Final thread.. which Europeans overlap with Levantines? Multiple choice.

[Goga]

Not all I's lived in Northern Europe. Check this thread, it's quite ilustrative: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26944-The-Paleolithic-Remnants-a-map&p=384627#post384627

Check the sublcades in the map, specially those located in the Pyrenees and Iberia, and perhaps you'll understand what I mean.

Ok, thanks.

As fas as I do understand hg. I2a never fully entered into the Iberian Peninsula and never fully established there. And that I2a came actually from other 'Northern' location in Europe ('northern' compared to the Iberian Peninsula)...

 

[lebowsky]

I was in Barcelona and I was in Madrid. I live in Amsterdam and here live many Spanish people. And Spanish people in general are MUCH darker than Dutch folks. Fact!

I'm sorry that I'm not blind!

Totally agree. A lot of people have a blind faith around a mith.

 

[sparkey]

Ok, thanks.

As fas as I do understand hg. I2a never fully entered into the Iberian Peninsula and never fully established there. And that I2a came actually from other 'Northern' location in Europe...

Hmm... dating indicates that such a dispersal of I2a from Northern Europe would have had to have happened in the Paleolithic... but Northern Europe was less inhabitable then. So I'm inclined to declare this theory "unlikely."

 

[sparkey]

('northern' compared to the Iberian Peninsula)...

Sorry, I started responding before you added this. Yes, it's possible that I2a dispersed from north of the Iberian Peninsula during the Paleolithic... but that doesn't really say much. I think it dispersed from east of there too at one point.... again, not saying much.

 

[Knovas]

I2a1a was originated in the Pyrenees, that's quite accepted today. Enough to generate Southwestern autosomes, and no need to say others could do so too. But it's very likely for a very long time, that I2a1a peoples inhabited the Iberian Peninsula in a great number, and their autosomes survived till modern days exceedingly well, even considering the R1b irruption.

 

[Goga]

Hmm... dating indicates that such a dispersal of I2a from Northern Europe would have had to have happened in the Paleolithic... but Northern Europe was less inhabitable then. So I'm inclined to declare this theory "unlikely."

Ok. But do you think that I2 is from Iberia?

 

[sparkey]

Ok. But do you think that I2a is from Iberia?

We really don't have enough data to be making declarations about I2a as a whole, other than that its center of diversity is in Europe, probably Western Europe, although even that we're not 100% sure of. We can speculate about Ice Age refuges all day, but we don't really know.

It's pretty clear that I2a1a is from Southwestern Europe, though... probably Northeastern Iberia or Southwestern France. And that's the subclade that seems to have been the the most common during the Neolithic in Europe, especially in the Southwest.

Edit: You just changed it to ask if I2 is from Iberia. I2 is only a little older than I2a and we know just as little about the I2 MRCA as about the I2a MRCA.

 

[Knovas]

Thanks sparkey, you are really better than me to explain this things.

 

[Goga]

We really don't have enough data to be making declarations about I2a as a whole, other than that its center of diversity is in Europe, probably Western Europe, although even that we're not 100% sure of. We can speculate about Ice Age refuges all day, but we don't really know.

It's pretty clear that I2a1a is from Southwestern Europe, though... probably Northeastern Iberia or Southwestern France. And that's the subclade that seems to have been the the most common during the Neolithic in Europe, especially in the Southwest.

Edit: You just changed it to ask if I2 is from Iberia. I2 is only a little older than I2a and we know just as little about the I2 MRCA as about the I2a MRCA.

Ok, I thought (and still think) that I2 is actually somewhere for the Balkans (Southeast Europe).

 

[sparkey]

Thanks sparkey, you are really better than me to explain this things.

I thought you were explaining well but I'm trying things a bit different to see if I can pull Goga our direction.

By the way, I'm agreeing with you on most things, but I'm inclined to use less certain terms about the relationship between Y-DNA and autosomal DNA. I'm not convinced yet that the autosomal DNA of R1b peoples isn't an important part of the Southwestern cluster. But you've certainly been convincing about how there's a very good chance that the autosomal impact of the ancient I2a1a carriers is higher than what we see in modern Y-DNA frequency distributions. In fact, I don't see that not being the case.

 

[sparkey]

Ok, I thought (and still think) that I2 is actually somewhere for the Balkans (Southeast Europe).

That was the old hat assumption based on frequency distributions. I think that it was the I2a1b1a-Din expansion confusing people. Don't get me wrong, nothing rules out the Balkans, its southern location makes it a possibility, but it's not the only possibility. I2 has too many bottlenecks to come to a good conclusion about where it was so long ago.

 

[Goga]

That was the old hat assumption based on frequency distributions. I think that it was the I2a1b1a-Din expansion confusing people. Don't get me wrong, nothing rules out the Balkans, its southern location makes it a possibility, but it's not the only possibility. I2 has too many bottlenecks to come to a good conclusion about where it was so long ago.

Ok. Btw Iberians are further away on autosomal maps from Europeans that have got a lot of hg. I.
Iberians are the closest to other Celts in the area, Italians (Italo-Celtic origin) and French. Italians don't have much of hg. I either, only for about 6.5 %. While French have very much Germanic influences and that's why they have 10% of hg. I1 !!!

Iberians are not that close to East Europeans. I mean even many West Asian/Caucasian groups are closer to the East European than the Iberians are. But maybe that's because of lack of hg. R1a....

Ps. And East Europeans have in general much more of hg. 'I' than West Europeans (Celts) do!

 

[Knovas]

You are twisting things and falling in the same error again. Check the Euro7 spreadsheet and think that I2a1a* people could have a huge relevance between both French and Italians, like happens in Iberians at the highest level.

Quoting sparkey: that's the subclade that seems to have been the the most common during the Neolithic in Europe.

Haplogroup distribution often gives a false impresion, or in other words, don't tell all things. And you still have it as the greatest truth. Open your mind.

 

[Goga]

Quoting sparkey: that's the subclade that seems to have been the the most common during the Neolithic in Europe.

At some points I do agree with him. But about I2 is being a major hg. in Iberia before the Neolithic is nothing more but pure SPECULATION!

I do trully believe that hg. 'I' was very common in Eastern (among Slavic nations), Northern (Scandinavia) and Southeastern Europe (Balkans). But NOT in Iberia and British Islands.

I'm not convinced and I want to see evidences first!

 

[Goga]

If R1b is younger than hg. 'I' in Western Europe, then is R1b not European AT ALL. But migrated only 3000-4000 years ago from Asia. Via the Pontic Steppes (also in Asia) from Anatolia.

This would mean that Celts are actually ASIAN in origin, and this doesn't make any sense to me!

Celts are NOT the most Asian people in Europe! According to me they are actually the 'oldest' Europeans!

 

[Knovas]

But guy, the R1b subclades among them are found exclusively in Europe, so they "evolved" to European, and that's what they are. ¿Why do you care about R1b as whole when the subclades are more important?

Most K linages (but this is MtDNA), as for example mine, are also exclusive for Europe. K is also very young and originated in the Near East, but this doesn't mean all clades must imply autosomes associated to the mentioned region.

So not the oldest people in Europe, that's what's really speculation since, again, no ancient R1b has been found in Europe so far.

PD: Buf! my god.

 

[Goga]

But guy, the R1b subclades among them are found exclusively in Europe, so they "evolved" to European, and that's what they are. ¿Why do you care about R1b as whole when the subclades are more important?

Most K linages (but this is MtDNA), as for example mine, are also exclusive for Europe. K is also very young and originated in the Near East, but this doesn't mean all clades must imply autosomes associated to the mentioned region.

So not the oldest people in Europe, that's what's really speculation since, again, no ancient R1b has been found in Europe so far.

PD: Buf! my god.

Lol, you have got very weird and crazy ideas/fantasies.

How can a haplogroup evolve to 'European' lol. Hocus pocus and it's European, African etc. now.

A haplogroup can evolve IN a region, but not into something, lol!

People with a particular haplogroups are from a specific region if they migrate to other regions they mix with other native haplogroups.


How lng must a haplogroup live in the region to become native?

How long must R1* or J* be in USA to become native American?

 

[Knovas]

The fact is haplogroups change, and if their subclades are found exclusively in a region, just start thinking. I think it's easy, ¿where do you see the difficulty?

 

[Goga]

The fact is haplogroups change, and if their subclades are found exclusively in a region, just start thinking. I think it's easy, ¿where do you see the difficulty?

I do understand you. But I don't agree with you!

 

[Drac II]

No, I'm not obsessed with Iberians. The thing is if WE ALL speak the truth we will find the real truth very fast! But due to twisting of facts by some people the whole thing became very confusing.

Iberians ARE Europeans and they look very European, but in general they are 'dark' Europeans and compared to Dutch people, Scandinavians etc. they have got very 'schwartie' features!

Yes, but those people you mentioned just happen to be the most depigmented Europeans, so of course Spaniards in general are "darker" than them.