Does the phrase 'genetically European' have an actual basis?

[Sikeliot]

I was discussing this with another member.

One argument is that even Europeans who cluster on the fringes of Europe, such as Greek islanders, southern Italians, and Maltese, have admixture labeled "Northwest European" and "Northeast European", which is not even found in people such as Cypriots, and thus showing that there are genes that are pretty much restricted to European groups and can indeed be found in all of them.

The other argument is that, since some groups of Europeans such as Finns and some Russians have measurable Asiatic admixture that pulls them away from other Northern Europeans, and that some Southern Europeans cluster nearer to some West Asians than to many European populations, the idea of "genetically European" is a social construct and it all depends on where you draw the line.

Which do you agree with?

[Lusos]

"Southern Europeans cluster nearer to some West Asians than to many European populations"

I thought all Europeans were closer to each other then to anyone else.

[Sikeliot]

"Southern Europeans cluster nearer to some West Asians than to many European populations"

I thought all Europeans were closer to each other then to anyone else.

I said some southern Europeans cluster nearer some West Asians than to some Europeans.. i.e. Maltese are closer to Lebanese than to Swedes.

But do we go by that? Or do we go by the fact that for instance, the North Euro components can be found in Europeans only, including even peripheral ones?

[Tooting Carmen]

I was discussing this with another member.

One argument is that even Europeans who cluster on the fringes of Europe, such as Greek islanders, southern Italians, and Maltese, have admixture labeled "Northwest European" and "Northeast European", which is not even found in people such as Cypriots, and thus showing that there are genes that are pretty much restricted to European groups and can indeed be found in all of them.

The other argument is that, since some groups of Europeans such as Finns and some Russians have measurable Asiatic admixture that pulls them away from other Northern Europeans, and that some Southern Europeans cluster nearer to some West Asians than to many European populations, the idea of "genetically European" is a social construct and it all depends on where you draw the line.

Which do you agree with?

The latter of the two arguments.

[Peikko]

WHG component is pretty much European. Some people can score something like 55% of it, but not more than that. So nobody's fully European by genetics.

[Lusos]

I said some southern Europeans cluster nearer some West Asians than to some Europeans.. i.e. Maltese are closer to Lebanese than to Swedes.

But do we go by that? Or do we go by the fact that for instance, the North Euro components can be found in Europeans only, including even peripheral ones?

Well that Is like saying that North euro only to be European.Or those with North Euro genetics even If smaller.

I forgot Malta.But I didn't know they cluster closer to Lebanese.

I don't know how this things work.But all the results from Portuguese I see here come as 97,98,99 % European.

[Insuperable]

There is no need to think like this when it comes to Europeans only since if we would go by this we would see that there are almost no 100% genetically "pure" native people to a certain large geography in the world. Having this in mind, without southern Europeans one could claim there are people who are genetically European. The very existence of southerners complicates the reasoning behind this.

[Lusos]

Who was the first Peoples In Europe ? (If such thing Is known)

[Ars Moriendi]

Empty concept whose origin can only be explained due to the American domination over science and media. Their lack of identity pushes them to project new ideas, pretending to be solid, over the past like Europeanness in an attempt to define their origin. That way the widespread miscegenation becomes less of a problem.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

There is a campaign to make it look like everyone came to europe very recently but it's more the case people have gone back and forth and mixed for a long time. So yes there is genetically european though it has been progressively mixed away with time (red anf blond hair disappearing for example).

[Linebacker]

Genetically European would mean R1a/R1b or I1/I2.

[Jackson]

I always took it as more of a broader identity, as while a lot of European populations are very close to each other, or closer to each other than to anyone else - there are some outliers, but if they are part of a broader European historical sphere then it's still fair enough to call them Europeans, after all there always has to be border people.

[Longbowman]

Genetically European would mean R1a/R1b or I1/I2.

1) what if it's an African-American who's 1/1024th European and it happens to be his paternal-line ancestor? Clearly the defining factor should be autosomal DNA.
2) most geneticists would tell you that the Neolithic lineages - G2a, J2, E1b1b - predate R in Europe. Indeed, in the Balkans in particular, they're still commoner. Clades of L, F and even C can also be found natively.

[Anglojew]

Yes but it's often used incorrectly as a synonym for white.

[Tuisto7]

A lot of times genetics and haplogroups don't mean much for example Iberians have mostly R1b and you would think they'd be so European but they're one of the most exotic Europeans

[Balmung]

Yes Sikeliot, Anglo Saxons were the original Europeans and the reason slavics and everyone else deviates from them is because of dilution in their genepools, miniscule admixture that all Europeans have. :lol: