Search results

No, the video is a mere heaping of delusional points by a pathetic afrocentrist, these "very good compelling arguments" are sheer nonsense, debunkable by any one with a iota of historical knowledge. I've skipped to the 30.00 minute time mark and the narrator said that the ancient Greeks...

No, G25 inflates it greatly compared to what comes out in official papers, which you dismiss as wrong, but you are unable to say why an amateur calculator is to be preferred over the work of academicians.

I hope you can provide evidence that somehow there is a conspiracy to hide the Levantine origins of south Italians, because you are clutching at straws.

As you said the lack of talforat or north african proxies forces the model to inflate greatly the Natufian.

Questions as these betray a lack of understanding of a very important fact: it is not as if I am so adamant just because people X have said Y and thus Y is the gospel (which seems a really crude strawman of my positions), but the totality of the evidence points strongly to a particular picture...

you've said that you can't use both Talforat and Natufian in qpAdm, because it would lead to high STD errors, so you can't design a model on qpAdm which distinguishes scenarios of high natufian or low talforat in Cypriots or south Italians, but I am getting that you are not following your own...

According to your words, qpAdm can't distinguish models where there is low talforat or high natufian, so you logically can't use the Cypriot case to "force" anyone to accept that south Italians have high natufian. What is needed is further evidence, which points to high natufian in Cypriots...

You said that the lack of talforat increases the natufian by a lot, so you yourself have said that it is not a plausible model, and you're saying nothing new (it is more plausible that there is low talforat in south Italy rather than high natufian, and it is exactly what the scientific...

We have positive evidence of ANE ancestry in some WHG (do you mean EEHG perhaps?), we have also positive evidence of the LACK of signifcant modern MENA ancestry in south Italians (the papers I linked, and Levant_BA admix would translate to affinities towards the MENA, hellenistic Anatolia might...

You have just thrown away logic at this point, there is literally no compelling argument or evidence that if I refuse the Cypriot model than I must refuse the south Italian model, you are just making stuff up. Have a nice day and go on working on your inferential skills. P.S. My argument to...

You're the one doing a lof of mental gymnastics, included your delusion that "those population genetists" know less than you and (your words) "most papers are wrong". Anyway, you're showing serious lack of logic: It is easier for Levantine ancestry to reach Cyprus because of the geographic...

Let me guess, it is "bad" because it doesn't support your delusional ideas? Is "1% Talforat" too little or does that makes sense because it translates to low levels of more proximate north african admixture, which is what both ADMIXTURE and Y haplogroups support?

Your coping mechanism is to claim that most papers are wrong and most archaeogenetists are inexperienced, and "muh very busy sea" is actually a genetic barrier: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1320811111, but we have already seen that you dismiss most of the genetic literature as wrong. I...

Your mistake is to assume that what applies to Cyprus must apply to south Italy as well: for Cyprus zero Levantine ancestry is a priori implausible, but for south Italy 20% Levantine ancestry is a priori implausible since it is separated by 1000+ km from the Levant and there is no historical...

1) It is BS for the evidence points to a relatively stable population structure in Europe, https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.05.15.491973v1.full, furthermore "muh Rome imperial samples" actually are mostly "east med" who were half Anatolian-half Balkanites (...

1)G25 is off the chart, it shows as well 20-30% Levant_BA/15% Levant_N in south Italy which is BS, and it is not my word but the consensus of the actual scientific literature, which you dismiss by saying that "official papers are often wrong", and I can retort that often hobbyists like yourself...

1) Your explanation to why they are wrong is that they didn't use Levant_N alongside Iran_N, but they did use as reference Levant_N in the Moot paper about Rome to model the Latin outliers and they came up with no excess Levant_N, and they used modern MENA samples in a f4 tests in the paper I...

1) What samples did you use? 2) Explain why professional genetists did not find such a conspicuous admixture.

You see, actually amateur hobbyists who believed such BS that south Italians were literally a mix of a north-Italian-like population with a straight Lebanese-like population and kept changing their claims when the evidence debunked their previous claims- always concocting though models in which...

Your mistake is to believe that G25 samples are representative, but it is clear there is something fishy about them, and there is no real historical process that explains how all that Levantine-Anatolian ancestry ended up in south Italy (muh slaves and hellenistic "Greeks" do not make sense...