Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
I've never yet heard from an Albanian who didn't think Dienekes was biased, and the reason is that they hate his analyses of Balkan genetics, particularly Greek and Albanian genetics.

Meanwhile, I, for have no stake in the matter, can't think of one major thing about which he was wrong, and I followed him from his first posts, and was part of his sample set.

Eurogenes, on the other hand, has been wrong so many times that as I've often said I could fill the phone book of a small city with his incorrect predictions. The only times he's right is when his buddy tells him about the contents of upcoming papers. Anyone interested can find his exchanges with me on this site and see for yourselves how he can't even read a paper properly and relate what it shows or doesn't show; he just jumps to his pre-determined conclusions.

As for "calculators", for people who haven't been around long enough, Dienekes "invented" them. Eurogenes is like a line engineer using someone else's algorithms and programs without, of course, acknowledging his debt.

That's not to mention that Eurogenes is an out and out racist propagandist convicted out of his own mouth and someone captured on discussions with his Russian buddy trying to figure out how to manipulate the sample selection to get the desired result. For crying out loud, on PCAs he used to routinely include close relatives of "his" samples.

OK, I remember something he was wrong about: some y dna predictions, like for Oetzi.
Dienekes claimed that E-V13 in Mediterranean is essentially of Greek origin. And that E-V13 and J2 (not just J2a) in Albanians are also of Ancient Greek origin. That Turks are to a large part Ancient Greeks. That is very ironic coming from a Pontic Greek who barely has Ancient Greek ancestry himself. He should know better as a Pontic Greek. This for starters completely knocks him out for me. It's done for me.

Davidski does not have this type of "bias".

Can name something similar about Davidski?

I am not really a follower of pre-history genetics or where Davidski disagreed but I do know that Davidski has a very long lists what Dienekes has been wrong about.

Many eminent writers (including highly respected not just Davidski) in genetics don't take him seriously and he has a very bad reputation in internet. Davidski has only a bad reputation here.

Do you have any proof about Davidski and his Russian buddy? Some may like Dienekes because he stroke their ego.