Cultures who have diverse Ydna less like a "people" than those who have mainly one?

saraman

Banned
Messages
66
Reaction score
10
Points
0
Cultures who have diverse Ydna less like a "people" than those who have mainly one?

What I'm getting at is Ydna represents a bond from father-to-son relationship sort of a specific personality trait of a specific culture and probably something that is also innate. Those that are diverse are less alike and thus less like a people. Those that are homogeneous are more alike and understand each other more. For example the Irish are way more of a people than Jews are with more diverse Ydna groups. As you know Jews are divided mainly religious, political, & personal beliefs while the Irish aren't and are mainly harmonious.
 
What I'm getting at is Ydna represents a bond from father-to-son relationship sort of a specific personality trait of a specific culture and probably something that is also innate. Those that are diverse are less alike and thus less like a people. Those that are homogeneous are more alike and understand each other more. For example the Irish are way more of a people than Jews are with more diverse Ydna groups. As you know Jews are divided mainly religious, political, & personal beliefs while the Irish aren't and are mainly harmonious.

did you consider an increase of inbreeding as a consequence?
 
What I'm getting at is Ydna represents a bond from father-to-son relationship sort of a specific personality trait of a specific culture and probably something that is also innate. Those that are diverse are less alike and thus less like a people. Those that are homogeneous are more alike and understand each other more. For example the Irish are way more of a people than Jews are with more diverse Ydna groups. As you know Jews are divided mainly religious, political, & personal beliefs while the Irish aren't and are mainly harmonious.

Actually I didn't know. From my knowledge of Irish history, far from being mainly harmonious they were divided by religious and political beliefs as much as any country in Europe. As a result, Ireland is still divided between two countries, the Republic of Ireland and the UK.

The R-L21 Y haplogroup that is dominant in Ireland is also the majority haplogroup in Scotland, Wales and England, so how can R-L21 make the Irish a different people from the Scots, Welsh or English?

The Y chromosome has fewer genes than any other chromosome, only about 30 functional genes out of about 20,000 in the human genome. One of them is the SRY gene that triggers male development, but apart from that the contribution of Ydna to innate characteristics is small and declining.
 
Actually I didn't know. From my knowledge of Irish history, far from being mainly harmonious they were divided by religious and political beliefs as much as any country in Europe. As a result, Ireland is still divided between two countries, the Republic of Ireland and the UK.

The R-L21 Y haplogroup that is dominant in Ireland is also the majority haplogroup in Scotland, Wales and England, so how can R-L21 make the Irish a different people from the Scots, Welsh or English?

The Y chromosome has fewer genes than any other chromosome, only about 30 functional genes out of about 20,000 in the human genome. One of them is the SRY gene that triggers male development, but apart from that the contribution of Ydna to innate characteristics is small and declining.

Gee, it's like culture doesn't exist.
 
What I'm getting at is Ydna represents a bond from father-to-son relationship sort of a specific personality trait of a specific culture and probably something that is also innate.

Now imagine the same homogeneity but also with women and mtDNA.
Like it was just before the European Neolithic...
 
Actually I didn't know. From my knowledge of Irish history, far from being mainly harmonious they were divided by religious and political beliefs as much as any country in Europe. As a result, Ireland is still divided between two countries, the Republic of Ireland and the UK.

The R-L21 Y haplogroup that is dominant in Ireland is also the majority haplogroup in Scotland, Wales and England, so how can R-L21 make the Irish a different people from the Scots, Welsh or English?

The Y chromosome has fewer genes than any other chromosome, only about 30 functional genes out of about 20,000 in the human genome. One of them is the SRY gene that triggers male development, but apart from that the contribution of Ydna to innate characteristics is small and declining.

Thank goodness for some actual science in this thread.
 
Actually I didn't know. From my knowledge of Irish history, far from being mainly harmonious they were divided by religious and political beliefs as much as any country in Europe. As a result, Ireland is still divided between two countries, the Republic of Ireland and the UK.

The R-L21 Y haplogroup that is dominant in Ireland is also the majority haplogroup in Scotland, Wales and England, so how can R-L21 make the Irish a different people from the Scots, Welsh or English?

Irish and Scottish men look very similar in their behaviour and way of acting and speaking.

Even when Irish are invaded by LOWLAND Scots, they feel the difference between them and English men.
 
What I'm getting at is Ydna represents a bond from father-to-son relationship sort of a specific personality trait of a specific culture and probably something that is also innate. Those that are diverse are less alike and thus less like a people. Those that are homogeneous are more alike and understand each other more. For example the Irish are way more of a people than Jews are with more diverse Ydna groups. As you know Jews are divided mainly religious, political, & personal beliefs while the Irish aren't and are mainly harmonious.

Ever heard of conflicts between Irish and N. Irish? I'm not even an expert here, and this one is obvious. Jewish groups are relatively harmonious, hence why the only major conflicts in Israel come from outsiders. Then again, this is usually how civilized people act.
 
Irish and Scottish men look very similar in their behaviour and way of acting and speaking.
Even when Irish are invaded by LOWLAND Scots, they feel the difference between them and English men.

I'm not even sure what this means. The difference is the English will never suck the Pope's knob. They take pride in that, back to our barbaric roots.
 
I'm not even sure what this means. The difference is the English will never suck the Pope's knob. They take pride in that, back to our barbaric roots.

Clean up your mouth or you're out of here. You can also park the anti-Catholicism at the door.

What the heck is wrong with you? You're gone for months and come back to post this kind of thing? This isn't theapricity or stormfront.

Well, folks, for all those who think the upper class English of Masterpiece Theater represent the whole country, think again.
 
Irish and Scottish people have not exactly the same Y-haplo's %'s nd have not exactly the same average deportment, spite sharing a lot.
That said, if Y chromosome has more effect than believed in respect of its global light weight in genetic transmission sex left aside, it has as a whole light imput compared to allover auDNA. And we may not forget that cultural aspects and shared or not-shared common history have also an heavy imput on Humans feelings, among them one group self affiliation and concern.
 
I'm not even sure what this means. The difference is the English will never suck the Pope's knob. They take pride in that, back to our barbaric roots.

An exceptionally low-IQ post.

Pride in Barbaric roots? Then why do they believe in an off-shoot of Catholicism? The Anglican church is very central to Anglo-Saxon identity.
 
Clean up your mouth or you're out of here. You can also park the anti-Catholicism at the door.

What the heck is wrong with you? You're gone for months and come back to post this kind of thing? This isn't theapricity or stormfront.

Well, folks, for all those who think the upper class English of Masterpiece Theater represent the whole country, think again.

Indeed, Aaron debases our forum with his low-class animalistic disposition.
 
Even the Mountain Jews of Azerbaijan who speak Farsi have a scarcity of both Iranic and Turkic Y-DNA haplogroups; their Y-DNA is closer to other Jews. Georgian Jews are genetically distinct from Georgians, and closer to other Jews. Sephardic Jews are distinct from other Mediterranean populations and closer to other Jews.

The only exceptions are Iranian Jews who show a proximity to Iranic peoples that clearly isn't from a Semitic source (greater ANE). This is consistent with Jews being seen as a religious group and not ethnic in Iran. Yemenite Jews are closer to the Arabian Peninsula than other Jews. This makes sense because both of these groups were derived from very early diasporic populations close to the formation of the Jewish religion, so it would make sense the first non-Levantine Jews were descended from indigenous peoples.

Socioculturally it's a different story. In the USSR, many Ashkenazi Jews migrated to places in West & Central Asia with native Jewish populations who spoke Persian or Georgian or Armenian, and they really didn't like each other. Georgian Jews and Armenian Jews detested the Ashkenazi immigrants in Tbilisi and Yerevan, and actually identified more with ethnic Georgians or Armenians than their own fellow Jews. Ashkenazi Jews were actually more likely to marry Slavs than they were Bukharan Jews. Bukharan Jews were more likely to marry Uzbeks or Tajiks than Ashkenazi, despite them being fellow Jews. Even in the US during the days of Ellis Island, the German Jews in many cases identified more with non-Jewish Germans than with the Russian Jews, whom they looked down upon.

So, in summary, there are indeed divisions among the Jewish people, but they have nothing to do with Y-DNA. Ashkenazi Cohens with Haplogroup J and Ashkenazi Levites with R1a have the same cultural traditions: Yiddish, shtetl, etc. They Y-DNA doesn't affect this. Meanwhile you can have 2 Jewish men with E1b1b, one Ashkenazi and the other Sephardic, and the Ashkenazi will feel an affinity for a J2 Ashkenazi man because of the common culture.
 
I'm not even sure what this means. The difference is the English will never suck the Pope's knob. They take pride in that, back to our barbaric roots.

Did you take history classes when you were in school? Henry the VII broke with Rome in the early 16th century and made himself head of the Protestant church of England. So are you a troll? or you ignorant or perhaps just an ignorant troll?
 
Did you take history classes when you were in school? Henry the VII broke with Rome in the early 16th century and made himself head of the Protestant church of England. So are you a troll? or you ignorant or perhaps just an ignorant troll?

Indeed. Henry VII was even given the title "Defender of the Faith" for a treatise he wrote supporting the traditional church against Luther and Calvin.

The only reason he broke with Rome was because the Pope wouldn't give him a dispensation to annul his decades long marriage to his wife so he could marry his already pregnant mistress whom he hoped would bear him a living son.

He should definitely be on the list of opportunist hypocrites. No idealism that I can see. He then proceeded to torture and execute not only Lutherans and Calvinists but any who still recognized Rome.

Another irony is that if you go to Anglican services, they're barely different from a Catholic Mass. So, it really was about making the head of the Church the King, instead of the Pope. Is that somehow more honorable, or is it just a way for a King to control more of the levers of power in a country?
 
Indeed. Henry VII was even given the title "Defender of the Faith" for a treatise he wrote supporting the traditional church against Luther and Calvin.

The only reason he broke with Rome was because the Pope wouldn't give him a dispensation to annul his decades long marriage to his wife so he could marry his already pregnant mistress whom he hoped would bear him a living son.

He should definitely be on the list of opportunist hypocrites. No idealism that I can see. He then proceeded to torture and execute not only Lutherans and Calvinists but any who still recognized Rome.

Another irony is that if you go to Anglican services, they're barely different from a Catholic Mass. So, it really was about making the head of the Church the King, instead of the Pope. Is that somehow more honorable, or is it just a way for a King to control more of the levers of power in a country?

Angela: Yes, he was given the title Defender of the Faith by the Pope Leo X for not embracing the views of Luther or Calvin. But of course, a wondering eye and desire for a male heir did him in, and it would do him in many more times besides Anne Boleyn.

And yes an Anglican Liturgy is very similar to a Catholic Liturgy since its roots are in the Sarum Rite of the Latin Catholic Church, the form of the Liturgy in England prior to both Henry VIII's break with Rome and the Council of Trent which codified all of the various Latin Liturgies into a standardize Rite, the so called Tridentine Liturgy as it is often referred to today.
 
Ever heard of conflicts between Irish and N. Irish? I'm not even an expert here, and this one is obvious. Jewish groups are relatively harmonious, hence why the only major conflicts in Israel come from outsiders. Then again, this is usually how civilized people act.

I am very very aware of the Irish and N. Irish conflict. You should've left it off at "I'm not even an expert here" and call it a day. I've never seen anyone try a counter point this bad. No offense.
 

This thread has been viewed 4932 times.

Back
Top