Finns in a Genetic Class of their Own

[Äike]

That's what we find, because complexes move, not just material or technological details.

It is ridiculous to assume that you have primitive hunter-gatherers of the archaic Cromagnoid and Osteuropid variants first and then suddenly whole settlements and cemeteries appear, with a completely different culture, new animals and customs, a completely different racial type or at least proportions.

That is just ridiculous, obviously the old elements were pushed aside and new came in, that's what we can see if looking at the record.

Demic diffusion reaching Northern-Europe is ridiculous. Most researchers say that it was only cultural diffusion, that's why the more north you go, the less dark individuals you see/less Indo-European influence.

Well, all genetic evidences we have so far show us that the presumably Indo-European people in the Central and Eastern areas had higher proportions of classic Europid mtDNA markers and R1a in the male lineage.

And for the "cultural diffusion", of course that happened too, once the two groups lived side by side and mixed with or controlled the others.

Yet at first we see group A disappearing and group B coming with a whole complex of traits, cultural and biological.

Again, it would be ridiculous to assume "cultural diffusion" with such facts.

Only cultural diffusion happened in Northern-Europe.

In Estonia the racial distribution still mirrors to a certain degree the different racial types and the Indo-European expansion:

Spoiler!

(After I. Schwidetzky)

Since the Neolithicum the Coastal/Western part being more Nordoid, the Eastern more Osteuropoid.

Western-Estonians are West-Baltid while Eastern ones are more borealized, that's logical.

It doesn't show Indo-European heritage, it clearly shows the climatic difference. The coldest place in Estonian is located in South-Eastern Estonia, Võru. Surprise-surprise, you can find the most borealized individuals there.

The warmest places in the winter are the Western-Estonian islands and the coast, surprise-surprise, there you can find the least borealized Estonians.

Different anthropological types can evolve in a single population without any foreign elements, it's the climate which plays a mayor role.

Saying that every Nordid individual descends from Indo-Europeans is quite silly. If Northern-Europeans had any Indo-European blood, then Nordids and UP-types wouldn't exist here.

Spot on.

Finnish word for slave, orja has dual meanings, south and slave.
Where did Slavs live from a Finnic perspective? The south.
Where were slaves taken from? The south.
Finnic peoples have been very tough hunters and were also excellent warriors and their societes have not been passive bystanders when some farmers came about.
I.e the word for war is an ancient Uralic word.
If modern genetics postulates something, then it's that "original" Finno/Baltic inhabitants held their ground and killed off any invaders, until they came in very large numbers. That's why the N1c male lineages are so dominating in the region. And for sure, spread of agriculture does not necessary need to be done by aggressive and expansive landposession, it may very well be spread as an innovation, like the use of new types of axes and pots.
But this is also a hypothesis, the truth lies somewhere in between.

As Finns and other Baltic-Finnics(Estonians) speak the native Northern-European languages and didn't take over the Indo-European languages/culture, then we also have the largest amount of ancient Upper Paleolithic genes. Finnic Y-DNA lineages in linguistically Indo-European Northern-European countries aren't that prevalent. But the women were spared and the ancient Upper Paleolithic Northern-European/Finno-Ugric/Uralic mt-DNA is quite common in all Northern-European countries, Finland having the most, of course.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

It is ridiculous to assume that you have primitive hunter-gatherers of the archaic Cromagnoid and Osteuropid variants

I don't assume any of this, it is you who think they were Cromagnoid and Osteuropid... I think they were Atlantolappoiddinarid Nords mixed with Trönder and Mongoliform Bruenns....

first and then suddenly whole settlements and cemeteries appear, with a completely different culture, new animals and customs,

Look dude, that's what happened when Christianity arrived. Grave customs changed almost instantly without massive migrations.
We can see from archeological evidences in Finland during Iron age how locals gradually switched from pagan burials with artefacts to christian burials.
What happens when a hunter gatherer starts breeding cows and a pigs? He becomes sedentary, right? His needs changes, he needs to spend more time near the cattle, his perception of the surrounding world changes... Instead of lurking in the forrest, he cuts down the trees. Then he thinks he needs a hatch not an axe, he needs a plow not a bow e.t.c.

For changes like that you don't need massive progressive migration and elite dominance to obtain a massive change.
When people adopt to a new lifestile, there are inevitably changes in the cultural expressions.
I do not rule out migration as the vector of these changes, as I know there have been constant trickles of migration into the area.

a completely different racial type or at least proportions.

What findings of skeletons and skulls are there in Fennoscandia/Baltics from 5000 years ago which reveal the dominating racial types and proportions?
I know a great deal about this subject, but I have never heard about any such findings!

Well, all genetic evidences we have so far show us that the presumably Indo-European people in the Central and Eastern areas had higher proportions of classic Europid mtDNA markers and R1a in the male lineage.

Yeah, Agrippa. North Africans and south Asians have mostly "classical Europid markers" without the mtDNA and Y-DNA of the Europeans.

Please explain that.

And for the "cultural diffusion", of course that happened too, once the two groups lived side by side and mixed with or controlled the others.

So we agree after all?

Yet at first we see group A disappearing and group B coming with a whole complex of traits, cultural and biological.

Where have we seen this group A disappear in Fennoscandia/Baltics? Please refer.

Again, it would be ridiculous to assume "cultural diffusion" with such facts.

So an almost complete population replacement is more logical?
Ok. The Roman realm i.e. was a complete replacement of people, not cultural diffusion, since the culture was similar all over the realm?

In Estonia the racial distribution still mirrors to a certain degree the different racial types and the Indo-European expansion

All those funky east Baltid and Lappoid Germans I see when visiting Germany, do they also reflect different racial types (original "Germans") and the Indo-European ("neo"-Germans) expansion?

Since the Neolithicum the Coastal/Western part being more Nordoid, the Eastern more Osteuropoid.

There is a minor antropological difference atleast between western and eastern Finland. But the genes are practically the same?

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Saying that every Nordid individual descends from Indo-Europeans is quite silly.

Super silly.

[Agrippa]

Demic diffusion reaching Northern-Europe is ridiculous. Most researchers say that it was only cultural diffusion, that's why the more north you go, the less dark individuals you see/less Indo-European influence.

First: That's an ongoing debate.

Second: The Indo-Europeans were primarily Central- and Eastern European variants of pred. Nordoid character with stronger Mediterranid and Cromagnid tendencies.

They were not in the same league as the primarily Mediterranoid carriers of the (Printed) Cardium Pottery.

They were also not that "Southern" further South and East...

Only cultural diffusion happened in Northern-Europe.

Compare with this article about the Northern Battle Axe culture:
http://fornvannen.se/pdf/2000talet/2006_274.pdf

Western-Estonians are West-Baltid while Eastern ones are more borealized, that's logical.

It doesn't show Indo-European heritage, it clearly shows the climatic difference. The coldest place in Estonian is located in South-Eastern Estonia, Võru. Surprise-surprise, you can find the most borealized individuals there.

The Borealised variants spread there more successfully, correct, but note that originally the classic Europids were wider spread and especially the leptodlichomorphic variants came primarily with the cultures associated with the Indo-Europeans and pushed aside the more archaic elements.

Also the Western-coastal part is not just Westbaltid, but has, like the graphic shows, significant real Nordoid elements.

The warmest places in the winter are the Western-Estonian islands and the coast, surprise-surprise, there you can find the least borealized Estonians.

Different anthropological types can evolve in a single population without any foreign elements, it's the climate which plays a mayor role.

Especially if both elements were present - the first due to the original archaic Cromagnoids and the Mongoliform tendency, potential Mongoloid admixture, the second because it came with the carriers of the Neolithic and Metal Age cultures.

Saying that every Nordid individual descends from Indo-Europeans is quite silly. If Northern-Europeans had any Indo-European blood, then Nordids and UP-types wouldn't exist here.

Well that's silly, because the original Indo-Europeans in Central-Eastern Europe were more Nordoid than the Mesolithic Northern and even more North Eastern Europeans...

The Nordoid element was the result of a fusion in Indo-Europeans and spread with them in areas in which it wasn't present before.

So there are parts of Europe where it means little, but in certain areas of North Eastern Europe most leptodolichomorphs came with the movements mentioned.

Also the typological make up of a population can change because of selective pressures, obviously, but the question is which variants came into the genpool first...

As Finns and other Baltic-Finnics(Estonians) speak the native Northern-European languages and didn't take over the Indo-European languages/culture, then we also have the largest amount of ancient Upper Paleolithic genes.

And Mongoloid too.

Finnic Y-DNA lineages in linguistically Indo-European Northern-European countries aren't that prevalent. But the women were spared and the ancient Upper Paleolithic Northern-European/Finno-Ugric/Uralic mt-DNA is quite common in all Northern-European countries, Finland having the most, of course.

yDNA N came most likely later and with non-Europids, but that's something we had already...

Look dude, that's what happened when Christianity arrived. Grave customs changed almost instantly without massive migrations.

Yet that doesn't mean anything for this case in which practically everything changed. There is almost no continuity to begin with in many areas!

We can see from archeological evidences in Finland during Iron age how locals gradually switched from pagan burials with artefacts to christian burials.
What happens when a hunter gatherer starts breeding cows and a pigs? He becomes sedentary, right?

Many Indo-European groups were rather semi-nomadic and quite mobile btw...

What findings of skeletons and skulls are there in Fennoscandia/Baltics from 5000 years ago which reveal the dominating racial types and proportions?
I know a great deal about this subject, but I have never heard about any such findings!

We know the related groups and even the Balanovo variants looked like this most of the time, only little Osteuropoid/Lappoid influences, most were classic Europids, many Nordoid/Aurignacoid (look at the 3rd in particular):


On the other hand rather archaic reduced Cromagnoids with Mongoliform/Mongoloid tendencies, most likely the carriers of yDNA-N, I hope studies will prove that in the near future:


Both from: Wolfram Bernhard, Annelise Kandler-Palsson, Ethnogenese europäischer Völker (1986).

The mostly Indo-European groups compared with Comb Ceramic and related in Neolithic times in a scale from Europid to Mongolid:


More about it here:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...7&postcount=46

The issue was also discussed on a genetic level here:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...0&postcount=30

and in the same thread:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...8&postcount=34

Yeah, Agrippa. North Africans and south Asians have mostly "classical Europid markers" without the mtDNA and Y-DNA of the Europeans.

Please explain that.

North Africans have Negroid and South Asians Weddoid influences, that's detectable also on a genetic level, yet they have a lot of variants in common with Europeans and R and IJ are very important for the yDNA.

Most Europid or related markers are present in various Europeans groups, one of the main exceptions is N.

Where have we seen this group A disappear in Fennoscandia/Baltics? Please refer.

Look at Denmark f.e. and the coastal regions of the Balticum...

So an almost complete population replacement is more logical?

The original inhabitants were pushed aside and fled into the woods if they could. Then, after some generations, mixture took place this or that way.

All those funky east Baltid and Lappoid Germans I see when visiting Germany, do they also reflect different racial types (original "Germans") and the Indo-European ("neo"-Germans) expansion?

Where they exist they are mostly the result of Eastern Germans, often Germanicised Slavs and Balts, being carried back into Western territories.

F.e. in Lower Saxony or Tyrol you rarely if ever find such variants...

There is a minor antropological difference atleast between western and eastern Finland. But the genes are practically the same?

If a large wave came into the country and then mixture took place, but new waves came (Germanics then), what do you expect? There will be mixture and therefore a common profile, but also regional differences reflecting the different degree of - in this case - Indo-European vs. Finno-Ugrian to a large extend - not only, but to a large extend - influences.

And "funnily" the more North Eastern regions are also less Nordoid and more Mongoliform in comparison.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

First: That's an ongoing debate.

Agreed. But why are you so certain about your version?

Second: The Indo-Europeans were primarily Central- and Eastern European variants of pred. Nordoid character with stronger Mediterranid and Cromagnid tendencies.

Don't make me laugh.
Explain the Nordoid North Africans and South Asians first and how this Nordoidness is related to MtDNA and Y-DNA.
Also explain why Finns and Swedes are craniometrically closest to Cro magnids of all European populations (M. Niskanen 2002) if your Central- and Eastern European buddies had stronger Cromagnid tendencies than the people in Fennoscandia/Baltics?

http://fornvannen.se/pdf/2000talet/2006_274.pdf

I will read this....

Especially if both elements were present - the first due to the original archaic Cromagnoids and the Mongoliform tendency, potential Mongoloid admixture, the second because it came with the carriers of the Neolithic and Metal Age cultures.

Now they (the Fennoscandian/Baltic natives) were more Cro Magnid again?

Well that's silly, because the original Indo-Europeans in Central-Eastern Europe were more Nordoid than the Mesolithic Northern and even more North Eastern Europeans...
The Nordoid element was the result of a fusion in Indo-Europeans and spread with them in areas in which it wasn't present before.

Really? How come the Indo European languages spread only later to Fennoscandinavia than the earliest "Nordoid" skulls found from Fennoscandia have been found, Mr Pseudoscience?

yDNA N came most likely later and with non-Europids, but that's something we had already...

Pure nonsense.
First, phenotypes have nothing to do with MtDNA or Y-DNA.
Second, Y-DNA N is virtually absent in Europe. N1c and N1B with their subgroups is present.
Third, we have no findings whatsoever of Mongoloid cranias from the region we discuss.

On the other hand rather archaic reduced Cromagnoids with Mongoliform/Mongoloid tendencies, most likely the carriers of yDNA-N, I hope studies will prove that in the near future:

Your heartcase isn't it?

The mostly Indo-European groups compared with Comb Ceramic and related in Neolithic times in a scale from Europid to Mongolid:

That table is based on the infamous reconstruction of fragments of a skull purposedly to reconstruct a mongoloid skull because that is what the Soviet anthropologies wanted to link Comb ceramic culture to Uralic language speakers.
And here are two facts to add to your already busted theory of linking N1c, Uralic languages and Mongolidness;
1. Linguistic research shows quite overwhelmingly that Uralic language spread later to the region than the Comb ceramic culture.
2. Y-DNA N1c spread later to the region than the dating of the Comb ceramic culture.

North Africans have Negroid and South Asians Weddoid influences, that's detectable also on a genetic level, yet they have a lot of variants in common with Europeans and R and IJ are very important for the yDNA.

I repeat Y-DNA does not equal phenotype. If it does then people like kazakhs and Khoton would look über Aryan in comparison because they carry huge amount of very important Y-DNA R1a.

Most Europid or related markers are present in various Europeans groups, one of the main exceptions is N.

See? You don't even know what haplotypes are involved. R = R1a? N = N1c?

The original inhabitants were pushed aside and fled into the woods if they could. Then, after some generations, mixture took place this or that way.

Oh, you were there and saw all this?

Where they exist they are mostly the result of Eastern Germans, often Germanicised Slavs and Balts, being carried back into Western territories.

Ahaa? And those huge east Baltid traits in Danes and Britons? Germanized slavs infiltrating?

Indo-European vs. Finno-Ugrian to a large extend - not only, but to a large extend - influences.

Tell me, why do "Finno Ugrians" carry same MtDNA and Y-DNA as "Indo Europeans" do?

[Agrippa]

Agreed. But why are you so certain about your version?

Because Nordoids are not cold adapted type, their traits must have been evolved in a different environment and can't be explained by ancestral populations living close to or even in the cold zones during the Ice Age.

The most likely explanation of the Nordisation is the influx of Mesolithic and Neolithic Aurignacoids coming from the South and East, mixing with local Cromagnids while the leptodolichomorphic/Aurignacoid racial/phenotype prevailed in the new context.

Explain the Nordoid North Africans and South Asians first and how this Nordoidness is related to MtDNA and Y-DNA.

The Nordoid North Africans are mostly the result of a parallel process - lighter Cromagnoids which existed there since the Ice Age mixed with mostly Neolithic Mediterranoids. Most light pigmented original forms should have been Cromagnoid (Berberid) there too, the Nordoid variants today are the result of mixture between Berberid-Mediterranoid or European genflow (Greeks, Romans, Vandals etc.), with the "light Berberid" being the main cause.

In South Asia we see the results of a massive Europid influx, in various waves, also from Central Asia which was an Indo-European centre before the Turko-Mongol expansions.

Also explain why Finns and Swedes are craniometrically closest to Cro magnids of all European populations (M. Niskanen 2002) if your Central- and Eastern European buddies had stronger Cromagnid tendencies than the people in Fennoscandia/Baltics?

Can I see the Niskanen study somewhere?

That's nonsense anyway latest at the times of the LBK and Corded Ware groups. You want to tell me the LBK and Corded were more Cromagnid than pre-Corded Fennoscandia and the Baltics?

Also compare with this, from "Mesolithic Europe" by G. N. Bailey und P. Spikins:

Large communal cemeteries, unknown in earlier periods reflect new social developments in the Ukrainian Mesolithic. A group of impressive cemeteries, Vasilevka, Volos'ke and others, lies near the Dniepr Rapids south of Dnepropetrovsk (Stolyar 1959, Telegin 1982). Individuals within the same cemeteries are associated with distinct burial rites, suggesting cultural homogeneity: most were buried in a contracted position, and some in an extended supine position. Still more important, the skeletons belong to at least three distinct physical types (Gokhman 1966, 1986, Potekhina 1999). A first group of individuals with broad and high-relief faces in by Gokhman (1966: 187) as belonging to the autochthonous Cro-Magnon population stemming from the Upper Palaeolithic of Central and Eastern Europe. A second group was found only at Volos'ke cemetery and includes individuals with very narrow and long faces typical of the Mediterranean race. The third type, found at Vasilevka 1 and among the dead buried in extended supine postures at Vasilevka 3, features narrow faces and protruding jaws. At Volos'ke and at Vasilevka 1 and 3, there are numerous cases of ribs and vertebrae penetrated by flint arrowheads, indicating death by violence.

http://forum.thiazi.net/showthread.php?t=103225

Volos'ke Nr. 16, male (after Debetz 1955):


Vasilevka 3 Nr. 38, male (after Gokhman 1966):


If you can read German, here and additional article:
http://forum.thiazi.net/showpost.php...1&postcount=50

Also compare with my whole thread about early Indo-Europeans on Thiazi (in German):
http://forum.thiazi.net/showthread.php?t=103225

Now they (the Fennoscandian/Baltic natives) were more Cro Magnid again?

The base was always (rather archaic) Cromagnoid, it is about the fact that Lappid-Eastbaltid is the result of Mongoloid accretion we can also observe to this day in the genetic deviation.

Simple put, the more progressive elements are rather the result of European, largely but not only Indo-European influences in that region, the Mongoliform tendencies of Mongoloid/Uralic...

Really? How come the Indo European languages spread only later to Fennoscandinavia than the earliest "Nordoid" skulls found from Fennoscandia have been found, Mr Pseudoscience?

- Can't see the skull.
- Don't know it, the date, circumstances etc.
- As my links show Nordoids were present in Eastern Europe in Mesolithic times already, thats not the point, the point is they didn't penetrate the North East significantly until the major expansions.

I. Schwidetzky too assumed that Nordoid elements might have made it to the Finns before the Indo-Europeans btw., it might have been the result of Mesolithic connections to the groups South.

Yet if looking at the population development in the North East, it is clear that the major shift took place when the Neolithic/Bronze Age/Indo-European cultures expanded.

First, phenotypes have nothing to do with MtDNA or Y-DNA.

Of course not, in a mixed population. But a foreign marker had to be introduced and N was introduced by non-Europids (at least in the narrower sense).

Second, Y-DNA N is virtually absent in Europe. N1c and N1B with their subgroups is present.

Correct it is absent in Europe, yet N1c is part of it.

Third, we have no findings whatsoever of Mongoloid cranias from the region we discuss.

So the "deviating" skulls they found in the Comb Ceramic group (no classic Cromagnoids) were as Europid as the Corded Ware and Unetice variants?

Make me laugh...

That table is based on the infamous reconstruction of fragments of a skull purposedly to reconstruct a mongoloid skull because that is what the Soviet anthropologies wanted to link Comb ceramic culture to Uralic language speakers.

Yes, it was a conspiration...

1. Linguistic research shows quite overwhelmingly that Uralic language spread later to the region than the Comb ceramic culture.
2. Y-DNA N1c spread later to the region than the dating of the Comb ceramic culture.

Interesting, can you elaborate on that?

I repeat Y-DNA does not equal phenotype. If it does then people like kazakhs and Khoton would look über Aryan in comparison because they carry huge amount of very important Y-DNA R1a.

Exactly, that's why Baltic Finns are Europid nevertheless, at least overwhelmingly.

But the same is true for the Central Asians, they have Indo-European genes too, it's just that the Mongolid influx was stronger because of the Turko-Mongol expansions. So the ancestral link to a specific race and the admixture is present as well.

See? You don't even know what haplotypes are involved. R = R1a? N = N1c?

I know it. Fact is N is only/primarily present (with its subgroups) in North Eastern Europe, R is (with its various subgroups) presentin virtually all Europid territories, at least at a low level even in North Africa and the Near East...

Oh, you were there and saw all this?

If you have one archaeological horizon and than a nother, completely different, while you see the survival of the older in the forest-territories - what else?

Ahaa? And those huge east Baltid traits in Danes and Britons? Germanized slavs infiltrating?

They are not that significant...

Tell me, why do "Finno Ugrians" carry same MtDNA and Y-DNA as "Indo Europeans" do?

Explained above: The dominance of the archaic Cromagnid and Neolithic Eastern European mtDNA, the Uralic influence is the strongest in the yDNA because of the genetic drift or social selection I'd assume.

As for the genetic part of the story, here new results which proof an Eastern component in Uralic speakers in Europe, with the Europid component being the result of a predominant maternal ancestry from Europeans:

The westernmost populations from Europe, both Uralic- and Indo-European speakers, are similar in their pattern of ancestry components and show low levels (less than 10%) of the eastern component. Conversely, the eastern ancestry component is dominant (60-70%) in the gene pool of the Siberian Uralic-speakers. In general, the genome-wide analyses corroborate the results of mtDNA analysis and do not reflect the common genetic characteristics between western and eastern Uralic-speakers at the level seen in case of N1c. Interestingly, among Saami from North Europe, who are often considered as „outliers“ in genetic studies, the dominant western component is accompanied by 30% of eastern component making them more similar to Volga-Uralic populations than to their closest neighbours.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/09...abstracts.html

Note especially the character of the less European Saami.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Because Nordoids are not cold adapted type their traits must have been evolved in a different environment and can't be explained by ancestral populations living close to or even in the cold zones during the Ice Age. The most likely explanation of the Nordisation is the influx of Mesolithic and Neolithic Aurignacoids coming from the South and East, mixing with local Cromagnids while the leptodolichomorphic/Aurignacoid racial/phenotype prevailed in the new context. The Nordoid North Africans are mostly the result of a parallel process - lighter Cromagnoids which existed there since the Ice Age mixed with mostly Neolithic Mediterranoids. Most light pigmented original forms should have been Cromagnoid (Berberid) there too, the Nordoid variants today are the result of mixture between Berberid-Mediterranoid or European genflow (Greeks, Romans, Vandals etc.), with the "light Berberid" being the main cause.In South Asia we see the results of a massive Europid influx, in various waves, also from Central Asia which was an Indo-European centre before the Turko-Mongol expansions.

Explain this 9000 years old "Nordoid" skull:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18764
Skip the word-fog and get to the point, what MtDNA and Y-DNA gives the Nordoid traits?

Can I see the Niskanen study somewhere?

It's right here
http://www.mankindquarterly.org/samp...ccorrected.pdf

- Don't know it, the date, circumstances etc.

Man, you better get to know this because this is the only, repeat only, reconstruction around which this whole Comb ceramic/Uralic theory revolves around!
Your "analysis" is based more or less completely on this case, you refer to this all the time, but yet you have not the knowledge about the circumstances about this reconstruction???

The Olenij Ostrov findings is better known as the hoax reconstructions of broken skullfragments found by Soviet archeologist.
The first findings were made when escavating limestone during the Stalinist Era, and therefore often damaged.

According to Denisova, this is quote a paper from the Archeology lecture at the Helsinki University, the bones found match most nearly those of the modern Saami. However, there seems to be a very wide variation between the anthropological type of the sculls found. Some have been classified as distictively Caucasoid, the others "Mongoloid".

Markku Niskanen, Muinaistutkija nr.4-1998:

"Many scholars have claimed that in the light of cranial findings, both Europid and Mongoloid types would have been present among the early inhabitants of Baltia. For example according to Denisova (1980) the Comb Ceramic population was Europid-Mongoloid hybrids, but the representatives of the Corded Ware culture were of purely Europid type. The Mongoloid-Europid type, that she considered as Finno-Ugric would had arrived to Baltia from the east.

In the reality, the most ancient inhabitants of eastern Europe and western Siberia were craniologically Europid, and the Mongoloid traits didn't appear to western Siberia earlier than at the turn of the Bronze- and the Iron ages (Liptak 1980). It has also been claimed, that only those skulls from Olenij Ostrov that were reconstructed, are flat-faced and so artificially Mongoloid (personal comment by Kozintsev in 1991), and that the variation among the early inhabitants of Baltic is normal variation within population (personal comment by Jacobbs, 1994). According to Zagorska (personal comment, 1997) Denisova has also recently considered all of the early Baltic skulls to be morphologically Europid."

As my links show Nordoids were present in Eastern Europe in Mesolithic times already

But how on earth do you know they were "Indo Europeans" or not?

Yet if looking at the population development in the North East, it is clear that the major shift took place when the Neolithic/Bronze Age/Indo-European cultures expanded.

Duuuuuuude... If there was a shift, then it has to do with the arrival of Uralic languages. Send PM to member Jaska. He can give you some more details on when Uralic languages spread to the Baltics.

Of course not, in a mixed population. But a foreign marker had to be introduced and N was introduced by non-Europids

You are a slow learner aren't you.

There is hardly any N in Europe.

Correct it is absent in Europe, yet N1c is part of it.

Learning? R1a is a part of R.

Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype.

But the same is true for the Central Asians, they have Indo-European genes too, it's just that the Mongolid influx was stronger because of the Turko-Mongol expansions. So the ancestral link to a specific race and the admixture is present as well.

There it is again, Indo-European genes.

As for the genetic part of the story, here new results which proof an Eastern component in Uralic speakers in Europe, with the Europid component being the result of a predominant maternal ancestry from Europeans:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/09...abstracts.html

Excuse me? The eastern component is well know, but how on earth do you pull the conclusion that N1c reflects phenotype?

For about last two decades the examination of uniparentally inherited genetic marker systems revealing the variation embedded in mtDNA and Y chromosome has been the main tool in the studies of human genetic origins. Within few recent years the analysis of the genome-wide SNP data of individuals from different populations has started to give promising new insights in the field of human population genetics. The uniparentally inherited markers have shown slightly different demographic scenarios for the maternal and paternal lineages of North Eurasian, particularly of European Uralic-speaking populations. The geographical location of a population has evidently been the most important component that dictates the proportion of western and eastern mtDNA types in the gene pool of Uralic-speakers. Thus, the palette of maternal lineages of the Uralic-speakers resembles that of their geographically close European or Western Siberian Indo-European and/or Altaic-speaking neighbours, respectively. At the same time, the most frequent North Eurasian Y chromosome type N1c, that is also a common link between almost all Uralic-speakers, is with few exceptions rare, if present at all, among Indo-European-speakers of Western and Southern Europe. Here we combine genome-wide high density SNP data (650 000 SNPs, Illumina) with uniparentally inherited mtDNA and Y-chromosome variation of 16 Uralic-speaking populations to assess their place on the genetic landscape of North Eurasia. By the use of principal component and structure-like analysis on the autosomal data we show that the proportions of western and eastern ancestry components among the Uralic-speakers are determined mostly by geographical factors. The westernmost populations from Europe, both Uralic- and Indo-European speakers, are similar in their pattern of ancestry components and show low levels (less than 10%) of the eastern component. Conversely, the eastern ancestry component is dominant (60-70%) in the gene pool of the Siberian Uralic-speakers. In general, the genome-wide analyses corroborate the results of mtDNA analysis and do not reflect the common genetic characteristics between western and eastern Uralic-speakers at the level seen in case of N1c. Interestingly, among Saami from North Europe, who are often considered as „outliers“ in genetic studies, the dominant western component is accompanied by 30% of eastern component making them more similar to Volga-Uralic populations than to their closest neighbours.

Because they are more similar to eastern Europeans than their north European neighbours?

[Motörhead Remember Me]

MRM wrote:
1. Linguistic research shows quite overwhelmingly that Uralic language spread later to the region than the Comb ceramic culture.
2. Y-DNA N1c spread later to the region than the dating of the Comb ceramic culture.

Agrippa wrote: Interesting, can you elaborate on that?

Look for member Jaskas posts.

[Agrippa]

Explain this 9000 years old "Nordoid" skull:

At best Nordeuropid, not Nordoid in the narrower sense I'd say after a first look.

Also we know from the Swedish samples that Nordoids were indeed present among earlier populations, but the not only and in many other areas became common only after the Neolithic/Indo-European input.

Here is a comparison of various prehistoric populations of importance, after I. Schwidetzky:


You can see that mostly presumably Indo-European cultures and populations cluster together, Corded Ware and related cultures, Ocre grave and related cultures.

One group from the Comb Ceramic and the Swedish Wohnplatzkultur cluster together (19 + 22), closest to them is Dnepr-Donec.

Those are the Nordeuropid elements in the Comb Ceramic, but now look at th outlier - clustering with the brachycephalic Southern elements, that is the foreign element we spoke about, because we can assume that it's facial details don't fit into the other brachycephalics scheme...

It's right here
http://www.mankindquarterly.org/samp...ccorrected.pdf

You didn't post the link correctly, it is a short version which can't be used, this is the real link (for others):
http://www.mankindquarterly.org/samp...ccorrected.pdf

Therefore, the genetic ancestors of the
Baltic-Finns have lived in the Baltic region more likely for 10,000
years rather than for 3000 years, and more likely arrived from
the south than from the east.

That is correct - for the Europid part.

For the rest: His work is obviously biased if looking at various aspects of it from the position of the Saami in particular, that's almost ridiculous.

But how on earth do you know they were "Indo Europeans" or not?

You and some others said that the Nordoid-Mediterranid elements came mostly from "Anatolians" and therefore can't have entered Northern Europe with Indo-Europeans. Yet in the areas from which most authors assume that they were Indo-European heartlands, we know Nordoid-Mediterranid variants from the Mesolithic times on!

So if racial variants expanded with Indo-Europeans, they could have come very well from these areas and being of similar racial quality, that's the point. There was no direct massive influx of Anatolian Neolithics marching through Europe from the South East to the North, but rather a continuous expansion and in the East we can observe Nordoid variants early on.

There is hardly any N in Europe.

You are funny aren't you, N1c is obviously a subgroup of N so N1c represents N in Europe.

Understood?

If you have problems with that, here is haplogroup N and N1c is a SUBgroup!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N_(Y-DNA)

Like R1a1a is a subgroup of R...

Haplotypes have nothing to do with phenotype

If an Europid racial group enters Mongoloid areas, it has to do with phenotype, not necessarily directly, but in the population, because the presence of the markers reflects the presence of Europid genes and vice versa.

There it is again, Indo-European genes.

Obviously the Central Asian Indo-European core group had a genetic profile, hadn't it? That genetic profile was different from Turkic and Mongol people? Wasn't it?

So there were Indo-European and Turkic or Mongol genes, until they mixed up...

Excuse me? The eastern component is well know, but how on earth do you pull the conclusion that N1c reflects phenotype?

Today a carrier of N1c can be a perfect textbook Nordid too, but the presence of N1c reflects the influence from the East which is also visible in the populations phenotypical variation.

The geographical location of a population has evidently been the most important component that dictates the proportion of western and eastern mtDNA types in the gene pool of Uralic-speakers.

That's why Baltic Finns are overwhelmingly Europid, because of the old and new Europid heritage. The foreign element which carried N in the yDNA was not that important for the whole genpool.

At the same time, the most frequent North Eurasian Y chromosome type N1c, that is also a common link between almost all Uralic-speakers, is with few exceptions rare, if present at all, among Indo-European-speakers of Western and Southern Europe.

Exactly.

the common genetic characteristics between western and eastern Uralic-speakers at the level seen in case of N1c. Interestingly, among Saami from North Europe, who are often considered as „outliers“ in genetic studies, the dominant western component is accompanied by 30% of eastern component making them more similar to Volga-Uralic populations than to their closest neighbours.

And Niskanen tried to make them more Europid than Central Europeans...

[Pallantides]

I wish I was in a genetic class of my own.