SUNGIR-man was C1.

[Rethel]

I think also, that the most interesting results would
be of the man from Sungir and some similar remains.

And we have the answer.
C1 as on the south and west...


http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/10/upper-paleolithic-genomes-from-sunghir.html

Upper Paleolithic genomes from Sunghir, Russia (Sikora et al. 2017)

Over at Science at this LINK. Not surprisingly, these four Sunghir individuals are very similar to another Upper Paleolithic Eastern European, Kostenki14, both in terms of genome-wide genetic structure and uniparental markers (Y-haplogroup C1a2, mtDNA-haplogroups U2 and U8c). If you can't access the paper, the supplementary materials are freely available here, and there's a press release here.

Abstract: Present-day hunter-gatherers (HGs) live in multilevel social groups essential to sustain a population structure characterized by limited levels of within-band relatedness and inbreeding. When these wider social networks evolved among HGs is unknown. Here, we investigate whether the contemporary HG strategy was already present in the Upper Paleolithic (UP), using complete genome sequences from Sunghir, a site dated to ~34 thousand years BP (kya) [total idiocy, but what can I do?] containing multiple anatomically modern human (AMH) individuals. We demonstrate that individuals at Sunghir derive from a population of small effective size, with limited kinship and levels of inbreeding similar to HG populations. Our findings suggest that UP social organization was similar to that of living HGs, with limited relatedness within residential groups embedded in a larger mating network.


M. Sikora et al., Ancient genomes show social and reproductive behavior of early Upper Paleolithic foragers, Science 10.1126/science.aao1807 (2017).

[Rethel]

From the paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2017/10/04/science.aao1807.DC1/aao1807_Sikora_SM.pdf

The age of it is obviously too high and fictional, but for the record, I quote as it is written:



All Sunghir individuals clustered with Haplogroup C1a2 (Table S12-S15), which
is rare in contemporary Europeans. Related haplogroups were also previously reported
for other early Eurasian HGs, including Kostenki 14 (8, 11) and a 7,000 year old
Mesolithic HG from La Braña, Spain (126).

Sunghir 3 clusters with an individual from Nepal (nep-0172; 96/100 replicates)
carrying the C1a2 - defining V20 mutation, albeit with an early divergence close
to the split with haplogroup C1a1

[Rethel]

Sungir girl - quite negroish...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/%D0%AE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B0_%D0%B8%D0%B7_%D0%BF %D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D0%BE% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D 0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0 %B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B 9_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%A 1%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%80%D1%8C..jpg/220px-%D0%AE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B0_%D0%B8%D0%B7_%D0%BF %D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D0%BE% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D 0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0 %B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B 9_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%A 1%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%80%D1%8C..jpg

[Mikula]

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a7/5b/2e/a75b2e9f583bb95fd4f3ec921a36efc6--stone-age-prehistory.jpg
http://www.anthropark.wz.cz/gravet43.jpg
http://www.anthropark.wz.cz/gravet26.jpg
More pics here (http://www.anthropark.wz.cz/gravetta.htm)

[Rethel]

What will do now all I-men :laugh:

C1 in Zalesie, on Ukraine, in Belgium, in Czechia,
on Hungary, in Spain... almost everywhere... BEFORE I2.

[Not a Cop]

Sungir guy - quite negroish...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/%D0%AE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B0_%D0%B8%D0%B7_%D0%BF %D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D0%BE% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D 0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0 %B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B 9_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%A 1%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%80%D1%8C..jpg/220px-%D0%AE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B0_%D0%B8%D0%B7_%D0%BF %D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D0%BE% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D 0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0 %B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B 9_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%A 1%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%80%D1%8C..jpg

That's a Sungir' girl IIRC, here is the man:

http://antropogenez.ru/uploads/tx_antropedia/%D0%A1%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%80%D1%8C_.jpg
https://r.mtdata.ru/r480x-/u24/photoF9B9/20153064587-0/original.jpeg
http://mtdata.ru/u24/photoCDE5/20822283134-0/huge.jpeg

[cosmoo]

The retarded MUH SUNGIR WAS R1 BRUNN theory of GtG goes down the drain.

As for its spread, Rethel, I already explicated how both C1a and C1b are found all over the globe, while I-M170 is chiefly associated with Europe, and was found during whole UP period, so it is pretty clear that C represents intrusive factor.

As for the first photo- it is not a Sungir man, but a child (retarded Soviet-era reconstruction). And there is nothing negroid about it or Sungir man's skull:

http://antropogenez.ru/uploads/tx_antropedia/Sungir-1.jpg

[Rethel]

That's a Sungir' girl IIRC,

I was convinced it was girl, I even wrote as such, but
somewhere I saw written that it is not girl when I was
searching for the picture, so I changed. Thank you for
correction. I repaired already the discribing.

[Rethel]

The retarded MUH SUNGIR WAS R1 BRUNN theory of GtG goes down the drain.

Who was saying it?


As for its spread, Rethel, I already explicated how both C1a and C1b are found all over the globe, while I-M170 is chiefly associated with Europe, and was found during whole UP period, so it is pretty clear that C represents intrusive factor.

I would not be so sure...
especially, that C1 is just founded where is lack
of I2 and where it is not known what result will be.


As for the first photo- it is not a Sungir man, but a child (retarded Soviet-era reconstruction). And there is nothing negroid about it or Sungir man's skull:

So, who they are racially according to you?

[cosmoo]

Who was saying it?
Grab the Gauge.


I would not be so sure...
especially, that C1 is just founded where is lack
of I2 and where it is not known what result will be.
Krems WA3 sample from Austria was I-M170, Paglicci 133 from Italy also, and they are dated to 31k and 34k years respectively, so I do not see how C should be older and more autochtonous (esp. considering its extreme spread).
As for I2, I am not sure it was formed yet back in then, but I-M170 as a whole was surely there.


So, who they are racially according to you?
Caucasoid (of UP Euro spectrum) with a lot of archaic Neanderthal traits.

[Proto-Shaman]

I always knew it: C is europoid and R is mongoloid :naughty: ancient Umvolkung :jackoff:

[Rethel]

68299

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=68299&d=1507245105

[Rethel]

Caucasoid (of UP Euro spectrum) with a lot of archaic Neanderthal traits.

But it has to be coloured/pigmented as Kostienki was,
and as later OEs (coincidently C1) from western Europe.

[Sacrificed Ram]

All Sunghir individuals clustered with Haplogroup C1a2 (Table S12-S15), which
is rare in contemporary Europeans.




What? Rare? Then did they leave descendents?

[Grab the Gauge]

The retarded MUH SUNGIR WAS R1 BRUNN theory of GtG goes down the drain.

As for its spread, Rethel, I already explicated how both C1a and C1b are found all over the globe, while I-M170 is chiefly associated with Europe, and was found during whole UP period, so it is pretty clear that C represents intrusive factor.

As for the first photo- it is not a Sungir man, but a child (retarded Soviet-era reconstruction). And there is nothing negroid about it or Sungir man's skull:

http://antropogenez.ru/uploads/tx_antropedia/Sungir-1.jpg

However, so does your (more retarded) theory that Brunn is I1. The point is that Brunn is unrelated to UP Euro skulls. And it still does nothing to disprove the fact that Indo-Europeans are the source for hypermorphic Europoid (i.e. Brunn) skulls.

The Sunghir skull does not have any more Neanderthal features than any other skull; it is very different from a Neanderthal.


Don't think for one second I won't put your micro-baby skull in the trash compactor and press the "crush" button. You belligerent whore.

[Grab the Gauge]

The retarded MUH SUNGIR WAS R1 BRUNN theory of GtG goes down the drain.

As for its spread, Rethel, I already explicated how both C1a and C1b are found all over the globe, while I-M170 is chiefly associated with Europe, and was found during whole UP period, so it is pretty clear that C represents intrusive factor.

As for the first photo- it is not a Sungir man, but a child (retarded Soviet-era reconstruction). And there is nothing negroid about it or Sungir man's skull:

http://antropogenez.ru/uploads/tx_antropedia/Sungir-1.jpg

However, so does your (more retarded) theory that Brunn is I1. The point is that Brunn is unrelated to UP Euro skulls. And it still does nothing to disprove the fact that Indo-Europeans are the source for hypermorphic Europoid (i.e. Brunn) skulls.

The Sunghir skull does not have any more Neanderthal features than any other skull; it is very different from a Neanderthal.


Don't think for one second I won't put your mini-micro baby skull in the trash compactor and press the "crush" button. You malignant Negroid pest.

[cosmoo]

However, so does your (more retarded) theory that Brunn is I1. The point is that Brunn is unrelated to UP Euro skulls. And it still does nothing to disprove the fact that Indo-Europeans are the source for hypermorphic Europoid (i.e. Brunn) skulls.

The Sunghir skull does not have any more Neanderthal features than any other skull; it is very different from a Neanderthal.


Don't think for one second I won't put your micro-baby skull in the trash compactor and press the "crush" button. You belligerent whore.
I knew you would come back and moan like a whore in heat.
I never claimed Brunns were exclusively I1, but that they were of UP Euro origin (that includes all of I-M170 and CM-specific origin), not of Indoshit one.
Sunghir's features like increased upper facial height, browridge, nasal and orbital form are indeed deviation towards more archaic Neanderthal form.

You got buttblasted both now and when you realized Yamnayans didn't contribute to western European ancestry. Now go and cry yourself to sleep.

[Grab the Gauge]

Sunghir's features like increased upper facial height, browridge, nasal and orbital form are indeed deviation towards more archaic Neanderthal form.

No, it's a deviation toward an archaic homo sapiens form. None of these features in Sunghir are anything like a Neanderthal, but identical to archaic African skull morphology.

Sunghir also no more Neanderthal ancestry than any Upper Paleolithic European skull. It is obviously nothing like a Neanderthal, as are all Cro Magnon skulls.




You got buttblasted both now and when you realized Yamnayans didn't contribute to western European ancestry. Now go and cry yourself to sleep.

Yamnayans did contribute to Western European ancestry -- that is a fact. Other Indo Europeans also contributed to Western European ancestry.


Your inferiority feelings are showing, my rat-tailed nigger boy.

[Grab the Gauge]

An actual Neanderthal skull, in case anyone was about to fall for Cosmoo's nigger howling:


https://www.tripdifferent.com/wp-content/uploads/virtualtour/grotta-guattari/Cranio_neanderthal_1.jpg

(Left, Neanderthal. Far right, Cro Magnon)

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aurelien_Mounier/publication/226923935/figure/fig10/AS:302339664695300@1449094801214/Fig-A5-Projection-de-la-partie-inferieure-du-processus-temporal-de-l-'-os-zygomatique.png

[cosmoo]

Yamnayans did contribute to Western European ancestry -- that is a fact. Other Indo Europeans also contributed to Western European ancestry.


Your inferiority feelings are showing, my rat-tailed nigger boy.
Yamnayans carried R1b branches (L23>Z2103) specific for Albanians, Greeks and Anatolians.
Cry me a river.

[cosmoo]

An actual Neanderthal skull, in case anyone was about to fall for Cosmoo's nigger howling:


https://www.tripdifferent.com/wp-content/uploads/virtualtour/grotta-guattari/Cranio_neanderthal_1.jpg

That is the Mount Circeo 1, which had considerably smaller cranial capacity than other Neanderthals, and on top of that, he was not associated with Levalloiso-Mousterian lithic industry, but with Quina-Mousterian one (which produced tools shittier than ones African hominids produced over a million years ago).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10646215

[Grab the Gauge]

Yamnayans carried R1b branches (L23>Z2103) specific for Albanians, Greeks and Anatolians.
Cry me a river.

Y-DNA isn't the only form of ancestry, and Yamnayans aren't the only Indo Europeans to contribute to Western Europe.

[Grab the Gauge]

That is the Mount Circeo 1, which had considerably smaller cranial capacity than other Neanderthals, and on top of that, he was not associated with Levalloiso-Mousterian lithic industry, but with Quina-Mousterian one (which produced tools shittier than ones African hominids produced over a million years ago).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10646215

How about this one, Cosmoo? This one had a big brain and was associated with a Levalloiso-Mousterian ancestry. Do you think he looks any more like Sungir, or will you act like an adult and admit that you are a black nigger African, and not a Neanderthal?


https://cdn3.volusion.com/nqpvm.detql/v/vspfiles/photos/VP751-1-3.jpg?1474372745

[cosmoo]

Y-DNA isn't the only form of ancestry, and Yamnayans aren't the only Indo Europeans to contribute to Western Europe.
No, they didn't contribute paternally AT ALL to western Europe, which means they never settled there, as migrations were usually male-mitigated.

How about this one, Cosmoo? This one had a big brain and was associated with a Levalloiso-Mousterian ancestry. Do you think he looks any more like Sungir, or will you act like an adult and admit that you are a black nigger African, and not a Neanderthal?


[Img]https://cdn3.volusion.com/nqpvm.detql/v/vspfiles/photos/VP751-1-3.jpg?1474372745[/img
I never said that Sunghir is Neanderthal, but that he has some traits which separate him from rest of UP Euro spectrum and go in Neanderthal direction (low head form, broader nasal form, oval, bigger orbits, stronger browridges, massive upper facial height).
But lets not sidetrack- this isn't point of our discussion. The point is that Sunghir man and skulls from Yamnaya culture were the pillars of your theory of "IE Brunns", and they both fell down after this testing, as well after I pointed out that Yamnayans only contributed to ancestry of SE Europeans and Anatolians. Your male ancestors were birdjawed Cordeds.

Cry more.

And for the end (unrelated to original discussion, but to your sidetracking), comparison of Saint Cessaire Neanderthal and Predmost 3 Cro-Magnon:
http://i42.tinypic.com/sgo9c4.jpg

[Rethel]

Yamnayans did contribute to Western European ancestry -- that is a fact. Other Indo Europeans also contributed to Western European ancestry.

Here Grab is right.


Yamnayans carried R1b branches (L23>Z2103) specific for Albanians, Greeks and Anatolians.
Cry me a river.

Couple of Yamanayans local chiefs. There were much more people.
And Yamanayans were not the only IEs existing at the time.

[Grab the Gauge]

No, they didn't contribute paternally AT ALL to western Europe, which means they never settled there, as migrations were usually male-mitigated.


Rofl, more baseless assumptions based on the meager amount of evidence that is actually available.


I never said that Sunghir is Neanderthal, but that he has some traits which separate him from rest of UP Euro spectrum and go in Neanderthal direction (low head form, broader nasal form, oval, bigger orbits, stronger browridges, massive upper facial height).

Except this doesn't go anywhere in a Neanderthal direction, but rests comfortably within archaic African direction. The morphological formation of all these features is non-Neanderthal; including the browridge.


Along with the fact that Sunghir man had no more Neanderthal DNA than any Upper Paleolithic European, and in fact had no more than the, chronologically much more recent, Afontova Gora 2 specimen.


But lets not sidetrack- this isn't point of our discussion. The point is that Sunghir man and skulls from Yamnaya culture were the pillars of your theory of "IE Brunns", and they both fell down after this testing, as well after I pointed out that Yamnayans only contributed to ancestry of SE Europeans and Anatolians. Your male ancestors were birdjawed Cordeds.

All wrong.



And for the end (unrelated to original discussion, but to your sidetracking), comparison of Saint Cessaire Neanderthal and Predmost 3 Cro-Magnon:


They are completely different.

[cosmoo]

Rofl, more baseless assumptions based on the meager amount of evidence that is actually available.
You are throwing "there is insufficient data" mantra at me now? Damn, I thought you were better at losing than this.
And no, we have dozens of Yamnayan samples tested from geographically distant locations, and they either bear L23>Z2103 branch typical for southeastern Europe, or clades ancestral to it.
Not even going to mention you failed to provide any ample anthropological proof as well, relying on 2 skulls (Sunghir and Yamnayan one) which neither fit your imaginary type nor did they contribute to western ancestry.

Moreover, you are chimping out on Serbian section now as well in attempt to diverge from main point and heal your ever-growing ass sore.


All wrong.





They are completely different.
Offering no counterargument while simultaneously denying what even an untrained eye can see. Good job.

[Grab the Gauge]

You are throwing "there is insufficient data" mantra at me now? Damn, I thought you were better at losing than this.
And no, we have dozens of Yamnayan samples tested from geographically distant locations, and they either bear L23>Z2103 branch typical for southeastern Europe, or clades ancestral to it.
Not even going to mention you failed to provide any ample anthropological proof as well, relying on 2 skulls (Sunghir and Yamnayan one) which neither fit your imaginary type nor did they contribute to western ancestry.

Again, that doesn't matter. Yamnayans contributed heavily to Wsstern European DNA and we can see that without the Y-DNA profiles. Thwre were definitely Yamnayans who belonged to other clades of R1b. Yamnayans aren't the only Indo Europeans who contributed, either.



Offering no counterargument while simultaneously denying what even an untrained eye can see. Good job.

Actually I already showed you the data months ago, Predmost 3 doesn't cluster with Neanderthal skulls. No one classifies it as a Neanderthal, and no one classifies Saint Cessaire as a modern human, a Cro Magnoid, or anything except a classical Neanderthal. There are visual differences between those skulls that you can't see because you are a SouthSlav ingrate with a sub 90 IQ. The gonial angle of Predmost 3 is unlike Saint Cesaire or any Neanderthal, for that matter.

[cosmoo]

Again, that doesn't matter. Yamnayans contributed heavily to Wsstern European DNA and we can see that without the Y-DNA profiles. Thwre were definitely Yamnayans who belonged to other clades of R1b. Yamnayans aren't the only Indo Europeans who contributed, either.




Actually I already showed you the data months ago, Predmost 3 doesn't cluster with Neanderthal skulls. No one classifies it as a Neanderthal, and no one classifies Saint Cessaire as a modern human, a Cro Magnoid, or anything except a classical Neanderthal. There are visual differences between those skulls that you can't see because you are a SouthSlav ingrate with a sub 90 IQ. The gonial angle of Predmost 3 is unlike Saint Cesaire or any Neanderthal, for that matter.

And yet you failed to provide data which would support you regarding those other cultures, constantly sperging about Sungir and Yamnaya.

"Gonial angle"? Is that all you have to bring to the table? I never said Predmost 3 is Neanderthal for that matter, just that some of his traits were influenced so.

Be gone now. Unless you provide photo of yourself or data which would support Brunn type among northern IE (Corded Ware complex), I shall respond no further to your subhuman drooling.

[Grab the Gauge]

And yet you failed to provide data which would support you regarding those other cultures, constantly sperging about Sungir and Yamnaya.

"Gonial angle"? Is that all you have to bring to the table? I never said Predmost 3 is Neanderthal for that matter, just that some of his traits were influenced so.

Be gone now. Unless you provide photo of yourself or data which would support Brunn type among northern IE (Corded Ware complex), I shall respond no further to your subhuman drooling.

Rofl, can't wait to read your response to this...

Predmost 3 doesn't have a single Neanderthal feature. His brow ridge is African. His modestly long face matches Africans. Eye orbits African, Kabwe 1 style. He doesn't trend in a Neanderthal direction, but an archaic modern human direction. His skull is also narrow, gracile, not robust and en bombe.

And even if he had Neanderthal features, he is guaranteed not to be a Neanderthal. Oase 1 actually has a couple of Neanderthal features, but is only 8% Neanderthal.

P.s. your ears attest to your subhumanity.

[Rethel]

Sunghir animated reconstruction.

What a propaganda... they really cannot say about the man,
but have to indoctrinate repeating nonsense like a mantra...

30,000 years ago... :picard2:
from Africa... :picard2:
and pale... :picard2:

Lie after lie...

Video: https://vimeo.com/236904436

Article: http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/fall-2017/article/30-000-year-old-sungir-homo-sapiens-visualized-for-the-first-time-in-3-d-virtual-reality

p.s. and why english speaker cannot pronounce normaly
just sungir, but have to say sun-gir. It is not chinese... :picard1: