Magdalenians had mtdna H in the upper paleolithic 19k years ago. Suck my unit, David Reich

[Prisoner Of Ice]

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2015/04/19-ka-bp-old-mtdna-h-from-cantabria.html



The present mtDNA study on human remains of fourteen archaeological sites from Cantabria, Basque Country and Navarra provided a diachronic overview from Paleolithic–Mesolithic to Late Antiquity period of some communities settled in the Cantabrian fringe. Ancient DNA studies in European human remains indicated a genetic discontinuity between the hunter–gatherers and later populations. However, some of the mtDNA lineages found in the Cantabrian fringe in Paleolithic–Mesolithic times persist in present-day populations.

The mtDNA variability observed in hunter–gatherers and farmers in Europe denoted a complex pattern for the Neolithic transition, occurring along several different routes into and across Europe. The mtDNA lineages found in the Cantabrian fringe indicated that the dispersion of Neolithic farmers had a different genetic impact in this area with respect to Central and Mediterranean regions of Europe. The differences in mtDNA variability were also apparent after the Neolithic, as shown by the genetic distance between the Chalcolithic populations from the Cantabrian fringe and the Bell Beaker Culture (BBC) populations of Central Europe.


Now really to anyone honest/sane, the other study showing all the eneolithic in western europe was heavy in H and it spread from the west shows the atlantic neolithic was indigenous in origin and that H mtdna (and therefore r1b y-dna) come from Iberia or at least have been there since ice age times.

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?136784-H-mtdna-comes-from-Iberia

Now there can't really be a doubt, we have found it in the magdalenians before the ice age ended (already it was found on the border as well and the pre-H has been found in europe 20-30k years ago). If people don't accept it now, they are hopelessly caught up in ethnocentrism.

[Artek]

> See adress with "Forwhattheywereweare"
> Know that this is a blog of a someone
> Of a Maju, this delusional R1b-H-paleolithic-basques-continuity-since-paleolithic-wanker-cocksucker
> Don't read it
> PROFIT?!

[Prisoner Of Ice]

> See adress with "Forwhattheywereweare"
> Know that this is a blog of a someone
> Of a Maju, this delusional R1b-H-paleolithic-basques-continuity-since-paleolithic-wanker-cocksucker
> Don't read it
> PROFIT?!

Who cares what the source is, he doesn't make the studies for fuck's sake. Also he is right anyway. If this supported reich BS it would have 50000 articles. It doesn't so the media completely ignores it.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

A couple of your questions

1) why is there voluminous data of mtDNA coming from Iberia, but no Y DNA data ? ( is it a lab issue ?)

2) what would you speculate to be in the LGM pool of Y Hgs harviured in LGM iberia ?




1. I suspect it's a problem of relative backwardness (and most of it is coming from the Basque Country and more rarely Catalonia, the most advanced countries in the region) and also budget (austerianism is taking a massive toll) but it's just a supposition (I don't mingle often with academics, I don't know what's going on behind the doors). Only the East Germans (Max Plank Institute) and occasionally the Swedes do seem to have budgets (and maybe the academic culture) to make full sequencing of aDNA.

2. I can't say. I still expect to find R1b (Euro subclade) in Paleolithic, mostly because it does not show up in Neolithic samples (and I do not believe in "molecular clock" dogmas but rather in geo-structure of haplogroups, which points to a western origin of these lineages) but only time and research will tell. I'd also imagine some E1b-M81 in West Iberia, if it is, as I suspect, a backflow from the Oranian genesis.


From the comments. That is one reason this crap pisses me off so much. If only multicult propaganda studies get funded, looking in the areas THEY want, of course we will never find anything. But with all this mtdna H and "probable H" (pre-H) I don't see how those fairy tales can be true.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

My own work on mtDNA molecular-clock-o-logy, suggests that huge star-like haplogroups like H or M (those are the only really big ones, with more than 40 basal branches each) imply a large sudden expansion, resulting in a stable large population what has the effect of dramatically slowing down the effective mutation downstream because the already fixated lineages rarely allow a mutant to survive, just because of drift: try it yourself, anything of the rank of Ne>10 and of course Ne>100 tends to keep the genetic pool very stable (for rare mutations as is the case of mtDNA, of course there's always a chance but it's much larger in smallest populations of the kind Ne<10). I once called this the "cannibal mum" effect because fixated ancestral states tend to effectively eliminate novel mutant ones systematically.


More from comments. What he is saying here is basically genetic drift doesn't exist in large populations. This is mainly the cause of y-dna and mtdna mutations. So if a large population already exists then it throws molecular clock estimates out of whack. I mean obviously, if population size matters then this stuff is almost totally useless bullshit. Belief in a molecular clock is a retarded holdout from out of africa theory. It's bad enough there, trying to apply it even to very recent events as if it's some kind of proof just blows my mind.

[Black Wolf]

It does seem quite likely now that some H subclades were present in Europe prior to the Neolithic. It is probably the case now that certain mtDNA haplogroup U and H subclades (in that order) dominated the mtDNA gene pools of the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in most of Europe.

[Hevo]

It does seem quite likely now that some H subclades were present in Europe prior to the Neolithic. It is probably the case now that certain mtDNA haplogroup U and H subclades (in that order) dominated the mtDNA gene pools of the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in most of Europe.

Probably some HV too.

[Black Wolf]

Probably some HV too.

Yes that is certainly possible.

[Artek]

Who cares what the source is, he doesn't make the studies for fuck's sake. Also he is right anyway. If this supported reich BS it would have 50000 articles. It doesn't so the media completely ignores it.
What is so biased about thesis of Reich, explain.

[Katie Karma]

Zana, the alleged sub-Saharan African Alma, also had mtDNA of the H clade. Honestly, what does any of this minute, at best one allele, hair splitting prove? It is at best one allele folks.

[Jackson]

Zana, the alleged sub-Saharan African Alma, also had mtDNA of the H clade. Honestly, what does any of this minute, at best one allele, hair splitting prove? It is at best one allele folks.

It's important for our understanding of the past. Archaeology in most cases cannot directly link people with their material culture, so in prehistory especially this helps bridge the gap and assists in answering questions related to whether particular changes or stasis in material culture is associated with demographic changes or not.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Zana, the alleged sub-Saharan African Alma, also had mtDNA of the H clade.


So what? As for african, she was found in georgia. There's been hundreds of people raised by wolves and crap, that is no doubt her case. All her children looked normal, she probably would have with normal upbringing, tons of people have monkeylike visages.



Honestly, what does any of this minute, at best one allele, hair splitting prove? It is at best one allele folks.

:rolleyes:

Yes all it does is show genetic proof of origins. Why the fuck care about that when you are talking about athropology and archaeology.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

What is so biased about thesis of Reich, explain.

Because certain people have supported this idea strongly for no real reason, except politics. I find it funny the study about ancient r1b is supposed to finally prove this case, when to me it obliterates it completely.

Of course, it was already pretty much long obliterated because of some other studies on H mtdna. This one makesit basically impossible.

Also, due to the times when settlement of europe happened this probably means H or pre H came to europe much sooner than 19k years ago. More like 26-35k years ago.

[Katie Karma]

So what? As for african, she was found in georgia. There's been hundreds of people raised by wolves and crap, that is no doubt her case. All her children looked normal, she probably would have with normal upbringing, tons of people have monkeylike visages.



:rolleyes:

Yes all it does is show genetic proof of origins. Why the fuck care about that when you are talking about athropology and archaeology.

Get a grip. Do you remember Out of Africa? All mtDNA H shows is the maternal (as in one generation) of one allele, period. If you want to talk about anthropology or genetics relating to origin, then you need whole genome. Basing ancestry on one allele is like predicting your hairstyle based on one hair.