Total B.S.
Here's a novel idea.
There were two samples found in Ardea, same time period.
How about modeling sample 850 with the genes from the other Ardean and see what else has to be added?
OH, WAIT! They already did that in the paper.
The clique at anthrogenica just doesn't like that result.
Too bad, so sad.
The problem, Ironside, whoever you are, is that the paper shows that the change in the Italian gene pool was from "added" ancestry from Anatolia, and the Caucasus, not the Levant. It also shows the "LEVANT TAIL" disappeared from the gene pool of modern Central Italians. I'm sure Sikeliot/Azzurro, and maybe Agamemnon and all their socks are devastated, but there it is.
These two "outliers" show that ancestry from that part of the world arrived in Central Rome very early; it didn't need to wait for hordes of Syrians or Jews who came as slaves in the Empire. My bet is that they either came from Greeks as prized artisans and teachers, or migrated up from Southern Italy.
Not that I would have had a problem with the Levant ancestry staying, God knows. From my own subjective world view better Levantine craftsmen and merchants than marauding Goths and Langobards from whose depredations it took us almost 2000 years to recover.
Facts are sometimes inconvenient things, but they have to be accepted to keep your own sense of honor intact and to be respected by those whom you yourself respect.
Honestly, anyone with any intellectual honesty should boycott that thread on anthrogenica. How can people support such blatant dishonesty in analysis?