Continental ancestry of colonial latinos in the 40-65% euro range from Gedmatch

[Argentano]

Continental ancestry of colonial latinos in the 40-65% euro range from Gedmatch

GEDMATCH KITS

https://i.imgur.com/2aVz0or.png
https://i.imgur.com/LNbu9kL.png
https://i.imgur.com/VNcOnPn.png

[axel.aleman]

Where you find gedmatch info, i am interesed of get gedmatch info from Panamá summarized for Provinces

[Argentano]

Where you find gedmatch info, i am interesed of get gedmatch info from Panamá summarized for Provinces

In gedmatch use "one to many" tool and add the cousins that have gedcom.

[Argentano]

Where you find gedmatch info, i am interesed of get gedmatch info from Panamá summarized for Provinces

if you PM your kit i can add you to the chart

[Erronkari]

Very interesting!!
It's impressive cuban case, SSA is substantially higher than dominican.
It shows us how segregated is that population racially talking.

[Carlito's Way]

can you divide the Caucasian ancestry? because i want to see who is more euro and who is more east med/west asian etc

[Argentano]

can you divide the Caucasian ancestry? because i want to see who is more euro and who is more east med/west asian etc

You mean caucasian maxed to 100% in everybody right? Just mestizos or all the sample?

[Argentano]

Some comments regarding this pardos

Cuba is mostly euro ssa very low amerindian

Venezuela has more amerindian than ssa. Phenotopically they look the other way around

Southern cone mestizos plus mexican mestizos have similar low ssa

[Argentano]

Cuba and dr are only ones who could be considered almost proper mulato

[Carlito's Way]

You mean caucasian maxed to 100% in everybody right? Just mestizos or all the sample?

just the mestizos/mulattos of 40-65 euros

[Argentano]

just the mestizos/mulattos of 40-65 euros

here i made it. This mestizos 40-65% euro are all scoring pretty similarly tbh . I had the impression that mexican and dominican mestizo samples were strangely very east med but they are not.


https://i.imgur.com/MZYiP0N.png

[Argentano]

here i made it. This mestizos 40-65% euro are all scoring pretty similarly tbh . I had the impression that mexican and dominican mestizo samples were strangely very east med but they are not.



something weird and insteresting, latin american mestizos have an euro result (euro components combination ) that is more similar between themselves than it is with spaniards. Or at least the spaniards i have in my chart.

Maybe i should remove basques from the spanish sample.:icon_ask:

[Argentano]

Here i checked a comparison of euro components between Argentine Chilean Paraguyan mestizos (45-65% euro) and Iberians with basques removed .

NOW THAT I REMOVED THE BASQUES from the spanish sample i think the boxplots between the mestizos and iberians look identical.

It seems the only reason why i thought iberians were scoring a little different than mestizos was the basque samples modyfying my spanish sample

GEDMATCH KITS


https://i.imgur.com/eiAOmZk.png

[Argentano]

I guess the bpxplots above prove basque ancestry is not that important in latam mestizos

[Token]

I have no idea why you separate European from South Asian and Asian stuff in Latin Americans. They are all included in their European ancestry package.

[samario]

I have no idea why you separate European from South Asian and Asian stuff in Latin Americans. They are all included in their European ancestry package.

Note this South Asian tends to be residual and very low, probably akin to other bigger componentes belonging to the West Eurasian cluster. The East Asian component iincludes some North Eurasian ancestry but still mostly Mongoloid.

[Argentano]

I have no idea why you separate European from South Asian and Asian stuff in Latin Americans. They are all included in their European ancestry package.

Regarding south asian 99.9% of latin americans almost dont even score it so it doesent change much. I think petersky told me to do it this way and it doesent really change much

I didnt understand the Asian stuff you mentioned. what components are you refering to as asian?

[Token]

Regarding south asian 99.9% of latin americans almost dont even score it so it doesent change much. I think petersky told me to do it this way and it doesent really change much

I didnt understand the Asian stuff you mentioned. what components are you refering to as asian?

Siberian, East Asian and other minor stuff. Even some of the SSA is actually packed in their European ancestry. Iberians usually score over 1% SSA in GEDmatch. Summing these minor admixtures Latino's European score will increase in at least 2%.

[Argentano]

Siberian, East Asian and other minor stuff. Even some of the SSA is actually packed in their European ancestry. Iberians usually score over 1% SSA in GEDmatch. Summing these minor admixtures Latino's European score will increase in at least 2%.

mmm i respect your opinion but i dont agree. According to what i see

Siberian is a component that is more common in a bolivian indomestizo than in an iberian. So its more amerindian than european
Southeast Asian and Oceanian arent related to any of those groups. I could have them separated.

South Asian Yes here you could argue some iberians score a little of that and amerindians dont. But its a separate component to both groups

Northeast African :I have noticed the more SSA latinos have , the more Northeast AFrican they have too. Blacks score some northeast African. I highly doubt Northeast AFrican in latinos is european ancestry. I included Jamaica Haiti results so you can see that while its a small difference this blacks are actually scoring more northeast african than an iberian




https://i.imgur.com/pm9isUQ.png
https://i.imgur.com/RbC8O25.png
https://i.imgur.com/Vxo0bi8.png

[Argentano]

Rgarding the northeast african, component being iberian or not, look at this mestizos/pardos results in OP

Which countries are the ones scoring the highest Northeast African? Brazil Venezuela Cuba Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico.

Which is the common denominator between those countries? Higher SSA


The country scoring the highest northeast AFrican , Cuba, is also the country scoring the highest SSA



Continental ancestry of colonial latinos in the 40-65% euro range from Gedmatch

GEDMATCH KITS

https://i.imgur.com/2aVz0or.png
https://i.imgur.com/LNbu9kL.png
https://i.imgur.com/VNcOnPn.png

[axel.aleman]

Rgarding the northeast african, component being iberian or not, look at this mestizos/pardos results in OP

Which countries are the ones scoring the highest Northeast African? Brazil Venezuela Cuba Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico.

Which is the common denominator between those countries? Higher SSA

How much northeast african score Panamá?

[Argentano]

How much northeast african score Panamá?

Not much but notice that panameños i have added from gedmatch are not the heavily SSA ones. They hve more amerindian than SSA.

Anyways i am not saying SSA admixed latino countries score huge Northeast African. I am saying the tend to score more northeast african than latino countries with low SSA. Thats why i doubt that is an european component

https://i.imgur.com/nbFDnG7.png

[Argentano]

Here one very clear example to show how northeast african is totally related to SSA ancestry.

Northeast African component in Brazilians from gedmatch depending on their SSA range. The more SSA brazilians score, the higher the northeast African component too.

https://i.imgur.com/tTiMkQO.png

[axel.aleman]

I am 25 % SSA and only score score 1.25 % Northeast African

95648

[Adamastor]

Siberian, East Asian and other minor stuff. Even some of the SSA is actually packed in their European ancestry. Iberians usually score over 1% SSA in GEDmatch. Summing these minor admixtures Latino's European score will increase in at least 2%.

Yeah. I like Argentano, but he seems to have a poor grasp of what GEDmatch is made for. It's not designed to calculate percentages of recent European, Asian and African ancestries, but to dig up components of thousands of years ago. Many Europeans will score things like East_Asian, Siberian and even SSA (in the case of Iberians/South Italians).

If a Latin American is, let's say, 90% Turkish and 10% Amerindian, that Latin American would come out as 80% Caucasoid and 20% Mongoloid in GEDmatch. The same for someone that is 90% Portuguese, Galician or Canarian and 10% SSA, that guy will come out as 85% or 87% European and 13% - 15% SSA. Almost all West Iberians and Canarians score over 2% SSA in GEDmatch.

[Zuh]

Besides Mexico what other Latino country I pass?

https://www.gedmatch.com/gifs/JE1182640_EB4566.gif

https://www.gedmatch.com/gifs/JE1182640_EB4566.gif

[gixajo]

I am 25 % SSA and only score score 1.25 % Northeast African

95648

I am from Spain and in my k15 I score 0% SSA and 1,32% Northeast African.

I edited: i score 1,24% in k13, and 1,32 in k15

[gixajo]

Yeah. I like Argentano, but he seems to have a poor grasp of what GEDmatch is made for. It's not designed to calculate percentages of recent European, Asian and African ancestries, but to dig up components of thousands of years ago. Many Europeans will score things like East_Asian, Siberian and even SSA (in the case of Iberians/South Italians).

If a Latin American is, let's say, 90% Turkish and 10% Amerindian, that Latin American would come out as 80% Caucasoid and 20% Mongoloid in GEDmatch. The same for someone that is 90% Portuguese, Galician or Canarian and 10% SSA, that guy will come out as 85% or 87% European and 13% - 15% SSA. Almost all West Iberians and Canarians score over 2% SSA in GEDmatch.

Are you from North Italia? Did you post any gedmatch results?

[Argentano]

I am 25 % SSA and only score score 1.25 % Northeast African

95648

well you are in the range of what i posted actually. What matters is what the majority of individuals scoring 25% SSA score like

[Token]

Yeah. I like Argentano, but he seems to have a poor grasp of what GEDmatch is made for. It's not designed to calculate percentages of recent European, Asian and African ancestries, but to dig up components of thousands of years ago. Many Europeans will score things like East_Asian, Siberian and even SSA (in the case of Iberians/South Italians).

If a Latin American is, let's say, 90% Turkish and 10% Amerindian, that Latin American would come out as 80% Caucasoid and 20% Mongoloid in GEDmatch. The same for someone that is 90% Portuguese, Galician or Canarian and 10% SSA, that guy will come out as 85% or 87% European and 13% - 15% SSA. Almost all West Iberians and Canarians score over 2% SSA in GEDmatch.

I appreciate Argentano's work but unfortunately Eurogenes K15 and other GEDmatch calculators aren't powerful enough to deal with noisy data. It produces noisy results by overfitting the data, which is why Europeans and even the extremely drifted Amerindians can score small amounts of East Asian, South Asian, Siberian and other stuff that aren't really there. And this is why people like me can score over 2% South Asian (with no Balkan shift, so Romani ancestry is impossible). Five years is like a century in the fastly developing field of genetics.

[Adamastor]

I am from Spain and in my k15 I score 0% SSA and 1,32% Northeast African.

I edited: i score 1,24% in k13, and 1,32 in k15

That is surprising actually. Weren't you fully Basque? Basques are supposed to score 0% SSA + Northeast African.

SSA and Northeast African in Europeans are signs of North African ancestry, so it will be higher in Iberians with more North African and lower/inexistent in individuals with no North African (like the Basques).

If you look at averages in Vahaduo, you would see that Basque average is 0% for both while Spanish_Galicia and Portuguese averages are like 3-4% for both components combined. It happens because in GEDmatch North Africans score 20% SSA, so if you're 1/8 North African you would score ~3% SSA + Northeast African. I generally use these components to calculate North African admixture in Iberians and Italians.

I'm not trying to say the Northeast African + SSA in Latin Americans is Iberian lol, what I'm saying is that Northeast African around the Iberian average (between 1.5% and 3%) likely comes from Iberians rather than from Blacks (of course it applies to people scoring it in lower amounts, not people who score 20%, for example). Canarians and Sephardic Jews score even higher Northeast African, around 5-6%.

[Argentano]

Yeah. I like Argentano, but he seems to have a poor grasp of what GEDmatch is made for. It's not designed to calculate percentages of recent European, Asian and African ancestries, but to dig up components of thousands of years ago. Many Europeans will score things like East_Asian, Siberian and even SSA (in the case of Iberians/South Italians).

If a Latin American is, let's say, 90% Turkish and 10% Amerindian, that Latin American would come out as 80% Caucasoid and 20% Mongoloid in GEDmatch. The same for someone that is 90% Portuguese, Galician or Canarian and 10% SSA, that guy will come out as 85% or 87% European and 13% - 15% SSA. Almost all West Iberians and Canarians score over 2% SSA in GEDmatch.


Yes i understand this are ancient components . But so what? eurogenes k15 is still very good to compare ancestry between latin american countries. Because latin americans dont have turkish or russian blood with high siberian or whatever. They mostly have iberian blood. And iberians DONT score southeast asian, they dont score siberian, they dont score south asian and they dont score high SSA .

Iberians are around 1% SSA in eurogenes K15 . If a dominican or a cuban or a brazilian is scoring 40% SSA in eurogenes K15, that is clearly not iberian blood.

Eurogenes k15 Reference populations (Very similar to the kits i have found in gedmatch but i prefer to post this as "official")

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19c_bZjUV_RouKyGyLHmMDw57WwAVabXFJOaso_gcuRE/edit?usp=sharing

https://i.imgur.com/NeJVbOf.png

[Argentano]

I appreciate Argentano's work but unfortunately Eurogenes K15 and other GEDmatch calculators aren't powerful enough to deal with noisy data. It produces noisy results by overfitting the data, which is why Europeans and even the extremely drifted Amerindians can score small amounts of East Asian, South Asian, Siberian and other stuff that aren't really there. And this is why people like me can score over 2% South Asian (with no Balkan shift, so Romani ancestry is impossible). Five years is like a century in the fastly developing field of genetics.

but THIS is clearly not noise. This is a clear pattern


Here one very clear example to show how northeast african is totally related to SSA ancestry.

Northeast African component in Brazilians from gedmatch depending on their SSA range. The more SSA brazilians score, the higher the northeast African component too.

https://i.imgur.com/tTiMkQO.png

[Argentano]

with all due respect to token and adamastor, 2 posters i appreciate. I dont agree with you. You talk like iberian kits in gedmatch were "full of noise" in eurogenes k15 when they are clearly not. They dont score east asian, they dont score siberian, they dont score high northeast african and they dont score high SSA.

MOST of Those components in latin americans are clearly non white ancestry.

https://i.imgur.com/RbC8O25.png

[Adamastor]

Yes i understand this are ancient components . But so what? eurogenes k15 is still very good to compare ancestry between latin american countries. Because latin americans dont have turkish or russian blood with high siberian or whatever. They mostly have iberian blood. And iberians DONT score southeast asian, they dont score siberian, they dont score south asian and they dont score high SSA .

Dude, sorry for being so harsh, but you clearly don't understand what you are saying. I'm not saying 40% SSA in a Cuban or Brazilian comes from Iberians, c'mon, you're smarter than that. Also ''Iberians'' vary a little bit depending on the region. They were supposed to not score Siberian, Southeast Asian etc. But many of them actually score those things in these calculators and it happens because they are designed for measuring things that go beyond recent ancestry from 500 years ago. Besides the fact GEDmatch opens an immense room for noise and lacks references to many ghost populations who got modeled and discovered in the last 6 years. Why do you think even the least SSA admixed North Africans are always 20% SSA there?

Actually the spreadsheet you posted corroborates what I said, Portuguese score ~3% SSA in there, Castillans around 2,7% and Galicians 2,5%, what is in line with the fact all of these guys are around 8-12% North African. So the SSA + Northeast African in West Iberians can range from 2% to 5% actually, given that the average is 2.5-3%. Canarians score even more, so modelling Cubans and Venezuelans the way you do is to miss a lot of stuff.

Canarian averages:

https://image.ibb.co/e08jZU/Canary-Island-Gedmatch.jpg

Davidski himself, the guy who created these Eurogenes calculators, said to me that GEDmatch isn't good to model Latin Americans and other recently admixed populations because it opens a lot of room for noise.

[Argentano]

Dude, sorry for being so harsh, but you clearly don't understand what you are saying. I'm not saying 40% SSA in a Cuban or Brazilian comes from Iberians, c'mon, you're smarter than that. Also ''Iberians'' vary a little bit depending on the region. They were supposed to not score Siberian, Southeast Asian etc. But many of them actually score those things in these calculators and it happens because they are designed for measuring things that go beyond recent ancestry from 500 years ago. Besides the fact GEDmatch opens an immense room for noise and lacks references to many ghost populations who got modeled and discovered in the last 6 years. Why do you think even the least SSA admixed North Africans are always 20% SSA there?

Actually the spreadsheet you posted corroborates what I said, Portuguese score ~3% SSA in there, Castillans around 2,7% and Galicians 2,5%, what is in line with the fact all of these guys are around 8-12% North African. So the SSA + Northeast African in West Iberians can range from 2% to 5% actually, given that the average is 2.5-3%. Canarians score even more, so modelling Cubans and Venezuelans the way you do is to miss a lot of stuff.

Canarian averages:

Davidski himself, the guy who created these Eurogenes calculators, said to me that GEDmatch isn't good to model Latin Americans and other recently admixed populations because it opens a lot of room for noise.


I call what you are saying bullshit. Show me proof of 20 or 30 iberians scoring relevant siberian, southeast asian , etc. Common prove me wrong. :rolleyes:

You are just inventing things . SHOW ME PROOF. SHOW ME KITS, IBERIANS SCORING HIGH OF THOSE COMPONETS YOU MENTIONED. I WAIT.


How many iberians are there in gedmatch? 5.000 ? 20.000? Show me 40 scoring high siberian....


And obvipsuly we are talking about eurogenes k15. Everything i posted is on eurogenes k15. Dont answer me with data from another calculator...

[Adamastor]

I call what you are saying bullshit. Show me proof of 20 or 30 iberians scoring relevant siberian, southeast asian , etc. Common prove me wrong. :rolleyes:

You are just inventing things . SHOW ME PROOF. SHOW ME KITS, IBERIANS SCORING HIGH OF THOSE COMPONETS YOU MENTIONED. I WAIT.

Jut look it up in this forum:

Gaditanian, Gallop, Spaniard 2.0 (I think that's his name), Pedro Ruben, FilhoV etc All of them score at least 2-3% East Eurasian in multiple GEDmatch calculators. I have more kits in my possession scoring beyond noise levels of these things (I can send you the kits). I can post even Sardinians with 2% East_Asian.

I score 1.76% East_Asian myself in K15 and 0% Amerindian (and I have no Amerindian ancestry), so there's no way it is real. The fact that GEDmatch isn't good for modelling proportions in Latin Americans is more than known by everyone in the genetics community. I'm not saying the variations will be huge, they will not, but they can be considerable.

A Cuban guy with 3 Canarian grandparents and a quadroon grandparent will seem more SSA than he really is using GEDmatch (and that's just one example).

[Token]

I call what you are saying bullshit. Show me proof of 20 or 30 iberians scoring relevant siberian, southeast asian , etc. Common prove me wrong. :rolleyes:

You are just inventing things . SHOW ME PROOF. SHOW ME KITS, IBERIANS SCORING HIGH OF THOSE COMPONETS YOU MENTIONED. I WAIT.


How many iberians are there in gedmatch? 5.000 ? 20.000? Show me 40 scoring high siberian....


And obvipsuly we are talking about eurogenes k15. Everything i posted is on eurogenes k15. Dont answer me with data from another calculator...

So are you saying there is actual Southeast Asian, Siberian and South Asian admixture in Latin Americans? Come on.

[Argentano]

Jut look it up in this forum:

Gaditanian, Gallop, Spaniard 2.0 (I think that's his name), Pedro Ruben, FilhoV etc All of them score at least 2-3% East Eurasian in multiple GEDmatch calculators. I have more kits in my possession scoring beyond noise levels of these things (I can send you the kits). I can post even Sardinians with 2% East_Asian.

I score 1.76% East_Asian myself in K15 and 0% Amerindian (and I have no Amerindian ancestry), so there's no way it is real. The fact that GEDmatch isn't good for modelling proportions in Latin Americans is more than known by everyone in the genetics community. I'm not saying the variations will be huge, they will not, but they can be considerable.

A Cuban guy with 3 Canarian grandparents and a quadroon grandparent will seem more SSA than he really is using GEDmatch (and that's just one example).

you said there is a lot of noise in gedmatch. Iberians scoring high southeast asian, siberian, SSA in eurogenes k15. Post the kits. I wait.

You talked a lot. Now its your time to show proof of what you are saying.

I call what you are saying bullshit until you back that up. And i aksed for 40 kits. Since you say this noise thing is so constnt i guess you have seen hudreds of kits like that :rolleyes:

[Argentano]

So are you saying there is actual Southeast Asian, Siberian and South Asian admixture in Latin Americans? Come on.

the one who score high siberian tend to be the ones with higher native american. Its probably part of the native american ancestry. Similar to the northeast african and SSA


Honestly i can expect this from adamastor because he/she is always claiming shit without proof. But it surprises me from you tbh

[Argentano]

this was made with around 250-300 iberians. VERY SMALLL noise. Nothing out of the ordinary. I guess adamastor has other 250-300 iberian kits with completely different results, full of noise :rolleyes:

https://i.imgur.com/RbC8O25.png

[Token]

People have difficulty understanding that present-day Siberians have nothing to do with the Paleosiberian ancestors of Native Americans. Siberian in K15 is represented by Uralic-speaking Nganassans who probably migrated from somewhere far to the southwest of East Siberia after Paleosiberians crossed the Beringian strait into America. Siberian ancestry only exists in some groups of North Amerindians from a later wave of Dené-Yeniseian speakers as proven by recent studies with hundreds of pages of formal statistical analysis. Therefore, Siberian scores in K15 among Latin Americans must be noise.

[Argentano]

People have difficulty understanding that present-day Siberians have nothing to do with the Paleosiberian ancestors of Native Americans. Siberian in K15 is represented by Uralic-speaking Nganassans who probably migrated from somewhere far to the southwest of East Siberia after Paleosiberians crossed the Beringian strait into America. Siberian ancestry only exists in some groups of North Amerindians from a later wave of Dené-Yeniseian speakers as proven by recent studies with hundreds of pages of formal statistical analysis. Therefore, Siberian scores in K15 among Latin Americans must be noise.

You dont understand me, i am not saying they have siberian ancestry. Im saying that the calculator probably sees some of the native american as siberian. AGAIN just the most native amerincan individuals are scoring a higher siberian.

High euro individuals dont score that siberian component

[Argentano]

I have just tried to check some of the kits adamastor posted as canarians in the eurogenes k15 calcualtor. I couldnt because Gedmatch says those kits dont even exist.

[Argentano]

People have difficulty understanding that present-day Siberians have nothing to do with the Paleosiberian ancestors of Native Americans. Siberian in K15 is represented by Uralic-speaking Nganassans who probably migrated from somewhere far to the southwest of East Siberia after Paleosiberians crossed the Beringian strait into America. Siberian ancestry only exists in some groups of North Amerindians from a later wave of Dené-Yeniseian speakers as proven by recent studies with hundreds of pages of formal statistical analysis. Therefore, Siberian scores in K15 among Latin Americans must be noise.

Let me give you an exmpale. If you run the kit of a native american in eurogenes k15 he woll score some small siberian. If you run the kit of a spaniard in eurogenes k15 he will score close to 0% siberian. So just by common sense i dont have to be a scientist to understand that component is more prevalent in individuals of native american ancestry than iberians. That is not an euro component.

[Argentano]

People have difficulty understanding that present-day Siberians have nothing to do with the Paleosiberian ancestors of Native Americans. Siberian in K15 is represented by Uralic-speaking Nganassans who probably migrated from somewhere far to the southwest of East Siberia after Paleosiberians crossed the Beringian strait into America. Siberian ancestry only exists in some groups of North Amerindians from a later wave of Dené-Yeniseian speakers as proven by recent studies with hundreds of pages of formal statistical analysis. Therefore, Siberian scores in K15 among Latin Americans must be noise.

Let me give you an exmpale. If you run the kit of a native american in eurogenes k15 he woll score some small siberian. If you run the kit of a spaniard in eurogenes k15 he will score close to 0% siberian. So just by common sense i dont have to be a scientist to understand that component is more prevalent in individuals of native american ancestry than iberians. That is not an euro component.

[Token]

Eurogenes K15:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcRBXk7cTt8AqBgO0jjaYw_q4k9hp_6 _rCHEenLF68DIE2KlQsNR

[Adamastor]

you said there is a lot of noise in gedmatch. Iberians scoring high southeast asian, siberian, SSA in eurogenes k15. Post the kits. I wait.

You talked a lot. Now its your time to show proof of what you are saying.

I call what you are saying bullshit until you back that up. And i aksed for 40 kits. Since you say this noise thing is so constnt i guess you have seen hudreds of kits like that :rolleyes:

Ok, easy:

Eurogenes K13

Portuguese

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 37.17
2 West_Med 26.92
3 East_Med 14.89
4 Baltic 9.5
5 West_Asian 3.33
6 Red_Sea 3.29
7 Northeast_African 2.45
8 Sub-Saharan 2.19
9 Oceanian 0.25

Andalusian

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 40.81
2 West_Med 29.04
3 Baltic 10
4 East_Med 6.81
5 West_Asian 5.78
6 Red_Sea 3.11
7 Northeast_African 2.34
9 Siberian 1.32

Canarians

Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 35.70
2 West_Med 25.80
3 East_Med 18.35
4 Baltic 6.40
5 Sub-Saharan 5.33
6 Red_Sea 4.84
7 Northeast_African 2.50

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 31.23
2 West_Med 25.97
3 East_Med 19.63
4 Baltic 10.94
5 Red_Sea 6.1
6 Northeast_African 5.12
7 Amerindian 1
8 Sub-Saharan 0.01

Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 39.97
2 West_Med 23.43
3 East_Med 17.3
4 Baltic 7.43
5 Sub-Saharan 4.3
6 West_Asian 3.59
7 Red_Sea 3.21
8 Amerindian 0.59
9 Northeast_African 0.16
10 Oceanian 0.01

Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 36.89
2 West_Med 26.87
3 East_Med 15.64
4 Baltic 9.38
5 Red_Sea 3.35
6 West_Asian 2.73
7 Sub-Saharan 2.03
8 Northeast_African 1.87
9 Amerindian 0.78
10 Oceanian 0.45


Pedro Ruben's K15

1 Atlantic 27.12
2 North_Sea 19.74
3 West_Med 18.91
4 East_Med 11.18
5 Baltic 6.45
6 Red_Sea 4.63
7 Eastern_Euro 3.84
8 Sub-Saharan 2.8
9 Northeast_African 2.74
10 West_Asian 1.49
11 Amerindian 0.86
12 Siberian 0.25

Andalusian

Population Percent
1 Atlantic 26.47
2 West_Med 23.69
3 North_Sea 23.69
4 East_Med 9.54
5 Baltic 6.91
6 Red_Sea 3.2
7 Eastern_Euro 3.03
8 Northeast_African 2.03
9 Sub-Saharan 0.99
10 Southeast_Asian 0

Portuguese

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 30.43
2 North_Sea 22.50
3 West_Med 21.75
4 Baltic 7.86
5 East_Med 5.94
6 Eastern_Euro 5.41
7 Sub-Saharan 2.11
8 West_Asian 1.89
9 Red_Sea 1.28

Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 28.13
2 Atlantic 24.82
3 West_Med 21.29
4 East_Med 10.57
5 Red_Sea 3.76
6 Sub-Saharan 3.37
7 Baltic 3.28
8 Eastern_Euro 2.02
9 Southeast_Asian 1.71
10 Northeast_African 0.52
11 West_Asian 0.3
12 Oceanian 0.23


Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 26
2 West_Med 24.31
3 North_Sea 18.13
4 East_Med 13.45
5 Baltic 4.59
6 Eastern_Euro 4.14
7 Red_Sea 4.08
8 Southeast_Asian 1.25
9 Sub-Saharan 1.24
10 Northeast_African 1.23
11 South_Asian 1
12 Amerindian 0.51
13 West_Asian 0.04


Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 27.66
2 North_Sea 24.47
3 West_Med 19.68
4 East_Med 9.91
5 Baltic 5.74
6 Red_Sea 4.51
7 Eastern_Euro 3.81
8 Northeast_African 2.13
9 Sub-Saharan 1.14
10 West_Asian 0.96


Half Portuguese and half Spanish

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 40.36
2 West_Med 26.9
3 East_Med 13.09
4 Baltic 9.28
5 West_Asian 3.85
6 Red_Sea 2.82
7 Northeast_African 2.24
8 South_Asian 1.08
9 Amerindian 0.39


Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 39.42
2 West_Med 28.51
3 East_Med 12.04
4 Baltic 9.58
5 Red_Sea 4.47
6 Northeast_African 2.60
7 Sub-Saharan 1.13
8 West_Asian 1.05





Most Iberians in my possesion are Portuguese, Galicians and other West Iberians, so I don't know about the others. I can post more 20, 30, 50 if you want. All have more than 2-3% of ''noise''.

[Adamastor]

I have just tried to check some of the kits adamastor posted as canarians in the eurogenes k15 calcualtor. I couldnt because Gedmatch says those kits dont even exist.

I took that print from another forum, dummy, they are not my kits.

[Argentano]

Ok, easy:

Eurogenes K13

8 Sub-Saharan 2.19
5 Sub-Saharan 5.33
8 Sub-Saharan 0.01
5 Sub-Saharan 4.3
7 Sub-Saharan 2.03
8 Sub-Saharan 2.8
9 Sub-Saharan 0.99
7 Sub-Saharan 2.11
6 Sub-Saharan 3.37
9 Sub-Saharan 1.24
9 Sub-Saharan 1.14
7 Sub-Saharan 1.13





Most Iberians in my possesion are Portuguese, Galicians and other West Iberians, so I don't know about the others. I can post more 20, 30, 50 if you want. All have more than 2-3% of ''noise''.

Well this is eurogenes k13 and not eurogenes k15 but i guess its comparable. The SSA isnt that high even when you spent half an hour searching for highly SSA kits.

What about the southeast asian and siberian?? You said gedmatch has a lot of noise,and that iberians were scoring relavant numbers of that :rolleyes:

I asked you to post 30-40 kits to back that up. I am still waiting. And post the kits not just the results....



Dude, sorry for being so harsh, but you clearly don't understand what you are saying. I'm not saying 40% SSA in a Cuban or Brazilian comes from Iberians, c'mon, you're smarter than that. Also ''Iberians'' vary a little bit depending on the region. They were supposed to not score Siberian, Southeast Asian etc. But many of them actually score those things in these calculators and it happens because they are designed for measuring things that go beyond recent ancestry from 500 years ago. Besides the fact GEDmatch opens an immense room for noise and lacks references to many ghost populations who got modeled and discovered in the last 6 years. Why do you think even the least SSA admixed North Africans are always 20% SSA there?

Actually the spreadsheet you posted corroborates what I said, Portuguese score ~3% SSA in there, Castillans around 2,7% and Galicians 2,5%, what is in line with the fact all of these guys are around 8-12% North African. So the SSA + Northeast African in West Iberians can range from 2% to 5% actually, given that the average is 2.5-3%. Canarians score even more, so modelling Cubans and Venezuelans the way you do is to miss a lot of stuff.

Canarian averages:

Davidski himself, the guy who created these Eurogenes calculators, said to me that GEDmatch isn't good to model Latin Americans and other recently admixed populations because it opens a lot of room for noise.

[gixajo]

Todavía a vueltas con el SSA?

[Token]

Well this is eurogenes k13 and not eurogenes k15 but i guess its comparable. The SSA isnt that high even when you spent half an hour searching for highly SSA kits.

What about the southeast asian and siberian?? You said gedmatch has a lot of noise,and that iberians were scoring relavant numbers of that :rolleyes:

I asked you to post 30-40 kits to back that up. I am still waiting. And post the kits not just the results....

Several of the kits posted by Adamastor shows significant Asian and Siberian scores.

[Adamastor]

Well this is eurogenes k13 and not eurogenes k15 but i guess its comparable. The SSA isnt that high even when you spent half an hour searching for highly SSA kits.

What about the southeast asian and siberian?? You said gedmatch has a lot of noise,and that iberians were scoring relavant numbers of that :rolleyes:

I asked you to post 30-40 kits to back that up. I am still waiting. And post the kits not just the results....

I knew you were going to insinuate these people are not Iberians, that's why I choose only kits of known members of anthroforums like FilhoV, PTTagus, Pedro Ruben etc (I have the kit numbers of some of them, so you can search and see for yourself). All of those kits belong to people who posted their results, this way you cannot claim I'm making this up. I challenge you to give a single non-Basque Iberian kit that doesn't score significant 3-4%+ levels of noise. Prove with kit numbers and genealogy, I'm posting only known people around here, so you cannot claim I'm inventing.

I never said Iberians were scoring more than 2-3% of Siberian, East_Asian etc. But even more than 1% is already a relevant noise, that's what you don't get. If a guy scores 2% SSA, 2.70% Northeast African and 1.77% Siberian it's already a lot of noise. Almost 7%.

You really think I'll waste my whole night posting 40 kits here, 10-15 are more than enough to show the pattern. Especially when all full Iberians who ever posted their results had similar results.

[Argentano]

Several of the kits posted by Adamastor shows significant Asian and Siberian scores.

FALSE some do score asian and sibeiran but most score 0. The average would be extremely low. All the fuss is about scoring 0.5 siberian on average?

Do an avrage of those kits, siberian and southeast asian will be close to 0. Irrelevant.

[Argentano]

I knew you were going to insinuate these people are not Iberians, that's why I choose only kits of known members of anthroforums like FilhoV, PTTagus, Pedro Ruben etc (I have the kit numbers of some of them, so you can search and see for yourself). All of those kits belong to people who posted their results, this way you cannot claim I'm making this up. I challenge you to give a single non-Basque Iberian kit that doesn't score significant 3-4%+ levels of noise. Prove with kit numbers and genealogy, I'm posting only known people around here, so you cannot claim I'm inventing.

I never said Iberians were scoring more than 2-3% of Siberian, East_Asian etc. But even more than 1% is already a relevant noise, that's what you don't get. If a guy scores 2% SSA, 2.70% Northeast African and 1.77% Siberian it's already a lot of noise. Almost 7%.

You really think I'll waste my whole night posting 40 kits here, 10-15 are more than enough to show the pattern. Especially when all full Iberians who ever posted their results had similar results.


You aactully say it yourslf. Its NOISE. I dont give a fuck if 1 iberian out of 20 scores 0.8 %siberian. Its completely irrelevant and i have no idea why the fuck do you care about this.

ITS NOISE. ITS IRRELEVANT.

if you were to make averages with the kits YOU posted the southeast asian and sibierna average would be close to 0 and the SSA would be close to 2


Not far from eurogenes k15 references. I find those numbers irrelevant. Dont know why all your complaints

https://i.imgur.com/NeJVbOf.png

[Zuh]

So after Mexico my genetics are more common in Chile Weon?

https://www.gedmatch.com/gifs/JE1182640_EB4566.gif

https://www.gedmatch.com/gifs/JE1182640_EB4566.gif

Maybe in less European areas of Puerto Rico and Northern east brazil?


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Interpolation_plots_showing_the_geographical_distr ibution_of_ancestry_in_Puerto_Rico.png/485px-Interpolation_plots_showing_the_geographical_distr ibution_of_ancestry_in_Puerto_Rico.png

[gixajo]

Ok, easy:

Eurogenes K13

Portuguese

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 37.17
2 West_Med 26.92
3 East_Med 14.89
4 Baltic 9.5
5 West_Asian 3.33
6 Red_Sea 3.29
7 Northeast_African 2.45
8 Sub-Saharan 2.19
9 Oceanian 0.25

Andalusian

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 40.81
2 West_Med 29.04
3 Baltic 10
4 East_Med 6.81
5 West_Asian 5.78
6 Red_Sea 3.11
7 Northeast_African 2.34
9 Siberian 1.32

Canarians

Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 35.70
2 West_Med 25.80
3 East_Med 18.35
4 Baltic 6.40
5 Sub-Saharan 5.33
6 Red_Sea 4.84
7 Northeast_African 2.50

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 31.23
2 West_Med 25.97
3 East_Med 19.63
4 Baltic 10.94
5 Red_Sea 6.1
6 Northeast_African 5.12
7 Amerindian 1
8 Sub-Saharan 0.01

Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 39.97
2 West_Med 23.43
3 East_Med 17.3
4 Baltic 7.43
5 Sub-Saharan 4.3
6 West_Asian 3.59
7 Red_Sea 3.21
8 Amerindian 0.59
9 Northeast_African 0.16
10 Oceanian 0.01

Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 36.89
2 West_Med 26.87
3 East_Med 15.64
4 Baltic 9.38
5 Red_Sea 3.35
6 West_Asian 2.73
7 Sub-Saharan 2.03
8 Northeast_African 1.87
9 Amerindian 0.78
10 Oceanian 0.45


Pedro Ruben's K15

1 Atlantic 27.12
2 North_Sea 19.74
3 West_Med 18.91
4 East_Med 11.18
5 Baltic 6.45
6 Red_Sea 4.63
7 Eastern_Euro 3.84
8 Sub-Saharan 2.8
9 Northeast_African 2.74
10 West_Asian 1.49
11 Amerindian 0.86
12 Siberian 0.25

Andalusian

Population Percent
1 Atlantic 26.47
2 West_Med 23.69
3 North_Sea 23.69
4 East_Med 9.54
5 Baltic 6.91
6 Red_Sea 3.2
7 Eastern_Euro 3.03
8 Northeast_African 2.03
9 Sub-Saharan 0.99
10 Southeast_Asian 0

Portuguese

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 30.43
2 North_Sea 22.50
3 West_Med 21.75
4 Baltic 7.86
5 East_Med 5.94
6 Eastern_Euro 5.41
7 Sub-Saharan 2.11
8 West_Asian 1.89
9 Red_Sea 1.28

Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 28.13
2 Atlantic 24.82
3 West_Med 21.29
4 East_Med 10.57
5 Red_Sea 3.76
6 Sub-Saharan 3.37
7 Baltic 3.28
8 Eastern_Euro 2.02
9 Southeast_Asian 1.71
10 Northeast_African 0.52
11 West_Asian 0.3
12 Oceanian 0.23


Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 26
2 West_Med 24.31
3 North_Sea 18.13
4 East_Med 13.45
5 Baltic 4.59
6 Eastern_Euro 4.14
7 Red_Sea 4.08
8 Southeast_Asian 1.25
9 Sub-Saharan 1.24
10 Northeast_African 1.23
11 South_Asian 1
12 Amerindian 0.51
13 West_Asian 0.04


Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 27.66
2 North_Sea 24.47
3 West_Med 19.68
4 East_Med 9.91
5 Baltic 5.74
6 Red_Sea 4.51
7 Eastern_Euro 3.81
8 Northeast_African 2.13
9 Sub-Saharan 1.14
10 West_Asian 0.96


Half Portuguese and half Spanish

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 40.36
2 West_Med 26.9
3 East_Med 13.09
4 Baltic 9.28
5 West_Asian 3.85
6 Red_Sea 2.82
7 Northeast_African 2.24
8 South_Asian 1.08
9 Amerindian 0.39


Portuguese

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 39.42
2 West_Med 28.51
3 East_Med 12.04
4 Baltic 9.58
5 Red_Sea 4.47
6 Northeast_African 2.60
7 Sub-Saharan 1.13
8 West_Asian 1.05





Most Iberians in my possesion are Portuguese, Galicians and other West Iberians, so I don't know about the others. I can post more 20, 30, 50 if you want. All have more than 2-3% of ''noise''.

Average of this 14 samples is 1,902, if I add my k13 would be 1,775.

What is the ponit of this?

West Iberia , Galicia and Portugal score usually more Northafrican and middle East always, and Canary Islands were originally populated by Guanches, who were ethnically Northafricans.

[Argentano]

Todavía a vueltas con el SSA?

jajajaj no se que les pasa. Quieren hacer un super problema porque un iberico sale 1% ssa o 0.5% siberian EN PROMEDIO :picard1:

Anda a saber a que quieren llegar

[gixajo]

jajajaj no se que les pasa. Quieren hacer un super problema porque un iberico sale 1% ssa o 0.5% siberian EN PROMEDIO :picard1:

Anda a saber a que quieren llegar

Se supone que quiere relacionar el Siberian a Iberia, y para demostrarlo relaciona el SSA Ibérico habitual con el Siberian Ibérico promedio?

Tú por el contrario relacionas el Siberian con la procedencia asiática?

No hay forma de discriminar de donde viene el Siberian, por movimientos de población tendría más lógica pensar que tu opción es más acertada, pero tampoco es mala idea de hacer lo que hace él para tener una idea del aporte de Siberian de la parte Europea.

En mi caso tengo SSA pero no Siberian, pero tampoco yo soy medida de nada siendo un solo individuo.

[Adamastor]

You aactully say it yourslf. Its NOISE. I dont give a fuck if 1 iberian out of 20 scores 0.8 %siberian. Its completely irrelevant and i have no idea why the fuck do you care about this.

ITS NOISE. ITS IRRELEVANT.

if you were to make averages with the kits YOU posted the southeast asian and sibierna average would be close to 0 and the SSA would be close to 2


Not far from eurogenes k15 references. I find those numbers irrelevant. Dont know why all your complaints

https://i.imgur.com/NeJVbOf.png

The East Eurasian average in the kits I posted would be around 1.5% and SSA +Northeast African around 3.5%, it's significant noise, 5%. And they are representative.

It's irrelevant for big percentages, I agree, but relevant for people scoring in the 90s or around. Let's say a Cuban with 3 Canarian grandparents is exactly 90% Canarian and 10% SSA. He would be 20% SSA in GEDmatch (Canarians have high SSA due to North African admixture and all Maghrebis are 20% SSA in K15/K13 that's why Canarians are 5-10%). It's a considerable difference IMO. The same way for some guy who is, let's say, 3.8% Amerindian and scored those bullshitic East Asian and Siberian percentages. He could end up being 7% ''Amerindian''.

I mean, I'm not making things up. Davidski himself admits it, he is the fucking creator of all those calculators. Mail him if you want, he is accessible.

[gixajo]

The East Eurasian average in the kits I posted would be around 1.5% and SSA +Northeast African around 3.5%, it's significant noise, 5%. And they are representative.

It's irrelevant for big percentages, I agree, but relevant for people scoring in the 90s or around. Let's say a Cuban with 3 Canarian grandparents is exactly 90% Canarian and 10% SSA. He would be 20% SSA in GEDmatch (Canarians have high SSA due to North African admixture and all Maghrebis are 20% SSA in K15/K13 that's why Canarians are 5-10%). It's a considerable difference IMO. The same way for some guy who is, let's say, 3.8% Amerindian and scored those bullshitic East Asian and Siberian percentages. He could end up being 7% ''Amerindian''.

I mean, I'm not making things up. Davidski himself admits it, he is the fucking creator of all those calculators. Mail him if you want, he is accessible.

Could you please summarize your point? is what i presumed in my last post?

[Adamastor]

Could you please summarize your point? is what i presumed in my last post?

I think GEDmatch calculators aren't the best tools to estimate % of ancestry in Latin Americans because they open too much room for noise. They are not developed for that by the way.

[gixajo]

y otra cosa, acaso no viene el porcentaje del individuo ideal según oriren en gedmatch? de ahí podéis sacar las proporciones ideales , no?

[gixajo]

I think GEDmatch calculators aren't the best tools to estimate % of ancestry in Latin Americans because they open too much room for noise. They are not developed for that by the way.

Maybe you are right.Latin Americans are very mixed and calculators in gedmatch are quite specific for Europe, Asia etc, but maybe not for mixed people.

Is there another better tool for this purpose?

[Adamastor]

Maybe you are right.Latin Americans are very mixed and calculators in gedmatch are quite specific for Europe, Asia etc, but maybe not for mixed people.

Is there another better tool for this purpose?

Yeah, nMonte using G25. Also, I think commercial tests are more reliable for true percentages in Latin Americans. GEDmatch is already quite outdated even for Europeans. North Italians, for example, have immense distances in K13/K15 because they have just one fucking sample for North Italy. When someone has distances of 10-11 for his first population (like many Venetians) without being mixed you know that calculator isn't exactly the best.

[Argentano]

Average of this 14 samples is 1,902, if I add my k13 would be 1,775.

What is the ponit of this?

West Iberia , Galicia and Portugal score usually more Northafrican and middle East always, and Canary Islands were originally populated by Guanches, who were ethnically Northafricans.

jaja exacto, de 500 resultados agarran 2 que tengan 0.5% siberian y te dicen que gedmatch no sirve por ese dato. Esta bordeando lo absurdo ya esta conversacion.

[Adamastor]

By the way, one of the reasons why Maghrebis were coming out 20-25% SSA in GEDmatch is because those calculators lack Iberomaurusian samples, that are extremely important to model North Africans. At the same time, they just have a dumb and unique ''SSA'' component for all of Sub-Saharan Africa, the most diverse region in the whole world.

Defending GEDmatch as an amazing tool at this point is very naive IMO. The creator of K13/K15 himself abandoned the platform.

[Argentano]

Se supone que quiere relacionar el Siberian a Iberia, y para demostrarlo relaciona el SSA Ibérico habitual con el Siberian Ibérico promedio?

Tú por el contrario relacionas el Siberian con la procedencia asiática?

No hay forma de discriminar de donde viene el Siberian, por movimientos de población tendría más lógica pensar que tu opción es más acertada, pero tampoco es mala idea de hacer lo que hace él para tener una idea del aporte de Siberian de la parte Europea.

En mi caso tengo SSA pero no Siberian, pero tampoco yo soy medida de nada siendo un solo individuo.

Lo que dice Adamastor es que como un azoriano o un canario puede salir por ejemplo 3% North east African y 3% SSA , entonces un brasilero o cubano en ese rango no deberia tomarse como un individuo de raza mixta. Y es verdad. Pero el tema es que el 90% de los latinos de gedmatch no estan en ese rango azoriano o canario. El 90% de latinos caribeños o brasileros de gedmatch tienen % de SSA/NEA que no podrian verse en un canario o azoriano, por lo cual no me parece que este dato tenga que invalidar todo le trabajo que hice.

Y sin mencionar que en este thread solo puse latinos en el rango 45-65% euro con lo cual mas que seguro el NEA/SSA es real. Que un canario salga 3% SSA no tiene ninguna importancia cundo los cubanos posteados en este thread son 30-50% SSA.


The East Eurasian average in the kits I posted would be around 1.5% and SSA +Northeast African around 3.5%, it's significant noise, 5%. And they are representative.

It's irrelevant for big percentages, I agree, but relevant for people scoring in the 90s or around. Let's say a Cuban with 3 Canarian grandparents is exactly 90% Canarian and 10% SSA. He would be 20% SSA in GEDmatch (Canarians have high SSA due to North African admixture and all Maghrebis are 20% SSA in K15/K13 that's why Canarians are 5-10%). It's a considerable difference IMO. The same way for some guy who is, let's say, 3.8% Amerindian and scored those bullshitic East Asian and Siberian percentages. He could end up being 7% ''Amerindian''.

I mean, I'm not making things up. Davidski himself admits it, he is the fucking creator of all those calculators. Mail him if you want, he is accessible.

But whats the point in saying that when all latinos posted in this Thread are between 45-65% european? Most of the non white in this latinos is real amerindian/SSA. So whats the point of saying that in this thread?


most cubans posted in this thread for example are like 40% SSA



This mestizos/pardos posted in this thread are around 50% European so if an iberian is 2% SSA or 3% SSA, only 1/1.5% of the SSA could be "iberian". Its irrelevant.

[Carlito's Way]

all this over irrelevant less than 1% SSA in Iberians? smh damn
a Cuban with 3 Canarian grandparents or even all 4 grandparents will be easily to tell apart from a Cuban with black African ancestry
how? the Northeast African will be higher in the Cuban with all 4 Canarian grandparents and have minor SSA
while the Cuban with most black African ancestry will have higher SSA and minor Northeastern African

the same way North Africans come out scoring and also Canarians, that is how you know whose black ancestry is ancient (Canarians), and whose is more recent (black admixed Latinos)

[Adamastor]

But whats the point in saying that when all latinos posted in this Thread are between 45-65% european? Most of the non white in this latinos is real amerindian/SSA. So whats the point of saying that in this thread?


most cubans posted in this thread for example are like 40% SSA

Well, yeah, I agree that my observations are not significant in those levels, from 40% to 42% SSA there's barely any difference, but we should take GEDmatch results with a grain of salt anyway. The tool is very old and even if it can show some interesting tendencies, it's still not designed for that. I like your work, I'm just pointing the problems with GEDmatch; there are better calculators right now.

[Argentano]

Well, yeah, I agree that my observations are not significant in those levels, from 40% to 42% SSA there's barely any difference, but we should take GEDmatch results with a grain of salt anyway. The tool is very old and even if it can show some interesting tendencies, it's still not designed for that. I like your work, I'm just pointing the problems with GEDmatch; there are better calculators right now.


I understand its true what you say that some highly euro Cubans and highly euro brazilian scoring "high" NEA/SSA can be in canarian/azorean levels. But remember those are the minority of the thousands of samples i post in this sites. For example in this thread everybody posted is in the mestizo/pardo level. So this doesent even apply

And also take into consideration that not every canarian/azorian scores super high SSA/NEA . Some actually score low levels. So for a cuban/brazilian group to be in the same range as those euros you cannot have everybody scoring the max. You should be close to the average of that group.

And last I am not so sure that the low level compoents are always noise. For example somebody could say that the 0-2% SSA in regular iberians is noise, but i almost never see SSA in northern euro kits. So why should some nations score "noise" and others dont? i dont really think those low levels are always noise. I think they are something even when its small

User token laughed when i tried to explain him that the high siberian in latinos wasnt just noise or an error of the calculator. Here you have a siberian boxplot of 2 indomestizo nations vs iberia Do you think this is just noise? Its a very clear pattern that the calculator correctly sees in most samples, even when its small.

I am not saying this guys are siberian but there is something consistent in the results. IMO something related the Native American ancestry in those countries and clearly not european

https://i.imgur.com/Qi3gv5Q.png

[Adamastor]

I understand its true what you say that some highly euro Cubans and highly euro brazilian scoring "high" NEA/SSA can be in canarian/azorean levels. But remember those are the minority of the thousands of samples i post in this sites. For example in this thread everybody posted is in the mestizo/pardo level. So this doesent even apply

And also take into consideration that not every canarian/azorian scores super high SSA/NEA . Some actually score low levels. So for a cuban/brazilian group to be in the same range as those euros you cannot have everybody scoring the max. You should be close to the average of that group.

And last I am not so sure that the low level compoents are always noise. For example somebody could say that the 0-2% SSA in regular iberians is noise, but i almost never see SSA in northern euro kits. So why should some nations score "noise" and others dont? i dont really think those low levels are always noise. I think they are something even when its small

User token laughed when i tried to explain him that the high siberian in latinos wasnt just noise or an error of the calculator. Here you have a siberian boxplot of 2 indomestizo nations vs iberia Do you think this is just noise? Its a very clear pattern that the calculator correctly sees in most samples, even when its small.

I am not saying this guys are siberian but there is something consistent in the results. IMO something related the Native American ancestry in those countries and clearly not european

https://i.imgur.com/Qi3gv5Q.png

This type of ''noise'' isn't really noise as you pointed well. This type of ancestry is really there. The problem is that GEDmatch calculators lack many references to extremely important archaic groups, like Iberomaurusians or Paleo-Amerindians, so they mistake these things for other components, it also can mistake part of the ANE or even WHG ancestry in Europeans as East Eurasian or SSA (there are proto-Indo-European samples scoring 5% SSA, what is completely impossible). That's what Token was talking about.

Just to show one case: We know for academic peer-reviewed studies that average Maghrebis aren't 25% West African as showed by GEDmatch calculators. They are roughly 1/3 Iberomaurusian, 1/3 Sardinian, 1/3 Levant. But no GEDmatch calculator has Iberomaurusian components, that's why all North Africans come up as 1/4 SSA, because of some deep ancestry shared by Iberomaurusians and West Africans.

That's the source of Iberian ''SSA'', North African admixture. That's why Canarians, Portuguese, Galicians always score SSA even if they don't have black ancestry and Basques never score it. The cline goes like this: Canarians can be from 15% to 40-50% North African, so they score from 5% to 10% SSA + Northeast African; Portuguese and Galicians can range from 5% to 1/8 (12%) North African, so they score in the 3-4% range, Andalusians are around 5% North African, so they score 2-3% and so on.

When we model heavily Euro (80%+) Cubans or Brazilians we must take into account that not all of the Northeast African + SSA is actual recent black admixture. In cases of people scoring 4%, 5%, maybe even all of it must come from North African instead of true ''black slave'' ancestry. In the case of Amerindian I don't know, but things like Siberian in very low amounts could have come both from Europeans and from Amerindians, so it's hard to know.

In the case of South Asian, Southeast Asian and East Asian I take for granted that it is noise, there's no other explanation, especially for South Asian.

[Argentano]

This type of ''noise'' isn't really noise as you pointed well. This type of ancestry is really there. The problem is that GEDmatch calculators lack many references to extremely important archaic groups, like Iberomaurusians or Paleo-Amerindians, so they mistake these things for other components, it also can mistake part of the ANE or even WHG ancestry in Europeans as East Eurasian or SSA (there are proto-Indo-European samples scoring 5% SSA, what is completely impossible). That's what Token was talking about.

Just to show one case: We know for academic peer-reviewed studies that average Maghrebis aren't 25% West African as showed by GEDmatch calculators. They are roughly 1/3 Iberomaurusian, 1/3 Sardinian, 1/3 Levant. But no GEDmatch calculator has Iberomaurusian components, that's why all North Africans come up as 1/4 SSA, because of some deep ancestry shared by Iberomaurusians and West Africans.

That's the source of Iberian ''SSA'', North African admixture. That's why Canarians, Portuguese, Galicians always score SSA even if they don't have black ancestry and Basques never score it. The cline goes like this: Canarians can be from 15% to 40-50% North African, so they score from 5% to 10% SSA + Northeast African; Portuguese and Galicians can range from 5% to 1/8 (12%) North African, so they score in the 3-4% range, Andalusians are around 5% North African, so they score 2-3% and so on.

When we model heavily Euro (80%+) Cubans or Brazilians we must take into account that not all of the Northeast African + SSA is actual recent black admixture. In cases of people scoring 4%, 5%, maybe even all of it must come from North African instead of true ''black slave'' ancestry. In the case of Amerindian I don't know, but things like Siberian in very low amounts could have come both from Europeans and from Amerindians, so it's hard to know.

In the case of South Asian, Southeast Asian and East Asian I take for granted that it is noise, there's no other explanation, especially for South Asian.

But here in this thread/boxplots/eurogenes k15 we are talking about ancient ancestry. If you are part iberomarusian arent you part ancient SSA too?

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/03/oldest-dna-africa-offers-clues-mysterious-ancient-culture


DNA in hand, Van de Loosdrecht and Choongwon Jeong, also ​of SHH, were able to analyze genetic material from the cell’s nucleus in five people and the maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA from seven people. But they found no genetic tie to ancient Europeans. Instead, the ancient Iberomaurusians appear to be related to Middle Easterners and other Africans: They shared about two-thirds of their genetic ancestry with Natufians, hunter-gatherers who lived in the Middle East 14,500 to 11,000 years ago, and one-third with sub-Saharan Africans who were most closely related to today’s West Africans and the Hadza of Tanzania.

Apparently this iberomarusians were already 33% SSA. So its understandable that the more iberomarusian a population is, the more ancient SSA people will score.

I think you assumed i was saying the SSA in the boxplots was recent from slaves but i never said so.

It seems we were both looking at different things (Recent SSA vs ancient SSA) thats why we couldnt understand each other

[Adamastor]

I think you assumed i was saying the SSA in the boxplots was recent from slaves but i never said so.
It seems we were both looking at different things (Recent SSA vs ancient SSA) thats why we couldnt understand each other

Yeah, that's likely the reason of misunderstanding. Not all SSA in Latin Americans with Canarian/Portuguese/Galician/Extremaduran ancestry is recent from slaves. The good hint is the Northeast African component, if the guy also scores it in substantial amounts (more than 1.5%) likely part of his Northeast_African + SSA is from Portuguese/Spanish North African ancestry.



Apparently this iberomarusians were already 33% SSA. So its understandable that the more iberomarusian a population is, the more ancient SSA people will score.

Actually no one have an idea of what exactly Iberomaurusians were, we know that 70% of their DNA was Caucasus-related (Dzudzuana) and 30% ''Ancient North African'', an archaic population that no one has an idea of what they were. Neolithic farmers from Europe had Iberomaurusian ancestry via Natufian-related type of ancestry and Natufians themselves had SSA affinities. When we reach ancient populations, these simple classifications of ''Caucasoid'', ''Negroid'' or ''Mongoloid'' start to blurry. For example, there's a 40.000 years gap between WHGs, ANE and Natufians, so saying they are all West Eurasian isn't necessarily true. Populations with those components may be regarded as West Eurasian nowadays, but the pure forms are something else. Chad Rohlfsen of Population Genomics blog and Razib Khan believe that Iberomaurusians were fully ''Caucasoid'', while others disagree. What we know for sure is that both West Eurasian and SSA populations have Iberomaurusian contributions. In the same way we discovered ANE in Amerindians, it seems many Sub-Saharan populations have Eurasian ties.

That's why I think using calculators based on ancient components (like GEDmatch) to calculate ''Caucasian'', ''Negroid'' and ''Indigenous'' ancestries in Latin Americans aren't really useful, especially considering that GEDmatch lacks samples from many of those populations. I think K13/K15 are indeed the best GEDmatch calculators, but they are very far behind more sophisticate tools like nMonte (that is, by far, the best way to model someone's ancestry).

I'm not saying this because I have any agenda and want to pass off Latinos with 30% Amerindian or SSA as Europeans, it's just an objection from a ''scientific'' standpoint. I really think 23andme (and similar calculators) are more efficient picking up Latin American ancestry.

[alnortedelsur]

Some comments regarding this pardos

Cuba is mostly euro ssa very low amerindian

Venezuela has more amerindian than ssa. Phenotopically they look the other way around

Southern cone mestizos plus mexican mestizos have similar low ssa

That's only valid if you pick the darkest/most SSA lower class Venezuelans from the large cities, as the Venezuelan average, when they're not. And they look more SSA, precisely because they are more African than the Venezuelan SSA average.

A very average Venezuelan look (when we average ALL the Venezuelan population) would be somebody who looks like half Euro, and shows some Amerindian and African traits, and looks kind of mestizoid, but with some more or less visible African influence, not enough, however, to make the person look mulatto. Diosdado Cabello would be a good example.

[Daven]

Argentano has a clear agenda is making us believe 30% amerindian is invisible while at the first time paiting someone like Oprah Winfrey a typical balanced mulatto. I bet he thinks your average harnizo looks like Penélope Cruz or Sophia Loren and your average balanced mestizo like Salma Hayek or Ximena Navarrete LMAO. That's how biased some Latin Americans are on this board. Don't blame the poor guy though. He lacks exposure to diversity where he lives. I bet he thinks the average Venezuelan looks like Elvis Andrus or some shit.

[axel.aleman]

Argentano has a clear agenda is making us believe 30% amerindian is invisible while at the first time paiting someone like Oprah Winfrey a typical balanced mulatto. I bet he thinks your average harnizo looks like Penélope Cruz or Sophia Loren and your average balanced mestizo like Salma Hayek or Ximena Navarrete LMAO. That's how biased some Latin Americans are on this board. Don't blame the poor guy though. He lacks exposure to diversity where he lives. I bet he thinks the average Venezuelan looks like Elvis Andrus or some shit.

I have only 18.75%(less than castizos) and the Amerindian in me Is visible in slanted eyes and nose

[Erronkari]

Up to 6% the native could be visible, but there are also some individuals who have more than 25% amerindian and not show any trait off.
With the SSA happens the same, some with 8% have a wide nose or woolly hair and others with 20% don't show nothing.
Genetics and Phenotype not always match.
And Daven, this time you are wrong.
This is not a an homogeneous country.
NOT AT ALL.

[Peterski]

Just to show one case: We know for academic peer-reviewed studies that average Maghrebis aren't 25% West African as showed by GEDmatch calculators. They are roughly 1/3 Iberomaurusian, 1/3 Sardinian, 1/3 Levant. But no GEDmatch calculator has Iberomaurusian components, that's why all North Africans come up as 1/4 SSA, because of some deep ancestry shared by Iberomaurusians and West Africans.

That's the source of Iberian ''SSA'', North African admixture.

Iberomaurusians were "racially" 40% Sub-Saharan, 2018 study says:

"main mixture model for the Iberomaurusians in M. van de Loosdrecht et al. (~60/40% Natufian-like/Sub-Saharan African-related)."

Did you think they were pure Caucasoids? Just because they lived in North Africa? And no, they were most likely not ancestral to Natufians despite what another study claimed. As Chad Rohlfsen (from "Population Genomics Blog") explained, it had to be shared ancestor (rather than one being descended from the other).

Quote:

"Iberomaurusian > Natufian doesn't go with the fact Natufians have no relationship with Africans. Natufians and Iberomaurusians share an ancestor."

And only partially shared ancestor. The other part of Iberomaurusian ancestry was SSA-relared. This is the mixture model that Davidski posted on Eurogenes Blog:

[1] distance%=24.6253 / distance=0.246253

Iberomaurusian

Natufian 65.45
Dinka 22.9
Yoruba 9.45
Tianyuan 2.2

In terms of physical anthropology, in Prehistoric North Africa according to "The Terminal Pleistocene and Early Holocene Populations of Northern Africa (1999)", quote:

"Evidently the Caucasoid/Negroid transition has fluctuated north and south over time."

^^^
For example one of the oldest known North African Homo Sapiens looked like this:

https://i.imgur.com/2suPq9C.jpg

^^^
Does is it really matter so much if "SSA" DNA in Iberomaurusians was from people like modern Yoruba, like modern Dinka (Nilotes), or from people similar to this very ancient Jebel Irhoud Man?:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/world-s-oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found-morocco

It still means ancestry way more closely related to modern SSA than to modern Non-Africans. K15 reads it correctly as Non-Caucasoid.

And it still means that the Iberomaurusians probably looked "like President Barack Obama", or even more African than him.

[Daven]

Up to 6% the native could be visible, but there are also some individuals who have more than 25% amerindian and not show any trait off.
With the SSA happens the same, some with 8% have a wide nose or woolly hair and others with 20% don't show nothing.
Genetics and Phenotype not always match.
And Daven, this time you are wrong.
This is not a an homogeneous country.
NOT AT ALL.

I thought he was Chilean (even with that name and all LMAO). Either way I was referring to SSA diversity which the South Cone has (some) but not to the level of New York or Santo Domingo for example. Of course Argentina is diverse. You guys have blancos from all areas of Europe. Plus mestizos of all types, Asians, Middle easterns, Bolivians, Paraguayans, some Venezuelans, some Dominicans, etc, etc. I don't like Argentano at all. He called me new world black in a derogatory way.

[Skengdo]

Argentano has a clear agenda is making us believe 30% amerindian is invisible while at the first time paiting someone like Oprah Winfrey a typical balanced mulatto. I bet he thinks your average harnizo looks like Penélope Cruz or Sophia Loren and your average balanced mestizo like Salma Hayek or Ximena Navarrete LMAO. That's how biased some Latin Americans are on this board. Don't blame the poor guy though. He lacks exposure to diversity where he lives. I bet he thinks the average Venezuelan looks like Elvis Andrus or some shit.

I don't think he does that. He just thinks the average result just gravitates to something less different than the original. I don't know why you complain so much about this when you know it's true. It's not that deep. The closest the components are, the less the results stray from the original.

A half middle eastern/european would look less mixed than someone who is half north Indian/european. And such subcontinental mix would also look less mixed than a Mestizo or CentralAsian. Likewise those would look less mixed than a mulatto. It's not that deep. It doesn't take into account certain individuals but the whole picture.

And scientifically he isn't wrong. In any PCA plot a Mestizo would be closer to West Eurasians than a Mulatto. Amerindians are fully Eurasian. Africans are fully non-Eurasian. This also translates to looks to a great extent. An Amerindian itself by default is also closer to West Eurasians than full Africans are. This is one of the main reasons. And this is something that is fully measurable and quantifiable by objective methods, not subjective mumbo jumbo about judging looks or not being exposed to diversity.

Then we aren't even taking into account the ANE (west eurasian-like) most Amerindians have in 30-40%. One would think someone who is 30% Amerindian would be 30% mongoloid, but in reality he'd be 17/18% Mongoloid (east eurasian) only.

[Erronkari]

I thought he was Chilean (even with that name and all LMAO). Either way I was referring to SSA diversity which the South Cone has (some) but not to the level of New York or Santo Domingo for example. Of course Argentina is diverse. You guys have blancos from all areas of Europe. Plus mestizos of all types, Asians, Middle easterns, Bolivians, Paraguayans, some Venezuelans, some Dominicans, etc, etc. I don't like Argentano at all. He called me new world black in a derogatory way.

Oh It's ok friend.
In that sense you are absolutely right.
Yes, of course we lack of that huge diversity of other places, apart which you mentioned we can add also La Habana, San Juan, Miami, Río de Janeiro and a lot of other places.
But as you said It's far to be an ethnostate either. ;)

[axel.aleman]

Up to 6% the native could be visible, but there are also some individuals who have more than 25% amerindian and not show any trait off.
With the SSA happens the same, some with 8% have a wide nose or woolly hair and others with 20% don't show nothing.
Genetics and Phenotype not always match.
And Daven, this time you are wrong.
This is not a an homogeneous country.
NOT AT ALL.

My mother are 25% SSA and does not show SSA traits my father are 25% and show curly hair and wide nose but fair skin, i am 25% SSA and show brown pigmentation and curly hair

[Skengdo]

Up to 6% the native could be visible, but there are also some individuals who have more than 25% amerindian and not show any trait off.
With the SSA happens the same, some with 8% have a wide nose or woolly hair and others with 20% don't show nothing.
Genetics and Phenotype not always match.
And Daven, this time you are wrong.
This is not a an homogeneous country.
NOT AT ALL.

If you make a morph with a large sample number it would definitely show one way or another.

I agree it doesn't entirely apply to individual levels, but I don't think Argentano ever claimed it did. We all can show 50/50 mixed idividuals either of Amerindian, Asian or African ancestry who don't show much of it.

But one would be foolish to think that in 20 individuals it would not show. It will most certainly do.

There isn't any problem admitting a half Saudi/half German would look closer to the European standard (and it would also show in a PCA plot) than someone who is half Amerindian/Spanish. Even if the result looks visibly Saudi! The population is a lot closer genetically so it makes sense. I don't see why there's resistance to admitting a 50/50 mestizo would look closer to that standard than someone who is 50/50 mulatto.

[Peterski]

And this is why people like me can score over 2% South Asian (with no Balkan shift, so Romani ancestry is impossible).

Show your 23andMe results for comparison?

You don't score any Central&South Asia there?

A large part of your ancestry is Italian so your Romani-related Balkan shift can be hardly visible because it can be masked by your more significant Italian shift (bear in mind that some commercial companies such as Ancestry and FTDNA even count parts of Italy together with parts of Greece and parts of the Balkans as the same broad genetic regions).

North Italy has some overlap with Western Balkans, while South Italy with Eastern Balkans. Before Slavic invasion as you know this overlap was even greater (for example ancient Dalmatia was basically like modern Bergamo).

=====

BTW, the Spanish Gitano GEDmatch kits that I have (I found them already long before the publication of this study with Spanish Roma, but I have these academic Spanish Roma samples too) have Italian shift, rather than Balkan.

Gitanos most likely mixed with Italians during their migration to Iberia. Which makes sense because they had to go through Italy when moving from South-East Europe towards Iberia.

I think Spanish Gitanos have Bulgarian, Serbian, Greek and Italian admixtures. So from nearly all the populations that lived along the way (only South French is missing, but it would be hard to tell for sure because of how similar South French are to Iberians and Italians anyway).

[Erronkari]

If you make a morph with a large sample number it would definitely show one way or another.

I agree it doesn't entirely apply to individual levels, but I don't think Argentano ever claimed it did. We all can show 50/50 mixed idividuals either of Amerindian, Asian or African ancestry who don't show much of it.

But one would be foolish to think that in 20 individuals it would not show. It will most certainly do.

There isn't any problem admitting a half Saudi/half German would look closer to the European standard (and it would also show in a PCA plot) than someone who is half Amerindian/Spanish. Even if the result looks visibly Saudi! The population is a lot closer genetically so it makes sense. I don't see why there's resistance to admitting a 50/50 mestizo would look closer to that standard than someone who is 50/50 mulatto.

Indeed, my arguments weren't against Argentano. ;)
They didn't had a specific mate really, I just only tried to point that many times genetics are very random.
Of course parameters exist but there are individuals who shows really different than what their genetics say.
Probably It's not the rule, but it happens...

[Adamastor]

Iberomaurusians were "racially" 40% Sub-Saharan, 2018 study says:

"main mixture model for the Iberomaurusians in M. van de Loosdrecht et al. (~60/40% Natufian-like/Sub-Saharan African-related)."

Do you think they were pure Caucasoids or what? Just because they lived in North Africa? And no, they were most likely not ancestral to Natufians despite what another study claimed. As Chad Rohlfsen (from "Population Genomics Blog") explained, it had to be shared ancestor (rather than one being descended from the other).


I respectfully disagree. The abrupt cline from North Africa to Subsaharan Africa seems to be an old pattern and even if there were Negroid looking people found in ancient North Africa it means nothing, because we could find such remains even in Eurasia. Modern ''Negroids'' retained tropical features from archaic humans, that's why early out of Africa groups like Papuans and Onge look superficially Subsaharan despite having nothing to do with them genetically.

Chad Rohlfsen does not say Iberomaurusians were exactly ''SSA-admixed'' but that Ancestral North African ancestry in them is intermediary between Eurasians and SSAs, kinda like they if they were the chain between Eurasia and Subsaharan Africa. Other study from 2018 (Kefi et al.) found very little Subsaharan influence in Iberomaurusians, I quote:

''The genetic structure of TAF and AFA specimens contains only North African and Eurasian maternal lineages. These finding demonstrate the presence of these haplotypes in North Africa from at least 20,000 YBP. The very low contribution of a Sub-Saharan African haplotype in the Iberomaurusian samples is confirmed. We also highlighted the existence of genetic flows between Southern and Northern coast of the Mediterranean.''


Also, new genetic studies like the Shum Laka paper are showing that the label ''SSA'' may be not really relevant, since some ''SSA'' populations may be more closely related to Eurasians than to other SSAs. We now for sure know that Taforalt was related to modern Western Subsaharan Africans in the sense that they shared ancestors, not that one descend from the other. A similar relationship that Iberomaurusians have with Natufians and other Eurasian populations.

But regardless of all of this that is not even my point to begin with and I think it's very clear since I stated that what Iberomaurusians were is still being discussed, it's all irrelevant to determine recent ancestry of Latin Americans.

For the purpose of this discussion, I don't care if Iberomaurusian in Iberians is true ''SSA'' or ''Caucasoid'', but using Eurogenes K15 you would never be able to model properly the recent ancestry of Cubans, Brazilians, Venezuelans and other Latin Americans whose main ''Caucasoid'' ancestry comes from North African admixed groups like Canarians, Portuguese and Galicians.

[Peterski]

By the way AFAIK it is extremely rare to see North African Berbers (or Arabs) scoring 25% West African.

The ones that really have so much of SSA admixture are Berbers from Southern Algeria (Adrar Province).

So I'm not sure what kind of Berber kits do you have.

Northern Berbers don't have so much SSA.

Post your North African kits and let's see.

[Peterski]

For example, the mean score for Kabyle Berbers in Eurogenes K36 calculator, is 2,84% (so less than 3%) West African.

These people - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabyle_people

By contrast some Southern Berbers score even 40% West African, it is recent & real (but Northern Berbers have under 3%).

[Adamastor]

By the way AFAIK it is extremely rare to see North African Berbers scoring 25% West African.

The ones that really have so much of SSA admixture are Berbers from Southern Algeria (Adrar Province).

So I'm not sure what kind of Berber kits do you have.

Northern Berbers don't have so much SSA.

Post your North African kits and let's see.

Their average is more like 18-22%, it depends if you include Northeast African as SSA or not (even Natufian scored around 6% Northeast African).

Kabyle Berber:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 30.49
2 West_Med 21.37
3 Atlantic 14.59
4 Red_Sea 13.32
5 Northeast_African 9.71
6 Sub-Saharan 9.05
7 Southeast_Asian 1.47


Tunisian:


# Population Percent
1 East_Med 24.78
2 West_Med 23.97
3 Red_Sea 15.39
4 Northeast_African 12.01
5 Atlantic 9.29
6 North_Sea 8.59
7 Sub-Saharan 5.82
8 Southeast_Asian 0.16

As a rule, Tunisians seem to score less SSA than Moroccans and Algerians. In this forum there's a Moroccan Berber who looks very ''white'' (Izana something is his nickname) and he scores 24% SSA + Northeast African.

But as much as I find Berbers fascinating, the topic being discussed is not about them or if their SSA is ''true'' or not. The point is that using K15 to estimate recent ancestry in North African admixed Latin American populations isn't going to be fruitful and can lead to distortion.

And I'm not even discussing the ''noise'' in Siberian, Amerindian etc.

[Peterski]

Twenty Adrar Province Berbers (Southern Algeria), these have the highest SSA (about 10x higher than Kabyle Berbers):


Sample,North-Sea,Atlantic,Baltic,Eastern-Euro,West-Med,West-Asian,East-Med,Red-Sea,South-Asian,Southeast-Asian,Siberian,Amerindian,Oceanian,Northeast African,Sub-Saharan
Adrar1,0,7.68,0,0,10.32,0,9.66,8.5,0.69,0.31,0,0.4 8,0,12.17,50.19
Adrar2,0,0,0,0,7.17,0,6.2,5.14,1.53,0,0.01,0.69,0, 7.57,71.7
Adrar3,0,4.79,1.75,0,6.18,0,5.36,7.09,0,0.75,0,0,0 .23,13.92,59.93
Adrar4,0,6.22,0.14,0,20.51,0,27.22,21.44,0,0,0,0.6 2,0,9.3,14.54
Adrar5,0,8.85,0,0,13.36,0,25.03,21.5,0,0,0,0,0,12. 91,18.36
Adrar6,0,5.74,1.61,0,8.82,0,11.22,8.46,0.66,1.37,0 ,0,0,13.22,48.9
Adrar7,4.1,2.94,0,0,13.65,0,9.32,8.48,0.02,0.1,0,0 ,0,12.76,48.64
Adrar8,0,0,0.61,0,5.91,0,0.56,7.39,0,0.27,0,0,0,9. 66,75.61
Adrar9,0,1.88,0.72,1.74,9.31,0,8.72,8.56,0,0,0,0.1 9,0,10.01,58.87
Adrar10,0.17,4.96,0.15,0,12.11,0,14.12,8.81,0.11,0 ,0.3,0.01,0.44,12.67,46.14
Adrar11,4.22,0.24,0.21,0,8.06,0,1.95,5.24,0,0.21,0 ,0.09,0.02,10.54,69.23
Adrar12,0,9.67,0,0.2,11.46,0,17.75,12.26,0,0.44,0, 1.03,0,9.52,37.68
Adrar13,0.27,2.59,0,0,12.44,0,13.06,6.64,0,0.81,0, 0,0,13.96,50.23
Adrar14,2.71,7.75,0.51,0,18.14,0,21.66,18.61,0,0.3 8,0,0.28,0,11.04,18.92
Adrar15,0,10.04,0,0,24.5,0,17.74,11.03,0,0.07,0,0, 0,14.37,22.25
Adrar16,2.91,1.7,0,0,10.09,0,6.48,8.7,0,0,0,0,0.31 ,15.66,54.15
Adrar17,0,1.08,0,0,3.78,0,3.61,5.46,0,0.12,0,0.51, 0.03,11.31,74.1
Adrar18,0,12.58,0,0.45,19.01,0,24.73,22.38,0,0,0.3 3,0,0,10.92,9.6
Adrar19,0,8.77,0,0,18.73,0,20.18,13.39,0,0,0,0,0.1 2,12.45,26.34
Adrar20,1.56,5.07,0.17,0.35,17.86,0,23.1,22.29,0,0 .94,0,0.37,0,10.91,17.38

^^^
And still you have some among them that score under 10%, so they could "pass" among Northern Berbers:

Adrar18,0,12.58,0,0.45,19.01,0,24.73,22.38,0,0,0.3 3,0,0,10.92,9.6

So I don't know where did you take your "25% SSA on average for Berbers in K15" from, it is not the case.

[Chaos One]

The East Eurasian average in the kits I posted would be around 1.5% and SSA +Northeast African around 3.5%, it's significant noise, 5%. And they are representative.

It's irrelevant for big percentages, I agree, but relevant for people scoring in the 90s or around. Let's say a Cuban with 3 Canarian grandparents is exactly 90% Canarian and 10% SSA. He would be 20% SSA in GEDmatch (Canarians have high SSA due to North African admixture and all Maghrebis are 20% SSA in K15/K13 that's why Canarians are 5-10%). It's a considerable difference IMO. The same way for some guy who is, let's say, 3.8% Amerindian and scored those bullshitic East Asian and Siberian percentages. He could end up being 7% ''Amerindian''.

I mean, I'm not making things up. Davidski himself admits it, he is the fucking creator of all those calculators. Mail him if you want, he is accessible.

This.

There're 2 points here:

1 - Some people just think that some guys will try to deny their SSA/Amerindian score and just blame the calculator for giving some specific numbers. Heck, that would make no sense at all - if you get some specific score (except obvious noise) you already have it, period. Same would work on a different way - that when you get some "weird" number this is pure noise because they cannot accept that you have a XYZ number. As I saw many times, this seems to be a pure TA thing, which people just like to show somekind of proper knowledge about something they do not have. Everytime I see people doing this at other Anthro foruns, they just go and talk about it trying to see why that happen, while here is almost a "THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE YOU CANNOT HAVE IT" or "STOP WITH THIS BS SAYING YOU DON'T HAVE THIS NUMBER BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE CALCULATOR IS SHOWING IT AND MUST ACCEPT"...few guys will just ask you why do you think this is right or wrong.

2 - Also, the calculators by themselves cannot be taken as granted for anything, because while I really believe that guys like Davidski or LM are trying to do their best, not every calculator will work same way and give the same numbers, because there're a huge number of combinations here and there by obvious means.

Maybe this is a good example: at Admix Studio there's a calculator called Tolan K25 which uses a different set of groups. Those are my results there:

Component %
P-Sahara 19,23%
E-West-Med 17,17%
A-Atlantic 16,32%
I-South-East-Europe 10,95%
X-Amerindian 9,8%
N-South-Caucasus 5,96%
B-Scandinavia 5,28%
Q-Equatorial_Africa 4,56%
D-South-Alps 4,42%
F-Baltic 4,01%
C-NW-Europe 1,07%
K-East-Caspian 0,68%
L-South-Caspien 0,16%
H-West_Black-Sea 0,14%
O-North-Anatolia 0,13%
M-Arabia 0,09%
G-Russian-Steppes 0,03%

Now, let's say I'll use those numbers as granted to create a proper situation where I'm just 4.5% SSA and I'm far more North African than anything else. This is a good point to show how any number can be used by granted if I just want too, at same time that anyone can just say that this calculator is wrong...there's no universal truth when doing genetics at this level, numbers can change here and there all the time. But it seems people prefer to be blind and accept anything the want just to make them secure about something else.

[Adamastor]

Twenty Adrar Province Berbers (Southern Algeria), these have the highest SSA (about 10x higher than Kabyle Berbers):


Sample,North-Sea,Atlantic,Baltic,Eastern-Euro,West-Med,West-Asian,East-Med,Red-Sea,South-Asian,Southeast-Asian,Siberian,Amerindian,Oceanian,Northeast African,Sub-Saharan
Adrar1,0,7.68,0,0,10.32,0,9.66,8.5,0.69,0.31,0,0.4 8,0,12.17,50.19
Adrar2,0,0,0,0,7.17,0,6.2,5.14,1.53,0,0.01,0.69,0, 7.57,71.7
Adrar3,0,4.79,1.75,0,6.18,0,5.36,7.09,0,0.75,0,0,0 .23,13.92,59.93
Adrar4,0,6.22,0.14,0,20.51,0,27.22,21.44,0,0,0,0.6 2,0,9.3,14.54
Adrar5,0,8.85,0,0,13.36,0,25.03,21.5,0,0,0,0,0,12. 91,18.36
Adrar6,0,5.74,1.61,0,8.82,0,11.22,8.46,0.66,1.37,0 ,0,0,13.22,48.9
Adrar7,4.1,2.94,0,0,13.65,0,9.32,8.48,0.02,0.1,0,0 ,0,12.76,48.64
Adrar8,0,0,0.61,0,5.91,0,0.56,7.39,0,0.27,0,0,0,9. 66,75.61
Adrar9,0,1.88,0.72,1.74,9.31,0,8.72,8.56,0,0,0,0.1 9,0,10.01,58.87
Adrar10,0.17,4.96,0.15,0,12.11,0,14.12,8.81,0.11,0 ,0.3,0.01,0.44,12.67,46.14
Adrar11,4.22,0.24,0.21,0,8.06,0,1.95,5.24,0,0.21,0 ,0.09,0.02,10.54,69.23
Adrar12,0,9.67,0,0.2,11.46,0,17.75,12.26,0,0.44,0, 1.03,0,9.52,37.68
Adrar13,0.27,2.59,0,0,12.44,0,13.06,6.64,0,0.81,0, 0,0,13.96,50.23
Adrar14,2.71,7.75,0.51,0,18.14,0,21.66,18.61,0,0.3 8,0,0.28,0,11.04,18.92
Adrar15,0,10.04,0,0,24.5,0,17.74,11.03,0,0.07,0,0, 0,14.37,22.25
Adrar16,2.91,1.7,0,0,10.09,0,6.48,8.7,0,0,0,0,0.31 ,15.66,54.15
Adrar17,0,1.08,0,0,3.78,0,3.61,5.46,0,0.12,0,0.51, 0.03,11.31,74.1
Adrar18,0,12.58,0,0.45,19.01,0,24.73,22.38,0,0,0.3 3,0,0,10.92,9.6
Adrar19,0,8.77,0,0,18.73,0,20.18,13.39,0,0,0,0,0.1 2,12.45,26.34
Adrar20,1.56,5.07,0.17,0.35,17.86,0,23.1,22.29,0,0 .94,0,0.37,0,10.91,17.38

Stop being dishonest and mingling calculators, Kabyles don't score 3% SSA in K15, the calculator being discussed here.

[Peterski]

These "black" Berbers are academic samples by the way.


Kabyles don't score 3% SSA in K15

But they don't score even close to 25% either, it is impossible.

Wait a minute, I will check.

[Adamastor]

These "black" Berbers are academic samples by the way.



But they don't score even close to 25% either, it is impossible.

Wait a minute, I will check.

Algerian average (based on Kabyles, I suppose) is 11.84 Northeast African and 10.12 Sub-Saharan in the spreadsheets.

[Adamastor]

In K36, Kabyles score 3% West African on average and Adrar Berbers score 38% West African in K36 on average.

In K15, the very same Adrar Berbers score 44% SSA. This is just a couple % more than their West African in K36.

I forgot where I saved Kabyle average in K15, but it will not be higher than 5% for sure. And you claimed 25%!

North African averages on K15

Algerian 4.18 8.75 0.98 0.51 21.32 0.93 25.13 15.47 0.20 0.24 0.04 0.12 0.18 11.84 10.12
Mozabite_Berber 1.20 11.89 0.42 0.20 23.64 0.24 22.64 15.62 0.02 0.25 0.04 0.01 0.07 12.15 11.62
Moroccan 2.23 9.50 0.52 0.43 24.21 0.21 22.46 17.47 0.04 0.41 0.04 0.03 0.16 13.79 8.49
Tunisian 0.94 11.73 1.47 0.06 20.07 1.69 27.17 15.05 0.00 0.17 0.29 0.00 0.34 10.52 10.4

They are more near 21-22% SSA (including Northeast African); closer to the 25% I claimed than to the 3% you claimed.

[Adamastor]

Also, it must be noted that SSA admixture in Berbers don't follow a north-south cline, some southern Moroccan groups have very little recent SSA while some northern groups have more recent admixture.

[Adamastor]

Yes Northeast African is from Proto-Iberomaurusians.

Because, Proto-Iberomaurusians originated in Northeast Africa (that is probably where the common ancestors with Natufians lived).


Even if Northeast African is not exactly SSA, they are still between 11% and 14%, very far from the 3% you claimed they would score. You would do more good if you admited that Eurogenes K15 lacks a lot of proper references and can be misinterpreted by people with little knowledge of the actual components.

Also, it seems to be very unlikely that only Northeast African is the ''Iberomaurusian'' part given that even part of the SSA they score disappears in calculators with proper Iberomaurusian references. ANA is said to have common ancestors with West Africans and SSA component in K15 is exclusively Yoruban (they score near 100% of it).


But I don't see your point yet, what the hell this discussion has to do with the subject of the thread? You've been proved wrong on your claims of supposed SSA in North Africans.


It does not have to follow any clines, genes don't get transmitted from the ground.

I did the observation to point a common misunderstanding on this forum> that Southern Maghrebis necessarily have more SSA (due to proximity with Subsaharan Africa) than Northern ones.

[Peterski]

very far from the 3% you claimed they would score

The 3% was about West_African in K36. And I estimate 5% Sub_Saharan (admixture's name) in K15.

The GEDmatch spreadsheet for K15 does not have Kabyle average. They are less SSA than Mozabites.


Also, it seems to be very unlikely that only Northeast African is the ''Iberomaurusian'' part given that even part of the SSA they score disappears in calculators with proper Iberomaurusian references.

Yes that's why I called it "Proto-Iberomaurusian". I assume they later absorbed some West African.

In that model posted by Davidski, Iberomaursians can be modelled as Natufian + Dinka + Yoruba.

Dinka represents the Northeast_African. Yoruba represents the West_African / Sub-Saharan.


I did the observation to point a common misunderstanding on this forum> that Southern Maghrebis necessarily have more SSA (due to proximity with Subsaharan Africa) than Northern ones.

In Morocco and Western Sahara it is not the case, but it seems the ones from South Algeria (Ardar) do.

[Adamastor]

The 3% was about West_African in K36. And I estimate 5% Sub_Saharan (admixture's name) in K15.


We have had Kabyle members in the past and not a single one scored as little as 5% of the Sub-Saharan component. The North African with the least SSA admixture I ever seen on K13/K15 had 6% (and 12% Northeast African) and was Tunisian.

The differences between Kabyles and Mozabites aren't huge, I believe Algerian average in K15 is Kabyle (I'm not sure though). I posted a Kabyle result some minutes ago in this thread, they are not that different from other Maghrebis on Eurogenes calculators, perhaps 1-3% less SSA (admixture's name).

[Peterski]

Even if Northeast African is not exactly SSA

Weren't Somalis (who are part Caucasoid) used among references for that component?

But David also posted the model for Iberomaurusians, as a mix of Natufian + Dinka + Yoruba.

Dinka people are Nilotic, they look like this and they have no West Eurasian admixture:

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/tribesman-of-the-dinka-tribe-also-called-jieng-he-wears-an-ivory-and-picture-id635755825

https://pickmyguide.com/business/886/excursions/330/img1046444ae9d1c2ed03.jpg

But they are not closely related to West Africans.

[Adamastor]

Weren't Somalis (who are part Caucasoid) used among references for that component?


It's supposed to be the ''black'' part of Somalis, because they also score SW Asian and Red Sea but it's tricky because it's a huge component on Maasai and other Southeastern Africans with confirmed West Eurasian ancestry, I believe Maasai and some Bantu speaking East Africans are like 10-20% ''Caucasoid''. Bantu N.E. and Bantu S.E. samples on Eurogenes also score Northeast African, but Yorubans, the purest ''SSAs'' don't score any.

The reality is that these Eurogenes calculators are outdated to infer deep ancestry, they cannot reach good results as qGraph and other methods.

[Adamastor]

And why the fuck you edit posts after my responses? It's dishonest, don't think I'm not seeing you're editing your posts after I reply to you.

[Peterski]

Chaos One:

"Sahara" is not North African though.

North Africa is to the north of Sahara.

You would need to ask Tolan what he used for that component but it sounds like it could be samples from the speakers of Nilo-Saharan and Chadic.

Maybe it should be called Sahel:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel

[Peterski]

Bantu N.E. and Bantu S.E. samples on Eurogenes also score Northeast African, but Yorubans, the purest ''SSAs'' don't score any.

This represents Pre-Bantu East Africans.

Before the Bantu migration most of East Africa was inhabited by people more closely related to the Khoisan Bushmen, Nilotes, and to Central African Pygmies than to West Africans.

[Chaos One]

Chaos One:

"Sahara" is not North African though.

North Africa is to the north of Sahara.

You would need to ask Tolan what he used for that component but it sounds like it could be samples from the speakers of Nilo-Saharan and Chadic.

Maybe it should be called Sahel:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel

Since there's no East African, North African and NE African on this calculator, seems this is a mix of all three.

Plus, there's no way I'm 19% Nilotic lol

Edit:

https://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/K25R1.png

Ok, there's "South Med" and "East Med". But this prove my point: just imagine if I just go there and say that I'm "19% Tuareg". Heck, that would make no sense at all - while I do think that I've Hausa or Fulani background (but both are SSA shifted, not Sahelian anyway).

[Adamastor]

Chaos One:

"Sahara" is not North African though.

North Africa is to the north of Sahara.

You would need to ask Tolan what he used for that component but it sounds like it could be samples from the speakers of Nilo-Saharan and Chadic.

Maybe it should be called Sahel:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahel

Sahara is North Africa, seems to be among the highest components on them in this calculator, I've seen results of some North Africans in Tolan K25.


This represents Pre-Bantu East Africans.

Before the Bantu migration most of East Africa was inhabited by people more closely related to the Khoisan Bushmen, Nilotes, and to Central African Pygmies than to West Africans.

When I said purest SSAs I meant they are the purest West Africans. Bantu speaking groups have admixture from African HGs and Pygmies.

Anyway, the discussion ends here, all you know is to spread innacurate bullshit about genetics in any single discussion (about other subjects as well), if that was a serious forum you would receive some kind of warning for editing posts after the response of your discussion partner.

I think that we should have moderation in genetics discussions here, since this is supposedly the only serious section in this forum.

[Peterski]

This shows the distribution of African populations 8000 years ago. Probably the area inhabited by Nilotes is underestimated.

"North Africans" is the area with Natufian-like admixture, which ultimately came from West Eurasia.

https://www.dhushara.com/paradoxhtm/culture.htm

https://www.dhushara.com/paradoxhtm/culture/africa.jpg

[Chaos One]

This shows the distribution of African populations 8000 years ago. Probably the area inhabited by Nilotes is underestimated.

"North Africans" is basically the area with Natufian-like admixture, which ultimately came from West Eurasia.

Iberomaurusians were basically a mix of Nilotic/Bushmen (Bushmen and Nilotoc are related) + West African + Natufian (which defines "North African"):

https://www.dhushara.com/paradoxhtm/culture.htm

https://www.dhushara.com/paradoxhtm/culture/africa.jpg

Ah, another point here.

My South Med at Tolan K13:

A-West-Europe 39,35%
C-South-Med 20,72%

It seems one gives it as South Med, other gives it as Sahelian.

At some point, maybe at K25 my Hausa and Moroccan background made a joint number to be at 19%, while there's residual SSA from the Hausa background.

[Argentano]

Chaos one even when you dont like a specific calculator at least national results are comparable.

You can argue the name of a component but its still useful to compare nations

[Adamastor]

Ah, another point here.


Don't waste your time discussing with Peterski, everything that nigga said in this thread was proved to be plainly wrong. From averages of K13/K15 SSA admixture in North Africans to ancient African populational admixtures.

Maybe he should return to his agenda of proving that Germans don't exist and are confused Poles.


Trolling like this shouldn't be allowed in genetics section IMO.

[Peterski]

Sahara is North Africa, seems to be among the highest components on them in this calculator, I've seen results of some North Africans in Tolan K25.



When I said purest SSAs I meant they are the purest West Africans. Bantu speaking groups have admixture from African HGs and Pygmies.

Yes and K15 has not enough admixtures to represent all of the African populations.

For example Pygmies score a mix of SSA and Northeast African because there is no Pygmy component there.

African HGs such as Hadza, Sandawe and Khoisan (except Pygmies) as well as some Ethiopian groups like Ari should be scoring mostly Northeast African. There is no South African Bushmen (Khoisan) admixture in thie calculator, and Khoisan are more closely related to Northeast Africans than to West Africans.

Northeast African is not based on Somalis. As you noticed, Somalis score also Caucasoid componente like Red Sea

I think it is based on Nilotic tribes with no any West Eurasian admixtute.

Northeast African is a Dinka-like component native to Africa since Paleolithic times.

====

I don't understand your "nitpicking" about Ibermoaursian. You don't complain about the lack of Pygmy, lack of Bushmen, lack of Hadza/Sandawe, etc.

Iberomaurusians were clearly a mixed-race population anyway. 60% Caucasoid and 40% Sub-Saharan, but mostly Dinka-related.

[Chaos One]

Chaos one even when you dont like a specific calculator at least national results are comparable.

You can argue the name of a component but its still useful to compare nations

Can be, but likely wise the usage of components can differ a lot and set the makeup at different points. At this point, I'm not going into K3/K4/K5 Calcs because they can be used to make those analysis, but this case of Tolan's calculators make it clear how things can go from 0 to 100 if you just see numbers without any proper analysis. Still, this SSA thing is a problem like Adamastor said, because the SSA itself is a very complicated number (and Amerindian can be too if someone has Asian admix).

[Peterski]

You would need a K100 calculator to represent every relevant population. But it doesn't mean that K15 is useless, you just need to understand that some populations will appear as something else, because there are not enough components.

But always a closely related component replaces a missing component.

So if Iberomaurusians score 40% SSA it just means they had 40% of indigenous African ancestry (and Natufian-like part - 60% - is not indigenous to Africa but ultimately had to come from Eurasia at one point or another, even if before agriculture).

Why? Because if something is more closely related to Non-Africans than to Africans, then it has to be descended from that "Out of Africa bottleneck" (very small group of people).

[Adamastor]

I don't understand your "nitpicking" about Ibermoaursian. You don't complain about the lack of Pygmy, lack of Bushmen, lack of Hadza/Sandawe, etc.

Iberomaurusians were clearly a mixed-race population anyway. 60% Caucasoid and 40% Sub-Saharan, but mostly Dinka-related.

Stop being dishonest, I'm not complaining, I'm just pointing about it in this thread because Iberomaurusians are part of Iberian DNA, that's why they are being discussed in a thread about Latin Americans.

I'm not talking about Hadza, Pygmy etc because they don't have anything to do with this discussion to begin with. I don't know how you managed to shift the discussion to this subject. Congratulations, man.

I already stated that, for the purposes of the discussion, it's irrelevant if Iberomaurusians were pure Caucasoids or part SSA. If they are part SSA then Canarians are Octoroons, North Africans are Quadroons and Galicians and Portuguese are near 1/16 SSA so it should be relevant for the discussion regardless.

[Peterski]

Sahara is North Africa, seems to be among the highest components on them in this calculator, I've seen results of some North Africans in Tolan K25.



When I said purest SSAs I meant they are the purest West Africans. Bantu speaking groups have admixture from African HGs and Pygmies.

Equatorial Guinea, Gabon etc. have admixture from Pygmies and possibly other ("ghost") Hunter-Gatherers. Who would score high Northeast African in K15. Because African HG component is not there.

So if Latinos score Northeast African in K15, it can be from slaves who originated in Equatorial Guinea (for example).

Or from the Chadic-speaking Hausa people, who also score high Northeast African, and they live as far west as Nigeria.

=====

Argentano showed that Latinos with high European have either zero or noise levels of rhis component.

It is mostly of SSA origin in Latin America.

[Adamastor]

By the way, I don't think Iberomaurusians were part-SSA, Peterski doesn't have knowledge enough to affirm that and many of his affirmations contradict the Shum Laka paper that came out this year (2020).


This is an Iberomaurusian reconstruction from crania discovered in 1967, recently reconstructed by French biological anthropologists:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/4a/b2/5f4ab29f9fb3ad5c8ed1043723c13224.jpg

Doesn't look like someone that is 40% Dinka.

[Adamastor]

Argentano showed that Latinos with high European have either zero or noise levels of rhis component.


This is not true, because average for West Iberians is near 2.70, inform yourself better.

[Peterski]

By the way, I don't think Iberomaurusians were part-SSA

They were up to 40% Non-Out-Of-Africans.

Non-Out-Of-African = indigenous African.

On the other hand, Natufian-like DNA (at least 60%) is descended from the Out-Of-Africa migration, which is why it is more closely related to Eurasians, and even to Australian Aborigines or Andaman Negritos, etc. than to Dinka.


many of his affirmations contradict the Shum Laka paper that came out this year (2020).

Like what? The Shum Laka paper is about Cameroon not about North Africa. They found Ancient Pygmies in Cameroon. Pygmies still live in Cameroon today, might be their direct descendants. The only surprise was that they did not find Bantu-like samples. Maybe it means they just did not have luck and sampled only Pygmy bones, or maybe it means the Proto-Bantu homeland was not in Cameroon but further west for example in Nigeria.


This is an Iberomaurusian reconstruction from crania discovered in 1967, recently reconstructed by French biological anthropologists:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/4a/b2/5f4ab29f9fb3ad5c8ed1043723c13224.jpg

Doesn't look like someone that is 40% Dinka.

That pigmentation is pure fantasy:

In reality they had darker colours:

https://i.imgur.com/wOIVz26.jpg

^^^
"Medium skin and black hair, half Northeast African":

https://www.biography.com/.image/t_share/MTE4MDAzNDEwNzg5ODI4MTEw/barack-obama-12782369-1-402.jpg

[Skengdo]

By the way, I don't think Iberomaurusians were part-SSA, Peterski doesn't have knowledge enough to affirm that and many of his affirmations contradict the Shum Laka paper that came out this year (2020).


This is an Iberomaurusian reconstruction from crania discovered in 1967, recently reconstructed by French biological anthropologists:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/4a/b2/5f4ab29f9fb3ad5c8ed1043723c13224.jpg

Doesn't look like someone that is 40% Dinka.

What do you think about the contrary though? If Ibero Maurisians aren't part SSA but SSA are part Ibero Maurusian would that mean they're significantly Eurasian?

[Skengdo]

I have only 18.75%(less than castizos) and the Amerindian in me Is visible in slanted eyes and nose

It may not be entirely due to Amerindian ancestry. Plenty of blacks and europeans have slanted eyes too.

It's very imprecise to select traits and assign them to a particular race in very mixed people like you.

[Peterski]

What do you think about the contrary though? If Ibero Maurisians aren't part SSA but SSA are part Ibero Maurusian would that mean they're significantly Eurasian?

Where is Natufian DNA in Yorubas or Dinkas?

If they are part-Iberomaurusian they should have Natufian-like DNA.

[Skengdo]

Where is Natufian DNA in Yorubas or Dinkas?

If they are part-Iberomaurusian they should have Natufian-like DNA.

They don't have it. I'm just trying to see the rationale on (what I think) he's saying.

I think he means the non natufian component in them, but I may be wrong.

[Ranger0075]

Nice stuff being produced through these discussions. I am not into reading anthropogenic articles at all, I even believe small skull individuals are most prone to be less intelligents. I wonder if it is really true or myth, so is small cranium/skull a sign of low intelligence?

[Argentano]

Argentano has a clear agenda is making us believe 30% amerindian is invisible while at the first time paiting someone like Oprah Winfrey a typical balanced mulatto. I bet he thinks your average harnizo looks like Penélope Cruz or Sophia Loren and your average balanced mestizo like Salma Hayek or Ximena Navarrete LMAO. That's how biased some Latin Americans are on this board. Don't blame the poor guy though. He lacks exposure to diversity where he lives. I bet he thinks the average Venezuelan looks like Elvis Andrus or some shit.


I have only 18.75%(less than castizos) and the Amerindian in me Is visible in slanted eyes and nose




Up to 6% the native could be visible, but there are also some individuals who have more than 25% amerindian and not show any trait off.
With the SSA happens the same, some with 8% have a wide nose or woolly hair and others with 20% don't show nothing.
Genetics and Phenotype not always match.
And Daven, this time you are wrong.
This is not a an homogeneous country.
NOT AT ALL.




I don't think he does that. He just thinks the average result just gravitates to something less different than the original. I don't know why you complain so much about this when you know it's true. It's not that deep. The closest the components are, the less the results stray from the original.

A half middle eastern/european would look less mixed than someone who is half north Indian/european. And such subcontinental mix would also look less mixed than a Mestizo or CentralAsian. Likewise those would look less mixed than a mulatto. It's not that deep. It doesn't take into account certain individuals but the whole picture.

And scientifically he isn't wrong. In any PCA plot a Mestizo would be closer to West Eurasians than a Mulatto. Amerindians are fully Eurasian. Africans are fully non-Eurasian. This also translates to looks to a great extent. An Amerindian itself by default is also closer to West Eurasians than full Africans are. This is one of the main reasons. And this is something that is fully measurable and quantifiable by objective methods, not subjective mumbo jumbo about judging looks or not being exposed to diversity.

Then we aren't even taking into account the ANE (west eurasian-like) most Amerindians have in 30-40%. One would think someone who is 30% Amerindian would be 30% mongoloid, but in reality he'd be 17/18% Mongoloid (east eurasian) only.


After seeing a lot of gedmatch/23andme results + pics i think that phenotypes are kind of random, altough gorups of people should make sense phenotype wise.

No i dont think 30% amerindian is invisibile, in fact there are cases where i think its super visible (this randomness i was talking about). But i have noticed that Nigga blood notices much more. Thats why many individuals only scoring 20/30% SSA already look new world black.

Thats why mulato countries tend to be more european than people think in genetic studies.

And dont forget a mestizo is only around 30% East Asian genetically whereas a mulato is indeed 50% African.

https://i.imgur.com/dTVo6Cv.png
https://i.imgur.com/PfkuC9o.png

[Peterski]

The Non-Natufian part is just indigenous African.

I don't think the term "Sub-Saharan" makes sense.

Today we make North Africa vs. Sub-Saharan distinction only because North Africa is an Eurasian colony (from Egypt to Morocco, inhabitants are mostly of Eurasian origin, but hat was not the case for example 30,000 years ago).

Before Eurasians (including Natufian-like group) came to North Africa, "black people" lived both north and south of the Sahara.

Also there was time when Sahara was "green" and was not a desert but densely inhabited.

[Adamastor]

They were up to 40% Non-Out-Of-Africans.

And Non-Out-Of-African = indigenous African.

On the other hand, Natufian-like DNA (at least 60%) is descended from the Out-of-Africa migration, which is why it is more closely related to Eurasians, and even to Australian Aborigines or Andaman Negritos, etc. than to Dinka.



Actually it seems there were back migration of Eurasians to Africa before Natufians expanded into North Africa and it seems that ANA isn't SSA related. I quote from the Shum Laka paper:

''We can also obtain a good fit for the Shum Laka individuals in a less parsimonious alternative model using three components, replacing the basal West African source with a combination of ancestry from inside the clade defined by the other West African populations and from a source
entirely outside the West African clade (near one lineage that contributes to the Taforalt individuals) (Extended Data Fig. 5, Supplementary Information section 3). However, two-component models for the Shum Laka individuals that have the majority source splitting closer to other West or East Africans are rejected''

That lineage that contributed to Taforalt is entirely outside West African lineage and is also not necessarily related to Dinka-like people.

One more quote, from another forum (that I plan to join soon):


Africa is genetically speaking very diverse. However, all of its completely indigenous genetic clusters are greatly divergent from the indigenous components found outside Africa and in North Africa. The differentiation between North Africa and SSA exists as early as the Late Pleistocene time. Aside from the people from the Horn of Africa, most SSA people have merely minor admixture from outside Africa. The SSA populations clearly form a separate group of peoples and cluster very much away from non-Africans and people with North African indigenous ancestry mixed with non-African ancestry. Therefore most modern and ancient North Africans, can be easily distinguished from these in genetic studies. Even though there is a great genetic diversity within SSA, the pattern is that all other human outside SSA cluster much closer to each other than to any of those, basically forming a separate branch of humankind.


So we have some options here:

1) You did not read the Shum Laka Paper, as seems probable based on this quote of yours:


Like what? The Shum Laka paper is about Cameroon not about North Africa. They found Ancient Pygmies in Cameroon. Pygmies still live in Cameroon today, might be their direct descendants. The only surprise was that they did not find Bantu-like samples. Maybe it means they just did not hace luck and samples only Pygmy bones, or maybe it means the Proto-Bantu homeland was not in Cameroon but further west for example in Nigeria.

Or

2) You don't understand it

About their pigmentation, it's completely irrelevant, almost all humans were dark-skinned back then.

[Argentano]

It may not be entirely due to Amerindian ancestry. Plenty of blacks and europeans have slanted eyes too.

It's very imprecise to select traits and assign them to a particular race in very mixed people like you.

notice he is almost as amerindian as he is SSA but he states mulatoid in his profile phenotype

[Peterski]

You could argue that Nilotic / Dinka-like DNA is also not "Sub-Saharan". Because they live in Sudan and even reach southern edges of Egypt.

The ones on the southern border of Egypt - Nubians - have Eurasian admixture already.

But generally Nilotic DNA is indigenous African and in terms of skin colour they are black as coal, actually darker than any West African group.

[Adamastor]

@ Peterski: Why don't you just adress my point? I think the Iberomaurusian discussion is interesting, but that's not my point here. You're just trying to create a smokescreen to avoid discussing the main subject. If Iberomaurusians were ''part-black'' or not is entirely irrelevant for the discussion.

[Peterski]

@ Peterski: Why don't you just adress my point? I think the Iberomaurusian discussion is interesting, but that's not my point here. You're just trying to create a smokescreen to avoid discussing the main subject. If Iberomaurusians were ''part-black'' or not is entirely irrelevant for the discussion.

Okay so what was the main point?

[Argentano]

@ Peterski: Why don't you just adress my point? I think the Iberomaurusian discussion is interesting, but that's not my point here. You're just trying to create a smokescreen to avoid discussing the main subject. If Iberomaurusians were ''part-black'' or not is entirely irrelevant for the discussion.

What perterski is saying is that if iberomarusians were already part SSA then the SSA that eurogenes k15 sees is real.

[Peterski]

Actually it seems there were back migration of Eurasians to Africa before Natufians expanded into North Africa and it seems that ANA isn't SSA related. I quote from the Shum Laka paper:

''We can also obtain a good fit for the Shum Laka individuals in a less parsimonious alternative model using three components, replacing the basal West African source with a combination of ancestry from inside the clade defined by the other West African populations and from a source
entirely outside the West African clade (near one lineage that contributes to the Taforalt individuals) (Extended Data Fig. 5, Supplementary Information section 3). However, two-component models for the Shum Laka individuals that have the majority source splitting closer to other West or East Africans are rejected''

That lineage that contributed to Taforalt is entirely outside West African lineage and is also not necessarily related to Dinka-like people.

That lineage was still more closely related to Sub-Saharans than to Non-Africans. Otherwise e.g. K15 would not read this DNA as "African".

Paleolithic Europeans predating WHG ("Villabruna cluster") are mostly extinct today, but were still related more to Europeans than to others.

We have the same situation here, some extinct (or mostly extinct - still exist as minor admixture in other groups) African hunter-gatherers.


and from a source entirely outside the West African clade

Yeah, but they don't say that this source was more closely related to Eurasians than to Africans.

And by contrast Natufian-like DNA is obviously more closely related to Eurasians than to Africans.


and is also not necessarily related to Dinka-like people

Where does the paper say it, did they actually check this possibility that they were Nilotic-like?

[Adamastor]

Okay so what was the main point?

I said it many times: difficulty of modeling recent ancestry of Latin Americans using K15 (or any other GEDmatch calculators). Most Iberians (actually most Europeans) will score non-West Eurasian components in these calculators, what makes the results skewed. Not in immense numbers, of course, but in small fractions like 2-3%. It may sound irrelevant when we discuss very mixed people with 20-30% + of admixture like in this thread, but is relevant for people scoring below 20%. If you use Spanish samples it may not look obvious, but using Portuguese and Galician samples it is.

I gave the example of high SSA (for European standards) in Iberians with high North African (Galicians, Portuguese, Extremadurans) and Canarians. It doesn't matter if it's true SSA or not, if it's ancient from 3000 years ago or from 700 years ago in the time of the Moors. But it can make an individual that is fully European become ''mixed-race'' if we consider only West Eurasian components as part of European ancestry. Basically all Portuguese, Galician, West Andalusian and Canarian results I've seen score more than 2% SSA (and some also minor/noise quantities of East Eurasian). Some other Europeans score bullshits like Southeast Asian and East Asian, that may also skew the parameters.

Since Canarians, Galicians and Portuguese are the main European ancestries of Brazilians and Cubans, many of them who are fully or mostly European will look more SSA than they are.

I have many kits of Portuguese in my possession (because I want to compare with Brazilians) and not a single one is 0% SSA + Northeast African.

[Adamastor]

I'm not going to discuss this Iberomaurusian stuff here, we can open a thread about it if you want. I still maintain that it is not SSA ''BLACK'' DNA, but that was not the point since the beggining.

[Argentano]

I said it many times: difficulty of modeling recent ancestry of Latin Americans using K15 (or any other GEDmatch calculators). Most Iberians (actually most Europeans) will score non-West Eurasian components in these calculators, what makes the results skewed. Not in immense numbers, of course, but in small fractions like 2-3%. It may sound irrelevant when we discuss very mixed people with 20-30% + of admixture like in this thread, but is relevant for people scoring below 20%. If you use Spanish samples it may not look obvious, but using Portuguese and Galician samples it is.

I gave the example of high SSA (for European standards) in Iberians with high North African (Galicians, Portuguese, Extremadurans) and Canarians. It doesn't matter if it's true SSA or not, if it's ancient from 3000 years ago or from 700 years ago in the time of the Moors. But it can make an individual that is fully European become ''mixed-race'' if we consider only West Eurasian components as part of European ancestry. Basically all Portuguese, Galician, West Andalusian and Canarian results I've seen score more than 2% SSA (and some also minor/noise quantities of East Eurasian). Some other Europeans score bullshits like Southeast Asian and East Asian, that may also skew the parameters.

Since Canarians, Galicians and Portuguese are the main European ancestries of Brazilians and Cubans, many of them who are fully or mostly European will look more SSA than they are.

I have many kits of Portuguese in my possession (because I want to compare with Brazilians) and not a single one is 0% SSA + Northeast African.

I have just noticed we have a lot of portuguese from azores in our chart. They are not scoring that high Northeast African + SSA .

This were not added by me, they were added by either birdman or peterski thats why i didnt know they were in the chart. Average Northeast AFrican and SSA is around 1.7 average each

https://i.imgur.com/FxyOBVp.png

[Argentano]

Here some kits from Azores scoring less than 1% SSA in eurogenes k15

Kit Country Total Eurasian South Asian Ame Ocea NEA SSA Name
T881308 Azores 100,00 97,75 0,00 1,27 0,98 0,00 Silvio Serpa Da Rosa Matos
A690597 Azores 100,01 97,06 0,00 0,57 1,70 0,68 0
A932414 Azores 99,98 96,03 0,50 2,14 0,99 0,32 Daniel Sozinho
M070445 Azores 99,97 95,93 0,00 0,89 2,16 0,99 Cory SantoCristo
T889070 Azores 100,02 95,92 0,00 2,26 1,12 0,72 Maria Vargas Garcia
A625820 Azores 99,99 95,57 0,77 1,96 1,32 0,37 Michelle DAPONTE
A326648 Azores 99,98 95,38 1,36 0,25 2,30 0,69 Michelle MARTINS-BOTELHO
T366088 Azores 99,99 94,64 0,99 1,13 3,13 0,10 0
T639528 Azores 99,99 94,64 0,99 1,13 3,13 0,10 0
T678257 Azores 100,01 94,17 1,37 0,99 3,25 0,23 Dalila Ferreira DINIZ

[Adamastor]

I have just noticed we have a lot of portuguese from azores in our chart. They are not scoring that high Northeast African + SSA .

This were not added by me, they were added by either birdman or peterski thats why i didnt know they were in the chart. Average Northeast AFrican and SSA is around 1.7 average each

https://i.imgur.com/FxyOBVp.png

It's not restricted to Azores, even Galicians and Northern Portuguese from deep villages isolated in the mountains can score 2% of each (totalizing 4%), it happens because all of them have it due to North African admixture. If the average in your chart is 1.7% for each, it means the total is 3.40%, way beyond noise. The average in K15 spreadsheet is also around 3% of both combined. It means at least half of the individuals will have more than 3%.

The ones who have the least are in the 3% range of both combined, the ones with more can reach even 5-6%. That is more than enough to skew average results.

[Adamastor]

...

I think you should remove people's names and kit numbers, this is not the appropriate place to post them.

By the way, only one score in the 1.5% of both combined. All of the others have more than 2%, Northeast African is also SSA.

One of those samples with supposedly less than 1% SSA is 4% SSA (and 1.32 Amerindian), for example. Look:

Kit A625820

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 33.37
2 West_Med 19.38
3 East_Med 12.9
4 North_Sea 11.52
5 Baltic 7.36
6 Red_Sea 4.85
7 West_Asian 3.67
8 Northeast_African 3.2
9 Amerindian 1.32
10 Eastern_Euro 1.29
11 Sub-Saharan 1.15

If he was a Brazilian, you guys would think he is 5-6% non-white.

[Adamastor]

...

By the way, the same guy in Gedrosia K3:


E_Eurasian -
SSA 5.85 Pct
W_Eurasian 94.15 Pct

Pedro Ruben, for example, is 7.88% SSA in this calculator. See my point now? GEDmatch is not good for calculate recent ancestry in Brazilians, their main ancestry is Portuguese and Brazilians have shitloads of recent SSA. How one can differentiate between recent black-slave influence and Portuguese mediated SSA?

That's why I stick to 23andme and maybe AncestryDNA.

[Dorian]

Do people with iberomaurusian admixture get the n-word pass?

[Peterski]

This is what Tarofalt Iberomaurusians score in K15, K36, K47:

K15:

Sample----- TAF009 TAF010 TAF011 TAF012 TAF013 TAF014 TAF015
West Med 14.09 13.37 13.62 13.02 12.67 13.56 12.7
East Med 13.88 9.21 8.61 9.09 9.52 8.6 16.91
Red Sea----- 21.73 25.86 26.02 24.98 25.48 24.59 22.96
South Asian 2.13 0.43 0.65 1.08 0 0.3 0
Southeast Asian 1.65 3.74 0.99 0.57 3 3.04 0
Oceanian 1.45 2.29 1.77 2.15 2.31 2.33 4.48
Northeast Afr 32.11 35.07 36.02 34.98 35.68 36.13 32.17
Sub Saharan 8.04 8.31 8.6 8.74 8.42 8.65 9.86
other------- 4.92 1.72 3.72 5.39 2.92 2.8 0.92

K36:

Sample----- TAF009 TAF010 TAF011 TAF012 TAF013 TAF014 TAF015
East African 2.89 5.35 2.91 0.42 4.55 3.84 0
Indo-Chinese 2.94 1.83 0 0 0 0 0
North African 60.29 64.01 63.92 63.43 62.01 62.25 60.83
Northeast Afr 24.45 19.72 21.44 21.08 20.73 20.97 25.39
Oceanian 1.14 0.68 0.86 1.21 0.99 1.08 2.77
Omotic----- 2.41 3.39 5.08 5.03 4.68 4.49 5.64
South Chinese 0 0 0 0 2.44 0.73 0
West African 3.06 3.81 4.16 5.89 4.36 5.2 5.36
other------- 2.82 1.21 1.63 2.94 0.24 1.44 0.01

K47:

Sample----- TAF009 TAF010 TAF011 TAF012 TAF013 TAF014 TAF015
Kushitic 17.19 20.64 21.44 15.6 21.24 20.23 19.15
Tibeto-Burman 2.53 0.46 0 0 0 0 0
North-African 66.9 62.68 61.7 66.08 61.41 62.1 63.73
Proto-Austron 1.65 1.73 0 0.22 0 0 0
Omotic----- 0.04 3.71 3.02 3.97 2.3 3.6 4.77
Munda----- 1.51 0.48 0.59 0.56 0 0.33 0
Indo-Chinese 0 0 0 1.52 0.03 0 0.06
South-Indian 0 0.49 0 0 0 0 0
NE-Asian 0.12 0.12 1.02 0 0.11 1.53 0
West-African 5.02 2.7 4.05 7.48 4.98 4.01 0.76
Sahelian 1.75 0.83 2.85 0.58 0.88 1.22 8.44
East-African 2.09 5.4 2.98 1.45 4.22 4.63 0
Malay------ 0 0 0 0.31 1.47 0.48 0
Papuan----- 0 0.74 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.47 1.6
other------- 1.2 0.02 0.85 0.83 2.16 1.4 1.49

Some of these minor admixtures could be due to DNA damage, these are very old samples.

[Peterski]

If he was a Brazilian, you guys would think he is 5-6% non-white.

Ok but do you know that pure Amerindians and Ancient Amerindians (pre-1492 samples) also score some European percentages? They don't score 100% Amerind.

So in the end, a few % of noise Amerind in Europeans, and a few % of noise European in Amerinds, balance each other out, and we end up with accurate big picture.

Especially if you calculate big population averages with hundreds of samples (like Argentano did), then these small noise percentages here and there do not matter.

They do not change the "big picture".

====

The same aplies to Africans as well.

[Adamastor]

Ok but do you know that pure Amerindians and Ancient Amerindians (pre-1492 samples) also score some European percentages? They don't score 100% Amerindian.

So in the end, a few faulty Amerindian % in Europeans, and a few faulty European % Amerindians, balance each other and you end up with quite accurate big picture.

This is a Karitiana (Brazilian Native) GEDmatch

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Amerindian 99.64
2 East_Asian 0.26
3 West_Med 0.09

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Karitiana 0.11
2 Pima 13.37
3 Mayan 16.47
4 North_Amerindian 37.53
5 East_Greenlander 80.63
6 West_Greenlander 83.35
7 MA-1 97.41
8 Chukchi 107.04
9 Koryak 117.37
10 Aghan_Hazara 118.72
11 Turkmen 118.85
12 Uygur 118.85
13 Shors 119.08
14 Nogay 119.38
15 Uzbeki 119.42
16 Afghan_Turkmen 119.45
17 Afghan_Tadjik 119.45
18 Tatar 119.61
19 Tadjik 119.67
20 Hazara 119.8

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 100% Karitiana + 0% Sardinian @ 0.11
2 100% Karitiana + 0% Abhkasian @ 0.11
3 100% Karitiana + 0% Adygei @ 0.11
4 100% Karitiana + 0% Afghan_Pashtun @ 0.11
5 100% Karitiana + 0% Afghan_Tadjik @ 0.11
6 100% Karitiana + 0% Afghan_Turkmen @ 0.11
7 100% Karitiana + 0% Aghan_Hazara @ 0.11
8 100% Karitiana + 0% Algerian @ 0.11
9 100% Karitiana + 0% Algerian_Jewish @ 0.11
10 100% Karitiana + 0% Altaian @ 0.11
11 100% Karitiana + 0% Armenian @ 0.11
12 100% Karitiana + 0% Ashkenazi @ 0.11
13 100% Karitiana + 0% Assyrian @ 0.11
14 100% Karitiana + 0% Austrian @ 0.11
15 100% Karitiana + 0% Austroasiatic_Ho @ 0.11
16 100% Karitiana + 0% Azeri @ 0.11
17 100% Karitiana + 0% Balkar @ 0.11
18 100% Karitiana + 0% Balochi @ 0.11
19 100% Karitiana + 0% Bangladeshi @ 0.11
20 100% Karitiana + 0% Bantu_N.E. @ 0.11

Total European: 0%.

Also, SSAs don't score even 1% European. And Brazilians are not mostly Spanish + Amerindian, but Portuguese + SSA. Cubans as well, and in their case it's aggravated by the fact they have huge Canarian input.


A Cuban with only 5% of SSA admixture would come out as almost 15% SSA having Canarian ancestry (average for Canarians in K15 is 6-7%). One cannot take this shit as good tool in this case.

[Peterski]

Maybe simply the NEA category should be moved to Eurasian, and that's it.

[Adamastor]

Maybe simply the NEA category should be moved to Eurasian, and that's it.

Well, in other GEDmatch calculators this Cuban would still score 13-15% SSA despite having only 5% recent black ancestry. Average for Canarians in Gedrosia K3 is ~91% West Eurasian, 8% SSA and 1% East Eurasian. I've seen tons of results, I think K15 and GEDmatch in general is pretty useless for Latin Americans.

Actually most of the SSA in Canarians and West Iberians isn't only Northeast African, it also can appear as only SSA and no Northeast African. Portuguese member PTagus is 0% Northeast African but 4.5% Sub-Saharan (admixture's name). In Gedrosia and other calculators his SSA is even higher.

Some can have equal proportions of SSA + Northeast African and some can have only Northeast African. It's random.

[Peterski]

This is a Karitiana (Brazilian Native) GEDmatch

(...)

Total European: 0%

Karitiana were used as reference samples in Eurogenes K15. Reference samples always score 100% of what they represent as a reference.

Samples that are not used as references will usually not score 100%, even if they are from the same population. Davidski wrote about it:

(this is why "normal" Native Americans don't score 100% Amerind, but also some Siberian, some East Asian, etc. - closely related Mong things)


Admixture works in some funny ways, especially in terms of assigning very different ancestry proportions to test and reference samples. So you can have an Iberomaurusian component that peaks at 100% in the reference Iberomaurusian samples, but it will only peak at something like 60% or even much less in Iberomaurusian test samples.

^^^
So if you use TAF009 as reference for Iberomaurusian, it will score 100% of it. But already TAF010 will not score 100% but 60% or 70%.

And Davidski never said that "GEDmatch is useless", he just said that it has its limitations (but no any other method is "perfect" either):


Tests based on Admixture output, like at GEDmatch, aren't necessarily bad, but they're always limited in some ways, such as the fact that they're either based on a few hypothetical ancient populations that never existed (like Gedrosia), or user defined/supervised reference populations that may or may not be the correct choices depending on what you're testing.

^^^
Obviously if your reference pops suck, then no matter what technology you use, it will suck.

And all the scientific studies are still using ADMIXTURE calculators, or an updated version.

Someone wrote about it (a few weeks ago):


Seems like ADMIXTURE was updated a year ago [in 2019].

^^^
About which Davidski also commented:


But the whole concept is still the same.

Also, you claimed that you won't find anything like this at GEDmatch. Wrong. In fact, all of the admixture tests at GEDmatch are based on ADMIXTURE output.

But scientists keep using it in studies...

[Peterski]

Just like for example Sardinians are reference population for West Med in K15.

But normal Sardinians don't score 100% West Med in Eurogenes K15. Only the ones that were used as reference samples do.

The rest of their score is not random stuff though, but things closely related.

[Adamastor]

Again you're trying to diverge the discussion and using smokescreen, as usual. I'm not saying GEDmatch is absolute trash and should never be used, I'm saying it's very limited in this particular case. The reason why you guys are using GEDmatch for this whole shit is because there you can stole kits from people who don't even know they are being used in these estimations (and also posting them with their full names on a troll forum like TA, what I find preposterous and unethical). Davidski doesn't use GEDmatch anymore btw, he abandoned it.


Anyway, now the discussion is over, I'm not wasting my time anymore. The limitation of your approach is more than demonstrated. Q.E.D.

[Peterski]

People have difficulty understanding that present-day Siberians have nothing to do with the Paleosiberian ancestors of Native Americans. Siberian in K15 is represented by Uralic-speaking Nganassans who probably migrated from somewhere far to the southwest of East Siberia after Paleosiberians crossed the Beringian strait into America. Siberian ancestry only exists in some groups of North Amerindians from a later wave of Dené-Yeniseian speakers as proven by recent studies with hundreds of pages of formal statistical analysis. Therefore, Siberian scores in K15 among Latin Americans must be noise.

Siberian admixture in Latin America was assumed to be 0% by scientists, who later modelled North Amerindians as a mixture of South Amerindians and Siberians. They by definition "made" South Amerindians 0% Siberian, because that's the model's assumption. See here, it says, "by definition 0%":

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?229998-Peopling-of-the-Americas-before-Columbus

Quote:

"Under the assumption that the populations at the extreme of the clines are descended solely from one of the source populations (...) blah blah"

https://i.imgur.com/3EI0c3r.png

In other words they wanted to check any excess of recent Siberian ancestry over what South Americans have.

They do not say anywhere that Paleosiberians are extinct, or have nothing to do with modern Siberians.

In fact there was another study that found populations descended from Paleosiberians still existing in Russia.

====

That's the issue with such models, you have to make a lot of assumptions and a lot of choices of possible source populations, before you even start.

That's why they call it "ancestry estimates", not "ancestry determination".


I gave the example of high SSA (for European standards) in Iberians with high North African (Galicians, Portuguese, Extremadurans) and Canarians. It doesn't matter if it's true SSA or not, if it's ancient from 3000 years ago or from 700 years ago in the time of the Moors. But it can make an individual that is fully European become ''mixed-race'' if we consider only West Eurasian components as part of European ancestry. Basically all Portuguese, Galician, West Andalusian and Canarian results I've seen score more than 2% SSA (and some also minor/noise quantities of East Eurasian). Some other Europeans score bullshits like Southeast Asian and East Asian, that may also skew the parameters.

It really all depends on what exactly you want to check.

If you want to check what % of their ancestry arrived to America after 1492 AD - no matter how much African-admixed the European immigrants were - then simply a datasheet with K15 population averages of Latin Americans can be used, just like you are using G25 population averages (coordinates values).

K15 percentages can even be converted into coordinates.


Since Canarians, Galicians and Portuguese are the main European ancestries of Brazilians and Cubans, many of them who are fully or mostly European will look more SSA than they are.

If they have African ancestors from 1450 AD in the Old World, or from 1550 AD in the New World?

It makes a difference from the point of view of demographic/migration studies, but not genetic.

[Peterski]

Also, SSAs don't score even 1% European.

Wrong, for example the Fulani always score several % European and North African admixtures. And they are 25 million people:

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


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U40rqwRp9gk

[Peterski]

So are you saying there is actual Southeast Asian, Siberian and South Asian admixture in Latin Americans? Come on.

An Amerindian is more likely to score South-East Asian or Siberian, than a European is.

There is a reason why 23andMe has "Broadly East Asian and Native American" category, instead of "Broadly East Asian and European".

South Asian is more likely to be from Gitanos or Jews, even though I don't deny that sometimes it can be just noise.

[Peterski]

Don't waste your time discussing with Peterski

You clown :picard1:, you were the one who specifically claimed that on GEDmatch Maghrebis are 25% WEST AFRICAN, and this is the claim I was debunking:

Quote:


Just to show one case: We know for academic peer-reviewed studies that average Maghrebis aren't 25% West African as showed by GEDmatch calculators. They are roughly 1/3 Iberomaurusian, 1/3 Sardinian, 1/3 Levant. But no GEDmatch calculator has Iberomaurusian components, that's why all North Africans come up as 1/4 SSA, because of some deep ancestry shared by Iberomaurusians and West Africans.

You also claimed that K15 has ONE component called "SSA" for all of Sub-Saharan Africa, which means you forgot it has Northeast_African:

Quote:


By the way, one of the reasons why Maghrebis were coming out 20-25% SSA in GEDmatch is because those calculators lack Iberomaurusian samples, that are extremely important to model North Africans. At the same time, they just have a dumb and unique ''SSA'' component for all of Sub-Saharan Africa, the most diverse region in the whole world.

You can't even tell the difference between West African and SSA, you equate the two, forgetting that there are multiple SSA populations, not just West Africans. You proved this in this thread when you suggested that before the Bantu expansion (which brought West African ancestry) East Africa was "Caucasoid". LOL.

[luc2112]

Siberian admixture in Latin America was assumed to be 0% by scientists, who later modelled North Amerindians as a mixture of South Amerindians and Siberians. They by definition "made" South Amerindians 0% Siberian, because that's the model's assumption. See here, it says, "by definition 0%":

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?229998-Peopling-of-the-Americas-before-Columbus

Quote:

"Under the assumption that the populations at the extreme of the clines are descended solely from one of the source populations (...) blah blah"

https://i.imgur.com/3EI0c3r.png

In other words they wanted to check any excess of recent Siberian ancestry over what South Americans have.

They do not say anywhere that Paleosiberians are extinct, or have nothing to do with modern Siberians.

In fact there was another study that found populations descended from Paleosiberians still existing in Russia.

====

That's the issue with such models, you have to make a lot of assumptions and a lot of choices of possible source populations, before you even start.

That's why they call it "ancestry estimates", not "ancestry determination".



It really all depends on what exactly you want to check.

If you want to check what % of their ancestry arrived to America after 1492 AD - no matter how much African-admixed the European immigrants were - then simply a datasheet with K15 population averages of Latin Americans can be used, just like you are using G25 population averages (coordinates values).

K15 percentages can even be converted into coordinates.



If they have African ancestors from 1450 AD in the Old World, or from 1550 AD in the New World?

It makes a difference from the point of view of demographic/migration studies, but not genetic.

The Amerindians are from the haplogroupo Q3-M3 (is Siberian and the closest to European Haplogroup R). Another migration is Haplogroup C3 this is from Mongolia (some little mix with dark Indu Caucasians).

haplogroupo N3 (Fininc) N2 (Ugric) Canada only

[Token]

Peterski you and your thread are fucking outdated. Read the Yana paper:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/448829v1
The first inhabitants, a previously unknown population of “Ancient North Siberians” (ANS), represented by Yana RHS, diverged ~38 kya from Western Eurasians, soon after the latter split from East Asians. Between 20 and 11 kya, the ANS population was largely replaced by peoples with ancestry related to present-day East Asians, giving rise to ancestral Native Americans and “Ancient Paleosiberians” (AP), represented by a 9.8 kya skeleton from Kolyma River. AP are closely related to the Siberian ancestors of Native Americans, and ancestral to contemporary communities such as Koryaks and Itelmen. Paleoclimatic modelling shows evidence for a refuge during the last glacial maximum (LGM) in southeastern Beringia, suggesting Beringia as a possible location for the admixture forming both ancestral Native Americans and AP. Between 11 and 4 kya, AP were in turn largely replaced by another group of peoples with ancestry from East Asia, the “Neosiberians” from which many contemporary Siberians derive. We detect gene flow events in both directions across the Bering Strait during this time, influencing the genetic composition of Inuit, as well as Na Dene-speaking Northern Native Americans, whose Siberian-related ancestry components is closely related to AP. Our analyses reveal that the population history of northeastern Siberia was highly dynamic throughout the Late Pleistocene and Holocene. The pattern observed in northeastern Siberia, with earlier, once widespread populations being replaced by distinct peoples, seems to have taken place across northern Eurasia, as far west as Scandinavia.

The paper you were talking about worked under the assumption that South Amerindians are 'basal Amerindian' because they lacked Paleolithic DNA from East Siberia to work with, and they were spot on. The Yana paper sees Siberian admixture in North Amerindians because, unlike South Amerindians, a two-way mixture of Ancient Paleosiberian and MA-1 doesn't fits.

Regarding ANA, the confusion comes from the fact that West Africans are mostly descended from an ANA population (probably from movements from the northeast) plus basal human and archaic hominin admixture. So ANA weren't exactly like West Africans because they lacked the deep ancestry, but they weren't Eurasians either because they didn't went through OOA bottleneck. So what were they? Sometimes the line becomes so blurry that you start classifying samples according to their geographic location. ANA never left Africa so people called it African, just like we did with Mota. But one thing is certain: present-day West Africans are substantially descended from ANA, probably more so than any other modern population. The term SSA means nothing in a genetic sense, Sub-Saharan African genetic history was even more messy than the Eurasian one.

[luc2112]

They were up to 40% Non-Out-Of-Africans.

Non-Out-Of-African = indigenous African.

On the other hand, Natufian-like DNA (at least 60%) is descended from the Out-Of-Africa migration, which is why it is more closely related to Eurasians, and even to Australian Aborigines or Andaman Negritos, etc. than to Dinka.

Like what? The Shum Laka paper is about Cameroon not about North Africa. They found Ancient Pygmies in Cameroon. Pygmies still live in Cameroon today, might be their direct descendants. The only surprise was that they did not find Bantu-like samples. Maybe it means they just did not have luck and sampled only Pygmy bones, or maybe it means the Proto-Bantu homeland was not in Cameroon but further west for example in Nigeria.

That pigmentation is pure fantasy:

In reality they had darker colours:

https://i.imgur.com/wOIVz26.jpg

^^^
"Medium skin and black hair, half Northeast African":

https://www.biography.com/.image/t_share/MTE4MDAzNDEwNzg5ODI4MTEw/barack-obama-12782369-1-402.jpg

pigmentation is a mutation and there are others related to heat that can change the bone structure.

Proto-Africans were probably clear, and went black with the desertification of africa.

North Africans are white Caucasians those who remained in africa (south of the sahara) mutated (in Somalis it is possible to observe the different levels of white to black).

Yorubas- dolichocephalic african sub-race (origins?)

Congolian - dolichocephalic african sub-race (origins?)

brusman/khoisan proto-human

I don't know anything about pygmies.

Bantu it is a people and not a race, as they are a mixture of African haplogroups, this does not indicate that there is no African or black race. The black race is understood as Bantus with skull khoisan, it may be very generalized, but they are very different from a white or Mongolian.

(Negritos and dark Caucasian hindus is a mystery, they do not inhabit a desert, their mutation of dark skin was not in Africa)

[Token]

Show your 23andMe results for comparison?

You don't score any Central&South Asia there?

A large part of your ancestry is Italian so your Romani-related Balkan shift can be hardly visible because it can be masked by your more significant Italian shift (bear in mind that some commercial companies such as Ancestry and FTDNA even count parts of Italy together with parts of Greece and parts of the Balkans as the same broad genetic regions).

North Italy has some overlap with Western Balkans, while South Italy with Eastern Balkans. Before Slavic invasion as you know this overlap was even greater (for example ancient Dalmatia was basically like modern Bergamo).

I cluster in the northern fringe of the German cluster in multiple analyses. So unless my German ancestry cluster with Norwegians (nearly impossible), Italian ancestry is out of question.

[Adamastor]

I cluster in the northern fringe of the German cluster in multiple analyses. So unless my German ancestry cluster with Norwegians (nearly impossible), Italian ancestry is out of question.

The guy is acting as if K15 was like a perfect tool with no noise when everyone knows plenty of noise there in most ethnicities isn't uncommon. I score East_Asian (around 1.7%, almost 2%) and all my ancestry is Southwest European. How so? Turanid Italians like was proposed in a troll thread here in the past? :laugh:

And the worst part is that he distorts what people say to fit his psycho agenda. He implying that some of those scorings may involve real ancestry in most cases is ludicrous to say the least. He is only attached to K15 because there he can steal data from people more freely than using other methods.

P.S: Stop spamming me with rep comments and sending me private messages, @Peterski. Try to be a little less autist and we can discuss. You transformed a discussion of estimations of recent ancestry in Latin Americans in a fucking mess about Iberomaurusians, Amerindians and Siberians, Sub-Saharan Africa genetic history and other completely unrelated subjects. This was not the main point and is irrelevant if the SSA scored by West Iberians and Canarians is ''black'' or ''Caucasoid'' being misread. I don't even believe we could classificate populations as such when we go back 10.000 years ago. Even if it was due to black slaves from 1450 (and it's not btw, I know more than you about the genetic history of Iberia), it still doesn't make a difference.

Even many of the supposed kits scoring ''less than 1% SSA'' you guys gathered have been demonstrated to score 4-5% SSA (and some scoring East Eurasian as well). Do you know why? Because scoring 1.5-2% Sub-Saharan (admixture's name) + 2.5% Northeast_African is pretty average in West Iberia giving the estimatives of North African admixture these populations have in peer-reviewed academic studies. You weren't aware of that, so how can you conduct any single study about a population without knowing what it's made of? I call it amateurish rubbish.

By the way, I never claimed East Africa was ''Caucasoid'' before Bantu expansion and this Fulani example is a joke, everyone knows they are partially Eurasian. Most Sub-Saharan African slaves in the New World were not ''Caucasoid'' admixed Fulanis, but Yorubans and Bantus from Central Africa and SouthWestern Africa.

[Argentano]

I think you should remove people's names and kit numbers, this is not the appropriate place to post them.

By the way, only one score in the 1.5% of both combined. All of the others have more than 2%, Northeast African is also SSA.

One of those samples with supposedly less than 1% SSA is 4% SSA (and 1.32 Amerindian), for example. Look:

Kit A625820

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 33.37
2 West_Med 19.38
3 East_Med 12.9
4 North_Sea 11.52
5 Baltic 7.36
6 Red_Sea 4.85
7 West_Asian 3.67
8 Northeast_African 3.2
9 Amerindian 1.32
10 Eastern_Euro 1.29
11 Sub-Saharan 1.15

If he was a Brazilian, you guys would think he is 5-6% non-white.



By the way, the same guy in Gedrosia K3:


E_Eurasian -
SSA 5.85 Pct
W_Eurasian 94.15 Pct

Pedro Ruben, for example, is 7.88% SSA in this calculator. See my point now? GEDmatch is not good for calculate recent ancestry in Brazilians, their main ancestry is Portuguese and Brazilians have shitloads of recent SSA. How one can differentiate between recent black-slave influence and Portuguese mediated SSA?

That's why I stick to 23andme and maybe AncestryDNA.



But you keep misundertanding me. I never said eurogenes k15 is a perfect indicator of recent ancestry. I know some canarians/azoreans can score 92-97% euro this way.In fact i tend to post iberian/protuguese kits when i post latin americans to show that with the same calculator southern euro can score some non euro. I did that a lot of times. But They are not scoring less euro than that. You are making a huge problem because of 10-15% of the latino samples scoring in this canarian/azorian range. The other 85-90% latinos in gedmatch, the huge majority, are in ranges that are far from the european levels.

You have a valid point for some people but you are exaggerating it X 1000 so that "everyting should be discarded" when we both well know most of this SSA scored in this thread is Sub Saharan AFrican. This thread was made with people who are mulattos/mestizos ffs. They are far from the azorian/canarian levels.


If i were saying that only 100% european according to my standards was full euro then you would have a point to argue with me. But i never said that and i dont believe that.



This is a post written by me in 2018....


we have a lot of spaniards and portuguese in gedmatch. But we havent added italians yet.

Italians probably score african too, but i havent seen that as i did with iberians. But here we are talking about chileans whose euro ancestry is mostly iberian, so its obvoios i am going to talk about iberian ancestry.

Again, Chileans score small african, but so do iberians (who contribute to 50% of the chilean genepool). So scoring 1% SSA in gedmatch doesent really make you black admixed.

Im not even trolling.


At first i thought gedmatch brazilians where mixed when scoring 0.5-2 % SSA but then we started adding portuguese and we realized they can score that too. Its not that easy as saying certain population should score 100% euro.

[Adamastor]

You have a valid point for some people but you are exaggerating it X 1000 so that "everyting should be discarded" when we both well know most of this SSA scored in this thread is Sub Saharan AFrican. This thread was made with people who are mulattos/mestizos ffs. They are far from the azorian/canarian levels.


If i were saying that only 100% european according to my standards was full euro then you would have a point to argue with me. But i never said that and i dont believe that.
.

I agree and I think it was already settled, then Peterski jumped in to spill bullshit saying it's true ancestry and things like that, that I don't know what I'm talking about and started talking about Iberomaurusians, Berbers etc. I mean, I don't even discussed if this was ''black'' ancestry or not, I just pointed that Canarians and West Iberians can score like 92% European in K15 and it should be noted in cases of modelling of Cubans, Brazilians, Venezuelans etc.

My point is that this SSA scored by Iberians comes from their North African ancestry and not from African slaves and you can see there's a real cline from West Iberia to Basque Country. Portuguese and Galicians can score up to 5% of SSA + Northeast African, Basques and Aragonese score none. It goes in line with what professional academic studies say about North African ancestry in Iberia (and I also pointed correctly that ''white'' Berbers score 18-22% SSA + Northeast African on K15 while Peterski claimed they score only 3% basing himself on K36).


I'm not saying ''everything should be discarded'', what I said is that we should consider these things because not all Latinos have Iberian ancestry from the same regions. If you use Basques or even Andalusians as models, the West Eurasian in Iberians go to 98-99% (average), using West Iberians it's in between 90-97%. I even said that for the purposes of this particular thread it was not that significant.

[Adamastor]

double

[Argentano]

Lets not forget this thread was made with eurogenes k15 results. NOT with Gedrosia K3.

AND IN EUROGENES K15, the calculator used for Oiriginal Post boxplots , the azorians we have in our chart are not scoring this crazy levels of SSA. They are scoring around 1.7% SSA 1.7% Northeast African ON AVERAGE




https://i.imgur.com/FxyOBVp.png

[Adamastor]

Lets not forget this thread was made with eurogenes k15 results. NOT with Gedrosia K3.

AND IN EUROGENES K15, the calculator used for Oiriginal Post boxplots , the azorians we have in our chart are not scoring this crazy levels of SSA. They are scoring around 1.7% SSA 1.7% Northeast African ON AVERAGE




https://i.imgur.com/FxyOBVp.png

This is 3.4% for the average, not much difference from 3.4% to 5%, c'mon... FilhoV has average Azorean (and Portuguese, Galician etc, they are indistuinguishable) results and this is how he scores:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 37.17
2 West_Med 26.92
3 East_Med 14.89
4 Baltic 9.5
5 West_Asian 3.33
6 Red_Sea 3.29
7 Northeast_African 2.45
8 Sub-Saharan 2.19
9 Oceanian 0.25

1.7% of each may look very small isolated, but when you add NEAfr + SSA it almost reaches Gedrosia K3 levels. And I already said I agree with you on the main point, I don't know why you keep insisting in this discussion.

And do you know why this is possible? Because of the already noted North African cline in Iberia, something that professional geneticists have already noted. There's nothing polemic or absurd in what I'm writing.

[luc2112]

Nice stuff being produced through these discussions. I am not into reading anthropogenic articles at all, I even believe small skull individuals are most prone to be less intelligents. I wonder if it is really true or myth, so is small cranium/skull a sign of low intelligence?

Yes, but it’s the brain size and not the skull and maybe the size of the body. Mongols have an advantage.

[JosephK]

Nice stuff being produced through these discussions. I am not into reading anthropogenic articles at all, I even believe small skull individuals are most prone to be less intelligents. I wonder if it is really true or myth, so is small cranium/skull a sign of low intelligence?

It is sometimes but not others. Generally it's gyrencephaly that counts, more dense folds and fissures provide more surface area for neurons--the more intelligent you are, the more folds and layers you'll have--it's how much you can pack into a braincase. That said, it's possible that some really unintelligent people and animals have really small brains.

[Tenma de Pegasus]

I agree and I think it was already settled, then Peterski jumped in to spill bullshit saying it's true ancestry and things like that, that I don't know what I'm talking about and started talking about Iberomaurusians, Berbers etc. I mean, I don't even discussed if this was ''black'' ancestry or not, I just pointed that Canarians and West Iberians can score like 92% European in K15 and it should be noted in cases of modelling of Cubans, Brazilians, Venezuelans etc.

My point is that this SSA scored by Iberians comes from their North African ancestry and not from African slaves and you can see there's a real cline from West Iberia to Basque Country. Portuguese and Galicians can score up to 5% of SSA + Northeast African, Basques and Aragonese score none. It goes in line with what professional academic studies say about North African ancestry in Iberia (and I also pointed correctly that ''white'' Berbers score 18-22% SSA + Northeast African on K15 while Peterski claimed they score only 3% basing himself on K36).


I'm not saying ''everything should be discarded'', what I said is that we should consider these things because not all Latinos have Iberian ancestry from the same regions. If you use Basques or even Andalusians as models, the West Eurasian in Iberians go to 98-99% (average), using West Iberians it's in between 90-97%. I even said that for the purposes of this particular thread it was not that significant.

Also Argentines and Uruguayans should show that since their iberian ancestry is strongly galician and Galicia is where this ancient component peaks.

It seems West Iberia have both iberomaurisian and north european peaks.

[luc2112]

It is sometimes but not others. Generally it's gyrencephaly that counts, more dense folds and fissures provide more surface area for neurons--the more intelligent you are, the more folds and layers you'll have--it's how much you can pack into a braincase. That said, it's possible that some really unintelligent people and animals have really small brains.

https://i.postimg.cc/pV33kTzc/Untitled341.jpg

[JosephK]

https://i.postimg.cc/pV33kTzc/Untitled341.jpg

Yeah I wouldn't doubt any of that... I'm just saying a large brain isn't necessary, but it probably helps. Neoplasticicity-- the ability to continually make loads of new neurons and connections, which continue to fold over and connect with new ones, is the basis of intelligence...

[luc2112]

Yeah I wouldn't doubt any of that... I'm just saying a large brain isn't necessary, but it probably helps. Neoplasticicity-- the ability to continually make loads of new neurons and connections, which continue to fold over and connect with new ones, is the basis of intelligence...

yes, but it must have a good use for brain, otherwise it will only be a champion in the video game.

[Daven]

After seeing a lot of gedmatch/23andme results + pics i think that phenotypes are kind of random, altough gorups of people should make sense phenotype wise.

No i dont think 30% amerindian is invisibile, in fact there are cases where i think its super visible (this randomness i was talking about). But i have noticed that Nigga blood notices much more. Thats why many individuals only scoring 20/30% SSA already look new world black.

Thats why mulato countries tend to be more european than people think in genetic studies.

And dont forget a mestizo is only around 30% East Asian genetically whereas a mulato is indeed 50% African.


You just said Venezuela looks more SSA than what it looks amerindian. That was just nuts LMAO.

And using the one drop rule on mulattoes is useless on a scientific forum. Be fair and applying it to mestizos too at least. The term "nigga" is racist and derogatory btw. Your font has been reported.

[Daven]

notice he is almost as amerindian as he is SSA but he states mulatoid in his profile phenotype

Amerindian can show at even 8% on Caribbeans. Look at these two girls for example. The second one is more SSA than native and yet looks more amerindian influenced. Both are only 8% indigenous.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrRB-sGMOGs&list=PL0AUFwiFVmhyqpcJXaNZi2ZS0D8GXGHiY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoCYQ4HAfqA

[Daven]

This other dude is 32% african and yet looks way more amerindian hahaha


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2AWKgG0N8c

[Daven]

Venezuelans more SSA than amerindian phenotypically-speaking hahaha

PS. Look at my cousin. She is only 9% native and the amerindian influence is mad strong in her body shape. At the same time is 20% negroid but doesn't look as much facially nor in the body LMAO.

https://images2.imagebam.com/5d/4c/a4/5c01e81330811213.jpg

[Skengdo]

Daven are we seeing the same pictures? I don't see anything Amerindian in them tbh. The first girl looks clearly black-influenced to me. So does the last one.

Second man just looks ambiguous and pred euro. Are you saying 5% Amerindian overrides their Afro hair and African features? Did you just skip the whole explanation we gave you?

Will you be happy if we say Amerindians look more nigga than niggas themselves? Is this what you're trying to suggest? I don't have any problem admitting a half Iraqi/Half Spanish will look more European than a half Amerindian/Half Spanish. Why are you chimping out at the fact Blackness is more visible than Amerindian blood?

This is non debatable at this point, you may as well concede reason to Argentano. This is getting ridiculous. This isn't about selected individuals so cherrypicking niggas whom you (perhaps wrongly) think look less nigga than amerindian is useless.

If we make a morph of 20 individuals the results will be very obvious. It's the global average what matters. If Amerindian blood was really that visible vs. African blood then the Dominican Republic or Puerto Rico would look like El Salvador or Honduras when it's clear they don't.

[Adamastor]

I don't agree Amerindian shows equally as SSA, there's a level of randomness in individual cases (one can be even 30% SSA and still look european/mostly european and 5% Amerindian and show traits, even if rare) but on average I think SSA shows much more than Amerindian. I also have the impression, based on results I've seen of Brazilians, that 80% European, 10% Amerindian and 10% SSA usually looks whiter than 90% European, 10% SSA for whatever the reason (but that's my biased subjective opinion). I think Brazilians look less white than Argentinians despite similar level of European ancestry.

But I do agree users here are biased towards SSA x Amerindian, as if very little quantities of SSA (1-15%) could make someone look mixed and in the case of Amerindian always being invisible and it's not true. I think in low levels the impact may be similar and very few people below 20% of any would show strong traits.

Someone posted a Dominican or Puerto Rican guy once who was 17% SSA and 35% Amerindian iirc and claimed the guy look dark mostly due to SSA, what is not reasonable since he is 30%+ Amerindian. Many Mexicans and Chileans have none or very little SSA and they still look passable as Brazilian Pardos with 30% SSA.

Many Latin Americans from countries with mostly European + Amerindian input like to claim Amerindian almost as a white component, as if it would make someone look White lmao.

[Skengdo]

I don't agree Amerindian shows equally as SSA, there's a level of randomness in individual cases (one can be even 30% SSA and still look european/mostly european and 5% Amerindian and show traits, even if rare) but on average I think SSA shows much more than Amerindian. I also have the impression, based on results I've seen of Brazilians, that 80% European, 10% Amerindian and 10% SSA usually looks whiter than 90% European, 10% SSA for whatever the reason (but that's my biased subjective opinion). I think Brazilians look less white than Argentinians despite similar level of European ancestry.

But I do agree users here are biased towards SSA x Amerindian, as if very little quantities of SSA (1-15%) could make someone look mixed and in the case of Amerindian always being invisible and it's not true. I think in low levels the impact may be similar and very few people below 20% of any would show strong traits.

Someone posted a Dominican or Puerto Rican guy once who was 17% SSA and 35% Amerindian iirc and claimed the guy look dark mostly due to SSA, what is not reasonable since he is 30%+ Amerindian. Many Mexicans and Chileans have none or very little SSA and they still look passable as Brazilian Pardos with 30% SSA.

Many Latin Americans from countries with mostly European + Amerindian input like to claim Amerindian almost as a white component, as if it would make someone look White lmao.

Plenty of Mexicans and Chileans have around 5% SSA so this doesn't help your case.

As for the latter, that's not my interest. It's just a statement of truth. Amerindian is more of a "white component" (your choice of term, not mine) than SSA, this is not debatable. Just like Yemenis, Saudis, Iraqis would be "whiter" than Amerindians. They're closer genetically to Europe so this isn't any ass pull.

No one is saying Amerindian is invisible. Just that the overall results, (on the contrary) specially when it's visible just land closer visually as they do genetically.

[Daven]

Learn how to read dummy. I never said the first girl didn't look negroid admixed. And if you don't see amerindian features in the rest of the examples you are clearly in denial LMAO.

I'm not even arguing if SSA faster than native or not. I'm just saying that panchito features aren't that easy to dilute neither. They can pop up at a very low %. An average balanced mestizo will look more amerindian than European also. Venezuela more SSA than indigenous hahaha

[Skengdo]

Learn how to read dummy. I never said the first girl didn't look negroid admixed. And if you don't see amerindian features in the rest of the examples you are clearly in denial LMAO. I'm not even arguing if SSA faster than native or not. I'm just saying that panchito features aren't that easy to dilute neither. They can pop up at a very low % ramdomly. An average balanced mestizo will look more amerindian than European also.

Even so, they would still land closer to Europe both in looks and genetic distance than a Mulatto would, even when he looks more European than African.

Remember Amerindians have 35%-40% of a component that is already present in West Eurasia. Spaniards have it at 15% but people East have even more of it. And the rest of Amerindian ancestry is basically older Siberian stuff.

And if you think Amerindian features (despite how invisible they are in your examples) are somehow more noticeable than prognathism, enlarged philtrums and afro hair you're the only one in denial.

[Erronkari]

Less than 5% are usually both invisible (SSA and Amerindian).
Not always but practically.
Probably there are some differences in people with more than 35/40% extra-euro (between SSA and Amerindian).
But there are many cases with 20% amerindian or 20% SSA and in both cases don't show nothing.
This discussion is dull & autistic if you pretend to make a rule just for individual cases.

[Adamastor]

Plenty of Mexicans and Chileans have around 5% SSA so this doesn't help your case.


True for Mexicans, false for Chileans, iirc Chileans don't score any SSA on 23andme. And don't be a retard, the chances of 2-5% SSA in Mexicans making them overlap with pardos instead of 40% Amerindian (due to brown skin) is beyond retardation.

Well, Amerindian is an Eurasian component, ''SSA'' in Latinos is mostly Bantu that is very far removed from Eurasian, so I'm not disputing that. You and many members of this forum need to improve textual interpretation skills. Where do I claimed that SSA is ''whiter'' than Amerindian? I said exactly the contrary.


But that's not always true anyway. Khoisan admixture is more far removed from European than Bantu and Khoi-admixed people look whiter than Bantu admixed people. Many 50/50 Coloreds from South Africa look like Mestizos rather than like Mulattoes, as Lukasz recently noted in another thread. So we don't know exactly what makes mixed people look like what they look.

[Skengdo]

Less than 5% are usually both invisible (SSA and Amerindian).
Probably there are some differences in people with more than 35/40% extra-euro.
But there are many cases with 20% amerindian or 20% SSA and in both cases don't show nothing.
This discussion is dull autistic if you pretend to make a rule just for individual cases.

I already explained this is not what I'm arguing for.

In fact I'll go one step beyond and say I'm strictly arguing for the cases where it shows. There's no point in arguing where it isn't visible. However a morph of many people will make even the invisible visible.

[Adamastor]

Also, Amerindians are not 35% ''Caucasoid'', that is plain retardation, anyone claiming it has no fucking idea of populational genetics.

[Skengdo]

Also, Amerindians are not 35% ''Caucasoid'', that is plain retardation, anyone claiming it has no fucking idea of populational genetics.

The simple idea of attributing things to "caucasoids" or "negroids" to mere genetic components is retarded to start with, but that's what we have in this slammer. Both caucasoids and negroids are a hodpodge of rather distinct components which also appear in populations far away from them in some extent.

Whether it's caucasoid or not is irrelevant. But if we insist in following that then you'd make a good portion of Europeans as non-fully caucasoid too. It would even make the proto-indoeuropeans almost half non-"caucasoid". I don't have any problem with that but I know a lot of people here will.

In fact we can go even further. Even caucasians (as from the Caucasus, where this outdated term came from) would be around 30% non-caucasian as well since they have important contribution from this as well. And needless to say, mongolians are not fully "mongoloid" either.

We can resume the discussion without using any of these outdated terms but you very well know it would become less concise and writing every sentence will take longer to explain. If anything they're only used for practicality, as wrong as they may be. We'll just get the thread derailed again just like when the IberoMaurusians were brought up.

[Erronkari]

I already explained this is not what I'm arguing for.

In fact I'll go one step beyond and say I'm strictly arguing for the cases where it shows. There's no point in arguing where it isn't visible. However a morph of many people will make even the invisible visible.

In this point there is a very interesting issue.
Even in low % of extra - euro, is possible to see that element in multigenerational individuals of colonial stock.
But at the same time the same % is not visible or almost invisible in the case of people who have recent european background .
Probably the =/= disposition of the segments of the CHRMS has to do.

[Adamastor]

The simple idea of attributing things to "caucasoids" or "negroids" to mere genetic components is retarded to start with, but that's what we have in this slammer. Both caucasoids and negroids are a hodpodge of rather distinct components which also appear in populations far away from them in some extent.

Whether it's caucasoid or not is irrelevant. But if we insist in following that then you'd make a good portion of Europeans as non-fully caucasoid too. It would even make the proto-indoeuropeans almost half non-"caucasoid". I don't have any problem with that but I know a lot of people here will.

In fact we can go even further. Even caucasians (as from the Caucasus, where this outdated term came from) would be around 30% non-caucasian as well since they have important contribution from this as well. And needless to say, mongolians are not fully "mongoloid" either.

Well, I'm personally not really attached to these labels, I think they are outdated bullshit without genetic basis. They are mostly a fruit of racist 19th century anthropology, far from reflecting any genetic reality. That's why I point out in my posts on Latin Americans that what is important is measuring their recent European, African and Indigenous ancestries, not how ''Caucasoid'' they are because this is irrelevant.

I think Europeans cannot be explained only as ''Caucasoid'', but as an ancient admixture of races. Between WHGs and Basal Eurasians there's almost 40k years of difference, how are these people supposed to be the same ''race''? At some point in human history even ''West Eurasians'' were metrically closer to ''Negroids'' and ''Australoids'' than to modern ''Caucasoids''.

If we look closely at genetic admixture models, only WHGs are fully ''West Eurasian'', ANE have Mongoloid-like affinities and Basal Eurasian/Natufian SSA-like affinities.

[Skengdo]

Well, I'm personally not really attached to these labels, I think they are outdated bullshit without genetic basis. They are mostly a fruit of racist 19th century anthropology, far from reflecting any genetic reality. That's why I point out in my posts on Latin Americans that what is important is measuring their recent European, African and Indigenous ancestries, not how ''Caucasoid'' they are because this is irrelevant.

I think Europeans cannot be explained only as ''Caucasoid'', but as an ancient admixture of races. Between WHGs and Basal Eurasians there's almost 40k years of difference, how are these people supposed to be the same ''race''? At some point in human history even ''West Eurasians'' were metrically closer to ''Negroids'' and ''Australoids'' than to modern ''Caucasoids''.

If we look closely at genetic admixture models, only WHGs are fully ''West Eurasian'', ANE have Mongoloid-like affinities and Basal Eurasian/Natufian SSA-like affinities.

I agree it's more eastern based than WHG. This should be obvious. It just happens that in modern day this component became far more common in Western Eurasia than in East. This is why British and Spanish people have ANE but not Japanese or Chinese.

Regardless of its ultimate origin, this is still a shared component that reduces genetic distance between both populations.

[Argentano]

I don't agree Amerindian shows equally as SSA, there's a level of randomness in individual cases (one can be even 30% SSA and still look european/mostly european and 5% Amerindian and show traits, even if rare) but on average I think SSA shows much more than Amerindian. I also have the impression, based on results I've seen of Brazilians, that 80% European, 10% Amerindian and 10% SSA usually looks whiter than 90% European, 10% SSA for whatever the reason (but that's my biased subjective opinion). I think Brazilians look less white than Argentinians despite similar level of European ancestry.

But I do agree users here are biased towards SSA x Amerindian, as if very little quantities of SSA (1-15%) could make someone look mixed and in the case of Amerindian always being invisible and it's not true. I think in low levels the impact may be similar and very few people below 20% of any would show strong traits.

Someone posted a Dominican or Puerto Rican guy once who was 17% SSA and 35% Amerindian iirc and claimed the guy look dark mostly due to SSA, what is not reasonable since he is 30%+ Amerindian. Many Mexicans and Chileans have none or very little SSA and they still look passable as Brazilian Pardos with 30% SSA.

Many Latin Americans from countries with mostly European + Amerindian input like to claim Amerindian almost as a white component, as if it would make someone look White lmao.

Yo tengo 2 resultados y las fotos de dos brasileras que una es 78% Europea y el resto en su mayoría amerindio y la otra es 78% Europea y el resto en su mayoría africanos si yo te muestro las fotos la que tiene más sangre nativo americana parece francesa o alemana y la que tiene más sangre africana parece una mulata tipo Haley Berry o algo así

Al que quiera se lo muestro por privado

Igual es bastante aleatorio pero me parece que los que tienen nativo americano tienden a ser menos evidente que los que tienen sangre africana

[Argentano]

Agregó que está brasilera que yo digo que se ve mulata tiene parientes blancos con resultado 99% europeo y que se ven blancos O sea que el africano es africano real al menos en este caso

[HelloGuys]

Yo tengo 2 resultados y las fotos de dos brasileras que una es 78% Europea y el resto en su mayoría amerindio y la otra es 78% Europea y el resto en su mayoría africanos si yo te muestro las fotos la que tiene más sangre nativo americana parece francesa o alemana y la que tiene más sangre africana parece una mulata tipo Haley Berry o algo así

Al que quiera se lo muestro por privado

Igual es bastante aleatorio pero me parece que los que tienen nativo americano tienden a ser menos evidente que los que tienen sangre africana

A mí me intriga, puedo verlas?

[Argentano]

I don't agree Amerindian shows equally as SSA, there's a level of randomness in individual cases (one can be even 30% SSA and still look european/mostly european and 5% Amerindian and show traits, even if rare) but on average I think SSA shows much more than Amerindian. I also have the impression, based on results I've seen of Brazilians, that 80% European, 10% Amerindian and 10% SSA usually looks whiter than 90% European, 10% SSA for whatever the reason (but that's my biased subjective opinion). I think Brazilians look less white than Argentinians despite similar level of European ancestry.

But I do agree users here are biased towards SSA x Amerindian, as if very little quantities of SSA (1-15%) could make someone look mixed and in the case of Amerindian always being invisible and it's not true. I think in low levels the impact may be similar and very few people below 20% of any would show strong traits.

Someone posted a Dominican or Puerto Rican guy once who was 17% SSA and 35% Amerindian iirc and claimed the guy look dark mostly due to SSA, what is not reasonable since he is 30%+ Amerindian. Many Mexicans and Chileans have none or very little SSA and they still look passable as Brazilian Pardos with 30% SSA.

Many Latin Americans from countries with mostly European + Amerindian input like to claim Amerindian almost as a white component, as if it would make someone look White lmao.

this is from an actual genetic study. What they did is compare the self perception vs genetic ancestry in thousands of latinos (brazilians colombians mexicans peruvians and chileans) . The result was that most people were less SSA than they thought and were similarly or a little less amerindian than they thought.

Thats more or less in accordance to what i am saying here

https://i.imgur.com/z9rGbAU.png

[Argentano]

A mí me intriga, puedo verlas?

dale ahi te lo paso pero no lo pongas en el sitio

They are all brazilians . Its the 2 woman who are 75/76% european in the second row the ones i am talking about

[Argentano]

A little explanation for those who dont like boxplots.

What this study is saying is that individuals who thought they were 40-60% SSA were in reality 5-25% SSA. In the other hand individuals who thought were 40-60% Native American were in reality 35-65% Native American

Thats more or less what we have been saying here in the site, but from an actual study.


this is from an actual genetic study. What they did is compare the self perception vs genetic ancestry in thousands of latinos (brazilians colombians mexicans peruvians and chileans) . The result was that most people were less SSA than they thought and were similarly or a little less amerindian than they thought.

Thats more or less in accordance to what i am saying here

https://i.imgur.com/z9rGbAU.png

[Adamastor]

Yo tengo 2 resultados y las fotos de dos brasileras que una es 78% Europea y el resto en su mayoría amerindio y la otra es 78% Europea y el resto en su mayoría africanos si yo te muestro las fotos la que tiene más sangre nativo americana parece francesa o alemana y la que tiene más sangre africana parece una mulata tipo Haley Berry o algo así

Al que quiera se lo muestro por privado

Igual es bastante aleatorio pero me parece que los que tienen nativo americano tienden a ser menos evidente que los que tienen sangre africana

This is possible, I have posted people with similar results. But most people with 78% European and the remaining mostly SSA do not look mulatto and the same for people in the 78% European and the remaining Amerindian, they generally do not look French or German.

Even if I think SSA has more tendency to show than Amerindian, let's not exaggerate. Most people with only 20-22% SSA do not look mulatto and many people with 20% Amerindian do not look white.

This guy is 17% SSA and he looks white American (I know him in real life):

https://scontent.fplu3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/12705226_997611026998956_870127327200927514_n.jpg? _nc_cat=102&_nc_sid=7aed08&_nc_ohc=Pb_Whlm-F9gAX8Nn888&_nc_ht=scontent.fplu3-1.fna&oh=e74690c91d73606a274eb5941672680b&oe=5EC99032

This one is 37% SSA (with no Amerindian):

https://scontent.fplu3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/47134096_2093641373990165_2452672294498074624_n.jp g?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=07e735&_nc_ohc=Fkad6HMS-2YAX8KVZW1&_nc_ht=scontent.fplu3-1.fna&oh=78a093610a66e6f28db0fdac0eda2abc&oe=5EBA3528


There is variation depending on the individual and I think that in order to look clearly black admixed (on average) people must be at least 30-40% SSA.

[Argentano]

This is possible, I have posted people with similar results. But most people with 78% European and the remaining mostly SSA do not look mulatto and the same for people in the 78% European and the remaining Amerindian, they generally do not look French or German.

Even if I think SSA has more tendency to show than Amerindian, let's not exaggerate. Most people with only 20-22% SSA do not look mulatto and most people with 20% Amerindian do not look white.

This guy is 17% SSA and he looks white American (I know him in real life):


This one is 37% SSA (with no Amerindian):



There is variation depending on the individual and I think that in order to look clearly black admixed (on average) people must be at least 30-40% SSA.


Yes i am not saying those individuals are are the norm, plus its kind of random. But on average i do think SSA tends to show much more.


The thing is that if i show you 20 mulatos vs 20 mestizos , next to each other. 2 Groups, You will see what i am talking about. Its easy to check in reality just type #23andmeresult in instagram search. Plenty of results+pics there

Then make a collage in 5 minutes with 10 samples each. And see the results.

[Skengdo]

This is possible, I have posted people with similar results. But most people with 78% European and the remaining mostly SSA do not look mulatto and the same for people in the 78% European and the remaining Amerindian, they generally do not look French or German.

Even if I think SSA has more tendency to show than Amerindian, let's not exaggerate. Most people with only 20-22% SSA do not look mulatto and most people with 20% Amerindian do not look white.

This guy is 17% SSA and he looks white American (I know him in real life):


This one is 37% SSA (with no Amerindian):



There is variation depending on the individual and I think that in order to look clearly black admixed (on average) people must be at least 30-40% SSA.

I already explained why choosing random individuals like that is not useful. This would be helpful for your case if we were in denial of individual randomness but we are not. The problem with using this kind of methods is that I can easily find people who are 40% european who at least look "caucasoid" at the very least. But I can also find lots of the contrary. We can't quantify this with only cherrypicking.

I think no one here is going to be convinced until you find 20 people that are 20% SSA and morph them. And you'd need to do the same with 20 people with 20% Amerindian. When you do morphs this randomness gets eliminated because randomness works in both ways.

You are finding people who are 20% SSA who do not show it, but I can also show you people with 20% SSA that look like Snoop Dogg. There was a guy in ABF who was half Dutch/Dominican and he looked like any random basketball player. Is he the norm? Of course not. But neither are the people you posted.

[Argentano]

I already explained why choosing random individuals like that is not useful. This would be helpful for your case if we were in denial of individual randomness but we are not. The problem with using this kind of methods is that I can easily find people who are 40% european who at least look "caucasoid" at the very least. But I can also find lots of the contrary. We can't quantify this with only cherrypicking.

I think no one here is going to be convinced until you find 20 people that are 20% SSA and morph them. And you'd need to do the same with 20 people with 20% Amerindian. When you do morphs this randomness gets eliminated because randomness works in both ways.

You are finding people who are 20% SSA who do not show it, but I can also show you people with 20% SSA that look like Snoop Dogg.

Yes the thing is when you find 10 samples of each for example. and compare 2 GROUPS. There you see the differences. And its not hard to do you can make it if 10 minutes with instagram, plenty of results+pics there

[Adamastor]

I already explained why choosing random individuals like that is not useful. This would be helpful for your case if we were in denial of individual randomness but we are not. The problem with using this kind of methods is that I can easily find people who are 40% european who at least look "caucasoid" at the very least. But I can also find lots of the contrary. We can't quantify this with only cherrypicking.

I think no one here is going to be convinced until you find 20 people that are 20% SSA and morph them. And you'd need to do the same with 20 people with 20% Amerindian. When you do morphs this randomness gets eliminated because randomness works in both ways.

You are finding people who are 20% SSA who do not show it, but I can also show you people with 20% SSA that look like Snoop Dogg.

Well, yeah, I agree. But it can happen in both ways, I posted some days ago some ''white american'' girl with 7% Amerindian who looked Filipino.

[HelloGuys]

dale ahi te lo paso pero no lo pongas en el sitio

They are all brazilians . Its the 2 woman who are 75/76% european in the second row the ones i am talking about

Por supuesto, no lo voy a publicar

Yendo ya con las mujeres, he visto varios casos así; la chica castiza se ve blanca completamente, en cambio la chica cuarterona se ve más africana de lo que dice su genética, se mira tercerona de hecho (Algo intermedio entre mulata y morisca)

En mi opinión los genes amerindios (En especial los del Norte) se diluyen mucho más rápido que los africanos, ya que éstos últimos tienen una pigmentación más oscura, cabello muy rizado y dominante, además de rasgos más "toscos"/fuertes

[Argentano]

Well, yeah, I agree. But it can happen in both ways, I posted some days ago some ''white american'' girl with 7% Amerindian who looked Filipino.

its random i can post mestizos who look native american. Or harnizos who look mestizo. But they are not the norm. Thats the point.

[Argentano]

Por supuesto, no lo voy a publicar

Yendo ya con las mujeres, he visto varios casos así; la chica castiza se ve blanca completamente, en cambio la chica cuarterona se ve más africana de lo que dice su genética, se mira tercerona de hecho (Algo intermedio entre mulata y morisca)

En mi opinión los genes amerindios (En especial los del Norte) se diluyen mucho más rápido que los africanos, ya que éstos últimos tienen una pigmentación más oscura, cabello muy rizado y dominante, además de rasgos más "toscos"/fuertes

fiajte en la primera fila el mestizo de ceara y el mulato de bahia. Estoy seguro que en brasil nadie pensaria que son igual de euro. Y eso que el mulato es mas euro

[Daven]

Argentano, su sesgo de información y "cherrypiqueo" excesivo LMAO. ¿Por qué no ponen ejemplos de primera generación como debería ser? Que será, que será, que será...

Mira estos 2 mestizos. Ambos son solo ~30% ameríndio por genotipo y el resto europeo con un residuo de SSA.

https://cdn.britannica.com/32/189332-050-A630C4A1/George-Lopez-2009.jpg

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjA4NTcyNTA2NV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODkyMDY0Nw@@._ V1_.jpg

^^^Mario para mí es mi idea de un balanced mestizo. No me parece que parezca siciliano o andaluz.

[Adamastor]

its random i can post mestizos who look native american. Or harnizos who look mestizo. But they are not the norm. Thats the point.

Yep, I'm not disputing that. My point is that people with 20% of anything hardly look strongly that thing. You occasionaly find someone who is only 20% African and look mulatto, but that's not the norm also. Maghrebis are 20% SSA on GEDmatch (and I'm not debating if it's true SSA or not) and they don't look like mulattoes. Egyptians themselves are around 20% SSA and they still look ''Caucasoid'' and are classified as such though one could argue their SSA isn't ''real''.

But even then, in the case of Latin Americans it's even less likely to show because the West Eurasian part is made of European components, not of MENA components (which are presumably more swarthy).

I've seen many results of Latin Americans and New Worlders in general, people with admixture as low as 20% generally don't look mestizo or mulatto. I think you guys exaggerate.

[Adamastor]

And of course I'm not saying mulattoes can look ''whiter'' (i.e. lighter) than mestizos, of course not. I mean, a mulatto is a 50/50 black and white mix and that individual for sure will show black traits. But 50/50 mestizos also show Amerindian traits and generally look brown-skinned. Both look non-white, but the mestizo would look lighter of course.

[luc2112]

Yes i am not saying those individuals are are the norm, plus its kind of random. But on average i do think SSA tends to show much more.


The thing is that if i show you 20 mulatos vs 20 mestizos , next to each other. 2 Groups, You will see what i am talking about. Its easy to check in reality just type #23andmeresult in instagram search. Plenty of results+pics there

Then make a collage in 5 minutes with 10 samples each. And see the results.

In Brazil it is SSA bantu, the features are really more noticeable than the Amerindians. But SSA-Africans with less robust features and dolichocephalic from the South of the Sahara, the visibility and percentage of the Euro may change.

[Daven]

Venezuelans more SSA than amerindian phenotypically-speaking hahaha

PS. Look at my cousin. She is only 9% native and the amerindian influence is mad strong in her body shape. At the same time is 20% negroid but doesn't look as much facially nor in the body LMAO.

https://images2.imagebam.com/5d/4c/a4/5c01e81330811213.jpg

[Adamastor]

You cousin does not look Negroid, yeah. But she shows non-European influences as it's obvious for someone who is nearly 30% non-European. When I say that 20% does not show strongly I mean someone will not look mulatto with 20% SSA, but any single part of our ancestry show on phenotype somehow. It may not be clearly visible in anthrotard forums, but it would be visible analyzing the person's phenotype.

I think people who are near 80% European will always look mainly Caucasoid, but admixture can be seen regardless of its nature.Always. People mistake not showing strong traits with not showing any trait at all. These are different things.

[Skengdo]

Argentano, su sesgo de información y "cherrypiqueo" excesivo LMAO. ¿Por qué no ponen ejemplos de primera generación como debería ser? Que será, que será, que será...

Mira estos 2 mestizos. Ambos son solo ~30% ameríndio por genotipo y el resto europeo con un residuo de SSA.


^^^Mario para mí es mi idea de un balanced mestizo. No me parece que parezca siciliano o andaluz.

Fue 23andme o Gedmatch? Hice una pequeña búsqueda en Google y me salió esto:


A DNA test whose results were displayed on the show Lopez Tonight (2009) stated that George’s genetic ancestry is:

*55% European
*32% Native American
*9% East Asian
*4% Sub-Saharan African

The exact accuracy of the DNA tests on Lopez Tonight has been questioned by genealogist Megan Smolenyak Smolenyak.

Ese 9% East Asian definitivamente es Amerindio. Por lo que en realidad sería 41%. Pero no sabemos que referencias usaron, ya que eso fue hace una década cuando 23andme y todo eso no estaba tan avanzado. El resultado bien podría ser completamente inválido.

Hay que tener cuidado cuando se usan referencias cruzadas. En esos mismos test del programa de George, Larry David resultó 37% Amerindio lo cual sabemos no es verdad.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Larry_David_at_the_2009_Tribeca_Film_Festival_2.jp g

[HelloGuys]

Daven: Porque tan obsesionado y obstinado con el SSA?? Es obvio que tendrán más rasgos y se notarán más que los amerindios...porque no puedes aceptarlo? Es algo que todos saben...solo estás quedando como un troll aquí, llegaremos a un punto en el que vas a perder credibilidad; ya somos muchísimos usuarios que te explicamos y demostramos y aún así no quieres entender...tanto te afecta que los rasgos amerindios sean más recesivos que los negros? De verdad tanto te acompleja? Tanto que peleas con todo el mundo aunque te demostraron lo contrario por goleada? Quieres que seamos hipócritas y te digamos: "Tienes razón" para que te sientas tranquilo y dejes de spamear? Ya madura y deja de hacer berrinche, a veces es bueno dejar temas por la paz, lo que estás haciendo ya son patadas de ahogado...

Argentano es de los mejores usuarios que hay, nos ha demostrado con fotos, datos y examenes de ADN personas "puras" y gente con diferente mezcla...y tú desacreditas su trabajo/muestras de AÑOS y de muchísimos países sólo por tu opinión? Sólo porque nos muestres 2 o 3 personas no vas a cambiar nada, no le vas a ganar a Argentano que nos ha mostrado cientos de fotos y examenes...y no solo él lo ha demostrado, también otros usuarios como Carlito's way, ambos de ellos han hecho un espléndido trabajo

[HelloGuys]

Doble post

[Daven]

You cousin does not look Negroid, yeah. But she shows non-European influences as it's obvious for someone who is nearly 30% non-European. When I say that 20% does not show strongly I mean someone will not look mulatto with 20% SSA, but any single part of our ancestry show on phenotype somehow. It may not be clearly visible in anthrotard forums, but it would be visible analyzing the person's phenotype.

I think people who are near 80% European will always look mainly Caucasoid, but admixture can be seen regardless of its nature.Always. People mistake not showing strong traits with not showing any trait at all. These are different things.

I never implied my cousin looked fully European. I am just saying that her body type seems heavily native influence for someone that is only 9% indigenous. She looks fully caucasoid in older pics to me though (when she was about 3-4 years old) and yet only scored 59% caucasoid on 23andme.

[Skengdo]

I never implied she looked fully European. I am just saying that he body type looks heavily native influence for someone that is only 9% native. She looked fully caucasoid in older pics to me though (when she was about 3-4 years old). My cousin is only 59% caucasoid according to 23andme.

LOL, this dumb nigga is getting mad because we're showing quantifiable evidence and all he does is post pics.

And now he's trying to assign body types/lack of fitness to a specific racial group. You're clearly getting desperate here boyo. I am even thinking you're just not smart enough to discuss this.

Gather 20 people who are each 50% amerindian and 50% black and then do a morph so you can see for yourself. Of course, use them all from the same calculator and don't put results from over a decade ago.

[HelloGuys]

fiajte en la primera fila el mestizo de ceara y el mulato de bahia. Estoy seguro que en brasil nadie pensaria que son igual de euro. Y eso que el mulato es mas euro

Pues es obvio, tú nos los has demostrado tantas veces...sólo que hay personas que no lo entienden y desacreditan tu trabajo, sólo porque su opinión y sus pensamientos no concuerdan con los HECHOS

[Erronkari]

You cousin does not look Negroid, yeah. But she shows non-European influences as it's obvious for someone who is nearly 30% non-European. When I say that 20% does not show strongly I mean someone will not look mulatto with 20% SSA, but any single part of our ancestry show on phenotype somehow. It may not be clearly visible in anthrotard forums, but it would be visible analyzing the person's phenotype.

I think people who are near 80% European will always look mainly Caucasoid, but admixture can be seen regardless of its nature.Always. People mistake not showing strong traits with not showing any trait at all. These are different things.

I insist that in my opinion independent if a person has SSA or Amerindian it has a lot to do if an individual who is slightly mixed comes from colonial stock or from recent European ancestry.
For example a 90/10 would probably look very different in both cases.
Probably because the segments are totally =/=.
In the case of a multigenerational individual of colonial stock the DNA would recive different elements thru time which probably create a pred Euro individual but very different or odd.
And you can compare Marcos Palmeira (96 Euro and 4 native) with Ezequiel Lavezzi or Messi who are probably 80/20 with recent Euro admix.
Of course, as I argued with others, I don't try to make a rule by individual cases, but I think that probably the difference exist between those =/= individuals and It's important.

[Token]

Also Argentines and Uruguayans should show that since their iberian ancestry is strongly galician and Galicia is where this ancient component peaks.

It seems West Iberia have both iberomaurisian and north european peaks.

North European peaking in West Iberia lines up very well with the strong Suebic superstratum in Galego-Portuguese. The particularities of Galego-Portuguese within the Ibero-Romance language family is attributed to the Suebi by Portuguese linguists. I believe the fact that they were still largely pagan and not romanized when they settled Gallaecia suggests that they were still very Iron Age Germanic-like, unlike the Visigoths.

[alnortedelsur]

Venezuelans more SSA than amerindian phenotypically-speaking hahaha

PS. Look at my cousin. She is only 9% native and the amerindian influence is mad strong in her body shape. At the same time is 20% negroid but doesn't look as much facially nor in the body LMAO.

https://images2.imagebam.com/5d/4c/a4/5c01e81330811213.jpg

A mi Argentano me cae bien, pero en eso tienes toda la razón.

La población Venezolana en conjunto (quitando casos de gente con fuerte aporte genético y aspecto bastante Africano, que no niego que son abundantes, pero no son mayoría ni son suficientes para representar el promedio Venezolano), no se ve mas Africana que Amerindia.

Aquí muestro unos cuantos ejemplos de Venezolanos en grandes números, con bastante gente de clase baja y clase trabajadora. En los videos salen unos cuantos que se ven fuertemente Africanos, pero no son mayoria, mientras que al mismo tiempo montones se ven mestizos en diversos grados, y montones se ven tri raciales pero con bastante mas influencia Europea y Amerindia que Africana (de esos que yo llamo triraciales-mestizoides):




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gx7sCo-9Nk

Presta atención a toda la gente que pasa por detrás del hombre y la mujer que salen hablando en la mayor parte del siguiente video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv7SNEqUJ70

Mas ejemplos:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dtH6Oo75hA


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6lNbs8oUvQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIqCKYjUGR4



Y eso sin mencionar que todos esos videos son en Caracas, y que mas hacia el interior del país la mezcla Africana tiende a disminuir. Y sin mencionar que los Andes son mayormente blanco/Euro-mestizos.

[Argentano]

LOL, this dumb nigga is getting mad because we're showing quantifiable evidence and all he does is post pics.

And now he's trying to assign body types/lack of fitness to a specific racial group. You're clearly getting desperate here boyo. I am even thinking you're just not smart enough to discuss this.

Gather 20 people who are each 50% amerindian and 50% black and then do a morph so you can see for yourself. Of course, use them all from the same calculator and don't put results from over a decade ago.

lol at the body type i was like WTF nigga

[Token]

Also, Amerindians are not 35% ''Caucasoid'', that is plain retardation, anyone claiming it has no fucking idea of populational genetics.

You don't believe ANE was West Eurasian?

[HelloGuys]

A mi Argentano me cae bien, pero en eso tienes toda la razón.

La población Venezolana en conjunto (quitando casos de gente con fuerte aporte genético y aspecto bastante Africano, que no niego que son abundantes, pero no son mayoría ni son suficientes para representar el promedio Venezolano), no se ve mas Africana que Amerindia.

Aquí muestro unos cuantos ejemplos de Venezolanos en grandes números, con bastante gente de clase baja y clase trabajadora. En los videos salen unos cuantos que se ven fuertemente Africanos, pero no son mayoria, mientras que al mismo tiempo montones se ven mestizos en diversos grados, y montones se ven tri raciales pero con bastante mas influencia Europea y Amerindia que Africana:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gx7sCo-9Nk

Presta atención a toda la gente que pasa por detrás del hombre y la mujer que salen hablando en la mayor parte del siguiente video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv7SNEqUJ70

Mas ejemplos:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dtH6Oo75hA


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6lNbs8oUvQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIqCKYjUGR4



Y eso sin mencionar que todos esos videos son en Caracas, y que mas hacia el interior del país la mezcla Africana tiende a disminuir. Y sin mencionar que los Andes son mayormente blanco/Euro-mestizos.

Venezuela es mayormente europeo/caucásico/blanco, luego amerindio y al final africano

[Daven]

Daven: Porque tan obsesionado y obstinado con el SSA?? Es obvio que tendrán más rasgos y se notarán más que los amerindios...porque no puedes aceptarlo? Es algo que todos saben...solo estás quedando como un troll aquí, llegaremos a un punto en el que vas a perder credibilidad; ya somos muchísimos usuarios que te explicamos y demostramos y aún así no quieres entender...tanto te afecta que los rasgos amerindios sean más recesivos que los negros? De verdad tanto te acompleja? Tanto que peleas con todo el mundo aunque te demostraron lo contrario por goleada? Quieres que seamos hipócritas y te digamos: "Tienes razón" para que te sientas tranquilo y dejes de spamear? Ya madura y deja de hacer berrinche, a veces es bueno dejar temas por la paz, lo que estás haciendo ya son patadas de ahogado...

Argentano es de los mejores usuarios que hay, nos ha demostrado con fotos, datos y examenes de ADN personas "puras" y gente con diferente mezcla...y tú desacreditas su trabajo/muestras de AÑOS y de muchísimos países sólo por tu opinión? Sólo porque nos muestres 2 o 3 personas no vas a cambiar nada, no le vas a ganar a Argentano que nos ha mostrado cientos de fotos y examenes...y no solo él lo ha demostrado, también otros usuarios como Carlito's way, ambos de ellos han hecho un espléndido trabajo

Oye bobo bájale un poco. Nadie anda obsesionado y de hecho se me ha visto solo como en 2 temas discutiendo estas cosas en los tres o más meses que tengo. A mí no me hables de complejo cuando probablemente tú seas más acomplejado que yo. Me estás
atacando en lo personal y ni siquiera me conoces en persona. Ten mucho cuidado, atrevido.

ps. Yo inicialmente ni siquiera hablé de cual elemento se diluía más fácil. Solo me referí al tonto post de Argentano sobre Venezuela que me pareció demasiado. En seguida salió uno de esos mestizos acomplejados (abundan por estos lares,) y hasta racista se volvió el hombre. Coño no es para tanto. Bájate y deja el drama mijo. Eres muy ridículo.

[Erronkari]

A mi Argentano me cae bien, pero en eso tienes toda la razón.

La población Venezolana en conjunto (quitando casos de gente con fuerte aporte genético y aspecto bastante Africano, que no niego que son abundantes, pero no son mayoría ni son suficientes para representar el promedio Venezolano), no se ve mas Africana que Amerindia.

Aquí muestro unos cuantos ejemplos de Venezolanos en grandes números, con bastante gente de clase baja y clase trabajadora. En los videos salen unos cuantos que se ven fuertemente Africanos, pero no son mayoria, mientras que al mismo tiempo montones se ven mestizos en diversos grados, y montones se ven tri raciales pero con bastante mas influencia Europea y Amerindia que Africana:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gx7sCo-9Nk

Presta atención a toda la gente que pasa por detrás del hombre que sale hablando en la mitad del siguiente video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv7SNEqUJ70

Mas ejemplos:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dtH6Oo75hA


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6lNbs8oUvQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIqCKYjUGR4



Y eso sin mencionar que todos esos videos son en Caracas, y que mas hacia el interior del país la mezcla Africana tiende a disminuir. Y sin mencionar que los Andes son mayormente blanco/Euro-mestizos.

Pero están exagerando, unos y otros.
Y están intentando hacer una regla de casos individuales y eso no siempre se dará así porque la genética es muy aleatoria respecto del fenotipo.
Hay casos en wue se da la lógica y otros que no.
Debajo del 7% lo que se suele ver de off white suele ser casi nada o nada directamente y en ambos casos.
Más del 30/35% el africano parece tomar más fuerza o tal vez se trate de que las diferencias físicas con el europeo son más notorias.
Entre los valores comprendidos (entre 30 y 7%) es posible que haya una determinada paridad entre los que tienen SSA o Nativo en cuanto a verse una u otra influencia.
Pero lo que sí es determinante es que a igual porcentaje de extra, digamos por debajo del 10 o 15% un individuo de origen puro colonial se verá más diferente a la gente del Viejo Continente que la que tiene reciente aporte europeo.
Los segmentos del ADN son totalmente distintos, ya que se está creando un individuo totalmente sui géneris por siglos y el mismo ha recibido montones de aportes extracaucasicos a través del tiempo y de manera progresiva aunque mucho menores que los europeos.
No es igual que alguien que es 12/16 reciente europeo y 4/16 colonial donde la mayor parte del ADN no ha dado vuelta tantas veces.
Son al final dos individuos totalmente disímiles aunque el % de los aportes sea el mismo y lo más probable es que se vean muy diferentes también.
Esto nadie lo está tomando en cuenta por lo que veo.

Y en el caso de Venezuela hay que tener en cuenta que justamente es un país donde una imporranrisima parte de la población tiene al menos un antepasado reciente inmigrante.

[Skengdo]

Oye bobo bájale un poco. Nadie anda obsesionado y de hecho se me ha visto solo como en 2 temas discutiendo estas cosas en los tres o más meses que tengo. A mí no me hables de complejo cuando probablemente tú seas más acomplejado que yo. Me estás
atacando en lo personal y ni siquiera me conoces en persona. Ten mucho cuidado, atrevido.

ps. Yo inicialmente ni siquiera hablé de cual elemento se diluía más fácil. Solo me referí al tonto post de Argentano sobre Venezuela que me pareció demasiado. En seguida salió uno de esos mestizos acomplejados (abundan por estos lares,) y hasta racista se volvió el hombre. Argentano me llamó nombres en otro tema y aquí lo andas defendiendo porque simplemente está abogando tu idea. Esas cosas de antropología a mí no me tienen que afectar en lo absoluto. Más bien es ti parece es que te está afectando que hiciste ese post tan largo lleno de disparates. Bájate y deja el drama mijo. Eres muy ridículo.

Si toda esa basofia que dices es verdad entonces cóncedele la razón, lárgate a la verga y deja de cagar el palo con tus poderes de voodoo para adivinar el fenotipo por medio de la grasa corporal y estudios genéticos de hace más de una década para defender lo indefendible.

Las acciones hablan más que las palabras.

[Daven]

Argentano me llamó nombres en otro tema y aquí ya lo andan defendiendo por abogar una idea. Esas cosas de antropología a mí no me tienen que afectar en lo absoluto. Más bien es a otros que parece que están afectando. Mira el post larguísimo de la Helloguys por ejemplo. Meh

[Adamastor]

You don't believe ANE was West Eurasian?

Well, at some point these definitions start to be blurry, especially when taking into account random genetic components + phenotype. When ''West Eurasians'' or any other human group emerged is still a point of contention. Just as I don't think ANA is ''black'' neither ''West Eurasian'' I also think classifying populations from 10.000 years ago or more in those labels becomes harder as we go back in time. I can say for sure that Amerindians I saw in real life do not look even slightly similar to Europeans. Their ancestors may have looked similar to some ancestors of Europeans, but that was more than 12.000 years ago. It's more than enough time to produce extremely divergent physical features. If we go by that logic we could say all humans once looked like Aboriginals, Onge, Khoisan or Negritos (I think these groups preserve more archaic hominin features than Neo-Africans a.k.a ''Negroids'').

Regarding recent admixture, I think it's always visible somewhat when above 5-10%, independently if it's black or Amerindian. I wouldn't say only 5% though, White South Africans are 3-5% SSA and even many 100% Euro Latin Americans generally look black compared to them.


Someone with 90% European and 5-10% other stuff is a European with some non-European ancestry, someone in the 80-90% spectrum is a ''quasi-European'' but will generally show some traits (even if apricians cannot see it). Less than 80% is already full blown biracial to me. I don't see much difference between a 65% European guy and a 72%. These Hispanic American terms like Harnizo or Castizo are extremely retarded. These persons are just ''mixed''. Period.

[alnortedelsur]

Venezuela es mayormente europeo/caucásico/blanco, luego amerindio y al final africano

Algo asi como 55% Euro, 29-30% Amerindio, y 17-20% SSA

[HelloGuys]

Oye bobo bájale un poco. Nadie anda obsesionado y de hecho se me ha visto solo como en 2 temas discutiendo estas cosas en los tres o más meses que tengo. A mí no me hables de complejo cuando probablemente tú seas más acomplejado que yo. Me estás
atacando en lo personal y ni siquiera me conoces en persona. Ten mucho cuidado, atrevido.

ps. Yo inicialmente ni siquiera hablé de cual elemento se diluía más fácil. Solo me referí al tonto post de Argentano sobre Venezuela que me pareció demasiado. En seguida salió uno de esos mestizos acomplejados (abundan por estos lares,) y hasta racista se volvió el hombre. Coño no es para tanto. Bájate y deja el drama mijo. Eres muy ridículo.

Lo ves? Me lo estás demostrando, neta que me encanta que me den la razón

Tus posts dicen otra cosa mijito

[Skengdo]

Well, at some point these definitions start to be blurry, especially when taking into account random genetic components + phenotype. When ''West Eurasians'' or any other human group emerged is still a point of contention. Just as I don't think ANA is ''black'' neither ''West Eurasian'' I also think classifying populations from 10.000 years ago or more in those labels becomes harder as we go back in time. I can say for sure that Amerindians I saw in real life do not look even slightly similar to Europeans. Their ancestors may have looked similar to some ancestors of Europeans, but that was more than 12.000 years ago. It's more than enough time to produce extremely divergent physical features. If we go by that logic we could say all humans once looked like Aboriginals, Onge, Khoisan or Negritos (I think these groups preserve more archaic hominin features than Neo-Africans a.k.a ''Negroids'').

Regarding recent admixture, I think it's always visible somewhat when above 5-10%, independently if it's black or Amerindian. I wouldn't say only 5% though, White South Africans are 3-5% SSA and even many 100% Euro Latin Americans generally look black compared to them.


Someone with 90% European and 5-10% other stuff is a European with some non-European ancestry, someone in the 80-90% spectrum is a ''quasi-European'' but will generally show some traits (even if apricians cannot see it). Less than 80% is already full blown biracial to me. I don't see much difference between a 65% European guy and a 72%. These Hispanic American terms like Harnizo or Castizo are extremely retarded. These persons are just ''mixed''. Period.

We can solve this easily. Where would a 50/50 mulatto plot in a PCA with Old World populations included? And where would a 50/50 mestizo plot?

This does not tell us about the phenotype directly, but we all can agree that the closest the populations in genetc distance are, the most they will look alike.

Remember, I am not arguing exactly which one "dissolves" easier. I am arguing that the non-dissolved individuals still look closer to one of the parent populations due to the closer distance. So this applies to many ways:

A 50/50 mulatto would look less European than a 50/50 mestizo, but he would also look less African than a 50/50 mestizo would look amerindian, because the distance between Africans and Europeans is higher than that of Amerindians and Europeans. Since the distance is bigger, the distance of the mulatto to the two respective parental components would be a lot longer than that of a Mestizo to both sides.

Say, if the total distance between afro and euro is 5000, the distance between amer and euro would be 2000. A mulatto would be 2500 away from both european and african, while the mestizo would only be 1000 away from each component.

A full European looks more like a Native American than he looks like an African. The reverse is also true, a Native American looks more like an European than an African would.

[Argentano]

Daven seems to be mad because i told him he looks new world black:rolleyes:

And i wasnt even trolling that time. It was a serious antropology discussion

https://www.memesmonkey.com/images/memesmonkey/ee/eed604568f0e311dca692e986139349b.jpeg





I don't like Argentano at all. He called me new world black in a derogatory way.


Argentano me llamó nombres en otro tema


Argentano eres un idiota. Diciéndole a Samario que es 40% SSA como si fuera algo malo. Racista inepto. Con lo aburrida que es la cultura de los países sin contribución negroide. Idiota.





Solo me referí al tonto post de Argentano sobre Venezuela que me pareció demasiado. .


Argentano, su sesgo de información y "cherrypiqueo" excesivo LMAO.


Argentano has a clear agenda is making us believe

[Daven]

Si toda esa basofia que dices es verdad entonces cóncedele la razón, lárgate a la verga y deja de cagar el palo con tus poderes de voodoo para adivinar el fenotipo por medio de la grasa corporal y estudios genéticos de hace más de una década para defender lo indefendible.

Las acciones hablan más que las palabras.

Uy mira, así de apasionados se vuelven. Insultando y todo. Atacándome por mis ideas que total parece que no me han leído en otros posts LMAO. Váyase de ahí con sus pasiones. No es para tanto. Lea mi primer post en este tema y después hablamos.

[HelloGuys]

Algo asi como 55% Euro, 29-30% Amerindio, y 17-20% SSA

Casi le atino jaja de hecho yo pensaba que era: 55% Euro, 30% Amerindio y 15% Africano xd

Tienen componente asiático? O sólo en algunos lados?

[Adamastor]

We can solve this easily. Where would a 50/50 mulatto plot in a PCA with Old World populations included? And where would a 50/50 mestizo plot?

This does not tell us about the phenotype directly, but we all can agree that the closest the populations in genetc distance are, the most they will look alike.

In the end it's just autism IMO. Someone who is 61.376367% European and someone who is 73.376357% are just mixed-race, if they look like George Lopez or Halle Berry is irrelevant. Of course they will have different social identities depending on what they are mixed with, but from an objective standpoint both are mixed race. A Mestizo would plot in Central Asia and a Mulatto would plot in the Southern Sahara, near Tuaregs, in 2-D PCA plots.

In a non 2-D PCA 10% of non-European admixture is already enough to start deviating someone from the European cluster, I believe that at less than 80% the person is already out of West Eurasian cluster. In this type of PCA, both mulattoes and mestizos plot isolated, because there are no populations resembling them in the world. Just mulattoes and mestizos.

[Token]

I don't know why you guys still debate about this phenotype shit. 'Amerindian influenced body type" LOL.

[alnortedelsur]

Pero están exagerando, unos y otros.
Y están intentando hacer una regla de casos individuales y eso no siempre se dará así porque la genética es muy aleatoria respecto del fenotipo.
Hay casos en wue se da la lógica y otros que no.
Debajo del 7% lo que se suele ver de off white suele ser casi nada o nada directamente y en ambos casos.
Más del 30/35% el africano parece tomar más fuerza o tal vez se trate de que las diferencias físicas con el europeo son más notorias.
Entre los valores comprendidos (entre 30 y 7%) es posible que haya una determinada paridad entre los que tienen ESA o Nativo en cuando a verse una u otra influencia.
Pero lo que sí es determinante es que a igual porcentaje de extra, digamos por debajo del 10 o 15% un individuo de origen puro colonial se verá más diferente a la gente del Viejo Continente que la que tiene reciente aporte europeo.
Los segmentos del ADN son totalmente distintos, ya que se está creando un individuo totalmente sui géneris por siglos y el mismo ha recibido montones de aportes extracaucasicos a través del tiempo y de manera progresiva aunque mucho menores que los europeos.
No es igual que alguien que es 12/16 reciente europeo y 4/16 colonial donde la mayor parte del ADN no ha dado vuelta tantas veces.
Son al final dos individuos totalmente disímiles aunque el % de los aportes sea el mismo y lo más probable es que se vean muy diferentes también.
Esto nadie lo está tomando en cuenta por lo que veo.

Y en el caso de Venezuela hay que tener en cuenta que justamente es un país donde una imporranrisima parte de la población tiene al menos un antepasado reciente inmigrante.

Yo lo que he querido mostrar con los videos, es que el fenotipo de los Venezolanos en conjunto si se corresponde con el hecho de que los aportes genéticos Europeo y Amerindio son mayores que el Africano, tal como refleja el gráfico de resultados genéticos de Venezolanos mostrado por Argentano, y que no es cierto que a los Venezolanos en conjunto (quitando unos cuantos que se ven bastante Africanos, y son abundantes pero no son mayoría) se les ve mas influencia Africana que Amerindia.

Que opinas de los videos?

Y a propósito he mostrado videos que muestran bastantes Venezolanos comunes (no solo gente de clase media), muchos de ellos de clases baja/trabajadora.

[Daven]

Lo ves? Me lo estás demostrando, neta que me encanta que me den la razón

Tus posts dicen otra cosa mijito

¿Cuáles posts, loquilla? Contesta como se debe y no se haga el loco.

Usted empezó a atacarme asumiendo lo que le pasó por su mente. Si usted tiene sus vainas por dentro no se refleja en mí. Pasaste por bobo.

[Argentano]

Lo ves? Me lo estás demostrando, neta que me encanta que me den la razón

Tus posts dicen otra cosa mijito

jaja esta re acomplejado este pibe, yo tuve una sola conversación con el en donde le comente que para mi el se veia new world negro (no era trolleo yo pense que era algo obvio) y ahora me odia

Lo peor de esta gente acomplejada es que vos podes hablarles bien y ellos se toman todo mal. Yo no tenia ningun problema con el pero al parecer me odia :picard1:

[Rocinante]

Casi le atino jaja de hecho yo pensaba que era: 55% Euro, 30% Amerindio y 15% Africano xd

Tienen componente asiático? O sólo en algunos lados?

Están dando un buen número para un promedio nacional, que está bien, pero esos números pueden variar como una montaña rusa en varios sitios. Pero si, son esos los números en promedio.

[Rocinante]

jaja esta re acomplejado este pibe, yo tuve una sola conversación con el en donde le comente que para mi el se veia new world negro (no era trolleo yo pense que era algo obvio) y ahora me odia

Lo peor de esta gente acomplejada es que vos podes hablarles bien y ellos se toman todo mal. Yo no tenia ningun problema con el pero al parecer me odia :picard1:

New world negro suena algo feo che :lmao pero bueno si es cierto que anda insultando a diestra y siniestra y a HelloGuys que ese no se mete con nadie.

[Argentano]

Yo lo que he querido mostrar con los videos, es que el fenotipo de los Venezolanos en conjunto si se corresponde con el hecho de que los aportes genéticos Europeo y Amerindio son mayores que el Africano, tal como refleja el gráfico de resultados genéticos de Venezolanos mostrado por Argentano, y que no es cierto que a los Venezolanos en conjunto (quitando unos cuantos que se ven bastante Africanos, y son abundantes pero no son mayoría) se les ve mas influencia Africana que Amerindia.

Que opinas de los videos?

Y a propósito he mostrado videos que muestran bastantes Venezolanos comunes (no solo gente de clase media), muchos de ellos de clases baja/trabajadora.

Igual yo lo que quise decir es que venezuela tiene un aporte indigena mas importante de lo que algunos piensan y que esto se venia en los boxplots en el post original.

Justamente si miras los boxplots de primero post el componente amerindio es mas alto que el SSA en la muestra venezolana (rojo vs verde)

[Daven]

Double post.

[Argentano]

Yo lo que he querido mostrar con los videos, es que el fenotipo de los Venezolanos en conjunto si se corresponde con el hecho de que los aportes genéticos Europeo y Amerindio son mayores que el Africano, tal como refleja el gráfico de resultados genéticos de Venezolanos mostrado por Argentano, y que no es cierto que a los Venezolanos en conjunto (quitando unos cuantos que se ven bastante Africanos, y son abundantes pero no son mayoría) se les ve mas influencia Africana que Amerindia.

Que opinas de los videos?

Y a propósito he mostrado videos que muestran bastantes Venezolanos comunes (no solo gente de clase media), muchos de ellos de clases baja/trabajadora.

Igual yo lo que quise decir es que venezuela tiene un aporte indigena mas importante de lo que algunos piensan y que esto se venia en los boxplots en el post original.

Justamente si miras los boxplots de primero post el componente amerindio es mas alto que el SSA en la muestra venezolana (rojo vs verde)

[Erronkari]

Yo lo que he querido mostrar con los videos, es que el fenotipo de los Venezolanos en conjunto si se corresponde con el hecho de que los aportes genéticos Europeo y Amerindio son mayores que el Africano, tal como refleja el gráfico de resultados genéticos de Venezolanos mostrado por Argentano, y que no es cierto que a los Venezolanos en conjunto (quitando unos cuantos que se ven bastante Africanos, y son abundantes pero no son mayoría) se les ve mas influencia Africana que Amerindia.

Que opinas de los videos?

Y a propósito he mostrado videos que muestran bastantes Venezolanos comunes (no solo gente de clase media), muchos de ellos de clases baja/trabajadora.

De hecho a lo que he visto la mayoría responden a esa idea, claro, lo se.
Y lo hemos hablado muchas veces, hacia el oeste (Coro, Zulia, etc) la influencia africana ha sido apenas figurativa, mínima, ni se diga los Andes, y bueno, Caracas un poco por ser la ciudad más aglutinante pero tampoco mucho.
Tal vez la zona donde más se ven sería posiblemente Barlovento y después ese Estado bien al oriente donde incluso bailan Socca ¿Sucre era el nombre? No recuerdo bien...
Bueno, pienso que tal vez esos últimos sectores mencionados deben tener población afrodescendiente considerable, no así el resto...
¿Estoy más o menos acertado?

Respecto de los vídeos, de acuerdo, imagino que muestran justamente esa misma dinámica que venimos mencionando.
El aporte nativo es mucho mayor que el afro sin dudas.

[Daven]

Daven seems to be mad because i told him he looks new world black:rolleyes:

And i wasnt even trolling that time. It was a serious antropology discussion

I was half kidding when I said you called me names LMAO. You did used "nigga" in a derogatory way though and that was wrong. People here don't seem to understand my sense of humor. I think Carlitos does and he knows. But whatever.

[Erronkari]

Yo lo que he querido mostrar con los videos, es que el fenotipo de los Venezolanos en conjunto si se corresponde con el hecho de que los aportes genéticos Europeo y Amerindio son mayores que el Africano, tal como refleja el gráfico de resultados genéticos de Venezolanos mostrado por Argentano, y que no es cierto que a los Venezolanos en conjunto (quitando unos cuantos que se ven bastante Africanos, y son abundantes pero no son mayoría) se les ve mas influencia Africana que Amerindia.

Que opinas de los videos?

Y a propósito he mostrado videos que muestran bastantes Venezolanos comunes (no solo gente de clase media), muchos de ellos de clases baja/trabajadora.

De hecho a lo que he visto la mayoría responden a esa idea, claro, lo se.
Y lo hemos hablado muchas veces, hacia el oeste (Coro, Zulia, etc) la influencia africana ha sido apenas figurativa, mínima, ni se diga los Andes, y bueno, Caracas un poco por ser la ciudad más aglutinante pero tampoco mucho.
Tal vez la zona donde más se ven sería posiblemente Barlovento y después ese Estado bien al oriente donde incluso bailan Socca ¿Sucre era el nombre? No recuerdo bien...
Bueno, pienso que tal vez esos últimos sectores mencionados deben tener población afrodescendiente considerable, no así el resto...
¿Estoy más o menos acertado?

Respecto de los vídeos, de acuerdo, imagino que muestran justamente esa misma dinámica que venimos mencionando.
El aporte nativo es mucho mayor que el afro sin dudas.

[alnortedelsur]

Casi le atino jaja de hecho yo pensaba que era: 55% Euro, 30% Amerindio y 15% Africano xd

Tienen componente asiático? O sólo en algunos lados?

Hay algunos descendientes de Chinos, y restaurantes Chinos y todo eso. Pero son muy minoría comparados con los aportes Europeo, Amerindio y Africano.

En Barquisimeto (ciudad capital del estado Lara, en el centro oeste de Venezuela), sin embargo, su presencia es algo mas notable que en el resto de Venezuela. Tampoco es que Barquisimeto sea una especie de Chinatown ni nada de eso, eh? pero si abundan un poco mas ahi.

[Duffmannn]

Daven, pues si te enfadaste con el término "Negro del Nuevo Mundo", estarías traumatizado si supieras el concepto de negritud que manejamos en Europa, mucho más estricto aún.

[HelloGuys]

jaja esta re acomplejado este pibe, yo tuve una sola conversación con el en donde le comente que para mi el se veia new world negro (no era trolleo yo pense que era algo obvio) y ahora me odia

Lo peor de esta gente acomplejada es que vos podes hablarles bien y ellos se toman todo mal. Yo no tenia ningun problema con el pero al parecer me odia :picard1:

Ni te preocupes, aquí el resto te queremos compa; espero y sigas haciendo un gran trabajo como siempre lo has hecho :thumb001: ya me he encontrado con gente como esa en la vida real y no hay manera, pero tampoco es que me quite el sueño jaja hay que tomárselo como él quiere que lo traten, con humor y sin seriedad

[Daven]

jaja esta re acomplejado este pibe, yo tuve una sola conversación con el en donde le comente que para mi el se veia new world negro (no era trolleo yo pense que era algo obvio) y ahora me odia

Lo peor de esta gente acomplejada es que vos podes hablarles bien y ellos se toman todo mal. Yo no tenia ningun problema con el pero al parecer me odia :picard1:

Yo inseguridades de ningún tipo puedo tener porque soy atractivo. Yo no sé si tú lo seras...

[Erronkari]

Yo lo que he querido mostrar con los videos, es que el fenotipo de los Venezolanos en conjunto si se corresponde con el hecho de que los aportes genéticos Europeo y Amerindio son mayores que el Africano, tal como refleja el gráfico de resultados genéticos de Venezolanos mostrado por Argentano, y que no es cierto que a los Venezolanos en conjunto (quitando unos cuantos que se ven bastante Africanos, y son abundantes pero no son mayoría) se les ve mas influencia Africana que Amerindia.

Que opinas de los videos?

Y a propósito he mostrado videos que muestran bastantes Venezolanos comunes (no solo gente de clase media), muchos de ellos de clases baja/trabajadora.

De hecho a lo que he visto la mayoría responden a esa idea, claro, lo se.
Y lo hemos hablado muchas veces, hacia el oeste (Coro, Zulia, etc) la influencia africana ha sido apenas figurativa, mínima, ni se diga los Andes, y bueno, Caracas un poco por ser la ciudad más aglutinante pero tampoco mucho.
Tal vez la zona donde más se ven sería posiblemente Barlovento y después ese Estado bien al oriente donde incluso bailan Socca ¿Sucre era el nombre? No recuerdo bien...
Bueno, pienso que tal vez esos últimos sectores mencionados deben tener población afrodescendiente considerable, no así el resto...
¿Estoy más o menos acertado?

Respecto de los vídeos, de acuerdo, imagino que muestran justamente esa misma dinámica que venimos mencionando.
El aporte nativo es mucho mayor que el afro sin dudas.

[Skengdo]

Argentano me llamó nombres en otro tema y aquí ya lo andan defendiendo por abogar una idea. Esas cosas de antropología a mí no me tienen que afectar en lo absoluto. Más bien es a otros que parece que están afectando. Mira el post larguísimo de la Helloguys por ejemplo. Meh

El problema tuyo es que te molesta mucho que usen estereotipos pero no tienes problema alguno en usarlos tú. No solo eso sino que no estás ni siquiera tratando de entender las razones que te damos. Cuando alguien te dice que la influencia negra se nota más empiezas a rabiar, pero luego sales poniendo un estudio fraudulento de George Lopez y diciendo que tu prima se ve amerindia porque tiene un poco de grasa corporal. Es por eso que todos se están burlando de ti.

Adamastor ha retado mucho más nuestro punto de vista y nadie lo ha insultado. Ni Argentano, ni el otro mexicano ni yo. La diferencia es que el sí está siguiendo la razón y está utilizando eso mismo para intentar contrarrestarnos. Tú no, solo estás ofendido y haciendo reacciones desesperadas por una plática que ni debería ser ofensiva en primer lugar.

Hasta le dijiste feo a argentano lol. Eres gay? Eso explicaría muchas cosas como tu comportamiento histérico. Si los negros ya son histéricos por sí solos y los maricas también, teniendo eso combinado ya eres Hulk.

[HelloGuys]

Están dando un buen número para un promedio nacional, que está bien, pero esos números pueden variar como una montaña rusa en varios sitios. Pero si, son esos los números en promedio.

Me imagino xddd supongo que en algunos lados puede ser en promedio:

El lugar más blanco del país: 70% Euro, 25% Amerindio y 5% Negro

El lugar más indígena del país: 15% Euro, 75% Amerindio y 10% Negro

El lugar más negro del país: 20% Euro, 15% Amerindio y 65% Negro

Qué opinas? Estoy bien o la erré muy feo? Jaja

[Argentano]

New world negro suena algo feo che :lmao pero bueno si es cierto que anda insultando a diestra y siniestra y a HelloGuys que ese no se mete con nadie.

Es que estabamos discutiendo si el SSA es fuerte en el fenotipo o no. El decia que no, yo decia que si. Y para dar un ejemplo le dije que el tiene un SSA "bajo" (20-25% SSA creo que es) y que para mi el ya se ve como "new world black" (obviamente en alguna de sus variaciones)

Mi post no fue agresivo , era solo un ejemplo para mostrar la influencia de la sangre SSA en el fenotipo. Y lo dije pq es mi opinion, pense que estaba todo bien, pero desde ese momento me ataca en cada post, me dijo varios insultos y me pone thumbs down a todo lo que digo . Ya hasta dijo en este thread que me odia porque le dije "new world black " :rotfl:

Ahora lo trolleo un poco porque me da risa que este tan enojado por eso pero inicialmente lo mio no era trolleo .