Are British and Irish people darker than Central&Eastern europeans ( hair and eye color wise?)

[Bloody]

I think brits tend to be darker haired (and probably eyed too) than most non balkan eastern and central europeans.

Are they?

[FeederOfRavens]

No

[Bloody]

I personally think Brits have darker hair (in adulthood) than most central-eastern europeans , but the eye color is similar.
Irish on the other hand are even more remarkably darker haired in comparison, but could be slighty lighter eyed.

[FeederOfRavens]

I personally think Brits have darker hair (in adulthood) than most central-eastern europeans , but the eye color is similar.
Irish on the other hand are even more remarkably darker haired in comparison, but could be slighty lighter eyed.

Which Central-Eastern Europeans are you talking about?

[Bloody]

Which Central-Eastern Europeans are you talking about?

Czech, Poles and Slovakians in my opinion are all blonder than Brits and Irish.

So are Ethnic Slavs in Russia and Belarus.

Brits are not a very blond race at all.

With Hungarian and Ukranian there could be a conversation, I have seen more natural blond hungarian women than english, who are almost always peroxide blondes.


In eye color they are all lighter than welsh and southern english, but probably darker eyed than irish, and on similar levels to scotland and northern england.

[FeederOfRavens]

Czech, Poles and Slovakians in my opinion are all blonder than Brits and Irish.

So are Ethnic Slavs in Russia and Belarus.

Brits are not a very blond race at all.

With Hungarian and Ukranian there could be a conversation, I have seen more natural blond hungarian women than english, who are almost always peroxide blondes.


In eye color they are all lighter than welsh and southern english, but probably darker eyed than irish, and on similar levels to scotland and northern england.

Nej

[JohnSmith]

I would say yes mostly because hair color is darker than central Europeans.

[Smaug]

Depends.

[Bahaman]

No. British are blonder than most central europeans. I'd say that British are blondest northern europeans(bar scandinavians)

[Grace O'Malley]

No they aren't darker than Central Europeans. Here is a picture of some Galway hurlers. I could post loads of pictures of Irish people and they are all quite similar more or less. Galway is in Western Ireland and people on these boards like to say how dark Western Irish are. Most Irish are blue eyed with fair skin (usually freckled) and the majority hair colour is a shade of brown. We seem to go around in circles always asking the same questions. The thing with Irish people is that they are usually quite uniform in colouring. There are some darker types and some lighter types but they are usually how I have described them in the majority. The thing with the Irish in particular is that they have more brown hair not particularly dark though. If you look at this logically the British Isles aren't particularly sunny they are in fact one of the most cloudy areas in Europe so why would the "natives" be particularly dark?

http://www.sportsmanager.ie/cake/app/webroot/user_data/modules/galleries/6929/image_7tpdQB886FMXTsAcCFoEnHPa.jpeg
http://www.gaa.ie/content/images/news/galway/Conneely_Brannigan_enjoy_the_glory2013.jpg
http://www.irishexaminer.com/media/images/e/Exam26072013GAA2_large.jpg
http://sportsnewsireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-shot-2014-05-22-at-12.07.05-610x400.png

[JohnSmith]

No they aren't darker than Central Europeans. Here is a picture of some Galway hurlers. I could post loads of pictures of Irish people and they are all quite similar more or less. Galway is in Western Ireland and people on these boards like to say how dark Western Irish are. Most Irish are blue eyed with fair skin (usually freckled) and the majority hair colour is a shade of brown. We seem to go around in circles always asking the same questions. The thing with Irish people is that they are usually quite uniform in colouring. There are some darker types and some lighter types but they are usually how I have described them in the majority. The thing with the Irish in particular is that they have more brown hair not particularly dark though. If you look at this logically the British Isles aren't particularly sunny they are in fact one of the most cloudy areas in Europe so why would the "natives" be particularly dark.

http://www.sportsmanager.ie/cake/app/webroot/user_data/modules/galleries/6929/image_7tpdQB886FMXTsAcCFoEnHPa.jpeg
http://www.gaa.ie/content/images/news/galway/Conneely_Brannigan_enjoy_the_glory2013.jpg
http://www.irishexaminer.com/media/images/e/Exam26072013GAA2_large.jpg
http://sportsnewsireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-shot-2014-05-22-at-12.07.05-610x400.png

I agree this thread is a little silly. You find differences among many people and there is a lot of complexity that this thread does not take into account.

[Sakis]

Czech and Poles are probably lighter on average.

[Bloody]

No they aren't darker than Central Europeans. Here is a picture of some Galway hurlers. I could post loads of pictures of Irish people and they are all quite similar more or less. Galway is in Western Ireland and people on these boards like to say how dark Western Irish are. Most Irish are blue eyed with fair skin (usually freckled) and the majority hair colour is a shade of brown. We seem to go around in circles always asking the same questions. The thing with Irish people is that they are usually quite uniform in colouring. There are some darker types and some lighter types but they are usually how I have described them in the majority. The thing with the Irish in particular is that they have more brown hair not particularly dark though. If you look at this logically the British Isles aren't particularly sunny they are in fact one of the most cloudy areas in Europe so why would the "natives" be particularly dark?

http://www.sportsmanager.ie/cake/app/webroot/user_data/modules/galleries/6929/image_7tpdQB886FMXTsAcCFoEnHPa.jpeg
http://www.gaa.ie/content/images/news/galway/Conneely_Brannigan_enjoy_the_glory2013.jpg
http://www.irishexaminer.com/media/images/e/Exam26072013GAA2_large.jpg
http://sportsnewsireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-shot-2014-05-22-at-12.07.05-610x400.png

Theh look ovewhelmingly brown haired.


True blonde hair is more common among the czech.

http://www.footjuniors.com/NPC/PHOTOLARGE/NPC07%20EUR%20SLAVIA%20PRAGUE.JPG

[Bahaman]

Theh look ovewhelmingly brown haired.


True blonde hair is more common among the czech.

http://www.footjuniors.com/NPC/PHOTOLARGE/NPC07%20EUR%20SLAVIA%20PRAGUE.JPG
Those are Irish people and they are darker haired than English

And from your picture a lot of czhech people dye their hair blonde.

[Bloody]

Those are Irish people and they are darker haired than English

And from your picture a lot of czhech people dye their hair blonde.

The only one obsessed with dyeing his hair was some old account you might be familiar with, who used to bleach his hair compulsively at his short age (16 years old) and claimed to be tronder.

Dont push your insecurities into other people's

[Bahaman]

The only one obsessed with dyeing his hair was some old account you might be familiar with, who used to bleach his hair compulsively at his short age (16 years old) and claimed to be tronder.

Dont push your insecurities into other people's
I don't know what are you talking but Brits are lot lighter than central europeans.

Central europeans = Wogs.

[Grace O'Malley]

[QUOTE=Bloody;3062093]Theh look ovewhelmingly brown haired.

That is what I was trying to show. This is the most common colouring in Irish. I could post lots of pics of blond Irish as well. The pictures I posted is the most common colouring but there are blonds and redheads as well. Just as an example women are more blond than men and this is true of Irish and don't go on about them having dyed their hair because that is not a common practice especially in the Irish countryside. Anyway I said they have mostly light brown to mid brown hair not particularly dark. I think in a lot of other populations you have more extremes than in the Irish one.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qd6bf1gQMo8/UGysSHd7Y4I/AAAAAAAAASU/cPDdZ4xyS5k/s1600/Team.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eUsBVqEDEsY/Us7msXarbDI/AAAAAAAABhM/3_eAka_50pI/s1600/Waterford+2013.png

Anyway these girls are an U14 team so no dyed hair.

http://gaapics.zenfolio.com/img/s4/v12/p248648299-3.jpg

[Grace O'Malley]

Anyway I'm not going out of my way to post pictures of a particular type. These are the first pictures that I come across that I post. It gives people a good idea of what Irish people look like and there is a big thread on this forum on the subject. I post different pictures every time so that people have an accurate portrayal.

[Grace O'Malley]

Theh look ovewhelmingly brown haired.


True blonde hair is more common among the czech.

http://www.footjuniors.com/NPC/PHOTOLARGE/NPC07%20EUR%20SLAVIA%20PRAGUE.JPG

They don't look particularly blond from that picture. They don't appear very different than the Irish and they are a younger age group.

[Bahaman]

They don't look particularly blond from that picture. They don't appear very different than the Irish and they are a younger age group.

Most Czhech dye their hair blonde. They are not germanic like English.

[Septentrion]

British Islanders are definitely not darker-haired, darker-eyed nor darker-skinned than Central/Eastern Europeans. People always exaggerate for the British, they are far from dark! In terms of hair color, they are well within the northern and western German spectrum. In terms of light eyes, they are lighter, especially the Irish and Scottish where 80% or more have blue/green eyes. In terms of skin color, they are the whitest people, there is, Especially the Irish, northern English and Scottish. The Poles wee found to be darker-haired, darker-eyed, darker-skinned than the Irish as a wole, in the GWAS study on Pigmentation in Four European countries (Poland, Ireland, Italy and Portugal) in 2012 by Candile et al. Enough of the lies, let the truth be known, many Eastern Europeans bleach their hair as well, who are you fooling with?

[Septentrion]

These young Czech boys aren't any particularly blonde! O.K., you want people who are blonder than the British/Irish, go to Norway or other Scandinavian countries. Enough with the Czech jokes! The Irish are also whiter than these folks!

[Septentrion]

78% of the British have blue/green eyes, this is higher than Germany and the Netherlands. It is always better to know what you are talking about.

[Gooding]

Using myself as a British template, I would have to say " no."
http://i.imgur.com/taLIBMQ.jpg

[Ctwentysevenj]

British and Irish people are not darker than Central and Eastern Europeans. In some cases are more blonder. Maybe Austrians and Germans are similar to the British isles.

[Deneb]

It depends. Real blonde hair isn't so common in the british islands, particularly among adults. There are more blondes among adult Poles imo. I'd say British match with Austrians in rate of blond hair, although blue eyed people are commoner among british.

[Neon Knight]

Had the question said central Europeans I would have said about the same. But Brits & Irish are certainly lighter than Balkanites.

[RighNick]

I don't really know whee people get this idea from. There are of course some darker Rowan Atkinson-esque types, but most British (and Irish) people are very light.

http://i.imgur.com/htpHvzJ.png

This is the study Septentrion was talking about. As you can see (regardless of what myths may exist on anthroboards), Irish people are significantly lighter in terms of skin, hair, and eye color than poles. Obviously no study is perfect, but I trust peer reviewed articles in scientific journals much more than the "observations" of ( often biased) strangers on the internet.

[Deneb]

That's my opinion. right? I've been 3 times in the british islands (London, dublin and Edimburgh), brief trips of 2/3 days. I only saw a true blond (scandinavian type) in Dublin and not even one in Edimburgh. In London I saw some.

I don't pretend to offend, just saying what I saw.

On the other hand, that study is crazy, how the fuck can Portugueses be lighter than Poles?

[Neon Knight]

A team from near Manchester, North-West England:

http://api.ning.com/files/oYfLznIexMLhpy40Y3oeTSLZIL4awavtvU83MdYiNukXnIGmpA FFprzxr54TPIBf1smstJ8zaT4tWDJgqJhv67A2o2xydfd0/FootballteamMale.jpg

[Roy]

No they are not darker (except for Welsh possibly).

[Ghaleon]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/13/c8c177d347e80704b0b8825b37b9aeb4.jpg

Apparently, I'm atypical for someone of English stock.

Sent from my SGH-I317M using Tapatalk

[Septentrion]

That's my opinion. right? I've been 3 times in the british islands (London, dublin and Edimburgh), brief trips of 2/3 days. I only saw a true blond (scandinavian type) in Dublin and not even one in Edimburgh. In London I saw some.

I don't pretend to offend, just saying what I saw.

On the other hand, that study is crazy, how the fuck can Portugueses be lighter than Poles?

You're the one lying saying that you only saw one true blonde in the British Isles, biggest lie ever told since the beginning of mankind. In London, there are so many non-British immigrants, so that would be a bad place to even judge the pigmentation of the indigenous Britons. Nevertheless the Poles were not darker than the Portuguese, but were found to be about the same skin tone when unexposed to sunlight. The study is not crazy, but rather really well done.!

[Nordicist]

Most English people are not Nordics. Yes, the English speak a Germanic language but that doesn't mean they are phenotypically/genetically Nordic. Stephen Oppenheimer wrote a book saying that native British people are largely descended from Neolithic people of northern Spain before the onslaught of Celtic Indo-Europeans. The Celtic and Nordic admixture is quite small overall and most native Brits are basically paler-skinned Mediterraneans. I know some native English people don't like to hear this but their ancestors were not principally Germanic but non-Indo-European Neolithic. Even in the most "Germanic" region of the UK (Essex) the Germanic component is thought to be only 50% among the native English.

[Grace O'Malley]

Most English people are not Nordics. Yes, the English speak a Germanic language but that doesn't mean they are phenotypically/genetically Nordic. Stephen Oppenheimer wrote a book saying that native British people are largely descended from Neolithic people of northern Spain before the onslaught of Celtic Indo-Europeans. The Celtic and Nordic admixture is quite small overall and most native Brits are basically paler-skinned Mediterraneans. I know some native English people don't like to hear this but their ancestors were not principally Germanic but non-Indo-European Neolithic. Even in the most "Germanic" region of the UK (Essex) the Germanic component is thought to be only 50% among the native English.

Your genetics info is old and not very accurate. It gets very tiring with people constantly posting very outdated information. You've got a lot of reading to do. :)

[Graham]

Well if he said Mid Neolithic and the onslaught/migration of Indo Europeans celtic languages. He could be closer.

[Cristiano viejo]

No way, British and Irish are lighter than any Central or Eastern Euros, including whatever you are thinking. IMO

[Itarildë]

Did I just read "Brits are paler skinned Mediterraneans"???!!! Hahaha! My whole family on my paternal and maternal sides are of Germanic stock... as are many other families in my area.

[Visage pâle]

Imo they are lighter than poles germans and russian.

[Sandman]

Brits have more paler skin then central europeans, but they have darker hair on average. Eyes are on average just as light as in the Poland. I think that they are shorter on average too.

[Visage pâle]

Lastest studies show irish lighter than poles in eye hair and skin color.

[Raikaswinþs]

The UK has a highr population than Poland, Czechia and Austria combined.... of course there's going to be a lot of variety here and plenty of mediterranean native types. But in average I would say it is realy hard to tell who's "lighter". What I can definitely tell is that there are a lot of people here that look unhealthily pale, sometimes with a pasty yellowish hue, some times pinkish and sometimes even blueish. In some cases all thre shades can combine in one individual. People here have a much harder time too getting a tan and burns easier. Ad that works too for many cotinentals , incluing South Europeans that have spend a good among of time in this Apollo-neglected island...

Now when it comes to eye colour, most people here have light eyes, and "mouse" hair, that kind of grey-ish brown ...truly blondes and true brunnetes do exist too, of course. But less.

[Morena]

I think maybe the media has something to do with our perception of British being darker. I love BBC dramas, comedies, and documentaries, and I have to say that many of the actors on there are dark haired and dark skinned, but British. To Americans, the typical British actor is dark haired. Seriously though, how many Germans look like Neil Oliver?

http://www.dkpw.co.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/NeilOliver.jpg

(I imagine that Brittons originally looked like him)
Is this just me not being aware of dark Germans or does the British media like promoting darker actors? I'm seriously curious.

[Nordicist]

Your genetics info is old and not very accurate. It gets very tiring with people constantly posting very outdated information. You've got a lot of reading to do. :)

You think Oppenheimer's theory is just bunk? Others have collaborated on Oppenheimer's thesis. The Celtic and Germanic influence is not as significant as previously thought. The rough estimate is that Germanic dna is about 30% in the UK overall (with the highest estimate being 50% in the eastern England like Norfolk, Essex, Suffolk, etc.).

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/stephenoppenheimer/origins_of_the_british.php

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEL7nCM5itg (Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFQiuGvxMd0 (Part 2)

The fantasy that a lot of native Brits have of being some magical Celtic and Nordic race is just that...fantasy. Most native Brits are descended from Neolithic groups originated in northern Iberia. They resembled modern-day Basques and northern Spaniards.

[Nordicist]

I think maybe the media has something to do with our perception of British being darker. I love BBC dramas, comedies, and documentaries, and I have to say that many of the actors on there are dark haired and dark skinned, but British. To Americans, the typical British actor is dark haired. Seriously though, how many Germans look like Neil Oliver?

http://www.dkpw.co.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/NeilOliver.jpg

(I imagine that Brittons originally looked like him)
Is this just me not being aware of dark Germans or does the British media like promoting darker actors? I'm seriously curious.

Most ancestors of the Brits looked like Cheryl Cole, Catherine Zeta-Jones, or John Rhys-Davies NOT Dolph Lundgren or Lena Gercke.

[Ali Pasha]

If anything Brits are lighter then central Europeans.

[Sandman]

Lastest studies show irish lighter than poles in eye hair and skin color.

What "lastest studies"?. For how in numbers, representative group of the population have been carried out?
national team poland
http://cdn15.se.smcloud.net/t/photos/153839/reprezentacja_polski.jpg
national team ireland
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/FIFA_WC-qualification_2014_-_Austria_vs_Ireland_2013-09-10_-_Republic_of_Ireland_national_football_team.jpg

[Grace O'Malley]

You think Oppenheimer's theory is just bunk? Others have collaborated on Oppenheimer's thesis. The Celtic and Germanic influence is not as significant as previously thought. The rough estimate is that Germanic dna is about 30% in the UK overall (with the highest estimate being 50% in the eastern England like Norfolk, Essex, Suffolk, etc.).

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/stephenoppenheimer/origins_of_the_british.php

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEL7nCM5itg (Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFQiuGvxMd0 (Part 2)

The fantasy that a lot of native Brits have of being some magical Celtic and Nordic race is just that...fantasy. Most native Brits are descended from Neolithic groups originated in northern Iberia. They resembled modern-day Basques and northern Spaniards.

Yes Oppenheimer is completely debunked and it has nothing to do with fantasy it is just having an open mind and looking at genetics objectively. Oppenheimer was basing his link on the high amount of R1b in both populations. This wasn't even looking at autosomal dna but ydna. It was only done on a very small amount of markers and on the belief that R1b was from the Franco-Cantabrian Ice Age Refuge. Move along to the present and R1b is actually Steppes derived and also there are different subclades to further separate people. As I said previously this has all being discussed thoroughly and your genetic information is very much out of date. I doubt someone who is partly Scottish would be so ignorant of their genetics.

As I said you have a lot of reading to do and use proper sources not Youtube. You might want to look at the PoBI study as well.

http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/nature14317.pdf

Even a simple exercise would be to look at a dna cluster map for Europe. Straight away if anyone uses that Brits are all Iberians you know they haven't looked too thoroughly into genetics.

You remind me of the starter of this thread.

[Septentrion]

You think Oppenheimer's theory is just bunk? Others have collaborated on Oppenheimer's thesis. The Celtic and Germanic influence is not as significant as previously thought. The rough estimate is that Germanic dna is about 30% in the UK overall (with the highest estimate being 50% in the eastern England like Norfolk, Essex, Suffolk, etc.).

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/stephenoppenheimer/origins_of_the_british.php

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEL7nCM5itg (Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFQiuGvxMd0 (Part 2)

The fantasy that a lot of native Brits have of being some magical Celtic and Nordic race is just that...fantasy. Most native Brits are descended from Neolithic groups originated in northern Iberia. They resembled modern-day Basques and northern Spaniards.

You are the fantasy! You are confusing Germanic with Germany, yes in the main English group about 30% of the DNA comes from Germany is . However Germanic people were not confined in Germany only, but were also in northern Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Yes they predominantly belong to the Northern European ("Nordic") group than to the Southern European ("Mediterranean") one, English/Brits are not Iberians!!! The genetical contribution from southern France and northern Spain (including Basque Country) is minimal. British people don't resemble Iberians in general.

Genetical contributions according to the POBI recent genetical study results (2015):

Core England (Main English population)

35% North France
22% Denmark-North Germany
15% Germany
10% Brittany
10% Sweden-Norway
8% Belgium
1% France & Spain

Cornwall
35% North France
25% Brittany
19% Denmark-North Germany
10% Germany
5% Belgium
4% Sweden-Norway
2% France & Spain

We clearly see that for example, in the English population, the France+Spain genetical contribution to be much lower than that of regions which lay more north. The earliest inhabitants of the British Isles came from northern Belgium and western Germany through Doggerland, later from northern France by boat. Away with Oppenheimer's theories.

[Septentrion]

Spaniards/Basques are firstly of a darker-pigmentation in comparison to Brits. Firstly they don't even have the pale complexion of the Brits, let alone light eyes and light hair. Facial measurements differ as well, where the British are more similar to western Scandinavians (especially Norwegians) in that respect. Most Brits have on average mousey to sandy hair color tones, while Iberians are dark brown to black hair color tones.

[Grace O'Malley]

You think Oppenheimer's theory is just bunk? Others have collaborated on Oppenheimer's thesis. The Celtic and Germanic influence is not as significant as previously thought. The rough estimate is that Germanic dna is about 30% in the UK overall (with the highest estimate being 50% in the eastern England like Norfolk, Essex, Suffolk, etc.).

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/stephenoppenheimer/origins_of_the_british.php

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEL7nCM5itg (Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFQiuGvxMd0 (Part 2)

The fantasy that a lot of native Brits have of being some magical Celtic and Nordic race is just that...fantasy. Most native Brits are descended from Neolithic groups originated in northern Iberia. They resembled modern-day Basques and northern Spaniards.

You are using old studies and you should know better if you have any idea of genetics. Oppenheimer based his study on R1b and on a tiny amount of markers. He thought that R1b came out of the Franco-Cantabrian Ice Age Refuge which was the opinion at the time. So he based this on ydna. It is now known that R1b wasn't around at this time and only came from the Steppes 5,000 years ago. He also wasn't aware of all the subclades of R1b and the main subclades of the British Isles and Iberia are different. How can the Irish not be Celtic when they speak a Celtic language and a large chunk of information about Celts basically comes from Ireland? I think you are the one that is fantasy driven. If the Irish, Scots etc originated from northern Iberia explain the differences in ANE levels?

Anyway you obviously aren't who you say you are and I think you're a sock of Bloody. Two threads on the same subject. Obsessed much?

[Bloody]

Spaniards/Basques are firstly of a darker-pigmentation in comparison to Brits. Firstly they don't even have the pale complexion of the Brits, let alone light eyes and light hair. Facial measurements differ as well, where the British are more similar to western Scandinavians (especially Norwegians) in that respect. Most Brits have on average mousey to sandy hair color tones, while Iberians are dark brown to black hair color tones.

Brits are certainly darker than western scandinavians, (Icelanders and Western Norwegians), even british members themselves would agree on that..
British hair colour tend to be mousy/auburn or darkbown/black, Western norwegians are on average more on the Darkblond/lightbrown or just plain blonde hair with the odd chesnut/darkbrown here and there

[Septentrion]

Brits are certainly darker than western scandinavians, (Icelanders and Western Norwegians), even british members themselves would agree on that..
British hair colour tend to be mousy/auburn or darkbown/black, Western norwegians are on average more on the Darkblond/lightbrown or just plain blonde hair with the odd chesnut/darkbrown here and there

You seem to be exaggerating. Yes, the Western Norwegians and Icelanders are on average of course blonder-haired than most Brits or Irish as well as most other Europeans groups (including Central/Eastern Europeans), but they are not paler in complexion than the Brits. The most common hair colour among the Brits/Irish is light brown (mousy) and reddish brown, not dark brown though it's present. Black hair is scarce. There is obviously more dark brown hair among Brits than amongst Norwegians, but that doesn't make them darker than Central/Eastern Europeans (Austrians, Hungarians, Poles, etc...). Norway is the blondest country of the Scandinavian countries with the exception of Finland. In an almost ten year medical study of skin cancer (1991-2000), comparing hundred of thousands of Norwegian and Swedish adult women, shows the Norwegian women to be considerably blonder than Swedish ones. So for Norwegians to be blonder-haired than Brits is no surprise, however I was noting that in facial features, the British and Irish are much more similar to western Scandinavians than they are to Germans/Central Europeans.

"Typical" Norwegian
blonde hair
blue eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" Icelander
dark blonde/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" British
mousy/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair/very fair skin
above average height

Princess Diana in Wales.
http://img.theepochtimes.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2014/10/12/76377058.jpg

Pale complexions is so British!
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/gc/468020948-camilla-duchess-of-cornwall-and-prince-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QVF6FpHXRVu7uf%2BQUyWYCC1jE8 KMJhFzrXnoXEmpJus4frD85mk4I%2Bu7mOVuqy1iXw%3D%3D

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/02439/01_06013206_a73f63_2439821a.jpg

[StonyArabia]

I live in area full of British descendants they are lighter than most Central Europeans.

[Bloody]

You seem to be exaggerating. Yes, the Western Norwegians and Icelanders are on average of course blonder-haired than most Brits or Irish as well as most other Europeans groups (including Central/Eastern Europeans), but they are not paler in complexion than the Brits. The most common hair colour among the Brits/Irish is light brown (mousy) and reddish brown, not dark brown though it's present. Black hair is scarce. There is obviously more dark brown hair among Brits than amongst Norwegians, but that doesn't make them darker than Central/Eastern Europeans (Austrians, Hungarians, Poles, etc...). Norway is the blondest country of the Scandinavian countries with the exception of Finland. In an almost ten year medical study of skin cancer (1991-2000), comparing hundred of thousands of Norwegian and Swedish adult women, shows the Norwegian women to be considerably blonder than Swedish ones. So for Norwegians to be blonder-haired than Brits is no surprise, however I was noting that in facial features, the British and Irish are much more similar to western Scandinavians than they are to Germans/Central Europeans.

"Typical" Norwegian
blonde hair
blue eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" Icelander
dark blonde/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" British
mousy/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair/very fair skin
above average height

Princess Diana in Wales.
http://img.theepochtimes.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2014/10/12/76377058.jpg

Pale complexions is so British!
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/gc/468020948-camilla-duchess-of-cornwall-and-prince-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QVF6FpHXRVu7uf%2BQUyWYCC1jE8 KMJhFzrXnoXEmpJus4frD85mk4I%2Bu7mOVuqy1iXw%3D%3D

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/02439/01_06013206_a73f63_2439821a.jpg

British and Irish are not that close to any other european phenotype wise.. Only parts of NW france have some similar types, but still they are of continental inspiration...

British people arent of above average height.. I dont consider 5'9-'5'10 being above average lol.

[Alessio]

Is red more of a color than blue?

[Bloody]

I live in area full of British descendants they are lighter than most Central Europeans.

http://z3.ifrm.com/67/29/0/p394117/Jablonski_Chaplin_et_al_2000_.jpg

recent studies (from 2003) contradict your observation..

Dutch and Germans have fairer skin than the English and Irish.

And Its well known the Isles are full of atlantids.. most brits have dark hair.

[StonyArabia]

http://z3.ifrm.com/67/29/0/p394117/Jablonski_Chaplin_et_al_2000_.jpg

recent studies (from 2003) contradict your observation..

Dutch and Germans have fairer skin than the English and Irish.

And Its well known the Isles are full of atlantids.. most brits have dark hair.

Dutch and Germans yea, but most Slavic people on average are darker than the British.

[Bloody]

Dutch and Germans yea, but most Slavic people on average are darker than the British.

I dont know Baltic states, Lithuanians, Russians, Poles and Czech all have lighter hair and eyes on average than Brits. Now Baltics also have lighter skin, in fact they have some of the lightest skins in the world.

As you see in the study, spanish basques have lighter skin than some english areas, so why not slavs?

[Oneeye]

Anglo Saxons were black.

[Septentrion]

Even with dark brown hair. Ireland has the highest frequency of people who have the dark brown hair, blue eyes, very pale skin/ freckled skin combination (about 36% of the Irish have dark brown hair). So how is that dark?
These Irish people exemplify quite well:
http://i2.listal.com/image/2022822/936full-kerry-condon.jpg
http://images.sciencedaily.com/2013/11/131121130027-large.jpg

The British and Irish are not dark, since regardless of hair/eye colour, not all, but they are generally light-skinned("whiter") than continental Europeans. This, we cannot say about other Western Europeans along the Atlantic regions? Can we? Nope!

[Imamudin]

I dont know Baltic states, Lithuanians, Russians, Poles and Czech all have lighter hair and eyes on average than Brits. Now Baltics also have lighter skin, in fact they have some of the lightest skins in the world.

As you see in the study, spanish basques have lighter skin than some english areas, so why not slavs?

Poles and West Slavs are about the same as British people I would say. They can be quite dark for their latitude.

http://www.tapetus.pl/obrazki/n/51679_prezydent-lech-kaczynski.jpg

[Bloody]

Poles and West Slavs are about the same as British people I would say. They can be quite dark for their latitude.

http://www.tapetus.pl/obrazki/n/51679_prezydent-lech-kaczynski.jpg

Skin might be similar but Poles and West Slavs are actually blonder and have lighter eyes..

http://i2.liverpoolecho.co.uk/incoming/article6172641.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/US-McCartney-200438_698.jpg

I know many polish women who are naturally blonde (usually more dark blonde than mid-light blonde though).. hardly any british girl with natural blonde hair though..

http://i1.chroniclelive.co.uk/incoming/article7128716.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/war-memorial.jpg

[Neida]

You seem to be exaggerating. Yes, the Western Norwegians and Icelanders are on average of course blonder-haired than most Brits or Irish as well as most other Europeans groups (including Central/Eastern Europeans), but they are not paler in complexion than the Brits. The most common hair colour among the Brits/Irish is light brown (mousy) and reddish brown, not dark brown though it's present. Black hair is scarce. There is obviously more dark brown hair among Brits than amongst Norwegians, but that doesn't make them darker than Central/Eastern Europeans (Austrians, Hungarians, Poles, etc...). Norway is the blondest country of the Scandinavian countries with the exception of Finland. In an almost ten year medical study of skin cancer (1991-2000), comparing hundred of thousands of Norwegian and Swedish adult women, shows the Norwegian women to be considerably blonder than Swedish ones. So for Norwegians to be blonder-haired than Brits is no surprise, however I was noting that in facial features, the British and Irish are much more similar to western Scandinavians than they are to Germans/Central Europeans.

"Typical" Norwegian
blonde hair
blue eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" Icelander
dark blonde/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" British
mousy/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair/very fair skin
above average height

Princess Diana in Wales.
http://img.theepochtimes.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2014/10/12/76377058.jpg

Pale complexions is so British!
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/gc/468020948-camilla-duchess-of-cornwall-and-prince-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QVF6FpHXRVu7uf%2BQUyWYCC1jE8 KMJhFzrXnoXEmpJus4frD85mk4I%2Bu7mOVuqy1iXw%3D%3D

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/02439/01_06013206_a73f63_2439821a.jpg

Icelanders ARE western norwegians you silly cow LOL. Go read some more history boy

[Neida]

You seem to be exaggerating. Yes, the Western Norwegians and Icelanders are on average of course blonder-haired than most Brits or Irish as well as most other Europeans groups (including Central/Eastern Europeans), but they are not paler in complexion than the Brits. The most common hair colour among the Brits/Irish is light brown (mousy) and reddish brown, not dark brown though it's present. Black hair is scarce. There is obviously more dark brown hair among Brits than amongst Norwegians, but that doesn't make them darker than Central/Eastern Europeans (Austrians, Hungarians, Poles, etc...). Norway is the blondest country of the Scandinavian countries with the exception of Finland. In an almost ten year medical study of skin cancer (1991-2000), comparing hundred of thousands of Norwegian and Swedish adult women, shows the Norwegian women to be considerably blonder than Swedish ones. So for Norwegians to be blonder-haired than Brits is no surprise, however I was noting that in facial features, the British and Irish are much more similar to western Scandinavians than they are to Germans/Central Europeans.

"Typical" Norwegian
blonde hair
blue eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" Icelander
dark blonde/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair skin
tall

"Typical" British
mousy/reddish hair
blue/green eyes
fair/very fair skin
above average height

Princess Diana in Wales.
http://img.theepochtimes.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2014/10/12/76377058.jpg

Pale complexions is so British!
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/gc/468020948-camilla-duchess-of-cornwall-and-prince-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QVF6FpHXRVu7uf%2BQUyWYCC1jE8 KMJhFzrXnoXEmpJus4frD85mk4I%2Bu7mOVuqy1iXw%3D%3D

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/02439/01_06013206_a73f63_2439821a.jpg

And BTW average height on norwegian men are 1,80 cm. Maybe tall by european standard but probably small by american standard

[Amor Vincit Omnia]

I personally think Brits have darker hair (in adulthood) than most central-eastern europeans , but the eye color is similar.
Irish on the other hand are even more remarkably darker haired in comparison, but could be slighty lighter eyed.

yes I think so , darker comparated germans , Czech, Poles and Slovakians, danmark ....Scandinavians , also if uk in extreme north Europe at the same level than danmark and south part of Norway and Sweden ......it because the admixture with iberic 6000 th years ago .....anyway they are north European anyway

[Amor Vincit Omnia]

http://http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=589CC035DC8408B583AD08E39DA9CF4DD5E46147&selectedIndex=0&ccid=px8c4oY%2b&simid=608044061323232875&thid=OIP.Ma71f1ce2863e95e3093fd729b0aaa409o0&ajaxhist=0 (http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=589CC035DC8408B583AD08E39DA9CF4DD5E46147&selectedIndex=0&ccid=px8c4oY%2b&simid=608044061323232875&thid=OIP.Ma71f1ce2863e95e3093fd729b0aaa409o0&ajaxhist=0)

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=7A8FBC9E8EF619AF2B83D6F21ABB5403D8D6662B&selectedindex=1&ccid=oPHBRQiI&simid=608000132404741838&thid=OIP.Ma0f1c1450888c316e6ee69b98ab87cb0o0&mode=overlay&first=1

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=589CC035DC8408B583ADF7CDA4583A672BB59F5F&selectedindex=7&ccid=ktZ8l8ku&simid=608043112131595319&thid=OIP.M92d67c97c92e1a227516bb1814865e5fH0&mode=overlay&first=1

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=B05270DE799A3B1BC5B6502D981796249069C850&selectedindex=12&ccid=fCCCkq73&simid=608049468683387100&thid=OIP.M7c208292aef7eb508de24ea6082e454do0&mode=overlay&first=1

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=D84E029053457B28BFE8487413D0E65526DB5CD3&selectedindex=13&ccid=X7dAAxE4&simid=608031408350888044&thid=OIP.M5fb740031138f5255d92b3091a1ab2fco0&mode=overlay&first=1

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=71D617C9B4A5FAD357C4C027E8D43CBA1A2C43A2&selectedindex=16&ccid=So%2Fr%2Fb4A&simid=608009856206505236&thid=OIP.M4a8febfdbe00e987cf174681c6a6adebH0&mode=overlay&first=1

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=light+hairs+and+eyes+map+in+europe&view=detailv2&qft=+filterui%3aimagesize-large&id=FF2352501E455D49FC55B7D4D0210606F43A6AF2&selectedindex=20&ccid=YaLTypIl&simid=608023020276154826&thid=OIP.M61a2d3ca9225ebbdfe18848bb4ff010ao0&mode=overlay&first=1


after saw this , I think they can be just a little less than them , but not much , almost the same .

[rhiannon]

:picard2::picard2::picard2::crazy::roll eyes

[Bloody]

And BTW average height on norwegian men are 1,80 cm. Maybe tall by european standard but probably small by american standard

White americans are actually shorter than most europeans..

Average white american is between 175-178 cm... 5'9-5'10

White americans are similar in height to French, Brits and Spaniards... all who are shorter than people in the Netherlands, Germany, Slavic countries, Scandinavia and Balkans.

Only portugal and Albania are shorter than the american average (and not by that much). Average white american woman is 5'4 or 163 cm..

[Septentrion]

White americans are actually shorter than most europeans..

Average white american is between 175-178 cm... 5'9-5'10

White americans are similar in height to French, Brits and Spaniards... all who are shorter than people in the Netherlands, Germany, Slavic countries, Scandinavia and Balkans.

Only portugal and Albania are shorter than the american average (and not by that much). Average white american woman is 5'4 or 163 cm..

White Americans are similar in height to most Europeans, their average is 177.8cm (5"10") same as that of Lithuanians, which is slightly above the average height of all Americans. They are similar to us Belgians where the average height for males is 178.5cm, not much of a difference. Though the Dutch and most Scandinavian countries are taller. White Americans have their origins all over the European continent, so we cannot use them as an example, they are too diverse. They are still slightly taller than the French, Spaniards, Portuguese, Bulgarians, Romanians, Ukrainians, Albanians, Georgians, Russians. So not all Slavic people are taller than White Americans. The Irish are slightly taller than the Brits who are still taller than the French. There has bee for the last 30 years, a dramatic increase in height, while at the beginning of the 20th century, Americans were indeed taller than most Europeans groups. This is more linked to nutrition and lifestyle, not to the garbage you are posting. In the 19th century, the Dutch were amongst the shortest people in Europe, so things have changed greatly. This has nothing to do with being Germanic/Slavic/Celtic/Latin/Basques.

[Septentrion]

Firstly stop the name-calling. If you do not have the intelligence to express yourself or lack in the English language to do so, it'd be better for you to be quiet! Firstly my knowledge of history most likely exceed yours by a stretch. For your information, Icelanders are principally the result of a mixture between Scandinavians and British Islanders, later came other people from the other countries of Europe. For Scandinavia, the genes hailed out of Western Norway, while from the British Isles, mainly northern Scotland and Ireland, coastal Wales. In fact genetical studies shows that 80% of the Y-Dna of Icelanders came from Scandinavia (Nordic) while 62% of the Mitochondrial DNA is from the British Isles (Celtic)!

[Septentrion]

You have no idea who British people are! Stop imagining things! You've forgotten that there are plenty of immigrants who live in Britain too.
http://media.postdesk.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/england-flag-girl-8.jpg
https://photomadly.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/6927-london-wedding-carolinematthr.jpg?w=864&h=346

Lily Cole is from southwest England, look how pale she is!
http://unicornbutterwomen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/936full-lily-cole.jpg

[Balmung]

Average White American is around 5'10 that's around the same height for most continental Europeans. Besides the idea that Americans are short because of British ancestry is nonsensical considering the fact back in a time when were perhaps slightly more purely British we were taller than all continental Europeans so were Aussies. American, British, Aus from the left to right.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Troops_of_the_Eight_nations_alliance_1900.jpg

[abcd123]

Average White American is around 5'10 that's around the same height for most continental Europeans. Besides the idea that Americans are short because of British ancestry is nonsensical considering the fact back in a time when were perhaps slightly more purely British we were taller than all continental Europeans so were Aussies. American, British, Aus from the left to right.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Troops_of_the_Eight_nations_alliance_1900.jpg

Anglos are good people!Superior genes!

[Septentrion]

No! Central-Eastern Europeans are never light-haired/lighter-eyed/fairer-skinned than Northwestern Europeans (Brits, Irish, Belgians, Dutch, northwest Germans, Norwegians, Icelanders, etc...).

Less than 70% of Central-Eastern Europeans have blue or green eyes, while for the British it's nearly 80%! The Brits and Irish have the lighest skin tone in the entire world, especially when red-haired.

[brennus dux gallorum]

British no, Irish to a degree

[brennus dux gallorum]

Comparing Ireland to Central-eastern Europe
Czech republic, Slovakia, Poland, Ukraine and belarus, have bigger percentage of light hair
Hungary has smaller

[♥ Lily ♥]

Depends on the individual person's hair and eye colour that you're comparing against another individual person in each nation.

Some crowds of people from various European nations;-

Kiev, Ukraine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwaRpf_co9w

London, South-East England

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgguEZCE3Dk

Sweden

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YrN91PJZlE

Austria

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_4oHQtg3zQ

Bournemouth on the south coast of England.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sh28uOgBoQ

Berlin, Germany

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK66nBNs3NQ

City of Westminster, London, south-east England, UK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKCGoGZPZ0k

[♥ Lily ♥]

Ireland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ietY3Tmou8

Poland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TOHI6PrG2E

Czech Republic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScqRsMqNsPo

Albania

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E3AYtaJ3zo

Milan, Northern Italy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO5xTg0oeiA

The Netherlands

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqg88Efv2dk

[Septentrion]

British no, Irish to a degree

No as a whole Poland does not have a higher frequency of light hair or light eyes than Ireland. This was already proven by the GWAS study on pigmentation in 4 European countries in 2012 where Ireland was found lighter in skin, hair and eyes than Poland, Portugal and Italy.

[bozkur]

None of the above

[brennus dux gallorum]

No as a whole Poland does not have a higher frequency of light hair or light eyes than Ireland. This was already proven by the GWAS study on pigmentation in 4 European countries in 2012 where Ireland was found lighter in skin, hair and eyes than Poland, Portugal and Italy.

In all maps I have seen Poland has lighter hair, maybe the study you refer is an exception. and we should not overlook that linguistically for many scholars poland is closer to Germanics and Ireland to Italy

also, Czech rep. has more fair people than Poland, Russia, Belarus and Baltic states too, and all of them are central/eastern europeans. As for skin color, maybe you are right, considering that Eastern Europe has much more sunshine than Ireland, which is one of the main variables affecting skin tone

the last but not least, it's not only maps or researches but my personal experience too.

[Amor Vincit Omnia]

https://thuleanperspective.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/europe-hair0223-light-h.png

https://thuleanperspective.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/europe-eyes-general-lig.png

[MINARDOWICZ]

It is a fact that they do. Not significantly, but yes. Ever-so-slightly. I mean, this should make sense, as they have a little more atlantic and med.

[Grace O'Malley]

In all maps I have seen Poland has lighter hair, maybe the study you refer is an exception. and we should not overlook that linguistically for many scholars poland is closer to Germanics and Ireland to Italy

also, Czech rep. has more fair people than Poland, Russia, Belarus and Baltic states too, and all of them are central/eastern europeans. As for skin color, maybe you are right, considering that Eastern Europe has much more sunshine than Ireland, which is one of the main variables affecting skin tone

the last but not least, it's not only maps or researches but my personal experience too.

You know you can't leave this place for 5 minutes without people posting inaccuracies. The Irish have fair skin because they are one of the highest carriers of the MC1R gene. Most Irish carry a copy. You need 2 to have red hair but having one copy will give you fair and freckled skin. In Ireland, an estimated 10 percent of the population has red hair, though about 40 percent of the Irish carry the recessive gene. In Scotland and England, 13 percent and 6 percent, respectively, are redheaded, according to the Daily Mail. Of my family tested (which is 4) we all carry a red hair variant.

http://www.livescience.com/26633-redhead-dna-gene.html

If you are talking about the Celtic language how does that influence genetics? The Irish cluster here. Tell me how they can cluster there and be more related to Italians than to closer populations like the Scots or even the Norwegians?

https://blog.23andme.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/novembreblogpostfig.jpg

There are all sorts of theories about the Celtic language and anyway the Irish speak Insular Celtic which is spoken in North West Europe.

[Sebastianus Rex]

Only darker than Baltics and possibly Belarussians.

[Grace O'Malley]

It is a fact that they do. Not significantly, but yes. Ever-so-slightly. I mean, this should make sense, as they have a little more atlantic and med.

Can you link about this? What about populations like South Dutch, Belgians and Swiss? Don't they carry more "med" than populations like the Irish? Not that there is anything wrong with "med" in those Gedmatch calculators. All populations have more or less of it. I've always thought "med" is related to EEF which is why Sardinians carry such a lot of it. There is no special link that the Irish and / or British have that populations such as the Germans or as I've stated earlier South Dutch or Belgians have. Populations like the West Germans and South Germans are much more "med" than either the British or Irish. As I've said not that there is anything wrong with that but I think people should talk in facts.

You can even look at this Eurogenes plot and look where populations are placed. So can people post links for what they say?

http://s28.postimg.org/obcl9ajn1/pca12.png

[Sebastianus Rex]

The Irish cluster here. Tell me how they can cluster there and be more related to Italians than to closer populations like the Scots or even the Norwegians?

https://blog.23andme.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/novembreblogpostfig.jpg

There are all sorts of theories about the Celtic language and anyway the Irish speak Insular Celtic which is spoken in North West Europe.

Those genetic maps are quite old, there's several more up to date:

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/K15V3.png

http://pichoster.net/images/2014/02/13/Eurasia%20PCA.png

[Grace O'Malley]

Those genetic maps are quite old, there's several more up to date:

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/K15V3.png

http://pichoster.net/images/2014/02/13/Eurasia%20PCA.png

Yes thanks Rex but I find the map I posted quite clear and it is also still relevant. All the maps still are consistent with where the populations are placed. If you look at the last one it is very hard to differentiate where the Irish and British are there are so many populations clustered together.

http://i68.tinypic.com/21j3ngg.jpg

[brennus dux gallorum]

You know you can't leave this place for 5 minutes without people posting inaccuracies. The Irish have fair skin because they are one of the highest carriers of the MC1R gene. Most Irish carry a copy. You need 2 to have red hair but having one copy will give you fair and freckled skin. In Ireland, an estimated 10 percent of the population has red hair, though about 40 percent of the Irish carry the recessive gene. In Scotland and England, 13 percent and 6 percent, respectively, are redheaded, according to the Daily Mail. Of my family tested (which is 4) we all carry a red hair variant.

http://www.livescience.com/26633-redhead-dna-gene.html

If you are talking about the Celtic language how does that influence genetics? The Irish cluster here. Tell me how they can cluster there and be more related to Italians than to closer populations like the Scots or even the Norwegians?

https://blog.23andme.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/novembreblogpostfig.jpg

There are all sorts of theories about the Celtic language and anyway the Irish speak Insular Celtic which is spoken in North West Europe.

let me know, since when do you know me personaly that you also know I post inaccuracies every 5 minutes?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aOLKFCqDMh0/T__9VubC9rI/AAAAAAAAAA4/5MAj7WqaKaQ/s1600/europe-hair0223--light-h.png

most of central eastern european countries have a bigger percentage of light hair than ireland

also, in case that you need occulist,Ireland is genetically closer to norway, and central-eastern europe closer to finland which has the biggest percentage of light hair in the world. EVEN SLOVAKIA HAS MORE FAIR HAIR THAN IRELAND

As for the language, if i am not mistaken most of Europeans are genetically connected to pre-IE people of Europe, including Celts. Also, you should have in mind that without latinisation, the Celtic-speaking map would be kinda different today, and would include people genetically very distant from norway, like Portuguese

[Grace O'Malley]

let me know, since when do you know me personaly that you also know I post inaccuracies every 5 minutes?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aOLKFCqDMh0/T__9VubC9rI/AAAAAAAAAA4/5MAj7WqaKaQ/s1600/europe-hair0223--light-h.png

most of central eastern european countries have a bigger percentage of light hair than ireland

also, in case that you need occulist,Ireland is genetically closer to norway, and central-eastern europe closer to finland which has the biggest percentage of light hair in the world. EVEN SLOVAKIA HAS MORE FAIR HAIR THAN IRELAND

As for the language, if i am not mistaken most of Europeans are genetically connected to pre-IE people of Europe, including Celts. Also, you should have in mind that without latinisation, the Celtic-speaking map would be kinda different today, and would include people genetically very distant from norway, like Portuguese

I didn't say you post inaccuracies every 5 minutes. This is what I said "You know you can't leave this place for 5 minutes without people posting inaccuracies." I was referring to myself re the 5 minutes because I haven't posted on here for a couple of months and also not just to your post but also to some of the other posters re the inaccuracies. So you've completely misinterpreted what I said.

The reason why I said you were inaccurate is because you said that Celtic is closer to Italian as if that has anything to do with hair colour or genetics. Italo-Celtic also started in Central Europe anyway but again what has that to do with how a population looks?

Both Italo-Celtic and Germanic started very near each other. Proto-Celtic shows contact with Pre-Germanic and either split from a common Proto-Italo-Celtic node or had early close contact with Proto-Italic." This is a quote from Jean Manco author of Blood of the Celts. There are also borrowings from Celtic into Old Germanic during the Iron Age showing both populations had contact with each other. Nothing too surprising there as Celtic originated out of Central Europe.

Have you even been to Ireland? Ireland is not significantly different than her neighbours in regard to hair and eye colour. It is just a matter of degrees. Random pictures of Irish using google search to I'm not trying to use cherry-picked pictures.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=gaa+camogie+ireland&espv=2&biw=1517&bih=735&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijr7ffnbvRAhVKG5QKHeMGAUUQ_AUIBygC

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=irish+rugby+fans&espv=2&biw=1517&bih=735&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNu6j9orvRAhUIFZQKHW1kCUcQ_AUICCgB

People on Anthroforums try to make out there are significant differences between neighbouring populations but there isn't.

Anyway all those maps people post are just blogger's maps. We just go around in circles about these things. Anyway Brennus I don't argue with you about Greeks but you like to chip in about the Irish and say you know what they look like better than I do. Have you actually visited Ireland to know what they look like? Anyway no matter what hair colour the Irish have they are overwhelmingly blue eyed with fair skin so very typical of both their genetics and geography. People just like to obsess on these matters. I'm a bit over these topics going around in circles.

[brennus dux gallorum]

Light hair perc. in Central-Eastern Europe ,UK and Ireland
Estonia70%
Latvia 66%
Lithuania 57%
England 56%
Czech rep 56%
Belarus 55%
Scotland 52%
Russia 47%
Poland 46%
Slovakia 45%
Ukraine 45%
Wales 42%
Ireland 38%

[Grace O'Malley]

Light hair perc. in Central-Eastern Europe ,UK and Ireland
Estonia70%
Latvia 66%
Lithuania 57%
England 56%
Czech rep 56%
Belarus 55%
Scotland 52%
Russia 47%
Poland 46%
Slovakia 45%
Ukraine 45%
Wales 42%
Ireland 38%

Who says those figures are accurate anyway. What is the source?

As I've said I don't want to be going back and forth with you on the topic of hair colour. It is very subjective. My main point was to explain how this is incorrect.


and we should not overlook that linguistically for many scholars poland is closer to Germanics and Ireland to Italy

Also why are the Irish so fair skinned and blue eyed? How does that tie in with what you said above?

[Grace O'Malley]

The actual study that Septentrion is referencing is this. It is actually a GWAS study on pigmentation so scientific based.

"Only participants who reported having natural hair color (i.e. not dyed) were measured." Also this is interesting. "The hair M index has a unimodal distribution skewed to the left, at smaller M index or lighter pigmentation (Figure 1C, n = 341). It differs between sexes in only one country, Ireland, where males have darker hair color than females (p = 8×10−3,

"Hair pigmentation is lighter in the Northern European countries, Ireland and Poland, than in the Southern European countries, Italy and Portugal (p<10−7 for all four comparisons, Table 1 and Table S1). Similarly to skin pigmentation, Irish participants have the lightest hair pigmentation of all groups."

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048294

Some blogs about the topic.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/gwas-study-of-pigmentation-in-four.html

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/causes-of-skin-and-hair-color-variance.html

[MINARDOWICZ]

Can you link about this? What about populations like South Dutch, Belgians and Swiss? Don't they carry more "med" than populations like the Irish? Not that there is anything wrong with "med" in those Gedmatch calculators. All populations have more or less of it. I've always thought "med" is related to EEF which is why Sardinians carry such a lot of it. There is no special link that the Irish and / or British have that populations such as the Germans or as I've stated earlier South Dutch or Belgians have. Populations like the West Germans and South Germans are much more "med" than either the British or Irish. As I've said not that there is anything wrong with that but I think people should talk in facts.

You can even look at this Eurogenes plot and look where populations are placed. So can people post links for what they say?

http://s28.postimg.org/obcl9ajn1/pca12.png

As you can see, British are the closest N Europeans there are to Basques (unless you count french) and even this image you are showing backs that up.

[Grace O'Malley]

As you can see, British are the closest N Europeans there are to Basques (unless you count french) and even this image you are showing backs that up.

They are miles away. Have you looked at the distance?

Here is a Cavalli-Sforza genetic distance for the Irish and Basque.

Autosomal markers
The lists below show genetic distances between the Irish and the Basque and selected populations based on Cavalli-Sforza's analysis of data on 'classical' markers (from HGHG, Table 5.5.1.)
Distance from Irish
Irish 0
Scottish 29
English 30
Danish 68
Belgian 75
Dutch 76
Norwegian 79
Spanish 113
Basque 145
Distance from Basque
Basque 0
French 93
Spanish 104
Belgian 107
Dutch 118
English 119
Russian 140
Italian 141
Irish 145

The Irish are more closely related to all northwest and north central Europeans than they are to the Basque. Basques are more closely related to the Dutch, and even Russians than they are to the Irish, according to autosomal data.

I've read everything on the topic and people that make that connection have obviously not looked into the topic and keep regurgitating that old Oppenheimer genetic study done year's ago on R1b. Even then with autosomal dna they would have seen how inaccurate it was. You will not find any genetic study today that supports any link. People that constantly rehash this old stuff have serious blinkers on. Yes the Dutch are closer to Basque so where are all the posts on their Basque connection?

[Grace O'Malley]

They are miles away. Have you looked at the distance?

Here is a Cavalli-Sforza genetic distance for the Irish and Basque.

Autosomal markers
The lists below show genetic distances between the Irish and the Basque and selected populations based on Cavalli-Sforza's analysis of data on 'classical' markers (from HGHG, Table 5.5.1.)
Distance from Irish
Irish 0
Scottish 29
English 30
Danish 68
Belgian 75
Dutch 76
Norwegian 79
Spanish 113
Basque 145
Distance from Basque
Basque 0
French 93
Spanish 104
Belgian 107
Dutch 118
English 119
Russian 140
Italian 141
Irish 145

The Irish are more closely related to all northwest and north central Europeans than they are to the Basque. Basques are more closely related to the Dutch, and even Russians than they are to the Irish, according to autosomal data.

I've read everything on the topic and people that make that connection have obviously not looked into the topic and keep regurgitating that old Oppenheimer genetic study done year's ago on R1b. Even then with autosomal dna they would have seen how inaccurate it was. You will not find any genetic study today that supports any link. People that constantly rehash this old stuff have serious blinkers on. Yes the Dutch are closer to Basque so where are all the posts on their Basque connection?

Here's another genetic table which included the Germans and yes they too are closer to Basque. The Germans are also significantly closer to Spanish than the Irish are. Anyone using logic would know why this makes perfect sense. The Germans are Central Europeans and as such are much closer to many populations than someone like the Irish would be. The Irish are a island population with another island between them and the European mainland. Why would the Irish be closer to populations like the Spanish than the Germans are? Where is the logic in that? The Irish are of course closest to neighbouring populations such as the British, Dutch and Scandinavians.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3343/5815310162_b536dd4de5_b.jpg

[brennus dux gallorum]

I didn't say you post inaccuracies every 5 minutes. This is what I said "You know you can't leave this place for 5 minutes without people posting inaccuracies." I was referring to myself re the 5 minutes because I haven't posted on here for a couple of months and also not just to your post but also to some of the other posters re the inaccuracies. So you've completely misinterpreted what I said.

The reason why I said you were inaccurate is because you said that Celtic is closer to Italian as if that has anything to do with hair colour or genetics. Italo-Celtic also started in Central Europe anyway but again what has that to do with how a population looks?

Both Italo-Celtic and Germanic started very near each other. Proto-Celtic shows contact with Pre-Germanic and either split from a common Proto-Italo-Celtic node or had early close contact with Proto-Italic." This is a quote from Jean Manco author of Blood of the Celts. There are also borrowings from Celtic into Old Germanic during the Iron Age showing both populations had contact with each other. Nothing too surprising there as Celtic originated out of Central Europe.

Have you even been to Ireland? Ireland is not significantly different than her neighbours in regard to hair and eye colour. It is just a matter of degrees. Random pictures of Irish using google search to I'm not trying to use cherry-picked pictures.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=gaa+camogie+ireland&espv=2&biw=1517&bih=735&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijr7ffnbvRAhVKG5QKHeMGAUUQ_AUIBygC

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=irish+rugby+fans&espv=2&biw=1517&bih=735&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNu6j9orvRAhUIFZQKHW1kCUcQ_AUICCgB

People on Anthroforums try to make out there are significant differences between neighbouring populations but there isn't.

Anyway all those maps people post are just blogger's maps. We just go around in circles about these things. Anyway Brennus I don't argue with you about Greeks but you like to chip in about the Irish and say you know what they look like better than I do. Have you actually visited Ireland to know what they look like? Anyway no matter what hair colour the Irish have they are overwhelmingly blue eyed with fair skin so very typical of both their genetics and geography. People just like to obsess on these matters. I'm a bit over these topics going around in circles.

All i did, was to say that Central-eastern Europe has a bigger percentage of light hair than ireland. All you did, was to disagree with me about things that I never said, you are acting like you're on your period. I never said that Ireland is phenotypically closer to anyone else than to its neighboors, except of hair color etc. The only thing i said was that in the first sentence, which as far as i know is official

also, my experience in both ireland (twice, to answer to your question) and tourists from both ireland and england, are very constructive ;), which along with both of your links confirm what i said.

as for linguistics, All i said is that this connection of Celts with the people that later colonised southern Europe MAY have some relation to the fact that Celtic speaking populations are geographically more northern than most of germanics, yet they always plot from insignificantly to significantly more south than these germanics do. Also, all IE speakers of Europe were closer to each other especially during prehistory and iron age, yet in the case of celts, they were even closer to the people who later colonised Southern Europe, than to Germanics.

[Grace O'Malley]

All i did, was to say that Central-eastern Europe has a bigger percentage of light hair than ireland. All you did, was to disagree with me about things that I never said, you are acting like you're on your period. I never said that Ireland is phenotypically closer to anyone else than to its neighboors, except of hair color etc. The only thing i said was that in the first sentence, which as far as i know is official

also, my experience in both ireland (twice, to answer to your question) and tourists from both ireland and england, are very constructive ;), which along with both of your links confirm what i said.

as for linguistics, All i said is that this connection of Celts with the people that later colonised southern Europe MAY have some relation to the fact that Celtic speaking populations are geographically more northern than most of germanics, yet they always plot from insignificantly to significantly more south than these germanics do. Also, all IE speakers of Europe were closer to each other especially during prehistory and iron age, yet in the case of celts, they were even closer to the people who later colonised Southern Europe, than to Germanics.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you've said above except this. "yet they always plot from insignificantly to significantly more south than these germanics do"

What populations are you discussing above. Populations like the Irish and Brits don't plot more southern than most germanics. Irish plot similarly to Scots, Orcadians. The only populations slightly more north of them are Norwegians, Swedish.

Here's the map that Sebastian Rex posted. He said it is one of the latest. The Irish are as north as the Danes and North Germans. The Irish have always plotted in northern Europe.

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/K15V3.png

[Grace O'Malley]

Also Rathlin genomes which were before the Celts and are 5,000 years old are northern as well. In fact Rathlin was virtually the same as German Bell Beaker.

Here is Rathlin's Eurogenes K13

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 49.94
2 Baltic 27.52
3 West_Asian 7.16
4 West_Med 6.48
5 South_Asian 3.40
6 Amerindian 2.20
7 Sub-Saharan 1.91
8 Red_Sea 1.06


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Norwegian @ 5.854991
2 Swedish @ 6.378155
3 Danish @ 6.435699
4 North_Dutch @ 6.943228
5 North_German @ 7.111557
6 Irish @ 8.086287
7 Orcadian @ 8.527667
8 West_Scottish @ 8.822106
9 Southeast_English @ 10.981000
10 Southwest_English @ 11.587136
11 North_Swedish @ 12.113091
12 South_Dutch @ 14.523604
13 West_German @ 15.031170
14 East_German @ 17.276731
15 Austrian @ 17.773823
16 Southwest_Finnish @ 21.165777
17 French @ 21.226280
18 Hungarian @ 21.971560
19 South_Polish @ 25.624912
20 La_Brana-1 @ 26.125484

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Danish +50% Swedish @ 5.763251


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Swedish +25% Swedish +25% West_Scottish @ 5.718463


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Irish + Norwegian + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.654887
2 Danish + Irish + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.673533
3 Danish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.695946
4 Irish + Swedish + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.708336
5 Norwegian + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.714194
6 North_German + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.717242
7 Swedish + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.718463
8 Irish + North_German + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.726860
9 Danish + Norwegian + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.727204
10 Danish + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.735286
11 North_German + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.738239
12 North_German + Norwegian + Norwegian + Norwegian @ 5.744429
13 Danish + Danish + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.755604
14 Norwegian + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.760739
15 Danish + Danish + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.763251
16 Irish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.771631
17 Irish + North_German + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.772011
18 Danish + North_German + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.800724
19 Danish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Norwegian @ 5.815938
20 Danish + Irish + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.816245

Eurogenes K15

Population Percent
1 Atlantic 32.45
2 North_Sea 31.58
3 Baltic 12.95
4 Eastern_Euro 11.65
5 West_Asian 3.29
6 South_Asian 3.17
7 Amerindian 1.87
8 Sub-Saharan 1.59
9 West_Med 1.39


Finished reading population data. 207 populations found.
15 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 North_German @ 8.570560
2 Danish @ 9.199459
3 Irish @ 9.273491
4 West_Scottish @ 9.632721
5 Southeast_English @ 10.713849
6 North_Dutch @ 10.812980
7 Orcadian @ 12.363866
8 Southwest_English @ 12.692083
9 South_Dutch @ 13.515372
10 Norwegian @ 13.539064
11 Swedish @ 13.852389
12 North_Swedish @ 14.337133
13 West_Norwegian @ 14.958194
14 Southwest_Finnish @ 15.931392
15 East_German @ 16.537271
16 West_German @ 16.948147
17 Austrian @ 19.163883
18 French @ 19.201525
19 Finnish @ 20.197750
20 La_Brana-1 @ 21.321207

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +50% North_German @ 8.413251


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +25% La_Brana-1 +25% West_Scottish @ 7.791201


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Irish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 7.791089
2 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish @ 7.791201
3 La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 7.810342
4 Irish + Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 @ 7.810678
5 Irish + Irish + Irish + Southwest_Finnish @ 7.922435
6 Irish + Irish + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish @ 7.980188
7 La_Brana-1 + North_German + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 7.996135
8 Irish + Irish + North_German + Southwest_Finnish @ 8.002673
9 Danish + Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 @ 8.004673
10 Danish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish @ 8.007087
11 Irish + La_Brana-1 + North_German + West_Scottish @ 8.020887
12 Danish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.028337
13 Irish + North_German + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish @ 8.034504
14 Irish + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.055216
15 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + North_German @ 8.064316
16 Irish + La_Brana-1 + Southeast_English + West_Scottish @ 8.069336
17 La_Brana-1 + Southeast_English + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.069387
18 North_German + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.080923
19 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + Southeast_English @ 8.087984
20 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + Orcadian @ 8.140745

[MINARDOWICZ]

Here's another genetic table which included the Germans and yes they too are closer to Basque. The Germans are also significantly closer to Spanish than the Irish are. Anyone using logic would know why this makes perfect sense. The Germans are Central Europeans and as such are much closer to many populations than someone like the Irish would be. The Irish are a island population with another island between them and the European mainland. Why would the Irish be closer to populations like the Spanish than the Germans are? Where is the logic in that? The Irish are of course closest to neighbouring populations such as the British, Dutch and Scandinavians.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3343/5815310162_b536dd4de5_b.jpg

Explain to me why the only population as "Atlantic" as the British are the Basques? Not even Swedish, German, etc. have as much as them. Take a look at some samples, like EG K13 averages, etc. Don't you think that a component making up HALF of their genome means something? I mean, all of these populations are SUPER close, but British are the furthest west-shifted, except for Basques. Do you really think this is a coincidence? Component overlap and plotting similarities as well as phenotype overlaps kind of suggest there is an ancient connection (maybe even just a common ancestor).

[Grace O'Malley]

Explain to me why the only population as "Atlantic" as the British are the Basques? Not even Swedish, German, etc. have as much as them. Take a look at some samples, like EG K13 averages, etc. Don't you think that a component making up HALF of their genome means something? I mean, all of these populations are SUPER close, but British are the furthest west-shifted, except for Basques. Do you really think this is a coincidence? Component overlap and plotting similarities as well as phenotype overlaps kind of suggest there is an ancient connection (maybe even just a common ancestor).

You're seriously clutching here. Explain to me how Galicians have less "Atlantic" than the Danes? Your picking a component from a Eurogenes calculator and ignoring all the other components. You do know the Irish have more North Sea in those calculators than "Atlantic" so by your reasoning is that a coincidence? Population distances show how close populations are. "Atlantic" is not even consistent as populations bordering the Atlantic e.g. Galicians have less of it than Danes and North Germans.

Atlantic is a component in a calculator like North Sea. All of those components are made of EEF/EHG/WHG etc. The Atlantic admixture appears to be a hybrid of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers. It doesn't show what populations are genetically closer to each other. Other calculators would have different components. You're looking for imaginary links and ignoring things like genetic distance and history. Galicians are actually much closer to Basque but have much lower Atlantic than them.

Here is my K15 and my brother's K15 so that you can see on that calculator with Atlantic what populations we are closest to. We are both 100% Irish.

Mine.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 37.04
2 Atlantic 29.88
3 Baltic 11.89
4 Eastern_Euro 8.75
5 West_Asian 5.16
6 West_Med 4.95
7 Amerindian 1.15
8 Red_Sea 1.10


Finished reading population data. 207 populations found.
15 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Irish @ 3.425280
2 West_Scottish @ 3.557808
3 North_Dutch @ 4.181393
4 Danish @ 4.453959
5 Orcadian @ 5.505360
6 Southeast_English @ 5.676529
7 North_German @ 5.882824
8 Southwest_English @ 7.466283
9 Norwegian @ 8.417722
10 West_Norwegian @ 8.735489
11 Swedish @ 9.296607
12 South_Dutch @ 11.184519
13 West_German @ 12.499153
14 North_Swedish @ 12.662151
15 East_German @ 16.492691
16 French @ 16.524723
17 Southwest_Finnish @ 17.903034
18 Austrian @ 21.142027
19 Finnish @ 21.647963
20 Hungarian @ 21.914810

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +50% North_Dutch @ 3.203073


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +25% North_Dutch +25% West_Scottish @ 3.143203


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Irish + North_German + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 3.125094
2 North_German + West_Scottish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 3.128713
3 Irish + Irish + North_Dutch + West_Scottish @ 3.143203
4 Irish + Irish + North_German + Orcadian @ 3.144938
5 Irish + Irish + Irish + North_Dutch @ 3.150105
6 Irish + North_German + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 3.159487
7 Irish + Irish + North_German + West_Scottish @ 3.182833
8 North_Dutch + North_German + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 3.183386
9 Irish + North_Dutch + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 3.193700
10 Irish + North_Dutch + North_German + West_Scottish @ 3.195021
11 North_German + Orcadian + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 3.202463
12 Irish + Irish + North_Dutch + North_Dutch @ 3.203073
13 Danish + Irish + Irish + North_Dutch @ 3.235043
14 Danish + Irish + Irish + Irish @ 3.235556
15 Irish + North_Dutch + North_Dutch + West_Scottish @ 3.238354
16 Danish + Irish + Irish + West_Scottish @ 3.248949
17 Irish + Irish + North_Dutch + North_German @ 3.252259
18 Irish + Irish + Irish + Swedish @ 3.254036
19 Irish + North_Dutch + North_German + Orcadian @ 3.259177
20 Irish + Irish + Irish + North_German @ 3.268316

Brother

# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 38.64
2 Atlantic 28.96
3 Eastern_Euro 10.14
4 Baltic 9.26
5 West_Med 7.68
6 West_Asian 5.32


Finished reading population data. 207 populations found.
15 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Orcadian @ 3.252395
2 West_Scottish @ 3.863092
3 North_Dutch @ 4.604623
4 Irish @ 4.760431
5 Danish @ 4.849364
6 Southeast_English @ 5.102021
7 Southwest_English @ 5.961900
8 West_Norwegian @ 7.667141
9 North_German @ 7.760393
10 Norwegian @ 7.908212
11 Swedish @ 9.859537
12 South_Dutch @ 10.933553
13 West_German @ 11.492620
14 North_Swedish @ 13.164362
15 French @ 15.739741
16 East_German @ 17.327667
17 Southwest_Finnish @ 19.471451
18 Austrian @ 22.511658
19 Hungarian @ 22.951315
20 Finnish @ 23.029737

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Danish +50% Orcadian @ 3.046177


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Danish +25% Orcadian +25% Orcadian @ 3.046177


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Danish + Orcadian + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 2.817050
2 North_German + Orcadian + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 2.846599
3 Danish + Orcadian + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 2.929381
4 North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 2.938189
5 North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 2.945912
6 Danish + Orcadian + Orcadian + Southwest_English @ 3.002342
7 Danish + North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 3.025333
8 Danish + Irish + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 3.042914
9 Danish + Danish + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 3.046177
10 Orcadian + Orcadian + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 3.048563
11 Danish + Orcadian + Orcadian + Southeast_English @ 3.053789
12 North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian + Southeast_English @ 3.058938
13 North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian + Southwest_English @ 3.081502
14 Irish + North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 3.081851
15 Orcadian + Orcadian + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 3.087203
16 Orcadian + Southwest_English + West_Norwegian + West_Scottish @ 3.099009
17 Irish + Orcadian + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 3.110105
18 North_Dutch + North_Dutch + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 3.120168
19 Orcadian + Orcadian + Orcadian + Southeast_English @ 3.127774
20 North_German + Orcadian + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 3.132918

[brennus dux gallorum]

I don't necessarily disagree with what you've said above except this. "yet they always plot from insignificantly to significantly more south than these germanics do"

What populations are you discussing above. Populations like the Irish and Brits don't plot more southern than most germanics. Irish plot similarly to Scots, Orcadians. The only populations slightly more north of them are Norwegians, Swedish.

Here's the map that Sebastian Rex posted. He said it is one of the latest. The Irish are as north as the Danes and North Germans. The Irish have always plotted in northern Europe.

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/K15V3.png

Dutch are also slightly more north than irish. You should also consider that All celtic speakers have more mediterranean autosomal admixture than ALL germanics, no matters if they have not interacted with Southern Europe for the last 1500 years unlike all germanic countries, or if they are geographically more distant from med sea, and that even the germanics who plot more south than celts, plot more south because of other kinds of admixture (gedrosian, west asian etc.) not mediterranean

Anyway, so, you somehow admit that your #85 post was wrong

[Grace O'Malley]

Dutch are also slightly more north than irish. You should also consider that All celtic speakers have more mediterranean autosomal admixture than ALL germanics, no matters if they have not interacted with Southern Europe for the last 1500 years unlike all germanic countries, or if they are geographically more distant from med sea, and that even the germanics who plot more south than celts, plot more south because of other kinds of admixture (gedrosian, west asian etc.) not mediterranean

Anyway, so, you somehow admit that your #85 post was wrong

Have you actually looked at the plot? Irish are more north of the South Dutch and almost by a smidgen lower than the North Dutch and also more north than the North Germans and East Germans. You should also know that language doesn't equal genetics. The Irish did not come from Southern Europe they are a North West European population and have been as long as the other populations that they are close to. Germanic and Celtic are language groups. People like the Irish are just as North West European as the Dutch. All Celtic speakers do not have more mediterranean autosomal admixture. If the Irish had more "mediterranean autosomal admixture" they would be more south. The South Dutch have more "mediterranean autosomal admixture" and they are Germanic speakers. We are just going around in circles here. Your comments actually go against what the plot shows. How can anyone deal with that?

http://i65.tinypic.com/2upxwgk.png

[brennus dux gallorum]

Have you actually looked at the plot? almost by a smidgen lower than the North Dutch
that's what i am talking about

and also more north than the North Germans and East Germans.
I did not even write the word "germans" in my post, anyway

All Celtic speakers do not have more mediterranean autosomal admixture. If the Irish had more "mediterranean autosomal admixture" they would be more south.
wrong, wrong
Irish and the rest of celtic speakers have more mediterranean autosomal admixture than ALL germanic speakers

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/93/6f/64/936f64af5bc9e56ef8077ec151ba76d4.jpg
yet compare to germanic speakers they lack other kinds of "southern" admixture such as caucasian
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autosomal_maps_dodecad.shtml#Caucasian

diagrams include all kinds of autosomal admxitures, not only med. and northwestern

my comments do not go against anything, you simply can not understand it

[Grace O'Malley]

that's what i am talking about

I did not even write the word "germans" in my post, anyway

wrong, wrong
Irish and the rest of celtic speakers have more mediterranean autosomal admixture than ALL germanic speakers

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/93/6f/64/936f64af5bc9e56ef8077ec151ba76d4.jpg
yet compare to germanic speakers they lack other kinds of "southern" admixture such as caucasian
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autosomal_maps_dodecad.shtml#Caucasian

diagrams include all kinds of autosomal admxitures, not only med. and northwestern

my comments do not go against anything, you simply can not understand it

Whatever you say Brennus. Despite all the evidence to the contrary you believe what you want. Possibly I'm not understanding but I've posted enough links here. Here is my Eurogenes K13. I even get North Dutch as my no 1 pop. How does a Irish Celt get that?

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 52.04
2 Baltic 25.27
3 West_Med 9.81
4 West_Asian 7.25
5 East_Med 1.77
6 Red_Sea 1.5
7 Amerindian 1.38
8 Siberian 0.75
9 Oceanian 0.24

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 North_Dutch 3.04
2 Irish 3.1
3 Norwegian 3.6
4 West_Scottish 3.61
5 Orcadian 3.82
6 Danish 3.86
7 North_German 5.45
8 Southeast_English 6.09
9 Southwest_English 6.26
10 Swedish 6.5
11 South_Dutch 10.22
12 West_German 11.04
13 North_Swedish 12.82
14 Austrian 15.29
15 East_German 15.45
16 French 15.89
17 Hungarian 19.56
18 Southwest_Finnish 21.09
19 Spanish_Cataluna 23.25
20 South_Polish 24.17

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 57.1% Irish + 42.9% Norwegian @ 2.28
2 50.1% Norwegian + 49.9% West_Scottish @ 2.33
3 77.2% Irish + 22.8% Swedish @ 2.54
4 51.6% North_Dutch + 48.4% Irish @ 2.56
5 70.2% West_Scottish + 29.8% Swedish @ 2.58
6 61.6% North_Dutch + 38.4% West_Scottish @ 2.6
7 88.2% Irish + 11.8% North_Swedish @ 2.61
8 94.4% Irish + 5.6% Finnish @ 2.67
9 94.5% Irish + 5.5% La_Brana-1 @ 2.68
10 93.4% Irish + 6.6% Southwest_Finnish @ 2.72
11 95.3% Irish + 4.7% East_Finnish @ 2.72
12 76.2% Irish + 23.8% North_German @ 2.72
13 66.7% West_Scottish + 33.3% North_German @ 2.74
14 96.7% Irish + 3.3% Chuvash @ 2.74
15 84.2% West_Scottish + 15.8% North_Swedish @ 2.75
16 65.5% Irish + 34.5% Danish @ 2.75
17 92% West_Scottish + 8% Finnish @ 2.77
18 97.1% Irish + 2.9% Mari @ 2.78
19 95.4% Irish + 4.6% Estonian @ 2.79
20 96.4% Irish + 3.6% Erzya @ 2.8

Anyway I'm all posted out and I'm tired of arguing. If you want to post more I'll definitely read it but possibly there is a misunderstanding. Thanks for the discussion anyway. :)

[brennus dux gallorum]

Whatever the links you posted say Brennus.


fixed, after all I am not a genetist, as you can see there is a link in my posts for everything i have said

and i repeat, there is nothing oppose to what i say in your evidence, like i said earlier, you disagree with me about things i never said;)

[Grace O'Malley]

fixed, after all I am not a genetist, as you can see there is a link in my posts for everything i have said

and i repeat, there is nothing oppose to what i say in your evidence, like i said earlier, you disagree with me about things i never said;)

I'll have to be honest and say I'm completely baffled to what you are saying Brennus. You keep saying how Irish and the rest of Celtic speakers (so that would be Scots, Welsh, Manx and Bretons) all have more Mediterranean than populations they cluster with but I not seeing this. Otherwise I'm at a loss.

Perhaps someone else can take over the reins here. I'm not sure what else I can add.

[brennus dux gallorum]

I'll have to be honest and say I'm completely baffled to what you are saying Brennus. You keep saying how Irish and the rest of Celtic speakers (so that would be Scots, Welsh, Manx and Bretons) all have more Mediterranean than populations they cluster with but I not seeing this. Otherwise I'm at a loss.

Perhaps someone else can take over the reins here. I'm not sure what else I can add.

In the map I posted, Scandinavia as a whole along with half of Germany have less mediterranean admixture than all celtic speakers, that's all I said, you can check it in my post, thanks for the conversation

[Grace O'Malley]

In the map I posted, Scandinavia as a whole along with half of Germany have less mediterranean admixture than all celtic speakers, that's all I said, you can check it in my post, thanks for the conversation

Are you talking about your link to Eupedia? The map of Mediterranean admixture doesn't show what you are saying. That is on a cline and doesn't show what you have stated at all. The more south to more med admixture. What about ANE what does that say about the Irish? All the Celts have higher ANE than Mediterranean countries. Irish also have quite high amounts of Gedrosian where did they get that? I'm not seeing from that map anything odd. It is just on a cline and doesn't show that they have unusual amounts of Med for their geographic position. The Dutch also have the same and the Belgians even more. It is related to Early Neolithic Farmer and all Europeans have that. We are all a mixture of ENF, EHG, ANE and CHG.

http://i65.tinypic.com/2ik4pis.jpg

http://i68.tinypic.com/15i6k1s.jpg

Like I said to Menard you can't isolate a component but have to look at the whole. Are the Irish more Mongolian due to more ANE?

[brennus dux gallorum]

Are you talking about your link to Eupedia? The map of Mediterranean admixture doesn't show what you are saying. That is on a cline and doesn't show what you have stated at all. The more south to more med admixture. What about ANE what does that say about the Irish? All the Celts have higher ANE than Mediterranean countries. Irish also have quite high amounts of Gedrosian where did they get that? I'm not seeing from that map anything odd. It is just on a cline and doesn't show that they have unusual amounts of Med for their geographic position. The Dutch also have the same and the Belgians even more. It is related to Early Neolithic Farmer and all Europeans have that. We are all a mixture of ENF, EHG, ANE and CHG.

http://i65.tinypic.com/2ik4pis.jpg

http://i68.tinypic.com/15i6k1s.jpg

Like I said to Menard you can't isolate a component but have to look at the whole. Are the Irish more Mongolian due to more ANE?

Dutch, and even more Belgians, are geographically closer to southern Europe,the same goes for Germans

[Grace O'Malley]

Dutch, and even more Belgians, are geographically closer to southern Europe,the same goes for Germans

Yes I agree. That is what I've been saying so I'm back to being baffled. You've completely confused me brennus. The Irish are nothing unusual for their geographic location. They don't have any special connection with other populations other than their neighbours except for slightly higher ANE. What are we not agreeing on?

[brennus dux gallorum]

What are we not agreeing on?

I guess it all begins in #85, we can agree that we confused each other

[Amor Vincit Omnia]

Skin
https://shoeuntied.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/map_of_indigenous_skin_colors.png

Hair color world map
http://orig15.deviantart.net/c2f1/f/2014/252/f/4/blonde_hair_map_by_schrodinger_excidium-d7yjja3.png

red hair frequency europe
https://i.imgur.com/jiVrRzM.png

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

http://orig15.deviantart.net/c2f1/f/2014/252/f/4/blonde_hair_map_by_schrodinger_excidium-d7yjja3.png

This map isn't based on any data, it's basically made up. Don't know about the others...

[Septentrion]

Light hair perc. in Central-Eastern Europe ,UK and Ireland
Estonia70%
Latvia 66%
Lithuania 57%
England 56%
Czech rep 56%
Belarus 55%
Scotland 52%
Russia 47%
Poland 46%
Slovakia 45%
Ukraine 45%
Wales 42%
Ireland 38%

Rubbish that map was made with no credibility whatsoever! The GWAS 2012, a very credible study by Stanford University in collaboration with European universities show otherwise.
Light hair % (red+blond+light brown/mousy shades)
Finland/Norway/Sweden/Denmark(various golden and ashen tones) - 80% or more
Iceland, Faroe Isles (mostly golden blond and reddish-tinged shades) ,Estonia/Latvia - 77% (mostly ash-blond/brown)
England (mostly light brown), the Netherlands (mostly golden blonde/brown), Lithuania, Byelorussia (mostly ash-blonde/brown) - 72%
Scotland - 66% (mostly reddish-tinged/light brown)
Ireland - 64% (mostly reddish-tinged/light brown)
Wales - 60% (very similar to the Irish)
Germany & Poland - 55% (various golden+ashen tone, though by regions such as in northern Germany the frequency is higher than average)
Belgium(mostly golden blonde/brown) & Austria & Czech Republic - 53.5% (various shades of light hair)
Slovakia, Hungary, Switzerland, Ukraine - 50%-53.5% (various shades)

[Lucas]

Buahhaha:)
http://racialreality.blogspot.gr/2011/10/most-british-blondes-are-fake.html

Four out of 10 women in the UK are blonde but more than 80 per cent are faking it, according to a survey published yesterday.

[alnortedelsur]

I didn't pay attention to the thread/poll question, and assumed that it was about comparing British and Irish with Northern Europeans, when it was actually about comparing British and Irish with Central and Eastern Europeans :p

In that case I should have voted for the last option: none of the above

[blubb]

linguistically for many scholars poland is closer to Germanics and Ireland to Italy

To my knowledge, Germanic is overall a rather exotic group within IE, but about equidistant to both Balto-Slavic and Italo-Celtic, sharing slightly more lexically with the former and slightly more grammar/common sound shifts with the latter. I personally value the latter higher when it comes to linguistic genetic relationship, so I'd personally put Italo-Celtic slightly closer to Germanic than Balto-Slavic to Germanic. Either way, those two are the closest, other IE languages such as Greek, Albanian, Armenian, Indo-Iranian,... are all far more distant

[brennus dux gallorum]

To my knowledge, Germanic is overall a rather exotic group within IE, but about equidistant to both Balto-Slavic and Italo-Celtic, sharing slightly more lexically with the former and slightly more grammar/common sound shifts with the latter. I personally value the latter higher when it comes to linguistic genetic relationship, so I'd personally put Italo-Celtic slightly closer to Germanic than Balto-Slavic to Germanic. Either way, those two are the closest, other IE languages such as Greek, Albanian, Armenian, Indo-Iranian,... are all far more distant

[brennus dux gallorum]

To my knowledge, Germanic is overall a rather exotic group within IE, but about equidistant to both Balto-Slavic and Italo-Celtic, sharing slightly more lexically with the former and slightly more grammar/common sound shifts with the latter. I personally value the latter higher when it comes to linguistic genetic relationship, so I'd personally put Italo-Celtic slightly closer to Germanic than Balto-Slavic to Germanic. Either way, those two are the closest, other IE languages such as Greek, Albanian, Armenian, Indo-Iranian,... are all far more distant

the opposite, Lexilogically means that it was developed closer to italo-celtic, but grammatically and common sound means it has common roots, with balto-slavic. Germanics had common roots and more contacts with eastern Europe until the fall of rome. Since then they had more contacts with italo-celtic

As for Greek, there are 4 basic theories, 1-2 of them associating it with italo-celtic. Only one of them associates it with armenian and albanian

[Grace O'Malley]

Celtic languages. What do they sound like?

Irish Gaeilge (Aran Islanders where they still speak it as their first language)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEgJyWaNoG0

Former Irish President Mary McAleese speaking Gaeilge. Put on the subtitles for this if you want a laugh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6JbUDBfY1E

Scottish Gaelic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lktt_DlpsJA

Welsh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-1SPdgcgeA

Do these languages sound like any other European language?

[brennus dux gallorum]

Do these languages sound like any other European language?

No, but you should have in mind that they sound "lighter" and more "singing" compare to any germanic sound

[Grace O'Malley]

No, but you should have in mind that they sound "lighter" and more "singing" compare to any germanic sound

Why would they sound Germanic? They are obviously unique and that is why they are in their own branch.

http://notsoblackandwhiteenglish.weebly.com/uploads/1/6/9/3/16938332/4455162_orig.gif

[blubb]

the opposite, Lexilogically means that it was developed closer to italo-celtic, but grammatically and common sound means it has common roots, with balto-slavic. Germanics had common roots and more contacts with eastern Europe until the fall of rome. Since then they had more contacts with italo-celtic

As for Greek, there are 4 basic theories, 1-2 of them associating it with italo-celtic. Only one of them associates it with armenian and albanian

At least this map (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Indo-European_isoglosses.png) suggests that Germanic shares more with Italo-Celtic sound-shift wise than it does with Balto-Slavic (the latter one in turn sharing quite a lot with Indo-Iranian, and tbh when I first heard Persian, it sounded like a mix of Russian and Sanskrit to me). Greek, as far as I know, is pretty much an outlier too, not sharing too much with any of its neighbouring IE languages in order to form clear groups. Maybe ancient Illyrian or Hittite, but too little of those are known to draw clear conclusions, plus the high pre-IE influence (Pelasgian and the likes) further complicates things


Celtic languages. What do they sound like?

...

Do these languages sound like any other European language?

Phonologically alone, they sound very similar to general British English to me. Which makes sense, as languages that are neighbouring each other, even if not genetically related, often heavily influence each other in phonology (nice example is Hungarian which from its sound alone gives some mixed Slavic-Germanic-Italic vibes, despite being related to none of them, or Finnish, which also slightly has that "sing-songy" ring to it which Swedish has)

[Septentrion]

Buahhaha:)
http://racialreality.blogspot.gr/2011/10/most-british-blondes-are-fake.html

Four out of 10 women in the UK are blonde but more than 80 per cent are faking it, according to a survey published yesterday.

Rubbish!! A new genetical study on the British population has just proven that the British over the last 2,000 years have become blonder, more blue-eyed, taller, more lactose-tolerant. Thus we may associate fair hair and blue eyes with the modern British people.
http://www.medicaldaily.com/evolution-blonde-hair-blue-eyes-british-people-386875

[Bloody]

Buahhaha:)
http://racialreality.blogspot.gr/2011/10/most-british-blondes-are-fake.html

Four out of 10 women in the UK are blonde but more than 80 per cent are faking it, according to a survey published yesterday.

Half of people posting in these treads, never been to the UK, barely travel or dont know how to tell when someone is naturally blonde or not.

Britain is way less blonde than Netherlands, Scandianvia, Germany, Baltics and even Eastern Europe (Poland, Russia, Belarus, Czech), I am talking about natural blondes not bleached. Most brits dont look very germanic either.

[Bloody]

Czech and Poles are probably lighter on average.

Ukranians too. My friend from italy lives in a town where recently there are coming lot of ukranians for holidays. He commented me how remarkably blonder the ukranians were compared to other groups they previously received , and most of those were brits.

[Septentrion]

Half of the people? You don't know what you are talking about! The British as a whole are not less blonde-haired than Germans or other Central Europeans like Czechs, Slovaks, Austria, etc...
Bleaching of hair happens in every European country including my own ( Belgium). There are plenty of German, Dutch women who bleach or lighten their hair especially as adults. English, Lowland Scots are essentially Germanic people. There is no single Germanic look! Flemish and Dutch people don't all look alike, we also don't look like Germans.

[Septentrion]

let me know, since when do you know me personaly that you also know I post inaccuracies every 5 minutes?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aOLKFCqDMh0/T__9VubC9rI/AAAAAAAAAA4/5MAj7WqaKaQ/s1600/europe-hair0223--light-h.png

most of central eastern european countries have a bigger percentage of light hair than ireland

also, in case that you need occulist,Ireland is genetically closer to norway, and central-eastern europe closer to finland which has the biggest percentage of light hair in the world. EVEN SLOVAKIA HAS MORE FAIR HAIR THAN IRELAND

As for the language, if i am not mistaken most of Europeans are genetically connected to pre-IE people of Europe, including Celts. Also, you should have in mind that without latinisation, the Celtic-speaking map would be kinda different today, and would include people genetically very distant from norway, like Portuguese

How can Ireland be less lighter-haired than Slovakia, when Ireland in the GWAS study of pigmentation in four European countries (Poland, Portugal, Italy, Ireland) in 2012, it was Ireland who scored the lightest in all categories (skin, hair, eyes colours)! SlOVAKIA IS NEVER MORE FAIR-HAIRED THAN IRELAND. It's rather you, who is either ignorant or biased.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj1toKL3-LRAhUG6CYKHdhiDYYQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournals.plos.org%2Fplosone%2Fart icle%3Fid%3D10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0048294&usg=AFQjCNF_MiIrnXYV83Y3NSR8WWQbOL6WVA

[Septentrion]

False. Your statement, "Irish and other Celtic people have more Med component than all Germanic people" is completely incorrect. As a whole the United Kingdom has a lower Mediterranean genomic component than Germany, and this is substantiated by the National Geographic Genographic Project!
Instead of being so super bias, get your facts straight!;)

[Septentrion]

fixed, after all I am not a genetist, as you can see there is a link in my posts for everything i have said

and i repeat, there is nothing oppose to what i say in your evidence, like i said earlier, you disagree with me about things i never said;)

You're not a geneticist, that's right. This is why you don't know what you're talking about! Insular Celts( Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Cornish) don't have a higher Med component than Germans, Dutch, Belgian people as a whole. This is why the frequency of red hair, pale or freckled skin, light eyes is highest amongst them.

[Septentrion]

Half of people posting in these treads, never been to the UK, barely travel or dont know how to tell when someone is naturally blonde or not.

Britain is way less blonde than Netherlands, Scandianvia, Germany, Baltics and even Eastern Europe (Poland, Russia, Belarus, Czech), I am talking about natural blondes not bleached. Most brits dont look very germanic either.

Rubbish! Watch your spelling! Scandinavia is not on the same level as the Netherlands let alone Germany, Poland, Russia, Byelorussia, I won't even consider the Czech Republic, but some Baltic nations are not so different from Scandinavia! Britain and Ireland are much more similar to the Netherlands and northern regions of Germany, but with more rufosity or red-headedness. In fact Ireland could be even considered a "blue eyes haven" according to a relatively recent study report! Bleached hair is found in every European nation including the Scandinavian and Finland which are the blondest! Scandinavia, Finland, Estonia have the highest frequency of light blondes not the Netherlands or Germany. You are clearly being biased. Not everyone looks Germanic, because not all Europeans are Germanics! See, I am Flemish or Vlaams, thus I am Germanic, why would you expect an Irishman to look Germanic, when they are Celtic? Britons who look Germanic, are those with a predominantly English or Lowland Scottish ancestry, as well as those from the Orkneys, Shetlands, Herbrides, etc... Some Welsh people too look Germanic. Additionally not all Germanic people are blond-haired! That's a false impression which you need to grow out of. Most adult people in Germanic countries have brown hair(generally light) not blond hair and darker shades are by no means rare. Gerard Schroeder, former German prime minister looks typically Germanic as well as the current Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte and they sure have brown hair. So stop spreading lies.

[Septentrion]

Only those of immigrant descent living in the British Islands might be dark-haired, darker-eyed, darker-skinned than Central and Eastern Europeans as a whole. The difference between Britain, Ireland and those other European nations is that due to the fact that Britain and Ireland are much more prosperous nations, they attract a much larger number of immigrants. This give the impression that they seem darker. It's false, the average Briton or Irish is a Northern European by excellence, pale-skinned, blond, brown, red-haired, mostly light-eyed.
Light hair (red+blond+light brown, in the majority it's mostly light brown)
England = 72%
Scotland = 66%
Ireland = 64%
Wales = 60%
Light eyes (blue+green)
Ireland = 86%( "blue eyes haven")
Britain = 78%
Principal phenotypes:
1.) Nordid
Keltic ( basic throughout)
Anglo-Saxon(mainly frequent in England and Scotland)
Troender (Scotland+north England)
Hallstatt ( England)
2.) Cromagnid
Brunn
Borreby & Dalofaelid
Paleo-Atlantid
3.) North-Atlantid ( Predominantly Keltic Nordid with Atlantid admixtures)
(Said to be most frequent in Wales.)

[Septentrion]

Most English people are not Nordics. Yes, the English speak a Germanic language but that doesn't mean they are phenotypically/genetically Nordic. Stephen Oppenheimer wrote a book saying that native British people are largely descended from Neolithic people of northern Spain before the onslaught of Celtic Indo-Europeans. The Celtic and Nordic admixture is quite small overall and most native Brits are basically paler-skinned Mediterraneans. I know some native English people don't like to hear this but their ancestors were not principally Germanic but non-Indo-European Neolithic. Even in the most "Germanic" region of the UK (Essex) the Germanic component is thought to be only 50% among the native English.

The basic phenotype throughout the British Islands, Belgium and the Netherlands is Keltic Nordid whether amongst Germanic or Keltic speakers! O.K. so think about it. There is nothing Med about that! Meds are dark due to the adaptation to the Mediterranean climate, we are lighter due to adaptation to a more northern climate.

[Septentrion]

[QUOTE=brennus dux gallorum;4179724]In all maps I have seen Poland has lighter hair, maybe the study you refer is an exception. and we should not overlook that linguistically for many scholars poland is closer to Germanics and Ireland to Italy

also, Czech rep. has more fair people than Poland, Russia, Belarus and Baltic states too, and all of them are central/eastern europeans. As for skin color, maybe you are right, considering that Eastern Europe has much more sunshine than Ireland, which is one of the main variables affecting skin tone

the last but not least, it's not only maps or researches but my personal experience too.[/QUOTE

The Czech Republic is not lighter-haired/lighter-eyed than Poland! The majority of Czechs have light brown hair, but the most common eye colour is light brown too! They are nowhere as pale as the British or Irish! Red hair is very rare.

[Septentrion]

Germany (hair colour) =
1.5% red
20% (gold) blond
10% ( ash) blond
25% (light) brown
45% (darker)
Altogether 56.5% light hair
33% (blue) eyes
35% ( green) eyes
42% ( brown) eyes
68% light eyes

Wales ( hair colour) =
10% red
18% ( golden) blond
32% ( light) brown
40% ( dark) brown
Altogether 60% light hair
45% (blue) eyes
33% (green) eyes
22% (brown) eyes
Altogether 78% light eye

Belgium=
4% red
15.5% (golden) blond
20% ( light) brown
14% (golden) brown
47% (dark) brown
Altogether 53% light hair
28.9% (blue) eyes
31% ( green/gray) eyes
40.1% ( brown) eyes
Altogether 59.9% light eyes

[Antimage]

what bullshit poll results

[brennus dux gallorum]

You're not a geneticist, that's right. This is why you don't know what you're talking about! Insular Celts( Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Cornish) don't have a higher Med component than Germans, Dutch, Belgian people as a whole. This is why the frequency of red hair, pale or freckled skin, light eyes is highest amongst them.

in other words not more than cherry picking germanics who do not even represent the majority of germanic people (also, yes they have more med admixture than Germans, and Belgians are not Germanic Get your facts right)

thanks for confirming what i said.

[JohnSmith]

The basic phenotype throughout the British Islands, Belgium and the Netherlands is Keltic Nordid whether amongst Germanic or Keltic speakers! O.K. so think about it. There is nothing Med about that! Meds are dark due to the adaptation to the Mediterranean climate, we are lighter due to adaptation to a more northern climate.

Keltic Nordid are Dinaric influenced, which some say Dinaric is Med type.

[Grace O'Malley]

Keltic Nordid are Dinaric influenced, which some say Dinaric is Med type.

That's why anthropology is a pseudo-science and why scientists only use genetics today. You can see what people are through their genetics. Brothers from the same family can have a different anthropology classification does that make them a different race?

[JohnSmith]

That's why anthropology is a pseudo-science and why scientists only use genetics today.

They gave their best guesses.

[Grace O'Malley]

They gave their best guesses.

Guesses is the optimum word. Anthropology is no longer used by scientists.

[JohnSmith]

Guesses is the optimum word. Anthropology is no longer used by scientists.

I always thought it was odd for people to use certain terms and what not.

[Grace O'Malley]

I always thought it was odd for people to use certain terms and what not.

Anthropology was used before they had genetics. Genetics now is dispelling a lot of myths. Who would have thought that R1b was so high in Yamnaya before that Haak paper was published just over a year ago?

[de Burgh II]

Anthropology was used before they had genetics. Genetics now is dispelling a lot of myths. Who would have thought that R1b was so high in Yamnaya before that Haak paper was published just over a year ago?

I guess we should thank the steppe peoples for giving us blondism, lactose-persistence and rufosity! :p (Idk if they are the reason behind the blue eye color mutation that I know was a hunter-gatherer mutation, but not sure about it being found in steppe peoples)

[Grace O'Malley]

I guess we should thank the steppe peoples for giving us blondism, lactose-persistence and rufosity! :p (Idk if they are the reason behind the blue eye color mutation that I know was a hunter-gatherer mutation, but not sure about it being found in steppe peoples)

Not sure if it was Steppe but people like Rathlin (early Bronze Age) had the attributes that are so common in the Irish today. Some not so good like hemochromatosis.

Three Bronze Age individuals from Rathlin Island (2026–1534 cal BC), including one high coverage (10.5×) genome, showed substantial Steppe genetic heritage indicating that the European population upheavals of the third millennium manifested all of the way from southern Siberia to the western ocean. This turnover invites the possibility of accompanying introduction of Indo-European, perhaps early Celtic, language. Irish Bronze Age haplotypic similarity is strongest within modern Irish, Scottish, and Welsh populations, and several important genetic variants that today show maximal or very high frequencies in Ireland appear at this horizon. These include those coding for lactase persistence, blue eye color, Y chromosome R1b haplotypes, and the hemochromatosis
C282Y allele; to our knowledge, the first detection of a known Mendelian disease variant in prehistory. These findings together suggest the establishment of central attributes of the Irish genome 4,000 y ago.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.full.pdf

That Lab at Trinity College also has a lot of ancient genomes from Ireland and elsewhere so expect more publications in the future.

[de Burgh II]

Not sure if it was Steppe but people like Rathlin (early Bronze Age) had the attributes that are so common in the Irish today. Some not so good like hemochromatosis.

Three Bronze Age individuals from Rathlin Island (2026–1534 cal BC), including one high coverage (10.5×) genome, showed substantial Steppe genetic heritage indicating that the European population upheavals of the third millennium manifested all of the way from southern Siberia to the western ocean. This turnover invites the possibility of accompanying introduction of Indo-European, perhaps early Celtic, language. Irish Bronze Age haplotypic similarity is strongest within modern Irish, Scottish, and Welsh populations, and several important genetic variants that today show maximal or very high frequencies in Ireland appear at this horizon. These include those coding for lactase persistence, blue eye color, Y chromosome R1b haplotypes, and the hemochromatosis
C282Y allele; to our knowledge, the first detection of a known Mendelian disease variant in prehistory. These findings together suggest the establishment of central attributes of the Irish genome 4,000 y ago.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.full.pdf

That Lab at Trinity College also has a lot of ancient genomes from Ireland and elsewhere so expect more publications in the future.

Kind of weird how the neolithic period was in Ireland with the Ballynahatty woman who was more genetically similar with predominantly other ethnicities who are mostly of European Neolithic Farmer ancestry such as... Sardinians, Iberian... etc.


DNA analysis of the Neolithic woman from Ballynahatty, near Belfast, reveals that she was most similar to modern people from Spain and Sardinia. But her ancestors ultimately came to Europe from the Middle East, where agriculture was invented.
The males from Rathlin Island, who lived not long after metallurgy was introduced, showed a different pattern to the Neolithic woman. A third of their ancestry came from ancient sources in the Pontic Steppe - a region now spread across Russia and Ukraine.
"There was a great wave of genome change that swept into [Bronze Age] Europe from above the Black Sea... we now know it washed all the way to the shores of its most westerly island," said geneticist Dan Bradley, from Trinity College Dublin, who led the study. [...]

Prof Bradley added: "This degree of genetic change invites the possibility of other associated changes, perhaps even the introduction of language ancestral to western Celtic tongues."
In contrast to the Neolithic woman, the Rathlin group showed a close genetic affinity with the modern Irish, Scottish and Welsh.
"Our finding is that there is some haplotypic [a set of linked DNA variants] continuity between our 4,000 year old genomes and the present Celtic populations, which is not shown strongly by the English," Prof Bradley told BBC News.
"It is clear that the Anglo-Saxons (and other influences) have diluted this affinity."

Today, Ireland has the world's highest frequencies of genetic variants that code for lactase persistence - the ability to drink milk into adulthood - and certain genetic diseases, including one of excessive iron retention called haemochromatosis.
One of the Rathlin men carried the common Irish haemochromatosis mutation, showing that it was established by the Bronze Age. Intriguingly, the Ballynahatty woman carried a different variant which is also associated with an increased risk of the disorder.
Both mutations may have originally spread because they gave carriers some advantage, such as tolerance of an iron-poor diet.
The same Bronze Age male carried a mutation that would have allowed him to drink raw milk in adulthood, while the Ballynahatty woman lacked this variant. This is consistent with data from elsewhere in Europe showing a relatively late spread of milk tolerance genes.
Prof Bradley explained that the Rathlin individuals were not identical to modern populations, adding that further work was required to understand how regional diversity came about in Celtic groups.
"Our snapshot of the past occurs early, around the time of establishment of these regional populations, before much of the divergence takes place," he explained.
"I think that the data do show that the Bronze Age was a major event in establishment of the insular Celtic genomes but we cannot rule out subsequent (presumably less important) population events contributing until we sample later genomes also."

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35179269

Although, not covered in the article, her phenotypic snps showed that she had genes for brown hair and eyes that lacked the lactose-persistence gene and quite neolithic autosomally. Whereas the Rathlin samples followed an expansion via the bronze age made their autosomal cline drop considerably in their Neolithic ancestry that brought a more "northern influence" in their genome from being very "Southernly" to present day "Northwestern" cline that is commonest in insular Britonic groupings such as Scottish, Irish, and Welsh.

I wonder who were the peoples that brought such changes.... :confused:

[Grace O'Malley]

Kind of weird how the neolithic period was in Ireland with the Ballynahatty woman who was more genetically similar with predominantly other ethnicities who are mostly of European Neolithic Farmer ancestry such as... Sardinians, Iberian... etc.



http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35179269

Although, not covered in the article, her phenotypic snps showed that she had genes for brown hair and eyes that lacked the lactose-persistence gene and quite neolithic autosomally. Whereas the Rathlin samples followed an expansion via the bronze age made their autosomal cline drop considerably in their Neolithic ancestry that brought a more "northern influence" in their genome from being very "Southernly" to present day "Northwestern" cline that is commonest in insular Britonic groupings such as Scottish, Irish, and Welsh.

I wonder who were the peoples that brought such changes.... :confused:

What is also interesting about the Ballynahatty woman is that she left no input into the modern Irish genepool. Men like Rathlin or Bell Beakers brought a population turnover in Ireland during the Early Bronze Age. Either the neolithic population died out in Ireland, which is very likely, as Ireland suffered a population crash in the neolithic. Also farming arrived later to Ireland than other parts of Europe. The decline in the neolithic was ripe for the coming of these R1b types which I'm presuming explains why the Irish are quite high in the steppe component. There are some tables on Eurogenes that I can post. I'm not sure from reading your post if you are aware that Rathlin brought the changes to Ireland.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/neolithic-boom-and-bust-in-ireland.html

I'll post a Gedmatch for Rathlin he was quite northern shifted.

[Grace O'Malley]

Here's the Eurogenes K13 of one of the Rathlin genomes

K13 Oracle ref data revised 21 Nov 2013

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 49.94
2 Baltic 27.52
3 West_Asian 7.16
4 West_Med 6.48
5 South_Asian 3.40
6 Amerindian 2.20
7 Sub-Saharan 1.91
8 Red_Sea 1.06


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Norwegian @ 5.854991
2 Swedish @ 6.378155
3 Danish @ 6.435699
4 North_Dutch @ 6.943228
5 North_German @ 7.111557
6 Irish @ 8.086287
7 Orcadian @ 8.527667
8 West_Scottish @ 8.822106
9 Southeast_English @ 10.981000
10 Southwest_English @ 11.587136
11 North_Swedish @ 12.113091
12 South_Dutch @ 14.523604
13 West_German @ 15.031170
14 East_German @ 17.276731
15 Austrian @ 17.773823
16 Southwest_Finnish @ 21.165777
17 French @ 21.226280
18 Hungarian @ 21.971560
19 South_Polish @ 25.624912
20 La_Brana-1 @ 26.125484

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Danish +50% Swedish @ 5.763251


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Swedish +25% Swedish +25% West_Scottish @ 5.718463


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Irish + Norwegian + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.654887
2 Danish + Irish + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.673533
3 Danish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.695946
4 Irish + Swedish + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.708336
5 Norwegian + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.714194
6 North_German + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.717242
7 Swedish + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.718463
8 Irish + North_German + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.726860
9 Danish + Norwegian + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.727204
10 Danish + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.735286
11 North_German + Swedish + Swedish + West_Scottish @ 5.738239
12 North_German + Norwegian + Norwegian + Norwegian @ 5.744429
13 Danish + Danish + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.755604
14 Norwegian + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.760739
15 Danish + Danish + Swedish + Swedish @ 5.763251
16 Irish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.771631
17 Irish + North_German + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.772011
18 Danish + North_German + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.800724
19 Danish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Norwegian @ 5.815938
20 Danish + Irish + Norwegian + Swedish @ 5.816245

K15

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 32.45
2 North_Sea 31.58
3 Baltic 12.95
4 Eastern_Euro 11.65
5 West_Asian 3.29
6 South_Asian 3.17
7 Amerindian 1.87
8 Sub-Saharan 1.59
9 West_Med 1.39


Finished reading population data. 207 populations found.
15 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 North_German @ 8.570560
2 Danish @ 9.199459
3 Irish @ 9.273491
4 West_Scottish @ 9.632721
5 Southeast_English @ 10.713849
6 North_Dutch @ 10.812980
7 Orcadian @ 12.363866
8 Southwest_English @ 12.692083
9 South_Dutch @ 13.515372
10 Norwegian @ 13.539064
11 Swedish @ 13.852389
12 North_Swedish @ 14.337133
13 West_Norwegian @ 14.958194
14 Southwest_Finnish @ 15.931392
15 East_German @ 16.537271
16 West_German @ 16.948147
17 Austrian @ 19.163883
18 French @ 19.201525
19 Finnish @ 20.197750
20 La_Brana-1 @ 21.321207

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +50% North_German @ 8.413251


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Irish +25% La_Brana-1 +25% West_Scottish @ 7.791201


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Irish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 7.791089
2 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish @ 7.791201
3 La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 7.810342
4 Irish + Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 @ 7.810678
5 Irish + Irish + Irish + Southwest_Finnish @ 7.922435
6 Irish + Irish + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish @ 7.980188
7 La_Brana-1 + North_German + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 7.996135
8 Irish + Irish + North_German + Southwest_Finnish @ 8.002673
9 Danish + Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 @ 8.004673
10 Danish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish @ 8.007087
11 Irish + La_Brana-1 + North_German + West_Scottish @ 8.020887
12 Danish + La_Brana-1 + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.028337
13 Irish + North_German + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish @ 8.034504
14 Irish + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.055216
15 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + North_German @ 8.064316
16 Irish + La_Brana-1 + Southeast_English + West_Scottish @ 8.069336
17 La_Brana-1 + Southeast_English + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.069387
18 North_German + Southwest_Finnish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 8.080923
19 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + Southeast_English @ 8.087984
20 Irish + Irish + La_Brana-1 + Orcadian @ 8.140745

It makes sense that his No 1 pop is North German because he was virtually identical to German Bell Beaker.

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_medium/public/thumbnails/image/2016/03/17/16/Heat-map.jpg

[brennus dux gallorum]

That's why anthropology is a pseudo-science and why scientists only use genetics today. You can see what people are through their genetics. Brothers from the same family can have a different anthropology classification does that make them a different race?

Anthropology is less objective but still not a pseudo-science, and still highly-linked to genetics

[Grace O'Malley]

Anthropology is less objective but still not a pseudo-science, and still highly-linked to genetics

I don't agree for the simple reason that the Irishman I posted John Ryan was classified as Borreby and yet he would cluster with a fellow Irishman classified as Atlantid and not some Borreby from Sweden. He would cluster with Colin Farrell and all the other Irishmen and have the same genetics. So how does Anthropological classifications show any relationship with people? It doesn't and that is why it isn't used anymore. Scientists now study genetics to show relationships between people and also look at ancient genomes to show where populations came from.

Famke Janssen has the same genetics as Doutzen Kroes and I think any person would acknowledge this. If you were to go on Anthropology people would be saying all these people have different origins and connections when we know this isn't the case.

Whether someone is classified as Anglo-Saxon or Atlanto-Med if they have long term ancestry in the same area they will have the same genetics.

[Septentrion]

what bullshit poll results

There is no BS. The only BS is you know who!!

[Septentrion]

in other words not more than cherry picking germanics who do not even represent the majority of germanic people (also, yes they have more med admixture than Germans, and Belgians are not Germanic Get your facts right)

thanks for confirming what i said.

Wrong. Germans have a slightly higher Mediterranean genomical component than British people (UK). This was already well confirmed by the National Geographic Genographic Project! O.K.! By the way, the three principal groups which make up Belgians ( Flemish, Walloons, Germans), Flemish and Germans are Germanics! I am Germanic because I am Flemish. You'd better get your facts straight!

[Septentrion]

Anthropology is less objective but still not a pseudo-science, and still highly-linked to genetics

Genetics go a lot deeper than anthropology. You should know that since you live in the 21 century. Genetics enlightens anthropology!

[brennus dux gallorum]

Genetics go a lot deeper than anthropology. You should know that since you live in the 21 century. Genetics enlightens anthropology!

Did you read anything else in my post?

[Septentrion]

The Mediterranean genomic component is found in all European populations but at different frequencies.
These results are given by studies done on various European populations (excluding those of immigrant non-European descent) by the NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC GENOGRAPHIC PROJECT led by Spencer Wells from 2005-2015:
Mediterranean
% from highest to lowest:
Sardinian (Italy) = 67%
Georgian = 61%
Tuscan (Italy) = 54%
Greek = 54%
Iberian (Spain & Portugal) = 48%
Romanian = 43%
Bulgarian = 47%
German = 36%
British = 33%
Danish = 30%
Russian = 25%
Tatar = 21%
Finnish = 17%
Northeast Asian ("Mongoloid") genomic component in European populations:
Tatar = 16%
Finnish = 7%
Russians = 4%
Romanians = 2%
Bulgarians = 2%
Northern European genomic component
Finnish = 57%
Danish = 53%
Russian = 51%
British = 50%
German = 46%
Tartar = 40%
Iberian = 37%
Romanian = 36%
Bulgarian = 31%
Greek = 28%
Tuscan = 28%
Sardinian = 24%
Georgian = 7%

[Septentrion]

I guess we should thank the steppe peoples for giving us blondism, lactose-persistence and rufosity! :p (Idk if they are the reason behind the blue eye color mutation that I know was a hunter-gatherer mutation, but not sure about it being found in steppe peoples)

Sure, blue eyes became commonplace in Ireland, 3-4,000 years ago when those people from the Pontic Steppes reached Ireland via North-Central Europe.

[Septentrion]

Dutch are also slightly more north than irish. You should also consider that All celtic speakers have more mediterranean autosomal admixture than ALL germanics, no matters if they have not interacted with Southern Europe for the last 1500 years unlike all germanic countries, or if they are geographically more distant from med sea, and that even the germanics who plot more south than celts, plot more south because of other kinds of admixture (gedrosian, west asian etc.) not mediterranean

Anyway, so, you somehow admit that your #85 post was wrong

Wrong! The Northern Dutch are about the same as the Irish and actually cluster pretty close to them. Plenty of other Germanics , the Southern Dutch, Western Germans, Eastern Germans, Austrians cluster in a clearly more southerly position than the Irish.

[Septentrion]

Half of people posting in these treads, never been to the UK, barely travel or dont know how to tell when someone is naturally blonde or not.

Britain is way less blonde than Netherlands, Scandianvia, Germany, Baltics and even Eastern Europe (Poland, Russia, Belarus, Czech), I am talking about natural blondes not bleached. Most brits dont look very germanic either.

Nonsense! By the way, a 2004 survey on the Dutch population show that at least 50% of women highlight their hair to make it appear blond/blonder. Due to the fact that among Dutch men, the preference for a blonde female is higher than for a brunette one. So are you going to say that blond hair is not common in the Netherlands too? We all know that hair usually darkens from childhood to adulthood. Bleaching of hair doesn't happen only in Britain, all over Europe including Eastern Europe. Britain is similar to countries in Northern and parts of Central and Western Europe.

[Septentrion]

You think Oppenheimer's theory is just bunk? Others have collaborated on Oppenheimer's thesis. The Celtic and Germanic influence is not as significant as previously thought. The rough estimate is that Germanic dna is about 30% in the UK overall (with the highest estimate being 50% in the eastern England like Norfolk, Essex, Suffolk, etc.).

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/stephenoppenheimer/origins_of_the_british.php

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEL7nCM5itg (Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFQiuGvxMd0 (Part 2)

The fantasy that a lot of native Brits have of being some magical Celtic and Nordic race is just that...fantasy. Most native Brits are descended from Neolithic groups originated in northern Iberia. They resembled modern-day Basques and northern Spaniards.

False. The Iberian genetic contribution to the genetic make-up of Britons and Irish people is minimal, especially with the English. Nearly 40% of the modern English genome came from the Anglo-Saxons alone. So there is no fantasy there! Modern Celtic populations of Ireland, Scotland and Wales are closest genomic ally to the Bronze Age populations of Europe who introduced the gene for lactose tolerance, Indo-European speech like Celtic languages to Europe! Those Bronze Age people have their origins in Eastern Europe ( Russia and Ukraine) reached the British Islands by way of Central Europe not Basque Country.

[Septentrion]

Nonsense! By the way, a 2004 survey on the Dutch population show that at least 50% of women highlight their hair to make it appear blond/blonder. Due to the fact that among Dutch men, the preference for a blonde female is higher than for a brunette one. So are you going to say that blond hair is not common in the Netherlands too? We all know that hair usually darkens from childhood to adulthood. Bleaching of hair doesn't happen only in Britain, all over Europe including Eastern Europe. Britain is similar to countries in Northern and parts of Central and Western Europe.

[Septentrion]

I think brits tend to be darker haired (and probably eyed too) than most non balkan eastern and central europeans.

Are they?

What you personally think, is your opinion. You are for sure entitled to your own opinion. However, the truth is that British people have tendency to have light hair(red+blond+light brown/auburn shades) , light eyes and a very fair skin complexion(Celtic complexion), sharp facial features. They are definitely not darker Central Europeans who are usually "swarthy" in complexion. However, Southern Europeans are darker than Central Europeans.

[Septentrion]

I personally think Brits have darker hair (in adulthood) than most central-eastern europeans , but the eye color is similar.
Irish on the other hand are even more remarkably darker haired in comparison, but could be slighty lighter eyed.

Irish? For your information, the Connacht region in Western Ireland has a higher frequency for blue eyes (53%) than the Denmark's national average (50.9%), as well as Leinster (52%) in Eastern Ireland.

[Septentrion]

Most English people are not Nordics. Yes, the English speak a Germanic language but that doesn't mean they are phenotypically/genetically Nordic. Stephen Oppenheimer wrote a book saying that native British people are largely descended from Neolithic people of northern Spain before the onslaught of Celtic Indo-Europeans. The Celtic and Nordic admixture is quite small overall and most native Brits are basically paler-skinned Mediterraneans. I know some native English people don't like to hear this but their ancestors were not principally Germanic but non-Indo-European Neolithic. Even in the most "Germanic" region of the UK (Essex) the Germanic component is thought to be only 50% among the native English.

Update yourself!!!!!!!

[Septentrion]

Brits are certainly darker than western scandinavians, (Icelanders and Western Norwegians), even british members themselves would agree on that..
British hair colour tend to be mousy/auburn or darkbown/black, Western norwegians are on average more on the Darkblond/lightbrown or just plain blonde hair with the odd chesnut/darkbrown here and there

Mousy hair = light brown with grayish tint.
Auburn hair = reddish brown
So both hair colour are not dark hair, O.K.

[FeederOfRavens]

Septentrion is an emotional lesbian.

[Septentrion]

Septentrion is an emotional lesbian.

Excuse me? Who are you calling emotional? It would have been better for you to hush it, when you don't know anything. I don't even know how sexual orientation comes up on this thread! I fully don't know your intention. If you are a Lesbian, just to let you know that I am not one.

[Odin]

None of the above.

[The Blade]

None of the above.

[Norb]

None of the above.

there is lots of people here who burn and dont tan in the sun, it must be the Keltic DNA!!

[The Blade]

there is lots of people here who burn and dont tan in the sun, it must be the Keltic DNA!!
You simply confirm what I said.
I said British/Irish are lighter than the majority of Central and Eastern Europeans.

[The Blade]

Only Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians seem to be lighter than British and Irish (hair and eye color-wise).
The rest of Central and Eastern Europeans are darker or fairly similar to British/Irish in these aspects.

[Septentrion]

Only Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians seem to be lighter than British and Irish (hair and eye color-wise).
The rest of Central and Eastern Europeans are darker or fairly similar to British/Irish in these aspects.

Lithuanians not quite, they might as a whole be more blond-haired or even light-haired, but are definitely not lighter-eyed than the people of Northern, Central England, Scotland and Ireland. As a whole, 78% of the British have blue or green eyes and only 22% have brown eyes. This is already high on the European scale, higher than northern Germany (75%) for example. If we separate the British into their various groups, it is even higher among the Scottish (86%) who match the Irish, only about 14% have dark eyes. The frequency of 86% for light eyes is higher than Lithuania's and Friesland, Groningen provinces in northern parts of the Netherlands, is more equal to that of Denmark, Latvia, Sweden, Iceland and so on. Skin type-wise, the British and Irish surpass any European populations. The highest frequency for skin type I is in North-West Europe in Ireland.

[Ayetooey]

Only Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians seem to be lighter than British and Irish (hair and eye color-wise).
The rest of Central and Eastern Europeans are darker or fairly similar to British/Irish in these aspects.

Poles are from my experience are lighter, if you count them; I don't think there's as many natural blondes in the UK than their is in Poland. I see a lot of blonde Polish men also which is rarer in the UK; many men will be blonder when younger as kids but their hair will darken over time.

(I didn't realise this was a grave-dug post, feel free to ignore me).

[Septentrion]

Poles are from my experience are lighter, if you count them; I don't think there's as many natural blondes in the UK than their is in Poland. I see a lot of blonde Polish men also which is rarer in the UK; many men will be blonder when younger as kids but their hair will darken over time.

(I didn't realise this was a grave-dug post, feel free to ignore me).

Blond hair percentage:
Poland = 28%
Great Britain = 26%
Ireland = 23%
Belgium = 20%-23%
Light eyes percentage:
Ireland = 86%
Great Britain = 78%
Poland = 69%
Belgium = 60%
Dark eyes percentage:
Ireland = 14%
The United Kingdom = 22%
Poland = 31%
Belgium = 40%
Light hair (Red/reddish+blond+light brown) percentage:
Great Britain = 68%
Ireland = 64%
Poland = 55%
Belgium = 51-55%

Polish have a slightly higher frequency of blonds, but at the same time they have higher frequencies of darker eyes, darker hair, "darker" skin (they are more likely to naturally tan).

[Ayetooey]

Blond hair percentage:
Poland = 28%
Great Britain = 26%
Ireland = 23%
Belgium = 20%-23%
Light eyes percentage:
Ireland = 86%
Great Britain = 78%
Poland = 69%
Belgium = 60%
Dark eyes percentage:
Ireland = 14%
The United Kingdom = 22%
Poland = 31%
Belgium = 40%
Light hair (Red/reddish+blond+light brown) percentage:
Great Britain = 68%
Ireland = 64%
Poland = 55%
Belgium = 51-55%

Polish have a slightly higher frequency of blonds, but at the same time they have higher frequencies of darker eyes, darker hair, "darker" skin (they are more likely to naturally tan).

Interesting, seems like Poles are higher but not by much. I think it depends on what is classified as blonde, I'm guessing the poll includes dirty blondes almost Brown that are technically blonde as a lot of Brits are like that, but I see a lot of Polish men with extremely light blonde hair almost that's rarer in British men; example (Polish worker in Britain).

http://www.coveralls.co.uk/young_blonde_polish_road_sweeper_1.jpg.

Most British blonde men are more dirty blonde like this dude.

https://haircutinspiration.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Brush-Back-Blonde-500x607.jpg

[Papastratosels26]

Yes and No....

Στάλθηκε από το G3311 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Regnera]

I think British and Irish people have darker hair

[Septentrion]

Interesting, seems like Poles are higher but not by much. I think it depends on what is classified as blonde, I'm guessing the poll includes dirty blondes almost Brown that are technically blonde as a lot of Brits are like that, but I see a lot of Polish men with extremely light blonde hair almost that's rarer in British men; example (Polish worker in Britain).

http://www.coveralls.co.uk/young_blonde_polish_road_sweeper_1.jpg.

Most British blonde men are more dirty blonde like this dude.

https://haircutinspiration.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Brush-Back-Blonde-500x607.jpg

Not at all. British have more of a reddish undertone in their blond or brown hair. This is under certain lights make their appear "dark", but it isn't. Many British males, even more so the Irish regardless of their hair colour have a reddish tinge in their beard colour too. This reddish tinge generally masked under brown or blond hair is matched with their pale or very fair skin with or without freckles which doesn't tan at all or tans poorly. This has to do with their ancestors adapting to a gloomier climate with less sunshine days per year than even Scandinavian countries. Poles and many other Northern Europeans have a lot less of reddish tinge in their hair with a tendency to ashen, this is why it gives that impression. Have you been to Poland? I have. The most common blond type outside of the Scandinavian countries, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia included is dark blond! Even in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Germany, northern France, Poland, Lithuania, Byelorussia, northern Russia, etc...
Many Britons living in sunnier areas than Britain, their hair also sort becomes less ruddy showing more lightness in their blond type.

These North Welsh people just as blond as the Polish migrant worker, you posted.
https://i2-prod.dailypost.co.uk/incoming/article5099477.ece/ALTERNATES/s810/rj140713music-37.jpg

[Septentrion]

Poles are from my experience are lighter, if you count them; I don't think there's as many natural blondes in the UK than their is in Poland. I see a lot of blonde Polish men also which is rarer in the UK; many men will be blonder when younger as kids but their hair will darken over time.

(I didn't realise this was a grave-dug post, feel free to ignore me).

Perhaps you might have thing for blond Polish men, but if you go to Poland, there you'll see that the most common hair colour by far is brown. The overall difference between Poles and Britons in blondism is small.

There are many Polish people who have brown hair, like these below:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/Polish%20crowd.jpg
https://c7.alamy.com/comp/E65MKW/warsaw-poland-14th-august-2014-people-takes-part-in-nightskating-warsaw-E65MKW.jpg
More Poles at a Christian concert
https://bgcdn.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/p03.jpg

These are Welsh people who are supposedly the "darkest" Britons.
http://i.imgur.com/HC2uJuR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/EkZLbBk.jpg

[Grace O'Malley]

Perhaps you might have thing for blond Polish men, but if you go to Poland, there you'll see that the most common hair colour by far is brown. The overall difference between Poles and Britons in blondism is small.

There are many Polish people who have brown hair, like these below:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/Polish%20crowd.jpg
https://c7.alamy.com/comp/E65MKW/warsaw-poland-14th-august-2014-people-takes-part-in-nightskating-warsaw-E65MKW.jpg
More Poles at a Christian concert
https://bgcdn.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/p03.jpg

These are Welsh people who are supposedly the "darkest" Britons.
http://i.imgur.com/HC2uJuR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/EkZLbBk.jpg

Oh the dark Welsh. :) That's a bit of a anthroboard myth. Not sure how it originated but I could guess.

[Mr. Anybody]

What does it matter?

[The Blade]

Poles are from my experience are lighter, if you count them; I don't think there's as many natural blondes in the UK than their is in Poland. I see a lot of blonde Polish men also which is rarer in the UK; many men will be blonder when younger as kids but their hair will darken over time.

(I didn't realise this was a grave-dug post, feel free to ignore me).
While the Polish have many blonds, I am not convinced they are blonder than Brits and Irish.
Most probably they are similar in this regard to Scots and Northern/Eastern English.
What I am convinced based on my contacts with members of these ethnicities is that Brits/Irish have a higher frequency of light eyes and tan less than any Central European group (by Central European I understand German, Polish, Czech, Austrian, Slovak and Hungarian).

[Septentrion]

Oh the dark Welsh. :) That's a bit of a anthroboard myth. Not sure how it originated but I could guess.

An obvious myth. There might be some Welsh individuals who might be darker than what is the average English or Scottish, but to make that a rule for the majority of Welsh people is wrong.

[Mingle]

Maybe the Irish, Welsh, and some western Englishmen are. The majority of Englishmen and Scots aren't though.

[arkas]

Not in Australia, there does seem to be a higher occurrence of the 'darker' Atlanto med types amongst Brits still in Britain imo.

I think it's close to equal.

[Septentrion]

While the Polish have many blonds, I am not convinced they are blonder than Brits and Irish.
Most probably they are similar in this regard to Scots and Northern/Eastern English.
What I am convinced based on my contacts with members of these ethnicities is that Brits/Irish have a higher frequency of light eyes and tan less than any Central European group (by Central European I understand German, Polish, Czech, Austrian, Slovak and Hungarian).

Yes they sure are! In terms of lower tanning ability, no European group come close to the Irish, Scottish, Northern English. Remember the Northern English might take the crown as the fairest, because they have the highest frequency of blond hair in the Isles and are about as red-haired as the Scottish and Irish.

[Mingle]

Oh the dark Welsh. :) That's a bit of a anthroboard myth. Not sure how it originated but I could guess.

Its not an anthrotard myth. Just look it up on Google and you'll see many results. The Welsh are stereotyped as short and dark-haired.

Maybe it has something to do with this (https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c5e37b0f6eeaa16d9188c97fae97ee2c-c). Of course the difference between British Islanders as a whole isn't that huge, but the English didn't interact as much with other Euros as much as they did with the Welsh so they stood out more easily as dark-haired. The Irish are also stereotyped as sorta bit dark-haired, but less so than the Welsh.

Here are people stereotyping the Welsh as dark outside anthrofora:

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-much-physical-appearance-difference-between-Welsh-English-and-Scottish-people

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=214767

Here's a better source on the stereotype, also not from an anthrotard place:

https://i.imgur.com/4Kp3tTz.png?1

Even if it is a myth, the stereotype has nothing to do with anthrotards.

[Septentrion]

Maybe the Irish, Welsh, and some western Englishmen are. The majority of Englishmen and Scots aren't though.

British Islanders are quite similar, but there are some differences between the English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh.
Highest frequencies for dark eyes:
Southwestern England
Eastern England
Southeastern England
Highest frequencies for dark hair:
Wales
Warwickshire (England)
Ireland
Though we should not exaggerate this, as a whole they are much more on the lighter side of the scale than dark.

[Mingle]

British Islanders are quite similar, but there are some differences between the English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh.
Highest frequencies for dark eyes:
Southwestern England
Eastern England
Southeastern England
Highest frequencies for dark hair:
Wales
Warwickshire (England)
Ireland
Though we should not exaggerate this, as a whole they are much more on the lighter side of the scale than dark.

Makes sense, where did you get that info though? Seems pretty specific.

[Septentrion]

Makes sense, where did you get that info though? Seems pretty specific.

I know it is pretty specific. I consider researching like an art and I take pride in it. Therefore I am hesitant to share my sources. Nevertheless, it takes a lot of time to do a thorough research due to many stats you might encounter. Concerning the British Isles, due to the fact that more research has been on their population than most other European populations, thus there is more information available. Give it a try yourself.

[Septentrion]

Its not an anthrotard myth. Just look it up on Google and you'll see many results. The Welsh are stereotyped as short and dark-haired.

Maybe it has something to do with this (https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c5e37b0f6eeaa16d9188c97fae97ee2c-c). Of course the difference between British Islanders as a whole isn't that huge, but the English didn't interact as much with other Euros as much as they did with the Welsh so they stood out more easily as dark-haired. The Irish are also stereotyped as sorta bit dark-haired, but less so than the Welsh.

Here are people stereotyping the Welsh as dark outside anthrofora:

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-much-physical-appearance-difference-between-Welsh-English-and-Scottish-people

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=214767

Here's a better source on the stereotype, also not from an anthrotard place:

https://i.imgur.com/4Kp3tTz.png?1

Even if it is a myth, the stereotype has nothing to do with anthrotards.

Exactly, that is what they are stereotypes! Many "Anthrotards" as O'Malley said use the stereotype to advance their own lying agendas.
For example the Irish are far from being dark-complected, they are in fact the world's fairest-skinned. These poor people tan less than Scandinavians, it doesn't get any whiter than that! I sometimes feel sorry for them.
Recent 2018 article:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiC7-u1nJTeAhXwc98KHTjdAFkQFjAAegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishpost.com%2Flife-style%2Frevealed-irish-fair-skinned-people-world-153584&usg=AOvVaw1tal2v_Gm7LvnxPZQG-uia

[Septentrion]

Oh the dark Welsh. :) That's a bit of a anthroboard myth. Not sure how it originated but I could guess.

Yes as we both know by now, that many of the "anthrotards" who were calling the British and Irish "darker" than such and such population have no clue of what they are talking about! Most of them probably don't even know the British and Irish or even people who are of British or Irish ancestry. Of all the British or Irish people I know and those who are of predominantly British or Irish ancestry are as "dark" as they put it. Since I know that you are also pretty good at researching as well. I found this article based on a proper scientific study by the University of Kentucky College of Medicine titled Ultraviolet Radiation and Skin. The article shows again that the people of the British Isles to be fairer-skinned than Scandinavians, Central Europeans, Southern Europeans and so on.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiwyemquJTeAhXyYN8KHRzCBNgQjhx6BAgBEAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mdpi.com%2F1422-0067%2F14%2F6%2F12222%2Fhtm&psig=AOvVaw0q8GeIiExJ-bqGfctGAkgM&ust=1540104535603454

[Septentrion]

there is lots of people here who burn and dont tan in the sun, it must be the Keltic DNA!!

You are right on! The Brits are the lightest.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwio5uKCvZTeAhWNTN8KHXuZDBAQjhx6BAgBEAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fearthlygoodskincare.co.za%2Fblog s%2Fnews%2Ftagged%2Ffitzpatrick&psig=AOvVaw0q8GeIiExJ-bqGfctGAkgM&ust=1540104535603454

[Mingle]

Exactly, that is what they are stereotypes! Many "Anthrotards" as O'Malley said use the stereotype to advance their own lying agendas.
For example the Irish are far from being dark-complected, they are in fact the world's fairest-skinned. These poor people tan less than Scandinavians, it doesn't get any whiter than that! I sometimes feel sorry for them.
Recent 2018 article:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiC7-u1nJTeAhXwc98KHTjdAFkQFjAAegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishpost.com%2Flife-style%2Frevealed-irish-fair-skinned-people-world-153584&usg=AOvVaw1tal2v_Gm7LvnxPZQG-uiaDark was in reference to their hair color not skin color. Anthrotards maybe promote the stereotype, but they don't invent it.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

[StonyArabia]

No the British and Irish are one of the fairest people. I don't know about eye color but they are quite light. They are lighter than Germans for example

[Septentrion]

Dark was in reference to their hair color not skin color. Anthrotards maybe promote the stereotype, but they don't invent it.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

Dark hair? The British and Irish are as a whole less blonde than most Scandinavians, Estonians and Latvians though not all regions of Scandinavia are lighter than the British Isles either. They exceed most regions of Northern Europe and Europe in terms of red/reddish hair. They are not darker than Central or Eastern Euros in terms of hair/eye/skin/colour.

[Septentrion]

No the British and Irish are one of the fairest people. I don't know about eye color but they are quite light. They are lighter than Germans for example

The British and Irish are by far predominantly light-eyed. This means the proportion of light eyes ratio exceeds that of light hair, which is generally not the case in most of continental Europe. In most of Europe, even in Belgium, the higher the ratio of light hair, the higher the ratio for light eyes but this case is not always concrete in Britain. Ireland is not the blondest region in the British Isles but has the highest frequency for light eyes! The most common eye color in the British Isles is blue. Approximately 78% of the British and 86% of the Irish populations have blue or green eyes. This is definitely lighter-eyed than France (45%), Northern France (48%), Slovenia(56%), Belgium (60%), Germany (65%), The Netherlands (68%), Poland (69%), Northern Poland (72%), Northern Germany (75%), Northern Netherlands (76%). The ratio of light eyes in Ireland (86%) is slightly higher than that of Denmark (84.2%), and 50.9% of Danes have blue eyes while 51.25% of the Irish are so.

[Jana]

Brown eyes are rare among Irish. Almost everyone is blue eyed indeed.

[Grace O'Malley]

Maybe the Irish, Welsh, and some western Englishmen are. The majority of Englishmen and Scots aren't though.

It is marginal. The most obvious difference is more brown hair. It is not like on Anthroforums where it is like English blond and the Celts brunet. It is very exaggerated. If you post up crowds from all those countries you can't even see any differences it is very subtle. It is all highly exaggerated. Irish for example are closest to Scots genetically so not sure why people have these sort of perceptions.

It's not like those populations come from very different stock.

[Grace O'Malley]

Its not an anthrotard myth. Just look it up on Google and you'll see many results. The Welsh are stereotyped as short and dark-haired.

Maybe it has something to do with this (https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c5e37b0f6eeaa16d9188c97fae97ee2c-c). Of course the difference between British Islanders as a whole isn't that huge, but the English didn't interact as much with other Euros as much as they did with the Welsh so they stood out more easily as dark-haired. The Irish are also stereotyped as sorta bit dark-haired, but less so than the Welsh.

Here are people stereotyping the Welsh as dark outside anthrofora:

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-much-physical-appearance-difference-between-Welsh-English-and-Scottish-people

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=214767

Here's a better source on the stereotype, also not from an anthrotard place:

https://i.imgur.com/4Kp3tTz.png?1

Even if it is a myth, the stereotype has nothing to do with anthrotards.

We know that the Iron aged people in both Ireland and Britain were not "genetically quite mixed". Most of Ireland and Britain owe their present genetics to Bell Beakers with basically a 90%+ or more population turnover in the Bronze Age. They are all from very similar sources. Whilst the English have more Anglo-Saxon both Irish and Scots have a higher amount of Norse. All those populations cluster very closely together which makes it sort of obvious there is not much differences in the genetics for the whole of Ireland and Britain.

Here is the one from Ancestry for comparison.

https://www.ancestrycdn.com/dna/static/images/ethnicity/help/PCA.jpg

[Grace O'Malley]

Exactly, that is what they are stereotypes! Many "Anthrotards" as O'Malley said use the stereotype to advance their own lying agendas.
For example the Irish are far from being dark-complected, they are in fact the world's fairest-skinned. These poor people tan less than Scandinavians, it doesn't get any whiter than that! I sometimes feel sorry for them.
Recent 2018 article:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiC7-u1nJTeAhXwc98KHTjdAFkQFjAAegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishpost.com%2Flife-style%2Frevealed-irish-fair-skinned-people-world-153584&usg=AOvVaw1tal2v_Gm7LvnxPZQG-uia

Why would you feel sorry for the Irish because of their lack of tanning ability? :) It's all down to percentages anyway and some Irish can tan. I personally see nothing wrong with fair and freckled skin. It's not an unattractive characteristic. Anyway these sort of things are quite subtle.

https://img.rasset.ie/000b9bba-800.jpg

[Septentrion]

Why would you feel sorry for the Irish because of their lack of tanning ability? :) It's all down to percentages anyway and some Irish can tan. I personally see nothing wrong with fair and freckled skin. It's not an unattractive characteristic. Anyway these sort of things are quite subtle.

https://img.rasset.ie/000b9bba-800.jpg

Oh don't take it as an offense, this was not the intention. I meant I feel sorry for people who blister badly and cannot truly enjoy the summer sun. I see nothing wrong with pale or very skin and freckles, I have a few family members which are like that. Actually, there quite a few gorgeous women who have freckles whether red-haired, blonde or brunette. So I think that it is quite a complex task to describe what is an attractive characteristic and varies per individual. One person may find a smooth bronzed-skin, golden blonde with light blue eyes as the ultimate attraction, while another finds a pale-skinned, freckled brunette with green eyes as super attractive. Yes the odds of finding Irish people who tan deeply well are about the same for finding an Iberian who does not tan and always burns!

[Grace O'Malley]

Oh don't take it as an offense, this was not the intention. I meant I feel sorry for people who blister badly and cannot truly enjoy the summer sun. I see nothing wrong with pale or very skin and freckles, I have a few family members which are like that. Actually, there quite a few gorgeous women who have freckles whether red-haired, blonde or brunette. So I think that it is quite a complex task to describe what is an attractive characteristic and varies per individual. One person may find a smooth bronzed-skin, golden blonde with light blue eyes as the ultimate attraction, while another finds a pale-skinned, freckled brunette with green eyes as super attractive. Yes the odds of finding Irish people who tan deeply well are about the same for finding an Iberian who does not tan and always burns!

People of all skin types can enjoy the summer sun if they take precautions. Even fair skinned people can build up some resistance if they acclimatise. The problem occurs when people who have very little exposure to the sun go to sunny climates and expose their skin too soon and too much without any protection. Naturally people that have the more fair and freckled skin will always have to be careful but they can still enjoy sunny climates. There are plenty of people in Australia that fit the bill but Australians are very aware of how to protect themselves and there are constant reminders about protecting the skin.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF40KBHFpn4

Tanning too much is not healthy despite what people say.

Also Danish people have one of the highest skin cancer rates in Europe so they should also be careful in the sun. France also has a high rate of skin cancer.

https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/cancer-trends/data-cancer-frequency-country

[Septentrion]

People of all skin types can enjoy the summer sun if they take precautions. Even fair skinned people can build up some resistance if they acclimatise. The problem occurs when people who have very little exposure to the sun go to sunny climates and expose their skin too soon and too much without any protection. Naturally people that have the more fair and freckled skin will always have to be careful but they can still enjoy sunny climates. There are plenty of people in Australia that fit the bill but Australians are very aware of how to protect themselves and there are constant reminders about protecting the skin.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF40KBHFpn4

Tanning too much is not healthy despite what people say.

Nope. Not all people can enjoy the sun equally. This is why there is an increase in skin cancers in many countries. People don't listen. There is a biological reason why one person has a pale white skin, freckles as many Irish or British have, while another has very dark brown skin as many Africans or Australians Indigenous people. It has to do with an adaptation to the "proper" climate they were meant to live in. When you change environments, do you know what happens? Australia and New Zealand have the highest frequencies for skin cancer on the planet. Do you know why? Because a bunch of Anglo-Celtic people thought they could "acclimatize" in such a warm country, throw themselves in the summer exposed, thinking a tan is a "healthy look". Both countries have more than double the incident rates found in Canada and the U.S.
For annual rates of melanoma among Australian females, it is ten times higher than among European females. For Australian males it is 20 times higher than that of European males. Who do you think invented the Fitzpatrick scale? It was a New Zealander dermatologist who was at Harvard University, this was made to help being aware of what type of skin they have. Having people from a high latitude such Britain then congest them to an area at much lower latitude, sun-drenched continent is a recipe for skin cancer disaster. Fake tan doesn't protect you from U.V. light.

[Grace O'Malley]

Nope. Not all people can enjoy the sun equally. This is why there is an increase in skin cancers in many countries. People don't listen. There is a biological reason why one person has a pale white skin, freckles as many Irish or British have, while another has very dark brown skin as many Africans or Australians Indigenous people. It has to do with an adaptation to the "proper" climate they were meant to live in. When you change environments, do you know what happens? Australia and New Zealand have the highest frequencies for skin cancer on the planet. Do you know why? Because a bunch of Anglo-Celtic people thought they could "acclimatize" in such a warm country, throw themselves in the summer exposed, thinking a tan is a "healthy look". Both countries have more than double the incident rates found in Canada and the U.S.
For annual rates of melanoma among Australian females, it is ten times higher than among European females. For Australian males it is 20 times higher than that of European males. Who do you think invented the Fitzpatrick scale? It was a New Zealander dermatologist who was at Harvard University, this was made to help being aware of what type of skin they have. Having people from a high latitude such Britain then congest them to an area at much lower latitude, sun-drenched continent is a recipe for skin cancer disaster. Fake tan doesn't protect you from U.V. light.

That's my point. You need to take the proper precautions and then you can enjoy the sun. I know I live here. That doesn't mean going out and lying in the sun at the beach in the height of summer. You need to cover up and use sunscreen but you can enjoy a healthy lifestyle in this sort of climate. There are some silly people that go out in very high temperatures and don't protect themselves but most Australians do use precautions and have a great lifestyle.

[Septentrion]

People of all skin types can enjoy the summer sun if they take precautions. Even fair skinned people can build up some resistance if they acclimatise. The problem occurs when people who have very little exposure to the sun go to sunny climates and expose their skin too soon and too much without any protection. Naturally people that have the more fair and freckled skin will always have to be careful but they can still enjoy sunny climates. There are plenty of people in Australia that fit the bill but Australians are very aware of how to protect themselves and there are constant reminders about protecting the skin.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF40KBHFpn4

Tanning too much is not healthy despite what people say.

Also Danish people have one of the highest skin cancer rates in Europe so they should also be careful in the sun. France also has a high rate of skin cancer.

https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/cancer-trends/data-cancer-frequency-country

Yes Danish people are for the most part, pale to fair skin and are obviously Northern European, but has a culture to bronze their skin which comes n contrast with light or medium blond hair color.
Nevertheless when we go from those who are susceptible to sunburn to the least based on studies, it is the following:
I - Lowest epidermal melanin, very UV sensitive, burn rather than tan, highest skin cancer risk
to
VI - Highest epidermal melanin, UV resistant, tan, never burn, lowest skin cancer risk
Most populations are in between these two extremes.
I - British
II - Scandinavian
III - Southern and Central European
IV - Mediterranean, Asian, Latino
V - East Indian, African, Native American
VI - African, Australian Aboriginal

[Creoda]

Nope. Not all people can enjoy the sun equally. This is why there is an increase in skin cancers in many countries. People don't listen. There is a biological reason why one person has a pale white skin, freckles as many Irish or British have, while another has very dark brown skin as many Africans or Australians Indigenous people. It has to do with an adaptation to the "proper" climate they were meant to live in. When you change environments, do you know what happens? Australia and New Zealand have the highest frequencies for skin cancer on the planet. Do you know why? Because a bunch of Anglo-Celtic people thought they could "acclimatize" in such a warm country, throw themselves in the summer exposed, thinking a tan is a "healthy look". Both countries have more than double the incident rates found in Canada and the U.S.
For annual rates of melanoma among Australian females, it is ten times higher than among European females. For Australian males it is 20 times higher than that of European males. Who do you think invented the Fitzpatrick scale? It was a New Zealander dermatologist who was at Harvard University, this was made to help being aware of what type of skin they have. Having people from a high latitude such Britain then congest them to an area at much lower latitude, sun-drenched continent is a recipe for skin cancer disaster. Fake tan doesn't protect you from U.V. light.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMlyT_Sb7sg

[Grace O'Malley]

Yes Danish people are for the most part, pale to fair skin and are obviously Northern European, but has a culture to bronze their skin which comes n contrast with light or medium blond hair color.
Nevertheless when we go from those who are susceptible to sunburn to the least based on studies, it is the following:
I - Lowest epidermal melanin, very UV sensitive, burn rather than tan, highest skin cancer risk
to
VI - Highest epidermal melanin, UV resistant, tan, never burn, lowest skin cancer risk
Most populations are in between these two extremes.
I - British
II - Scandinavian
III - Southern and Central European
IV - Mediterranean, Asian, Latino
V - East Indian, African, Native American
VI - African, Australian Aboriginal

I'm not disagreeing with this. I've seen skin studies and know what types of skin populations have. I was pointing out in my posts above that people tend to make a big deal about some subtle differences in colouring among Europeans. Of course the biggest differences are between North and Southern Europeans but this is all on a gradient. I'm always somewhat bemused by people differentiating between Scots & English on one hand and Irish and Welsh on the other. These differences are all very subtle between those populations. It is somewhat ironic that Irish and Scots are grouped together in Ancestry and England, Wales and Northwestern Europe in the other category. I posted the Ancestry map above. What would make these similar populations so different phenotypically?

That's what I would like people to explain? People exaggerate all these differences when populations tend to blend into each other. Neighbouring populations are not going to have great differences unless there are some very restrictive barriers. Mountain ranges are somewhat a greater barrier than populations connected by water. Dal Riada is a good example of this.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--bXX7lgnAmU/WD8TcJMLGsI/AAAAAAAACM8/ThlMlcRB9gUip3u7N-7IKn_pYL1cN3OkQCLcB/s1600/Dalriada.jpg

[Septentrion]

According to a relatively very recent study on the Irish skin pigmentation published this summer of 2018, it says, " Irish people underestimate how pale they really are". The Prospect and Inspect campaign did a study on how Irish perceive their natural skin colour. The majority surveyed (77%) acknowledge their skin to be "fair/freckled" or type 1 and 2 and 23% considered their skin to be anything from 'light olive' to 'dark olive'. According to Dr Rupert Barry, a Consultant Dermatologist, this is dangerous when people overestimates how well their skin would tolerate the summer levels of ultra-violet radiation and could medium to long term risk for skin cancer. Now the the truth is that according to the latest census figures taken by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) indicate that 93% of the Irish population fall into the fair complexion of skin type 1 and 2 category, people in this category burn easily poorly tan.
The Irish Skin Foundation survey suggest that one in four Irish people is mistaken about their skin type, thinking they are darker and more resilient to UV radiation than they really are. They also quote that "Celtic skin is simply not genetically equipped to with over exposure to the sun."
The Irish are the most ghostly-white people on earth!
I think the recent statistics on the ratio of skin type 1 and 2 in the Irish population is similar with that of Carleton Coon's (Races of Europe) excerpt on Ireland, where he quotes "the Irish are uniquely pale, out of 10,000 men from all over Ireland, over 90% had skins of the pale pink shade represented by von Luschan # 3, not a single was darker than von Luschan # 11".
The Von Luschan scale # 0 to 6 is equivalent Fitzpatrick type 1 (very light/white, "Celtic" type).
Von Luschan scale # 7 to 13 is equivalent to Fitzpatrick type 2 (light-skinned European).

[Septentrion]

I'm not disagreeing with this. I've seen skin studies and know what types of skin populations have. I was pointing out in my posts above that people tend to make a big deal about some subtle differences in colouring among Europeans. Of course the biggest differences are between North and Southern Europeans but this is all on a gradient. I'm always somewhat bemused by people differentiating between Scots & English on one hand and Irish and Welsh on the other. These differences are all very subtle between those populations. It is somewhat ironic that Irish and Scots are grouped together in Ancestry and England, Wales and Northwestern Europe in the other category. I posted the Ancestry map above. What would make these similar populations so different phenotypically?

That's what I would like people to explain? People exaggerate all these differences when populations tend to blend into each other. Neighbouring populations are not going to have great differences unless there are some very restrictive barriers. Mountain ranges are somewhat a greater barrier than populations connected by water. Dal Riada is a good example of this.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--bXX7lgnAmU/WD8TcJMLGsI/AAAAAAAACM8/ThlMlcRB9gUip3u7N-7IKn_pYL1cN3OkQCLcB/s1600/Dalriada.jpg

As a British Islanders are pretty much similar. It is the little differences which made one English and the other Welsh, etc... Germanic Y-DNA lineages make over half of all England and Lowland Scotland with the exception Cornwall (45%). While on the other hand, over two-thirds of male lineages in Ireland, Wales, Highland Scotland belong to the Proto-Celtic group (L21). There were natural barriers such the insular location of the British Isles made it for some isolation for periods of time in history. Water is a great barrier, the Romans did not bother to come to Ireland, water separates Cornwall from Devon and makes a subtle genetic difference between the Cornish (slightly more Celtic) than the people of Devon (slightly more Germanic). Anglo-Saxons did not come at first to Ireland, it would have been a different story if Ireland was not separated. Ireland remote northerly insular location made it so that in the past most invaders were Northern European Whites concentrating those genes further made them the fairest-skinned people in the world ( 93% are skin type 1 and 2!) and the British Islanders as a whole, so you cannot underestimate the power of separation by water.

[Grace O'Malley]

As a British Islanders are pretty much similar. It is the little differences which made one English and the other Welsh, etc... Germanic Y-DNA lineages make over half of all England and Lowland Scotland with the exception Cornwall (45%). While on the other hand, over two-thirds of male lineages in Ireland, Wales, Highland Scotland belong to the Proto-Celtic group (L21). There were natural barriers such the insular location of the British Isles made it for some isolation for periods of time in history. Water is a great barrier, the Romans did not bother to come to Ireland, water separates Cornwall from Devon and makes a subtle genetic difference between the Cornish (slightly more Celtic) than the people of Devon (slightly more Germanic). Anglo-Saxons did not come at first to Ireland, it would have been a different story if Ireland was not separated. Ireland remote northerly insular location made it so that in the past most invaders were Northern European Whites concentrating those genes further made them the fairest-skinned people in the world ( 93% are skin type 1 and 2!) and the British Islanders as a whole, so you cannot underestimate the power of separation by water.

It wasn't a barrier to the Irish who raided Britain regularly and also the reason why Gaelic language spread to Scotland. It is also the reason why Vikings had an impact in so many areas. Also Brittany was populated by fleeing Britons i.e. Cornish, Welsh etc. Places that had high mountain range were more a barrier i.e. The Alps and the Pyrenees to a lesser extent. Much easier to get around water than through mountain ranges. All the populations of the British Isles are very similar and the distances between them are small and autosomal dna is more important because ydna is more subject to drift and sexual selection i.e. which group is more dominant. I'm sure you've seen this map before from the Insular Celtic paper which I believe is the best paper today looking at both Ireland and Britain. This is very fine structure but you can still see how close all these populations are.

https://indo-european.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/ireland-britain-genetic-geography.jpg

And if you look at the Ancestry one I posted previously you can see on a European level how close both British and Irish populations are. So whether people are Celtic or Germanic they are very similar. On Ancestry the Irish & Scots (i.e. Celts) shifted a bit more north and west of the English, Welsh and Northwestern European clusters with Norway to their north, then France is to the south of the English, Welsh and Northwestern European cluster. Germanic Europe is the largest cluster stretching between the Northwestern European groups and the Eastern Europe/Russia cluster. Notice how Germanic Europe clusters with all those populations? Genetically what do you think is going on here? The Irish can't have been too isolated looking at that plot. Other populations on there appear to have been more isolated or separated.

That Ancestry map is the newest one with their increased populations. To me it is very interesting.

https://www.ancestrycdn.com/dna/static/images/ethnicity/help/PCA.jpg

[Peterski]

https://www.ancestrycdn.com/dna/static/images/ethnicity/help/PCA.jpg

Genetics Contradicts Geography: https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?264408-Genetics-Contradicts-Geography

[Septentrion]

It wasn't a barrier to the Irish who raided Britain regularly and also the reason why Gaelic language spread to Scotland. It is also the reason why Vikings had an impact in so many areas. Also Brittany was populated by fleeing Britons i.e. Cornish, Welsh etc. Places that had high mountain range were more a barrier i.e. The Alps and the Pyrenees to a lesser extent. Much easier to get around water than through mountain ranges. All the populations of the British Isles are very similar and the distances between them are small and autosomal dna is more important because ydna is more subject to drift and sexual selection i.e. which group is more dominant. I'm sure you've seen this map before from the Insular Celtic paper which I believe is the best paper today looking at both Ireland and Britain. This is very fine structure but you can still see how close all these populations are.

https://indo-european.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/ireland-britain-genetic-geography.jpg

And if you look at the Ancestry one I posted previously you can see on a European level how close both British and Irish populations are. So whether people are Celtic or Germanic they are very similar. On Ancestry the Irish & Scots (i.e. Celts) shifted a bit more north and west of the English, Welsh and Northwestern European clusters with Norway to their north, then France is to the south of the English, Welsh and Northwestern European cluster. Germanic Europe is the largest cluster stretching between the Northwestern European groups and the Eastern Europe/Russia cluster. Notice how Germanic Europe clusters with all those populations? Genetically what do you think is going on here? The Irish can't have been too isolated looking at that plot. Other populations on there appear to have been more isolated or separated.

That Ancestry map is the newest one with their increased populations. To me it is very interesting.

https://www.ancestrycdn.com/dna/static/images/ethnicity/help/PCA.jpg

Two-thirds of the male lineages in Wales, Ireland and Highland Scotland comes from the Proto-Celtic Y-DNA haplogroup R1b-L21, while in England ( except Cornwall) and Lowland Scotland over half of the male lineages comes from the Germanic lineages. Outside, the British Islands, the R1b-L21 is not that common, except along coastal region of Brittany where some Romano- Britons settled in the 5th century fleeing Germanic wrath.