Prehistoric Romanian (~40,000 years old) in GEDmatch

[Peterski]

Oase-1 GEDmatch kit T732095
Native Australian kit Z905945

Gedrosia K6 calculator:

1) Oase1 Romania 41,640-37,580 ybp:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 28.53
2 East_Asian 18.24
3 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 16.79
4 Natufian 15.61
5 Sub_Saharan 11.06
6 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 9.77

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Bengali 22.31
2 Palliyar 22.38
3 Kharia 25.02
4 Paniyas 25.5
5 Punjabi_PJL 27.6
6 GujaratiD 28.6
7 GoyetQ116 29.96
8 GujaratiC 30.08
9 Burusho 31.11
10 GujaratiB 33.04
11 GujaratiA 33.24
12 Turkmen 33.25
13 Uzbek 34.35
14 Tajik 34.38
15 Punjabi 34.72
16 Pashtun_Afghan 35.02
17 Sindhi 36.71
18 Pathan 36.77
19 Kalash 37.56
20 Steppe_IA 37.87

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 66% Kharia + 34% Moroccan @ 6.97
2 66.5% Kharia + 33.5% Algerian @ 7.51
3 67.5% Kharia + 32.5% Saharawi @ 7.76
4 66.1% Paniyas + 33.9% Moroccan @ 9.44
5 66.5% Paniyas + 33.5% Algerian @ 9.44
6 67.5% Paniyas + 32.5% Saharawi @ 9.69
7 67.1% Kharia + 32.9% Libyan @ 9.76
8 69.8% Palliyar + 30.2% Moroccan @ 10.09
9 70.1% Palliyar + 29.9% Algerian @ 10.12
10 71% Palliyar + 29% Saharawi @ 10.15
11 67.6% Kharia + 32.4% Egyptian @ 10.64
12 66.2% Kharia + 33.8% Yemeni @ 10.8
13 59.1% Palliyar + 40.9% GoyetQ116 @ 11.69
14 75.8% Palliyar + 24.2% Somali @ 11.96
15 55.6% Kharia + 44.4% GoyetQ116 @ 12.08
16 68.7% Kharia + 31.3% BedouinA @ 12.09
17 69.6% Kharia + 30.4% Jew_Libyan @ 12.17
18 70.4% Kharia + 29.6% Spanish @ 12.18
19 67.5% Paniyas + 32.5% Libyan @ 12.19
20 73.1% Kharia + 26.9% Somali @ 12.39

2) Native Australian 1850-1900 AD:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 90.27
2 East_Asian 5.69
3 Sub_Saharan 3.24
4 Natufian 0.42
5 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 0.39

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Onge 8.46
2 Australian 11.34
3 Andamanese 11.34
4 Papuan 11.34
5 Paniyas 50
6 Palliyar 55.51
7 Kharia 59.47
8 Bengali 71.01
9 Punjabi_PJL 73.41
10 GujaratiD 75.01
11 GujaratiC 76.65
12 GoyetQ116 81.42
13 GujaratiB 82.13
14 GujaratiA 83.5
15 Punjabi 85.48
16 Burusho 86.43
17 Sindhi 86.64
18 Kusunda 89.35
19 Pathan 89.43
20 Kalash 90.08

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 90.9% Andamanese + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
2 90.9% Australian + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
3 90.9% Papuan + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
4 90.7% Andamanese + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
5 90.7% Australian + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
6 90.7% Papuan + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
7 91.3% Andamanese + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
8 91.3% Australian + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
9 91.3% Papuan + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
10 89.4% Andamanese + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
11 89.4% Australian + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
12 89.4% Papuan + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
13 90.3% Andamanese + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
14 90.3% Australian + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
15 90.3% Papuan + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
16 91.6% Andamanese + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
17 91.6% Australian + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
18 91.6% Papuan + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
19 90.5% Andamanese + 9.5% Cambodian @ 4.12
20 90.5% Australian + 9.5% Cambodian @ 4.12

MDLP K23b calculator:

1) Oase1 Romania 41,640-37,580 ybp:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_Indian 22.92
2 European_Early_Farmers 12.52
3 Austronesian 11.88
4 Subsaharian 9.73
5 South_Central_Asian 8.73
6 Melano_Polynesian 7.48
7 Australoid 6.62
8 Paleo_Siberian 4.32
9 African_Pygmy 4.22
10 Archaic_African 3.69
11 European_Hunters_Gatherers 3.42
12 North_African 2.15
13 Khoisan 1.39
14 Ancestral_Altaic 0.74
15 Archaic_Human 0.19

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Ayta_AE ( ) 28.13
2 Kensiu ( ) 34.58
3 Mamanawa ( ) 34.92
4 Nepalese ( ) 35.11
5 Tamil_Singapore ( ) 37.3
6 Ati ( ) 38.9
7 Jatt_Haryana ( ) 38.99
8 Hindi ( ) 39
9 Jatt_Muslim ( ) 39.17
10 Cochin_Jew ( ) 39.26
11 Tiwari ( ) 39.54
12 Marathi ( ) 39.9
13 Agta_AG ( ) 40.02
14 Uygur-Han ( ) 40.03
15 Jehai ( ) 40.05
16 Burusho ( ) 40.24
17 GujaratiA_GIH ( ) 40.32
18 Pahari ( ) 40.46
19 Aeta ( ) 40.88
20 Agta ( ) 41.17

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.2% Onge ( ) + 49.8% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 20.75
2 76% Ayta_AE ( ) + 24% Spanish_Pais_Vasco_IBS ( ) @ 20.81
3 78.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.6% Basque_French ( ) @ 20.94
4 78.2% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.8% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 20.99
5 66.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 33.7% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.09
6 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% French_South ( ) @ 21.2
7 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Cantabria_IBS ( ) @ 21.46
8 74.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.6% Spanish_Aragon_IBS ( ) @ 21.47
9 74.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.4% Spanish_Castilla_la_Mancha_IBS ( ) @ 21.63
10 57.2% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 42.8% Australian_ECCAC ( ) @ 21.67
11 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% Spanish_Valencia_IBS ( ) @ 21.77
12 54.5% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 45.5% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.78
13 73.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.3% Spanish_Castilla_y_Leon_IBS ( ) @ 21.79
14 72.5% Ayta_AE ( ) + 27.5% Spanish_Canarias_IBS ( ) @ 21.8
15 69.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.6% Orcadian ( ) @ 21.81
16 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Galicia_IBS ( ) @ 21.83
17 74.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.3% Spanish_Andalucia_IBS ( ) @ 21.84
18 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Extremadura_IBS ( ) @ 21.87
19 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Murcia_IBS ( ) @ 21.91
20 69.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.4% Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR ( ) @ 21.94

2) Native Australian 1850-1900 AD:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Australoid 51.38
2 Melano_Polynesian 39.18
3 South_Indian 4.35
4 South_East_Asian 2.58
5 Archaic_Human 1.86
6 Archaic_African 0.65

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Australian ( ) 4.6
2 Australian_ECCAC ( ) 25.13
3 Alorese ( ) 41.71
4 Lembata ( ) 50.3
5 Lamaholt ( ) 51.8
6 Manggarai ( ) 59.37
7 Ayta_AE ( ) 60.25
8 Naasioi ( ) 61.45
9 Mamanawa ( ) 65.33
10 Kambera ( ) 65.4
11 Papuan ( ) 65.96
12 Ati ( ) 67.43
13 Kosipe ( ) 67.58
14 Koinanbe ( ) 67.63
15 Agta_AG ( ) 70.14
16 Tongan ( ) 71.09
17 Aeta ( ) 73.45
18 Agta ( ) 73.54
19 Saami ( ) 74.27
20 Kensiu ( ) 74.82

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Paniya ( ) @ 3.65
2 96.7% Australian ( ) + 3.3% Onge ( ) @ 3.68
3 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Malayan ( ) @ 3.69
4 97.6% Australian ( ) + 2.4% Pulliyar ( ) @ 3.69
5 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Santhal ( ) @ 3.69
6 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Nihali ( ) @ 3.7
7 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Dhurwa ( ) @ 3.71
8 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Bhunjia ( ) @ 3.72
9 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% TN_Dalit ( ) @ 3.73
10 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Hallaki ( ) @ 3.73
11 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Kurumba ( ) @ 3.73
12 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Madiga ( ) @ 3.73
13 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Mala ( ) @ 3.74
14 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Chamar ( ) @ 3.75
15 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Hakkipikki ( ) @ 3.75
16 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Kharia ( ) @ 3.75
17 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Sakilli ( ) @ 3.76
18 96.2% Australian ( ) + 3.8% Papuan ( ) @ 3.78
19 96.3% Australian ( ) + 3.7% Koinanbe ( ) @ 3.78
20 96.3% Australian ( ) + 3.7% Kosipe ( ) @ 3.78

[RN97]

prehistoric Romanians were Indians? :confused:

[Peterski]

prehistoric Romanians were Indians? :confused:

Kind of.

Oase-1 had Y-DNA haplogroup NO (K2a):

https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/34198/2/1000Y.main.Revision2.pdf

The same haplogroup was found in a modern South Asian Telugu individual:


(...) a lineage carried by a South Asian Telugu individual, HG03742, enabled us to refine early differentiation within the K2a clade ~50 kya. Using the high resolving power of the SNVs in our phylogeny, we determined that this lineage split off from the branch leading to haplogroups N and O (NO) not long after the ancestors of two individuals with well known ancient DNA (aDNA) sequences did. Ust’-Ishim and Oase1 lived in Western Siberia 43–47 kya and Romania 37–42 kya, respectively. Their Y chromosomes join HG03742 in sharing with haplogroup NO the derived T allele at M2308 (GRCh37 Y:7,690,182), and the modern sample shares just four additional mutations (SI 4.4.11) with the NO clade. (...)

Wikipedia about haplogroup NO (K2a):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_NO

Telugu people of India:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telugu_people

Check also, "Angry Negrito admixture":

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?202255-Post-your-Angry-Negrito

[RN97]

Kind of.

Oase-1 had Y-DNA haplogroup NO (K2a):

https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/34198/2/1000Y.main.Revision2.pdf

The same haplogroup was found in a modern South Asian Telugu individual:



Wikipedia about haplogroup NO (K2a):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_NO

That's quite crazy. Where did they go then? Were they exterminated or something?

[Peterski]

That's quite crazy. Where did they go then? Were they exterminated or something?

Either they got extinct, or maybe they went to India ???

[Ülev]

Haplogroup LT or L298/P326, also known as K1 (and previously as Haplogroup K2), is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup. Its defining SNP mutations are L298 and P326.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_LT

[Peterski]

But Oase-1 was NO, not LT. Check the modern distribution of NO:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Haplogroup_NO.png/800px-Haplogroup_NO.png

[Bell Beaker]

ORIGINAL EUROPEANS WERE FROM INDIA!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

Prehistoric Europeans were more mixed than I thought

so Australian aborigine = south Eurasian?

[Peterski]

ORIGINAL EUROPEANS WERE FROM INDIA!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe Gypsies are direct descendants of Oase-1, the First Nations of Romania? xD

[Peterski]

Oase-1 (facial reconstruction):


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.2% Onge ( ) + 49.8% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 20.75

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE4BGW3UgAAV89N.jpg:large

Versus modern Onge people:

https://www.google.pl/search?q=Onge+people&client=opera&hs=8Bz&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi9qIHIwfHRAhWEWRQKHQFMBc0Q_AUICCgB&biw=1366&bih=658#imgrc=_


100.0% Onge

http://assets.survivalinternational.org/pictures/81/jarawa30_600_landscape.jpg


so Australian aborigine = south Eurasian?

Ancestral South Eurasians were ancestors of:

- Australian Aborigines
- Papuans, Melanesians
- Negrito populations
- South Indians

Etc.

[Grab the Gauge]

Calculators like GEDmatch cannot be used on fossil humans and they were not made for this. GEDmatch bills Neanderthal admixture as Sub-Saharan African admixture in fossil samples. Oase had nothing whatever to do with Indians.

[Grab the Gauge]

Oase-1 (facial reconstruction):



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE4BGW3UgAAV89N.jpg:large

This is actually a reconstruction of the Oase 2 skull, which has never yielded a DNA profile. Oase 1 was just a mandible.


http://www.pnas.org/content/104/4/1165.full

[Grab the Gauge]

Neither Oase 1 nor Oase 2 has any similarities with the modern Onge. The Oase 1 mandible is metrically comparable to a Neanderthal or even a Heidelbergensis mandible. Oase 2 had as flat of a frontal bone as the Shanidar 1 Neanderthal, which is one of the flattest of all Neanderthals. They had lots of similarities with EUP Aurignacians and Skhul-Qafzeh as well. But nothing in common with the Onge. These were a Neanderthal-like people with more admixture than was the norm even in those days.

[Peterski]

GEDmatch bills Neanderthal admixture as Sub-Saharan African admixture in fossil samples.

Not true (at least not in case of calculators which include Archaic admixtures).

This is Altai Neanderthal in MDLP K23b calculator (no Sub-Saharan, just Archaic):

MDLP K23b Oracle results:

Kit F999902

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Archaic_Human 64.47
2 Archaic_African 34.51
3 Khoisan 0.58
4 Ancestral_Altaic 0.27
5 European_Early_Farmers 0.08
6 Australoid 0.05
7 Caucasian 0.02
8 Melano_Polynesian 0.01

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 BiakaPygmy ( ) 70.7
2 Saami ( ) 71.13
3 Saami_Finland ( ) 71.98
4 Bashkir ( ) 73.58
5 Saami_Kola ( ) 73.59
6 Karelian ( ) 73.63
7 Finn ( ) 73.81
8 MbutiPygmy ( ) 73.95
9 Sandawe ( ) 74
10 Tatar-Siberian ( ) 74.01
11 Uygur-Han ( ) 74.07
12 Ayta_AE ( ) 74.32
13 Mari ( ) 74.56
14 Finn_East ( ) 74.65
15 Finnish-East ( ) 74.76
16 Pygmy ( ) 74.77
17 Kazahs ( ) 74.78
18 Vepsa ( ) 74.84
19 Finnish_FIN ( ) 74.87
20 Hema ( ) 75.11

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 54% Saami ( ) + 46% Pygmy ( ) @ 60.55
2 53.2% Saami ( ) + 46.8% MbutiPygmy ( ) @ 60.58
3 53% Saami_Finland ( ) + 47% Pygmy ( ) @ 60.83
4 52.2% Saami_Finland ( ) + 47.8% MbutiPygmy ( ) @ 60.85
5 51.3% Bashkir ( ) + 48.7% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.33
6 50.4% Bashkir ( ) + 49.6% MbutiPygmy ( ) @ 61.33
7 51.3% Saami_Kola ( ) + 48.7% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.35
8 50.4% Saami_Kola ( ) + 49.6% MbutiPygmy ( ) @ 61.35
9 51.2% Karelian ( ) + 48.8% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.37
10 50.4% Karelian ( ) + 49.6% MbutiPygmy ( ) @ 61.38
11 51% Finn ( ) + 49% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.43
12 50.1% Finn ( ) + 49.9% MbutiPygmy ( ) @ 61.43
13 50.1% MbutiPygmy ( ) + 49.9% Tatar-Siberian ( ) @ 61.44
14 50.8% Tatar-Siberian ( ) + 49.2% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.44
15 50.1% MbutiPygmy ( ) + 49.9% Uygur-Han ( ) @ 61.49
16 50.7% Uygur-Han ( ) + 49.3% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.5
17 50.7% MbutiPygmy ( ) + 49.3% Mari ( ) @ 61.65
18 50.2% Mari ( ) + 49.8% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.66
19 50.8% MbutiPygmy ( ) + 49.2% Finn_East ( ) @ 61.67
20 50.1% Finn_East ( ) + 49.9% Pygmy ( ) @ 61.68

[Peterski]

Denisova Hominin (kit number F999903) in MDLP K23b calculator:

MDLP K23b Oracle results:

Kit F999903

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Archaic_Human 93.43
2 Archaic_African 5.15
3 Khoisan 1.39
4 North_African 0.02
5 Melano_Polynesian 0.01

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Saami ( ) 88.97
2 Saami_Finland ( ) 89.63
3 Bashkir ( ) 90.9
4 Saami_Kola ( ) 90.92
5 Karelian ( ) 90.96
6 Finn ( ) 91.11
7 Tatar-Siberian ( ) 91.2
8 Uygur-Han ( ) 91.27
9 Ayta_AE ( ) 91.67
10 Mari ( ) 91.72
11 Finn_East ( ) 91.79
12 Finnish-East ( ) 91.88
13 Kazahs ( ) 91.9
14 Vepsa ( ) 91.93
15 Finnish_FIN ( ) 91.97
16 Aleut ( ) 92.24
17 Udmurd ( ) 92.28
18 Uygur ( ) 92.44
19 Komi ( ) 92.45
20 Chuvash ( ) 92.6

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 61.9% Saami ( ) + 38.1% Ayta_AE ( ) @ 87.27
2 58.4% Saami_Finland ( ) + 41.6% Ayta_AE ( ) @ 87.5
3 66.9% Saami ( ) + 33.1% Mamanawa ( ) @ 87.69
4 74.7% Saami ( ) + 25.3% Khwe ( ) @ 87.76
5 73.6% Saami ( ) + 26.4% Agta ( ) @ 87.76
6 73.4% Saami ( ) + 26.6% Sandawe ( ) @ 87.77
7 74.1% Saami ( ) + 25.9% Aeta ( ) @ 87.79
8 75.5% Saami ( ) + 24.5% Shua ( ) @ 87.79
9 77.8% Saami ( ) + 22.2% BiakaPygmy ( ) @ 87.82
10 74.4% Saami ( ) + 25.6% Hema ( ) @ 87.82
11 75.3% Saami ( ) + 24.7% Kikuyu ( ) @ 87.88
12 52.8% Saami_Kola ( ) + 47.2% Ayta_AE ( ) @ 87.89
13 71.9% Saami ( ) + 28.1% Ati ( ) @ 87.89
14 75.5% Saami ( ) + 24.5% Masai_Ayodo ( ) @ 87.9
15 77.3% Saami ( ) + 22.7% Alur ( ) @ 87.9
16 52.7% Karelian ( ) + 47.3% Ayta_AE ( ) @ 87.91
17 52.1% Finn ( ) + 47.9% Ayta_AE ( ) @ 87.91
18 78.2% Saami ( ) + 21.8% Tshwa ( ) @ 87.91
19 78.8% Saami ( ) + 21.2% !Kung ( ) @ 87.91
20 78.1% Saami ( ) + 21.9% Kgalagadi ( ) @ 87.92

[Grab the Gauge]

:rolleyes:

Litvin, you cannot run archaic humans thougn GEDmatch. It isn't designed to work with fossil profiles. The calculator can only spit out answers it's programmers have designed it to spit out. IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO WORK WITH FOSSIL HUMANS. You are accomplishing nothing here. No archaic African fossil has ever yielded a DNA profile.

[XenophobicPrussian]

That's quite crazy. Where did they go then? Were they exterminated or something?


Either they got extinct, or maybe they went to India ???
Oase1's line was exterminated, but other paleolithic Europeans like Kostenki14 also had a lot of ASI/Andamanese.

They didn't go anywhere, they evolved. When you look at a person from the Andamans(Australia/Papau New Guinea too, but they have extra Denisovan admixture we don't have), you are pretty much looking back in time. Of course, we wouldn't have been exactly like them, but closer to that, just like the pre-chimp/human ancestor would've still looked closer to a chimp.

[Grab the Gauge]

Oase1's line was exterminated,

LMFAO. There is no evidence for that whatsoever.

[XenophobicPrussian]

Prehistoric Europeans were more mixed than I thought

so Australian aborigine = south Eurasian?
They were not "mixed". There was no such thing as a pure genetic "European", "East Asian", etc in 40k BC to mix with.

[Peterski]

other paleolithic Europeans like Kostenki14 also had a lot of ASI/Andamanese.

Kostenki14 looks like a tropically-adapted human and he does show Australoid-like features.

Just ask member Physical-Anthro from this forum, he will confirm.

Also Kostenki14 carried Y-DNA haplogroup C1b, the same as modern Australian Aborigines.

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

Thats a funny admixture you got but that shows MLD is really bad at comparing populations.
Also Its confusing puerto rican with European spaniard/ basque. Every other Admix mixed population European component has spaniard or iberian something on it

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.2% Onge ( ) + 49.8% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 20.75
2 76% Ayta_AE ( ) + 24% Spanish_Pais_Vasco_IBS ( ) @ 20.81
3 78.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.6% Basque_French ( ) @ 20.94
4 78.2% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.8% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 20.99
5 66.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 33.7% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.09
6 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% French_South ( ) @ 21.2
7 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Cantabria_IBS ( ) @ 21.46
8 74.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.6% Spanish_Aragon_IBS ( ) @ 21.47
9 74.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.4% Spanish_Castilla_la_Mancha_IBS ( ) @ 21.63
10 57.2% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 42.8% Australian_ECCAC ( ) @ 21.67
11 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% Spanish_Valencia_IBS ( ) @ 21.77
12 54.5% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 45.5% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.78
13 73.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.3% Spanish_Castilla_y_Leon_IBS ( ) @ 21.79
14 72.5% Ayta_AE ( ) + 27.5% Spanish_Canarias_IBS ( ) @ 21.8
15 69.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.6% Orcadian ( ) @ 21.81
16 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Galicia_IBS ( ) @ 21.83
17 74.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.3% Spanish_Andalucia_IBS ( ) @ 21.84
18 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Extremadura_IBS ( ) @ 21.87
19 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Murcia_IBS ( ) @ 21.91
20 69.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.4% Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR ( ) @ 21.94

My mother is full puerto rican

It placed her several other ethnicities before puerto rican

https://s30.postimg.org/58d8raqgh/bandicam_2017_02_02_08_36_57_886.jpg
https://s28.postimg.org/i02cq65nx/bandicam_2017_02_02_08_37_11_129.jpg

[XenophobicPrussian]

LMFAO. There is no evidence for that whatsoever.
I mean, you're right. Outbred, whatever.

[Grab the Gauge]

Kostenki14 looks like a tropically-adapted human and he does show Australoid-like features.

Just ask member Physical-Anthro from this forum, he will confirm.

Also Kostenki14 carried Y-DNA haplogroup C1b, the same as modern Australian Aborigines.

Kostenki-14 isn't any more tropically adapted than any other and doesn't have Australoid features. Kostenki was C-M130 which is an East Asian haplogroup.

[Peterski]

Kostenki-14 isn't tropically adapted and doesn't have Australoid features.

He is, and he does. Sorry but Physical-Anthro is a better expert in anthropology than you.


Kostenki was C-M130.

He was C1b according to "Genetic History of Ice Age Europe" (Fu et al. 2016 publication).

C1b is the most common haplogroup among pure-blooded Australian Aborigines.

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

He is, and he does. Sorry but Physical-Anthro is a better expert in anthropology than you.



He was C1b according to "Genetic History of Ice Age Europe" (Fu et al. 2016 publication).

C1b is the most common haplogroup among pure-blooded Australian Aborigines.

C1b is 15000 years old. So it cant be c1b is kostenki is 40000 years old

http://haplogroup.org/mtdna/rsrs/l123456/l23456/l2346/l346/l34/l3/m/m8/cz/c/c1/c1b/

Edit NVM you mean Y-dna

[Grab the Gauge]

He is, and he does. Sorry but Physical-Anthro is a better expert in anthropology than you.



He was C1b according to "Genetic History of Ice Age Europe" (Fu et al. 2016 publication).

C1b is the most common haplogroup among pure-blooded Australian Aborigines.

Physical antro knows nothing about anthropology, has been severely humiliated on this forum multiple times, anyone who gets information from him has been completely misinformed. The skull is not tropically adapted.


Kostenski 14 is C M-130. He is genetically most closely related to modern Scandinavians.

C* (M130) was also identified in prehistoric remains, dating from 34,000 years BP, found in Russia and known as "Kostenki 14".[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_C-M130

[Harkonnen]

You dumb Polak piece of shit: you can not use admixture on these kind of ancient specimen who are older than modern races/populations.

[Ibericus]

Prehistoric Europeans were more mixed than I thought

so Australian aborigine = south Eurasian?
They are actually not mixed. It's because we are using modern population to describe them. But it's the other way around, it's us who have ancestry from them.

[Grab the Gauge]

This quote was taken from a posting on the internet:



"...Certain cranial features, including very narrow braincase, low and narrow face, marked prognathism (anterior protrusion of the midface), and very wide nose, are typical of tropical populations. The trait combination links the cranium with those of Papuans and Melanesians.

A broad nose and an anteriorly projecting midface are not tropical adaptations. Neanderthals evolved extremely wide noses and projecting maxillary bones while living in high altitude, glacial-to-cold regions of Europe and Central Asia. The wide nasal opening and large maxillary sinuses serve to maximize the storage of nitric oxide which is a fuel for muscular activity which is used to generate body heat. I get so sick and tired of people claiming that wide noses are a tropical feature. Kostenki-14 has a wide nose because he had very high levels of Neanderthal admixture. Tropically adapted, indigenous African crania all have narrow noses:

Idaltu African skull:


https://boneclones.com/images/store-product/product-1420-main-main-big-1415043039.jpg


Kabwe skull (Africa)

http://www.ancient-origins.net/sites/default/files/Broken-Hill-Kabwe-skull-bullet-like-holes.jpg

Jebel Irhoud skull (Africa) next to Neanderthal (Europe):

http://68.media.tumblr.com/747d4772988bb5a8e05c5a9dbddeffe4/tumblr_nhbkna47mL1r46foao1_1280.jpg

Dar es Soltane (Africa):


http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/jpg/02_250.jpg

Narrow nose is a proto-nigroid and African tropical-savannah-interglacial characteristic.


The narrow braincase and small facial dimensions of Kostenki are primarily a reflection of the fact that he was born with congenital microcephaly.

[Hithaeglir]

So the only true european in this forum is Mortimer.

[Harkonnen]

So the only true european in this forum is Mortimer.

No he fucking is not. Do not trust the Polish propaganda machine.

[Hithaeglir]

No he fucking is not. Do not trust the Polish propaganda machine.

:rotfl:

[Harkonnen]

Kostenki, Ust-Ishim and Oase are the only pure West Eurasian samples.

All others are mixed with East Eurasian (Mal'ta, WHGs) or Basal Eurasian (Stuttgart etc)

https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/molbev/msw293/2838774/A-working-model-of-the-deep-relationships-of?redirectedFrom=fulltext

http://i64.tinypic.com/npigew.jpg


After the divergence of Dinka from non-Africans, the next split point on the modern human lineage in our model is that between the major eastern and western clades (the node labeled “Non-African”—although we note that the split point of Basal Eurasian would be deeper.) This split is soon followed on the western Eurasian branch by the split between K14 and Ust’-Ishim (i.e., their respective modern-human ancestry components). The original Ust’-Ishim analysis (Fu et al., 2014) inferred a near-trifurcation at this point, and we wished to test whether K14 (and other western Eurasians) and Ust’-Ishim form a statistically supported clade. In fact, while the best-fitting position for Ust’-Ishim is on the western lineage (0.6 shared drift), the inferred 95% confidence interval for this point overlaps the eastern/western split (standard error 0.4 for the Ust’-Ishim split position), so that we cannot confidently resolve the branching order. We therefore continue to regard this cluster as approximately a trifurcation; while we show Ust’Ishim at its best-fitting split point in Figure 1, we color-code it as a basal non-African rather than a member of the western clade.

[Harkonnen]

Oase-1 (facial reconstruction):



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE4BGW3UgAAV89N.jpg:large

Versus modern Onge people:

https://www.google.pl/search?q=Onge+people&client=opera&hs=8Bz&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi9qIHIwfHRAhWEWRQKHQFMBc0Q_AUICCgB&biw=1366&bih=658#imgrc=_



http://assets.survivalinternational.org/pictures/81/jarawa30_600_landscape.jpg



Ancestral South Eurasians were ancestors of:

- Australian Aborigines
- Papuans, Melanesians
- Negrito populations
- South Indians

Etc.

lol you fucking idiot. It is obvious you haven't read any literature on Oase. Oase was a massive archaic specimen. It was such a huge bitch (well actually Oase is two different specimen) that it actually fits better metrically with tens of thousands years older specimens. Ridiculous to suggest it had anything to do with Negritos physically.

[Harkonnen]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wIXCiYCiiw

[Rethel]

Oase-1 (facial reconstruction):

Versus modern Onge people:

Not similar.
Oase is more bantu/papuan faced.


Ancestral South Eurasians were ancestors of:

- Australian Aborigines
- Papuans, Melanesians
- Negrito populations
- South IndiansEtc.

So it is another evidence, that mongolian C is a founder
effect, and whole C-D was australoid originaly...

So, assuming, "I" had to be something
beteen Saudis and Australians, but,
but with square face nad more darker
as among hybrids ala natufian skin.

Did I assume correctly?

[Rethel]

Also Kostenki14 carried Y-DNA haplogroup C1b, the same as modern Australian Aborigines.

Is it not amazing, that first and last land, which IEs
colonized were previously inhabited by Aborigens :)
And in both cases, they were ab-origo indeed.

[Grab the Gauge]

Not similar.
Oase is more bantu/papuan faced.



So it is another evidence, that mongolian C is a founder
effect, and whole C-D was australoid originaly...

So, assuming, "I" had to be something
beteen Saudis and Australians, but,
but with square face nad more darker
as among hybrids ala natufian skin.

Did I assume correctly?

Oase has nothing to do with Bantus or Papuans. The skull and mandible are Neandethaloid. They looked nothing like Saudis or Australians. C was never Australoid and ancient Europeans have NOTHING to do with Australoids. Haplogroup D in Oceania is a result of a very recent turnover event. Oase 2 has several Mongoloid features.

[Rethel]

Oase has nothing to do with Bantus or Papuans.

I only said, that they look like. Negrito from the photo
does not have such flat face and nose and is more round.

[Grab the Gauge]

I only said, that they look like. Negrito from the photo
does not have such flat face and nose and is more round.

Except Oase doesn't look anything like a Bantu or a Papuan. One of the most distinctive traits of Negritos/Papuans/Bantu is their vertical, convex foreheads. Oase 2 is the exact opposite.

Oase 2
http://i.imgur.com/bC14yEz.png?1

Bantu
http://i.imgur.com/F7n29eK.jpg?1

Papuan
http://i.imgur.com/8PBnh72.jpg?1

Oase 2 is more like an Amerindian:


http://i.imgur.com/bC14yEz.png?1

http://i.imgur.com/WPx7yu6.jpg?1

The skull is also similar to a Shanidar Neanderthal in this regard:


http://i.imgur.com/FPRbH4G.jpg?1


Oase 2 also presents apparently independent features that are, at best, unusual for a modern human, whether the reference sample is of preceding MPMH or EUP and MUP modern humans.

Despite the high and rounded sagittal parietal arc, the sagittal frontal arc is long and exceptionally flat. The Oase 2 frontal bone arc versus chord residual is below those of all of the early modern human crania; it falls in the middle of the Neandertal range of variation despite the absence of a supraorbital torus (Fig. 5). In combination with its highly curved parietal arc, it is exceptional for an early modern human and is closest to the Shanidar 1 Neandertal. No deformational process can explain this pattern because no postdepositional distortion was observed on any part of the cranium, all of the cranial vault fragments fit perfectly, and no trace of artificial deformation was noticed. Among the early modern humans, Oase 2 is most closely approached by Cioclovina 1 (frontal arc/chord residual: −5.6) and secondarily by Nazlet Khater 2 (−4.3) and Skhul 5 (−4.3, although it has a supraorbital torus)


http://www.pnas.org/content/104/4/1165.full


So sorry to burst your bubble but Oase 2 was the opposite of a Negrito (Polack) and was more similar to an IndoEuropean (Amerindian/Borreby) in this regard. Oase 2's physical type was among the original Indo-Europeans who destroyed your Polack ancestors in a cannibalistic rape attack of genocide.

[Rethel]

type was among the original Indo-Europeans who destroyed your Polack ancestors in a cannibalistic rape attack of genocide.

Fine, but:

1) At that time here was no Polacks at all.
2) I have no polish ancestors (at least I do not know about them).
3) So, how they could destroy them, the more: ate them? :picard2:

[Harkonnen]

"The specimens suggest that there have been clear changes in human anatomy since then," said Trinkaus. "The bones are also fully compatible with the blending of modern human and Neandertal populations. Not only is the face very large, but so are the jaws and the teeth, particularly the wisdom teeth. In the human fossil record, you have to go back a half-million years to find a specimen that has bigger wisdom teeth."

http://donsmaps.com/romaniancaveskull.html

[Harkonnen]

https://boneclones.com/images/store-product/product-1426-main-original-1415043068.jpg

35,000 years BP: Oase 1 (mandible) and Oase 2 (cranium) were both discovered in the Peştera cu Oase, Romania. The mandible was found first, in 2002, by speleologists Milota, Bîlgăr and Sarcină. The cranium, which is from a different individual, was found by a team led by Trinkaus and Zilhão between 2003-2005. BH-048, which has a sagittal cut revealing details of the endocranium, is an exact cast of a 3D scan printed output provided to Bone Clones by Racoviță Institute of Speleology. From there Bone Clones cleaned up the scan lines and reconstructed the missing details and elements in consultation with Erik Trinkaus and Hélène Rougier and producedBH-049. These are the earliest and among the most complete anatomically modern human remains found to date from this period in Europe. The Bone Clones® Hominid line is composed of discoveries from anatomically modern humans, archaic humans, early Homo, early hominins, and other hominids. The majority of the casts in this line have been recreated by our team of anatomical sculptors. Some are reconstructions made by anthropology professionals using fragmentary elements from original discoveries and extrapolating the missing parts from those (i.e. Neanderthal skeleton).

[Harkonnen]

http://donsmaps.com/images8/oasetooth.jpg

The biting surface of a third molar tooth from a Homo sapiens specimen found in a Romanian cave exhibits a curious welter of protrusions, which raises questions about its evolutionary heritage.

Photo: Romanian Academy in http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040522/bob8.asp

Yet the Romanian fossil also flaunts some strikingly primitive traits. Its molar teeth are considerably larger than those of European H. sapiens that lived 30000 to 20000 years ago. In fact, Trinkaus says, the chewing surfaces of the Oase skull's molars are wider than those of the generally bulkier Neandertals.

Moreover, at the back of the Oase individual's mouth, a welter of bumps tops its third molars. No fewer than 11 protrusions of various sizes jut up from each chewing surface. Corresponding H. sapiens molars are far smoother.

A third-molar tooth from another human ancestor, which was recently unearthed in the central Asian nation of Uzbekistan, also displays nearly a dozen bumps. Preliminary work suggests that this tooth belonged to a Neandertal that lived at least 40000 years ago. Michelle Glantz of Colorado State University in Ft. Collins described that find at the Paleoanthropology Society meeting.

Bump-covered third molars appear in some current species of mammals and may evolve as a by-product of genetic mechanisms that promote larger teeth, Trinkaus speculates.

Aside from the Oase specimen's teeth, the heft of its jaw and the shape of parts of its braincase also hark back to H. sapiens that lived 100000 years ago or more, he says.

The mix of old and new features on the Romanian fossils adds to suspicion that, on the evolutionary path toward today's people, interbreeding occurred among H. sapiens, Neandertals, and other ancient Homo species to varying extents in different regions, according to Trinkaus and a colleague in the Oase project, Joao Zilhao of Cidade University in Lisbon, Portugal.

That theory previously received a boost with the discovery in Portugal of a 24500-year-old skeleton that Trinkaus and Zilhao view as a prime example of interbreeding between modern H. sapiens and Neandertals. The child's bones display a potpourri of traits from both species, in the researchers' view.

The Oase fossils contain a different mosaic of characteristics, with more pieces from archaic H. sapiens than from Neandertals. If human evolution hinged on groups of various Stone Age species moving from place to place and interbreeding to some extent along the way, then unpredictable mixes of anatomical features would have been generated in any locality that attracted prehistoric crowds, Trinkaus contends.

He thus takes a skeptical view of traditional efforts to reconstruct neatly branching evolutionary trees of human ancestors by determining whether fossils contain predominantly primitive or advanced traits. Analyses of modern and ancient DNA are also incapable of unraveling the extent to which Neandertals and other Homo species interbred with H. sapiens, in Trinkaus' opinion.

That leaves a big evolutionary question mark punctuating the Romanian discoveries. "We don't fully understand what's going on with the combination of features on these bones," the St. Louis researcher says.

[Lucas]

Again Kostenki. Boring.

PDF http://www.booksite.ru/etnogr/1955/1955_1.pdf (since 43 page)

This is Kostenki skull in three views, not only frontal.
https://s30.postimg.org/peig3od75/kostenki14_skull.jpg

It's clearly visible thaht such alveolar proghantism (alveolar angle 70) isn't Neanderthal or Western Euro Cromagnon trait. Maybe Gtg think in another way. I don't care. Coon said [1962] that Neanderthals were proghnatic in middle facial region, not in jaw region.

https://s28.postimg.org/ljv4orlt9/possibly_Kostenki.jpg

Also it's fully concordant with Gerasimov reconstruction. Look at jaw and nose.

Debec (renowned Soviet anthropologist cited also in Coon'w works) who discovered Kostenki skull wrote that it was similar to Veddoid or Australoid, not African Negroid, nor Mongoloid.

Some measurements. So Kostenki XIV wasn't robust as some people say... Compare this tiny skull to CMs or Neanderthals. Now you understand why it was classified as non-Europen?

https://s30.postimg.org/sziczn1tt/kostenki14.jpg
https://s27.postimg.org/ckui4kzj7/kostface.jpg

[Rethel]

Now I finally get, why in the 10,000 BC film is such guy: :rolleyes:

http://www.aveleyman.com/Gallery/ActorsB/69147-27785.gif :)

[Lucas]

;)

[Harkonnen]

Get lost Polak monkey brains. The wise man cares not about Polakstan bullshit

[Grab the Gauge]

It's clearly visible thaht such alveolar proghantism (alveolar angle 70) isn't Neanderthal or Western Euro Cromagnon trait. Maybe Gtg think in another way. I don't care. Coon said [1962] that Neanderthals were proghnatic in middle facial region, not in jaw region.


You are wrong, as usual. Coon did not say that, and European Neanderthals exhibited monstrous alveolar prognaghism.

This photo demonstrates the outline of the La Chapelle aux Saints Neanderthal next to ths very orthognathic Skhul IV. As you can see, La Chapelle looks like a crocodile compared to Skhul IV.

http://i.imgur.com/AYaX0xU.jpg


From the Stone Age of Mount Carmel by Dorothy Garrod ^


http://i.imgur.com/YYO9dXd.jpg


Several other Upper Paleolithic skulls exhibit this animalistic prognathism. Predmost 3 compared to a modern Czech skull (white outline):


http://i.imgur.com/8iaMmU2.jpg?1





]Also it's fully concordant with Gerasimov reconstruction. Look at jaw and nose.

Debec (renowned Soviet anthropologist cited also in Coon'w works) who discovered Kostenki skull wrote that it was similar to Veddoid or Australoid, not African Negroid, nor Mongoloid.

Mikhail Gerassimov is a fraud and all of his reconstructions are worthless, but that still doesn't look like a Papuan or Australoid.


Some measurements. So Kostenki XIV wasn't robust as some people say... Compare this tiny skull to CMs or Neanderthals. Now you understand why it was classified as non-Europen?


He was born with congenital microcephaly. The other remains at Kostenki aren't as small.

♬ ♬ It's a new day, it's a new dawn...
Another Polack is in the wrong. ♬ ♬

[Lucas]

Coon did not say that, and European Neanderthals exhibited monstrous alveolar prognaghism.

You're lying intentionally, or you are just not well informed:)

Coon, Origin of races, 1962 :)
https://s9.postimg.org/gteetiinj/prg.jpg

About LaChapelle. He is indeed proghnatous (I know you like it) but what Coon said about this proto-Negro:) Shanidar is fully neanderthaloid and is orthognatous.
https://s27.postimg.org/6po383of7/chap.jpg


Mikhail Gerassimov is a fraud and all of his reconstructions are worthless, but that still doesn't look like a Papuan or Australoid.
You are nothing to real anthropoloogists and you are worthless:) And he looks like Veddoid.

[Lucas]

The other remains at Kostenki aren't as small.
Oh really?You probaly thought about this babyfaced Kostenki II. But browrigdes and nasal bones indicates he was adult. Interesting he isn't proghnatous as Kostenki XIV...

https://s10.postimg.org/dqkpljkyh/kostenki2.jpg


Kostenki XIV was an exception, yes. Buty he looks as he looks. Certainly not Caucasoid.

[Rethel]

64062

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64062&d=1486927801

Papuo-Amerindiano-Asiano-Veddo-Natufiano-WHGbrowno-ME-African

[Peterski]

64062

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64062&d=1486927801

Papuo-Amerindiano-Asiano-Veddo-Natufiano-WHGbrowno-ME-African

Rethel, nie spodziewałem się autosomalnego rejszyzmu po tobie... :p

[Grab the Gauge]

You're lying intentionally, or you are just not well informed:)

Coon, Origin of races, 1962 :)
https://s9.postimg.org/gteetiinj/prg.jpg

About LaChapelle. He is indeed proghnatous (I know you like it) but what Coon said about this proto-Negro:) Shanidar is fully neanderthaloid and is orthognatous.
https://s27.postimg.org/6po383of7/chap.jpg


You are nothing to real anthropoloogists and you are worthless:) And he looks like Veddoid.

Well, Coon was wrong in this regard. Pretty much everything written on that page is wrong. He is not incapable of being wrong. Also, Shanidar 1 is not considered fully Neanderthaloid. He is, like other late West Asian Neanderthals, intermediate between Neanderthal and Homo Sapiens. Shanidar 1 differs from the other Shanidar skulls in many regards.

[Grab the Gauge]

Oh really?You probaly thought about this babyfaced Kostenki II. But browrigdes and nasal bones indicates he was adult. Interesting he isn't proghnatous as Kostenki XIV...

https://s10.postimg.org/dqkpljkyh/kostenki2.jpg


Kostenki XIV was an exception, yes. Buty he looks as he looks. Certainly not Caucasoid.

Kostenki was Caucasoid and genetically is European (Northern European):


http://sciencenordic.com/scandinavians-are-earliest-europeans




An international team of scientists have sequenced the genome of a 37,000-year-old male skeleton found in Kostenki in Russia.

The study, which was recently published in Science, sheds entirely new light on who we are as Europeans.

"From a genetic point of view he's an European," says Professor Eske Willerslev, Director of the Centre for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen, who was involved in the new study, and adds:

“Actually, he is closer to Danes, Swedes, Finns and Russians than to Frenchmen, Spaniards and Germans”.

[Rethel]

Rethel, nie spodziewałem się autosomalnego rejszyzmu po tobie... :p

Ja uźywam autosomalu tam gdzie to jest potrzebne.
Każde dane są ważne, ale w ramach rozsądku.
Autosomal jest wazny przy ocenie wyglądu a
także w dedukcjach historycznych migracji gdy
debile badając szczątki zapomniały rutynowo
zbadać Y, ale nie zapomniały zbadać dzisiątek
mt - ergo jedynym ratunkim jest wówczas aDNA.

Do tego służy autosomal.

Z pewnością nie służy do określania pochodzenia
per se ani do określania przynależności trybalnej,
tudzież tożsamości idywidua, a już na pewno nie
do dewaluacji genealogii i historycznych korzeni,
a do tego tu w większości jest używane, często
będąc zupełnie olewanem w aspekcie właściwym
tj pierwszym o którym pisałem powyżej.

[Grab the Gauge]

https://s27.postimg.org/6po383of7/chap.jpg

Coon makes yet another error in the 1960s. Skhul IV is as low headed, if not lower-headed, than La Chapelle. Their auricular head height is the same. These skulls are additionally not accurate to scale.

https://ia600503.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?zip=/32/items/stoneageofmountc02join/stoneageofmountc02join_jp2.zip&file=stoneageofmountc02join_jp2/stoneageofmountc02join_0424.jp2&scale=2&rotate=0

http://i.imgur.com/T0xgrZJ.jpg?1

The Shanidar 1 Neanderthal had a higher cranial vault than Skhul IV. It is also certain now, that they aren't contemporaneous. Skhul IV is roughly 90,000 years old. La Chapelle is 55,000 years old.


I think it is safe to say that by the 1960s Coon was perhaps in the early stages of Alzheimer's and had bit off a bit more than he could chew, with his multi-regional evolution theory. Later on he would promote the existence of Bigfoot.

[Grab the Gauge]

Coon even noted in the 1930s that Skhul IV was low headed:



In the skull, Skhul man is definitely intermediate between the Neanderthal and sapiens groups, but much closer to the latter, so that its inclusion in the living species cannot be denied. The skulls of the three males are extremely large. In length, they equal Galley Hill, but far exceed it in breadth; the vault height of two specimens, #5 and #9, measured from the ear holes, is equal to that of Galley Hill, but the third, #4, is as low as with true Neanderthals, while the extreme breadth of this specimen acts as a compensatioi, permitting a greater capacity than with the other two. In vault form, then, two are mainly sapiens, while one appears, from the measuremenis, to be largely Neanderthaloid

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-II05.htm


So yeah, everything Coon wrote from the 1960s can be disregarded as the Alzheimer's ramblings of a senile old man.

[Grab the Gauge]

https://anthropology.net/2008/10/17/neandertal-broad-noses-due-to-lower-face-prognathism/




Some researchers, like Milford Wolpoff, have suggested that there’s a growth and development reason to why we don’t see narrow Neandertal noses. For example, the effects of large teeth and broad palates could have affected the reduction of the nasal aperture, and were most likely inherited traits from Pleistocene ancestors. In a new Journal of Human Evolution paper that Dienekes pointed out this week, researchers from the University of Iowa have investigated the relationships between nasal breadth, intercanine breadth, and facial prognathism. The paper is titled, “The paradox of a wide nasal aperture in cold-adapted Neandertals: a causal assessment.” They tested variants of the following hypothesis: Does the distance between the two upper canines correlated with nasal breadth in modern and archaic Homo?

]Their sample set of modern humans included 119 crania of Bantu people and 112 crania of Western Europeans. The sample of human ancestors included 11 from the early Upper Paleolithic, 9 from the late Upper Paleolithic all coming from Eurasia. They also included 15 samples from the late Stone Age in Africa, and 14 Pleistocene Homo. Like I mentioned earlier, they measured the distance between the two canines, known as the ICB. In anatomical terms that’s the distance between the lingual tubercles of the maxillary canines, or the pointy parts of your vampire teeth. The lower facial prognathism (BPL) is a measurement of basion to prosthion. Upper facial prognathism (BNL) is a measurement of basion to nasion. Of course some fossils didn’t have all the measurements so predictions were made by least squares regression.

The authors conclude that intercanine breadth cannot fully explain nasal breadth from their sample set, which goes against what anatomist Gustav Schwalbe said in the later 1800’s and what E.V. Glanville reconfirmed in the late ’60s. They also note that the development of the anterior palatine bone does not affect the growth trajectory of the breadth of the nose. While, they do suggest that nasal breadth is affected by the ICB, the lower facial prognathism impacts nasal breadth more than any other trait.

[Lucas]

It doesn't matter if some Neanderthals had proghnatism or not, because Kostenki wasn't Neanderthal, but human with little archaic admix


The Kostenki genome also contained, as with all people of Eurasia today, a small percentage of Neanderthal genes,

But it's huge proghnatism was one of the many factors of skull build which led Debec to clasiffy this fossil as non-european.
Everyting is in this PDF in my previous post, later I will try to translate it.

[Grab the Gauge]

It doesn't matter if some Neanderthals had proghnatism or not, because Kostenki wasn't Neanderthal, but human with little archaic admix

Wrong. It matters because Kostenski wasn't Veddoid, Australoid, Papuan or any such nonsense. He was a modern European. He lived at the same time Neanderthals did. He did not live anywhere near Veddoids or Australoids, who did not even exist. His Neanderthal admixture was large (equivalent of a great-great-great grandparent) and it was inherited at an earlier period of time, meaning he had larger mB portions of Neanderthal ancestry. All signs point to Neanderthals as the source of Kostenki's prognathism, as well as his broad nose, his protruding maxillary region, etc.




But it's huge proghnatism was one of the many factors of skull build which led Debec to clasiffy this fossil as non-european.
Everyting is in this PDF in my previous post, later I will try to translate it.


Debec is a fool like the rest of these Eastern European anthropologists who know nothing. Prognathism is as European as it gets, as are broad noses. Narrow noses and orthognathism came to Europe from east Africa. It is ancient east African crania that are actually orthognathic and have a narrow nasal index:


Kabwe:

http://www.ancient-origins.net/sites/default/files/Broken-Hill-Kabwe-skull-bullet-like-holes.jpg



Herto:


http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/herto.jpg


Ancient European skull:

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/sima-150120081634-conversion-gate02/95/main-fossils-from-the-sima-de-los-huesos-2-638.jpg?cb=1428319010



You will never be able to enter Nirvana until you realize that you are wrong, and that anthropology isn't suited for you.

No broad nose = not European.

[Lucas]

No broad nose = not European.


;)

Yes Grab, of course, you are right. You convinced me.

I have ideal example of 100% broad-nosed proto-European with proghnatism.


http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Human_Race/Negroid_albino_3.JPG

[Grab the Gauge]

Yamnaya skull:


https://www.sciencenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/article-main-image-large/public/main/articles/ss_skull_main.jpg?itok=ztnNmxSN

European old-blood:


http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe042.jpg

http://www.nordish.org/bilder/troe041.jpg


http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe064.jpg

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe065.jpg

Ivar the Boneless:

http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/images/various/reptn_warrior.jpg

Robert the Bruce:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/science/2016/12/08/ss-composite-image-2016-12-8-15-16-large_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWe Z_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.png

Brymbo Man:


http://www.wrexham.gov.uk/images/city/brymboman.jpg

No broad nose = not European

[Rethel]

Ivar the Boneless:

I saw him alive, in TV and he looked like that:

http://cdn.breathecast.com/data/images/full/35147/ivar-the-boneless-in-vikings.jpg


Robert the Bruce:

These one too I saw in TV:

https://cinemaedebate.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/angustiado-robert-the-bruce.jpg


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Peterski]

MDLP K16 Modern Oracle results of Oase-1:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Indian 32.15
2 SouthEastAsian 19.94
3 Neolithic 10.5
4 Subsaharian 9.48
5 Steppe 7.46
6 Australian 6.69
7 NorthAfrican 4.58
8 NorthEastEuropean 3.92
9 Oceanic 2.79
10 Arctic 1.55
11 Ancestor 0.94

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Onge 19.07
2 Great_Andamanese 20.61
3 Gadaba 24.04
4 Brahmin 24.09
5 Bhunjia 24.27
6 Munda 24.37
7 Mawasi 24.39
8 Kharia 24.62
9 Savara 24.65
10 Ho 24.68
11 Bonda 24.75
12 Dhurwa 25.28
13 Juang 25.7
14 Sahariya 25.98
15 Dhaka 26.68
16 Santhal 26.93
17 Gond 27.01
18 Asur 28.07
19 Satnami 28.51
20 Jew 28.73

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 67.9% Gadaba + 32.1% Spanish @ 11.6
2 67.3% Kharia + 32.7% Spanish @ 11.87
3 67.3% Ho + 32.7% Spanish @ 11.94
4 70.9% Gadaba + 29.1% French @ 11.94
5 69.7% Gadaba + 30.3% Spanish @ 11.94
6 67.6% Munda + 32.4% Spanish @ 12.01
7 70.3% Kharia + 29.7% French @ 12.06
8 68.3% Mawasi + 31.7% Spanish @ 12.09
9 69.1% Kharia + 30.9% Spanish @ 12.1
10 69.4% Mawasi + 30.6% Spanish @ 12.11
11 70.6% Mawasi + 29.4% French @ 12.12
12 70.3% Ho + 29.7% French @ 12.12
13 68% Gadaba + 32% Portuguese @ 12.15
14 69.1% Ho + 30.9% Spanish @ 12.16
15 67.7% Mawasi + 32.3% Spanish @ 12.19
16 69.4% Gadaba + 30.6% Spanish @ 12.21
17 69.5% Mawasi + 30.5% Spanish @ 12.25
18 67.9% Bhunjia + 32.1% Spanish @ 12.28
19 66.2% Juang + 33.8% Spanish @ 12.28
20 66.7% Dhurwa + 33.3% Spanish @ 12.28

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Dhurwa +50% Spanish @ 17.215548

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Ho +25% Siddi +25% Spanish @ 9.415039

[Rethel]

MDLP K16 Modern Oracle results of Oase-1:

Does it has some Y?

[Lek]

Bump

[Mortimer]

Either they got extinct, or maybe they went to India ???

maybe gypsies are longer in europe then previously thought?

[Lek]

maybe gypsies are longer in europe then previously thought?

Or maybe modern Europeans came from other places of the world

[Shah-Jehan]

Interesting, so pre-historic Europe was like super-mixed?

I'm making Aliyah to Romania btw, Bengalis are original Romanians.

[Źıün]

Interesting, so pre-historic Europe was like super-mixed?

I'm making Aliyah to Romania btw, Bengalis are original Romanians.

You are the original Britons actually. It is a known fact that Bengalis came from ancient England.

[Wrong]

Bump for Ancient Gipsis

[Joachim]

Oase-1 GEDmatch kit T732095
Native Australian kit Z905945

Gedrosia K6 calculator:

1) Oase1 Romania 41,640-37,580 ybp:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 28.53
2 East_Asian 18.24
3 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 16.79
4 Natufian 15.61
5 Sub_Saharan 11.06
6 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 9.77

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Bengali 22.31
2 Palliyar 22.38
3 Kharia 25.02
4 Paniyas 25.5
5 Punjabi_PJL 27.6
6 GujaratiD 28.6
7 GoyetQ116 29.96
8 GujaratiC 30.08
9 Burusho 31.11
10 GujaratiB 33.04
11 GujaratiA 33.24
12 Turkmen 33.25
13 Uzbek 34.35
14 Tajik 34.38
15 Punjabi 34.72
16 Pashtun_Afghan 35.02
17 Sindhi 36.71
18 Pathan 36.77
19 Kalash 37.56
20 Steppe_IA 37.87

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 66% Kharia + 34% Moroccan @ 6.97
2 66.5% Kharia + 33.5% Algerian @ 7.51
3 67.5% Kharia + 32.5% Saharawi @ 7.76
4 66.1% Paniyas + 33.9% Moroccan @ 9.44
5 66.5% Paniyas + 33.5% Algerian @ 9.44
6 67.5% Paniyas + 32.5% Saharawi @ 9.69
7 67.1% Kharia + 32.9% Libyan @ 9.76
8 69.8% Palliyar + 30.2% Moroccan @ 10.09
9 70.1% Palliyar + 29.9% Algerian @ 10.12
10 71% Palliyar + 29% Saharawi @ 10.15
11 67.6% Kharia + 32.4% Egyptian @ 10.64
12 66.2% Kharia + 33.8% Yemeni @ 10.8
13 59.1% Palliyar + 40.9% GoyetQ116 @ 11.69
14 75.8% Palliyar + 24.2% Somali @ 11.96
15 55.6% Kharia + 44.4% GoyetQ116 @ 12.08
16 68.7% Kharia + 31.3% BedouinA @ 12.09
17 69.6% Kharia + 30.4% Jew_Libyan @ 12.17
18 70.4% Kharia + 29.6% Spanish @ 12.18
19 67.5% Paniyas + 32.5% Libyan @ 12.19
20 73.1% Kharia + 26.9% Somali @ 12.39

2) Native Australian 1850-1900 AD:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 90.27
2 East_Asian 5.69
3 Sub_Saharan 3.24
4 Natufian 0.42
5 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 0.39

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Onge 8.46
2 Australian 11.34
3 Andamanese 11.34
4 Papuan 11.34
5 Paniyas 50
6 Palliyar 55.51
7 Kharia 59.47
8 Bengali 71.01
9 Punjabi_PJL 73.41
10 GujaratiD 75.01
11 GujaratiC 76.65
12 GoyetQ116 81.42
13 GujaratiB 82.13
14 GujaratiA 83.5
15 Punjabi 85.48
16 Burusho 86.43
17 Sindhi 86.64
18 Kusunda 89.35
19 Pathan 89.43
20 Kalash 90.08

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 90.9% Andamanese + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
2 90.9% Australian + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
3 90.9% Papuan + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
4 90.7% Andamanese + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
5 90.7% Australian + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
6 90.7% Papuan + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
7 91.3% Andamanese + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
8 91.3% Australian + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
9 91.3% Papuan + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
10 89.4% Andamanese + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
11 89.4% Australian + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
12 89.4% Papuan + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
13 90.3% Andamanese + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
14 90.3% Australian + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
15 90.3% Papuan + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
16 91.6% Andamanese + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
17 91.6% Australian + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
18 91.6% Papuan + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
19 90.5% Andamanese + 9.5% Cambodian @ 4.12
20 90.5% Australian + 9.5% Cambodian @ 4.12

MDLP K23b calculator:

1) Oase1 Romania 41,640-37,580 ybp:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_Indian 22.92
2 European_Early_Farmers 12.52
3 Austronesian 11.88
4 Subsaharian 9.73
5 South_Central_Asian 8.73
6 Melano_Polynesian 7.48
7 Australoid 6.62
8 Paleo_Siberian 4.32
9 African_Pygmy 4.22
10 Archaic_African 3.69
11 European_Hunters_Gatherers 3.42
12 North_African 2.15
13 Khoisan 1.39
14 Ancestral_Altaic 0.74
15 Archaic_Human 0.19

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Ayta_AE ( ) 28.13
2 Kensiu ( ) 34.58
3 Mamanawa ( ) 34.92
4 Nepalese ( ) 35.11
5 Tamil_Singapore ( ) 37.3
6 Ati ( ) 38.9
7 Jatt_Haryana ( ) 38.99
8 Hindi ( ) 39
9 Jatt_Muslim ( ) 39.17
10 Cochin_Jew ( ) 39.26
11 Tiwari ( ) 39.54
12 Marathi ( ) 39.9
13 Agta_AG ( ) 40.02
14 Uygur-Han ( ) 40.03
15 Jehai ( ) 40.05
16 Burusho ( ) 40.24
17 GujaratiA_GIH ( ) 40.32
18 Pahari ( ) 40.46
19 Aeta ( ) 40.88
20 Agta ( ) 41.17

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.2% Onge ( ) + 49.8% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 20.75
2 76% Ayta_AE ( ) + 24% Spanish_Pais_Vasco_IBS ( ) @ 20.81
3 78.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.6% Basque_French ( ) @ 20.94
4 78.2% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.8% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 20.99
5 66.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 33.7% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.09
6 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% French_South ( ) @ 21.2
7 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Cantabria_IBS ( ) @ 21.46
8 74.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.6% Spanish_Aragon_IBS ( ) @ 21.47
9 74.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.4% Spanish_Castilla_la_Mancha_IBS ( ) @ 21.63
10 57.2% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 42.8% Australian_ECCAC ( ) @ 21.67
11 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% Spanish_Valencia_IBS ( ) @ 21.77
12 54.5% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 45.5% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.78
13 73.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.3% Spanish_Castilla_y_Leon_IBS ( ) @ 21.79
14 72.5% Ayta_AE ( ) + 27.5% Spanish_Canarias_IBS ( ) @ 21.8
15 69.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.6% Orcadian ( ) @ 21.81
16 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Galicia_IBS ( ) @ 21.83
17 74.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.3% Spanish_Andalucia_IBS ( ) @ 21.84
18 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Extremadura_IBS ( ) @ 21.87
19 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Murcia_IBS ( ) @ 21.91
20 69.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.4% Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR ( ) @ 21.94

2) Native Australian 1850-1900 AD:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Australoid 51.38
2 Melano_Polynesian 39.18
3 South_Indian 4.35
4 South_East_Asian 2.58
5 Archaic_Human 1.86
6 Archaic_African 0.65

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Australian ( ) 4.6
2 Australian_ECCAC ( ) 25.13
3 Alorese ( ) 41.71
4 Lembata ( ) 50.3
5 Lamaholt ( ) 51.8
6 Manggarai ( ) 59.37
7 Ayta_AE ( ) 60.25
8 Naasioi ( ) 61.45
9 Mamanawa ( ) 65.33
10 Kambera ( ) 65.4
11 Papuan ( ) 65.96
12 Ati ( ) 67.43
13 Kosipe ( ) 67.58
14 Koinanbe ( ) 67.63
15 Agta_AG ( ) 70.14
16 Tongan ( ) 71.09
17 Aeta ( ) 73.45
18 Agta ( ) 73.54
19 Saami ( ) 74.27
20 Kensiu ( ) 74.82

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Paniya ( ) @ 3.65
2 96.7% Australian ( ) + 3.3% Onge ( ) @ 3.68
3 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Malayan ( ) @ 3.69
4 97.6% Australian ( ) + 2.4% Pulliyar ( ) @ 3.69
5 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Santhal ( ) @ 3.69
6 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Nihali ( ) @ 3.7
7 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Dhurwa ( ) @ 3.71
8 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Bhunjia ( ) @ 3.72
9 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% TN_Dalit ( ) @ 3.73
10 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Hallaki ( ) @ 3.73
11 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Kurumba ( ) @ 3.73
12 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Madiga ( ) @ 3.73
13 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Mala ( ) @ 3.74
14 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Chamar ( ) @ 3.75
15 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Hakkipikki ( ) @ 3.75
16 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Kharia ( ) @ 3.75
17 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Sakilli ( ) @ 3.76
18 96.2% Australian ( ) + 3.8% Papuan ( ) @ 3.78
19 96.3% Australian ( ) + 3.7% Koinanbe ( ) @ 3.78
20 96.3% Australian ( ) + 3.7% Kosipe ( ) @ 3.78

Piotraschke
Bump,the kit Is Replaced,anyone has the k13 runs or the kit of oase? I want to extract it's g25 coordinates

[aherne]

Based on reconstructions he looked somewhat similar to certain Moluccans: a mix of australoid and proto-mongoloid. Totally alien face here...

[Sacrificed Ram]

Interesting how these ancient europeans were substantially black africans.

Was it just retention of original OOA or did they acquire it later and after?

[Petalpusher]

Neanderthal admix also comes out SSA in calculators, but really what it means, is more genetically archaic/older, so it has to choose something. SSA and Oceanians nowadays are the closest to that. In the same even more extreme way, Chimps score full SSA as well. It needs to show 100% of something regardless if it's that close or not.

[ScandinavianCelt]

[QUOTE=Piotraschke;4221524]Oase-1 GEDmatch kit T732095
Native Australian kit Z905945

Who is Sarah Fezio? That kit # says her name.

[oszkar07]

Oase-1 GEDmatch kit T732095
Native Australian kit Z905945

Gedrosia K6 calculator:

1) Oase1 Romania 41,640-37,580 ybp:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 28.53
2 East_Asian 18.24
3 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 16.79
4 Natufian 15.61
5 Sub_Saharan 11.06
6 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 9.77

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Bengali 22.31
2 Palliyar 22.38
3 Kharia 25.02
4 Paniyas 25.5
5 Punjabi_PJL 27.6
6 GujaratiD 28.6
7 GoyetQ116 29.96
8 GujaratiC 30.08
9 Burusho 31.11
10 GujaratiB 33.04
11 GujaratiA 33.24
12 Turkmen 33.25
13 Uzbek 34.35
14 Tajik 34.38
15 Punjabi 34.72
16 Pashtun_Afghan 35.02
17 Sindhi 36.71
18 Pathan 36.77
19 Kalash 37.56
20 Steppe_IA 37.87

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 66% Kharia + 34% Moroccan @ 6.97
2 66.5% Kharia + 33.5% Algerian @ 7.51
3 67.5% Kharia + 32.5% Saharawi @ 7.76
4 66.1% Paniyas + 33.9% Moroccan @ 9.44
5 66.5% Paniyas + 33.5% Algerian @ 9.44
6 67.5% Paniyas + 32.5% Saharawi @ 9.69
7 67.1% Kharia + 32.9% Libyan @ 9.76
8 69.8% Palliyar + 30.2% Moroccan @ 10.09
9 70.1% Palliyar + 29.9% Algerian @ 10.12
10 71% Palliyar + 29% Saharawi @ 10.15
11 67.6% Kharia + 32.4% Egyptian @ 10.64
12 66.2% Kharia + 33.8% Yemeni @ 10.8
13 59.1% Palliyar + 40.9% GoyetQ116 @ 11.69
14 75.8% Palliyar + 24.2% Somali @ 11.96
15 55.6% Kharia + 44.4% GoyetQ116 @ 12.08
16 68.7% Kharia + 31.3% BedouinA @ 12.09
17 69.6% Kharia + 30.4% Jew_Libyan @ 12.17
18 70.4% Kharia + 29.6% Spanish @ 12.18
19 67.5% Paniyas + 32.5% Libyan @ 12.19
20 73.1% Kharia + 26.9% Somali @ 12.39

2) Native Australian 1850-1900 AD:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 90.27
2 East_Asian 5.69
3 Sub_Saharan 3.24
4 Natufian 0.42
5 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 0.39

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Onge 8.46
2 Australian 11.34
3 Andamanese 11.34
4 Papuan 11.34
5 Paniyas 50
6 Palliyar 55.51
7 Kharia 59.47
8 Bengali 71.01
9 Punjabi_PJL 73.41
10 GujaratiD 75.01
11 GujaratiC 76.65
12 GoyetQ116 81.42
13 GujaratiB 82.13
14 GujaratiA 83.5
15 Punjabi 85.48
16 Burusho 86.43
17 Sindhi 86.64
18 Kusunda 89.35
19 Pathan 89.43
20 Kalash 90.08

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 90.9% Andamanese + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
2 90.9% Australian + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
3 90.9% Papuan + 9.1% Altaian @ 3.77
4 90.7% Andamanese + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
5 90.7% Australian + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
6 90.7% Papuan + 9.3% Kyrgyz @ 3.78
7 91.3% Andamanese + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
8 91.3% Australian + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
9 91.3% Papuan + 8.7% Kalmyk @ 3.84
10 89.4% Andamanese + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
11 89.4% Australian + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
12 89.4% Papuan + 10.6% Kusunda @ 3.97
13 90.3% Andamanese + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
14 90.3% Australian + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
15 90.3% Papuan + 9.7% Sherpa @ 4.02
16 91.6% Andamanese + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
17 91.6% Australian + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
18 91.6% Papuan + 8.4% Eskimo @ 4.12
19 90.5% Andamanese + 9.5% Cambodian @ 4.12
20 90.5% Australian + 9.5% Cambodian @ 4.12

MDLP K23b calculator:

1) Oase1 Romania 41,640-37,580 ybp:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_Indian 22.92
2 European_Early_Farmers 12.52
3 Austronesian 11.88
4 Subsaharian 9.73
5 South_Central_Asian 8.73
6 Melano_Polynesian 7.48
7 Australoid 6.62
8 Paleo_Siberian 4.32
9 African_Pygmy 4.22
10 Archaic_African 3.69
11 European_Hunters_Gatherers 3.42
12 North_African 2.15
13 Khoisan 1.39
14 Ancestral_Altaic 0.74
15 Archaic_Human 0.19

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Ayta_AE ( ) 28.13
2 Kensiu ( ) 34.58
3 Mamanawa ( ) 34.92
4 Nepalese ( ) 35.11
5 Tamil_Singapore ( ) 37.3
6 Ati ( ) 38.9
7 Jatt_Haryana ( ) 38.99
8 Hindi ( ) 39
9 Jatt_Muslim ( ) 39.17
10 Cochin_Jew ( ) 39.26
11 Tiwari ( ) 39.54
12 Marathi ( ) 39.9
13 Agta_AG ( ) 40.02
14 Uygur-Han ( ) 40.03
15 Jehai ( ) 40.05
16 Burusho ( ) 40.24
17 GujaratiA_GIH ( ) 40.32
18 Pahari ( ) 40.46
19 Aeta ( ) 40.88
20 Agta ( ) 41.17

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.2% Onge ( ) + 49.8% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 20.75
2 76% Ayta_AE ( ) + 24% Spanish_Pais_Vasco_IBS ( ) @ 20.81
3 78.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.6% Basque_French ( ) @ 20.94
4 78.2% Ayta_AE ( ) + 21.8% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 20.99
5 66.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 33.7% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.09
6 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% French_South ( ) @ 21.2
7 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Cantabria_IBS ( ) @ 21.46
8 74.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.6% Spanish_Aragon_IBS ( ) @ 21.47
9 74.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.4% Spanish_Castilla_la_Mancha_IBS ( ) @ 21.63
10 57.2% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 42.8% Australian_ECCAC ( ) @ 21.67
11 74.8% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.2% Spanish_Valencia_IBS ( ) @ 21.77
12 54.5% Tamil_Singapore ( ) + 45.5% Puerto_Rican ( ) @ 21.78
13 73.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.3% Spanish_Castilla_y_Leon_IBS ( ) @ 21.79
14 72.5% Ayta_AE ( ) + 27.5% Spanish_Canarias_IBS ( ) @ 21.8
15 69.4% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.6% Orcadian ( ) @ 21.81
16 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Galicia_IBS ( ) @ 21.83
17 74.7% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.3% Spanish_Andalucia_IBS ( ) @ 21.84
18 73.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 26.4% Spanish_Extremadura_IBS ( ) @ 21.87
19 74.3% Ayta_AE ( ) + 25.7% Spanish_Murcia_IBS ( ) @ 21.91
20 69.6% Ayta_AE ( ) + 30.4% Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR ( ) @ 21.94

2) Native Australian 1850-1900 AD:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Australoid 51.38
2 Melano_Polynesian 39.18
3 South_Indian 4.35
4 South_East_Asian 2.58
5 Archaic_Human 1.86
6 Archaic_African 0.65

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Australian ( ) 4.6
2 Australian_ECCAC ( ) 25.13
3 Alorese ( ) 41.71
4 Lembata ( ) 50.3
5 Lamaholt ( ) 51.8
6 Manggarai ( ) 59.37
7 Ayta_AE ( ) 60.25
8 Naasioi ( ) 61.45
9 Mamanawa ( ) 65.33
10 Kambera ( ) 65.4
11 Papuan ( ) 65.96
12 Ati ( ) 67.43
13 Kosipe ( ) 67.58
14 Koinanbe ( ) 67.63
15 Agta_AG ( ) 70.14
16 Tongan ( ) 71.09
17 Aeta ( ) 73.45
18 Agta ( ) 73.54
19 Saami ( ) 74.27
20 Kensiu ( ) 74.82

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Paniya ( ) @ 3.65
2 96.7% Australian ( ) + 3.3% Onge ( ) @ 3.68
3 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Malayan ( ) @ 3.69
4 97.6% Australian ( ) + 2.4% Pulliyar ( ) @ 3.69
5 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Santhal ( ) @ 3.69
6 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Nihali ( ) @ 3.7
7 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Dhurwa ( ) @ 3.71
8 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Bhunjia ( ) @ 3.72
9 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% TN_Dalit ( ) @ 3.73
10 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Hallaki ( ) @ 3.73
11 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Kurumba ( ) @ 3.73
12 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Madiga ( ) @ 3.73
13 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Mala ( ) @ 3.74
14 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Chamar ( ) @ 3.75
15 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Hakkipikki ( ) @ 3.75
16 97.4% Australian ( ) + 2.6% Kharia ( ) @ 3.75
17 97.5% Australian ( ) + 2.5% Sakilli ( ) @ 3.76
18 96.2% Australian ( ) + 3.8% Papuan ( ) @ 3.78
19 96.3% Australian ( ) + 3.7% Koinanbe ( ) @ 3.78
20 96.3% Australian ( ) + 3.7% Kosipe ( ) @ 3.78

Does this mean Gypsies are from Romania originally.

[Coastal Elite]

Does this mean Gypsies are from Romania originally.

Romania is also the center for Eastern wisdom. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism started in Romania land and went east back to India.

[Mortimer]

Romania is also the center for Eastern wisdom. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism started in Romania land and went east back to India.

That result is not much different then a gypsy, even if a gypsy is a more modern phenomenon something similar existed 40.000 years back then, before whites. So a Gypsy can be a European, i mean if those genetics can be ancient european why not gypsy genetics? Usually people exclude gypsies because of their genetics. Also in another thread someone said Sunghir was gypsy like too, and Sunghir is the proto-caucasian cromagnid or something?

[Tauromachos]

Based on reconstructions he looked somewhat similar to certain Moluccans: a mix of australoid and proto-mongoloid. Totally alien face here...

Ancient Malakas ?

[Mortimer]

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 28.53
2 East_Asian 18.24
3 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 16.79
4 Natufian 15.61
5 Sub_Saharan 11.06
6 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 9.77

Actually that is not similar to a Gypsy, too much east asian, too much SSA, and all that... a gypsy would be mostly farmer, with some whg etc. and indo-european, eventhough both have a similar amount of south indian, but the other components do not fit, that proto-romanian was much less white then a gypsy even....

[Sacrificed Ram]

Neanderthal admix also comes out SSA in calculators, but really what it means, is more genetically archaic/older, so it has to choose something. SSA and Oceanians nowadays are the closest to that. In the same even more extreme way, Chimps score full SSA as well. It needs to show 100% of something regardless if it's that close or not.

Then they are using SSA as a basket for anything out of database. ERROR.

[Petalpusher]

Then they are using SSA as a basket for anything out of database. ERROR.

Not willingly, African SSA is more archaic, makes all very old samples or Neanderthal look African in calculators and Oase had a fairly recent Neanderthal ancestor, estimated at up to 10% Neanderthal (that's possibly almost 1/8). Africans also have ancestry from a ghost archaic not yet discovered. On top of all that, Eurasians acquired new genotype progressively from genuine selection/evolution, the infamous 10 000 years explosion in the pleistocene. The results we see is likely a combination of both.

[Sacrificed Ram]

Not willingly, African SSA is more archaic, makes all very old samples or Neanderthal look African in calculators and Oase had a fairly recent Neanderthal ancestor, estimated at up to 10% Neanderthal (that's possibly almost 1/8). Africans also have ancestry from a ghost archaic not yet discovered. On top of all that, Eurasians acquired new genotype progressively from genuine selection/evolution, the infamous 10 000 years explosion in the pleistocene. The results we see is likely a combination of both.

Even if I put the DNA of an orange it will score 100% SSA, due the absence of data, the algorithmic will find the most basal data in databank and SSA is the most basal. Neanderthal has noting special content to relate them with SSA, just it is a fail of chip/database used.

But an interesting result is if Nigeria/Cameroon area shows the most basal data, it tend to be the source of humans, even because it makes sense because in this area is also founding the most basal Y-DNA like A0 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_A-L1085) and even A00 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_A_(Y-DNA)#A00).

[Petalpusher]

Even if I put the DNA of an orange it will score 100% SSA, due the absence of data, the algorithmic will find the most basal data in databank and SSA is the most basal. Neanderthal has noting special content to relate them with SSA, just it is a fail of chip/database used.

But an interesting result is if Nigeria/Cameroon area shows the most basal data, it tend to be the source of humans, even because it makes sense because in this area is also founding the most basal Y-DNA like A0 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_A-L1085) and even A00 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_A_(Y-DNA)#A00).

Certainly an orange would score SSA, that orange still share 50% or so of dna with us. Before hominids there were chimps, mamal primates, etc.. and if you go back enough through all living branches... plants/fruits. So even if Africans are ever so slightly closer than all other humans to that, it will show up as SSA. Neanderthals are the oldest things we have therefore they score full SSA, despite the fact Africans are the least Neanderthal admixed.

[Sacrificed Ram]

Certainly an orange would score SSA, that orange still share 50% or so of dna with us. Before hominids there were chimps, mamal primates, etc.. and if you go back enough through all living branches... plants/fruits. So even if Africans are ever so slightly closer than all other humans to that, it will show up as SSA. Neanderthals are the oldest things we have therefore they score full SSA, despite the fact Africans are the least Neanderthal admixed.

It just shows algorithmic must be improved, because it isn't capable to identify a so divergent comparison as SSA is from Neanderthal.