Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 418

Thread: Is anthrogenica.com gone?

  1. #226
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-01-09
    Posts
    960

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z36

    Country: UK - Scotland



    As far as I could see, a number of Anthrogenica members considered modern Italians to be descendants of Roman Age Levantines and early Medieval Germanic invaders.

  2. #227
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,607

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    4 members found this post helpful.
    ^^Explains the odd bedfellows of nordicists and levantists.

    We don't need these interlopers to explain anything to us, because we are adept in analyzing the data ourselves.

    Thank god that embarrassment to population genetics and all of their garbage musings have been erased and no longer stand the test of time.

    Eupedia is where the truth will endure

  3. #228
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    20-11-20
    Posts
    48


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    What is exotic about these haplogroups?
    Nothing, that's why I put it in quotes. The user I was responding to called them exotic.

  4. #229
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,231


    Country: Albania



    Wrong thread.

  5. #230
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,607

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Keep the thread on topic about the fact anthrogenica no longer exists.

  6. #231
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,607

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    I told you people not to derail the thread, now I have given infractions. Post it an appropriate thread.

  7. #232
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,607

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Keep the thread on topic about the fact anthrogenica no longer exists.
    Stay on topic.

  8. #233
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-01-14
    Posts
    11


    Country: France



    6 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Basil View Post
    Riverman, you posted on AG at a higher rate than almost anyone and I know you recognize its value as an open science paradise frequented by some of the most informed and reasonable people in the population genomics space. If you want into the Discord server, just email me.

    As for the invectives directed at me and my associates on AG by some of the ignoramuses on this forum, I'm just embarrassed for you.

    1.) Charges of AG being too strict:
    AG was special because of the academic-style decorum it observed and enforced. It was supposed to be a highbrow space for scientific inquiry and discussion, not a playground for ethnocentrists and nationalists. If we let anybody run roughshod over the TOS, it would have completely defeated the purpose of the forum. By the way, even Davidski was banned on AG several times. The mods didn't play! So much for unabashed Davidski worship!

    2.) Charges of bias:
    I spent years on anthrofora as the most vociferous anti-Nordicist, pro-Mediterranean celebrant in the world. I've earned my bona fides, so the butthurt ghouls speaking ill of me or AG don't have a leg to stand on. The completely banal recognition of minor Levantine ancestry in certain Southern Europeans doesn't make a person a "Levantinist." It means they live in reality. I wonder how many people in here deny the minor North African ancestry in Spaniards and Portuguese, too. I don't even want to know.

    As far as being a Davidski acolyte goes, you might as well accuse me of being a David Reich-ballhugger, Nick Patterson worshipper, Iosif Lazaridis disciple. That's how silly you sound. I like these guys because I respect them. I've engaged with Davidski on matters anthropological since before this forum existed. We've had both moments of agreement and disagreement over the years; he's a good egg and one of the best open scientists I've ever met. There's a reason Nick Patterson has engaged with Davidski on his blog and not with any of you; there's a reason his method has been cited in a recent aDNA paper as inspiring a methodology used therein. And AG has been cited, too. AG is frequented mostly by people who follow the preponderance of evidence, and the nature of an open science community ensures disagreement with poorly argued conclusions or methodological decisions made by certain academics in the field; it also includes a lot of praise and result replication. And if I thought the evidence pointed to PIE coming from the Near East, I'd be delighted. I care about what's true, not what I want to believe. And if David Reich has an smoking gun in Southern Arc to change my mind, that would be most welcome. This is a lesson in character many of you could stand to learn.

    One way or another the community will survive. For those too blind or stupid to understand the value of a forum like that, that's entirely your loss.
    Yeah right, isn't Polako/davidski the guy so full of himself that for like 7 years he was making fun of R1b-m269 being wogs in origin and was insulting/calling names all of those who said R1b-m269 was proto-indo european ? And when the Yamnaya paper came out, he changed his mind and said he was mistaken because the evidences were against it before. No the truth was that he was too full of himself, stupid and biased to see the evidences. Of course not a word of excuse for his past behaviour.

    Speaking of wich he had like a special treatment in anthrogenica, random members acting like him would have been banned 10 times already, he just got suspended one time and then said he won't come back to anthrogenica because of the horrible moderation. Yeah ! finally he found out the obvious about anthrogenica, took him 8 years. I mean I agree with some of your points but don't forgot that he's full of himself and also made many big mistakes in his interpretations, never forget this. Oh and don't your back hurt with all that self sucking ?

  9. #234
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,231


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    Davidski had said that Mycenaeans would be 'Sintashta clones'. Can you mention a case where you had disagreed with him?
    Besides Sikeliot had an account on Anthrogenica for quite some time even though it was well known and obvious he was a troll.
    I'll bite even though I said I will refrain.
    Davidski from May 2017:
    Why would the Myceneans not just cluster with the majority of the Bronze age Balkan samples instead of that 1 R1a1a outlier from Bulgaria?
    Who claimed that? I didn't.
    What I said was that the Z93 sample (not really an outlier, because he forms a very neat cline along with Balkan Yamnaya, Vucedol and most other Balkan BA samples) might represent the arrival of the horse/chariot complex in the southern Balkans, and related admixture in Mycenaeans.
    I have no idea how much of this admixture will be in the sampled Mycenaean groups. We might find one Sintashta clone in one of the grave shafts that has Sintashta horse bits as grave goods, or we might not
    . The Sintashta-related admixture might be more evenly spread out in the Mycenaean elite, or even across their whole society.
    My thoughts at the moment are that the proto-Mycenaeans arrived in the Balkans with Yamnaya, and I think it's pretty clear from the PCA above that if not for the really spotty sampling of the EBA Balkans in this paper, we'd see a massive surge of Yamnaya ancestry into the Balkans during the EBA.
    I think that the horse/chariot complex had a profound impact on Mycenaean culture, but that it was a secondary layer of steppe influence in the Mycenaeans.

  10. #235
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    03-09-21
    Posts
    8


    Country: United States



    Any update from the owners of antrogenica is it dead or not

  11. #236
    Regular Member spruithean's Avatar
    Join Date
    29-08-12
    Posts
    435


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by venustas View Post
    Any update from the owners of antrogenica is it dead or not
    There have been attempts to contact the owner, they have not yet responded. Hopefully they are well.

  12. #237
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    581


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by ihype02 View Post
    I'll bite even though I said I will refrain.
    Davidski from May 2017:
    Why would the Myceneans not just cluster with the majority of the Bronze age Balkan samples instead of that 1 R1a1a outlier from Bulgaria?
    Who claimed that? I didn't.
    What I said was that the Z93 sample (not really an outlier, because he forms a very neat cline along with Balkan Yamnaya, Vucedol and most other Balkan BA samples) might represent the arrival of the horse/chariot complex in the southern Balkans, and related admixture in Mycenaeans.
    I have no idea how much of this admixture will be in the sampled Mycenaean groups. We might find one Sintashta clone in one of the grave shafts that has Sintashta horse bits as grave goods, or we might not
    . The Sintashta-related admixture might be more evenly spread out in the Mycenaean elite, or even across their whole society.
    My thoughts at the moment are that the proto-Mycenaeans arrived in the Balkans with Yamnaya, and I think it's pretty clear from the PCA above that if not for the really spotty sampling of the EBA Balkans in this paper, we'd see a massive surge of Yamnaya ancestry into the Balkans during the EBA.
    I think that the horse/chariot complex had a profound impact on Mycenaean culture, but that it was a secondary layer of steppe influence in the Mycenaeans.
    Are you his representative? See if he had used the phrase 'Sintashta clones' on Anthrogenica too and post that too to get the whole picture.
    Those who have 'Sintashta horse bits as grave goods' can be 'Sintashta clones'. Is that YOUR position too? And what happens if they don't?

    We are talking about a person who has called Herodotus a 'geographer' btw.

  13. #238
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,231


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    Are you his representative? See if he had used the phrase 'Sintashta clones' on Anthrogenica too and post that too to get the whole picture.
    Those who have 'Sintashta horse bits as grave goods' can be 'Sintashta clones'. Is that YOUR position too? And what happens if they don't?

    We are talking about a person who has called Herodotus a 'geographer' btw.
    I wonder what your point might actually be?

  14. #239
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    581


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by ihype02 View Post
    I wonder what your point might actually be?
    You should wonder what YOUR point is because YOU quoted me.

  15. #240
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,231


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    You should wonder what YOUR point is because YOU quoted me.
    I corrected you on the claim that Davidski asserted Mycenaeans will turn out to be Sintashta clones.
    Unless he said it somewhere else.

    "Those who have 'Sintashta horse bits as grave goods' can be 'Sintashta clones."

    Sure they can be and they can not be. Don't see anything wrong with this line.

  16. #241
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    581


    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by ihype02 View Post
    I corrected you on the claim that Davidski asserted Mycenaeans will turn out to be Sintashta clones.
    Unless he said it somewhere else.
    "Those who have 'Sintashta horse bits as grave goods' can be 'Sintashta clones."
    Sure they can be and they can not be. Don't see anything wrong with this line.
    He had said it somewhere else, yes (on anthrogenica). Though I don't remember the exact words. Maybe the wording wasn't as bad as I remember it.
    These were his positions after the Mathieson et al. 2017 study, we knew then what the Balkans BA profile was at least then.

    Actually I don't want to talk about him, I don't dislike him. He is a human. This "Basil' / "Moriopoulos" is 100 times worse.
    See this post though and the comments, it is clearly the result of a bias / complex https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/...-have.html?m=1

  17. #242
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    212


    Country: Italy



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    He had said it somewhere else, yes (on anthrogenica). Though I don't remember the exact words. Maybe the wording wasn't as bad as I remember it.
    These were his positions after the Mathieson et al. 2017 study, we knew then what the Balkans BA profile was at least then.

    Actually I don't want to talk about him, I don't dislike him. He is a human. This "Basil' / "Moriopoulos" is 100 times worse.
    See this post though and the comments, it is clearly the result of a bias / complex https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/...-have.html?m=1
    Ah, scrolling through that comment section has reminded me of how despicable and chronically mendacious both most Eurogenes commentators and a good chunk of Anthrogenica users:
    1) as for Basil/Moriopoulos and people like him, they are so sure they "live in reality" that they speak of their laughworthy and incredibly moronic theories as well-known truisms beyond any doubt when in reality those are just sheer delusions born out of sheer ethnic narcissism, since the "east med" race they keep mentioning, as a tripartite mixture of Greek, Anatolian and Levantine ancestry, is something that DOES NOT EXIST and hasn't shown up in any single genetic paper up to date, and the reason why it has been concocted is because it stroked the ethnic narcissism of Erikl86 who believed contrary to every piece and bit of available evidence that the ethnogenesis of western/european Jews took place by far and large in situ in the Levant. That is why the label "levanticism" is spot on.
    2) as for Davidsky/Polako and people like him, I'll never understand the fiery animus he has towards south Italians amd Greeks, which brings him to hold the most contrived and ridicolous claims about the ethnogenesis of modern Italians and Greeks (especially southern Italians, as if they were a separate ethny from northern ones, whereas according to science in Italy the genetic difference is clinal, not disjunctive), as when he claimed that modern Greeks had almost no continuity with ancient Greeks (a view he has recently changed but we can add it to the list of obvious things that he still got wrong), or when he claimed/seems to claim still that south Italians have around 25-50% Levantine ancestry; as I've said in other occasions, it isn't enough to believe that southern Italians have semitic ancestry in order to be said to hold anti-italian sentiments, since it can be just a cold matter-of-fact assertion, but it's clear that Davidsky doesn't just believe in it because he thinks it's true but because he has the desire to find it because he believes south Italy isn't European enough (that is a fair inference to draw from his statement that south Italians ought to be kicked out of Europe). Frankly, I hope he has been bying Maloox since it has been proven that actually southern Italians are among the closest genetic relatives of ancient Greeks, the very creators of the notions of Europe and western civilization.

    What both groups had in common is their reconstruction of the ethnogenesis of Greeks and (south) Italians, and it is why they ended up working together, but they differ in how they interpret the contribution of their relative ancestral component to the historical events of ancient Greece and Italy, with the former believing that the Levant acted as a civilizational force which built the hellenistic and imperial world, and the barbarians as a force that tore it down, whereas the latter believing that the Levant acted as a decaying factor that led to the "decadency" of the hellenistic and imperial periods respectively compared to the "European" splendour of the previous eras (of course brought into being by the influx of steppe ancestry they'll say).

    Another thing they have in common is the ONLY reliance on G25 results to support their theory, dismissing the existing genetic literature in what is an incredibly anti-intellectualistic stance (which explains, imo, why their historical reconstructions are so ridicolous: you can't have books stand in the way of how to interpret G25 and the sacred Eurogenes blog!)

  18. #243
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,231


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    He had said it somewhere else, yes (on anthrogenica). Though I don't remember the exact words. Maybe the wording wasn't as bad as I remember it.
    These were his positions after the Mathieson et al. 2017 study, we knew then what the Balkans BA profile was at least then.
    I doubt it.

    Actually I don't want to talk about him, I don't dislike him. He is a human. This "Basil' / "Moriopoulos" is 100 times worse.
    See this post though and the comments, it is clearly the result of a bias / complex https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/...-have.html?m=1
    Again I do not see anything controversial in that page or either I have missed something there or cannot comprehend it.
    Everybody knows that Davidski has some bias towards his Steppe admiration.
    And for G25 modern coordinates even Davidski did give a hint that some of the G25 coordinates might not be fully accurate.

  19. #244
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    581


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by ihype02 View Post
    I doubt it.



    Again I do not see anything controversial in that page or either I have missed something there or cannot comprehend it.
    Everybody knows that Davidski has some bias towards his Steppe admiration.
    And for G25 modern coordinates even Davidski did give a hint that some of the G25 coordinates might not be fully accurate.
    He had used the phrase 'Sintashta clones' on Anthrogenica. Find it to see what he had said exactly. Maybe it was more nuanced* than what I remember. Can you find it? If you can't find it don't quote me again.

    You don't see anything controversial? LOL.

    (I did not say anything about G25. I don't know what G25 is or does. Should I?)

    *Maybe they were Sintashta clones, maybe they weren't. Ήξεις αφήξεις ​etc.

  20. #245
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    1,734


    Country: Austria



    1 members found this post helpful.
    We have to wait for the paper which claimed that at the beginning of the LBA "Central-Eastern European" ancestry appeared in the Aegean. The most likely scenario is that Proto-Greeks came with mixed Catacomb/MCW people in the MBA-LBA transition down to Greece. They won't be clones of Sintashta when coming in, they might have been different on the steppe already, especially with their main lineage being still Yamnaya/R-Z2103, and picking up a lot of local ancestry and lineages, possibly, even before entering Greece.

    Anyway, people shouldn't forget the achievements of David and Anthrogenica. Its not like they didn't make valuable contributions. That's not really fair.

    It would be like bashing Eupedia just because its down. I think David and Maciamo being two of the most active and productive contributors to this field online. Are they always right? Of course not, who is?

    Obviously one of the reasons I joined Eupedia was Maciamos great work and the resources he provided. I don't get why people have to bash each other for rather minor differences and age old disputes.

  21. #246
    Regular Member Er Monnezza's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-01-18
    Posts
    165


    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    Davidski had said that Mycenaeans would be 'Sintashta clones'.
    He is talking about outliers, not all Mycenaeans (1 "Sintashta clone" in 1 Grave shaft). Also, he did not state this with certainty.


  22. #247
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,280


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 members found this post helpful.
    The acolyte rushes in.:) That isn't what he said right before the paper came out. No doubt that statement is no longer there. So easy to scrub posts on your site if they make you look like a fool.


    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

  23. #248
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,607

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Lol Davidski literally told me himself that the Lazaridis paper is not reliable, and that more samples will show different with high steppe that was only two years ago before getting banned on anthrogenica. It really is pathetic this cult of people who powder his backside. Two years later that pca from the greek-german exhibit re-enforce the Lazaridis paper

  24. #249
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,607

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    It doesn't matter how many of you come out of the woodwork because it only re-enforces the IQ distribution of the Bellcurve. Moreover, verifiable high IQ people in the genetic field say otherwise. I'd recommend deference to your mental superiors (i.e. cohorts of geneticists who author papers)

  25. #250
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-12-21
    Posts
    687

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2B2-L283/Z638

    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    It doesn't matter how many of you come out of the woodwork because it only re-enforces the IQ distribution of the Bellcurve. Moreover, verifiable high IQ people in the genetic field say otherwise. I'd recommend deference to your mental superiors (i.e. cohorts of geneticists who author papers)
    You mean the very same people that for the first 10-15 years of archeogenetics wrote all sorts of garbage and solidified wrong opinions amongst people?

    Let's not pretend like geneticists are PhD theoretical physicists or something.

Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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