Fire-Haired:You're saying no one should use Ks?
I said no such thing. You know better than that, Fire-Haired. I meant, as I'm sure you understand, that depending on the nature of each run, you get clarity with X number of "K", and you can tell the optimum "K" level by a statistical analysis of the data.
Pre-Yamna, Yamna, etc. all the components in this test are simply components just like "West-Med" in K15. Davidski gave them those names because they best represent Yamna, pre-Yamna, etc. ancestry. When he added ancient genomes in his database they created components modern ones couldn't, because they better represent the ancestors of modern people than other modern people.
No one is(or at least should) taking this as a competition to see who's the most Yamna-descended. That was never the point. Yamna-like people passed on a lot of genes so when researching modern origins they're very much in subject.
No, they don't best represent these components, because the data is internally inconsistent.
As to your latter statement, I will pay you the compliment of believing you are just still naive, and have also not been reading blog posts by the "usual suspects" for the last ten years. Everything wasn't always so PC, you know. It's true that many of those blogs either crashed or have been deliberately "cleansed", but a lot of people took an awful lot of screenshots. Someday they'll surface and the ****will hit the fan, and it won't just be about wanting certain populations to have a large Yamnaya Indo-European component. When that happens, academics and professional people with a reputation to lose are going to pay a price for their associations if they can be linked to some of these anonymous "internet names".
Greying Wanderer: Seems to me there is obviously a flaw in the three way model: EEF, WHG, ANE.
1) There's at least two sets of farmers, a more maritime Levant set and another more overland set and the "near eastern" component may be a composite of the two rather than a single component.
There is indeed something wrong with the EEF, WHG, ANE model, which is why it's clear the Reich Lab has quietly dropped it. The Mal'ta sample is either too old, or too poor quality, or just not very informative. It's clear, for example, the EHG can't really be modeled as an actual mixture of WHG and ANE according to formal stats.
As to point number one, all of the EEF are very homogenous, which is another clue that this K6 is not correct or helpful. That's clear from every academic paper that has dealt with the subject. Theirs was a maritime expansion originating somewhere around northern Syria/southeast Anatolia some of whose people followed the littoral of the northern Mediterranean, and some of whom went inland after reaching Greece. That information is nicely backed up by the findings of Paschou et al.
The "Near Eastern" component, in so far as I can tell from the data so far is probably vast majority the same element, which probably traveled north from the center of gravity to the Caucasus, Iran, Central Asia and India. I've posted numerous maps of the movement of the Neolithic to those areas. In addition, there's some sort of older "Central Asian/Sindh" element, for lack of a better description, which is a minority component.
Perhaps a pre-emptive strike?