Why Cruciani's data shows less E1b1b1 percentages?

**Parafarne** · 11-09-17, 08:24

Eupedia's charts shows higher percentages for so many regions which contradicts Cruciani's research?

**Parafarne** · 11-09-17, 08:32

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/conten....full.pdf+html
This data shows 7% for Romania, 7% for Campania, 10% Calabria, 4% in Sardinia, 4% in Croatia, 4% for Hungary, Ukraine ... while in Eupedia they are much higher percentages, I don't know which one is nearer to the CORRECT figures.

**Angela** · 11-09-17, 20:47

^^One study is generally not going to be as accurate as the aggregate of many studies, unless the methodology of certain studies is questionable.

**Parafarne** · 12-09-17, 05:06

Yes Eupedia takes all available researches into account, having said that I prefer Cruciani's data because it specifically studied hg E and had wider scope. It would be good if this research's data is added in Eupedia charts because it gives very realistic figures.

Thread: Why Cruciani's data shows less E1b1b1 percentages?

Thread Tools

Display

Why Cruciani's data shows less E1b1b1 percentages?

Posting Permissions