Why do you overestimate the incidence of autosomal genetic influences recent in Italy?

[manu15151513]

Why do you overestimate the incidence of autosomal genetic influences that follow the pre-Roman stratification in Italy?

The studies suggest that the Italians derive essentially from the men who arrived in Europe over forty thousand years ago, known as Western European Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, from the first Neolithic peasants who mingled with them during their journey, from the Neolithic farmers who they have followed more coastal roads, mixing very little with the Western European Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, by the people who arrived in Italy as Indo-Europeans, deriving from nomadic shepherds who are the result of the crossing of hunter-gatherers of Caucasian origin and of Eastern European Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, who were essentially related to the ancient northern Eurasians. These Indo-Europeans, in the Italian case, take the name of Celts, Italic and Italiots fundamentally. The Longobards, the Normans, the Phoenicians, Byzantines, the Franks and the peoples coming from the various parts of the Roman Empire would appear to have less influence. Why here overestimate the most recent genetic influences so much? Southern Italians would seem to have inherited a very small number of alleles from the Phoenicians and Saracens.
Northern Italians were more affected by the more recent autosomal genetic influences, the southerners are very archaic.

[Tauromachos]

These Indo-Europeans, in the Italian case, take the name of Celts, Italic and Italiots fundamentally.

What about the Sikeliots?

I think you forgot them

[Licantropo]

North Italians may have been affected a little by German migrations in the midlle age but it is still negligible too.
For the most part they are a pre roman people.

[Tauromachos]

North Italians may have been affected very little by German migrations in the midlle age but it is negligible too.

Licantropo

You call yourself Licantropo but the user manu looks to me as if he realy is one

[Sikeliot]

Northern Italians were more affected by the more recent autosomal genetic influences, the southerners are very archaic.

False. North Italians are very similar to Bell Beaker populations in North Italy in ancient times. South Italians today do not plot near Sicilian Bell Beaker. South Italians have about 20% post-Neolithic MENA input, and a small degree of Norman and Swabian.

The notion that most "Near Eastern" input in southern Italy is Neolithic has been debunked so many times and it is time people stop believing it. Neolithic farmers were like Sardinians, not like Levantines.

Also, the amount of Caucasus-area admixture in southern Italy is not even all Neolithic, some of it is post-Neolithic.

[Percivalle]

False. North Italians are very similar to Bell Beaker populations in North Italy in ancient times.

This is a poor reading that Davidski pushes with his Global 25 and a sample of northern Italy like that of Bergamo that can not be representative of the whole of northern Italy. Northern Italy has the largest cluster in Italy and is much more complicated than that. Although it is likely that the impact of Bell Beaker migrations have played an important role, were not the only migrations to play a role in the make-up of the north of Italy.

[Sikeliot]

This is a poor reading that Davidski pushes with his Global 25 and a sample of northern Italy like that of Bergamo that can not be representative of the whole of northern Italy. Northern Italy has the largest cluster in Italy and is much more complicated than that. Although it is likely that the impact of Bell Beaker migrations have played an important role, were not the only migrations to play a role in the make-up of the north of Italy.

Ok I can revise my statement: a portion of North Italians are basically unchanged since Bell Beaker times, while almost no one in Sicily or South Italy is purely Sicilian Bell Beaker or Mycenaean (which are difficult to separate from one another to begin with).

[manu15151513]

False. North Italians are very similar to Bell Beaker populations in North Italy in ancient times. South Italians today do not plot near Sicilian Bell Beaker. South Italians have about 20% post-Neolithic MENA input, and a small degree of Norman and Swabian.

The notion that most "Near Eastern" input in southern Italy is Neolithic has been debunked so many times and it is time people stop believing it. Neolithic farmers were like Sardinians, not like Levantines.

Also, the amount of Caucasus-area admixture in southern Italy is not even all Neolithic, some of it is post-Neolithic.

The early Neolithic farmers were probably very close to the Levantines, while the first European Neolithic farmers were very close to today's Sardinians thanks to the mixture with the Mesolithic peoples. The Italians of the South derive largely from Neolithic peoples who have mixed very little with the Mesolithic peoples, and therefore approach the Levant. Although the contribution of the medieval peoples has been marginal in northern Italy, it seems to me that the data suggest that they were more influential than in the south. Perhaps scientific data validate my interpretation but you misunderstand it.

[Sikeliot]

The early Neolithic farmers were probably very close to the Levantines, while the first European Neolithic farmers were very close to today's Sardinians thanks to the mixture with the Mesolithic peoples. The Italians of the South derive largely from Neolithic peoples who have mixed very little with the Mesolithic peoples, and therefore approach the Levant. Although the contribution of the medieval peoples has been marginal in northern Italy, it seems to me that the data suggest that they were more influential than in the south. Perhaps scientific data validate my interpretation but you misunderstand it.

South Italians are partly descended from Semitic-speaking Levantines. Just accept it. It's only about 20-25%. They also have traces of Germanic input.

[manu15151513]

South Italians are partly descended from Semitic-speaking Levantines. Just accept it. It's only about 20-25%. They also have traces of Germanic input.

I consider plausible reasonable interpretations deriving from scientific data, not the misunderstandings of a neurotypical who, although spending a lot of time here, says things that are often contestable. Show me the scientific data and maybe I'll give you reason, but I doubt it.

[manu15151513]

South Italians are partly descended from Semitic-speaking Levantines. Just accept it. It's only about 20-25%. They also have traces of Germanic input.

Then?