MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,893
- Reaction score
- 1,295
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
Sorry (if I may say!) I put a thumb up to your post spite I don't think like you. Chance... (or my great age)...
I am not a specialist of distances and admixtures tools, but I don't think ANE is a too precise tool to associate-differentiate relatively recent pops at the autosomes level.
Some people as Lebrok did admixtures analysis based on a K13 system. This "kit" presents and opposes 'baloch" (alias "gedrosia"?) vs "caucasian", breaking 'west-eurasian' in 2 parts. I spoke of this here in other thread and in Anthrogenica, what costed me a fantastic "bronca" and mocking. Whatsoever, my points was to show that today Basques and N-W Europeans show the stronger % of 'gedrosia' or 'baluch' compared to 'caucasian'; the lowest ones being the Slavs (the most for 'caucasian' in this very comparison). I was told these runs had no value, arguing on logarythms arbitrary choices etc... but even in close regions were other components were similar, we see a big difference in the 'baluch'/'caucasian' ratio. The Basques have very more 'baluch' (if 'gedrosia' is a good proxi, what I think) than other Iberic people and N-Italians, these last ones have more of it than S-Italians, Greeks. Even people of Near-East and Iran, closer to the 'Baluch' region and spite their History of eastern tribes invasions, are far from the strong ratios of N-W Europeans and Basques.
My (fragile?) hypothesis is that, as it seems when we look at the very strong 'baluch'/'caucasian' ratio among ancient pops of the Steppes and even very older pops there (> 20000 y), and the absence of both among WHG's, is that this 'baluch' signal is tied to the ancient N-Steppes drifted ANE-linked component before differenciation occurred in the region where its was also strong and surely in a denser pop favouring mutations, the Peri-Caucasus; this 'baluch', so, could be the ancient CHG heritage in N-Steppes, 'caucasus' being the ne-look CHG one, the one which passed lately in S-Steppes, and into SE-Europe through Calcho/BA Anatolia.
the possible conclusion is that the first Steppic tribes cary this ancient CHG component in them and passed it to W-European ancient pops, the later CHG influences, from Caucasus, having been passed to Steppes only after these first moves.
Whatever the reality of this tale of mine, even if we take this classification 'baluch/caucasus' as only a relative tool, it could explain why, based on diverging drifts, specialists can tell Steppes CHG of Late Caucasus CHG.
Scientists are not saints all of them, but they are not more idiots all of them.
I am not a specialist of distances and admixtures tools, but I don't think ANE is a too precise tool to associate-differentiate relatively recent pops at the autosomes level.
Some people as Lebrok did admixtures analysis based on a K13 system. This "kit" presents and opposes 'baloch" (alias "gedrosia"?) vs "caucasian", breaking 'west-eurasian' in 2 parts. I spoke of this here in other thread and in Anthrogenica, what costed me a fantastic "bronca" and mocking. Whatsoever, my points was to show that today Basques and N-W Europeans show the stronger % of 'gedrosia' or 'baluch' compared to 'caucasian'; the lowest ones being the Slavs (the most for 'caucasian' in this very comparison). I was told these runs had no value, arguing on logarythms arbitrary choices etc... but even in close regions were other components were similar, we see a big difference in the 'baluch'/'caucasian' ratio. The Basques have very more 'baluch' (if 'gedrosia' is a good proxi, what I think) than other Iberic people and N-Italians, these last ones have more of it than S-Italians, Greeks. Even people of Near-East and Iran, closer to the 'Baluch' region and spite their History of eastern tribes invasions, are far from the strong ratios of N-W Europeans and Basques.
My (fragile?) hypothesis is that, as it seems when we look at the very strong 'baluch'/'caucasian' ratio among ancient pops of the Steppes and even very older pops there (> 20000 y), and the absence of both among WHG's, is that this 'baluch' signal is tied to the ancient N-Steppes drifted ANE-linked component before differenciation occurred in the region where its was also strong and surely in a denser pop favouring mutations, the Peri-Caucasus; this 'baluch', so, could be the ancient CHG heritage in N-Steppes, 'caucasus' being the ne-look CHG one, the one which passed lately in S-Steppes, and into SE-Europe through Calcho/BA Anatolia.
the possible conclusion is that the first Steppic tribes cary this ancient CHG component in them and passed it to W-European ancient pops, the later CHG influences, from Caucasus, having been passed to Steppes only after these first moves.
Whatever the reality of this tale of mine, even if we take this classification 'baluch/caucasus' as only a relative tool, it could explain why, based on diverging drifts, specialists can tell Steppes CHG of Late Caucasus CHG.
Scientists are not saints all of them, but they are not more idiots all of them.