The Mediterranean route into Europe (Paschou et al. 2014)

All debunked non scientific stuff from deluded nordicists like Arthur Kemp. Whereas your Iberian masters were very active in the African slave trade with their North African/Arab friends, with all the obvious mixing, my mulatto friend.

Do you actually know that they have found a copper age Iberian farmer who was genetically very similar to modern mainland Italians? I guess he was one of those milions of slaves who invaded Italy.

"Debunked" only in your dreams, my delusional friend, plus on top of that none of them were "Nordicists", and one of the scholars (Mommsen) that Kemp quotes even won a Nobel Prize for his work on Roman history, a work which is still consulted by modern scholars on the subject. Arthur Kemp, the only one of the people who you have in mind who in fact is a Nordicist, had it very easy when he consulted those actual historians of Rome seeking to back up his beliefs, he did not need to look around too much for what he wanted to find since the historians who point out those things are very common and easy to find. On the other hand, he hardly found anything regarding his silly claims about medieval Iberia backed up by any specialists in the history of the area since most of them do not say what he wanted to hear when it comes to demographics.

Regarding the African slave trade: practically all of Western Europe -including Italy- was involved in it, so moot point.
 
"Debunked" only in your dreams, my delusional friend, plus on top of that none of them were "Nordicists", and one of the scholars (Mommsen) that Kemp quotes even won a Nobel Prize for his work on Roman history, a work which is still consulted by modern scholars on the subject. Arthur Kemp, the only one of the people who you have in mind who in fact is a Nordicist, had it very easy when he consulted those actual historians of Rome seeking to back up his beliefs, he did not need to look around too much for what he wanted to find since the historians who point out those things are very common and easy to find. On the other hand, he hardly found anything regarding his silly claims about medieval Iberia backed up by any specialists in the history of the area since most of them do not say what he wanted to hear when it comes to demographics.

Yeah debunked nonsense from the XIX century. Written by a German. LOL. Even Obama won a Nobel Prize, go figure.

Still you have not answered how is it possible that a copper age Iberian farmer was so similar to modern mainland Italians. Was he one of those milions of slaves?

Regarding the African slave trade: practically all of Western Europe -including Italy- was involved in it, so moot point.

Iberia was the center of the Atlantic slave trade for centuries. Only an American mulatto could deny that.
 
Still you have not answered how is it possible that a copper age Iberian farmer was so similar to modern mainland Italians. Was he one of those milions of slaves?
There you are the explanation for this "similarity", although I know it is useless to make you understand: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2014/05/pca-projection-bias-in-ancient-dna.html

To summarize, what the original study you're referring to was pointing out, was simply a Southern European-like similarity, which could also be Sardinian or Basque. Don't forget they did not even include any modern Iberian samples, but still doesn't matter for those who really understand the implications derived from the employed methodology of the PCA plot you're using as clear proof of your agenda. So I immediately exclude you from this group, it just will be helpful for other forumers.

Quoting the paper, this is what the author states when it comes to similarities (no misinterpretations): The Neolithic Iberian individual was genetically similar to Scandinavian Neolithic farmers

Balanced and objective as expected from an academic abstract: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?searchId=1&pid=diva2:667495
 
There you are the explanation for this "similarity", although I know it is useless to make you understand: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2014/05/pca-projection-bias-in-ancient-dna.html

To summarize, what the original study you're referring to was pointing out, was simply a Southern European-like similarity, which could also be Sardinian or Basque. Don't forget they did not even include any modern Iberian samples, but still doesn't matter for those who really understand the implications derived from the employed methodology of the PCA plot you're using as clear proof of your agenda. So I immediately exclude you from this group, it just will be helpful for other forumers.

LOL a genome blogger. Do not make me laugh.

I don't see how the lack of modern Iberian samples is important.

Quoting the paper, this is what the author states when it comes to similarities (no misinterpretations): The Neolithic Iberian individual was genetically similar to Scandinavian Neolithic farmers

Balanced and objective as expected from an academic abstract: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?searchId=1&pid=diva2:667495

He was closer to Scandinavian farmers than to Mesolitich hunther gatherers. Of course Tuscans are genetically closer to Sardinians than to North Eastern Europeans. From the paper.

There are major genetic similarities between the Scandinavian farmer, the Iberianfarmer, and Ötzi, who all cluster with contemporary southern Europeans (see Figure
13B).

Similarly, the Scandinavian Neolithic hunter-gatherers and Mesolithic Iberian
all have genetic affinities towards contemporary Northern Europeans. The farmers
can be considered to form a “farmer” cluster separated from the “hunter-gatherer”
cluster, e.g. the gene-pool of hunter-gatherers. The fact that the Iberian farmer
clusters closely with contemporary southern Europeans in contrast to Iberian
Mesolithic individuals suggest an early colonization of Iberia and (at least one) later
distinct migration event.
 
Yeah debunked nonsense from the XIX century. Written by a German. LOL. Even Obama won a Nobel Prize, go figure.

Nah, wishful thinking on your part. Plus it also includes a whole bunch of scholars on the same subject from the 20th and 21st century who reached very similar conclusions as the 19th century ones, based on all the historical evidence at their disposal.

Obama won a Nobel on something completely different. Mommsen is the only man to ever have won a Nobel for a work on history. Comparing apples with oranges.


Still you have not answered how is it possible that a copper age Iberian farmer was so similar to modern mainland Italians. Was he one of those milions of slaves?

Possibly because it is pretty irrelevant to the subject, plus Knovas is clarifying that for you.

Iberia was the center of the Atlantic slave trade for centuries. Only an American mulatto could deny that.

No, not "Iberia", mostly Portugal was, but then Holland and England jumped in as well and got deeply involved in the same trade to compete with the Portuguese. Plus Italy was another client of these slave trading nations, just like Spain was. Only a paranoid Italian with an agenda would deny this.
 
Possibly because it is pretty irrelevant to the subject, plus Knovas is clarifying that for you.
What a waste of time. Reading comprehension below zero (added to other evident problems).
 
Gentlemen, here is an official warning to all. Derogatory statements towards other Eupedia members, or referring to mulatos, blacks or slaves as a lesser human being, or suggestion of shameful relation to both, will be treated with demerit points and eventually with a banhammer.
 
LOL a genome blogger. Do not make me laugh.

I don't see how the lack of modern Iberian samples is important.



He was closer to Scandinavian farmers than to Mesolitich hunther gatherers. Of course Tuscans are genetically closer to Sardinians than to North Eastern Europeans. From the paper.

is this person you refer to the 4000bc old neolithic farmer in basque area who has nearly the same markers as an etruscan
Neolithic farmers from the site of El Portalón
a Chalcolithic Iberian farmer from Atapuerca
 
Gentlemen, here is an official warning to all. Derogatory statements towards other Eupedia members, or referring to mulatos, blacks or slaves as a lesser human being, or suggestion of shameful relation to both, will be treated with demerit points and eventually with a banhammer.

the term Mulatto is not Derogatory, its the general term for a child of a mixed marriage of a white and black person, you find this term in every registry and census................it would only be derogatory if it was used in reference for a child of a marriage of a white and yellow mix.
children of anglo-indian marriages are neither referred to as a mulatto....but simply angloindian
 
the term Mulatto is not Derogatory, its the general term for a child of a mixed marriage of a white and black person, you find this term in every registry and census................it would only be derogatory if it was used in reference for a child of a marriage of a white and yellow mix.
children of anglo-indian marriages are neither referred to as a mulatto....but simply angloindian
Read again relevant posts.
 
nothing just another mistake of me
 
the term Mulatto is not Derogatory, its the general term for a child of a mixed marriage of a white and black person, you find this term in every registry and census................it would only be derogatory if it was used in reference for a child of a marriage of a white and yellow mix.
children of anglo-indian marriages are neither referred to as a mulatto....but simply angloindian

The term itself is not offensive, but the way characters like "Joey" use it is with obvious offensive intention.
 

This thread has been viewed 66415 times.

Back
Top