Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Correlation does not mean causation: the damage of the ‘Yamnaya ancestral component’

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    20-05-18
    Posts
    122


    Country: Portugal



    2 members found this post helpful.

    Correlation does not mean causation: the damage of the ‘Yamnaya ancestral component’

    Interesting and quite obvious text for those who had already observed some facts - such as the different distribution between r1b /r1a and the obvious autosomal difference involved. Also the fact that the Bell Beaker culture of the northwest has more connection with Yamnaya and afanasievo than Corded Were - not only in the dominance of different haplogroups, but also in an autosomal way.

    https://indo-european.eu/2017/11/correlation-does-not-mean-causation-the-damage-of-the-yamnaya-ancestral-component-and-the-future-america-hypothesis/

  2. #2
    Regular Member Joey37's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-06-18
    Location
    Coventry, Rhode Island
    Posts
    458

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a-YP445
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c2b

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic
    Country: USA - Rhode Island



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Please do not share the Uralic Corded Ware fantasies of Carlos Quiles, I know you may be susceptible to his Jedi mind tricks and his haplogroup bottlenecks as magic bullets logical fallacies. I suspect Hitler would be delighted with his Slavs as Indo-Europeanized yoiking Forest Finns idea, it fits in with his idiotic conception of Slavs as primitive, untermensch-y people, civilized by the Drang nach Osten Bell Beaker R1b supermen. And then there's the part where he says Corded Ware hijacked the Yamnaya genetic component, which is grasping at straws bizarre. Being wrong in an attempt to fight Nordicist racism does not make you right, it just makes you wrong with good intentions. Or perhaps, with his pan-Europeanist fantasies, sinister intentions, and you Latin students may enjoy the double meaning of that.

  3. #3
    Moderator
    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    2,253


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ack View Post
    Interesting and quite obvious text for those who had already observed some facts - such as the different distribution between r1b /r1a and the obvious autosomal difference involved. Also the fact that the Bell Beaker culture of the northwest has more connection with Yamnaya and afanasievo than Corded Were - not only in the dominance of different haplogroups, but also in an autosomal way.

    https://indo-european.eu/2017/11/correlation-does-not-mean-causation-the-damage-of-the-yamnaya-ancestral-component-and-the-future-america-hypothesis/
    I see absolutely no evidence that Bell Beaker and Corded Ware's steppic admixture were substantially different, and that Bell Beaker's was closer to Yamnaya's. In fact, if you model all the BB and CWC you will soon notice that both had a far bigger EHG:CHG ratio than Yamnaya, which suggests that both came from the same source or at least had a similar history of admixture between Late Khvalynsk/Repin/Yamnaya and groups with lower CHG admixture like the Sredny Stog before expanding out of the Pontic-Caspian zone.

    If anything, what you can see in BB and CWC samples is a strong indication that the mature phase of Yamnaya was less important in the Indo-Europeanization of Europe than was once believed (with the possible exception of the Balkans), and those that were "outcast" by the Yamnaya and gradually displaced to the peripheries of the steppes and thence to other lands outside the steppes were the ones who really brought Proto-Indo-European dialects to other parts of Europe.

    Carlos Quiles just can't quit his ludicrous Indo-Uralic Neolithic Steppe (yes, he believes a common Indo-Uralic was spoken just one or two millennia before Indo-European itself started to split) and Uralic Corded Ware hypothesis, and he pretends everyone else is being partial to an Indo-European CWC, but the fact is that he is the one who seems hellbent on keeping his pet theory despite all odds. He and other people who think like him genuinely believe (despite everything we have learned in the last years) that there were entire peoples, spread through a very large territory, who belonged to just 1 and only Y-DNA haplogroup, and there was once a direct and necessary relationship between one Y-DNA lineage and one distinct language family. I honestly don't believe that simplistic scenario is even very plausible when the archaeological record shows multiple waves of expansion and cultural exchange in the steppes - let alone if it's likely.

  4. #4
    Baron
    Join Date
    10-06-12
    Posts
    462

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-BY593
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2

    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Makes perfect sense.
    Simple and easy explanation why common R1a sample has not yet been found in all three cultures -Yamnaya-Afanasievo-Bell Beaker- share R1b-L23+L51+Z2109+. While Afanasievo like R1b-L51 is found in Corded Ware burials, and R1b-Z2109+ is found in Sintashta burials.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Joey37's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-06-18
    Location
    Coventry, Rhode Island
    Posts
    458

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a-YP445
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c2b

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic
    Country: USA - Rhode Island



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Please recreate the Rhine Uralic dialect for me, then. Because Corded Ware spread all the way to the Rhine. The various original home areas of Uralic languages set up by people who speak and actually know the history of Uralic languages and peoples are far to the northeast of where the earliest R1a samples have been found. If you want to say Indo-European was spread by R1b peoples, fine. If you are going to make up ridiculous stories not supported by decades of research and science to buttress your pet political ideologies, YOU ARE FAKE NEWS.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    2,253


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joey37 View Post
    Please recreate the Rhine Uralic dialect for me, then. Because Corded Ware spread all the way to the Rhine. The various original home areas of Uralic languages set up by people who speak and actually know the history of Uralic languages and peoples are far to the northeast of where the earliest R1a samples have been found. If you want to say Indo-European was spread by R1b peoples, fine. If you are going to make up ridiculous stories not supported by decades of research and science to buttress your pet political ideologies, YOU ARE FAKE NEWS.
    That's one of the caveats in that hypothesis. AFAIK no sign of a Uralic substrate has ever been found in Central-Western Europe as far west as the Netherlands and Switzerland, and Carlos Quiles wants us to believe that the huge difference between Proto-Uralic and Proto-Indo-European was the result of a linguistic divergence only 2,000-3,000 years before they started to expanded in different ways. He also wants us to believe that IE subgroups that are usually estimated by linguists to have diverged particularly early (e.g. Italo-Celtic vs. Balto-Slavic/Indo-Iranian) actually derive from an once common Northwestern IE language that started to split into distinct families after the BB expansion (and yet less than 1,000 years later Vedic Sanskrit and Mitanni were already totally Indo-Iranian-like). No way, sorry.

    Besides, it's just incredible that he wants us to believe Uralic is correlated with R1a-M417 when the vast majority of R1a-M417 individuals in Europe are and were historically Indo-European speakers, but he wants us to see no correlation at all between Uralic, N1c and small ammounts of Siberian admixture (all of which are consistent with an original expansion from north and east from the PIE Pontic-Caspian homeland), when virtually all modern Uralic peoples have those signals even if in minor proportions (Hungarians are really an outlier in many, many ways, their demographic history was just too complex and convoluted).

    FWIW, I do think some Proto-Uralic speakers did belong to R1a and even more specifically R1a-M417, because in my opinion the earliest Proto-Uralic homeland was peopled essentially by EHG people with low CHG admixture and a varying bit of Siberian admixture - therefore, nothing like CWC or any former Pontic-Caspian culture. But that's totally different from claiming that CWC was Uralic. In fact, there is a high likelihood that CWC contributed more than Yamnaya to spread CWC languages.

Posting Permissions

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