Strange genetic facts about populations that surprise you.

[Sikeliot]

These are all things I find surprising:

1. Lebanese Muslims have more Western European genetic influence (be it Norman, French, etc) than the Christians.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/14/article-2203291-1503B22A000005DC-612_964x568.jpg

2. Southernmost Italians are genetically closer to Jordanians than to Iberians, Bulgarians, or Armenians; likewise, Jordanians are genetically closer to Southern Italians than to Kurds and Iranians.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/files/live/sites/almonitor/files/images/almpics/2013/03/Jordan%20protest.jpg

3. Despite looking quite a bit blacker, Jamaicans are on average roughly the same ratio of African to European ancestry as African Americans are (80-20).


http://bronxjournal.com/wp-content/themes/city-desk/timthumb.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fbronxjournal.com%2Fw p-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F09%2Fwestindian9.jpeg&q=90&w=954&zc=1

4. Spaniards and Portuguese are genetically closer to Norwegians than to southern Italians and Aegean islanders despite looking MUCH more like the latter than the former.


https://www.crossed-flag-pins.com/Friendship-Pins/Spain/Flag-Pins-Spain-Norway.jpg

5. Pacific Islanders often look very African, but they are genetically further from Sub-Saharan Africans than Europeans are.


https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ce538e8c92749c257b963a081bd0bfba-c?convert_to_webp=true

6. Egyptians are on average only around 15-20% black/SSA. I would think it would be higher given the phenotype I see when Egyptians are shown on TV.


http://dpshots.com/images/protests_in_egypt/protest-in-egypt.jpg

7. People from Mali, Senegal, and Gambia genetically shift toward the Maghreb, and away from other West Africans; you'd never know it looking at their phenotypes.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/140521115912-patrick-vieira-senegal-1-horizontal-gallery.jpg

[Hadouken]

Sikeliot I already explained you about your nr.2 what it is about here

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179084&viewfull=1#post4179084

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179091&viewfull=1#post4179091

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179091&viewfull=1#post4179091

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179110&viewfull=1#post4179110

[Spyy]

number1 is really a great surprise to me

[Berahthraban]

1. But also more SSA, so not closer to us. Roughly, they're the same anyway.

2. a) Proof that Southern Italians are closer to Jordanians than to Bulgarians? Some lousy oracle isn't going to cut it for you to state this as a fact. Yes, Bulgarians have a lot more WHG, but Jordanians have a lot less, while also having much more SSA. Not saying that they can't be intermediate, but from what I have seen so far, you haven't given any good material to back it up.
b) The same goes here. From what I've seen in different pcas at least, Jordanians would be closer to Iranians. Furthermore, we can discuss how homogeneous Jordanians really are, and who has been the target for the very few samples there are.

5. Just curious, how much closer?

7. What do you mean with shift toward the Maghreb, in what sense? How much Caucasian are they, compared to Horners.

[Sikeliot]

Sikeliot I already explained you about your nr.2 what it is about here

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179084&viewfull=1#post4179084

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179091&viewfull=1#post4179091

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179091&viewfull=1#post4179091

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?200332-Most-Euro-Leaning-MENA-peoples&p=4179110&viewfull=1#post4179110

What you said is right, but it does not disprove what I said. In fact, it explains why what I said in #2 is correct.

[Sikeliot]

1. But also more SSA, so not closer to us. Roughly, they're the same anyway.

Fair enough.


2. a) Proof that Southern Italians are closer to Jordanians than to Bulgarians? Some lousy oracle isn't going to cut it for you to state this as a fact. Yes, Bulgarians have a lot more WHG, but Jordanians have a lot less, while also having much more SSA. Not saying that they can't be intermediate, but from what I have seen so far, you haven't given any good material to back it up.
b) The same goes here. From what I've seen in different pcas at least, Jordanians would be closer to Iranians. Furthermore, we can discuss how homogeneous Jordanians really are, and who has been the target for the very few samples there are.

Oracles on GEDmatch are the way I determined this, with nearly 100 results all coming out the same way. Bulgarians may occasionally appear before Jordanians, but Iberians almost never do.


7. What do you mean with shift toward the Maghreb, in what sense? How much Caucasian are they, compared to Horners.

5-10% or so. Same is true for Nigerian Fulani and Hausa people.

[Bell Beaker]

Nr 8 Brazil despite having the most SSA of all big countries of Latin America is the country with the highest number of Whites (in absolute numbers).

[Berahthraban]

Oracles on GEDmatch are the way I determined this, with nearly 100 results all coming out the same way. Bulgarians may occasionally appear before Jordanians, but Iberians almost never do.

The Sicilian samples may be many, but I doubt the same thing about Jordanians. I'm not by any means convinced, but if it is correct, it might only be for Northern Jordanians, or what not. If you get my notion. If the diversity inside Jordania is big, but isn't caught up by gedmatch due to low samples, we can't make such conclusions.

[Sebastianus Rex]

1. Don't believe in that, Christian Leb look significantly more euro than muslims.
2. BS, vast majority of southern Italians and Jordanians look nothing alike.
3. If they are blacker on average then they must be more SSA on average.
4. LOL...you really believe that ? Genetic markers/components and the way they work and correlate are man made and is far from being an exact science. Iberians are obviously more similar to southern Italians than to Norwegians on average.
5. Same fallacy as number 4.
6. Some are, some are not. Not an homogeneous population so...
7. Yeah, it's BS. Most Malians are as black as they come.

In short these perceptions are based on two major fallacies:
1. Deficient methodology
2. Unsuficient data, samples are way too insignificant still.

[randomguy1235]

First group isn't Lebanese :picard2:

[Lek]

Brown Brazilians have pred. European ancestry

[randomguy1235]

The Sicilian samples may be many, but I doubt the same thing about Jordanians. I'm not by any means convinced, but if it is correct, it might only be for Northern Jordanians, or what not. If you get my notion. If the diversity inside Jordania is big, but isn't caught up by gedmatch due to low samples, we can't make such conclusions.

The large majority of "Jordanian" samples are Palestinian. Approximately 50-55% of Jordan's population is of Palestinian descent (located almost exclusively in the capital Amman), so Sikeliot's point should be changed to: "...closer to Palestinians..."

Native Jordanians are a Levantine/East Med-shifted Bedouin population.

[Berahthraban]

The large majority of "Jordanian" samples are Palestinian. Approximately 50-55% of Jordan's population is of Palestinian descent (located almost exclusively in the capital Amman), so Sikeliot's point should be changed to: "...closer to Palestinians..."

Native Jordanians are a Levantine/East Med-shifted Bedouin population.

If so then that's a great point

[Profileid]

The large majority of "Jordanian" samples are Palestinian. Approximately 50-55% of Jordan's population is of Palestinian descent (located almost exclusively in the capital Amman), so Sikeliot's point should be changed to: "...closer to Palestinians..."

Native Jordanians are a Levantine/East Med-shifted Bedouin population.

That's kind of confusing.

[randomguy1235]

That's kind of confusing.

What point exactly?

[Profileid]

What point exactly?

I understand what you're saying, but it's just difficult to wrap my head around. Basically, it would mean Jordanians aren't really a people.

[Myanthropologies]

LOL you just discovered the thing about Jordanians like 20 minutes ago and got happier than a 5 year old on roller blades with an ice cream cone.

[Percivalle]

The Sicilian samples may be many, but I doubt the same thing about Jordanians. I'm not by any means convinced, but if it is correct, it might only be for Northern Jordanians, or what not. If you get my notion. If the diversity inside Jordania is big, but isn't caught up by gedmatch due to low samples, we can't make such conclusions.

There is a significant internal variability among Sicilians. Then a lot depends on the type of calculator.




Oracles on GEDmatch are the way I determined this, with nearly 100 results all coming out the same way. Bulgarians may occasionally appear before Jordanians, but Iberians almost never do.

Almost. This is a Sicilian.


# Population (source) Distance
1 Italian_Abruzzo 4.41
2 West_Sicilian 6.37
3 South_Italian 7.37
4 Central_Greek 7.39
5 East_Sicilian 7.93
6 Tuscan 9.55
7 Greek_Thessaly 11.18
8 Ashkenazi 12.57
9 Sephardic_Jewish 13.17
10 Italian_Jewish 13.95
11 Algerian_Jewish 14.59
12 North_Italian 14.82
13 Tunisian_Jewish 17.72
14 Bulgarian 18.24
15 Libyan_Jewish 18.39
16 Romanian 19.55
17 Cyprian 20.22
18 Turkish 20.93
19 Spanish_Extremadura 21.89
20 Spanish_Andalucia 22.26

[hedonist]

During the crusades, Franks and Normans took over what is now known today as Lebanon ( back then Antioch ) and left their seed inside the local women to gift continuing generations of Arabs with European genetics

[randomguy1235]

During the crusades, Franks and Normans took over what is now known today as Lebanon ( back then Antioch ) and left their seed inside the local women to gift continuing generations of Arabs with European genetics

1) Less than 2% Norman in Muslim Leb populations =/= lasting genetic legacy

2) Lebanese are not/never were Arabs. They're "Arabs" in linguistics only.

[randomguy1235]

I understand what you're saying, but it's just difficult to wrap my head around. Basically, it would mean Jordanians aren't really a people.
The indigenous Jordanians had their country usurped by regional turmoil. The massive influx of Palis in 1948, Iraqis during the 1980s and 2003+, actual Syrian refugees, and Egyptian workers = native Jordanians being a minority. However, they exercise very disproportionate power thanks to their ties with the Hashemite regime (tribalism and nepotism) and its alliance with the U.S.

[hedonist]

1) Less than 2% Norman in Muslim Leb populations =/= lasting genetic legacy

2) Lebanese are not/never were Arabs. They're "Arabs" in linguistics only.

too bad, we should go back

[Percivalle]

number1 is really a great surprise to me

It's based on limited sampling though.

[Myanthropologies]

If so then that's a great point

What he says is actually not true, the samples are from real Jordanians. He just wants Palestinians to seem more "European." There are many other multi ethnic countries with gedmatches and they all always specificy the exact ethnicity, so I'm sure those are ethnic Jordanians.

Back to the topic on that. Sikeloit actually discovered the Jordanian thing like two hours ago in a thread by looking at one oracle and got all "JORDANIANS ARE CLOSER TO SICILIANS THAN KURDS AND ARMENIANS ARE LULZ! SICILIANS IZ LEVANTINE! " (no offense Sikeliot, you're amazing, but you got too carried away lol). Most Sicilians can be modeled as Spanish + Lebanese, or North Italian + Lebanese, so I'm sure most Sicilians are not genetically closer to Jordanians or even Palestinians than they are to Spaniards. Also, most Sicilians are genetically closer to at least one balkan group (be it Albanian, Bulgarian, or Romanian) than they are to any Levantines. However, Sicilians are a diverse bunch. I've seen some oracles that scored Saudis and Egyptians in their top 20 at only 17 distances. However, those Sicilians always came up as Ashkenazis and Sefardics first (one time even as Tunisian Jewish first), so we can assume that those are VERY outlying samples (or maybe just a shitty calculator).

[Sikeliot]

1. Don't believe in that, Christian Leb look significantly more euro than muslims.
2. BS, vast majority of southern Italians and Jordanians look nothing alike.
3. If they are balcker on average then they must be more SSA on average.
4. LOL...you really believe that ? Genetic markers/components and the way they work and correlate are man made and is far from being an exact science. Iberians are obviously more similar to southern Italians than to Norwegians on average.
5. Same fallacy as number 4.
6. Some are, some are not. Not an homogeneous population so...
7. Yeah, it's BS. Most Malians are as black as they come.


Looks like you failed to understand the point of the thread.

1. Because of less SSA ancestry. But actual ancestry FROM EUROPE is higher in Muslims.
2. That's the point... Sicilians obv look more like Armenians and Iberians (NOT Bulgarians, IMO) than like Jordanians so it is a shock that the genetics are the opposite.
3. Apparently not.
4. Iberians are genetically closer to Norwegians because they lack all of the West Asian in southern Italians, but you wouldn't know it from how Iberians look (closer to Med Europeans).
5. Pacific Islanders are very isolated from Africans genetically. You're wrong.
6. I said ON AVERAGE. Learn to read.
7. Apparently genetics do not agree with you, they shift toward North Africa.

[Sikeliot]

Almost. This is a Sicilian.


# Population (source) Distance
1 Italian_Abruzzo 4.41
2 West_Sicilian 6.37
3 South_Italian 7.37
4 Central_Greek 7.39
5 East_Sicilian 7.93
6 Tuscan 9.55
7 Greek_Thessaly 11.18
8 Ashkenazi 12.57
9 Sephardic_Jewish 13.17
10 Italian_Jewish 13.95
11 Algerian_Jewish 14.59
12 North_Italian 14.82
13 Tunisian_Jewish 17.72
14 Bulgarian 18.24
15 Libyan_Jewish 18.39
16 Romanian 19.55
17 Cyprian 20.22
18 Turkish 20.93
19 Spanish_Extremadura 21.89
20 Spanish_Andalucia 22.26


Please send me their gedmatch ID (in a message). I have never seen a result like this.

[Sikeliot]

Back to the topic on that. Sikeloit actually discovered the Jordanian thing like two hours ago in a thread and got all "JORDANIANS ARE CLOSER TO SICILIANS THAN KURDS AND ARMENIANS ARE LULZ! SICILIANS IZ LEVANTINE! " (no.offense Sikeliot, you're amazing, but you got too carried away lol). Most Sicilians can be modeled as Spanish + Lebanese, or North Italian + Lebanese, so I'm sure most Sicilians are not genetically closer to Jordanians or even Palestinians than they are to Spaniards. Also, most Sicilians are genetically closer to at least one balkan group (be it Albanian, Bulgarian, or Romanian) than they are to any Levantines. However, Sicilians are a diverse bunch. I've seen some oracles that scored Saudis and Egyptians in their top 20 at only 17 distances. However, those Sicilians always came up as Ashkenazis and Sefardics first (one time even as Tunisian Jewish first), so we can assume that those are VERY outlying samples (or maybe just a shitty calculator).

Most Sicilians (some 95% of them, and I have nearly 100 to go based on) get Lebanese before Spanish. I don't see why it'd be different for Palestinians given Spanish usually is not within their top 20 and Lebanon is around 15.

As for the Balkan comment, Albanians always come before Levantines with rare exceptions, but Bulgarians and Romanians are so Slavicized that the same is usually not true for them.

[Myanthropologies]

Honestly though, Jordanians are darkwashed more than they should be. They look very much like Palestinians, but they're not that genetically close to S.Europe.

[Sikeliot]

Honestly though, Jordanians are darkwashed more than they should be. They look very much like Palestinians, but they're not that genetically close to S.Europe.

No, but they are comparatively close to the outliers (Southern Italian, Maltese, Sicilian). They are not going to get Greek, Spanish, etc in their top 20. Maybe if Cretan was separate they would score it.

[Myanthropologies]

No, but they are comparatively close to the outliers (Southern Italian, Maltese, Sicilian). They are not going to get Greek, Spanish, etc in their top 20. Maybe if Cretan was separate they would score it.

But Jordanians don't really look like Europeans. Some do (my Sunday school principal growing up was a Jordanian guy at one point, and he looked white), but majority look like Palestinians and Syrians, and a minority can look like Bedouins.

[Sikeliot]

But Jordanians don't really look like Europeans. Some do (my Sunday school principal growing up was a Jordanian guy at one point, and he looked white), but majority look like Palestinians and Syrians, and a minority can look like Bedouins.

You missed the point of my post. I am VERY surprised that a sizable number of southern Italians on my sharing list are closer genetically to the Jordanian sample than to Iberians and Armenians (not Bulgarians, since they look too Slavicized) because most of them do not look it.

[Sebastianus Rex]

[QUOTE=Sikeliot;4179308]Looks like you failed to understand the point of the thread.

I understood the point of the thread i just wrote we should not make conclusions out of a deficient methodology, this science is still on its infancy, in time the methodology will become much better and new genetic componets will be isolated and as a consequence the results might be very different.


1. Because of less SSA ancestry. But actual ancestry FROM EUROPE is higher in Muslims.

What's the percentage of the population tested ? Not even 0.1%, you make conclusions based on such insignificant samples ? Leb Muslims are noticeably more arabic influenced than Christians, i believe that almost everybody agrees with that, it's not a few samples DNA tested that are going to change that perception.


2. That's the point... Sicilians obv look more like Armenians and Iberians (NOT Bulgarians, IMO) than like Jordanians so it is a shock that the genetics are the opposite.

Because you don't realize that the methodology is flawed and very undeveloped at the present. In a few years with a more advanced and precise science you might be contradicting your present thread...wich will happen because it's visibly more in line with the reality.


3. Apparently not.

...we laugh at what was written on genetic blogs 10 years ago...


4. Iberians are genetically closer to Norwegians because they lack all of the West Asian in southern Italians, but you wouldn't know it from how Iberians look (closer to Med Europeans).

And who or what determines that West Asian component as it is determined and calculated at the present is genetically closer than other components ? Don't enter that logic because you will hit a wall, as i wrote in the first place, that is all determined by man under the current technology, methodology and knowledge, it is not a mathematic certainty or an exact science. Methodology is always evolving.


5. Pacific Islanders are very isolated from Africans genetically. You're wrong.

Really ? Determines who and what ? They look much more similar to Africans than Europeans do.


6. I said ON AVERAGE. Learn to read.

Pay attention to what i'm writting or you will not understand the meaning of my posts.


7. Apparently genetics do not agree with you, they shift toward North Africa.

Current genetic science and based on insignificant population samples.

[Brás Garcia de Mascarenhas]

4. Spaniards and Portuguese are genetically closer to Norwegians than to southern Italians and Aegean islanders despite looking MUCH more like the latter than the former.



This statement made Cristiano Viejo have multiple orgasms, but it sounds quite unlikely. Iberians and Italians are genetically closer than Norwegians.

[cosmoo]

4. Spaniards and Portuguese are genetically closer to Norwegians than to southern Italians and Aegean islanders despite looking MUCH more like the latter than the former.

They aren't, nor will they ever be, except in fantasy world of "muh gedmach kalkulator" people. Just another proof of how aDNA calculators are (more often than not) worthless and how they have a very long, long way to improve.

[Sikeliot]

This statement made Cristiano Viejo have multiple orgasms, but it sounds quite unlikely. Iberians and Italians are genetically closer than Norwegians.

Well genetically, southern Italians are halfway between Iberian and Levantine, so why is it unreasonable to assume Iberians end up somewhat closer to Norwegians?

[Brás Garcia de Mascarenhas]

Well genetically, southern Italians are halfway between Iberian and Levantine, so why is it unreasonable to assume Iberians end up somewhat closer to Norwegians?

Most Iberians have Italic ancestry, even if minor. Norwegian is quite unlikely.

[Sikeliot]

Most Iberians have Italic ancestry, even if minor. Norwegian is quite unlikely.

You aren't understanding me: not sure if it is purposely or otherwise. There is an excess of West Asian ancestry in southern Italians that pulls them closer to the Levant. Iberians do not have this. This is why they are comparatively closer to Norway.

[Brás Garcia de Mascarenhas]

You aren't understanding me: not sure if it is purposely or otherwise. There is an excess of West Asian ancestry in southern Italians that pulls them closer to the Levant. Iberians do not have this. This is why they are comparatively closer to Norway.

Nevertheless we both share Italic ancestry so it is hard to imagine us being genetically closer to Norwegians.

[cosmoo]

Well genetically, southern Italians are halfway between Iberian and Levantine, so why is it unreasonable to assume Iberians end up somewhat closer to Norwegians?
"Genetically"? Your calculators are far from damn genetics. Iberians are in every possible way closer to southern Italians than to Norwegians.
Just checked out MDLP calculator, seems that we are also closer to Norwegians than to Albanians xD How would you explain that? Just let genotardism go.

[Sikeliot]

What's the percentage of the population tested ? Not even 0.1%, you make conclusions based on such insignificant samples ? Leb Muslims are noticeably more arabic influenced than Christians, i believe that almost everybody agrees with that, it's not a few samples DNA tested that are going to change that perception.

Going by this logic then we cannot trust any genetic study because only 0.1% or so of the population is ever sampled. If we apply this standard across the board everything we think we know about genetics can just be disregarded. But when a trend holds for so long, you can reasonably assume it is true.


Because you don't realize that the methodology is flawed and very undeveloped at the present. In a few years with a more advanced and precise science you might be contradicting your present thread...wich will happen because it's visibly more in line with the reality.

Doubtful anything will show Sicilians to be any significant mount genetically closer to Iberians than to Lebanese, so why should Jordanians be different? The only solution I can think of is if there is something massively wrong with the Jordanian sample on those calculators.


And who or what determines that West Asian component as it is determined and calculated at the present is genetically closer than other components ? Don't enter that logic because you will hit a wall, as i wrote in the first place, that is all determined by man under the current technology, methodology and knowledge, it is not a mathematic certainty or an exact science. Methodology is always evolving.

Your question makes no sense, at this point you're rambling.


Really ? Determines who and what ? They look much more similar to Africans than Europeans do.

It is well known that Australoids are the most genetically removed race from Africa because THEY LEFT FIRST.



Current genetic science and based on insignificant population samples.

So let's just disregard it all. Great idea.

[Sikeliot]

"Genetically"? Your calculators are far from damn genetics. Iberians are in every possible way closer to southern Italians than to Norwegians.
Just checked out MDLP calculator, seems that we are also closer to Norwegians than to Albanians xD How would you explain that? Just let genotardism go.

Iberians are closer to Norwegians genetically than to Albanians, southern Italians and Greeks. That's how it can be explained.

[Mingle]

When making big claims like that in your OP, you should be including sources.

[cosmoo]

Iberians are closer to Norwegians genetically than to Albanians, southern Italians and Greeks. That's how it can be explained.

No, they are not. They are anthropologically pretty much identical.
BTW, I'm not an Iberian. How would you explain that my countrymen are "genetically closer" to Norwegians than to Albanians (according to MDLP calculator), even though intermarriages happened between us and Albanians quite recently, but intermarriages between our and Norwegian ancestors happened thousands of years ago when our distant male ancestors live more north?

[Sikeliot]

When making big claims like that in your OP, you should be including sources.

I'd be posting hundreds of results and it'd take up too much bandwidth.

[LieDetector]

During the crusades, Franks and Normans took over what is now known today as Lebanon ( back then Antioch ) and left their seed inside the local women to gift continuing generations of Arabs with European genetics

:laugh:

[Sikeliot]

No, they are not. They are anthropologically pretty much identical.
BTW, I'm not an Iberian. How would you explain that my countrymen are "genetically closer" to Norwegians than to Albanians (according to MDLP calculator), even though intermarriages happened between us and Albanians quite recently, but intermarriages between our and Norwegian ancestors happened thousands of years ago when our distant male ancestors live more north?

Ok you're not understanding what I am saying. Genetically, Iberians are closer to Norwegians because southern Italians, and to a lesser extent Albanians and Greeks have MUCH more West Asian ancestry than Iberians do.

[Hadouken]

Ok you're not understanding what I am saying. Genetically, Iberians are closer to Norwegians because southern Italians, and to a lesser extent Albanians and Greeks have MUCH more West Asian ancestry than Iberians do.

read what I wrote to you in anothr thread again

"no thats not how it works



think of it like this :

imagine you would have a cousin who is half ssa half sicilian . you would be related with him more than to a random italian because he is your relative but the italian would be closer to you lookwise and racially . the jordanian shares the med components in a high amount with the sicilians just like you share your dad/uncle with your cousin but the other components of the jordanian is different to the sicilians (like the ssa wife of your cousin would be)"

italians (including south) are closer to iberians than they are to west asians all things being considered

[Sikeliot]

read what I wrote to you in anothr thread again

"no thats not how it works




think of it like this :

imagine you would have a cousin who is half ssa half sicilian . you would be related with him more than to a random italian because he is your relative but the italian would be closer to you lookwise and racially . the jordanian shares the med components in a high amount with the sicilians just like you share your dad/uncle with your cousin but the other components of the jordanian is different to the sicilians (like the ssa wife of your cousin would be)"

italians (including south) are closer to iberians than they are to west asians all things being considered

Genetically, southern Italians are not closer to Iberians than to Levantines. Balkan people probably also are closer to Levantines than to Iberians. Why is this such a shock?

The components of southern Italians do not line up with Iberians: the West Asian stuff throws it all off. With Levantines there are differences too but it is smaller.

[Sikeliot]

Your analogy makes no sense because Levantines and Sicilians are genetically closer in general than to Iberians. Iberians lack the West Asian component and have higher North European than anything in Sicily. On the other hand nearly 1/3 of Sicilian genes are on many calculators the "Caucasus" component plus another 10% of SW Asian. Their DNA does not line up with Iberians no matter how you twist it.

[Ylla]

Genetically, southern Italians are not closer to Iberians than to Levantines. Balkan people probably also are closer to Levantines than to Iberians. Why is this such a shock?

The components of southern Italians do not line up with Iberians: the West Asian stuff throws it all off. With Levantines there are differences too but it is smaller.

We are closer with Iberians

http://i68.tinypic.com/312b5og.png

[Sikeliot]

We are closer with Iberians

http://i68.tinypic.com/312b5og.png

But the Sicilians/South Italians aren't, going with my original point. They're equidistant to Levantines.

[Bell Beaker]

"They are equidistant between Levantines and Iberians".

"They shift towards the Levant"

"Sicilians have more West Asian on average"

Oh gosh just shut the fuck up.

[Ibericus]

Most of the points are actually true, or almost true.

[Sikeliot]

"They are equidistant between Levantines and Iberians".

"They shift towards the Levant"

"Sicilians have more West Asian on average"

Oh gosh just shut the fuck up.

You shut up.