Is anthrogenica.com gone?

[Vallicanus]

You must remember that there is a Davidski/Polako cult and anything as meaningless as actual evidence should not take the place of unyielding belief in the Exalted One.

 

[Riverman]

You would have to be naive or just plain stupid to think you know better than professionals.

Sometimes its not about knowing better, but being less ideologically and personally constraint as well. Like a migrationist stance was and in some respects still is problematic in the field because of political pressure. Its not like science is as free as it was. E.g., in the past a professore here in Europe could make up his mind and his position being lragely safe, everything he needed to bring forward being facts and logic. They were still very often wrong, mainly because the of the limitation of the means they could use, at that time, but the constraints were definitely not bigger than they are now.

I mean you live in the USA, you very well know how things are running don't you? Cancel culture is for real and its worse in the academic sphere. Without saying the expected things and complying, without having the right connections, you don't get into a position anyway. And the discrepancy between the actual results and the interpretation of those can be quite astonishing.

The methods are more advanced than they are in the past, but at the same time they can be checked by amateurs better than in the past as well. So we don't have to take a scientists word and that's just great. Because they can be intentionally or unintentionally wrong about an issue. And tools like G25 are tremendously helpful in sorting things out.

So are fora in which people can point to logical conclusions and fallacies. Doesn't mean they are more right than a scientists who wrote piece, but sometimes they defintiely are. Even more so since sometimes two blinds work together in ancient DNA: Geneticists with blindfolds and archaeologists with blindfolds. You bring those two together, which have no mutual understanding of their subjects to begin with, and many papers come out as mess. Its sometimes better to a have a basic understanding of different disciplines, instead of being a specialist in just one.

 

[Jovialis]

Sometimes its not about knowing better, but being less ideologically and personally constraint as well. Like a migrationist stance was and in some respects still is problematic in the field because of political pressure. Its not like science is as free as it was. E.g., in the past a professore here in Europe could make up his mind and his position being lragely safe, everything he needed to bring forward being facts and logic. They were still very often wrong, mainly because the of the limitation of the means they could use, at that time, but the constraints were definitely not bigger than they are now.

I mean you live in the USA, you very well know how things are running don't you? Cancel culture is for real and its worse in the academic sphere. Without saying the expected things and complying, without having the right connections, you don't get into a position anyway. And the discrepancy between the actual results and the interpretation of those can be quite astonishing.

The methods are more advanced than they are in the past, but at the same time they can be checked by amateurs better than in the past as well. So we don't have to take a scientists word and that's just great. Because they can be intentionally or unintentionally wrong about an issue. And tools like G25 are tremendously helpful in sorting things out.

So are fora in which people can point to logical conclusions and fallacies. Doesn't mean they are more right than a scientists who wrote piece, but sometimes they defintiely are. Even more so since sometimes two blinds work together in ancient DNA: Geneticists with blindfolds and archaeologists with blindfolds. You bring those two together, which have no mutual understanding of their subjects to begin with, and many papers come out as mess. Its sometimes better to a have a basic understanding of different disciplines, instead of being a specialist in just one.

You think random people on the internet are immune to ideological bias? I beg to differ.

Also cancel culture and mainstream wokeism is pretty hostile to archeogenetics, actually, I find.

 

[Riverman]

You think random people on the internet are immune to ideological bias? I beg to differ.

That's not what I'm saying, but bring many such people which have a basic knowledge together and some alternatives might emerge which are highly more probable. For example, the team around Reich still proposes "social differentiation" as the most likely reason for the spread of Bell Beaker R1b, like the socially more stratified Bell Beakers had kind of rich guys, which almost like sultans had many wives and did spread their genes at the expense of the local lineages.
There are so many holes in this approach, its just ridiculous. Even if single such individuals and chiefs existed, the main reason being quite obviously ethnic replacement. But that's something they won't propose until its 100 % bulletproven, and probably even delay or avoid it once it is, exactly because of

Also cancel culture and mainstream wokeism is pretty hostile to archeogenetics, actually, I find.

Because the "Wokeism" dislikes factual arguments, because its based on non-factual, illogical ideological thinking and social engineering.

Most of them are Liberals in a field which being attacked by the left fringe already, they don't want to risk their jobs and research for explanations they
a) don't like themselves
b) would get highly negative reactions and attacks for.

If your job depends on how you wrap your results up and present them to the public, the ultimate truth and most correct answer might not be your only or not even one of the primary concerns. And that's true for many fields of science, including economics, social science, etc, etc...

But the Bell Beaker case is just such a clear one, as are the other such cases. Like a "scientist" once argued that the forager females might have defected to the Neolithic clans because they might have deemed these "males more attractive". I mean seriously, that's not real world logic, but the transfer of current ideology on the past. Just like they always have accused the classical authors of. Yet these were much closer to how the clans and tribes usually thought and worked, than what some of the new authors propose with big fat clan chiefs having hundreds of wives turning half or Europe into R1b land or how females switched sides between hostile groups of people.

 

[Jovialis]

I wonder if Anthrogenica was taken down because of researchers being appalled at the misguided discourse behind leaked information.

I wonder if it is any coincidence that Anthrogenica was taken down after the Reich lecture was leaked by Erick so-and-so. Maybe they threatened to sue the pants of the website owners.

 

[Aaron1981]

I would just like to see the justification for a SE Caucasus origin for PIE or IE language, since it seems J2 left no imprint on the steppes until the Iron Age/post-Iron Age. I think beyond simply stating the PC steppes as a secondary homeland, you need an actual hypothesis how this happened. I'm very curious to see what they would say.

 

[voloh]

What makes you think layman are somehow superior or more trustworthy? Would you take medical advice from some random person on the internet? Sadly quite a bit of people do.

official scientific studies on the haplogroup i2 in eastern Europe claimed it was Balkan Paleolithic, or even Finno-Ugric, based on some pretty weird logics. I can link the studies if you want.
astrophysicist and hobby geneticist Ken Nortvedt was the first to point out that it's more likely from a recent Slavic founder effect, based on his mathematical analyses.
That was 10 or 15 years ago, and only now it's slowly being recognized in academic studies. Davidski's methods are also mentioned in some top-level studies.

I don't know why the standards are so low in some academic studies, but that's how it is in this field. If I was limiting myself only academic studies and ignoring the hobbyists, my knowledge would be a lot poorer.

 

[Jovialis]

official scientific studies on the haplogroup i2 in eastern Europe claimed it was Balkan Paleolithic, or even Finno-Ugric, based on some pretty weird logics. I can link the studies if you want.
astrophysicist and hobby geneticist Ken Nortvedt was the first to point out that it's more likely from a recent Slavic founder effect, based on his mathematical analyses.
That was 10 or 15 years ago, and only now it's slowly being recognized in academic studies. Davidski's methods are also mentioned in some top-level studies.

I don't know why the standards are so low in some academic studies, but that's how it is in this field. If I was limiting myself only academic studies and ignoring the hobbyists, my knowledge would be a lot poorer.

I myself am a hobbyist, and using data I collected from studies came to the conclusion that minoan-like people are indeed a good proxy for many southern Europeans to be modeled. Academics also came to that conclusion which affirmed my beliefs. That was INSPITE of what many clearly biased hobbyists said. So what is there to make of that?

 

[Riverman]

I wonder if Anthrogenica was taken down because of researchers being appalled at the misguided discourse behind leaked information.

I wonder if it is any coincidence that Anthrogenica was taken down after the Reich lecture was leaked by Erick so-and-so. Maybe they threatened to sue the pants of the website owners.

That's not fair. Actually, Erik and others which had more inside knowledge on the lecture explicitly refrained from telling too much details and many of the other leaks came about from floating around on Youtube and the authors themselves. The debates on Anthrogenica surely weren't misguided or manipulated, surely not more than anywhere else.

We should all stick to the facts and appreciate the efforts of others which might help to improve our knowledge on a subject - for free. I surely appreciate what Maciamo achieved, as I do what others have done. Whether they are always right, again, you will find wrong in every person.

 

[Jovialis]

That's not fair. Actually, Erik and others which had more inside knowledge on the lecture explicitly refrained from telling too much details and many of the other leaks came about from floating around on Youtube and the authors themselves. The debates on Anthrogenica surely weren't misguided or manipulated, surely not more than anywhere else.

We should all stick to the facts and appreciate the efforts of others which might help to improve our knowledge on a subject - for free. I surely appreciate what Maciamo achieved, as I do what others have done. Whether they are always right, again, you will find wrong in every person.

Last i checked, Maciamo never called whole institutions insane or stupid, like Davidski has. he has also not been monstrously wrong like Davidski, and yet still clings on to a failed theory. You debase Maciamo by comparing him to Davidski. Also, I collaborated with maciamo, from which he created the Ethnicity checker, from which helped me led to my conclusion about Minoans.

 

[Riverman]

I myself am a hobbyist, and using data I collected from studies came to the conclusion that minoan-like people are indeed a good proxy for many southern Europeans to be modeled. Academics also came to that conclusion which affirmed my beliefs. That was INSPITE of what many clearly biased hobbyists said. So what is there to make of that?

That problem will be only solved by analysing way more data, especially from the Late Antiquity and Early Medieval period. And something like G25 might help if pointing to e.g. recent vs. ancient admixture. Many such questions being not finally answered yet and that's why opinion may differ. So what? People can have different opinions on the issue, without bashing and banning each other, as long as things stay civil.

Last i checked, Maciamo never called whole institutions insane or stupid, like Davidski has. Also, I collaborated with maciamo, from which he created the Ethnicity checker, from which helped me led to my conclusion about minoans.

Well, he surely is not restraining himself as much. But how would you call paper with absurd explanations, which go against the facts, which don't even get geography right?

 

[enter_tain]

What makes you think layman are somehow superior or more trustworthy? Would you take medical advice from some random person on the internet? Sadly quite a bit of people do.

Because it's not about individuals. It's about reality/facts. Academics on average are more knowledgeable, but on average =/= right all the time.

As for medical advice, medicine is not archeogenetics. It's a field that has existed for thousands of years.

For archeogenetics, even academics for the first 10-15 years were just throwing crap at the wall seeing what sticks.

 

[Jovialis]

That problem will be only solved by analysing way more data, especially from the Late Antiquity and Early Medieval period. And something like G25 might help if pointing to e.g. recent vs. ancient admixture. Many such questions being not finally answered yet and that's why opinion may differ. So what? People can have different opinions on the issue, without bashing and banning each other, as long as things stay civil.



Well, he surely is not restraining himself as much. But how would you call paper with absurd explanations, which go against the facts, which don't even get geography right?

Usually people point to the crappy modeling of Sicilians in the that paper on steppe and Iranian in the western med. But as Palermo Trapani pointed out, in what I think is a very important observation is that they modeled them a lot more soundly in the supplement as heavy in Minoan in an alternative model. To me that would have made more sense to publish it as such, and would perfectly complement what Raveane et al. 2022 shows.


Why they choose to go with that poor modeling as 40% Neolithic North African, idk, maybe there was some motivation involved. But the paper also provides different information, which makes more sense. The alternative model was what I was expecting to find.

 

[Jovialis]

Because it's not about individuals. It's about reality/facts. Academics on average are more knowledgeable, but on average =/= right all the time.

As for medical advice, medicine is not archeogenetics. It's a field that has existed for thousands of years.

For archeogenetics, even academics for the first 10-15 years were just throwing crap at the wall seeing what sticks.

For people that don't have respect for academic authority you sure love to lecture others. I all I see from many hobbyists is just flinging crap as well. But the difference is that they are usually bunch of yahoos.

What exactly were most of you doing 15 years ago? I highly doubt it was this.

So much hubris, and arrogance. You people are delusional.

 

[Jovialis]

You must remember that there is a Davidski/Polako cult and anything as meaningless as actual evidence should not take the place of unyielding belief in the Exalted One.

The cult is about to come to an end like Thulsa Doom, and Conan will come in the form of the 700+ new samples from the southern Arc paper that nobody here has even seen yet.

 

[voloh]

I myself am a hobbyist, and using data I collected from studies came to the conclusion that minoan-like people are indeed a good proxy for many southern Europeans to be modeled. Academics also came to that conclusion which affirmed my beliefs. That was INSPITE of what many clearly biased hobbyists said. So what is there to make of that?

I don't have a strong opinion on Italian/Iberian etc. genetics. The official studies seem alright so I follow them.

I just don't like this type of dogmatism, that academic studies cannot be questioned, even if they are from e.g. 2005 and there's a lot of new evidence which disproves them, which just hasn't been put together in an academic study yet. it's very hindering for discussions.

 

[ThirdTerm]

I would just like to see the justification for a SE Caucasus origin for PIE or IE language, since it seems J2 left no imprint on the steppes until the Iron Age/post-Iron Age.

The Maykop people belonged to G2 and J2. The Maykop culture preceded the Yamnaya culture and it was genetically linked to the south. I used to post about this Maykop link to the defunct website and some posters strongly disagreed with me. The Maykop culture has been linked to the north Ubaid culture in Eastern Anatolia.

 

[ihype02]

Davidski had said that Mycenaeans would be 'Sintashta clones'. Can you mention a case where you had disagreed with him?

Besides Sikeliot had an account on Anthrogenica for quite some time even though it was well known and obvious he was a troll.

Sikeliot was caught posting crude racist content about Sicilians in two different accounts with different usernames that's why Angela dislikes him.
He did come to me as a bit obsessive too.
But why do you dislike him and Moriopoulos?
Because I honestly unaware of anything, expect for what Angela has mentioned in the past.

 

[Angela]

Sikeliot was caught posting crude racist content about Sicilians in two different accounts with different usernames that's why Angela dislikes him.
He did come to me as a bit obsessive too.
But why do you dislike him and Moriopoulos?
Because I honestly unaware of anything, expect for what Angela has mentioned in the past.

You're a real piece of work. That's not enough for you to "dislike" him? As long as his racism wasn't aimed at Albanians you saw no problem with it?

For the record, my distaste for him arose long before that event. On 23andme he falsified data on "Southern Italians", and especially Sicilians. He also often posted photos of people purportedly from Sicily or other places in Southern Italy upon which I did reverse image searches and found the photos were from Turkey or Palestine or Lebanon.

He had no shame.

He, or one of his socks, told me how he had made a trip to Italy and his description of the people was accurate. He sent me "proof" in the form of a picture of, I presume, him, but who knows, crudely photoshopped on top of an Italian street scene. It was so bad a fifth grader could have done better.

Then I learned of his persecution of a Jewish student at his university.

This is the person the moderators at anthrogenica allowed to post there under more than a couple of sock accounts, but banned me for a mistake.

You people who support them are delusional.

Don't you at least expect honesty and integrity from the people you admire or support? I'll never support some of the people in this hobby.

 

[ihype02]

You're a real piece of work. That's not enough for you to "dislike" him? As long as his racism wasn't aimed at Albanians you saw no problem with it?
For the record, my distaste for him arose long before that event. On 23andme he falsified data on "Southern Italians", and especially Sicilians. He also often posted photos of people purportedly from Sicily or other places in Southern Italy upon which I did reverse image searches and found the photos were from Turkey or Palestine or Lebanon.
He had no shame.
He, or one of his socks, told me how he had made a trip to Italy and his description of the people was accurate. He sent me "proof" in the form of a picture of, I presume, him, but who knows, crudely photoshopped on top of an Italian street scene. It was so bad a fifth grader could have done better.
Then I learned of his persecution of a Jewish student at his university.
This is the person the moderators at anthrogenica allowed to post there under more than a couple of sock accounts, but banned me for a mistake.
You people who support them are delusional.
Don't you at least expect honesty and integrity from the people you admire or support? I'll never support some of the people in this hobby.

I was just asking if he knows something else that I don't know.
I surely don't admire Sikeliot or give two bananas about him. I don't even know him that much.