Is anthrogenica.com gone?

Status
Not open for further replies.
So nice to know you don't trust us to adequately analyze the papers.


i trust you very much
but do you know how to read y calls of bam files ?
like pribislav and few other in that site

p.s
i know that people are interested in autosomal of those ancients
but i am more on the y haplogroups so for me it is a loss
in that aspect thats all
 
So nice to know you don't trust us to adequately analyze the papers.

From my perspective its rather about more opinions of different knowledgeable people. It doesn't hurt if more people get on it, which is why I was always on both boards and read what different people had to say. If its about contacting authors, making haplogroup assignments and G25 models in particular, just as an example, there was just more activity on AG.
 
Point taken, gentlemen.

However, from the posts above, it seems that steps have been taken to get the old gang back together.

@Riverman, I also wished to hear different viewpoints, and so occasionally lurked there. Unfortunately, when I forgot my password and just decided to open a different account, I was peremptorily banned, even though I had never posted there and so could hardly be accused of trying to deceive anyone. My attempts to explain were met by a response that I was banned forever and would never be allowed back even to read posts.

I'm a more tolerant person, so the many anthrogenica members who lurk here are in no danger from "me".
 
i trust you very much
but do you know how to read y calls of bam files ?
like pribislav and few other in that site

p.s
i know that people are interested in autosomal of those ancients
but i am more on the y haplogroups so for me it is a loss
in that aspect thats all
As far as I know there is a clear difference between papers such as the Stable population structure one and the Southern Arc papers/ upcoming Balkan study. Whilst the Stable population structure paper did not have a layout of analyzed haplogroup classifications it did however provide the bam files of the samples. This won't be the case for the Southern Arc papers or the upcoming Balkan study where there is even graphs in regards to the paternal lines provided (on top of bam files). So, I expect them to have a layout of the parental lines and even if there won't be exact classifications we will at least initially know what the overall picture will be. Also, Trojet has made great contributions when it comes to analyzing Y calls of aDNA samples from the Balkans and whenever they were published he let us know and posted the results.
 
Albanians are 10 million. Outside of Eupedia I tend to see more Greeks than Albanians interested in Genetics but Albanians are among them with other Balkanites. But it mostly about Ancient Greeks and Illyrians I suppose.

Sorry, I quickly was going by the population size of Albanian alone. I forgot to consider diaspora.

But the Balkans as a whole is certainly the most interested in genetics out of all of Europe I have noticed.
 
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.

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 got this message from someone:

"If anyone does want to access the site right now you just need to add this to your local hosts file:

188.114.98.160 anthrogenica.com "

Can't get it to work, after adding it to my local hosts file I'm getting the namecheap page by using the original url (whereas previously I was getting nothing) and a denial of connection with the direct ip.
 
@Basil

Oh please you're full of it. A little Levant, what about people claiming 20%! Which is purpostrous. When I pointed to papers showing otherwise, I was given bs excuses, of which you endorsed. That is willful ignorance. You have endorsed G25 models that fly in the face of reputable academic papers. Which is why I thought of you as a Davidski acolyte. I've always maintained that it was trace amounts or a couple percent. Also, I seriously doubt any of you are as meticulous in analyzing the data. For one, those populations are notably heterogeneous. So i think alot of those models are inaccurate. So you better not be implying that I am denying reality!
 
@ Jovialis,

Now, all of a sudden it's trace amounts, and they never agreed with the claims of Sikelliot, Azzurro/Principe, and all the socks they posted under. They never even SPOTTED those sock accounts, btw, but they were on me like a duck on a June bug. Heck, they never even heard of Sikeliot, and as for being able to spot his socks, it was impossible!

Smells to me like maybe someone saw a leaked portion of an upcoming paper(s) and they're trying to back pedal furiously.

Polako very often did the same. Get a heads up, scrub the worst of contradictory posts, and come out with a brand new position right before a paper comes out. I used to conjecture that perhaps Razib Khan, with all his contacts, used to help his friend Polako out in that way.

Notice he doesn't mention the huge mistakes Polako made about the Etruscans or the Myceneaens, great open scientist that he is. :)

Yet we, who got both things right, are the ignoramuses. It's typical the pot calling the kettle black.

What hypocrites and liars.

Notice too how quickly some little acolytes must have been running to them with reports of what we're saying here. Honestly, so many of these young men on anthrofora have a disturbing resemblance to adolescent girls and their vicious little cliques. I remember when they tried to bring Dienekes down in one poor excuse for a forum. They're right in tune with the spirit of the age and the blurring of the genders.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, wrong thread.
 
Again, Anthrogenica bans are very often extremely unfair but some of you are exaggerating and putting things out of context and I am talking about 3 members in here. Don't make me expose you all but I don't wanna get personal with anyone. So I'll refrain.

Eupator deserved a warning or an infraction at most but not a perma ban. I actually liked his posts and was very disappointed when he got banned.
 
Well, Riverman, Polska, Jackson, Matadworf, Luso, Flann Fina, ihype02, hrvclv, thank you for letting us know where you stand, not that it's much of a surprise.

For the five of you who never or almost never post here, I now see why.

For the three who do post here, likewise, why?

Never mind, it would just be self-serving nonsense.
 
Again, Anthrogenica bans are very often extremely unfair but some of you are exaggerating and putting things out of context and I am talking about 3 members in here. Don't make you expose you all but I don't wanna get personal with anyone. So I'll refrain.

Eupator deserved a warning or an infraction at most but not a perma ban. I actually liked his posts and was very disappointed when he got banned.

Oh, we can take it. You've made it clear often enough. There's a reason you're on permanent ignore for me.
 
Well, Riverman, Polska, Jackson, Matadworf, Luso, Flann Fina, ihype02, hrvclv, thank you for letting us know where you stand, not that it's much of a surprise.

For the five of you who never or almost never post here, I now see why.

For the three who do post here, likewise, why?

Never mind, it would just be self-serving nonsense.

Eupator got banned for claiming that the Greek Macedonian average is wrong due to population exchange in 1920.
Mount derailed the Albanian thread and it got closed due to him getting in heated arguments about all Illyrians being J2b and Northern Italian-like which turned to be at least partly wrong.

I can continue.

Anthrogenica has it flaws but they don't have to lie I got banned by this, I got banned by that. It's just taken out of context.

About Davidski I don't know much about him. I know once he called Jovailis work garbage which would very likely result in a ban if it was said by somebody else. So I believe there at least some bias towards him.
 
Eupator got banned for claiming that the Greek Macedonian average is wrong due to population exchange in 1920.
Mount derailed the Albanian thread and it got closed due to him getting in heated arguments about all Illyrians being J2b and Northern Italian-like which turned to be at least partly wrong.

I can continue.
Aside from the fact that this is far from the truth, I find it astounding how even though I never really engaged in a proper conversation with you of any kind, you keep on personalizing the thread's topic and addressing me frequently. Not sure what the matter is with that but mind you I am not enthusiastic about it and would kindly ask you to stop doing so.

Either way, I think I made my point clear here and won't give any of your repetitive output that is about to come any further attention.
 
Aside from the fact that this is far from the truth, I find it astounding how even though I never really engaged in a proper conversation with you of any kind, you keep on personalizing the thread's topic and addressing me frequently. Not sure what the matter is with that but mind you I am not enthusiastic about it and would kindly ask you to stop doing so.

Either way, I think I made my point clear here and won't give any of your repetitive output that is about to come any further attention.

I did it twice not frequently.
If the site comes back the posts will be there for you and for many others.
I mean I was banned from there for having a second account with no bad intentions too.

I will refrain from this topic from now on.
 
@Basil
Oh please you're full of it. A little Levant, what about people claiming 20%! Which is purpostrous. When I pointed to papers showing otherwise, I was given bs excuses, of which you endorsed. That is willful ignorance. You have endorsed G25 models that fly in the face of reputable academic papers. Which is why I thought of you as a Davidski acolyte. I've always maintained that it was trace amounts or a couple percent. Also, I seriously doubt any of you are as meticulous in analyzing the data. For one, those populations are notably heterogeneous. So i think alot of those models are inaccurate. So you better not be implying that I am denying reality!


You people are lucky anthrogenica is gone, now you can hide the fact that you were wrong about much.
 
@Riverman, I also wished to hear different viewpoints, and so occasionally lurked there. Unfortunately, when I forgot my password and just decided to open a different account, I was peremptorily banned, even though I had never posted there and so could hardly be accused of trying to deceive anyone. My attempts to explain were met by a response that I was banned forever and would never be allowed back even to read posts.

You could have simply clicked a "forgot password?" hyperlink and been sent a reset link to your email. It didn't require a whole new account, no?

Anthrogenica had that in place to prevent the whole multiple accounts of t-rolls thing.
 
You could have simply clicked a "forgot password?" hyperlink and been sent a reset link to your email. It didn't require a whole new account, no?

Anthrogenica had that in place to prevent the whole multiple accounts of t-rolls thing.

Oh, yes? Then why was Sikeliot there under multiple socks which were never banned? On one interesting thread two of his socks were talking to each other. :)

Then, yes, I should have done it the way you suggest, but perhaps they might have done as I asked, and checked to see, as I explained, that I had never posted there, and so I wasn't attempting to deceive anyone.

They chose not to, and I know why. My accounts lead straight back to me, to someone they detested, and so I got banned instead, never having posted there.
 
You people are lucky anthrogenica is gone, now you can hide the fact that you were wrong about much.

It wouldn't surprise me to find out that they scrubbed the site.

Their "linguist", Agamemnon, wrote dozens, maybe hundreds of pages, explaining why the Etruscans HAD to be First Millennium B.C. migrants from the Near East. I don't know if it's true, but someone told me recently he couldn't find a lot of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 106617 times.

Back
Top