. R1b L11 and R1b Z2103 lineages are just as sperater to each other as they are to some hg I people. Are u freaking kidding me can u stop making these quick conclusions with nothing to back u up. Red hair is very popular in England according to all the maps i have looked at it is 5-10% it is the second most popular spot for red hair in all of europe. Irish people are Irish okay no arguing that sure they have a tiny bit of blood from Germanic people including South Scandinavian Vikings. The Insular Celts used to dointe all of Ireland and Britian they were split with the Gealic's in Ireland and the Brythonic's in Britain including Scotland used to be the Picts. Y DNa R1b L21 takes up the vast majority of their Y DNA overall about 90% is either R1b L21 or another R1b P312 Italo Celtic subclade. They invaded in the bronze age probably 3,000-4,000ybp. They are a ethnic group and it seems like they almost completly killed off the natives of Britian and Irleand. We cant find one for sure paternal lineage that was in Neolithic Britain and Ireland except some G2a. Red hair shows a huge correlation with R1b L11 in west europe and it seems like Insular Celts are nearly 100% from original R1b L11 Germanic Italo celts which would be why they have so much red hair. The 45th parrel thing Maciamo started i think is total BS!!! red hair still stays at 1-3% deep into Italy, southern France, Apls, and northern Spain. what about red hair decreasing as u get east of Germany did he mention that it is probably the same issue. Who ever the people group or blood flow in west europe taht is the source of red hair just deceases as u go south of France and east of Germany. I think the reason why red hair is higher in Denmark than spain even though both were conquered by Germanic Italo Celts. Is because the natives of Denmark were majority blonde haired and light eyes the natives of spain almost only dark haired and eyed so red hair had a better chance to pop up wen mixing with light haired people. Redheads do just fins south of the 45th parrel what real evidence do have that we just die of skin cancer and stuff like that. The south in the US has the highest mount of red hair in all of America it is about 5-10% so it is actulley one of the top places for red hair in the world. The south is sunny and depressing they are under the 45th parrel but it seems redheads do just fine. Also red hair still pops up in Indo Iranian speaking ethnic groups in Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Turkey the Kalash, Kurdish, Pashuten, Pamiri and those people are under the 45th parrel plus they are all brown skinned it is amazing red hair was able to stay alive. U don know that hg R was originally mongliod r1b had nothing to do with Europeans till 6,000-8,000ybp. the hg R people dont exist just random groups of people who received some male lineages that are hg R. It gets annoying how simplfy haplogroups not naming subclades and act like everyone no matter how deep the subclade is connected.

 

[nordicwarrior]

... It gets annoying how simplfy haplogroups not naming subclades and like everyone no matter how deep the subclade is connected.

Yes, but we need to be careful not to do the same thing with red hair. Red heads are not monolithic, and even Neanderthal had strains of reddish hair (located on different spots on their genome than modern humans.) Also we are looking at blonde and red hair through the prism of 21st century experience. Maybe Native Americans and much earlier European peoples viewed these traits through their own unique lense. Lastly, I think red hair can be attributed to more y-dna groups than R1b.

 

[nordicwarrior]

For example, if you lived in eleventh century coastal Korea and a boatload of folks with light brown hair pulled onto shore, you might explain to your village that these strange visitors had red hair. If two weeks later, some true redheads from say Scotland arrived-- only then would the Koreans see the difference.

 

[MOESAN]

For example, if you lived in eleventh century coastal Korea and a boatload of folks with light brown hair pulled onto shore, you might explain to your village that these strange visitors had red hair. If two weeks later, some true redheads from say Scotland arrived-- only then would the Koreans see the difference.

it is a detail but of some importance: you are right here: a lot of southern "dark" Europeans use to confuse 'blond' and 'red' hairs (in spanish, 'rubio' has I believe, the meaning of "blond" OR "red" haired - and too, they considere very often a middle brown haired man as a "blond", by contrast with their dominantly dark hairs - and on all these threads people confuse constantly "blond" and "red"
SO IT IS OF POOR VALUE TAKING THE ANCIENTS REPORTS (GREEKS/ROMANS/ARABS) AS A SCIENTIFIC STATING

 

[Noman]

R1a maybe existed 17,000-22,000ybp it defintley was not popular anywhere it could have originated in Europe but we dont know.

These same kind of estimates said that blue eyes developed 5k years ago and that red hair 10k years ago. now we know neanderthal had red hair, and light eyes. WHOOPS!

TMRCA means absolutely nothing. Even if the time estimate part is correct and you can trace common ancestor back to a particular time IT MEANS NOTHING. If you have a big expansion OR you have a bottleneck this can easily happen. So like the concept itself, it hinges on random distribution which we absolutely know doesn't exist. No bottlenecks, no giant expansions, no wars, no natural selection. Basically if there were no history and no biology then we could make assumptions like this.

Indo European R1a1a1 M417 spread out of around Ukraine before Indo European expanision of R1a it was not that spread out and probably very rare except in Ukriane. I realy really really doubt any solutreans had R1a.what evidence do u have that R1a has mixed more with hg I than R1b.

Because that's just factually the case.

U have to realize hg I is not unifed hg I1 and hg I2a1b lineages split over 20,000 years ago do u really think nordic's felt a connection with eastern European I2a1b. They had no cultural connections the hg I people were not a unified group of people at all.

Proving that culture is nothing to do with genetics. Just like how hitler and the nazis were identifyiing themselves with the nordics and identifying the aryans with the nordics too. We happen to be talking about genetics not culture. There is no indo european race but there is certain some originating red haired race or in this case megagroup of races.

hg I does not tell ur full ancestry actulley all Europeans trace most of their ancestry to a hg I people it is the only for sure Paleolithic European paternal lineage.

There's no real evidence of that, any more than there is hard evidence that the africans today originated there, and there's evidence I has been all over the place from north africa to gedrosia. It can't have originated where it is now, it goes under the ice periodically, it had to originate elsewhere. The only connect you could have is cro magnon skulls.

Does cro magnon I seem all that nordic? Skull analysis can be tricky but I'd say modern nords are similar but quite a bit different. I'd say besides cro magnon I the answer is a resounding no. If anything we ought to look for neanderthal features to find real europeans, and we find that in the irish, basque, and a few others. Definitely not so much in the nordics.

hg I2a1b people in Yugoslavia have much higher amounts of med in globe13 aust dna test which most likely came in the neloithic and they have alot higher southwest Asian and west asian than I1 Scandinavians. That could be a reason why they have so much more dark hair. hg I is just a direct male lineage if u want to get full ancestry look at austmol dna. U are coming up with quick conclusions. No matter how u but it red hair in Europe orignally came from a hg I people the red hair that seems to have spread with Indo Europeans probably comes from a Paloithic - Mesloithic I2a1b people. red hair itself though might bo back 50,000-60,000ybp in the mid east since smartiens who dont have a drop of European blood according to aust dna some have red hair and freckles.When u say R1b what R1b are u talking about. Nota ll R1b people were unifed almost non were u need to start naming subclades. R1b L51 and L51 seems to have spread in the early bronze age starting 5,000ybp to west Europe with Germanic Italo Celtic languages and possibly red hair. The R1b people in turkey 5,000ybp did not give a crap what people with R1b were doing in Germany they were not unified u need to get that. R1b L11 and R1b Z2103 lineages are just as sperater to each other as they are to some hg I people. Are u freaking kidding me can u stop making these quick conclusions with nothing to back u up. Red hair is very popular in England according to all the maps i have looked at it is 5-10% it is the second most popular spot for red hair in all of europe. Irish people are Irish okay no arguing that sure they have a tiny bit of blood from Germanic people including South Scandinavian Vikings. The Insular Celts used to dointe all of Ireland and Britian they were split with the Gealic's in Ireland and the Brythonic's in Britain including Scotland used to be the Picts. Y DNa R1b L21 takes up the vast majority of their Y DNA overall about 90% is either R1b L21 or another R1b P312 Italo Celtic subclade. They invaded in the bronze age probably 3,000-4,000ybp. They are a ethnic group and it seems like they almost completly killed off the natives of Britian and Irleand. We cant find one for sure paternal lineage that was in Neolithic Britain and Ireland except some G2a. Red hair shows a huge correlation with R1b L11 in west europe and it seems like Insular Celts are nearly 100% from original R1b L11 Germanic Italo celts which would be why they have so much red hair. The 45th parrel thing Maciamo started i think is total BS!!! red hair still stays at 1-3% deep into Italy, southern France, Apls, and northern Spain. what about red hair decreasing as u get east of Germany did he mention that it is probably the same issue. Who ever the people group or blood flow in west europe taht is the source of red hair just deceases as u go south of France and east of Germany. I think the reason why red hair is higher in Denmark than spain even though both were conquered by Germanic Italo Celts. Is because the natives of Denmark were majority blonde haired and light eyes the natives of spain almost only dark haired and eyed so red hair had a better chance to pop up wen mixing with light haired people. Redheads do just fins south of the 45th parrel what real evidence do have that we just die of skin cancer and stuff like that. The south in the US has the highest mount of red hair in all of America it is about 5-10% so it is actulley one of the top places for red hair in the world. The south is sunny and depressing they are under the 45th parrel but it seems redheads do just fine.

Yeah I know more than a few who have skin cancer. Red hair and light skin means weeded out, especially thousands of years ago. Now we have air conditioning and indoor jobs obviously it's not as bad but it's still an issue.

Also red hair still pops up in Indo Iranian speaking ethnic groups in Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Turkey the Kalash, Kurdish, Pashuten, Pamiri and those people are under the 45th parrel plus they are all brown skinned it is amazing red hair was able to stay alive.

The numbers drop off very quick from where I said.

U don know that hg R was originally mongliod r1b had nothing to do with Europeans till 6,000-8,000ybp.

Maybe (and more likely) what we call a mongoloid had nothing to do with east asians at the time. I find that much more likely given how much population expansion the han have had since agriculture came. Tarim had red hair. Manchu was not asian, north china was not asian. The problem is we don't have real reference populations but this is what all archaeology says, even the ultra nationalists in china have to admit this. Not to mention how many chinese girls look very nearly absolutely caucasian, with thicker hair and somewhat smaller breasts.

the hg R people dont exist just random groups of people who received some male lineages that are hg R. It gets annoying how simplfy haplogroups not naming subclades and act like everyone no matter how deep the subclade is connected.

but H I G are all sister clades. They ARE somewhat related.

 

[nordicwarrior]

...Does cro magnon I seem all that nordic? Skull analysis can be tricky but I'd say modern nords are similar but quite a bit different. I'd say besides cro magnon I the answer is a resounding no. If anything we ought to look for neanderthal features to find real europeans, and we find that in the irish, basque, and a few others. Definitely not so much in the nordics...

"Real Europeans", hmm I don't agree with this premise for a couple reasons. Number one, Neanderthal had an enormous range that was not limited to Europe... and so R1a, R1b, N, O, etc. could have gotten massive exposure to this admixture even if they didn't set foot West of Hungary. Number two... in the highly unlikely event that ONLY hg. I or even G had Neanderthal code... we've all been mixing in Europe for the last 5,000 years or so and now EVERYONE in Europe would have basically the same amount of Neanderthal genome coursing through their veins. But to say Nordics don't have any ties to Cro-Magnon... or even that Celts are more closely related to these early residents? I'd like to place a wager... if Cro Magnon is proven to be the father of R1b Basque or R1b Irish, or R1b anything in the next year... I will drink a smoothie made from the ample tufts of hair sprouting from my shoulders. Of course you would have to take the opposing side (but with the same consequences). Nordics have plenty of Cro-Magnon traits, trust me on this one.

 

[Noman]

Yeah I did not really mean to say real europeans. I guess "most ancient" is better. And I suspect the range of neanderthals was basically the same as R is today minus india. I suspect I spent a lot of time in the most north areas at some point, as well. Where I originates back in the ice age is one of the bigger question marks out there, in my mind. I guess somewhere between r1a and r1b.

cromag 1 btw does look pretty slavic to me, like a much larger slav/alpinid mix.

 

[Nobody1]

App. G2a(L91) Neolithic farmer/herdsman Ötzi holds the record of being the most Neanderthal;

Prof. John Hawks (2012) - Uni. of Wisconsin
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal_dna/neandertal-ancestry-iced-2012.html

"He has substantially greater sharing with Neanderthals than any other recent person we have ever examined"


Whatever the significance behind the Bull-run on Neanderthal genetics is
- looks like the Tuscans are winning it;

Prof. John Hawks (2012) - Uni. of Wisconsin
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews...mes-introgression-among-populations-2012.html

 

[Fire Haired]

Noman i am kind of sick of crazy things u say. Redheads in the Paleoithic age could find ways to survive they had human brains and souls they would not just die out if they are south of the 45th parrel. The 45th parrel thing was started by Maciamo there is no real hard evidence. Also those stimates for blue eyes being only 6,000ybp is total BS. When u look at how European ethic groups have formed over time there common ancestors and all of that stuff blue eyes goes way way way back over 20,000ybp for sure. Europeans all come from the same paleothic famly aust dna has proven that. Europeans ancestors had been settling europe 10,000's of ybp i guess they made post last ice age migrations 15,000-19,000ybp but they would have been very spread out in europe i would assume 30,000ybp. They would have already been light skinned had alot of blue eyes and non brown hair in those times. I cant wait till we can get pigmentation genes from people for example lascux cave to prove they looked no diff from modern people in france. I have heard some ligit age estimates that say blonde hair became popular 11,000-20,000ybp starting right when the last ice age ended but the thing is that light skin light hair and eyes did not just randomly spread acroos Europe the founding population of all Europeans had those features and they populated Europe when no one else was there or who ever was there before went extinct. We already have pigmentation genes from 3,800 year old early indo Iranians who left yamna culture in central Russia 5,000ybp they had mainly blonde hair and light eyes showing those features are much older than the age estimates. Plus they dont have any european descendants or people mainly decended from them because they migrated to central asia.Noman the fact is that hg I people had no idea they had hg I. So u cant unite them all as the same people they were as diff from each other as they were to Indo Europeans. U cant just call people hg I u need to add subclades and cultures. No man are u freaking kidding me of curse mongliod 30,000ybp is what mongliod is today. FACT HG R AND R! WERE ROIGNALLY MONGLIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Chinese are one ethnic group like Germans not all white people are GErman just because there wee Indo IRanian redheads in west china 4,000ybpd and before chinese does not mean there were no east asians there. thE tarium mummies had almost all east asian mtdna haplogroups they mixed with the east asian people that alreayd lived there. When u look at aust dna not just ur assumptions on their physical features mongliods and caucasins are very UNRELATED. they are about as related to each other as they are to sub sharen africans. MOngliod form in the same family as austrlien abrognals and other black looking people in asia it is suprsing but true DNA has proven it. I call it the Mongliod Oceania race. I get sick of these stupid consipericy people with the tarium mummies saying china used to be white. 42,000 year old mtDNA sample near bejing guess what it had specifically mongliod mtdna B its subclade B4'5 also they had other i think aust dna info and they found out it was in the mongliod family its closest relatives east Asians but it did not form into any specif group it still had the ancestral form of all of them. Look at native Americans we have 14,300ybp mtdna and 10,300ybp y dna in north america with specif native american haplogroups they have been in america for over 20,000 years. WHERE DID THEY COME FROM ASIA THIS MEANS THERE WERE MONGLIODS IN ASIA BACK THEN.sure all H G and I are sister actulley brother clades since we are talking about y dna which only men have. All human father lines go back to the same father of humanity all mamel lines do to u go back to the same father as ur dog but that means nothing. We have been separated for so long that hg I1a and hg I1b people dont care about each other.

 

[Nobody1]

Kijeong Kim et al 2010 - R1a1 male in 2,000-year old Mongolian Xiongnu
This is the first genetic evidence that a male of distinctive Indo-European lineages (R1a1) was present in the Xiongnu of Mongolia. This might indicate an Indo-European migration into Northeast Asia 2,000 years ago.....The genetic evidence of U2e1 and R1a1 may help to clarify the migration patterns of Indo-Europeans and ancient East-West contacts of the Xiongnu Empire.

The inter-mixture you (Fire Haired) describe in the Tarim basin is exactly the pattern that occurred across the entire Indo-European range;
The emerging Indo-Europeans mixed with the pre-existing populations (most notably the female part/mtDNA);
Whether in Europe, Anatolia (Hatti), Indus Valley, Iranian plateau and of course Tarim basin;
These pre-existing populations are Archaeologically/Historically/Anthropologically and now (partially for now) Genetically determined;

PS: its not Mongliod its - M O N G O L O I D
or Altaic [A L T A I C]

 

[Noman]

Noman i am kind of sick of crazy things u say. Redheads in the Paleoithic age could find ways to survive they had human brains and souls they would not just die out if they are south of the 45th parrel.

The way natural selection works is that you have more personal success, usually a tiny bit more, that adds up to more surviving children over time. When you have red hair and pale skin it's great for absorbing more sunlight in arctic like areas.

People in africa didn't decide to be black, they darkened up because everyone who didn't had major health problems.

The 45th parrel thing was started by Maciamo there is no real hard evidence. Also those stimates for blue eyes being only 6,000ybp is total BS. When u look at how European ethic groups have formed over time there common ancestors and all of that stuff blue eyes goes way way way back over 20,000ybp for sure. Europeans all come from the same paleothic famly aust dna has proven that. Europeans ancestors had been settling europe 10,000's of ybp i guess they made post last ice age migrations 15,000-19,000ybp but they would have been very spread out in europe i would assume 30,000ybp. They would have already been light skinned had alot of blue eyes and non brown hair in those times.

Humans and their ancestors have inhabited europe since there's been humans and human ancestors. I seriously doubt they were all black haired and black eyed and skinned until 5k years ago. I am pretty sure the opposite has happened and those features have introgressed from elsewhere.

I cant wait till we can get pigmentation genes from people for example lascux cave to prove they looked no diff from modern people in france.

We already do, they were neanderthals, they had reddish hair but not quite the same as people with red hair today.

I have heard some ligit age estimates that say blonde hair became popular 11,000-20,000ybp starting right when the last ice age ended but the thing is that light skin light hair and eyes did not just randomly spread acroos Europe the founding population of all Europeans had those features and they populated Europe when no one else was there or who ever was there before went extinct. We already have pigmentation genes from 3,800 year old early indo Iranians who left yamna culture in central Russia 5,000ybp they had mainly blonde hair and light eyes showing those features are much older than the age estimates.

The obvious truth is anything we consider european has been on the way out for thousands of years. They try so very hard to prove otherwise to further the corporate/european union agenda to keep borders open so that they can contnue to have cheap, desperate workers and whenever possible to disposess anyone who has any wealth so they can suck it up themselves. That's where all those dumb studies come from.

Also, like I said, having the MRCA be young is a good sign it's actually on the way out. On the way in or the way out, but it's obvious which is more likely.

Plus they dont have any european descendants or people mainly decended from them because they migrated to central asia.Noman the fact is that hg I people had no idea they had hg I. So u cant unite them all as the same people they were as diff from each other as they were to Indo Europeans.

Just like being blonde didn't suddenly become popular, the people in I all have a common descent. And in order for the I clade to form there had to be some time when they really were pressed together all as one people.

U cant just call people hg I u need to add subclades and cultures. No man are u freaking kidding me of curse mongliod 30,000ybp is what mongliod is today. FACT HG R AND R! WERE ROIGNALLY MONGLIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So why is it ok for mongoloids to stay the same but not europeans?

Chinese are one ethnic group like Germans

Chinese are most certainly NOT one ethnic group. They also had more ethnic groups than they do now and drove most of them out.

And guess what? Before agriculture they were not a big part of much of anything. So don't think they were dominating anything, they really weren't.

not all white people are GErman just because there wee Indo IRanian redheads in west china 4,000ybpd and before chinese does not mean there were no east asians there.

Yes it does, the ughyar moved in to tarim valley around 300 bc. The mongols had also been soaking up a great deal of the surrounding tribes a long time before then. The whole group started off looking about the same.

Guess what the khazars looked like? Red hair and blue eyes, with Q haplotype being the main one and r1a1 as next. Now the same area is covered with black haired more asian people with the same haplotypes but different looks. Because they have been taking a ton of DNA from the east since agriculture started.

thE tarium mummies had almost all east asian mtdna haplogroups they mixed with the east asian people that alreayd lived there. When u look at aust dna not just ur assumptions on their physical features mongliods and caucasins are very UNRELATED.

Yet they weren't, always. You believe that red haird people evolved from mongols but it's pretty clear there was no evolution, just washing out, of the red haired people who were there a long time.

they are about as related to each other as they are to sub sharen africans. MOngliod form in the same family as austrlien abrognals and other black looking people in asia it is suprsing but true DNA has proven it. I call it the Mongliod Oceania race. I get sick of these stupid consipericy people with the tarium mummies saying china used to be white.

The north of china was, that's just a fact. The han ethnic group group of south china is what we think of as chinese today, and is also overwhelming all of asia with massive immigration.

The mongols soaked up a lot of korean, han, whatever the hell else over 15k years.

42,000 year old mtDNA sample near bejing guess what it had specifically mongliod mtdna B its subclade B4'5 also they had other i think aust dna info and they found out it was in the mongliod family its closest relatives east Asians but it did not form into any specif group it still had the ancestral form of all of them. Look at native Americans we have 14,300ybp mtdna and 10,300ybp y dna in north america with specif native american haplogroups they have been in america for over 20,000 years. WHERE DID THEY COME FROM ASIA THIS MEANS THERE WERE MONGLIODS IN ASIA BACK THEN.

Eskimos only came over about 2k years ago or something, and you would certainly not say that all native americans are "mongoloid". No one denies dark hair and dark eyes have been around a long time but plenty of people wo are Q don't have mongoloid features, and never ever did. I suspect that's more like how Q was when it first formed.

sure all H G and I are sister actulley brother clades since we are talking about y dna which only men have. All human father lines go back to the same father of humanity all mamel lines do to u go back to the same father as ur dog but that means nothing. We have been separated for so long that hg I1a and hg I1b people dont care about each other.

:lol:

Kind of like how the mongoloids don't care about their redheaded Q ancestors any more. Also there's tales all over north and south america about red headed tribes of giants that arrived before the current inhabitants. Thankfully, they killed them all off for us (which seems to be the fate in much of the world even today).

Also, lots of 8 foot tall skepetons in south america with that weird deformed head look.

 

[Noman]

having the MRCA be young is a good sign it's actually on the way out. On the way in or the way out, but it's obvious which is more likely.

This applies double for I groups. Especially if it's true that they were the major inhabitants of europe until 5k years ago when IE came as everyone seems to think. The way they are spread around so thin all over makes it obvious if nothing else does.

 

[Fire Haired]

The way natural selection works is that you have more personal success, usually a tiny bit more, that adds up to more surviving children over time. When you have red hair and pale skin it's great for absorbing more sunlight in arctic like areas.

People in africa didn't decide to be black, they darkened up because everyone who didn't had major health problems.

I know it seems that things evolve but it still seems impossible. Natural selection seems really impossible maybe we just cant explain why things change. I am a redhead and alot of my relatives are on my dad's side it is the most popular hair color the red hair genes are extremely strong in my DNA. I am as much as a redhead as possible i know what it is like more than u. I don't endure cold any better than a black person my extremely pale skin does not give me an advantage at all. I dont see how i would survive better in ice age Europe than a black person would. The only negative thing is i get sun burned a little more easily than the average white person but there is nothing majorly differnt. Red hair goes very deep under the 45th parrel.

It is easy to explain why red hair does not cover all of Italy and Spain as 1% or above. Because the celtic blood in Spain became less and less the more south they went and the dark hair genes dominate more than the light hair genes in Denmark which is why red hair from Germans survived better in Denmark than red hair from Celts in Spain. Same probably with italics and Celts in the alps and Italy. What about the decline of red hair as u get east of Germany why doesnt maciamo talk about that. The Sycthians and other Indo Iranians tribes lived in very sunny desert like areas of central Asia and they had high amounts of red hair but did fine from 4,000-1,500ybp till they were conquered by central Asian turkic tribes.

Even after over 4,000 years of inter marrying with brown skinned and dark haired mid easterns red hair still pops up in Indo Iranian speakers today and they live i very sunny desert like area's.

Humans and their ancestors have inhabited europe since there's been humans and human ancestors. I seriously doubt they were all black haired and black eyed and skinned until 5k years ago. I am pretty sure the opposite has happened and those features have introgressed from elsewhere.

We already do, they were neanderthals, they had reddish hair but not quite the same as people with red hair today

It is alot more complicated than what u say sure relatives to humans have lived in Europe for over a million years. But that does not mean they were humans ancestors only off shoots of the same family while humans ancestors could have stayed in africa that whole time. Our human family would have begun in sub shara africa 200,000-400,000ybp. Then the family it seems all non sub sharen africans come from migrated to north africa and the mid east over 100,000ybp. Then they split into Caucasins and Oceania mongliod or they came from separate migrations out of Africa. Oceania mongliod migrated to India then further into asia splitting into Mongliods and Oceania i dont know maybe 80,000ybp Oceania going south and Mongliods north. Caucasins stayed in the mid east and groups of Caucasians would have made it to Europe first over 55,000ybp. The founder population of all modern Europeans probably arrived from a mix of diff groups or one group anywhere from 30,000-60,000ybp.

Yes some Neanderthals i think the ones they tested were from spain and they had very pale skin and red hair i think they were only 50,000 years old. Their red hair and pale skin came from a diff source than what mod Europeans have so that does not matter when arguing a older age for Europeans paleness. I also wnat to say we dont know who the neanderthals were. I have looked at so many of their skulls and so many from diff ages and regions look so diff. When u look at a Caucasian skull and the type African americans have so west African they look extremely similar u have to study it to see the difference. Even though their ancestors have been split for probably around 150,000-250,000 years. But if neanderthal skulls looked so obviously diff they probably were very unrelated compared to all modern humans today. I think the so called Neanderthal is just random some what related breds that might have come in multiple migrations. So when they have that DNA from Neanderthals and say they can tell u how much DNA u have from them if that is liget they are only talking about some Neanderthals.

The obvious truth is anything we consider european has been on the way out for thousands of years. They try so very hard to prove otherwise to further the corporate/european union agenda to keep borders open so that they can contnue to have cheap, desperate workers and whenever possible to disposess anyone who has any wealth so they can suck it up themselves. That's where all those dumb studies come from.

Also, like I said, having the MRCA be young is a good sign it's actually on the way out. On the way in or the way out, but it's obvious which is more likely.

What are u trying to say.

Just like being blonde didn't suddenly become popular, the people in I all have a common descent. And in order for the I clade to form there had to be some time when they really were pressed together all as one people.

That is true but many mainly hg I people like Sardines and Yugoslaians inter married alot with non hg I people. sure their paternal line stayed mainly hg I but their ancestry came mainlyf rom probably not hg I people. in the globe13 aust dna test the onlyf or sure group to be unque to Europeans and existed in the Paleolithic age in North Euro which is extremely rare only 16% in Sardine people who have over 35% hg I2a1a Most of their ancestry came from farmers in the Neolithic age.

So why is it ok for mongoloids to stay the same but not europeans?

U dont get what i am saying the first hg R people were Mongliods they were not apart of the Caucasin bloodline they were in the Mongliod bloodline. 50,000ybp Europeans ancestors most likely had tannish skin they are still in the European bloodline.

Chinese are most certainly NOT one ethnic group. They also had more ethnic groups than they do now and drove most of them out.

And guess what? Before agriculture they were not a big part of much of anything. So don't think they were dominating anything, they really weren't

Yes they are sure they have many tribes but they all go back to the first Chinese speakers. There where many Germanic tribes but they were still all German. Han chinese and some othe group of Chinese dont come from completly diff sources they come from the orignal Chinese source. Maybe not completely geneticalley but defintley in language.

Yes it does, the ughyar moved in to tarim valley around 300 bc. The mongols had also been soaking up a great deal of the surrounding tribes a long time before then. The whole group started off looking about the same.

Guess what the khazars looked like? Red hair and blue eyes, with Q haplotype being the main one and r1a1 as next. Now the same area is covered with black haired more asian people with the same haplotypes but different looks. Because they have been taking a ton of DNA from the east since agriculture started.

No it does not. 4,000ybp is not that long ago epxlain how almost all tarium mummies had mongliod mtdna haplogroups. There were mongliods everywhere but for some reason refused to go to the tarium basin after living in east asia for over 40,000 years does that make any sense. Khazars were not red haired and blue eyes sure some Indo iranian tribes 2,000-4,000ybp who did not inter marry did have around 3-15% red hair but Khazars did not. Y dna Q is not popular any where in asia except central siberera get ur facts together at least try to check stuff in Wikipedia before throwing out lie's. The European light features in central asia all come form Indo Iranian migrations starting 5,000ybp. Unified Indo Iranian tribes who kept their European blood seem to have all been killed off in the early mid ages that is why they dont exist they were very famous and we have alot of their ancient DNA but they were not the only iron and bronze age central Asians. I do think that east Asian like all Turkic speakers are very recent in central asia but i may be wrong.

Yet they weren't, always. You believe that red haird people evolved from mongols but it's pretty clear there was no evolution, just washing out, of the red haired people who were there a long time

I dont believe red hair evolved out of Mongliod that is crazy talk. red hair in central asia from what we know is only from Indo Iranians that started migrating there at the earliest 5,000ybp.

The north of china was, that's just a fact. The han ethnic group group of south china is what we think of as chinese today, and is also overwhelming all of asia with massive immigration.

The mongols soaked up a lot of korean, han, whatever the hell else over 15k years.

U are making up consipircy theorys with no evidence to put down mongliod people to make them feel recent. I get sick of that when it is done on whites. did u read when i mentioned 42,000 year old mtdna sample near bejing with specifcalley mongliod B4'5 and aust dna proving it was in the mongliod family. Mongoloids are from what i can see the first and only settlers of places like Korea and probably Japan.

Eskimos only came over about 2k years ago or something, and you would certainly not say that all native americans are "mongoloid". No one denies dark hair and dark eyes have been around a long time but plenty of people wo are Q don't have mongoloid features, and never ever did. I suspect that's more like how Q was when it first formed.

Have u even looked up when Eskeoms came. from what i have looked up on google the Eskemo Aluet language is probably 4,000 years old. I am sorry i cant find the link but i looked at this genetic stuff about native americans and eskemo inuit people. Native Americans ancestors when looking at mtdna and y dna haplogroups most likely arrived over 20,00ybp eskemo inuit ancestors 6,000-10,000ybp. When u look at the globe13 aust da groups of mongliod's artic which represents easta sian looking people in north america is closest to native american not east asian. Originally native Americans ancestors may have looked east asian.

The only heavily hg Q people i can think of is native americans and east asian looking native people of america and central siberns. There is no doubt the first hg Q people would have been Mongliod looking. ANtive Americans count as Mongliod looking they have the highcheck bons and many other of the same features There is a native american center by my house some full bloded native americans go to my school and most have slanted eyes when i first saw them i thought they were like dark skinned east asians.

Kind of like how the mongoloids don't care about their redheaded Q ancestors any more. Also there's tales all over north and south america about red headed tribes of giants that arrived before the current inhabitants. Thankfully, they killed them all off for us (which seems to be the fate in much of the world even today).

Also, lots of 8 foot tall skepetons in south america with that weird deformed head look.

Like i have been saying the red hair that existed and kind of still exists in central asia is from R1a1a1b2 Z93 Indo Iranian migrations out of Russia starting at the earliest 5,000ybp. What evidence do u have with y dna Q being connected with red hair. I dont know how true those native american stories are and who knows how popular they were. There are probably many similar storys that sound like people are talking about aliens or something. Native Americans ancestors spread acrros north and south america from 25,000-10,000ybp. So those stories would have to very very old if those red haired people were there before them i doubt they could keep the same story for that long. Also there is no such thing as a red haired people red hair at the highest gets up to 15-20% in some Insular Celts of Ireland and Britain and the Uralic speaking Udmurts of Volga Russia.

 

[Fire Haired]

This applies double for I groups. Especially if it's true that they were the major inhabitants of europe until 5k years ago when IE came as everyone seems to think. The way they are spread around so thin all over makes it obvious if nothing else does.

U do know that 31 y dna samples from neloithic and chaloithic west europe 24 had G2a, 4 had i2a1a, one had E V13, and twohad posibly F or one of its decendants. hg I was dominte in Europe 10,000ybp or more. Farmers brought G2a maybe some J1 and J2 and E V13 either came with farmers 9,000-6,000ybp or in the mesloithic age probably 11,000-10,000ybp.

 

[Sile]

I know it seems that things evolve but it still seems impossible. Natural selection seems really impossible maybe we just cant explain why things change. I am a redhead and alot of my relatives are on my dad's side it is the most popular hair color the red hair genes are extremely strong in my DNA. I am as much as a redhead as possible i know what it is like more than u. I don't endure cold any better than a black person my extremely pale skin does not give me an advantage at all. I dont see how i would survive better in ice age Europe than a black person would. The only negative thing is i get sun burned a little more easily than the average white person but there is nothing majorly differnt. Red hair goes very deep under the 45th parrel.

It is easy to explain why red hair does not cover all of Italy and Spain as 1% or above. Because the celtic blood in Spain became less and less the more south they went and the dark hair genes dominate more than the light hair genes in Denmark which is why red hair from Germans survived better in Denmark than red hair from Celts in Spain. Same probably with italics and Celts in the alps and Italy. What about the decline of red hair as u get east of Germany why doesnt maciamo talk about that. The Sycthians and other Indo Iranians tribes lived in very sunny desert like areas of central Asia and they had high amounts of red hair but did fine from 4,000-1,500ybp till they were conquered by central Asian turkic tribes.

Even after over 4,000 years of inter marrying with brown skinned and dark haired mid easterns red hair still pops up in Indo Iranian speakers today and they live i very sunny desert like area's.





It is alot more complicated than what u say sure relatives to humans have lived in Europe for over a million years. But that does not mean they were humans ancestors only off shoots of the same family while humans ancestors could have stayed in africa that whole time. Our human family would have begun in sub shara africa 200,000-400,000ybp. Then the family it seems all non sub sharen africans come from migrated to north africa and the mid east over 100,000ybp. Then they split into Caucasins and Oceania mongliod or they came from separate migrations out of Africa. Oceania mongliod migrated to India then further into asia splitting into Mongliods and Oceania i dont know maybe 80,000ybp Oceania going south and Mongliods north. Caucasins stayed in the mid east and groups of Caucasians would have made it to Europe first over 55,000ybp. The founder population of all modern Europeans probably arrived from a mix of diff groups or one group anywhere from 30,000-60,000ybp.

Yes some Neanderthals i think the ones they tested were from spain and they had very pale skin and red hair i think they were only 50,000 years old. Their red hair and pale skin came from a diff source than what mod Europeans have so that does not matter when arguing a older age for Europeans paleness. I also wnat to say we dont know who the neanderthals were. I have looked at so many of their skulls and so many from diff ages and regions look so diff. When u look at a Caucasian skull and the type African americans have so west African they look extremely similar u have to study it to see the difference. Even though their ancestors have been split for probably around 150,000-250,000 years. But if neanderthal skulls looked so obviously diff they probably were very unrelated compared to all modern humans today. I think the so called Neanderthal is just random some what related breds that might have come in multiple migrations. So when they have that DNA from Neanderthals and say they can tell u how much DNA u have from them if that is liget they are only talking about some Neanderthals.



What are u trying to say.



That is true but many mainly hg I people like Sardines and Yugoslaians inter married alot with non hg I people. sure their paternal line stayed mainly hg I but their ancestry came mainlyf rom probably not hg I people. in the globe13 aust dna test the onlyf or sure group to be unque to Europeans and existed in the Paleolithic age in North Euro which is extremely rare only 16% in Sardine people who have over 35% hg I2a1a Most of their ancestry came from farmers in the Neolithic age.



U dont get what i am saying the first hg R people were Mongliods they were not apart of the Caucasin bloodline they were in the Mongliod bloodline. 50,000ybp Europeans ancestors most likely had tannish skin they are still in the European bloodline.



Yes they are sure they have many tribes but they all go back to the first Chinese speakers. There where many Germanic tribes but they were still all German. Han chinese and some othe group of Chinese dont come from completly diff sources they come from the orignal Chinese source. Maybe not completely geneticalley but defintley in language.




No it does not. 4,000ybp is not that long ago epxlain how almost all tarium mummies had mongliod mtdna haplogroups. There were mongliods everywhere but for some reason refused to go to the tarium basin after living in east asia for over 40,000 years does that make any sense. Khazars were not red haired and blue eyes sure some Indo iranian tribes 2,000-4,000ybp who did not inter marry did have around 3-15% red hair but Khazars did not. Y dna Q is not popular any where in asia except central siberera get ur facts together at least try to check stuff in Wikipedia before throwing out lie's. The European light features in central asia all come form Indo Iranian migrations starting 5,000ybp. Unified Indo Iranian tribes who kept their European blood seem to have all been killed off in the early mid ages that is why they dont exist they were very famous and we have alot of their ancient DNA but they were not the only iron and bronze age central Asians. I do think that east Asian like all Turkic speakers are very recent in central asia but i may be wrong.



I dont believe red hair evolved out of Mongliod that is crazy talk. red hair in central asia from what we know is only from Indo Iranians that started migrating there at the earliest 5,000ybp.



U are making up consipircy theorys with no evidence to put down mongliod people to make them feel recent. I get sick of that when it is done on whites. did u read when i mentioned 42,000 year old mtdna sample near bejing with specifcalley mongliod B4'5 and aust dna proving it was in the mongliod family. Mongoloids are from what i can see the first and only settlers of places like Korea and probably Japan.



Have u even looked up when Eskeoms came. from what i have looked up on google the Eskemo Aluet language is probably 4,000 years old. I am sorry i cant find the link but i looked at this genetic stuff about native americans and eskemo inuit people. Native Americans ancestors when looking at mtdna and y dna haplogroups most likely arrived over 20,00ybp eskemo inuit ancestors 6,000-10,000ybp. When u look at the globe13 aust da groups of mongliod's artic which represents easta sian looking people in north america is closest to native american not east asian. Originally native Americans ancestors may have looked east asian.

The only heavily hg Q people i can think of is native americans and east asian looking native people of america and central siberns. There is no doubt the first hg Q people would have been Mongliod looking. ANtive Americans count as Mongliod looking they have the highcheck bons and many other of the same features There is a native american center by my house some full bloded native americans go to my school and most have slanted eyes when i first saw them i thought they were like dark skinned east asians.



Like i have been saying the red hair that existed and kind of still exists in central asia is from R1a1a1b2 Z93 Indo Iranian migrations out of Russia starting at the earliest 5,000ybp. What evidence do u have with y dna Q being connected with red hair. I dont know how true those native american stories are and who knows how popular they were. There are probably many similar storys that sound like people are talking about aliens or something. Native Americans ancestors spread acrros north and south america from 25,000-10,000ybp. So those stories would have to very very old if those red haired people were there before them i doubt they could keep the same story for that long. Also there is no such thing as a red haired people red hair at the highest gets up to 15-20% in some Insular Celts of Ireland and Britain and the Uralic speaking Udmurts of Volga Russia.

you forgot the ancient Thracians had red hair, they traded women for other women with pure red hair
Maybe they are associated with the Udmurts as the thracians are also noted as light eyes and red hair, usually green or grey by the many Greek and roman historians

 

[Noman]

I just told you, the khazars had red hair and blue eyes, they don't exist any more except in other populations.

The red haird folk in the americas were supposedly encountered by conquistadors, who killed them. They killed several who were supposedly 9 foot tall but eventually threw the bodies overboard.

http://xavianthaze.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/the-conquistadors-encounters-with-giants.html#{%22color%22%3A%22%23828282%22%2C%22backgroundColor%22%3A%22%23ffffff%22%2C%22unvisitedLinkColor%22%3A%22%23e86c14%22%2C%22fontFamily%22%3A%22Arial%2C%20Verdana%22}

There's another alleged encounter, they didn't see them personally but saw blankets woven from their hair.

There was a giant sized mummy found in yellowstone as well, a woman but almost 7 foot tall.

This is over the entirety of the north and south americas, by people who never traveled far, and didn't speak each other's languages and would have to travel through often cannibal territory to interact with each other.

In south america, entirety of the polynesians who'd settled there got wiped out. Most of the rest died out due to disease. So called hispanics average 60+% caucasian and only 20% native DNA, the rest being blacks and middle east (like sephardic jews). Mix varies country to country.

For 400 years blood fevers would take the natives in south america. Whole cities simply died off due to disease. They are finding now cities the spaniards never saw, deep in the jungles, that died from plagues.

Point is, it's pretty hard to say what was there because it's largely not there any more, and you don't get stories like this (and some proof) without some kind of basis.

U do know that 31 y dna samples from neloithic and chaloithic west europe 24 had G2a, 4 had i2a1a, one had E V13, and twohad posibly F or one of its decendants. hg I was dominte in Europe 10,000ybp or more. Farmers brought G2a maybe some J1 and J2 and E V13 either came with farmers 9,000-6,000ybp or in the mesloithic age probably 11,000-10,000ybp.

I spent about 5 pages saying why I don't think that's a big problem. almost all those results come from one study, and half the only 4 studies do have r1b.