Is anthrogenica.com gone?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ihype02 said:
Sikeliot was caught posting crude racist content about Sicilians in two different accounts with different usernames that's why Angela dislikes him.
He did come to me as a bit obsessive too.
But why do you dislike him and Moriopoulos?
Because I honestly unaware of anything, expect for what Angela has mentioned in the past.
Click to expand...




Wasn't Sikeliot an Italo-American of mostly Sicilian heritage with daddy issue?
 
real expert said:
Wasn't Sikeliot an Italo-American of mostly Sicilian heritage with daddy issue?
Click to expand...

He said several times that his mother is Portuguese and Polish, so no more than 50 per cent Sicilian. Portuguese Princess was his name before Sikeliot.
 
LeoJ said:
Stop this off-topic subjects. Here is about ANTHROGENICA shut down, please ! If anybody is able to restore Anthrogenica forum please do it ! Excellent opinions, debates, subjects and materials, despite a lot of preconceptions and forced personal opinions. Way ahead Eupedia.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with LeoJ - the topic of this thread is about Anthrogenica status, shut down and possible resurrection. It should not be just another thread for horny ethnocentricsts to post their banned opinions. Really, the last one should care about the destiny of Anthrogenica so that they have some place to blather.
 
Jovialis said:
For people that don't have respect for academic authority you sure love to lecture others. I all I see from many hobbyists is just flinging crap as well. But the difference is that they are usually bunch of yahoos.

What exactly were most of you doing 15 years ago? I highly doubt it was this.

So much hubris, and arrogance. You people are delusional.
Click to expand...

Ok dude. Let's take what academics say at face value.

David Anthony in 2019 "PIE originated in EHGs"

David Reich in 2022 "No"

Who am I supposed to believe? These people change their minds every 3 years.
 
Given the last couple of years, it wouldn't be a far-fetched possibility that whoever runs Anthrogenica simply has become seriously ill or has even died. I'm sure you're all aware of the, ahem, "excess deaths" noted by various life insurance companies for 2021. Just by the numbers, it would only be a matter of time before some notable from this hobby would be struck down.

I hope that's not the case.
 
enter_tain said:
Ok dude. Let's take what academics say at face value.

David Anthony in 2019 "PIE originated in EHGs"

David Reich in 2022 "No"

Who am I supposed to believe? These people change their minds every 3 years.
Click to expand...

enter_tain: Anthony is an archeologist. So he is looking at artifacts and formulating his hypothesis. Reich is a Geneticist and looks at the DNA and says not quite the case. Looking back through Reich's Who We are and How we got here, it is not uncommon for archeologist, linguist and anthropologist working with the data they have to formulate hypotheses that the DNA evidence do not support. Now I am not saying those other 3 fields are not important, but when there are ancient genomes from numerous different individuals, that provides clarity on which hypothesis is correct.

So I guess that Reich now has enough new ancient genomes to provide more clarity on the question of the PIE homeland. Now, Anthony saying it originated in EHG's might be partially true. It is just reading Reich, the population that PIE originated in could likely be from a population formed by admixture from EHG + other populations. So from a genetics perspective (which Reich is coming from), the population that PIE originated in can't be EHG's but rather a population with EHG admixture.

That is how research works. Theories are developed from the data that we have be it from linguist, archeologist, anthropologist, then hypotheses are formulated and then when ancient genomes are sequenced and tested, we can confirm which hypothesis is correct (reject ones not supported by genetic evidence).
 
enter_tain said:
Ok dude. Let's take what academics say at face value.

David Anthony in 2019 "PIE originated in EHGs"

David Reich in 2022 "No"

Who am I supposed to believe? These people change their minds every 3 years.
Click to expand...

David Anthony agrees with David Reich, dude. Yes, minds change with new data, that's how science works.


Again, you think the head of the archaeogenetics Department at Harvard would assert such a claim without evidence to back it up? You people are basing your beliefs on already published data, when he has over 700+ new samples we haven't even seen yet. Are you going to discount new and undisputable information when it comes out?


This is what is going to happen, the field will move forward with these new discoveries, and you will ultimately become a hyper-minority.
 
Tomenable said:
Nice. But these genomes are not yet publicly available?
Click to expand...

I don't think so, but this is my assumption of their origins:

ehJsqBx.png


Maybe I am wrong, but if I am, I am happy to know the truth.
 
User Palermo said - ''I guess that Reich now has enough new ancient genomes to provide more clarity on the question of the PIE homeland. Now, Anthony saying it originated in EHG's might be partially true. It is just reading Reich, the population that PIE originated in could likely be from a population formed by admixture from EHG + other populations. So from a genetics perspective (which Reich is coming from), the population that PIE originated in can't be EHG's but rather a population with EHG admixture.''


No; Reich is a highly fallible & overrated geneticist. His models are very problematic, and whn you couple that with his general ignorance of archaeology & uniparentals, as well as data fudging and his political bias, his opinion is not worth the e-paper it's printed on. Unfortunately, too many people buy into his half-baked theories
 
Dinaric Superman said:
User Palermo said - ''I guess that Reich now has enough new ancient genomes to provide more clarity on the question of the PIE homeland. Now, Anthony saying it originated in EHG's might be partially true. It is just reading Reich, the population that PIE originated in could likely be from a population formed by admixture from EHG + other populations. So from a genetics perspective (which Reich is coming from), the population that PIE originated in can't be EHG's but rather a population with EHG admixture.''


No; Reich is a highly fallible & overrated geneticist. His models are very problematic, and whn you couple that with his general ignorance of archaeology & uniparentals, as well as data fudging and his political bias, his opinion is not worth the e-paper it's printed on. Unfortunately, too many people buy into his half-baked theories
Click to expand...

Ok, why don't you write a paper get it published in Nature or Science and show him that he is overrated.
 
I think some of you should join anti-vaxxer/flat-earther forums, you might feel right at home with the anti-intellectualism. Then you can find like minded people who believe all of academia is bias.

Basil said:
AG was special because of the academic-style decorum it observed and enforced.
Click to expand...


What joke, it is academic-style decorum to believe hobbyists know better than actual academics. Please, give me a break.
 
Dinaric Superman said:
User Palermo said - ''I guess that Reich now has enough new ancient genomes to provide more clarity on the question of the PIE homeland. Now, Anthony saying it originated in EHG's might be partially true. It is just reading Reich, the population that PIE originated in could likely be from a population formed by admixture from EHG + other populations. So from a genetics perspective (which Reich is coming from), the population that PIE originated in can't be EHG's but rather a population with EHG admixture.''


No; Reich is a highly fallible & overrated geneticist. His models are very problematic, and whn you couple that with his general ignorance of archaeology & uniparentals, as well as data fudging and his political bias, his opinion is not worth the e-paper it's printed on. Unfortunately, too many people buy into his half-baked theories
Click to expand...

Furthermore, don't you think making an accusation like you made is not appropriate (i.e Fudging data).

If you think his models are poorly specified, that is a legitimate criticism. However, if He and his team publish models in journals. Other academics once the samples are made available for other scholars (and lay hobbyist) to review, will analyze those same genomes and provide models that better explain the data. So what are the incentives for Reich and his team to do a crappy job? There are none. Now, again, maybe models in their papers can be done better. Fair enough.

I am unaware of any of Reich's papers at Retraction watch. Most of the papers retracted tend to be from Chinese academics who publish papers and then when other academics from around the world try to replicate their results, they can't.

I am not a Moderator but in my view, your post is over the top.
 
Palermo Trapani said:
Furthermore, don't you think making an accusation like you made is not appropriate (i.e Fudging data).

If you think his models are poorly specified, that is a legitimate criticism. However, if He and his team publish models in journals. Other academics once the samples are made available for other scholars (and lay hobbyist) to review, will analyze those same genomes and provide models that better explain the data. So what are the incentives for Reich and his team to do a crappy job? There are none. Now, again, maybe models in their papers can be done better. Fair enough.

I am unaware of any of Reich's papers at Retraction watch. Most of the papers retracted tend to be from Chinese academics who publish papers and then when other academics from around the world try to replicate their results, they can't.

I am not a Moderator but in my view, your post is inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Don't waste your time, you are never going to change his mind. Even if you had a doctorate and worked at Harvard, it wouldn't be enough for him to defer to expert opinion. Let these people live in their silos.
 
Palermo Trapani said:
enter_tain: Anthony is an archeologist. So he is looking at artifacts and formulating his hypothesis. Reich is a Geneticist and looks at the DNA and says not quite the case. Looking back through Reich's Who We are and How we got here, it is not uncommon for archeologist, linguist and anthropologist working with the data they have to formulate hypotheses that the DNA evidence do not support. Now I am not saying those other 3 fields are not important, but when there are ancient genomes from numerous different individuals, that provides clarity on which hypothesis is correct.

So I guess that Reich now has enough new ancient genomes to provide more clarity on the question of the PIE homeland. Now, Anthony saying it originated in EHG's might be partially true. It is just reading Reich, the population that PIE originated in could likely be from a population formed by admixture from EHG + other populations. So from a genetics perspective (which Reich is coming from), the population that PIE originated in can't be EHG's but rather a population with EHG admixture.

That is how research works. Theories are developed from the data that we have be it from linguist, archeologist, anthropologist, then hypotheses are formulated and then when ancient genomes are sequenced and tested, we can confirm which hypothesis is correct (reject ones not supported by genetic evidence).
Click to expand...

David Anthony is an anthropologist, not an archaeologist. And he talks about genetics, archaeology, linguistics. Certainly not an expert on these fields.

Reich and those around him can and should form a hypothesis. Now they don't even have one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 107216 times.

Back
Top