Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
....I tend to disagree with the way they attribute the origin of subclades because they only look at the places where subclades are found today and not at their potential migration patterns. For example, on their phylogenetic tree of haplogroup K they claim that K1b and K1b1 are of European origin but that K1b1c is Near Eastern. How could that have happened ? That's nonsense since haplogroup K was never found in Europe before the Neolithic and is undeniably of Near Eastern origin, a fact that they visibly are not ready to recognise since they place K and K1 in the category "undetermined origin".
They grant K2 an outright European origin simply because they estimate it to be 18,700 years old in Europe as opposed to 17,600 years old in the Near East. That is preposterous for two reasons: 1) age estimates for mtDNA are very unreliable, 2) comparison of age estimate by region should take into account historical population sizes. That's with this kind of method that other "professional" population geneticists estimated that R1a must have originated in India because it had a greater diversity there, before phylogeny proved that that wasn't the case....
What study shows a big discrepancy between the mtDna frequencies of western European versus Eastern European Jews?
You are correct - that logic is dubious. A similar thing is happening with regards to the debate over my own yDNA haplotype, R1b-M222. It is undeniable that this type is now strongly associated with Celts of the British Isles and especially those from Northern Ireland, but there has been some debate over whether it first mutated there or was brought there via a movement from the continental Celtic population and later flourished in Ireland due to founder effects, family dynasties, and polygamy.
"(...) In this regard, it is worth mentioning that economic historians have noticed that Jewish economic activity has tended not to be characterized by technological innovation related to mechanical abilities tapped by tests of visuo-spatial abilities (i.e., Performance IQ). Thus, Mosse (1987, 166) suggests that the distinguishing features of Jewish economic activity in 19th-century Germany are to be found "less in outright innovation or invention than in a special aptitude for economic 'mediation' in the forms of the export of German goods, of 'secondary innovation', technology transfer through the introduction into Germany of processes and methods observed abroad, and new techniques for the stimulation of demand."
Modern Israel has two "host populations" - its Non-Jewish people (Palestinian Arabs etc.) and its American supporters.
No group has had greater achievements in the natural sciences and mathematics of the late 19th and the 20th century than European Jews - and that's before normalizing for population size. Those fields don't strike me as very heavy on verbal reasoning. Obviously they were confined to economic niches in the 19th century because Jews were widely discriminated against and they tended not to own land.
He never stops. If it's not the racist Lynn, it's Polish historians from the 19th century downplaying Ashkenazi achievements. It's best to just ignore.
Those 'host population' formulations are genuinely sinister.
If it's not the racist Lynn
because of there features and many years living in Europe
I really hope he gets some perspective though. Those 'host population' formulations are genuinely sinister. He's reading propaganda of the worst kind.
This thread has been viewed 73410 times.