Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

^^Another aspect of the graphic that doesn't make sense is the fact that is shows that Anatolian_BA is closer to Northern Italian, than South Italian. Which is completely backwards, according to Raveane et al 2018.
 
Okay so now either or. Either this proves there is genetic continuity between Greeks and Myceneans and Minoans. Or it is just an overlap of Anatolian_N and CHG. Can not really have it both ways.



The "Greek" sample in Dodecad doesn't account for all Greeks. The sample set is limited, and doesn't represent all modern populations. There are in fact Greeks that are closer to Minoans than these Jews:


C: These calculators are not estimating IBD. This is just measuring how far the algorithm places them on the PCA plot. Which is why it requires mental gymnastics to understand that it doesn't make sense.

Minoans are however ancestral to some modern populations, for example Modern Greeks.


Knowing the Y DNA of my Maternal Grandfather was found in Heraklion Crete 4.9-3.9 kya, I have my own opinions. But lets be honest here. Some things are mutually exclusive.

I would go on a rant that it is hard to just find pure bred (100%) Anatolian_N and CHG and just somehow go through the generational permutations to create a false positive, false positives mind you for populations that are historically known to have had population movements as well as trade connections. That's a rabbit hole I am not willing to go down on.



There are also issues with that graphic too, notice the south Italian sample is blue, yet we know there is a relatively high affinity compared to the others that are redder.

^^Another aspect of the graphic that doesn't make sense is the fact that is shows that Anatolian_BA is closer to Northern Italian, than South Italian. Which is completely backwards, according to Raveane et al 2018.



Alas. there are three populations in South Italy, two around Palermo, one gulf of Taranto. Two of them have more affinity with these ancient populations than North Italians.

Nevertheless, I am not here to defend these guys
pntqtMr.png

I am sure peer reviewers did that.
 
Okay so now either or. Either this proves there is genetic continuity between Greeks and Myceneans and Minoans. Or it is just an overlap of Anatolian_N and CHG. Can not really have it both ways.








Knowing the Y DNA of my Maternal Grandfather was found in Heraklion Crete 4.9-3.9 kya, I have my own opinions. But lets be honest here. Some things are mutually exclusive.

I would go on a rant that it is hard to just find pure bred (100%) Anatolian_N and CHG and just somehow go through the generational permutations to create a false positive, false positives mind you for populations that are historically known to have had population movements as well as trade connections. That's a rabbit hole I am not willing to go down on.









Alas. there are three populations in South Italy, two around Palermo, one gulf of Taranto. Two of them have more affinity with these ancient populations than North Italians.

Nevertheless, I am not here to defend these guys
pntqtMr.png

I am sure peer reviewers did that.

WTF are you even talking about? I have it both ways? I just told you there was problems with the graphic. North Italians are not closer to Anatolian_BA than South Italians. Nor are they closer to Myceneans, and Minoans than south Italians. I AM NOT THE ONE USING THIS GRAPHIC TO PROVE ANYTHING!
 
WTF are you even talking about? I have it both ways? I just told you there was problems with the graphic. North Italians are not closer to Anatolian_BA than South Italians. Nor are they closer to Myceneans, and Minoans than south Italians. I AM NOT THE ONE USING THIS GRAPHIC TO PROVE ANYTHING!

Listen to the lecture video part with Lazaridis, he explains the issue with that graphic. FST is affected by genetic drift.

 
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? That is what I have been saying.

Also check your attitude, because you are one step away from being thrown out of here. This is your final warning.

and my point was that the numbers from Dodecad can make sense and that the simple fact that jewish people have a different autosomal composition doesn't negate this, because every modern population has a different autosomal composition too. if there is Natufian or not doesn't matter if you don't also look at the exotic admixtures in the other populations.

i mentioned the Fst graphics to support your point not to attack you. but of course, it's not proof that the numbers of Dodecad make no sense. you question the Fst values yourself. Drift probably has a strong effect especially in jewish populations.
 
Last edited:
Nevertheless, I am not here to defend these guys
pntqtMr.png

I am sure peer reviewers did that.

Are you implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial.
 
Ok, I wanted to add that most of Mycenean-like DNA in Peloponnese comes from Classical Greeks themselves because there was never any substantial alternation in the population of Peloponesse with some people very similar to old Greeks genetically.

But for places like Macedonia it's different because Thracians were very numerous there.
 
Are you implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial.

The what now? Where did you get such a wild idea?
The paper is in line with exactly what I am saying... Just look at the graphics. I am not the one saying 10 + world renowned geneticist don't have a clue and made mistakes in their graphics.

Please re read my posts, and when you find me "Implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial." quote it in your reply.

Else stop slandering me ad hominem, and start looking at my arguments here.
 
The what now? Where did you get such a wild idea?
The paper is in line with exactly what I am saying... Just look at the graphics. I am not the one saying 10 + world renowned geneticist don't have a clue and made mistakes in their graphics.
Please re read my posts, and when you find me "Implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial." quote it in your reply.
Else stop slandering me ad hominem, and start looking at my arguments here.
There is no mistake, it is because of genetic drift. Which is why you can really compare ancient to modern populations solely with FST, and not cross examine with other tools, and disciplines. Please see the lecture video, as the main author clarifies why the graphic is as such.
 
There is no mistake, it is because of genetic drift. Which is why you can really compare ancient to modern populations solely with FST, and not cross examine with other tools, and disciplines. Please see the lecture video, as the main author clarifies why the graphic is as such.

Could you provide a timestamp, lack 2+ hours right now. Will watch the whole thing later.

Did they discuss the Canary Islands? Or North Italians and Albanians for that matter?
 
The what now? Where did you get such a wild idea?
The paper is in line with exactly what I am saying... Just look at the graphics. I am not the one saying 10 + world renowned geneticist don't have a clue and made mistakes in their graphics.

Please re read my posts, and when you find me "Implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial." quote it in your reply.

Else stop slandering me ad hominem, and start looking at my arguments here.

Sorry, but if I want to libel/slander you I would make a direct accusation, not ask a question. I would have also said “is” conspiratorial instead of “sounds.” It’s not my intention. Peer reviewers are supposed to ensure published papers meet scientific standards, not defend them regardless of accuracy or veracity, which is how I interpreted the statement.

Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.
 
@ 1: 27 : 00 around that time.

Thanks.

So: "Genetic drift... I do not think there is anything particularly weird going on with South Italy." Lazaridis 1:30:00

1:25-1:26:30 Was particularly revealing. Since he describes what we can and can't deduce using these specific methods in correlation with an appropriate sample size. And also how genetic samples differ from other samples.
 
Sorry, but if I want to libel/slander you I would make a direct accusation, not ask a question. I would have also said “is” conspiratorial instead of “sounds.” It’s not my intention. Peer reviewers are supposed to ensure published papers meet scientific standards, not defend them regardless of accuracy or veracity, which is how I interpreted the statement.

Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.

Indeed, it seems like a misunderstanding from both our sides. I was neither defending nor criticizing the researchers, combined they probably have longer CVs in the field than all my posts in this thread. Hence I am not qualified to cast criticism on their methods, of which I have superficial understanding. I was simply interpreting their data, which reading the paper is 100% in line with what I said in my posts. Hence why I thought you were slandering me, saying that I am some conspiracy theorists accusing them of bias. Sure I could criticize them on something if I was properly trained in the field and knew what I was talking about, but I guarantee that if you read my posts at no point I did.

Yeah the Eurogenes development is interesting.

yes
i now saw that would be cool :cool-v:

blank.gif
A said...Is this the Greek paper you mentioned a while ago, or is there another one coming out?
May 14, 2021 at 4:19 AM

blank.gif
Davidski said...There's at least one more paper coming soon about Greece or the Balkans and Greece, with samples from the Iron Age, Classical period, Middle Ages, etc.


blank.gif
Davidski said...Greeks do have Cypriot-like ancestry, it's just that it's not necessarily from Cyprus.

This is obvious by looking at modern Greek DNA vs Mycenaean DNA.

But it'll also be shown with new samples from Classical Greece, some of which actually cluster with Cypriots and Anatolians.


PS:

Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.

That was indeed my point some posts ago. And if we can take the current data to prove genetic continuity for Greeks to these samples, a big if till we get more samples and publications, then we would have to clump Sicilians, North Italians(?) and Albanians in that group as well. Else that would be the bias I was being accused of.
 
Sorry, but if I want to libel/slander you I would make a direct accusation, not ask a question. I would have also said “is” conspiratorial instead of “sounds.” It’s not my intention. Peer reviewers are supposed to ensure published papers meet scientific standards, not defend them regardless of accuracy or veracity, which is how I interpreted the statement.

Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.

He's just grasping at straws since the "Slavic Theory house of cards" is crumbling.
 
He's just grasping at straws since the "Slavic Theory house of cards" is crumbling.

Now I am interested. What is this Slavic Theory? :embarassed:
 
You know what it is, and it's almost dead. Back in the grave with Fallmerayer.

I tried googling, the only thing I found was "https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2020/11/slavic-like-medieval-germans.html"... That cant be it given we are talking about Minoans and Myceneans. To lazy to go over thousands of comments just to find out some theory that as you say seems to be the butt of a joke.

Edit: Nvm, searched fallmerayer and I think I got what's up. :confused:

Edit2: After checking this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34097-Early-Medieval-Slavic-DNA-(years-600-900-AD)/page2 ... I would not say its almost dead. It was never alive to begin with.
 

This thread has been viewed 1161680 times.

Back
Top