Sumerians and Native Americans could be related?

adian808 · Nov 14, 2021

Sumerians are ASI/AASI people, and those people come ftpm africa

Doggerland said:
The term “Black” is not a modern population genetic therm and has no support in modern sciences. It is an outdated concept like “White Race” or “Aryan” in Third Reich Germany.
“Black” is a social empowerment terminology today based on primitive human eye recognition of someones skin color, based on social liberation ideas or racist mythology, but not on genetic science.

Australian Aboriginals and ancient Iranians are genetically very distant from today's Africans.
Cheddar Man is a typical Mesolithic European and not African in any way. See his Eurogenes K36 results:

32.26% Fennoscandian
24.48% North_Sea
16.45% East_Central_Euro
10.70% Eastern_Euro
9.41% North_Atlantic
6.69% Basque

Cheddar Mans Y Haplogroup was I2a2 and mtDNA U5b1 not M.

The nearest ancient populations that cluster with today's Africans are Neanderthals, Denisovans and the living Primates. I have posted you all the Eurogenes K36 results before.

The map you linked says nothing, not what program was used to generate it, nor if it is just someones imagination of how he liked it to be. There is no paleolithic sample from the region you posted and no proof for a “Proto Caucasoid/Veddoid” in this region.

Veddoid/Dravidian peoples are of Eurasian descent, cluster with other Indian Ethnicities and are in a triangle between Tianyuan 1, Vietnam HG and Ust Ishim. No connection to Sub Saharan Africa in the last 45.000years.

There is no such thing as a white race, because depigmentation causing skin, hair and eye alleles evolved independently in Eurasia and there are not only one, but many paleolithic sources of them: Scandinavia, Siberia, Anatolia for example.
There is no single population that was the ancestor of all Europeans. Its a myth with the same harmful social consequences as the myth of a global black race.

Albinism is not the source of fair skin in Europe and Asia, the mutations that cause the so called “Albino Dravidians” from the Black Supermacy internet sites are not on the same SNPs as the ones for today's fair skin.
The blue eyed Africans you can find on google do not posses the same alleles as Eurasians, its a genetic disease called Waardenburg Syndrome and is not located on the same SNPs as Eurasian blue eyes.

black people do exist !!!
remember old greeks divide blacks in two categories : curly ones ( ancient efypt, koushites , puntites, ethiopia ethiopians , egyptian colonists in caucasus, homerites of himyar kingdom of yemen) and long haired ones ( dravidians, sumerians ( the cephenes met on euphrate by hellanicus), elamites , australoid Munda people )
Contrary to what you say dravidians , ausrealoid and aborigines come from africa as said Bernard Sergent of french CNRS clio.fr/BIBLIOTHEQUE/l_origine_des_populations_de_l_inde_a_la_lumiere_des_dernieres_decouvertes_archeologiques.asp
,
The map of ASI/AASI genetic presence is a real map recognised by all scientists and it shows irak, india , iran , east and south afghanistan to west burma and horn of africa was peoplesd by those kind of persons and they originate from horn of africa
qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3
Masaman and Bernaerd Sergent confirm this map
youtube.com/watch?v=-Pru9nMTbc8&t=74s
( Masaman about dravidians origins )

youtube.com/watch?v=slTy8MvLQ4U
( Masaman about australoid origins: you can see the similarity of his AASI map wirh my AASI map and his source is harvard and wikipedia )

youtube.com/watch?v=Rd8y40xd1J4
( Masaman about adivasis a australoid people)

All of the ASI/AASI are M haplogroup and this map says they come from africa from L3
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Peopling_of_eurasia.jpg/220px-Peopling_of_eurasia.jpg

Cheddar Man has the genetic markers of skin pigmentation usually associated with sub-Saharan Africa. This discovery is consistent with a number of other Mesolithic human remains discovered throughout Europe nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html

kingjohn · Nov 15, 2021

Doggerland said:
Yes, many ones:

Ancient Roman, Balkan Neolithic, Celtic France, Eastern Bell Beaker, Ertebolle, Hittite, Hungarian Hunter Gatherer, Iberomaurusian, Iron Gates Hunter Gatherer, Karanovo, Kura Araxes, Mal Ta Buret, Megalithic Scotland, Sunghir

Doggerland · Nov 15, 2021

adian808 said:
black people do exist !!!
remember old greeks divide blacks in two categories : curly ones ( ancient efypt, koushites , puntites, ethiopia ethiopians , egyptian colonists in caucasus, homerites of himyar kingdom of yemen) and long haired ones ( dravidians, sumerians ( the cephenes met on euphrate by hellanicus), elamites , australoid Munda people )
Contrary to what you say dravidians , ausrealoid and aborigines come from africa as said Bernard Sergent of french CNRS clio.fr/BIBLIOTHEQUE/l_origine_des_populations_de_l_inde_a_la_lumiere_des_dernieres_decouvertes_archeologiques.asp
,
The map of ASI/AASI genetic presence is a real map recognised by all scientists and it shows irak, india , iran , east and south afghanistan to west burma and horn of africa was peoplesd by those kind of persons and they originate from horn of africa
qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8a1e2300d2869577d4ed9ae64e0898d3
Masaman and Bernaerd Sergent confirm this map
youtube.com/watch?v=-Pru9nMTbc8&t=74s
( Masaman about dravidians origins )

youtube.com/watch?v=slTy8MvLQ4U
( Masaman about australoid origins: you can see the similarity of his AASI map wirh my AASI map and his source is harvard and wikipedia )

youtube.com/watch?v=Rd8y40xd1J4
( Masaman about adivasis a australoid people)

All of the ASI/AASI are M haplogroup and this map says they come from africa from L3
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Peopling_of_eurasia.jpg/220px-Peopling_of_eurasia.jpg

Cheddar Man has the genetic markers of skin pigmentation usually associated with sub-Saharan Africa. This discovery is consistent with a number of other Mesolithic human remains discovered throughout Europe nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html

Ancient Greeks where not modern scientists and could not perform genetic analysis. They recognized people based on their bias.

“Blacks” do exist as a social idea, but not as a genetic reality. Sub Saharan African can be seen as an ethnicity, because they share ancient ancestry. Sub Saharan Africans are genetically real. But Aboriginal Australians, Negritos, South Indians, Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans are genetically very distant from them. They are not part of their genetic cluster, not part of their genetic ethnicity.

The idea that people with a same trait like dark skin, blue eyes or blonde hair belong to the same “Race” or are somehow related, is an outdated idea that has no support in modern science.
It was the base for racial wars in the past and it seems that it will be in the future, because some(or many?) people are not interested in reality and place their bad claiming for vengeance over knowledge and wisdom.

If Cheddar Man is "black" because he has alleles for dark skin, I must be "black" too, because I have wild type alleles for dark eye and hair color, the same ones Archaic Humans and Sub Saharan Africans have.

As the first human genomes where sequenced, scientists found out that most alleles in all humans are the same. So they had to find a method to differentiate populations and traits. They found out that some single SNPs determined traits that differ between populations, but that was not enough to make a clear differentiation. They searched for patterns of alleles in SNPs that where common for a population and based on this, ancestry can be determined.

Cheddar Man does not share a large amount of unique DNA with Sub Saharan Africans, but with Europeans:

Eurogenes K36 results:

32.26% Fennoscandian
24.48% North_Sea
16.45% East_Central_Euro
10.70% Eastern_Euro
9.41% North_Atlantic

6.69% Basque

If he would be of ancient African ancestry, he must have at least 30% Pygmy component.

Population Oracles from Gedmatch for Cheddar Man:

MDLPK16

#	Population	Percent
1	NorthEastEuropean	72.46
2	Neolithic	25.2
3	Steppe	1.19
4	Australian	0.53
5	Subsaharian	0.44
6	Oceanic	0.15
7	Ancestor	0.03
8	Amerindian	0.01

#	Population (source)	Distance
1	Finn (Finland)	39.01
2	Latvian (Latvia)	39.33
3	Latvian_Dobele (Dobele)	39.45
4	Estonian (Estonia)	39.65
5	Lithuanian (Lithuania)	40.51
6	Latvian_Cesis (Cesis)	40.6
7	Russian (Russia)	41.27
8	Vepsa (Russia)	42.19
9	Karelian (Karelia)	42.31
10	Saami_WGA (Lapland)	42.39

DodecadK12b

#	Population	Percent
1	North_European	69.96
2	Atlantic_Med	29.74
3	Sub_Saharan	0.24
4	East_African	0.05

#	Population (source)	Distance
1	Swedish (Dodecad)	14.36
2	Polish (Dodecad)	15.06
3	Norwegian (Dodecad)	16.95
4	FIN30 (1000Genomes)	17.03
5	Belorussian (Behar)	17.55
6	Lithuanian (Dodecad)	17.7
7	Finnish (Dodecad)	17.82
8	Lithuanians (Behar)	17.85
9	Mixed_Slav (Dodecad)	18
10	Russian (Dodecad)	18.62

Much distance to any living population, but closest to Northeast Europeans.

But we can ignore the genetic components of Cheddar Man and just look what modern populations most matches his look in trait SNPs, not ancestry:

Swede 68% United Kingdom 68% European 68%
Aboriginal Australian 63% Ukrainian 63%
All Africans 61%
Northern South Asian 60%
Dravidian 59% Middle East 59%
San 58%
Khanty 56% Native American 56%
Bantu 55%
Papuan 53%
Han Chinese 48%

He doesn't resemble any living population in a large percentage.
Its the same case like with the Tarim Mummies, some people do hard in accepting that ancient individuals often don’t fit in today's categories build by social movements and the racial Ideas of the last century.

Cheddar Mans people may looked like this Aboriginal Australian + European mixed woman on the right side of the picture:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d8/f3/f9/d8f3f950ed05ce62dc7070e4a936c533.jpg

kingjohn · Nov 16, 2021

kingjohn said:
i found the
pre-pottery neolithic of upper mesoptamia paper abstract :sun:
here :
https://isba9.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/Abstract_Book_ISBA9_2022.pdf

First Genomic Insights into Pre-pottery Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia
Altınışık N. Ezgi (1) Aydoğan Ayça (1), Kazancı Duygu Deniz (1), Vural KıvılcımBaşak (2), Koptekin Dilek (2), Özkan Mustafa (2), Gemici Hasan Can (3),Karamurat Cansu (3), Erdal Ömür Dilek (4), Götherström Anders (5, 6), SürerElif (7), Atakuman Çiğdem (8), Erim Aslı (9), Özer Füsun (1), Somel Mehmet (2),Erdal Yılmaz Selim (1)1 - Human-G Laboratory, Department of Anthropology, Hacettepe University, Ankara,Turkey (Turkey), 2 - Department of Biology, Middle East Technical University(METU), Ankara, Turkey (Turkey), 3 - Graduate School of Social Sciences, MiddleEast Technical University (METU), Ankara, Turkey (Turkey), 4 - Husbiol Laboratory,Department of Anthropology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey (Turkey), 5 -Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University, Stockholm,Sweden (Sweden), 6 - Centre for Palaeogenetics, Stockholm, Sweden (Sweden), 7 -Department of Modeling and Simulation, Graduate School of Informatics, Middle EastTechnical University (METU), Ankara, Turkey (Turkey), 8 - Institute of SocialSciences, Middle East Technical University (METU), Ankara, Turkey (Turkey), 9 -Department of Archaeology, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale 17100,Turkey (Turkey)

Recent studies showed that Neolithic populations in southwest Asia included distinctgene pools in the Levant, in Central Anatolia, and in the Zagros. Further, genomic comparisons suggested that all three populations adopted sedentism and farming without major admixture or replacement from other regions. Meanwhile, the population genetic characteristics of the geographic midpoint of these regions,namely upper Mesopotamia, has not been investigated so far. Here in this study, we present the first genomic data of individuals excavated from the PPNB phase of Çayönü. Çayönü, near the upper stretches of river Tigris, is one of the earlysettlements discovered in southeast Anatolia at the upper-most edge of FertileCrescent. Material culture data indicate that the Çayönü population interactedintensely with nearby regions - Anatolia, Levant, and Zagros. Despite poor DNA preservation due to harsh environmental conditions, after screening the remains of 33 individuals we managed to obtain genomic data enough for population genetics analyses from 14 individuals. We revealed that Çayönü individuals were genetically similar to early Holocene groups of C Anatolia, Levant, and Zagros, with higher affinity to the C Anatolia-Levant cline. We also modelled Çayönü as a three-way admixture utilizing qpAdm and found that pre-pottery Neolithic population of Çayönü harbored ancestry from all surrounding populations. Overall, in line with archaeological evidence, Çayönü appears to have been a melting pot of neighbouring Neolithic populations during the 9th and 8th millennia BC.

the site
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Çayönü

I think davidski has a crystal ball
Or he saw this paper above

His commnt on eurogenes :

@Luuk

Based on what I've seen, Y-DNA G and J will be important in ancient Mesopotamia.

Not sure about T. I can't remember seeing that in any upcoming samples from the region.

But it's already quite clear how the Steppe Maykop outlier T arrived on the steppe.

It came from contacts between Steppe Maykop and Caucasus Maykop, because obviously the Steppe Maykop outliers have Caucasus Maykop ancestry.

torzio · Nov 17, 2021

kingjohn said:
I think davidski has a crystal ball
Or he saw this paper above
His commnt on eurogenes :
@Luuk
Based on what I've seen, Y-DNA G and J will be important in ancient Mesopotamia.
Not sure about T. I can't remember seeing that in any upcoming samples from the region.
But it's already quite clear how the Steppe Maykop outlier T arrived on the steppe.
It came from contacts between Steppe Maykop and Caucasus Maykop, because obviously the Steppe Maykop outliers have Caucasus Maykop ancestry.

Caucasus Maykop is basically North Caucasus .........

while......the fair skinned , blue eyes , basically states, areas in South Caucasus

Blogger Andrzejewski said...

@Luuk @Genos “ Levant inherited genes for blue eyes from their Anatolian ancestors. The few Levant Chalcolithic samples are exceptionally fair in skin color and eye color genes. But it isn't enough samples to say much. It just demonstrates European-style fair pigmentation exists is native in the SW Asian variation.”

Levant and Anatolian, especially Pequi’in populations were light skinned. It’s the Kura Araxes, Hurrian, Jebusites (Mitanni migrants?)

kingjohn · Nov 17, 2021

torzio said:
Caucasus Maykop is basically North Caucasus .........
while......the fair skinned , blue eyes , basically states, areas in South Caucasus
Blogger Andrzejewski said...
@Luuk @Genos “ Levant inherited genes for blue eyes from their Anatolian ancestors. The few Levant Chalcolithic samples are exceptionally fair in skin color and eye color genes. But it isn't enough samples to say much. It just demonstrates European-style fair pigmentation exists is native in the SW Asian variation.”
Levant and Anatolian, especially Pequi’in populations were light skinned. It’s the Kura Araxes, Hurrian, Jebusites (Mitanni migrants?)

Andrzejewski probably
spoke about this paper as an example :
which showed light eye allells in near eastern chalcolithic remains
(side note they happen to have huge % of y haplogroup T
there was also 1 e-z830 individual in the cave probably natufian or ppnb survivor )
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6102297/

torzio · Nov 17, 2021

kingjohn said:
Andrzejewski probably
spoke about this paper as an example :
which showed light eye allells in near eastern chalcolithic remains
(side note they happen to have huge % of y haplogroup T
there was also 1 e-z830 individual in the cave probably natufian or ppnb survivor )
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6102297/

they all have blue eyes ...........and the same snp but different mtdna

Peqi'in Cave ( 6150 yBP - Late Chalcolithic )

I1155
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: K1a
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.09
Other IDs: CHPK021 / S1155.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1160
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: N1a1b
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 308
Other IDs: CHPKL101B-005, CHPKL101B-011 / S1160.E1.L1, S1161.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1165
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: HV1a’b’c’
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.95
Other IDs: CHPKL104-004 / S1165.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1166
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: H
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.981
Other IDs: CHPKL104-014, CHPKL104-026 / S1166.E1.L1 / S1167.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1170
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: T1a2
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.67
Other IDs: CHPKL105-030 / S1170.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1172
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: K1a
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.12
Other IDs: CHPKL108B-024 / S1172.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1178
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: I6
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 2.56
Other IDs: CHPKL109L-015 / S1178.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1180
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: T
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.09
Other IDs: CHPKL109M-028 / S1180.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

I1187
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: U6d
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.12
Other IDs: CHPKL301N-001 / Library S1187.E1.L1
Other IDs: CHPKL109M-028 / S1180.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM

Peqi'in Cave atDNA notes: Northern origin. They also carry the WHG G allele for Blue eyes at Rs12913832.

kingjohn · Nov 17, 2021

torzio said:
they all have blue eyes ...........and the same snp but different mtdna
Peqi'in Cave ( 6150 yBP - Late Chalcolithic )
I1155
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: K1a
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.09
Other IDs: CHPK021 / S1155.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1160
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: N1a1b
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 308
Other IDs: CHPKL101B-005, CHPKL101B-011 / S1160.E1.L1, S1161.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1165
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: HV1a’b’c’
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.95
Other IDs: CHPKL104-004 / S1165.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1166
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: H
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.981
Other IDs: CHPKL104-014, CHPKL104-026 / S1166.E1.L1 / S1167.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1170
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: T1a2
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.67
Other IDs: CHPKL105-030 / S1170.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1172
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: K1a
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.12
Other IDs: CHPKL108B-024 / S1172.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1178
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: I6
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 2.56
Other IDs: CHPKL109L-015 / S1178.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1180
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: T
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.09
Other IDs: CHPKL109M-028 / S1180.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
I1187
Y-DNA: T1a1a1a-CTS2214 (xY15711,, Y21017, Y3782, Y9102, Z709)
mtDNA: U6d
Sample: Petrous
Coverage: 0.12
Other IDs: CHPKL301N-001 / Library S1187.E1.L1
Other IDs: CHPKL109M-028 / S1180.E1.L1
Files: FASTQ / FASTQ&BAM (galaxy) / BAM
Peqi'in Cave atDNA notes: Northern origin. They also carry the WHG G allele for Blue eyes at Rs12913832.

the e-z830 dude also ?

I1171 - Peqi'in Cave

E-CTS10298 (E1b)

K

5950

Israel - Israel Chalcolith

p.s
they are dated earlier than 3100 bc they are 3900 bc
https://haplotree.info/maps/ancient...hcolumn=Country&searchfor=Israel&ybp=500000,0

MOESAN · Nov 18, 2021

Doggerland said:
NCBI says concave nose bridge is most common in Africans and Afro Americans, most uncommon in Caucasus, South Asians, Siberians and East Asians.
Maybe the straight or hooked nose bridge is not so prominent in East Asians, because they have a generally more pedomorphic facial bone physiology. But there are also East Asian people which have a little hook or their nose bridge.

https://1.soompi.io/wp-content/uploads/3/b/9f/439743/439743.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f1/31/9c/f1319c3c307ba7f920f5dd90306504f2.jpg

There are so numerous forms of noses that it is uneasy to put all them in only two bags. Not to say what you wrote is wrong.
It seems to me that the more southern East Asians have more often convave or seemingly concave noses bridges than the more northern ones, as a whole. What is sure is that the breadth of the nose hole on crania is not always linked to the bridge profile: our Paleo "europoids" had often broad enough noses holes along with an agressive "bumpish" nose bridge under kind of a notch.

MOESAN · Nov 18, 2021

@Torzio
Interesting.
Were they all homozygotous for blue eyes?

torzio · Nov 18, 2021

MOESAN said:
@Torzio
Interesting.
Were they all homozygotous for blue eyes?

snpedia states

https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs12913832

rs12913832 is a SNP near the OCA2 gene that may be functionally linked to blue or brown eye color, due to a lowering of promoter activity of the OCA2 gene. Blue eye color is associated with the rs12913832(G;G) genotype.[PMID 18172690, PMID 18252222]

MOESAN · Nov 18, 2021

@Doggerland post #103

I agree with the most of your post.

you say too:
He doesn't resemble any living population in a large percentage.
Its the same case like with the Tarim Mummies, some people do hard in accepting that ancient individuals often don’t fit in today's categories build by social movements and the racial Ideas of the last century.

Cheddar Mans people may looked like this Aboriginal Australian + European mixed woman on the right side of the picture:

I agree that our inherited classifications of phenotypes don't reflect allover genom reality, but is it correct to say they are based on nothing?
Raciation is a common phenomenon, always competing with crossings and osmosis; A lot of features unites "europoïds" or "africanoïds or "east-asianoïds" within their groups even if others are rather errative. We could say this big simplistic "bags" of types represents a very small divergence compared to the great allover unicity of Humans, and that they don't include all Humans, because left aside recent crossed pop's we have here and there other small pops whic'h cannot be put in any of these bags; it's the case of "sedimented" old pop's which often carry old features halfway (or rather in a no man's land) to our recent superficial groupings.
That said, the most of our clearly recognised groups shows some auDNA large clustering, proof of a at least recent common ancestry, compared one to another.
the Tarim Basin group could be one of those not clearly differentiated groups, having common ancestors with the two groups claiming them but withoutn having took part recently in one of both reent specialisation (new mutations + lost of certain different old mutations).
split of hairs!
Cheddar Man is surely far enough from Australoids at the cranial bones level, I think? spite I lack dense clues to say that.

Ailchu · Nov 18, 2021

Doggerland said:
Ancient Greeks where not modern scientists and could not perform genetic analysis. They recognized people based on their bias.

“Blacks” do exist as a social idea, but not as a genetic reality. Sub Saharan African can be seen as an ethnicity, because they share ancient ancestry. Sub Saharan Africans are genetically real. But Aboriginal Australians, Negritos, South Indians, Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans are genetically very distant from them. They are not part of their genetic cluster, not part of their genetic ethnicity.

The idea that people with a same trait like dark skin, blue eyes or blonde hair belong to the same “Race” or are somehow related, is an outdated idea that has no support in modern science.
It was the base for racial wars in the past and it seems that it will be in the future, because some(or many?) people are not interested in reality and place their bad claiming for vengeance over knowledge and wisdom.

If Cheddar Man is "black" because he has alleles for dark skin, I must be "black" too, because I have wild type alleles for dark eye and hair color, the same ones Archaic Humans and Sub Saharan Africans have.

As the first human genomes where sequenced, scientists found out that most alleles in all humans are the same. So they had to find a method to differentiate populations and traits. They found out that some single SNPs determined traits that differ between populations, but that was not enough to make a clear differentiation. They searched for patterns of alleles in SNPs that where common for a population and based on this, ancestry can be determined.

Cheddar Man does not share a large amount of unique DNA with Sub Saharan Africans, but with Europeans:

Eurogenes K36 results:

32.26% Fennoscandian
24.48% North_Sea
16.45% East_Central_Euro
10.70% Eastern_Euro
9.41% North_Atlantic
6.69% Basque

If he would be of ancient African ancestry, he must have at least 30% Pygmy component.

Population Oracles from Gedmatch for Cheddar Man:

MDLPK16

#
Population
Percent
1
NorthEastEuropean
72.46
2
Neolithic
25.2
3
Steppe
1.19
4
Australian
0.53
5
Subsaharian
0.44
6
Oceanic
0.15
7
Ancestor
0.03
8
Amerindian
0.01

#
Population (source)
Distance
1
Finn (Finland)
39.01
2
Latvian (Latvia)
39.33
3
Latvian_Dobele (Dobele)
39.45
4
Estonian (Estonia)
39.65
5
Lithuanian (Lithuania)
40.51
6
Latvian_Cesis (Cesis)
40.6
7
Russian (Russia)
41.27
8
Vepsa (Russia)
42.19
9
Karelian (Karelia)
42.31
10
Saami_WGA (Lapland)
42.39

DodecadK12b

#
Population
Percent
1
North_European
69.96
2
Atlantic_Med
29.74
3
Sub_Saharan
0.24
4
East_African
0.05

#
Population (source)
Distance
1
Swedish (Dodecad)
14.36
2
Polish (Dodecad)
15.06
3
Norwegian (Dodecad)
16.95
4
FIN30 (1000Genomes)
17.03
5
Belorussian (Behar)
17.55
6
Lithuanian (Dodecad)
17.7
7
Finnish (Dodecad)
17.82
8
Lithuanians (Behar)
17.85
9
Mixed_Slav (Dodecad)
18
10
Russian (Dodecad)
18.62

Much distance to any living population, but closest to Northeast Europeans.

But we can ignore the genetic components of Cheddar Man and just look what modern populations most matches his look in trait SNPs, not ancestry:

Swede 68% United Kingdom 68% European 68%
Aboriginal Australian 63% Ukrainian 63%
All Africans 61%
Northern South Asian 60%
Dravidian 59% Middle East 59%
San 58%
Khanty 56% Native American 56%
Bantu 55%
Papuan 53%
Han Chinese 48%

He doesn't resemble any living population in a large percentage.
Its the same case like with the Tarim Mummies, some people do hard in accepting that ancient individuals often don’t fit in today's categories build by social movements and the racial Ideas of the last century.

Cheddar Mans people may looked like this Aboriginal Australian + European mixed woman on the right side of the picture:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d8/f3/f9/d8f3f950ed05ce62dc7070e4a936c533.jpg

you could argue that if the category "black" is a social construct based on phenotype then people who look like cheddar men would, if they were walking around today, probably be considered part of that group. WHG's are genetically very far away from modern westeurasians also far away from europeans, in fact for many europeans modern south asians are genetically about the same distance away. modern east asians aren't that much further away. hard to say how they would have looked in reality. Krause once said, if we met a WHG in the forest today we would probably think that he is african.

torzio · Nov 18, 2021

torzio said:
snpedia states

https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs12913832

rs12913832 is a SNP near the OCA2 gene that may be functionally linked to blue or brown eye color, due to a lowering of promoter activity of the OCA2 gene. Blue eye color is associated with the rs12913832(G;G) genotype.[PMID 18172690, PMID 18252222]

I have the exact same RS for myself .........noted as blue eyes in 23andme and other sites .............but I have green eyes like my father, grandfather and greatgrandfather ..............this is because Green eyes come out of Blue eyed colour

Doggerland · Nov 19, 2021

No,I don’t think that intelligent people today would think that Cheddar man is an African. They would consider him strange, because he has almost European facial features, but is dark skinned. May be he would be viewed like Rachel Dolezal, Nuka Zeus or Martina Big, as a fraud to the Black Community:

https://aisvip-a.akamaihd.net/masters/1266138/martina-big-riesnrad.jpg

https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/MSNBC/Components/Video/150616/tdy_lauer_dolezal_150616.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-x4I5cjK8s

WHG are as far from modern Europeans as the samples and components where used. It depends also on the calculator that is used. But they are distant to today's Europeans, that's true. But they are in no way closer to Africans or Oceanians then to Europeans in terms of ancestry components. Northeastern Europeans got the most similarity of components to them.

I have not seen any calculator that is modeling South Asians and Europeans near when all other populations are also added. Between them are Middle East, Caucasus and also Native Americans and Siberians in some calculators. East Asians are the Population that is often most distant to Africans and also much distant to Europeans.

https://www.harappadna.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ref1_pca_1_2.png

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8d80b3ef730bd4d26643c2c120812699

The divergence between modern ancestry calculators and isolated trait analysis is simple: The intention the people had that made the ancestry calculators was not to explain people how the ancient humans looked like. They where not interested in those traits. They wanted to find out how humanity evolved over time and who descended from another.
The gene regions where the traits are may differ strongly between the populations, so they had different components in calculators. But the specfic trait SNPs (Like blue eyes) had been environmental or socially selected, because they had been an advantage.
For example we find no traces of big Oceanian DNA components in Cheddarman, but his isolated traits indicate clearly a little similarity to Asutralian Aboriginals.
We know this from other WHG samples with dark skin and hair, but they appear Finnish on calculators, against some of their optical traits.

The same goes for the thing with the Tripillans. They appear Neolithic in ancestry components, but looked northern European/British. Why? That's evolution. These traits once entered the population from outside or where even present in them a long long time ago and they where selected positively over time.

I can only mention myself as an example for all of this. I am I1, appear Northern German in most calculators but I am not blue eyed, not blonde, not long faced, brachycephalic.
Here are for example my highest matches in trait SNPs:

Yamnaya (73%) Linear Pottery Alföld (73%)
Hittite (70%) Anatolia HG (70%) Iron Gates HG (70%)
Linear Pottery Germany (69%) Bell Beaker CE (69%) Ancient Turk (69%)
Anatolia Neolithic (68%) Maglemose (68%) Germanic (68%) Lengynel (68%) Vikings Iceland (68%) Guanches (68%) Megalithic Scotland (68%) BattleAxe Sweden (68%)

Doesn't sound much Northern German.

MOESAN · Nov 19, 2021

kingjohn said:
Thanks for answere
Thats fascinating how dna
Effect our facial features
Do you have an examples or
Images of
Upturned nose bridge angel ?
Maybe this lady
Carey Mulligan

Or this sicilian dude
http://isabelle.theviot.free.fr/pagim/joe.htm

P.s
I think upturned nose bridge angel is rare no
Maybe more common in east asian

We are focalising on one aspect of this topic but it's interesting.
To split hairs as often (if I have understood well your thought), I 'll say "upturned nose bridge" is not a so accurate terminology :
we can have upturned nose tip with a not-concave but convex nose bridge: it was the case, I think, of most of Paleo and Mesolithic people of western Europe and surely northern Eurasia (so sinuous noses concerning profile of the bridge).

MOESAN · Nov 19, 2021

torzio said:
snpedia states
https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs12913832
rs12913832 is a SNP near the OCA2 gene that may be functionally linked to blue or brown eye color, due to a lowering of promoter activity of the OCA2 gene. Blue eye color is associated with the rs12913832(G;G) genotype.[PMID 18172690, PMID 18252222]

Thanks.
But my question was to be precise: have all these individuals we speak about G;G at this SNP, or someones have a mix A;G ?

MOESAN · Nov 19, 2021

Ailchu said:
you could argue that if the category "black" is a social construct based on phenotype then people who look like cheddar men would, if they were walking around today, probably be considered part of that group. WHG's are genetically very far away from modern westeurasians also far away from europeans, in fact for many europeans modern south asians are genetically about the same distance away. modern east asians aren't that much further away. hard to say how they would have looked in reality. Krause once said, if we met a WHG in the forest today we would probably think that he is african.

The question is, we cannot put in the same bag all the people with MORE OR LESS black skin, when they have a lot of skeletal and autosomal differences and are living in different periods of history, even if they could be on a ancient "trail" of human emigration, just because they are "black"; "black" alone is not a strong marker of ethnicity or common origin.
Even if things could have changed more than a time, with this kind of reasoning, we may say Humanity is maid of "Blacks": what value of discrimination?
Concerning autosomal distances, I have some doubts about your personal affirmations here.

Ailchu · Nov 19, 2021

Doggerland said:
No,I don’t think that intelligent people today would think that Cheddar man is an African. They would consider him strange, because he has almost European facial features, but is dark skinned. May be he would be viewed like Rachel Dolezal, Nuka Zeus or Martina Big, as a fraud to the Black Community:

https://aisvip-a.akamaihd.net/masters/1266138/martina-big-riesnrad.jpg

https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/MSNBC/Components/Video/150616/tdy_lauer_dolezal_150616.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-x4I5cjK8s

WHG are as far from modern Europeans as the samples and components where used. It depends also on the calculator that is used. But they are distant to today's Europeans, that's true. But they are in no way closer to Africans or Oceanians then to Europeans in terms of ancestry components. Northeastern Europeans got the most similarity of components to them.

I have not seen any calculator that is modeling South Asians and Europeans near when all other populations are also added. Between them are Middle East, Caucasus and also Native Americans and Siberians in some calculators. East Asians are the Population that is often most distant to Africans and also much distant to Europeans.

https://www.harappadna.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ref1_pca_1_2.png

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8d80b3ef730bd4d26643c2c120812699

The divergence between modern ancestry calculators and isolated trait analysis is simple: The intention the people had that made the ancestry calculators was not to explain people how the ancient humans looked like. They where not interested in those traits. They wanted to find out how humanity evolved over time and who descended from another.
The gene regions where the traits are may differ strongly between the populations, so they had different components in calculators. But the specfic trait SNPs (Like blue eyes) had been environmental or socially selected, because they had been an advantage.
For example we find no traces of big Oceanian DNA components in Cheddarman, but his isolated traits indicate clearly a little similarity to Asutralian Aboriginals.
We know this from other WHG samples with dark skin and hair, but they appear Finnish on calculators, against some of their optical traits.

The same goes for the thing with the Tripillans. They appear Neolithic in ancestry components, but looked northern European/British. Why? That's evolution. These traits once entered the population from outside or where even present in them a long long time ago and they where selected positively over time.

I can only mention myself as an example for all of this. I am I1, appear Northern German in most calculators but I am not blue eyed, not blonde, not long faced, brachycephalic.
Here are for example my highest matches in trait SNPs:

Yamnaya (73%) Linear Pottery Alföld (73%)
Hittite (70%) Anatolia HG (70%) Iron Gates HG (70%)
Linear Pottery Germany (69%) Bell Beaker CE (69%) Ancient Turk (69%)
Anatolia Neolithic (68%) Maglemose (68%) Germanic (68%) Lengynel (68%) Vikings Iceland (68%) Guanches (68%) Megalithic Scotland (68%) BattleAxe Sweden (68%)

Doesn't sound much Northern German.

where do you get from that WHG would have almost european features? if we look at snp sharing then WHG are as distant to many europeans as modern south asians are. even those europeans who are closest to them do not really score much closer values relatively speaking. for example in this table from this study a lot of europeans are equidistant to Kharia people:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...ntary-material

hard to say imo if WHG would have looked that similar to modern europeans. also something to consider is that WHG/ANF/CHG/EHG were all quite distant to each other. there is more snp sharing between modern europeans and modern south asians. we have values almost similar or even bigger than those between modern euroepans and modern east asians.

Doggerland · Nov 19, 2021

Ailchu said:
where do you get from that WHG would have almost european features?

From my own data of WHGs like Loschbour, La Brana, Cheddar Man, Ranchot. But we only had Cheddar Man last time. Everybody can download the Data from European Nucleotide Archive.
Lets take a look at WHG trait SNP data merged from all WHG labled samples I have in my database:

Swede 82%
European 79%
Dravidian 76%
Basque 75%
Middle East 73% Northern South Asian 73%
Khanty 72%
Aboriginal Australian 68% Papuan 68%
Iberian 64%
East Asian 63%
Native American 62%
Bantu 60%
Bedouin 51%

The problem with ancient and modern DNA data is till today the often low quality of samples. Many of the datasets used for those expert or hobby analysis are not based on whole genome sequencing data. Many samples are lacking significant trait SNPs to determine their look for example too.
But whole genome sequencing is mostly not really the whole genome, often people find that in their whole genome sequencing data SNPs are missing.

The question is what data is used for an analysis, which algorithm.

I also read 5 years ago as I started with the hobby a critical book about population genomics and all the strange things that happened at the beginning of commercial analysis and wrong results that where brought to the customers. It was also a critical book about Haplogroups and the psychological effect they often have on people and their identity.
Multiple cases where demonstrated where DNA analysis created more uncertainty then before.

I am personally always septic about any big analysis and deep down I know that many things that we believe about this topic can be wrong. This is because the data we have is limited and the technology we are using is designed to get the results we are awaiting.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.11.439381v4.full

Just think about all the calculators on Gedmatch and what kind of strange different results they can create in terms of components of ancient populations. One calculator says that you are of over 40% WHG ancestry, the other one only 20%? Is this really realistic? I think not. It is only true in the sense of which samples where used and which algorithm and from what company you imported your data.

There will be also always questions that cannot be answered by population genetics, because of the “simple” nature of human genetics in general. And there is also a limit of time. It is unlikely that fossils 100.000 years old will have a large amount of intact DNA. So topics like out Of Africa or what was the real ancestor of modern humans will maybe never be answered and stay a field of discussion forever.
Fossils and skull metrics may be nice ideas, but they can also be totally wrong and lead to a false direction of interpretation, because all other data is missing.

The problem is that ancestry is for many people a fundamental term to their identity. For example Cheddar Man is a social nuke and created much controversy. There are different social movements that want to claim him to demonstrate a kind of ancestral right to live where he now lives.

Some weeks ago I was in a conversation with people and someone said that a politician that is against migration should note that Europe was dark skinned 8000 years ago. I told him that this is not true and that Scandinavian Hunter Gatherers also had alleles for light skin and blue eyes and that they where also present in Anatolian Farmers. The answer of this person was: “We should stop talking about history!”

People are using this data to create or heat up social conflicts and build expectations. But it is nothing new, it has also happened in the ancient past. May be there is no way to stop this. But in this conflict, the truth will die. Just for the benefit of one of the counter parties.

Sumerians and Native Americans could be related?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Elite member

Elite member

Regular Member

Elite member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Elite member

Elite member

Elite member

Banned

Regular Member