Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 39 of 40 FirstFirst ... 2937383940 LastLast
Results 951 to 975 of 985

Thread: Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

  1. #951
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    77


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    I am not saying that there is nothing, something is certainly there the further south you go in Italy, I am saying that it is not possible to calculate it with precision, as it is not possible to understand what has happened for example in southern Italy without the ancient samples that are still missing.
    It is not a good idea to take G25 results as better than academic results, which didn't show any Levant_N needed for south Italians. By the way, Anatolian Farmers had some Levant_N so more EEF ancestry would mean more Levant_N, but the thing is that it seems that north Italians have more EEF than south Italians, who have less IE than the former but also another admixture that is either Iran_N or CHG, and in fact it is all you need to model them ( and a bit of north african in Sicilians and few Calabresi), and it is only G25 samples showing that you need more Levant_N to model south Italians. Why don't we stick to what is reliable?

  2. #952
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone View Post
    I own up my slip on E-V22 and E-V13, but E-V22 has been found also in Asturians, and it is a bit hard to link that place with any Phoenician or Moorish legacy, given that neither set foot there, and the picture is still muddy to say the least.

    Also, J2-M205 is found also overall Europe, and J2-M92 even in India, so it is clear that you can't simply state "it is an ancient (of the last 5,000 years) Egyptian and Levantine marker", and either a CHG/Iran_N origin makes up for a much more parsimonious explanation, given that all these places have some admixture from it.

    The problems with your approach is that you take some haplogroups, throw away all the most plausible explanations, and build your own narrative around them discarding all the contrary evidence.
    If I am understandin you correctly, it seems you are saying that half of J1 in Italy is "surely of Levantine origins", and also a good chunk of J2. Also, I think it has already been noticed that potentially shared J1 and J2 subclades might be just shared CHG/Iran_N, so I am not sure that the argument "the oldest subclade we have is from place X so it must be a marker of ancestry from that place" is airtight.
    J-M205 is non argument, we can discuss other clades if you'd like. J-M205 is equivalent to saying R-M269 and Indo Europeans, the parsimonious explanation is Iron Age and Classical Age Levantine people moving across the Mediterranean. It isn't even a top 20 clade in frequency for J2 in Italy.

    E-V22 in Austrias could easily be a paternal ancestor from the Levant who arrived there during Roman era and also not necessarily, could have originated with a paternal Phoenician ancestor from Southern Spain who moved up? All countries have internal movement.

  3. #953
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    203


    Country: United Kingdom



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Iran_N and Natufian can also come out in the Balkans with these models using G25. Why is no one asking how they got there?







    Quote Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone View Post
    It is not a good idea to take G25 results as better than academic results, which didn't show any Levant_N needed for south Italians. By the way, Anatolian Farmers had some Levant_N so more EEF ancestry would mean more Levant_N, but the thing is that it seems that north Italians have more EEF than south Italians, who have less IE than the former but also another admixture that is either Iran_N or CHG, and in fact it is all you need to model them ( and a bit of north african in Sicilians and few Calabresi), and it is only G25 samples showing that you need more Levant_N to model south Italians. Why don't we stick to what is reliable?

    I am fully aware of this. Read my second post.

  4. #954
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    77


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    J-M205 is non argument, we can discuss other clades if you'd like. J-M205 is equivalent to saying R-M269 and Indo Europeans, the parsimonious explanation is Iron Age and Classical Age Levantine people moving across the Mediterranean. It isn't even a top 20 clade in frequency for J2 in Italy.

    E-V22 in Austrias could easily be a paternal ancestor from the Levant who arrived there during Roman era and also not necessarily, could have originated with a paternal Phoenician ancestor from Southern Spain who moved up? All countries have internal movement.
    So did also iron and classical age Levantine moved to India? I might be recalling wrongly, but isn't J-M205 more common in the Balkans compared to Italy? Especially northern Balkans? did ancient Levantines not only reach those places, but also left such a significat genetic legacy? Don't get me wrong, some haplos are indeed linked to Phoenicians or other Levantines, but not those you claim, which are much more common.

    Lastly, earnestly do you put forwards such explanations? E-V22 haplo shows no correspondency with supposed Phoenician or Moorish settlements in the area, so you must posit internal migrations that "reversed" the original distribution.

  5. #955
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    Iran_N and Natufian can also come out in the Balkans with these models using G25. Why is no one asking how they got there?










    I am fully aware of this. Read my second post.
    Who said no one is asking? Greece already had an abundance of Iran Neo since Bronze Age both Minoans and Cycladic culture had a lot of Iran Neo, the Natufian is the bigger the question, my guess is the same way how Italy got theirs, just add a layer with the Hellenistic era. From Hellenistic through Roman through Byzantine you have over 1000 years of opportunity for this component to reach the Aegean and Balkans, and case in point would be the J-M205 clade in the Balkans.

  6. #956
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone View Post
    So did also iron and classical age Levantine moved to India? I might be recalling wrongly, but isn't J-M205 more common in the Balkans compared to Italy? Especially northern Balkans? did ancient Levantines not only reach those places, but also left such a significat genetic legacy? Don't get me wrong, some haplos are indeed linked to Phoenicians or other Levantines, but not those you claim, which are much more common.

    Lastly, earnestly do you put forwards such explanations? E-V22 haplo shows no correspondency with supposed Phoenician or Moorish settlements in the area, so you must posit internal migrations that "reversed" the original distribution.
    Your right J-M205 is more common in the Northern Balkans than Italy, https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y22059/ the clade is 1000 years old, and is probably a Byzantine era founder effect. I am no longer discussing J-M205, if you chose not to believe its Levantine in origin its on you, this is a fact.

    Please do me a favour and look at E-V22's phylogentic tree

    https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-V22/

    Are you thinking of J-L283 instead of J-M205? J-L283 is historically old in Europe, some Bronze Age Caucasus movement into the Balkans, and has been found throughout several Balkan and Italian ancient sites.

  7. #957
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    77


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    Your right J-M205 is more common in the Northern Balkans than Italy, https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y22059/ the clade is 1000 years old, and is probably a Byzantine era founder effect. I am no longer discussing J-M205, if you chose not to believe its Levantine in origin its on you, this is a fact.

    Please do me a favour and look at E-V22's phylogentic tree

    https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-V22/
    So I guess that the J-M205 in India, Scandinavia and even central asia was ancient Phoenicians settling there, and if you think that postulating founder effects after founder effects based on implausible internal migrations is scientific you might want to review a basic logics handbook.

    P.S.

    is this outdated as well? How did J-M205 end up in India and central asia spread by Levantine travellers?
    https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...up-J2b1-(M205)

  8. #958
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone View Post
    So I guess that the J-M205 in India, Scandinavia and even central asia was ancient Phoenicians settling there, and if you think that postulating founder effects after founder effects based on implausible internal migrations is scientific you might want to review a basic logics handbook.
    LOL, it was found in every single Levantine civilization and Egypt not only Phoenicians. So it can be Phoenician, Jewish, Syrian, Assyrian, Edomite, Egyptian, Amorite, Aramean, etc...

    The Scandinivan, the Indian and the Central Asian ones all have an ancestor who belonged to one of those mentioned groups, again this is a fact and facts don't care about your feelings.

  9. #959
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    203


    Country: United Kingdom



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    That is the thing, I always said its range, in the first or second post to Jovialis I said it is somewhere between 5-20%, we going to get another Ancient Roman Italy paper (with various Italic tribes), several Ancient Greek ones and one on the Iron Age Middle East those will papers will be crucial going forward. We can more accurately calculate autosomal and uniparental inheritance.

    I do not think it will be easy to calculate even with the publication of new ancient samples, certainly now it is impossible. Since with the same models using the G25, never forget it is an amateur tool, these components come out even to the Greeks, and the Greeks had an important role in Italy, it is clear that not everything can be attributed to foreign presence during imperial Rome. Moreover, we must consider that the genetics of the Balkans has been greatly altered by the Slavic migrations of the medieval era and that in the past Balkans may have played an important role as a bridge between Italy and the Near East. Finally, the Natufian sample itself is still based on one or two individuals, isn't it? It is highly problematic.


    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    Who said no one is asking? Greece already had an abundance of Iran Neo since Bronze Age both Minoans and Cycladic culture had a lot of Iran Neo, the Natufian is the bigger the question, my guess is the same way how Italy got theirs, just add a layer with the Hellenistic era. From Hellenistic through Roman through Byzantine you have over 1000 years of opportunity for this component to reach the Aegean and Balkans, and case in point would be the J-M205 clade in the Balkans.

    Natufian has likely many problems and is the big question, I agree. With the same model used with Italians and Balkans, many Iberian populations (both Spanish and Portuguese) get out significant percentages of Natufian. Only by putting SSA do these percentages decrease but not disappear. The strange thing is that Natufian comes out to some Iberian samples, to others it does not. Does it really make sense? This suggests to me that these results cannot be taken too seriously, for a number of reasons already listed, possible sampling error, because of the possible errors in G25, and because of the very nature of these tools, which are tools that calculate only possible estimates that depend on the choices made (models, reference samples) and are not definitive proofs of anything.



  10. #960
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    77


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    LOL, it was found in every single Levantine civilization and Egypt not only Phoenicians. So it can be Phoenician, Jewish, Syrian, Assyrian, Edomite, Egyptian, Amorite, Aramean, etc...

    The Scandinivan, the Indian and the Central Asian ones all have an ancestor who belonged to one of those mentioned groups, again this is a fact and facts don't care about your feelings.
    Yes, how convenient it is to postulate that it was some Semitic-speaking groups travelling all the way there and settling down instead of taking as the most plausible explanation that it was spread by Iran_N or CHG lineages that are known to have contributed to all groups living in those areas? Again, I have been waiting for some sources, but you just pointed that "the oldest samples that have it are from the Levant, so it must be Levantine", although the fact there is no historical evidence of any possible Egyptian or Levantine sources reaching as far, and that the age of the J2-M205 subclade is compatible with much older movements, https://haplogroup.org/ystory/j-m205/.

    We have discussed for some length about this clade, but you have shown to build your "arguments" by wishful thinking, weak evidence and overlooking of contrary evidence, so I do not expect anything different about any eventual discussion about the other clades.

  11. #961
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone View Post
    Yes, how convenient it is to postulate that it was some Semitic-speaking groups travelling all the way there and settling down instead of taking as the most plausible explanation that it was spread by Iran_N or CHG lineages that are known to have contributed to all groups living in those areas? Again, I have been waiting for some sources, but you just pointed that "the oldest samples that have it are from the Levant, so it must be Levantine", although the fact there is no historical evidence of any possible Egyptian or Levantine sources reaching as far, and that the age of the J2-M205 subclade is compatible with much older movements, https://haplogroup.org/ystory/j-m205/.

    We have discussed for some length about this clade, but you have shown to build your "arguments" by wishful thinking, weak evidence and overlooking of contrary evidence, so I do not expect anything different about any eventual discussion about the other clades.
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....-History-of-J2

  12. #962
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    I do not think it will be easy to calculate even with the publication of new ancient samples, certainly now it is impossible. Since with the same models using the G25, never forget it is an amateur tool, these components come out even to the Greeks, and the Greeks had an important role in Italy, it is clear that not everything can be attributed to foreign presence during imperial Rome. Moreover, we must consider that the genetics of the Balkans has been greatly altered by the Slavic migrations of the medieval era and that in the past Balkans may have played an important role as a bridge between Italy and the Near East. Finally, the Natufian sample itself is still based on one or two individuals, isn't it? It is highly problematic.





    Natufian has likely many problems and is the big question, I agree. With the same model used with Italians and Balkans, many Iberian populations (both Spanish and Portuguese) get out significant percentages of Natufian. Only by putting SSA do these percentages decrease but not disappear. The strange thing is that Natufian comes out to some Iberian samples it comes out, to others it does not. Does it really make sense? This suggests to me that these results cannot be taken too seriously, for a number of reasons already listed, possible sampling error, because of the possible errors in G25, and because of the very nature of these tools, which are tools that calculate only possible estimates that depend on the choices made (models, reference samples) and are not definitive proofs of anything.

    We will be getting more Natufian samples, we'll how much they vary from the few we have now. While I don't fully disagree with you on all points, and think you bring out excellent points, like I said my whole point with this is shut up the everything came in Neolithic or Bronze Age crowd. On the opposite end you see clear Greco-Roman clades who made into the Middle East and North Africa and there is much less of an opposition to it, one of the markers found in one of the Latin Tribes has been found in Algeria and Turkey, or E-V13 that has none trivial frequencies in Middle East, you don't see "E-V13 Neolithic in Fertile Crescent" as a response. Italy and the Balkans were practically the center of the world for 500 years, so its normal you have movements towards there, and the same thing happened the other way. We take for granted how mobile ancient people truly were.

  13. #963
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    77


    Country: Italy



    If the oldest R1b sample found had been from western Europe, should we be talking about an European migrations into north America? Maybe in the absence of better explanations, but the spread of J2-M205 with CHG/Iran_N genes makes much more sense, that is to say it is better supported by the available evidence, than a recent spread from Levantines populations reaching as far as India and central asia and north Europe, and the age of the subclade, according to the site I've linked, is compatible with such picture (6000 byp +/- 2700 years).

  14. #964
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,235


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    It is enough to add the Neolithic sample Tepecik_Ciftlik_N and both Iran_N and Natufian descend significantly in the Italian samples.


    Don't you just love how he always starts out with Barcin just because it will show more Levant Neo or Natufian in Italians?

    Then when he gets caught he'll reluctantly use Tepecek instead. WOW, what happened to all that extra Natufian?

    If that isn't the sign of a dishonest, agenda driven analysis, I don't know what is. Sicily is in the 5% range, and Campania and Calabria 3.7%. The rest of the south drops off precipitously.

    Is this the big onslaught of Levantine genes we've been hearing about for almost a decade? You'd think they'd be ashamed.

    I do believe I said above that if excess Levant appeared in academic studies using more sophisticated tools it would be in the low single digits. Don't they ever get tired of being always wrong?


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  15. #965
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone View Post
    If the oldest R1b sample found had been from western Europe, should we be talking about an European migrations into north America? Maybe in the absence of better explanations, but the spread of J2-M205 with CHG/Iran_N genes makes much more sense, that is to say it is better supported by the available evidence, than a recent spread from Levantines populations reaching as far as India and central asia and north Europe, and the age of the subclade, according to the site I've linked, is compatible with such picture (6000 byp +/- 2700 years).
    Iron Age and Classical era are recent for you? Bothers you that there is the potential for you having Semitic speaking ancestors

  16. #966
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,235


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    Lol I never sent you a picture of myself, I can’t believe you pulled of a lie like this to try and prove i’m sock, its pitiful.
    I never lie; no one has ever been able to prove such a thing after more than ten years here.

    You, on the other hand, used a sock on this very site. You posted as Principe and also posted as Azurro, and then went to anthrogenica as Principe Azzurro.

    You must have a very short memory.

    You've been so wrong so many times. Do the Etruscans ring a bell? Didn't it teach you a little humility?

    Well, at least you've finally learned how to spell "Azzurro"; after all the conversations with your Sicilian grandmother and three years of studying Italian, it took all this time.

  17. #967
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Your a despicable human being

    I sincerely hope your Luni region in Emilia Romagna has nothing to do with Sicily or Basilicata since the Neolithic

  18. #968
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,235


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    Your a despicable human being

    I sincerely hope your Luni region in Emilia Romagna has nothing to do with Sicily or Basilicata since the Neolithic

    FYI: it is YOU'RE, a contraction of YOU ARE. Your means belonging to you, as in your agenda driven, dishonest analyses.

    I see you don't deny that you posted under two separate identities here. Well, of course you can't.

    I'm despicable for pointing that out?

    What do you call someone who would do that? The word dishonest comes to mind.

    Every one who is from Italy shares ancestry. We're all on a cline, so like it or not, we're related on some level. Doesn't mean we all have to like each other. I judge each person as an individual on qualities like honesty, integrity, and compassion.

  19. #969
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    FYI: it is YOU'RE, a contraction of YOU ARE. Your means belonging to you, as in your agenda driven, dishonest analyses.

    I see you don't deny that you posted under two separate identities here. Well, of course you can't.

    I'm despicable for pointing that out?

    What do you call someone who would do that? The word dishonest comes to mind.
    Principe, Principe Azzurro and Azzurro are variants of the classic Prince Charming reference. I posted under Principe Azzurro because you banned the Azzurro account and did personal attacks and thought I wasn't going to respond, you think I care about your silly rules?

    Jovialis on AG posted as Fuorilegge does that make him a sock?

    And let me tell you something Angela, unlike you I have many people who personally contact me for information regarding the spread and origins of their Y lines, you bad mouth Anthrogenica, but it is seen as the most pristine anthrofora genetic site, Eupedia forum section is deemed as toxic mostly because of you.

    So enjoy posting threads with the same 10-15 people who agree with you and be hostile with anyone who veers away from your line of thinking.

  20. #970
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,235


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    Principe, Principe Azzurro and Azzurro are variants of the classic Prince Charming reference. I posted under Principe Azzurro because you banned the Azzurro account and did personal attacks and thought I wasn't going to respond, you think I care about your silly rules?

    Jovialis on AG posted as Fuorilegge does that make him a sock?

    Are you understanding yourself properly?
    This is the last time I am going to address this. To the best of my recollection you had two separate accounts here; one as Principe and one as Azurro. At anthrogenica you posted as Principe Azzurro.

    As for your arguments, such as they are, you have made them; they have been answered. Yours are unconvincing imo and that of most people here.

    So, unless you start spamming the same posts over and over again, that would seem to be the end of the matter.

  21. #971
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-02-11
    Posts
    207


    Country: France



    3 members found this post helpful.
    On Anthrogenica anyone who thinks differently from the leading group, who tries to influence and address every discussion, is regularly banned. On Eupedia this does not happen.

  22. #972
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by binx View Post
    On Anthrogenica anyone who thinks differently from the leading group, who tries to influence and address every discussion, is regularly banned. On Eupedia this does not happen.
    That’s absolutely not true, its definitely more open. Have you ever posted there?

  23. #973
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    This is the last time I am going to address this. To the best of my recollection you had two separate accounts here; one as Principe and one as Azurro. At anthrogenica you posted as Principe Azzurro.

    As for your arguments, such as they are, you have made them; they have been answered. Yours are unconvincing imo and that of most people here.

    So, unless you start spamming the same posts over and over again, that would seem to be the end of the matter.
    Not one convincing counter argument has been made in my opinion, pretty much all the same answers masquerading in different words tbh.

  24. #974
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    5,488

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    (R1b-F1794) R-M269
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    4 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Azzurro View Post
    Not one convincing counter argument has been made in my opinion, pretty much all the same answers masquerading in different words tbh.
    I've already made my points upthread. Your eurogenes modeling is flawed, there have been many reasons given why, which I have mentioned myself. It is absurd to suggest that south Italians are 20% Levantine, sorry, but to be frank, that's just crazy. If this is the main thing you are arguing, than you should think about this:


    You don't find it to be odd that this calculator is producing models that no academic study could support? I know Davidski doesn't like to admit it, in fact he argues that his calculator is better than academic papers! He has told me that himself on AG. That's when I knew that AG is a sort of fan-boy site for eurogenes, people that are delusional enough to think that this calculator is better than academic analysis. It is laughable!


    The difference between Eupedia, and AG is that on Eupedia we use these tools, like Dodecad, to best replicate the academic findings to verify accuracy. On AG, you take the results of eurogenes as gospel, despite the fact that is is contrary to academic analysis. Sorry, but dozens of Ivy-League geneticists working on papers using multiple tools for analysis, holds more water than the results of a single tool interpreted by laymen.

  25. #975
    Banned
    Join Date
    31-08-16
    Posts
    452

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-Y15222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a2b5

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    @Jovialis,

    Its not my main focus, in fact I only become this Levantine in Italians rep when discussing with this crowd. Also I didn’t say it’s definitely 20% range of 5-20%.

    By counter arguement why are all genetic companies like Ftdna, MyHeritage, 23&Me and the old Nat Geo calculator give this Middle Eastern?

    Your aware that the Ivy League schools are in contact with him? He actually isn’t an amateur regardless of what you think of Davidski.

    This is why I dislike autosomal dna, because a lot of it is subjective and bias, i’m an very biased not going to lie about that. When it comes to Uniparental its much more clear cut.

Page 39 of 40 FirstFirst ... 2937383940 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •