Which is more European ? Finno-ugric languages or Indo-European languages?

[Melancon]

Since your Y haplotype is R1b, at least some of your ancestors were Asians before they were Europeans (and any that weren't would have originally been from the Middle East). And since your background is French and English, you probably have a lot less WHG than Kristiina, as has already been pointed out to you. That's just hard, cold logic.

Still, it does not prove anything. Asian and European are just words; and they were probably created by the Greek civilization; in order to pinpoint certain continents. I am not talking about region; I am talking about ethnicity.



Region of Haplogroup origin, has nothing to do with current ethnicity: I am talking about ethnicity.

She may have more original "European" DNA than I do as a Finn; like you say. But she may also carry East Asian genetics too; like many Finns do. Which actually makes me more "European" ethnically; possibly more than her and other Finns. I believe the average Finn has 6.1% East Asian genetics on average. I have probably much lower percentage; to maybe none at all.

What you fail to realize is that Finns carry East Asian DNA, which is evident by Y-DNA N1c; as well as a few distinct, but rare Finnish mtDna subclades.



And, I'm still not buying the theories, dudes. The studies you guys suggest, and the theories. They seem pretty outlandish to me. Only 5,000 years of white, fair skin developed in the European ethnicity? I doubt it.


Neanderthals, did they not have fair skin as far back as 30,000 years ago?

 

[Sile]

Still, it does not prove anything. Asian and European are just words; and they were probably created by the Greek civilization; in order to pinpoint certain continents. I am not talking about region; I am talking about ethnicity.



Region of Haplogroup origin, has nothing to do with current ethnicity: I am talking about ethnicity.

She may have more original "European" DNA than I do as a Finn; like you say. But she may also carry East Asian genetics too; like many Finns do. Which actually makes me more "European" ethnically; possibly more than her and other Finns. I believe the average Finn has 6.1% East Asian genetics on average. I have probably much lower percentage; to maybe none at all.

What you fail to realize is that Finns carry East Asian DNA, which is evident by Y-DNA N1c; as well as a few distinct, but rare Finnish mtDna subclades.



And, I'm still not buying the theories, dudes. The studies you guys suggest, and the theories. They seem pretty outlandish to me. Only 5,000 years of white, fair skin developed in the European ethnicity? I doubt it.


Neanderthals, did they not have fair skin as far back as 30,000 years ago?

I think the issue was the terminology ............if you said only N was East Asian.........I agree..........N1c I do not agree with asian

example , as some say
R is south east Asian
R1 is south central Asian
R2 is South Asian
R1a is somewhere else
R1b elsewhere
Basically not all of one haplogroup is created in the same spot..........but you know this

Origin of subclades per Haplogroup dicatate where it began

So, N is next to O in and around modern Burma/thailand
N1 could be siberia
N1c could be eastern finland

 

[sparkey]

Region of Haplogroup origin, has nothing to do with current ethnicity: I am talking about ethnicity.

She may have more original "European" DNA than I do as a Finn; like you say. But she may also carry East Asian genetics too; like many Finns do. Which actually makes me more "European" ethnically; possibly more than her and other Finns. I believe the average Finn has 6.1% East Asian genetics on average. I have probably much lower percentage; to maybe none at all.

What you fail to realize is that Finns carry East Asian DNA, which is evident by Y-DNA N1c; as well as a few distinct, but rare Finnish mtDna subclades.

Well, you're making it clearer here what you believe being more European is--basically, the more European person would contain greater typical European components (WHG+EEF+ANE) combined, as opposed to any outside of that combination (like what is known as "ENA," or Eastern non-African). I'm actually with you as far as Finns carrying higher than normal ENA admixture as far as Europeans go. That doesn't negate them having higher WHG+EEF+ANE than ENA and hence still being very European, and in particular having very high WHG, which is the oldest of all European components. Davidski has a deep dive here. So can we reach agreement here that under some definitions of what "most European" is, Finns score amongst the lowest of Europeans, and under other definitions, they score amongst the highest?

And, I'm still not buying the theories, dudes. The studies you guys suggest, and the theories. They seem pretty outlandish to me. Only 5,000 years of white, fair skin developed in the European ethnicity? I doubt it.

The studies directly tested the mutations that are known to affect skin color in several ancient samples. So far, hunter-gatherer Europeans keep having fewer light-skin mutations than farmer Europeans. At least blue eyes seem to have come from the hunters. What exactly is outlandish about the idea that, based on this, farmers likely brought light skin? Europeans have plenty of genes from the farmers, keep in mind.

 

[Kristiina]

Am I supposed to be feeling sorry for you? It's just cold hard logic.

Do not worry! You need not feel sorry for me, I am completely happy with my DNA and what it tells about my ancestors. By contrast, I would never like to change brains with you.

 

[John Doe]

Maybe Europeans are a mix of ancient races, but a "race" is just a phenotypically similar group of people anyway, so it's not contradictory to then say that Europeans have since become a common race, perhaps alongside West Asians and maybe some North Africans. There's nothing problematic here.

Interesting... That would explain a lot.

 

[Melancon]

Everyone in this post is wrong. Read Maciamo's autosomal admixtures. Where in the world is R1 classified as Asian?

N1 is classified as Siberian. Also it is found in Nenets (Uralic speakers, like Finns) and Yakuts (East Asian Turkic speakers) at over 90% frequency; and descends from the NO or NOPQ branch of descending haplogroups of K.

N1 is almost exclusively East Asian in ethnic origin; not European. Meaning that Finns who carry N1c1 share many East Asian ancestors(6.1%); even though most of their DNA (93.9%) is European.

I am not wrong. LOL

 

[Melancon]

Do not worry! You need not feel sorry for me, I am completely happy with my DNA and what it tells about my ancestors. By contrast, I would never like to change brains with you.

Okay. Fair enough. It is not my fault that you Finnish people would rather not like to acknowledge your European ancestors had offspring with Lappis or Saamis. (Unless you're a Finnish Swede; this does not apply to you.)

Disclaimer: What you guys must acknowledge; is that I am hoping to prove myself wrong. But I really don't think I am. [It has nothing to do with racism, illogicality, attacking people, or hurting feelings. I am cocky because I feel like what I present is not taken seriously.]

 

[Sile]

Where in the world is R1 classified as Asian?

most say R1 is central asian..........R is South-East Asian ( thats where basal R-M207 is )

N1 is classified as Siberian.

yes, I can agree and state dit so

Also it is found in Nenets (Uralic speakers, like Finns) and Yakuts (East Asian Turkic speakers)

is it not Central-asian Turkic speakers?

at over 90% frequency; and descends from the NO or NOPQ branch of descending haplogroups of K.

from K split K1 which is T and L and also K2 formed ............from K2 there was a split K2a formed X and that split into N and O
then there is k2b.......check this link for ease of understanding
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragroup

N1 is almost exclusively East Asian in ethnic origin; not European.

unsure, but I doubt it has east asian , but I need to check

Meaning that Finns who carry N1c1 share many East Asian ancestors(6.1%); even though most of their DNA (93.9%) is European.

of course they have some asian , most likely due to N and N1....less so with N1c

 

[Kristiina]

It is quite likely that the pre-Ugric people were Europeans (pre-Hungarians), and they once enslaved the East Asian/Siberian people who speak the other two Ugric branches of Uralic; and these pre-Hungarians gradually allowed Siberians freedom after enslavement. In theory, this would allow Siberian Ugrics plenty of time to form their own dialects such as Mansi & Khanty.

I would like to note that according to my understanding you think that 1. you are whiter and more European than Finns because your yDNA is R1b, 2. Siberians are miserable people who used to be slaves to true Europeans and 3. yDNA N is the same as the Siberian autosomal ancestry and 4. East Asian ancestry is something that true Europeans should not have and a justification for your feeling of superiority.
The first three statements are all wrong while the fourth one obviously shows your true feelings about people who you do not consider being your kin.

 

[Melancon]

Since your Y haplotype is R1b, at least some of your ancestors were Asians.

As I stated before, I am talking about ethnicity; not regions or continents.

That's just hard, cold logic.

BTW you are self-projecting things that I have stated to people. I know what it is, too; you're attempting to get a rise in order to get under my skin. This is a form of mockery and passive-aggressive harassment. I'm not being touchy; as sparkey seemed to suggest. Truth is Aberdeen: you seem like someone who is holding a grudge against me and is trying to get personal. So do you want to take this to private messages? Or maybe your repeated passive-aggressive harassment or irresponsibility will get both; or one of us banned?


I really have a hard time believing why the majority of you are acting so juvenile and touchy towards me; and are self-projecting. Even sparkey. Am I really all that a threat? Maybe it has something to do with ego or social status? Gee; sorry for holding a different opinion from the masses; but this seems real unprofessional. It's difficult for me to understand why people of seemingly high social status or Moderator powers on this board would act so irresponsible and personal towards little ol' me. (I've tried to be nice; but I don't know what it is.) There must be some major competition here.

@ also sparkey; have you not noticed this user Aberdeen insulting me back - calling me idiotic; and also making baseless, predetermined assumptions and accusations about me? And calling me "racist"or "illogical".

 

[Melancon]

justification for your feeling of superiority.

Where?

I may be wrong in all other points that you've made. But where is my feeling of superiority?

I would like to note that according to my understanding you think that 1. you are whiter and more European than Finns because your yDNA is R1b, 2. Siberians are miserable people who used to be slaves to true Europeans and 3. yDNA N is the same as the Siberian autosomal ancestry

And also; I still have not quite figured out if Hungarians are even 100% white Caucasian either. It seems that their East Asian admixture is quite low though; compared to Finns. But N1c1 is definitely there in the population. But probably about as much frequency as the neighboring countries. (Poland, Ukraine, Austria, Croatia.)


I still don't know whether the Uralic language has a Caucasian or Mongoloid origin either. It's possible it could have been a Caucasian language group that was taken by Mongoloids from East Asia; or vice versa.


The Siberian Mongoloids who speak Uralic like Nenets, Mansi and Khanty may have not been enslaved by Caucasian Hungarians; But they seem to have a genetic kinship to the Siberian Yakuts; who are obviously of the Mongoloid ethnicity.

Were these groups of people (Mansi, Khanty, Nenets & Yakuts) once the same people? If so, why do they speak different language groups (Uralic) and (Turkic)?

 

[Melancon]

For Sile, Aberdeen, sparkey, Kristiina, and everyone else:


http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_N1c_Y-DNA.shtml

Please read carefully.

1. "Haplogroup N is a descendant of East Asian macro-haplogroup NO. It is believed to have originated in Indochina or southern China approximately 15,000 to 20,000 years ago."

2. "hinting that N1 people played a major role in the diffusion of the Neolithic lifestyle around Northeast China, and probably also to Mongolia and Siberia."

3. "The N1c1 subclade found in Europe likely arose in Southern Siberia 12,000 years ago, and spread to north-eastern Europe 10,000 years ago."

And finally:

4. "N1c represents the western extent of haplogroup N, which is found all over the Far East (China, Korea, Japan), Mongolia and Siberia, especially among Uralic speakers of northern Siberia. N1c reaches a maximum frequency of approximately 95% in the Nenets and Nganassans, two Uralic tribes of central-northern Siberia, and 90% among the Yakuts, a Turkic people who live mainly in the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic in central-eastern Siberia."

---

It is a scientific fact: The Y-DNA gene Haplogroup N is purely East Asian (Mongoloid) in origin. And these comments and summaries are not my own; they are Maciamo's.

There was absolutely nothing idiotic, racist or illogical about my comments. If you are calling me idiotic; racist and illogical; you are also calling Maciamo the same things. Boy oh boy.

 

[Angela]

I find it extremely ironic that the poster who is "calling out" Finns for not being "white European" enough, comes from a state in which the percentage of European-Americans who have presumably unknown African and Amerindian ancestry is in the teens.
See: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...re-European-Finno-ugric-)?p=443730#post443730

I also find it disheartening that some people still 1)believe that y lineages show a complete correlation with autosomal "racial" ancestry (they obviously know nothing about the autosomally and phenotypically "black" R1b Africans from Cameroon, 2) don't realize that none of the roots of the y lineages present in Europe today come from Europe, (including R1b, which probably arose somewhere around the Caspian Sea and/or the Iranian plateau), and 3) give a **** what minor admixtures might exist in some Europeans.

 

[Melancon]

I find it extremely ironic that the poster who is "calling out" Finns for not being "white European" enough, comes from a state in which the percentage of European-Americans who have presumably unknown African and Amerindian ancestry is in the teens.
See: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...re-European-Finno-ugric-)?p=443730#post443730

I also find it disheartening that some people still 1)believe that y lineages show a complete correlation with autosomal "racial" ancestry (they obviously know nothing about the autosomally and phenotypically "black" R1b Africans from Cameroon, 2) don't realize that none of the roots of the y lineages present in Europe today come from Europe, (including R1b, which probably arose somewhere around the Caspian Sea and/or the Iranian plateau), and 3) give a **** what minor admixtures might exist in some Europeans.

Um, no? Cajuns have nothing to do with Creoles or Métis.

What you are suggesting is that because I am from Louisiana, I have secret Black or American indian ancestry. Wow, another baseless assumption without evidence...

Your argument is about as plausible and senseless as suggesting Irish or British people have secret Arabic or Black ancestry that they do not know of, due to recent Multiculturalism.

Please get out of this thread; I have lost all respect for you.

also find it disheartening that some people still 1)believe that y lineages show a complete correlation with autosomal "racial" ancestry (they obviously know nothing about the autosomally and phenotypically "black" R1b Africans from Cameroon, 2) don't realize that none of the roots of the y lineages present in Europe today come from Europe, (including R1b, which probably arose somewhere around the Caspian Sea and/or the Iranian plateau)

It is possible that fair-skin R1b people migrated back into Africa and the Middle East. Some became Semitic and Jewish people; while some migrations became mixed with Black Africans from Cameroon. Doesn't mean R1b individuals were dark-skinned.

 

[sparkey]

3. "The N1c1 subclade found in Europe likely arose in Southern Siberia 12,000 years ago, and spread to north-eastern Europe 10,000 years ago."

So you're agreeing with a source that says that N1c1 has been in Europe longer than R1b? Maciamo places the R1b migration into Europe at roughly 3000 years later, see here.

It's a bit odd to say that a haplogroup that has been in Europe longer than another is nonetheless less European than the more recent arrival.

 

[Angela]

Um, no? Cajuns have nothing to do with Creoles or Métis.

What you are suggesting is that because I am from Louisiana, I have secret Black or American indian ancestry. Wow, another baseless assumption without evidence...

Your argument is about as plausible and senseless as suggesting Irish or British people have secret Arabic or Black ancestry that they do not know of, due to recent Multiculturalism.

Please get out of this thread; I have lost all respect for you.



It is possible that fair-skin R1b people migrated back into Africa and the Middle East. Some became Semitic and Jewish people; while some migrations became mixed with Black Africans from Cameroon. Doesn't mean R1b individuals were dark-skinned.

I regret to inform you that this discussion is not about you as an individual. I don't know your racial make-up, I'm not implying anything about it whatsoever, and I'm actually not at all interested in it.

As I pointed out in the Cajun thread, the main thrust of your argument has not been whether an individual Finn like Kristina, for example, has East Asian ancestry, or to what extent, but about the presence of such non-European ancestry in Finns as a group. I said that I found it ironic that this should be so emphasized by someone from a state which itself has such high levels of non-European admixture in self-reported European Americans.

Surely you see the difference between what I said and your accusation?

Furthermore, you are not in control of who posts on which threads, and your comment could be viewed as a personal attack. Any such further outbursts, and I'll be forced to report your posts, despite my disinclination from doing so as a general matter.

 

[Melancon]

I regret to inform you that this discussion is not about you as an individual. I don't know your racial make-up, I'm not implying anything about it whatsoever, and I'm actually not at all interested in it.

As I pointed out in the Cajun thread, the main thrust of your argument has not been whether an individual Finn like Kristina, for example, has East Asian ancestry, or to what extent, but about the presence of such non-European ancestry in Finns as a group. I said that I found it ironic that this should be so emphasized by someone from a state which itself has such high levels of non-European admixture in self-reported European Americans.

Surely you see the difference between what I said and your accusation?

Furthermore, you are not in control of who posts on which threads, and your comment could be viewed as a personal attack. Any such further outbursts, and I'll be forced to report your posts, despite my disinclination from doing so as a general matter.

I am not attacking anyone; YOU are. you can get Maciamo and perhaps all other Moderators to come into this thread and analyze everything that I have said. I have not had an outburst either. I have broke NO rules.

And YOU ARE discussing me as an individual: you are saying how it is ironic for me to suggest that Finnish people have East Asian DNA. You are accusing that because I am from Louisiana that I am claiming to know more about racial admixture of Finnish people; while my ethnicity apparently has non-white genetics too. (false) And you are also suggesting that Cajuns and other white people from my state (Louisiana) have non-white admixture at a higher than average frequency; when this is not true at all. I am not the one being a hypocrite; YOU are. And I am not attacking anyone. Just stating facts.

All I have done in this thread, is base arguments off of Maciamo's analysis. I have done nothing but repeat Maciamo.

You, like almost everyone else in this thread commenting against me; have constantly attacked me with baseless accusations and assumptions. Almost in a passive-aggressive manner.

I think that it is better if you just dismiss yourself.

 

[Melancon]

So you're agreeing with a source that says that N1c1 has been in Europe longer than R1b? Maciamo places the R1b migration into Europe at roughly 3000 years later, see here.

It's a bit odd to say that a haplogroup that has been in Europe longer than another is nonetheless less European than the more recent arrival.

Did I say that? Where did I say that? More baseless assumptions and accusations. This is getting kind of old. We were meant to discuss whether or not the Uralic language had a Caucasian origin or an Asian one. Read the title of this thread.


And by the way, is R1b prevalent in East Asian populations such as Chinese, Korean or Japanese? I would say it's likely; but the odds of this would be pretty damn low.

 

[Aberdeen]

Did I say that? Where did I say that? More baseless assumptions and accusations. This is getting kind of old. We were meant to discuss whether or not the Uralic language had a Caucasian origin or an Asian one. Read the title of this thread.


And by the way, is R1b prevalent in East Asian populations such as Chinese, Korean or Japanese? I would say it's likely; but the odds of this would be pretty damn low.

R1b is very prevalent in Black populations in West Africa. What conclusions do you draw from that? Maybe we should consider the possibility that migrations of human populations result in there often being little correlation between haplotypes and autosomal makeup, as has already been pointed out.

 

[Melancon]

R1b is very prevalent in Black populations in West Africa. What conclusions do you draw from that? Maybe we should consider the possibility that migrations of human populations result in there often being little correlation between haplotypes and autosomal makeup, as has already been pointed out.

Yeah; problem is: YOU and everyone else commenting here are the ones who seem to be suggesting that haplogroups have nothing to do with current ethnicity. When the reality is, this is only partly true.

Finnish people having an East Asian Y-DNA like N is no small coincidence. It suggests that they descended from Mongoloids; not Caucasians.

For example, this is nearly equivalent to a white person in the USA having American indian ancestry (as far back as 14 generations or more) on his paternal side and also having the Native American haplogroup Q1a2; while appearing to be 100% white and having mostly European genetics. He appears to be Caucasian; but some of his paternal ancestors weren't, they were Native Americans. The same applies to Finns who have East Asian (Mongoloid) Haplogroup N.

It may seem like I am contradicting myself, but I am not. Please pay attention.

Alternatively; you can try to explain to me why Yakuts of Siberia have N1c1 also like the Finnish people; even though they are clearly Mongoloid in ethnicity and not Caucasian like Finnish apparently are. Would that mean Yakuts originally had Caucasian ancestors? That doesn't seem anywhere near likely. The only alternative is, Finnish people and other Europeans who possess the N1c Y-DNA originally had East Asian (Mongoloid) ancestors on the paternal side; and not Caucasian.