2 members found this post helpful.
One by one vs. Dorian's latest points... these are some of his best so far, I'll admit...

Originally Posted by
Dorianfinder
You are not wrong for looking at the variance but I feel you have been swayed somewhat by the pan-slavists who frequent forum discussions.
I hope not. I'm rather influenced by Ken Nordtvedt, but I doubt he's a pan-slavist. I can't think of any other biases I'm coming into this with, and I tend to be self-critical.

Originally Posted by
Dorianfinder
1. The distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration, that is if one did take place, than the Slavic expansion of the 6th-7th cent. AD.
As I've mentioned, modern frequency distributions can be misleading. If we look for a distribution that's an exact match with where incoming Slavs settled, and find a mismatch with I2a-Din frequencies, it doesn't disprove the link.

Originally Posted by
Dorianfinder
2. Montenegrins, Croatians, Serbians and Bosniaks are three distinct peoples, despite what some panslavists want us to believe. I believe the Serb and Bosniak communities are early Balkan.
How early are Serbs and Bosniaks? Because they have the highest diversity of I2a-Din in the Balkans per Verenich, indicating that they have the oldest Slavic input if the Slavic input theories are correct. Maybe this is more consistent with your thinking than you expect?
Besides, I could also say that the Welsh, Cornish, and Bretons are three distinct peoples, "as opposed to what the pancelticists want us to believe," and be correct. But that doesn't mean that they weren't contiguous culturally, linguistically, and genetically to a large degree back in the 1st millennium CE.

Originally Posted by
Dorianfinder
3. Greek and Armenian I2a puts the Slav and Sarmatian theories in the realm of fantasy.
Three points: (1) Greeks have a nontrivial Slavic input, (2) The Greek Slavic input is of a generally different flavor than the Balkan Slavic input (N instead of S), (3) Armenians do not have I2a-Din, they have a good amount of I2c-B and low levels of I2a2a2-Cont3 (which has an older spread than I2a-Din).

Originally Posted by
Dorianfinder
4. No links have been found linking Disles and Isles to Sarmatia or the Baltoslavic regions.
Yes, I know. That doesn't rule out wide dispersion, near-total bottleneck, and subsequent getting "picked up" by certain expanding groups. In fact, it makes that the most likely explanation.

Originally Posted by
Dorianfinder
I agree wholeheartedly regarding the Sea Peoples and believe we simply do not know enough about them, however it remains a possibility and is not mutually exclusive to a Balkan Paleolithic continuity thesis, in fact they fit rather well.
Sea Peoples run into the same difficulty as Paleolithic continuity (the double-bottleneck problem), which is why I have them listed as nearly equally unlikely. If you find them equally likely, at least we're seeing eye-to-eye here.