Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: What is your opinion on arguments mtDNA H did not spread in Europe in the Neolithic

Voters
5. You may not vote on this poll
  • 100% agree with The main mtDNA H subclades in Europe are rarely found in the Middle East

    1 20.00%
  • partly agree with The main mtDNA H subclades in Europe are rarely found in the Middle East

    2 40.00%
  • Undecided on the main mtDNA H subclades in Europe are rarely found in the Middle East

    0 0%
  • Dont agree with the main mtDNA H subclades in Europe are rarely found in the Middle East

    0 0%
  • 100% agree with not enough research on Pre historic European DNA, only ones with few H are mentioned

    3 60.00%
  • partly agree to not enough research on Pre historic European DNA only ones with few H are mentioned

    2 40.00%
  • Undecided on not enough research on Pre historic European DNA only ones with few H are mentioned

    0 0%
  • Dont agree with not enough research on Pre historic European DNA only ones with few H are mentioned

    0 0%
  • 100% agree with It is impossible for Bell Beaker to have spread mtDNA H

    1 20.00%
  • partly agree with It is impossible for Bell Beaker to have spread mtDNA H

    0 0%
  • Undecided on It is impossible for Bell Beaker to have spread mtDNA H

    1 20.00%
  • Dont agree with It is impossible for Bell Beaker to have spread mtDNA H

    0 0%
  • 100% agree with Europeans have different mtDNA H subclades from each other

    2 40.00%
  • partly agree with Europeans have different mtDNA H subclades from each other

    1 20.00%
  • Undecided on Europeans have different mtDNA H subclades from each other

    0 0%
  • Dont agree with Europeans have different mtDNA H subclades from each other

    0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 58

Thread: Strong Evidence mtDNA H did not spread in Neolithic and was already popular in Europe

  1. #26
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    Fire Haired, you only see what you want to see, and you only read what you want to read:

    - First of all, you say Scandinavians have "only" 25% Med, when the incredibly North Euro-like Moroccans you checked are ONLY 6.5% North European. ¿How do both things match? LOL.

    - Second, North Africans don't have more North European than any other population outside of Europe: Selkup (35%), Ket (27.7%) Jatt (18.4%), Uzbeks (16.3%), Dolgan (13.1%)...and so on.

    - I specially mentioned Berbers, since they are Pre-Arab, and they also did not mate with Vandals and other similar people who probably brought minor North European component. Check the Mozabite samples and you'll see they are 0% North European in globe13.

    - Take the North African samples as whole, and you'll see how low is the average North European: Mozabite (0%), Behar Moroccans (2.3%), Algerian (5.8%) and Dodecad Moroccans (6.5%) = 3.65% average.

    - Of course, I am not taking into account Morocco Jews (8.9%), since Jews are always outliers compared to their host populations. However, they also probably spread some North Euro as well among the main North African population, but not in more isolated regions where Berber tribes lived.


    So H was definetely responsible of the Mediterranean admixture in North Africa, since North European is rather the product of the overlap between some allele frequencies, or the result of minor migrations as I said. Completely irrelevant.


    Edited:

    At lower K's when the Atlantic-Baltic component is present, the program simply searches the most likely fit taking the available clusters as reference (No Med available at K=7). But Dienekes' already made another experiment proving that the West Eurasian ancestry in North Africa is overwhelmingly Sardinian-like, hence Mediterranean.

    http://dodecad.blogspot.com.es/2012/...alculator.html

    The Mozabite samples as expected show noisy Atlantic-Baltic figures.
    okay ur right the north euro thing in north africans is not signifcant because most mid eastern have as much but in k7b northwest africans have 27% atlantic baltic how can u say H in north africa is related to med because we have the la brana austome dnaa he had very little med as much as modern scandnvaiens he was a hunter gather spainard in the neloithci age he probably got it from otzie people and the farmer in swedans people who ha over 55% med and lived in spain at that time because they had y dn g2a and we have 3 y dna g2a samples from farmers in spain from 7,000ybp so if u went to spain 15,000ybp that is 8,000 years before la brana they would have no med or very very very little so to say all med in north africa comes from H would mean they had like 100% med what u are saying has very weak evidence okay sure otzie was chaloithic but he was apart of that farmer race with y dna g2a in europe it does not matter what age experts put him in he is the same genticalley as the Neolithic farmers so he does count as a early farmer in europe that is why his austome dna was like the farm from swedan and sure he was related to sardinens that does not help ur argument at all his people still went to spain and by the way spainish and sardinens are very related they are the only people with y dn i2a1a1 which ur so u can not deny europe would have probably had absoultly no med austomnal dna before the Neolithic and the farmers including otzie where dominated by med while hunter gathers where north euro there is no way H and med spread to north africa and all of europe has about 40% H including norway but med does not show relation to H and the source i gave is not unreliable it is real mtdna tests they took on people so those re rel results and i have heard Scandinavia has very high amount of h1 and h3 before and mtdan is just a direct linage no haplogroup has shown real connections to austome groups and since H has been in europe for about 35,000 years that is before med or north euro even existed and it has mixed with so many diff austome groups

  2. #27
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-09
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,661
    Points
    15,281
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,281, Level: 37
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 369
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-S26
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Celtiberians
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    You are fighting against evidence. The only high frequency haplogorups in common between North-Africa and Europe is mtDNA H ...and the only autosomal component shared with europeans and north-africans at high frequency is Mediterranean. The 27% Atlantic-Baltic of NW-Africans on K7b is mostly West-Med, because remember that this Atlanto-Baltic component is a mixbag of Northern and West-Med alelles, that in case of North-Africans only shows the west-med side. That's why for example Basques got 72% of Atlantic-Baltic, cos besides the west-med there is northern-euro thrown in there. In the case of Lithuanians, is the other way around, mostly the northern alleles manifesting. Hope that helps.

  3. #28
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilhelm View Post
    The 27% Atlantic-Baltic of NW-Africans on K7b is mostly West-Med
    The K10a experiment I posted was basically proving that point. Shows clearly the real affinity of the "Atlantic-Baltic"element at K=7.


    To summarise, an exellent quote from Dienekes':

    the Mediterranean component here is modal in Sardinians as usual, but also projects into North Africa. Again, this is intermediate between K7 which shows a predominance of West Eurasian ancestry in North Africa + an African component, and K12 in which there are "Atlantic_Med" and "Northwest_Afican" regional components.

    These are strong hints that the West Eurasian element in Africa differs between NW and E Africa. In the former region, it is most related to Sardinians, and in the latter it is most related to Arabians.

  4. #29
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Wilhelm View Post
    You are fighting against evidence. The only high frequency haplogorups in common between North-Africa and Europe is mtDNA H ...and the only autosomal component shared with europeans and north-africans at high frequency is Mediterranean. The 27% Atlantic-Baltic of NW-Africans on K7b is mostly West-Med, because remember that this Atlanto-Baltic component is a mixbag of Northern and West-Med alelles, that in case of North-Africans only shows the west-med side. That's why for example Basques got 72% of Atlantic-Baltic, cos besides the west-med there is northern-euro thrown in there. In the case of Lithuanians, is the other way around, mostly the northern alleles manifesting. Hope that helps.
    well europeans and north Africans have about 15% mtDNA U that is another similaty so H is not the only one Europeans and north africans have mainly brown hair and all non caucasin people have black hair so what just because they have similarities does not been those similarties are connected we know that the farmers that came to europe where over 60% med and the hunter gathers where 20% or less europe was orignalley just north european in austomnal dna h1 and h3 spread to north africa from spain 15,000-10,000ybp before med ever became popular in europe so ur rgument is defeated by those facts u guys are very stubborn about the connection with mtdna h and med but mtdna h is older than any of those austpmnal groups it is about 40,000years old since we have a two 25,000 year old h17 in russia one 28,000 year old h in italy and it orignated in the mid east so it is at least 40,000 years old so the orugnal H people had a ancestor caucasin group they did not have med because it did not exist yet mtdna h1, h3, h6 and other european h subclades where born into people who where about 100% north european in austomnal dna meditreaen austomnal is also in the mid east does that mean they got it from European H no it does not maybe some europeans had med in paloithci but that is almost impossible

  5. #30
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    North Africans are U6, while Europeans belong to U5 with very minor U6 presence. Certainly U6 seems to be a Paleolithic remnant in North Africa, but I don't see any special connection with U5. Both splitted from U, but that happened a very long time ago. The same as For example K, the main subclade of U8, has something in common with U...of course, already buried in the most remote antiquity.

    So that point goes nowhere.

  6. #31
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-09
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,661
    Points
    15,281
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,281, Level: 37
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 369
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-S26
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Celtiberians
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    well europeans and north Africans have about 15% mtDNA U that is another similaty
    No, it's not a similary, like Knovas says they belong to the "berber" clade U6..

    so H is not the only one Europeans and north africans have mainly brown hair and all non caucasin people have black hair so what just because they have similarities does not been those similarties are connected we know that the farmers that came to europe where over 60% med
    No, there is no evidence, since Otzi is not a neolithic migrant, he is Calcholitic, and his ancestors, or part of them could have been in Europe in pre-Neolithic times.

    and the hunter gathers where 20% or less europe was orignalley just north european in austomnal dna
    La Braña shows non-trivial levels of mediterranean, up to 45% in some calculators. And even if it was 25%, it's still high, and evidence of being Mesolithic.

    yet mtdna h1, h3, h6 and other european h subclades where born into people who where about 100% north european in austomnal dna
    Prove it. La Braña was far from being 100% North-Euro.

  7. #32
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    not all north africans have U6 that is just their unque subclade and La Brana had only 20% med in globe13 that is lower than anyone in europe today not counting scandnaviens so no way can u say med was nearlly as popular in spain or anywhere in europe in mesloithci and paloithic age and sure otzie is chaltoithic age he decends from neloithic migrants he has y dna g2a so do 26 of 31 y dna samples in western europe from 7,000-4,700ybp even a 7,000 year old NELOITHIC farmer from germany he was in tehwestern european neloithci race

    sure la bran is up to 40% med in some calculators but u cant say med percentage in k7b is same as med in globe13 sure in those calcultaors la brana had 40 med that is much lower than almost all modern europeans only north europeans have 40% med in those calculators it is a fact la brana was most related to finnish and sami and northern europeans peruiod he was not a meditreaen person in austomnal dna some with all pre Neolithic Europeans there is no way 15,000ybp when h1 and h3 spread to north africa from spain that those people had alot or any med so right there your argument is defeated but what confuses me is that otzie had he same white skin genes as modern europeans even though he technically was less than 20% european and modern sardinen people who have as much med as those farmers and have the highest amount of g2a in europe and and te closest modern relatives to early european farmers they are also white bit are also like only 20% european and G2a rignated in north antolia or iran but in those areas med is lower than in europe and west asian is the majority then why dident the farmers have alot of west asian they had tons of med and they had white skin his makes me think they had to be mainly european and maybe the med is european but besides that there is no good evidence and it almost defintley was not in spain before neloithic

  8. #33
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    What the calculators show is La Braña had non trivial amounts of Mediterranean, so that is telling us indeed something.

    And again, obviously North Africans have other maternal lines, but the U ones are almost exclusively U6. Well, and K, but that's all. There's no U5.

    Oh, and the West Asian component isn't significant in both Sardinians and Neolithic individuals. Still getting nowhere.

  9. #34
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-09
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,661
    Points
    15,281
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,281, Level: 37
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 369
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-S26
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Celtiberians
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    not all north africans have U6 that is just their unque subclade and La Brana had only 20% med in globe13 that is lower than anyone in europe today not counting scandnaviens so no way can u say med was nearlly as popular in spain or anywhere in europe in mesloithci and paloithic age and sure otzie is chaltoithic age he decends from neloithic migrants he has y dna g2a so do 26 of 31 y dna samples in western europe from 7,000-4,700ybp even a 7,000 year old NELOITHIC farmer from germany he was in tehwestern european neloithci race

    sure la bran is up to 40% med in some calculators but u cant say med percentage in k7b is same as med in globe13 sure in those calcultaors la brana had 40 med that is much lower than almost all modern europeans only north europeans have 40% med in those calculators it is a fact la brana was most related to finnish and sami and northern europeans peruiod he was not a meditreaen person in austomnal dna some with all pre Neolithic Europeans there is no way 15,000ybp when h1 and h3 spread to north africa from spain that those people had alot or any med so right there your argument is defeated but what confuses me is that otzie had he same white skin genes as modern europeans even though he technically was less than 20% european and modern sardinen people who have as much med as those farmers and have the highest amount of g2a in europe and and te closest modern relatives to early european farmers they are also white bit are also like only 20% european and G2a rignated in north antolia or iran but in those areas med is lower than in europe and west asian is the majority then why dident the farmers have alot of west asian they had tons of med and they had white skin his makes me think they had to be mainly european and maybe the med is european but besides that there is no good evidence and it almost defintley was not in spain before neloithic
    Where do you get that Sardinians are only 20% european ? How can they be only 20% european when their mtDNA haplogropus are typical european, and their y-DNA also, except for 15% G2 , which is not that behind the Alpine region like Switzerland which has 8%..

  10. #35
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    We don't know yet for sure how old is G2/G2a in Europe. It seems pretty old, at least, in the Caucasus region. I suspect a very long time ago the Caucasus could have been dominant in Mediterranean, and at some point was mostly replaced by the West Asian admixture. It is interesting to note that Georgians and Abkhazians retained their Non Indo-European languages, and they still possess substantial Med component shared with Sardinians and other Southern European populations.

  11. #36
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    in glbe13 armanians med is 29.2%, for georgians it is 25.3%, in adygie it is 21.8% https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...tUE9kaUE#gid=2

    all of thes are caucus people vnow here are european examples

    dutch in globe13 have 33.3% med, bulgaran have 34.1% serb have 31.2%, french have 40.1%, swedish 26.1%, finnish who have 9.8%

    finnish have been proven to be closet reltives to la bran hunter gather sapain hunter gather and to two hunter gathers from swedan 5,000ybp http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...13725450115847

    so la brana and the two hunter gathers from swedan are most related to sami and finnish who have the least amount of med in europe so in my opion that proves la bran was not a major med person like iberians and lot of europeans today so that defeats your argment and ur argument is aginst what all austomnal dna experts say and the people that aculley tested la bran europe before he neloithic had almost no if any med in any type of austomnal dna test europe was orignalley almost only north european in austomnl dna and only sami and finnish ho have been genetically isolated from the rest of europe for about 10,000 years hve kept those austomnal genes and super high north european also people around parts of russi have to but ur argument abot med bieng major in europeans 10,000ybp or before is almost defintley not true

    europeans unlike mid easterns and north africans have are their own ethnic group they europeans ancestors 10,000's ybp only inter married with each other they devloped the north europen austomnal group and developed unque features that is why all europeans are all white while other caucasins are rar;ey white skinned that is why Europeans have unque hair colors that only they have since europeans are a unque ethnic group that did not inter marry till 10,000ybp it makes sense they only had one austomnal dna group which is north european before 10,000ybp so that is another strong point that i think defeats ur argument

  12. #37
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    i disagree with saying sardinens are only 20% european but according to austomnal dna north europen is the only europen austomnal group and they and some other south europens have about 20% and most europens have round 40-50% which suprises me because u know europeans are more than half european

    also the farmer otzie who had over 55% med and less than 20% north european in globe13 also had the genes for european white skin his closest mdern relatives are sardinens who also have white skin and are most likley the last true neloithic western europeans so these super med people who spread y dna g2a and technically should not be european actulley would have not looked phiscalley any differnt from modern europeans or the hunter gathers they conquered they would have been white but if they are not european then why are they white so somehow there is a europen thing about them u cant find in austomnal dna or i dont really know how to explain it and where did the med farmers come from y dna g2a is from caucus turkey iran area but those areas have very little med most med is in europe but europe over 10,000ybp probably had almost no med so where the heck did these farmers come from and if they where not native to europe why where they white just like the native hunter gathers this is very confusing i defintley think u guys have some good points that maybe these med farmers where european maybe there was some med in europe before 10,000ybp it is not a bad idea to investigate it

  13. #38
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,048
    Points
    9,076
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,076, Level: 28
    Level completed: 55%, Points required for next Level: 274
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    so la brana and the two hunter gathers from swedan are most related to sami and finnish who have the least amount of med in europe so in my opion that proves la bran was not a major med person like iberians and lot of europeans today so that defeats your argment
    It think you unwillingly deviated from the original question into some strawman argument. No one here denies that Saami/Fennobaltic North_european component is clearly dominant in La Brana and Gotland hunter-gatherers and no one claims that they are mediterranean. The main question was why has La Brana so much more mediterranean in some calculators (45% in K12b) than the two hunter-gatherers from Gotland (<15%)? There must be a reason for this difference.

    I'm just describing with words here again what the numbers of the calculators say, actually the numbers speak for themselves.

  14. #39
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-09
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,661
    Points
    15,281
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,281, Level: 37
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 369
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-S26
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Celtiberians
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    i
    finnish have been proven to be closet reltives to la bran hunter gather sapain hunter gather and to two hunter gathers from swedan 5,000ybp http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...13725450115847
    That plot is not from the original study, it's this one, where La Brana is close to CEU Utah-Americans than to Finns :


  15. #40
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    so what those utah americans are from either england or somewhere in teh uk germany or norway they are still north europeans and those where random people la bran eriod was by far mainly north european in austomnal dna he most likley got his austomnal dna med from incoming farmers it still defends my point that he did not have alot of med alot less than any modern europeans and that in mesloithic and paloithic europe north euro was probably the only austomnal group and med came longer but i still thin there is a chance med was there but most modern med was not

    and made a very string point earlier europeans are a ethnic group unlike mid easterns, south asians, and sub cahren aafricams europeans are all from one big family europeans where isolated and devloped unque traitss minly their own hair colors light skin in europeans and blue and green eyes orignalley caame frm teh mi8d east about 50,000ybo then became dominet in europeans ancestors when they migrted to europe or when they where in the mid east but ssince europeans are from one familyu that one family like 30,000 or more years ago would have had a unque austomnal group which is north euro all of europe would haave had north euro before neloithic

    mid easterns have no unque group they share their groups with many diffenrt people and they have inter married but europeans where isolated like native americans all none european mtdna, y dn haplogroups, and non north euro austomnal dna cme to europe in probably the last 10,00 years

  16. #41
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Again, there's still no definite proof that North European is the "only" European cluster, since both were maybe living side by side and we don't know it yet. On the other hand, I see a bunch of contradictions, but let's start:

    Quote Originally Posted by ElHorsto View Post
    It think you unwillingly deviated from the original question into some strawman argument. No one here denies that Saami/Fennobaltic North_european component is clearly dominant in La Brana and Gotland hunter-gatherers and no one claims that they are mediterranean. The main question was why has La Brana so much more mediterranean in some calculators (45% in K12b) than the two hunter-gatherers from Gotland (<15%)? There must be a reason for this difference.

    I'm just describing with words here again what the numbers of the calculators say, actually the numbers speak for themselves.
    ElHorsto got the point, if I were you I would take good note.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    so what those utah americans are from either england or somewhere in teh uk germany or norway they are still north europeans
    They carry A LOT of Mediterranean alleles, so the shift towards them is definetely telling us something. For instance, ¿do you know why Basques don't cluster people from the UK? it's not because they don't have as much "Atlantic-Baltic" in some calculators, but simply because they lack the West Asian admixture. Just for you to see...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    europeans are all from one big family europeans where isolated and devloped unque traitss minly their own hair colors light skin in europeans and blue and green eyes
    Europeans as whole are ALL quite homogenous, both Southern and Northern Europeans. And we are not dealing with traits, don't know why do you mention this now. Anyways, I'm afraid you would be surprised seeing how light Med people can be.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    mid easterns have no unque group they share their groups with many diffenrt people and they have inter married but europeans where isolated like native americans all none european mtdna, y dn haplogroups, and non north euro austomnal dna cme to europe in probably the last 10,00 years
    Don't know why do you talk about Middle Easterns, since it's pretty clear that if the Med component has something in common with them, it's because THEY carry the Med admixture diluted with something else (SW Asian), not the other way around as I already explained above.

    Concerning the allele sharing and isolation arguments, in short, both are plain false:

    - I posted figures showing that North European is indeed present deep in Asia at non trivial amounts (and according to you even in North Africa LOL), so the component looks widely shared in my book.

    - If there's an isolated component in West Eurasia, that is NOT North European, but Mediterranean. I think it's more or less the 4th time we're dealing with this. Check the Fst distances and the PCA plot, and you'll see that North European has more non-European affinities than the Med admixture. So it didn't remain unaltered as you think, no way.

  17. #42
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,048
    Points
    9,076
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,076, Level: 28
    Level completed: 55%, Points required for next Level: 274
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    so what those utah americans are from either england or somewhere in teh uk germany or norway they are still north europeans
    They are as much "north european" as CEU. That's why the La Brana sample clusters more with them and less with Saami and Finns. Even the authors of the La Brana paper claim La Brana to be similar to Britons. That's not because of north-europeanness, else La Brana would be closest to Finns and Saami. La Brana is obviously closer to contemporary average europeans than the Ajv52 and Ajv70 samples from Gotland are.

    la bran eriod was by far mainly north european in austomnal dna he most likley got his austomnal dna med from incoming farmers it still defends my point that he did not have alot of med alot less than any modern europeans and that in mesloithic and paloithic europe north euro was probably the only austomnal group and med came longer but i still thin there is a chance med was there but most modern med was not
    That's possible. And I agree that most farmers were autosomally mostly atlantic_med, but by this it is not clear yet where the origin of the Atlantic_med component was.
    Regarding paleolithic: I personally don't believe that european and near-eastern hunter-gatheres were completely isolated from each other all the time, because there is evidence of exchange between european and siberian hunter-gatherers (amerindian component, globe13). I see no reason why near-eastern hunter-gatherers should be an exception. Europe is adjacent to both, Asia and the Mediterranean.

  18. #43
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    Again, there's still no definite proof that North European is the "only" European cluster, since both were maybe living side by side and we don't know it yet. On the other hand, I see a bunch of contradictions, but let's start:


    ElHorsto got the point, if I were you I would take good note.
    i think there is tons of proof mesloithic hunter gather who lived with farmers in Spain was dominated by north euro more than almost all europeans same with hunter gather in swedan from 5,000ybp and farmer austomnal dna was dominated by med even one that lived near swedish hunter gather and at same time this means med almost defintley came with farming to europe at least most of it and the some med in la brana and Swedish hunter gathers came from farmer inter marrage and the fact sami and finnish have been shown to be extremly relted to them and that they have almost no med and their ancestors where seperated from the rest of europe in neloithic and wherehunter gathers till at earliest 4,000ybp they are like the last mesloithic europeans in austomnal dna but same with far eastern europeans like volga russians so i think all med is non european inter marraige all europeans trace most of their ancetry to onne group that created north euro


    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    They carry A LOT of Mediterranean alleles, so the shift towards them is definetely telling us something. For instance, ¿do you know why Basques don't cluster people from the UK? it's not because they don't have as much "Atlantic-Baltic" in some calculators, but simply because they lack the West Asian admixture. Just for you to see...
    in those calculators atlantic baltic includes some med like what u said before and basque have alot of neloithic anestry that is why they have 60% med in globe13 like early european farmers that is why they are differnt from british


    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    Europeans as whole are ALL quite homogenous, both Southern and Northern Europeans. And we are not dealing with traits, don't know why do you mention this now. Anyways, I'm afraid you would be surprised seeing how light Med people can be.
    we are dealing with traits all Europeans are dominated by genes that create pale skin all Caucasians except Indians also have these genes but they are more popular in european people ad most caucasins are brownish skinned while white is a small minority but with europeans white skin is the only skin color sone europeas including many members of my family have brownish skin but that is from noneuropean inter marriage and about 40% of western and eastern europeans have blue or green eyes blue ad green eyes orignated in the mid east about 50,000ybp but they became extremly popular in europeans blonde hair is very popular in europeas it exsits at aleast 30% in almost all of europe blonde hair originated in europe and is a european trait red hair is extremly rare and only found i western europe and parts of volga russia and in some indo europeans in asia but europeansare defintley connected by traits that is why they are know as white people and i dont think ever said med people are not pale they are darker than the rest of europe in hair and eye color but they are much paler than non europeans


    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    Don't know why do you talk about Middle Easterns, since it's pretty clear that if the Med component has something in common with them, it's because THEY carry the Med admixture diluted with something else (SW Asian), not the other way around as I already explained above.
    yes med is in the mid east at about 20-30% i globe13 austomnal dna but u cant say it is diluted by SW asian because that group originated i SW asia so if anything med dilutes SW asian and since europeans where orignalley one family withone austomnal group and native americans where two that means they are all one family but mid easterns and indians have many groups and many y dna and mtdna haplogroups they are a mix of many differnt families there is no such thing as the mid eastern race they are a results of mixing also it is hard to say where med orignated[/QUOTE]

    Concerning the allele sharing and isolation arguments, in short, both are plain false:

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - I posted figures showing that North European is indeed present deep in Asia at non trivial amounts (and according to you even in North Africa LOL), so the component looks widely shared in my book.
    yes north euro isin asia but it is mainly in areas know is history for european inter marraige in iraq, turkey, and syria the ancien indo european indo iranien cimmerians conquered most of that area 2,800-2,600ybphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimmerians remains of early indo irnians show they where mainly north euro in austomnal dna and about 70% light eyes ad 60% blonde with some red hair http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...-and-eye-color moder kurds are really cimmerians they have about 20% easter European I2a1b ad 20% indo European R1b M73, R1a1a1b2 and light hair and eyes pop up commonly and even red hair they also still speak a indo iranien language and have spread north euro in the mid east

    also indo Iranians also migrated acroos most of the mid east and south asia that is why most in india iran area speak a indo Iranian language they spread north europe in those areas also near caucus they inter married with ethnic groups in russia who in russia who have over 70% north euro in globe13 and greeks inter married with turks and in central asia there is a long history of europeans in central asia the sythiens and other indo iraniens dominated that area from 5,000-2,000ybp then where conquered by east asian and other non european people also we have remains of european mtdna u5 and east asian mtdna c in central asia from over 7,000ybp so u can defintley explain north euro in most of asia easily just like u can explain west asin in almost allof europe

    - If there's an isolated component in West Eurasia, that is NOT North European, but Mediterranean. I think it's more or less the 4th time we're dealing with this. Check the Fast distances and the PCA plot, and you'll see that North European has more non-European affinities than the Med admixture. So it didn't remain unaltered as you think, no way.[/QUOTE]

  19. #44
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Your ability to twist things really amazes me:

    - First, those tons of proofs don't exist. You can keep ignoring the fact La Braña shows quite a lot of Med, and that the individual was actually closer to CEU than any other population.

    - The calculators you mention basically hide Med because the Ks are low, but when Med appears it also shows up at very high levels among people from the UK (not only the Basques). So the main difference is their West Asian admixture, the lack of it is what mostly isolates Basques from standard Europeans. It is safe to say that if they wouldn't cluster perfectly, they would do it extremely close. So the argument works.

    This random West Eurasian map shows they are not that distant, and we see some Kent samples pulling towards Basques: http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/5977/weunov011.png

    Sardinians on the other hand are more distant because their North European is much lower in that case, but Basques still have enough to be close.

    - We don't know which hair colour was present first in Europe. Your blond hair theory is just that, a theory, not to mention your idea concerning eye colour. Still no data my friend, and I don't see any particular reason to not find dark hair or eyes during the Paleolithic. Maybe you possess information labeled top secret lol.

    - The SW Asian component, as I explained three times, is a blend of MED + something else. The program reads the alleles as Med or SW depending on the samples used and the distances employed. On the other hand, Med is the most remote component, so it does not come from the SW Asian one, rather the opposite.

    - Search the populations I posted having North European outside of Europe, because some of them are no way geographically close to Turks and the others you mention.

  20. #45
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    Your ability to twist things really amazes me:

    - First, those tons of proofs don't exist. You can keep ignoring the fact La Braña shows quite a lot of Med, and that the individual was actually closer to CEU than any other population.
    i am not ignoring that fact what i am saying is he is extremly related to finnish and sami who have almost no med and their ancestors where isolated from the neloithic age and are the last true Mesolithic europeans in austomnal dna also i am not ignoring that there where already farmers all over spain and france and germany 7,000ybp who where full of med in austomnal dna we have 3 y dna g2a samples in spain from 7,000ybp just like otzie who had 55% globe13 med so that is almost defintley where he got his med all europeans technicalley should be from hunter gathers but we have alot of med so our ancestors inter married with farmers like otzie so did a brana it had to happen at somepoint basque and iberians are a results of l brana and otzie people breding together why dont basque have tons of north european because their ancestors inter married with farmers and la brana still had very little med compared to most europeans even in the test where he had 45% the only europeans in that test with that little atlantcic med are fr northern europeans like norwiegan and british so he alines with far northern europeans in all tests the same thing happened with the some med in the two hunte rgathers in swedan from 5,000ybp they lived right next to a farmer in that area who had 64% mmed u know they are going to inter marry at somepoint so that is another easy explination and the fact that finnish only have 9.8% med while most of europe has over 30% and that their ancestors where pretty much isolted from teh Neolithic age but not completely it is obvious just about all med austomnal dna in europe is from neloithic it is so obvisous to me there is a very small chance any existed in europe before Neolithic and the fact europeans have unque traits and all europeans come from one big family that family was unque and would have had one austomnal group which is north euro i have very good evidence north euro was orignalley the only European austomnal group and from what i have heard all experts agree

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - The calculators you mention basically hide Med because the Ks are low, but when Med appears it also shows up at very high levels among people from the UK (not only the Basques). So the main difference is their West Asian admixture, the lack of it is what mostly isolates Basques from standard Europeans. It is safe to say that if they wouldn't cluster perfectly, they would do it extremely close. So the argument works.
    the fact is that basque have about highest med in europe okay maybe ur right more med would show if the hide the k's even though i dont know what that is then the k's are hiding med that is in basque to either ay basque have tons of med like those early farmers and not like british and the fact the basuqe have less than 20% blonde hair while british have over 35% at least and british have 10-15% red hair while basque only have 1-3% and it came from gaulic inter marraige all that shows basque are a diffenrt people from british their only similarity is their european the R1b thing means nothing basque also get R1b from gauls

    med was almost defintley not in pre Neolithic europe orignalley at some point all europeans had north euro or the ancestral type of north euro u keep trying to say med is more popular in Europe tody than tests show and that it was in Mesolithic and Paleolithic europe when there really is not alot of evidence and i think austomnal tests dont tell exact percentages and are complicated it seems u know more about how it works than me but i know those percentages are off because according to them europeans are less than 50% european we all know this is not true

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    This random West Eurasian map shows they are not that distant, and we see some Kent samples pulling towards Basques: http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/5977/weunov011.png

    Sardinians on the other hand are more distant because their North European is much lower in that case, but Basques still have enough to be close.
    i dont really trust that basque are close to british they have very differnt hair color percentages and basque do have alot more med than British the hair color eye color differnce convinces me they are two diffenrt groups because if they where so close they would have sme hair and eye color percentages british are mainly from R1b indo europeans they probably are mainly decended of indo europeans who came from around the are of russia and ukriane and migrted to western europe about 5,000ybp basque are probably mainly decended of farmers like otzie who are a mix of probably mainly la barna people but also alot of incoming farmers from somewhere that is not europe but they also had white skin like europens because we can see otzie skin color in his dna so i dont know they had some european blood to it is so confusing where they came from

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - We don't know which hair colour was present first in Europe. Your blond hair theory is just that, a theory, not to mention your idea concerning eye colour. Still no data my friend, and I don't see any particular reason to not find dark hair or eyes during the Paleolithic. Maybe you possess information labeled top secret lol.
    blonde hair is totally european it only exsits in european people at average it is about 30-40% in europe it would hve been higher 6,000-10,000ybp because greeks who are in teh same family as polish and ukraines would have had mainly y dna i2a1b and theyw ould not have 24% west asian and 18% swouthwest asian in globe13 they would also have about 30-40% blonde hair yugoslvaiens who have 40% i1a1b still have 15% west asian and over 10% southwest asian in austomnal dna but most prts have pver 20% blonde hair orignalley they would have had 30-40% scandnaviens and baltic people their main non Indo European, uralic y dna is i1 and they hve over 60% blonde hair blonde hair is very european and was probably been there since paloithic defintley over 20,000ybp there is some blonde hair in urdish people in mid east because tehy partly decend from european indo iranien speaking cimmerians and some other indo iranien speakers like kalsah in asia have blonde hair from what we know only europeans have blonde hair it is totalley a european trit same with red hair and blue eyes which are almost as popular as brown eyes in europe and would have been more popular 10,000ybp than today most likly orignated in teh mid east with the common ancestor family of Europeans, north Africans, west Asians, and iraniens and pakistania about 60,000ybp http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot...ogeny-and.html
    because mid easterns and pakistni people have the blue eye genes but they have the ancestral type at a higher percentage than any Europeans an mid eastern groups that have inter married with Europeans like kalash people have they have more of the non ancestral alle like Europeans so it is constant this means mid easterns who actulley have lot of the blue eye genes could not have gotten it from European inter marriage because they have different alle percentages also it has been proven all the genes identified to create pale skin in Europeans exist at almost the same rate in the mid east, north Africa, and pakistan area http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...48572450,d.dmg
    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - The SW Asian component, as I explained three times, is a blend of MED + something else. The program reads the alleles as Med or SW depending on the samples used and the distances employed. On the other hand, Med is the most remote component, so it does not come from the SW Asian one, rather the opposite.
    i never said med came from SW asian and since med and SW asian are most related to each other and that from what u say SW asian is mix of med and something else then that probably meansmed orignated in southwest asian and north african people in globe13 and other tests have almost no west asian they are almost all southwest asian and med i think this also shows north africans are most relted to arabs, jews, all sw asians and they would have migrated there 30,000-50,000ybp and southwest asia is the place to look for the origin of the med austomnal dna

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - Search the populations I posted having North European outside of Europe, because some of them are no way geographically close to Turks and the others you mention.
    i dont know about that since north euro is so centered in europe and from what i know only exists in areas with known european contact and seems to have been the only group in europe before neloithic makes me think and ll the experts there is no doubt north euro originated in europe and any one who is not European and has it got it from european inter marraige i would like to see these populations u are talking about and where did u post it and not everything is recorded mainly in anceint history so there may have been europen inter marraige in places like 10,000ybp but from what i know north euro that is not in europe only exsist in mid east, north africa, south asia, and central asia and some areas of china because tocherians and other indo iraniens who came there like sythiens from 4,500-1,500ybp there are still some white people that pop up in china

  21. #46
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    My last post, some things become really boring after many clarifications.

    - Of course you ignore the facts, I'll show you again and maybe (I highly doubt it) you realise what I'm saying: La Braña, for the third or fourth time, is NOT extremely related to Finns, but to CEU or Northwestern Europeans, who carry A LOT of Med alleles. Deal with it. La Braña is a valuable piece of evidence that Southern Europe and Northern Europe could have been substantially different during the Mesolithic or even the Paleolithic. My point since the begining was that maybe Med was more restricted, and the finding (the only one from Southern Europe, don't forget) supports the point. If this one shows quite a lot of Med, ¿how do you know others would not be the same or even more? You simply don't know it, but you still keep saying it's obvious when you're not even able to see how obvious is that MtDNA H was responsible of the Med admixture in North Africa. The more one analyses the available data, the clearer it is.

    - Then you continue twisting things basing your argument on pigmentation observations, completely ignoring that, first of all, pigmentation SNPs represent a very small fraction of our full genome heritage. No one talked about who is lighter or darker, the issue were genetic similarities (overall), and I basically said the main difference between the UK and the Basques is the West Asian component. Imagine what would happen in the map I posted if we remove the West Asian element from the Kent samples: they would be placed down very close to the Basques.

    - We lack ancient pigmentation data, so you can speculate what's "most European" all night and day if you feel like. Nothing will change, at the moment there's no particular reason to assume dark traits are not enough old in Europe to be considered native as well. However, it's true that blond hair and blue eyes are found mostly in Europe, the question is when those traits became significant.

    - You didn't understand anything regarding Med and SW asian: I said Med people mated in the Near East with someone else creating the SW Asian element. By no means this points that the Med admixture originated there, but only expanded. If Med was better preserved in Southern Europe than elsewhere, that is what really speaks for itself if you want to look for its origins. That simple.

    - North Euro is so centered according to you. The numbers say it's quite present in Asia as well, and I don't think all North European there is the result of relatively recent conquests. Don't forget North European is Asian shifted compared to the Med admixture (did you check the Fst distances? ¬¬) so that is showing us some kind of connection, likely Siberian or Amerindian-like as some experiments already showed.
    Last edited by Knovas; 01-07-13 at 22:35.

  22. #47
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,048
    Points
    9,076
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,076, Level: 28
    Level completed: 55%, Points required for next Level: 274
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    I basically said the main difference between the UK and the Basques is the West Asian component. Imagine what would happen in the map I posted if we remove the West Asian element from the Kent samples: they would be placed down very close to the Basques.
    The West Asian admixture in Britain still seems very low to me. The main difference between Britons and Basques is actually the Med/North ratio, which can be seen also in your map where the UK is half-way distant between Finns and Basque - part Northern part Mediterranean. West-asian admixture would cause a shift more to the right towards the Caucasus peoples. Not?
    Else I agree.

  23. #48
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Knovas's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-05-11
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,444
    Points
    9,065
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,065, Level: 28
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 285
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Well, I don't pretend to be right about everything I say. Maybe my point is more an impression than a fact, and it's quite uncertain how the Kent samples would behave without West Asian. I tend to think they would be placed closer to Basques than the French or even some Iberians do, but maybe I'm wrong. Anyways, it made no sense to mention traits.
    Last edited by Knovas; 01-07-13 at 22:28.

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Overdrive1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Fire Haired's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-13
    Posts
    689
    Points
    4,121
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,121, Level: 18
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 129
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Df27(Spain)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2(Prussia)

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic, Latino(~6%)
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - Of course you ignore the facts, I'll show you again and maybe (I highly doubt it) you realise what I'm saying: La Braña, for the third or fourth time, is NOT extremely related to Finns, but to CEU or Northwestern Europeans, who carry A LOT of Med alleles. Deal with it. La Braña is a valuable piece of evidence that Southern Europe and Northern Europe could have been substantially different during the Mesolithic or even the Paleolithic. My point since the begining was that maybe Med was more restricted, and the finding (the only one from Southern Europe, don't forget) supports the point. If this one shows quite a lot of Med, ¿how do you know others would not be the same or even more? You simply don't know it, but you still keep saying it's obvious when you're not even able to see how obvious is that MtDNA H was responsible of the Med admixture in North Africa. The more one analyses the available data, the clearer it is.
    yes la brana had 24% med well most of europe today has at leatst 30% ma rana has lower med than almost all europeans he probably got his med from farmer inte rmarraige he is kind off evidence there may have been med in mesloithic and paloithic but not really obvisouly he had way less than modern iberians and less than modern europeans period this means that med in modern europeans comes from those farmers who had 59% and 64% and since la brana lived near these farmers he most likley got the med from inter marraige and at somepoint hunter gather farmer inte rmarraige happened and i dont see teh connection with med and mtdna h lets just say some how la brana did not get his med fro farmers and his people where th H1 and H3 that spread to north africa he only had 24% he would need like 80% to give so much to north africans he had mainly north euro north africans have more than 4 times more med than north euro so i dont think it is possible they got that med from another source and if they had so much european blood they would be white u do see some ones with red hair and other strictley european features and those ones live in the atlas mountains and have the highest amount of H1, H3, V, and U5b1 in north africa but who knows if they got it from that migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - Then you continue twisting things basing your argument on pigmentation observations, completely ignoring that, first of all, pigmentation SNPs represent a very small fraction of our full genome heritage. No one talked about who is lighter or darker, the issue were genetic similarities (overall), and I basically said the main difference between the UK and the Basques is the West Asian component. Imagine what would happen in the map I posted if we remove the West Asian element from the Kent samples: they would be placed down very close to the Basques.
    pigmentation is very important it is one of the best ways to identfy differnt ethnic groups and it is true basque have majority brown eyes british have majority light eyes basque have vast majority brown hair british have vast majority light hair basque have at most 1-3% red hair but it is from Gauls and british have 10-15% that is very important it shows they are two differnt people groups sure pigmentation is is small in our genome but there is a reason why europeans are white it is in their dna it is a huge part of genetics the pigmentation of a people group is in their dna if british and basque where so related they wpuld have teh same pigmentation which they dont and it is not just teh west asian compont that makes them differnt it seems u ignore the extremly high amount of meditreaen in basque people
    british glob13 are 58.2% north euro, 34.8% med, and 6% west asian
    french globe13 basque are 39% north euro, 59.5% med, 0.2% west asian
    in my opionon it is the med that is teh biggest differncve for sure the west asian is important but the biggest is for sure the med basque have the highest tied with sardine in all of teh world they have just as much as those farmers otzie and the one in swedan they defintley did not get this from la brana they got the north euro from his people

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - We lack ancient pigmentation data, so you can speculate what's "most European" all night and day if you feel like. Nothing will change, at the moment there's no particular reason to assume dark traits are not enough old in Europe to be considered native as well. However, it's true that blond hair and blue eyes are found mostly in Europe, the question is when those traits became significant.
    we so far have pigmentation from peopel who where apart of some of teh earliest indo european cultures bout 6,000 years ago in teh north pontic steppe(central Russia) they said they havd teh same phenotype as modern europeans whatever that means and they had the same pale pigmentation genes as modern europeans and they had by far mainly brown eyes just like the people in that area today and this could mean that p[eople in that area today come from some of the earliest indo europeans so pigmentation is important and that they where definable a European population not a surprise since they lived in europe
    we also have pigmentation from adronovo culture in south siberia from 3,800ybp they where also indo europeans they where Indo Iraniens they spread the language in asia they also had the same pale skin genes as modern europeans and had mainly blonde hair and light eyes we also have a ton of pigmentation genes from later Indo Iraniens in russia and central Asia over all about 60% had blonde hair and 70% had light eyes these high amounts are only found in modern scandviens which tells something about indo iranien ancestry maybe they have a northwest russian ancestry since people in that area also have that high amount of light hair and eyes and later ones in tagar russia from 3,400-3,00ybp have been proven to be very unrelated to the brown eyed people who where apart of teh ancestral culture and teh fact the 6,000 year old ones had brown eyes and the 3,800 year old ones had blue eyes i would have guessed they where diffenrt people groups anyways that shows again how pigmentation is important i got all this onfo athttp://dienekes.blogspot.no/2013/06/...-hints-of.html, and http://www.buildinghistory.org/dista...cientdna.shtml i almost forgit otzie teh oceman 5,300 year old meditreaen farmer in alps italy also had the white skin genes modern europeans do so we actulley have alot of pigmentation from anceint remains and there are many new dna projects that claim they will have pigmentation not just for skin color but also hair and eye color from mesloithic europeans like from 7,000ybp ain scandvai and from 100-150 scandviens and central europeans in early bronze age from 4,000-5,000ybp in the next 5 years we will know how pale cro magnon man was 30,000ybp

    i think it is common sense that europeans are white skinned and that is apart of who they are and it is the european pigmentation i me u would have to be crazy to think that is not true i have no idea what evidence u have probably none and those few people in far southern europe like greece who have tannish skin that is from mid eastern and north African inter marraige the white skin genes that dominte europeans also exsist in mid easterns and north africans but are not as popular but eurpopeans ancestors at somepoint probably at least 25,000ybp became dominated by those genes also peopel in the caucus mountains like geogians even though we assume they are eastern europeans according to austomnal dna they have almost no european blood they have the highest amount of west asian in all austomnal test west asian is the closet realtives to north european which really represents all europeans this could mean the common ancestors of north european and west asian had white skin i noticed that west asian is centered in caucus mountains, turkey, northern iraq, and western iran these are the areas where amny experts belive european Y DNA I originated and these areas have just about as pale skin as europeans i dont know but i think there is a connection and since in the graph they made for globe13 north european and west asian where tuching each pother almost as if theyw here teh same group they where closer than any other austomnal group this makes me think they split very early and since europe would have been dominated by y dna I from at least 20,000-10,000ybp and west asians where dominated by i brother J and both trace to a common ancestor around the Caucus Iran area about 40,000ybp europeans split from these people not that long ago and that Europeans are from a late migration that came just 30,000ybp from the caucus mountains i dont know that is just a guess i am not even going to argue about the pigmentation thing we europeans are white fact u cant argue that

    Quote Originally Posted by Knovas View Post
    - You didn't understand anything regarding Med and SW asian: I said Med people mated in the Near East with someone else creating the SW Asian element. By no means this points that the Med admixture originated there, but only expanded. If Med was better preserved in Southern Europe than elsewhere, that is what really speaks for itself if you want to look for its origins. That simple.
    i defntley dont think it started in southern europe because of la brana he had only 24% in globe13 scandviens have 28% he has less than almost all modern europeans but teh incoming invading farmers who conquered europe had 59% and 64% i mean come on it is obvious it was the farmers with Y DNA G2a and who probably came from antolia who brought med the native european hunter gathers where full of north euro and i know u keep arguing well la brana still had some med but he deifntley got that from inter marraige with farmers we have G2a farmer samlples in spain from 7,000ybp they already dominted spain when la brana was around modern europeans are a results of farmer hunter gather inter marriage so at some point it happened and la brana was at the early stage so that is a very good explination for why he had some med but it is still very little and the fact that all europeans come from ne big familt one biog family cant have two austomnal dna groups and there is defintley no way med orignated in southern europe one bug family creates one austomnal group at somepoint all austomnal groups where created by one family whp had 100% of that group and the one group for europeans is north euro and why do u think med is more popular in soutrh europe it is non european inter marraige why would it be in south europe but north europeans who come from the same family only have north european

    - North Euro is so centered according to you. The numbers say it's quite present in Asia as well, and I don't think all North European there is the result of relatively recent conquests. Don't forget North European is Asian shifted compared to the Med admixture (did you check the Fst distances? ¬¬) so that is showing us some kind of connection, likely Siberian or Amerindian-like as some experiments already showed.[/QUOTE]
    north euro originated in europe at teh most it reachs 5-10% in asia that is nothing u cant just say it is quite present in asia u need to put numbers words can give many differnt ideas it is not that popular out of europe and u can explian it through european inter marraige ost of it is in history but other parts could have been in pre history but all of it is defintley european inter marraige now u are trying to say north euro is not European but med is i dont understand that it is the other way around and from what i know all experts agree and when u say north euro is asian shifted do u mean west asian and i dont understand what you mean by the siberian connection are u saying there is a mix of siberian in north euro and that austomnal groups are really just mixes of a bunch of groups

  25. #50
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    14-10-11
    Posts
    1,048
    Points
    9,076
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,076, Level: 28
    Level completed: 55%, Points required for next Level: 274
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Yes
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Yes

    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired View Post
    yes la brana had 24% med well most of europe today has at leatst 30% ma rana has lower med than almost all europeans
    One tiny remark only:

    Almost all europeans is a bit exaggerated since there are today many european peoples with less Mediterranean than La Brana (24%):

    - Finns: 10%
    - Mordovians: 13%
    - Balts: ca. 13%
    - Slavs (non-Balkan): ca. 17%

    It is about half of Europe (ca. 150-200 million people).

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •