Hittite GEDmatch results (1750 BC)

[Hudayar]

He was from Central Anatolia (Kaman Kalehöyük/Kırşehir)

Kit Number: Z020190

PuntDNAL K12
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Anatolian_NF 47.26
2 Caucasus_HG 34.77
3 Near_East 14.50
4 European_HG 3.12


Finished reading population data. 135 populations found.
12 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Cypriot @ 6.935007
2 Druze @ 10.994926
3 Turkish_Jew @ 14.822724
4 Sicilian_East @ 15.314612
5 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 15.611962
6 Moroccan_Jew @ 15.721437
7 Assyrian @ 16.169197
8 Turkish_Kayseri @ 16.760128
9 Tunisian_Jew @ 16.816135
10 Iranian_Jew @ 16.839214
11 Armenian @ 17.485435
12 Iraqi_Jew @ 18.015112
13 Libyan_Jew @ 18.145651
14 Lebanese @ 18.156378
15 Sicilian_West @ 18.457388
16 Syrian @ 19.995495
17 Laz @ 20.040901
18 Palestinian @ 20.930710
19 Turkish_Trabzon @ 20.976038
20 Georgian_Jew @ 21.219385

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot +50% Cypriot @ 6.935007


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Druze +25% Sardinian +25% Turkish_Trabzon @ 5.844772

Eurogenes K13
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 42.41
2 West_Med 26.84
3 West_Asian 22.52
4 Red_Sea 4.61
5 North_Atlantic 3.61


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Cyprian @ 8.972751
2 Lebanese_Christian @ 15.004678
3 Lebanese_Muslim @ 15.063251
4 Samaritan @ 15.162564
5 Tunisian_Jewish @ 17.403482
6 Algerian_Jewish @ 17.440098
7 Syrian @ 17.687239
8 Libyan_Jewish @ 18.073921
9 Lebanese_Druze @ 18.260983
10 Sephardic_Jewish @ 18.392298
11 Italian_Jewish @ 18.535755
12 Assyrian @ 19.442945
13 South_Italian @ 19.825220
14 Kurdish_Jewish @ 19.852375
15 Jordanian @ 20.816086
16 Iranian_Jewish @ 21.012079
17 Palestinian @ 21.370081
18 East_Sicilian @ 22.692663
19 Georgian_Jewish @ 22.722448
20 Ashkenazi @ 22.969913

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cyprian +50% Cyprian @ 8.972751


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Assyrian +25% Lebanese_Christian +25% Sardinian @ 8.520500

MDLP K23b
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 48.92
2 European_Early_Farmers 25.13
3 Near_East 13.54
4 South_Central_Asian 5.42
5 North_African 5.11
6 African_Pygmy 1.23


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Greek_Islands_ @ 8.805417
2 Cypriot_ @ 9.266016
3 Greek_Smyrna_ @ 11.211859
4 Italian_Jew_ @ 13.447717
5 French_Jew_ @ 14.134159
6 Turk_Jew_ @ 14.209823
7 Sephardic_Jew_ @ 14.274565
8 Christian_Arabs_Israel_ @ 14.341336
9 Sicilian_Center_ @ 14.360955
10 Cretan_ @ 14.496547
11 Italian_South_ @ 14.845836
12 Syrian_Jew_ @ 15.162273
13 Sicilian_East_ @ 15.701872
14 Romanian_Jew_ @ 16.193060
15 Sicilian_Siracusa_ @ 16.922123
16 Moroccan_Jew_ @ 16.983034
17 Sicilian_Agrigento_ @ 17.003237
18 Lebanese_Druze_ @ 17.126554
19 Lebanese_Christian_ @ 17.236076
20 Greek_Athens_ @ 17.320421

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot_ +50% Greek_Islands_ @ 8.101921


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Christian_Arabs_Israel_ +25% Georgian_Laz_ +25% Sardinian_ @ 4.099204

[Hudayar]

For comparison, a Turk from the very place the Hittite sample is from (Kaman/Kırşehir)

puntDNAL K12 modern
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasus_HG 28.54
2 Anatolian_NF 27.95
3 Near_East 11.96
4 European_HG 11.07
5 East_Asian 6.78
6 Siberian 6.35
7 South_Asian 4.12
8 Amerindian 1.31


Finished reading population data. 135 populations found.
12 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Turkish_Aydin @ 7.720378
2 Turkish @ 11.157304
3 Turkish_Kayseri @ 15.581287
4 Nogai @ 16.215765
5 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 17.216215
6 Kurdish @ 17.465765
7 Lebanese @ 18.043579
8 Sicilian_East @ 18.101967
9 Assyrian @ 18.600979
10 Sicilian_West @ 19.228670
11 Syrian @ 19.999912
12 Cypriot @ 20.123589
13 Kumyk @ 20.854126
14 Greek @ 21.163874
15 Palestinian @ 21.174234
16 Druze @ 21.382940
17 Iranian_Jew @ 21.466494
18 Iranian @ 21.686722
19 Moroccan_Jew @ 21.722210
20 Balkar @ 22.102951

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Turkish_Jew +50% Uzbek @ 3.628577


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Assyrian +25% Hazara +25% Spanish_Southwest @ 2.936852


Eurogenes K13

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 West_Asian 27.26
2 East_Med 25.23
3 West_Med 11.52
4 Siberian 7.36
5 Baltic 7.15
6 North_Atlantic 6.98
7 East_Asian 5.52
8 Red_Sea 5.11
9 South_Asian 2.80
10 Amerindian 1.08


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Turkish @ 7.827005
2 Azeri @ 12.115146
3 Turkmen @ 15.416478
4 Kurdish @ 18.422138
5 Kumyk @ 18.570681
6 Georgian_Jewish @ 18.789095
7 Iranian @ 18.978643
8 Armenian @ 19.156500
9 Assyrian @ 19.462763
10 Lebanese_Muslim @ 19.852335
11 Nogay @ 20.215675
12 Syrian @ 20.334293
13 Central_Greek @ 21.214485
14 Iranian_Jewish @ 21.888222
15 East_Sicilian @ 21.967295
16 Kurdish_Jewish @ 22.030170
17 Cyprian @ 22.043495
18 Balkar @ 22.044586
19 South_Italian @ 22.422161
20 Kabardin @ 23.159328

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Lebanese_Muslim +50% Nogay @ 2.316665


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Cyprian +25% North_Ossetian +25% Uygur @ 2.066952


MDLP K23b
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 32.92
2 South_Central_Asian 13.38
3 European_Early_Farmers 11.78
4 Near_East 10.05
5 European_Hunters_Gatherers 6.76
6 Tungus-Altaic 5.68
7 South_East_Asian 4.00
8 Ancestral_Altaic 3.92
9 North_African 3.78
10 East_Siberian 2.86
11 South_Indian 1.89
12 Melano_Polynesian 1.53


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Turk_Aydin_ @ 8.711747
2 Turk_Balikesir_ @ 9.255285
3 Turk_Adana_ @ 10.547227
4 Turk_ @ 10.965065
5 Turk_Istanbul_ @ 11.683854
6 Turk_Kayseri_ @ 12.140862
7 Syrian_Jew_ @ 14.830103
8 Georgian_Jew_ @ 15.257236
9 Azeri_ @ 15.646427
10 Azov_Greek_ @ 15.908009
11 Crimean_Tatar_Mountain_ @ 16.021025
12 Iraki_ @ 16.045719
13 Cretan_ @ 16.095943
14 Kurd_North_ @ 16.215921
15 Iraqi_Chaldean_ @ 16.792669
16 Kurd_South_ @ 16.900669
17 Nogai_ @ 16.970963
18 Uzbek_Tashkent_ @ 17.030437
19 Lebanese_Muslim_ @ 17.075161
20 Sicilian_West_ @ 17.164715

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot_ +50% Turkmen_Uzbekistan_ @ 3.520825


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Turk_ +25% Turk_Jew_ +25% Uygur-Han_ @ 2.917146

[Mejgusu]

Looks like that Hittites were genitically the same like cypriots/levantines with visible caucasian influence. Non Indoeuropean influence. Even modern Turks are more „european“

[Leto]

A high quality sample

Dodecad K12b

Population
Gedrosia 5.28 Pct
Siberian -
Northwest_African 1.31 Pct
Southeast_Asian -
Atlantic_Med 22.47 Pct
North_European -
South_Asian -
East_African -
Southwest_Asian 14.48 Pct
East_Asian -
Caucasus 56.18 Pct
Sub_Saharan 0.30 Pct

HarappaWorld

Population
S-Indian -
Baloch 7.88 Pct
Caucasian 54.01 Pct
NE-Euro -
SE-Asian -
Siberian -
NE-Asian -
Papuan -
American -
Beringian -
Mediterranean 22.07 Pct
SW-Asian 15.48 Pct
San -
E-African -
Pygmy -
W-African 0.56 Pct

[Mejgusu]

A high quality sample

Dodecad K12b

Population
Gedrosia 5.28 Pct
Siberian -
Northwest_African 1.31 Pct
Southeast_Asian -
Atlantic_Med 22.47 Pct
North_European -
South_Asian -
East_African -
Southwest_Asian 14.48 Pct
East_Asian -
Caucasus 56.18 Pct
Sub_Saharan 0.30 Pct

HarappaWorld

Population
S-Indian -
Baloch 7.88 Pct
Caucasian 54.01 Pct
NE-Euro -
SE-Asian -
Siberian -
NE-Asian -
Papuan -
American -
Beringian -
Mediterranean 22.07 Pct
SW-Asian 15.48 Pct
San -
E-African -
Pygmy -
W-African 0.56 Pct

This one is more Caucasian shifted, like today Laz/Georgian with SW-Asian influence.

[Hudayar]

Looks like that Hittites were genitically the same like cypriots/levantines with visible caucasian influence. Non Indoeuropean influence. Even modern Turks are more „european“

There seems to be 3-4% European influence in him. in modern day Anatolian Greeks the rate is around 3-7% as well. Small but visible influence. Modern Turks' European heritage (7-15%) is more visible most likely due to Scythian heritage.

And I'd not call Hittites being same as Cypriots. It's the other way around most likely. Cypriots are most likely hellenized Hittites.

[dududud]

LOL, not very indo-european...

[Mejgusu]

There seems to be 3-4% European influence in him. in modern day Anatolian Greeks the rate is around 3-7% as well. Small but visible influence. Modern Turks' European heritage (7-15%) is more visible most likely due to Scythian heritage.

And I'd not call Hittites being same as Cypriots. It's the other way around most likely. Cypriots are most likely hellenized Hittites.

Yes i think the european genes came from Turkic part.

Youre right, lets say prehellenuc cypriots. Also i would say ancient anatolian could differ from regional placements, i mean northen one could score more caucasian and southern one more near eastern, isnt it?

[Leto]

There seems to be 3-4% European influence in him. in modern day Anatolian Greeks the rate is around 3-7% as well. Small but visible influence. Modern Turks' European heritage (7-15%) is more visible most likely due to Scythian heritage.

Can you post the Turk's Dodecad & Harappa the way I posted the Hittite's?

[Hudayar]

Can you post the Turk's Dodecad & Harappa the way I posted the Hittite's?

Turk from Kaman:


Dodecad K12b
Population
1 Caucasus 33.03
2 Gedrosia 15.72
3 Atlantic_Med 13.02
4 Southwest_Asian 11.47
5 North_European 11.19
6 East_Asian 8.95
7 Siberian 4.54
8 Northwest_African 1.42
9 South_Asian 0.65


HarappaWorld
Population
1 Caucasian 34.89
2 Baloch 15.21
3 Mediterranean 12.67
4 NE-Euro 11.29
5 SW-Asian 10.69
6 NE-Asian 7.87
7 Siberian 5.28
8 S-Indian 0.86
9 American 0.79
10 Beringian 0.36
11 San 0.08

[Zoro]

LOL, not very indo-european...

How can you say that? He scored Modern Caucasus 56.18 Pct and Modern Atlantic_Med 22.47 Pct. How much of the 56.18% and the 22.47% in those modern references is Indo-European?

[dududud]

How can you say that? He scored Modern Caucasus 56.18 Pct and Modern Atlantic_Med 22.47 Pct. How much of the 56.18% and the 22.47% in those modern references is Indo-European?

This sample is very levantine shifted. Not very indo-european, that's it.

Indo-europeans are not levantine shifted.

[Leto]

How can you say that? He scored Modern Caucasus 56.18 Pct and Modern Atlantic_Med 22.47 Pct. How much of the 56.18% and the 22.47% in those modern references is Indo-European?
That samples is zero North_European, therefore practically no Steppe ancestry.

[Mejgusu]

Ancient anatolians were indoeurpeanized. Some maybe became more european genetically with some greek influence, but they mostly mix caucasian+levantine/med.

[Zoro]

That samples is zero North_European, therefore practically no Steppe ancestry.

I understand it didn't score N. European but surely a percentage of the 56% Caucasian is Indo-European. As far as I know Caucasians are NOT 0% Indo-European. Same logic for the modern Atlantic_Med references whoever they are.

If you really want to nail down how much Indo-European a close to fool-proof way is to use a calculator with an ENF component, WHG component, EHG component, Namazga component.

[Mejgusu]

I understand it didn't score N. European but surely a percentage of the 56% Caucasian is Indo-European. As far as I know Caucasians are NOT 0% Indo-European. Same logic for the modern Atlantic_Med references whoever they are.

If you really want to nail down how much Indo-European a close to fool-proof way is to use a calculator with an ENF component, WHG component, EHG component, Namazga component.

Caucasian isnt indoeuropean. Even some caucasian people with high ammount of caucasian admix score at least 10% NE. This one not even score 5% NE.

[Zoro]

Caucasian isnt indoeuropean. Even some caucasian people with high ammount of caucasian admix score at least 10% NE. This one not even score 5% NE.

Read my post again. I am saying what percentage of a Caucasian reference is Indo-European. Let's say it's 20%. So if you do the math 20% of 56% is equal to 11.2% Indo-European. Get it!

[Mejgusu]

Read my post again. I am saying what percentage of a Caucasian reference is Indo-European. Let's say it's 20%. So if you do the math 20% of 56% is equal to 11.2% Indo-European. Get it!

Yes i understood you. What i meant is that if he is of indoeuropean ancestry, he would score more NE. He is genetically very similar or related to non IE people of the Region in and around anatolia. So i really doubt that he is IE influenced.

[Rabbit Hole]

He was from Central Anatolia (Kaman Kalehöyük/Kırşehir)

Kit Number: Z020190

PuntDNAL K12
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Anatolian_NF 47.26
2 Caucasus_HG 34.77
3 Near_East 14.50
4 European_HG 3.12


Finished reading population data. 135 populations found.
12 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Cypriot @ 6.935007
2 Druze @ 10.994926
3 Turkish_Jew @ 14.822724
4 Sicilian_East @ 15.314612
5 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 15.611962
6 Moroccan_Jew @ 15.721437
7 Assyrian @ 16.169197
8 Turkish_Kayseri @ 16.760128
9 Tunisian_Jew @ 16.816135
10 Iranian_Jew @ 16.839214
11 Armenian @ 17.485435
12 Iraqi_Jew @ 18.015112
13 Libyan_Jew @ 18.145651
14 Lebanese @ 18.156378
15 Sicilian_West @ 18.457388
16 Syrian @ 19.995495
17 Laz @ 20.040901
18 Palestinian @ 20.930710
19 Turkish_Trabzon @ 20.976038
20 Georgian_Jew @ 21.219385

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot +50% Cypriot @ 6.935007


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Druze +25% Sardinian +25% Turkish_Trabzon @ 5.844772

Eurogenes K13
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 42.41
2 West_Med 26.84
3 West_Asian 22.52
4 Red_Sea 4.61
5 North_Atlantic 3.61


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Cyprian @ 8.972751
2 Lebanese_Christian @ 15.004678
3 Lebanese_Muslim @ 15.063251
4 Samaritan @ 15.162564
5 Tunisian_Jewish @ 17.403482
6 Algerian_Jewish @ 17.440098
7 Syrian @ 17.687239
8 Libyan_Jewish @ 18.073921
9 Lebanese_Druze @ 18.260983
10 Sephardic_Jewish @ 18.392298
11 Italian_Jewish @ 18.535755
12 Assyrian @ 19.442945
13 South_Italian @ 19.825220
14 Kurdish_Jewish @ 19.852375
15 Jordanian @ 20.816086
16 Iranian_Jewish @ 21.012079
17 Palestinian @ 21.370081
18 East_Sicilian @ 22.692663
19 Georgian_Jewish @ 22.722448
20 Ashkenazi @ 22.969913

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cyprian +50% Cyprian @ 8.972751


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Assyrian +25% Lebanese_Christian +25% Sardinian @ 8.520500

MDLP K23b
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 48.92
2 European_Early_Farmers 25.13
3 Near_East 13.54
4 South_Central_Asian 5.42
5 North_African 5.11
6 African_Pygmy 1.23


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Greek_Islands_ @ 8.805417
2 Cypriot_ @ 9.266016
3 Greek_Smyrna_ @ 11.211859
4 Italian_Jew_ @ 13.447717
5 French_Jew_ @ 14.134159
6 Turk_Jew_ @ 14.209823
7 Sephardic_Jew_ @ 14.274565
8 Christian_Arabs_Israel_ @ 14.341336
9 Sicilian_Center_ @ 14.360955
10 Cretan_ @ 14.496547
11 Italian_South_ @ 14.845836
12 Syrian_Jew_ @ 15.162273
13 Sicilian_East_ @ 15.701872
14 Romanian_Jew_ @ 16.193060
15 Sicilian_Siracusa_ @ 16.922123
16 Moroccan_Jew_ @ 16.983034
17 Sicilian_Agrigento_ @ 17.003237
18 Lebanese_Druze_ @ 17.126554
19 Lebanese_Christian_ @ 17.236076
20 Greek_Athens_ @ 17.320421

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot_ +50% Greek_Islands_ @ 8.101921


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Christian_Arabs_Israel_ +25% Georgian_Laz_ +25% Sardinian_ @ 4.099204

Interesting that they are so close to Cypriot samples it was similar to my mother's but she got the Levant a little bit first than Cyprus second.

[Rabbit Hole]

Looks like that Hittites were genitically the same like cypriots/levantines with visible caucasian influence. Non Indoeuropean influence. Even modern Turks are more „european“

This is impossible Cypriots and Levantines are more Indo European than Turks

Both Levantines and Cypriots on the k36 on Ged have a Mycenaean Anatolian mix, that's all that means.

[tipirneni]

I get following on 1-on-1 match at 100 SNP

Total cM: 21.45
Largest segment cM: 1.92
Total segments: 16

[yamagi]

Turan stronk

[Rabbit Hole]

Caucasian isnt indoeuropean. Even some caucasian people with high ammount of caucasian admix score at least 10% NE. This one not even score 5% NE.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24653570?seq=1

''Cypriots and Levantines were the pioneers of the ancient Mediterranean coastline''

People IN the Caucasus have big Jewish noses at least my nose is straight you mother fucking Dagestani Georgian prick.

[Zoro]

Yes i understood you. What i meant is that if he is of indoeuropean ancestry, he would score more NE. He is genetically very similar or related to non IE people of the Region in and around anatolia. So i really doubt that he is IE influenced.

Not necessarily. Supposing that one of those Caucasian references they used is my mom and dad and it's been verified by formal methods that my my parents are 20% Indo-European. I come along and use the calculator and score 100% Caucasian (because my parents are some of the Caucasian references). Does it mean that I don't have any Indo-European because I scored 100% Caucasian knowing that my parents are 20% Indo-European.

I would say even Cypriots also have some Indo-European

[Rabbit Hole]

Turan stronk

Mongolian Mongoloid stock with small slanted eyes

EUropa not Stepp-opa

Narrow eyes.

[Jana]

LOL, not very indo-european...

Based on what? There is a possibility earliest IE were of Caucasus ancestry, not steppe.
Yamnaya was half CHG half EHG, and we still don't know which half brought the language.

Some people are quite limited. Sample like this speaks in favour of Armenian Highland theory which David Reich also speaks about.

[FinalFlash]

The closest modern day populations to Hittites would probably be Central Anatolian Greeks.

[Mejgusu]

This is impossible Cypriots and Levantines are more Indo European than Turks

Both Levantines and Cypriots on the k36 on Ged have a Mycenaean Anatolian mix, that's all that means.

Genetically IE are NE european influenced. They might be outliners in Lebanon who score more than 10% NE europe, but idont think thats count for the majority. Lebanese are maybe sometimes iranian influenced, but that doesnt make them more „european“. I dont know how much NE europe mycenean score, but i doubt they inflated the NE european admix of lebanese people.

[Mejgusu]

The closest modern day populations to Hittites would probably be Central Anatolian Greeks.

I think Armenians.

[Jana]

IE = North European is quite outdated concept.
It's interesting how early IE speaking Anatolians and Greeks have so little of this ancestry, while they have lot of CHG.

I am more and more in favour of CHG=earliest IE theory, but with Yamnaya/Corded Ware and other North European heavy populations spreading the language in greatest amount.

However, I now think they are not the most original IE populations.

[FinalFlash]

I think Armenians.

Assuming this sample even belongs to a Hittite person, the oracles don't match modern day Armenians(East or West) from what I can tell.

[Rabbit Hole]

Assuming this sample even belongs to a Hittite person, the oracles don't match modern day Armenians(East or West) from what I can tell.

Turkish trolling again.

[FinalFlash]

IE = North European is quite outdated concept.
It's interesting how early IE speaking Anatolians and Greeks have so little of this ancestry, while they have lot of CHG.

I am more and more in favour of CHG=early IE theory, but with Yamnaya/Corded Ware and other North European heavy populations spreading the language in greatest amount.
However, I now think they are not the most original IE populations.

CHG/Iran_N is an important part of PIE ancestry which often gets overlooked and ignored.

[Kyp]

Distance to: OP_sample
9.06609067 Cypriots
12.85940123 Greek_Cappadocia
14.75958333 Greek_Pontus
15.36369422 Druze
16.55296952 Turk_East_Black_Sea
17.46178971 Nusayri_Turkey
17.47093300 Armenian_West
18.55734356 Hemshin
18.99757090 Laz
19.31735489 Assyrian
19.71218405 Azerbaijan_Jews
20.02557615 Armenian_East
20.22560259 Sephardic_Jews
20.27194613 Georgia_Jews
21.46204324 Assyrian
21.78317240 Greek_Crete
21.88438256 Lebanese
21.91129617 Georgian_Adjara
21.94481943 Turk_East
22.17481003 Iraq_Jews
22.25310540 Ashkenazy_Jews
22.74363208 Turk_Ahiska
22.77212990 Samaritians
22.88755557 Ashkenazi
23.17839080 Georgian_Turkey

[FinalFlash]

Distance to: OP_sample
9.06609067 Cypriots
12.85940123 Greek_Cappadocia
14.75958333 Greek_Pontus
15.36369422 Druze
16.55296952 Turk_East_Black_Sea
17.46178971 Nusayri_Turkey
17.47093300 Armenian_West
18.55734356 Hemshin
18.99757090 Laz
19.31735489 Assyrian
19.71218405 Azerbaijan_Jews
20.02557615 Armenian_East
20.22560259 Sephardic_Jews
20.27194613 Georgia_Jews
21.46204324 Assyrian
21.78317240 Greek_Crete
21.88438256 Lebanese
21.91129617 Georgian_Adjara
21.94481943 Turk_East
22.17481003 Iraq_Jews
22.25310540 Ashkenazy_Jews
22.74363208 Turk_Ahiska
22.77212990 Samaritians
22.88755557 Ashkenazi
23.17839080 Georgian_Turkey

Guess I wasn't too far off. Cypriots and Central Anatolian Greeks are their first matches.

[Rabbit Hole]

Based on what? There is a possibility earliest IE were of Caucasus ancestry, not steppe.
Yamnaya was half CHG half EHG, and we still don't know which half brought the language.

Some people are quite limited. Sample like this speaks in favour of Armenian Highland theory which David Reich also speaks about.
Exactly ready here

http://archhades.blogspot.com/2015/10/myth-of-light-pigmented-nordic-looking.html
The table above represents frequencies found in ancient samples compared to modern Ukrainian ones. The dataset for the ancient sample is a combined pooling of both the Yamnaya culture and the succeeding Catacomb culture from the same area. Note the SNP rs12912832 [OCA2] in the HERC2 gene which predicts blue eyes is present in 65% of modern Ukrainians, but was only present in 16% of the ancient samples. Also note that the ancient samples have much lower frequencies in all three SNPs which predict light pigmentation including SNPs in the TYR gene which are associated with blondism. So while blue eyes and blondism were not completely unseen among the Proto Indo-European speakers...those phenotypical traits were indeed in the small minority.

SOURCE : Wilde et al., Direct evidence for positive selection of skin, hair, and eye pigmentation in Europeans during the last 5,000 y PNAS, Published online before print on March 10, 2014, DO:I10.1073/pnas.1316513111

Link PDF


Another article released a year later basically revealed the same thing, although this study focused the pigmentation of many ancient European populations in comparison to modern ones including pre Neolithic Western Hunter Gatherers and early Neolithic Farmers in Europe. But the study did also include a sample set from the Yamnaya culture which is identified by most linguists as the speakers of the Proto Indo-European language on the eve of their great expansion. Only 11% of the Yamnaya in this sample from the Samar Oblast region carry alleles for light eyes, as they are noticeably darker pigmented in skin and eyes than contemporary Southern Europeans. See data below.
In graph A you'll see a timeline which consists of ancient samples all the way up to modern CEU (which represents White Americans from Utah who are mostly of Northwestern European origin). In graph B you'll see ancient samples represented as well, and you'll also see that the Yamnaya are represented in graph B. Graph C represents modern European populations. Notice the red bar which measures the frequency of light eye color pigmentation alles is extremely low in Yamnaya only scoring 11%, lower than modern Southern Europeans such as the Spanish and Italians (the Italian sample is from Tuscany). This means the Yamnaya, who were the likely speakers of late stage or 'classical' Proto Indo-European were around 90% dark eyed. You'll also notice that the blue and green bars represent the presence of light skin color alles, and their frequency in Yamnaya is lower than modern Southern Europeans as well. The blue bar in Yamnaya is equal to modern Europeans, but the green bar is lower. The data is clearly pointing to the idea that most of the presence of blue eyes in Europe derives from pre Neolithic and pre Indo-European speaking Western Hunter Gatherers, who are uniformly blue eyed. The data also points that natural selection has been favoring an increase in light skin over the past 5,000 in most areas of Europe, peaking in contemporary Northern Europe.

SOURCE : Mathieson, Iain, et al. "Eight thousand years of natural selection in Europe." bioRxiv (2015): 016477.

Link PDF



Also of note, another 2015 major aDNA study was released just several months later. Interestingly enough, it found the same extremely high prevalence for brown eyes in the people of the Yamnaya culture. These aDNA samples were taken from the Kalmykia & Rostov Oblast regions, which are roughly 1,000 kilometers Southwest of the other Yamnaya group sampled in the earlier Maithieson et al study above, which were taken from the Samara Oblast region. However, the study and new sample locations yielded the same results.
"For rs12913832, a major determinant of blue versus brown eyes in humans, our results indicate the presence of blue eyes already in Mesolithic hunter-gatherers as previously described. We find it at intermediate frequency in Bronze Age Europeans, but it is notably absent from the Pontic-Caspian steppe populations, suggesting a high prevalence of brown eyes in these individuals."

Pretty much puts the nail in the coffin for the old idea of the Proto Indo-Europeans being a highly blonde and blue eyed group or phenotypically indistinguishable from present day Northern Europeans. Well, at least for those that support the Kurgan/steppe hypothesis for PIE origins. Of course, there is still the competing Armenian Highland hypothesis and (the now dying) Anatolian hypothesis, but there's no suspicion of predominately light pigmented populations in those prehistoric areas.

SOURCE : Allentoft et al., Bronze Age population dynamics, selection, and the formation of Eurasian genetic structure, Nature 522, 167–172 (11 June 2015) doi:10.1038/nature14507

Link



Those curious of what the geographic distribution of early Indo-European linguistic expansion looks like according to the Kurgan hypothesis, here are some great maps I found from a fellow blogger.
So what does this mean? It means the long lasting and now hopelessly outdated conjectures from Nordicists about Proto Indo-European phenotype have been falsified. To be fair, we must not forget though that the Yamnaya had greater "genetic height" [Not actual height which is based on a complex combination of genetics and environmental/dietary upbringing] than modern Spaniards & Central Europeans, and perhaps one of the reasons modern Northern Europeans are on average the tallest in Europe is because they have the most Yamnaya like ancestry.

But back to the point, let us not forget that these conjectures about pigmentation, and the idea of predominately light pigmented proto Indo-Europeans [such as John V. Day's hypothesis] were based on little more than select literature references of personalities (both real and mythological) from ancient Indo-European cultures that existed thousands of years after the Proto Indo-Europeans existed, and in most cases many hundreds to thousands of miles away from the Proto Indo-European urheimat. Of course, that's not even getting into the problem of the relativeness of color terminology nor vagueness of the descriptions. The point is none of these later distant and distinct Indo-European populations in which ancient literature mentions of light pigmented individuals spoke the original or even a pure Indo-European language, they merely spoke a language which shared an ultimate linguistic ancestor with Proto Indo-European. In the future more data from ancient DNA I'm sure will show these populations to not be fully genetically continuous to the early Bronze age Proto Indo-European steppe populations (or even the "elites"), though they definitely may have significant Bronze age steppe admixture like most modern Indo-European speaking populations in Europe do.

Keep in mind, just because the Proto Indo-Europeans were overwhelming dark eyed and rather dark skinned and haired by Eurocentric standards, does not mean all later particular Indo-European speaking cultures or populations were. I don't want anyone to fall into that trap. We of course know that modern Indo-European speaking populations vary greatly in phenotype and pigmentation. We also know that even by the late bronze age, that many later Indo-European peoples were evolving not only their own unique languages, but also their own unique genetic identities away from the Proto Indo-European identity as well. So with this in mind, there's no reason to believe they weren't developing their own unique phenotypes distinct from the original Indo-European phenotype either. Many later derived Indo-European cultures like the Proto Indo-Iranians or the Proto Germanics were probably predominately light pigmented.

The beauty of science strikes again and throws us another surprise. Any contemporary seeker of truth is lucky to live in this era of scientific inquiry when humanity has thrown off dogmatic and religious assertions in search for genuine knowledge. I know I am.

[Demhat]

He was from Central Anatolia (Kaman Kalehöyük/Kırşehir)

Kit Number: Z020190

PuntDNAL K12
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Anatolian_NF 47.26
2 Caucasus_HG 34.77
3 Near_East 14.50
4 European_HG 3.12


Finished reading population data. 135 populations found.
12 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Cypriot @ 6.935007
2 Druze @ 10.994926
3 Turkish_Jew @ 14.822724
4 Sicilian_East @ 15.314612
5 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 15.611962
6 Moroccan_Jew @ 15.721437
7 Assyrian @ 16.169197
8 Turkish_Kayseri @ 16.760128
9 Tunisian_Jew @ 16.816135
10 Iranian_Jew @ 16.839214
11 Armenian @ 17.485435
12 Iraqi_Jew @ 18.015112
13 Libyan_Jew @ 18.145651
14 Lebanese @ 18.156378
15 Sicilian_West @ 18.457388
16 Syrian @ 19.995495
17 Laz @ 20.040901
18 Palestinian @ 20.930710
19 Turkish_Trabzon @ 20.976038
20 Georgian_Jew @ 21.219385

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot +50% Cypriot @ 6.935007


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Druze +25% Sardinian +25% Turkish_Trabzon @ 5.844772

Eurogenes K13
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 42.41
2 West_Med 26.84
3 West_Asian 22.52
4 Red_Sea 4.61
5 North_Atlantic 3.61


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Cyprian @ 8.972751
2 Lebanese_Christian @ 15.004678
3 Lebanese_Muslim @ 15.063251
4 Samaritan @ 15.162564
5 Tunisian_Jewish @ 17.403482
6 Algerian_Jewish @ 17.440098
7 Syrian @ 17.687239
8 Libyan_Jewish @ 18.073921
9 Lebanese_Druze @ 18.260983
10 Sephardic_Jewish @ 18.392298
11 Italian_Jewish @ 18.535755
12 Assyrian @ 19.442945
13 South_Italian @ 19.825220
14 Kurdish_Jewish @ 19.852375
15 Jordanian @ 20.816086
16 Iranian_Jewish @ 21.012079
17 Palestinian @ 21.370081
18 East_Sicilian @ 22.692663
19 Georgian_Jewish @ 22.722448
20 Ashkenazi @ 22.969913

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cyprian +50% Cyprian @ 8.972751


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Assyrian +25% Lebanese_Christian +25% Sardinian @ 8.520500

MDLP K23b
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 48.92
2 European_Early_Farmers 25.13
3 Near_East 13.54
4 South_Central_Asian 5.42
5 North_African 5.11
6 African_Pygmy 1.23


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Greek_Islands_ @ 8.805417
2 Cypriot_ @ 9.266016
3 Greek_Smyrna_ @ 11.211859
4 Italian_Jew_ @ 13.447717
5 French_Jew_ @ 14.134159
6 Turk_Jew_ @ 14.209823
7 Sephardic_Jew_ @ 14.274565
8 Christian_Arabs_Israel_ @ 14.341336
9 Sicilian_Center_ @ 14.360955
10 Cretan_ @ 14.496547
11 Italian_South_ @ 14.845836
12 Syrian_Jew_ @ 15.162273
13 Sicilian_East_ @ 15.701872
14 Romanian_Jew_ @ 16.193060
15 Sicilian_Siracusa_ @ 16.922123
16 Moroccan_Jew_ @ 16.983034
17 Sicilian_Agrigento_ @ 17.003237
18 Lebanese_Druze_ @ 17.126554
19 Lebanese_Christian_ @ 17.236076
20 Greek_Athens_ @ 17.320421

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cypriot_ +50% Greek_Islands_ @ 8.101921


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Christian_Arabs_Israel_ +25% Georgian_Laz_ +25% Sardinian_ @ 4.099204


And these results are exactly the reason why scientists to this day are arguing if the Hittite really came from the Steppes or if they were branched off from the Core of the Indo Europeans before they reached the Steppes.

They literally had no DNA that can be explained via later migration. For example the ~3% European H&G DNA looks more like it came via a Kura Araxes type of culture probably from the Eastern Caucasus (Leyla Tepe?).

By Neolithic the Eastern Anatolia /South Caucasus region and even by mesolithic the Iranian Plateau had around 10% EHG like ancestry. 3% is noise ancestry anyways it could very well be also Iran_Neo like ancestry in EHG.

[Rabbit Hole]

CHG/Iran_N is an important part of PIE ancestry which often gets overlooked and ignored.

This came later

[Rabbit Hole]

Guess I wasn't too far off. Cypriots and Central Anatolian Greeks are their first matches.

Cypriots have a basic PIE Anatolian and Mycenaean imput.

[Mejgusu]

IE = North European is quite outdated concept.
It's interesting how early IE speaking Anatolians and Greeks have so little of this ancestry, while they have lot of CHG.

I am more and more in favour of CHG=early IE theory, but with Yamnaya/Corded Ware and other North European heavy populations spreading the language in greatest amount.
However, I now think they are not the most original IE populations.

Anatolia was inhabited by many other non IE people, who had the same culture like anatolian IEs. Thatshow, early IE absorbed the anatolian preIE culture, however they came from Caucasus or Balkans. Ancient anatolian people, instead of southeastern parts to Iraq and syria border, were most plausible caucasian people. There are a old men on lake van whitch chechen ancestry, who can read old uratrian texts perfectly. He claimed, that this languege is familae to chechen language.

[FinalFlash]

This came later

How much later? Some of those Yamnaya and later steppe people have heavy CHG/Iran_N input.

[Demhat]

This came later

Yamnaya is like 50% Iran_Neo/CHG. That has been known since at least 4-5 years.

[Mejgusu]

Turkish trolling again.

I am not trolling, i just claimed that this sample would better pass to an armenian than to a greek. So i dont understand why its trolling. Armenians score nearly the same ammount of SW Asia, Med, European. They are just sometimes less Caucasus with Gedrosian admix. So dont understand it as attack, i just opinionated.

[Rabbit Hole]

How much later? Some of those Yamnaya and later steppe people have heavy CHG/Iran_N input.

Please look at the article posted there was a element of Iran _N input even in Natufian samples but it's not as much as later stages especially in the Steppes/Anatolia

Hittite were native Anatolians, they did not inhabit the Steppes then land in Anatolia

More like their were originally PIE Anatolians and spread out throughout the Near East during the Middle to late Bronze Age.

There are more genuine samples of the Levant and Cypriots PIE Anatolian samples along with IE Mycenaean

The Indo Europeans who inhabited the Steppes came later anyway.

Why do Turks White wash their history and slag off the original inhabitants.

Even the ''most white Turks'' with end up in Bosnia/Serbia Bulgaria because they took that part during their dirty empire. They are in no way shape or form North East Europeans.

[Rabbit Hole]

I am not trolling, i just claimed that this sample would better pass to an armenian than to a greek. So i dont understand why its trolling. Armenians score nearly the same ammount of SW Asia, Med, European. They are just sometimes less Caucasus with Gedrosian admix. So dont understand it as attack, i just opinionated.

You are trolling. A Turk who lands in the mainland Balkans probably desends from either a Janissary descendant or some hareem queen. You are not North East or North West Europeans.

Don't you dare speak that way about us.

[FinalFlash]

I am not trolling, i just claimed that this sample would better pass to an armenian than to a greek. So i dont understand why its trolling. Armenians score nearly the same ammount of SW Asia, Med, European. They are just sometimes less Caucasus with Gedrosian admix. So dont understand it as attack, i just opinionated.

Because based off the oracles and admix levels, this sample doesn't score like Armenians would. In fact, it is somewhat distant to Armenians given the fact that they are closer to modern day Anatolians and even Levantines than Armenians would be on average.

[Mejgusu]

Distance to: OP_sample
9.06609067 Cypriots
12.85940123 Greek_Cappadocia
14.75958333 Greek_Pontus
15.36369422 Druze
16.55296952 Turk_East_Black_Sea
17.46178971 Nusayri_Turkey
17.47093300 Armenian_West
18.55734356 Hemshin
18.99757090 Laz
19.31735489 Assyrian
19.71218405 Azerbaijan_Jews
20.02557615 Armenian_East
20.22560259 Sephardic_Jews
20.27194613 Georgia_Jews
21.46204324 Assyrian
21.78317240 Greek_Crete
21.88438256 Lebanese
21.91129617 Georgian_Adjara
21.94481943 Turk_East
22.17481003 Iraq_Jews
22.25310540 Ashkenazy_Jews
22.74363208 Turk_Ahiska
22.77212990 Samaritians
22.88755557 Ashkenazi
23.17839080 Georgian_Turkey

Looks that its a mix of Caucasian and Med/Levantine. So indeed he is clustering with central anatolian greeks, also show affinity to Caucasian people

[Rabbit Hole]

Because based off the oracles and admix levels, this sample doesn't score like Armenians would. In fact, it is somewhat distant to Armenians given the fact that they are closer to modern day Anatolians and even Levantines than Armenians would be on average.

This is what it says on K36 yes

[Rabbit Hole]

Because based off the oracles and admix levels, this sample doesn't score like Armenians would. In fact, it is somewhat distant to Armenians given the fact that they are closer to modern day Anatolians and even Levantines than Armenians would be on average.

This is what it says on K36 yes

[Mejgusu]

You are trolling. A Turk who lands in the mainland Balkans probably desends from either a Janissary descendant or some hareem queen. You are not North East or North West Europeans.

Don't you dare speak that way about us.


Wtf just your dont like my opinion your start to be offensive. Childish

[Ion Basescul]

I understand it didn't score N. European but surely a percentage of the 56% Caucasian is Indo-European. As far as I know Caucasians are NOT 0% Indo-European. Same logic for the modern Atlantic_Med references whoever they are.

If you really want to nail down how much Indo-European a close to fool-proof way is to use a calculator with an ENF component, WHG component, EHG component, Namazga component.

Yamnaya are literally like 45% CHG, 45% EHG and about 10% Farmer. Nordicists are just retarded like they always were.

[Mejgusu]

Just clarify: i dont deny anyones ethnical belonging or attack soneone, also i am not obsessed about the 100% NE european theory to be IE, just stated that this sample like many others dont show appreciable IE influence. I dont understand why every culture on this world shold be heavily IE influenced. Its a wide accepted fact that IE anatolians were just natives whos accepted the language of their new rulers.

[Demhat]

Looks like that Hittites were genitically the same like cypriots/levantines with visible caucasian influence. Non Indoeuropean influence. Even modern Turks are more „european“

Hittites were literally ~70% Calcolthic West_Central Anatolia and 30% Iran_Chl/South Caucasus_Chl derived. That's what the study perfectly explains. Many people don't take in mind that by late Neolithic most of the region was already very mixed they still see the early Neolithic components in their heads. Iran_Chl for example was around 30% Anatolian_Neolithic derived. And Anatolia_Chl was already around 35% Iran_Neolithic/CHG derived.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ron_Pinhasi/publication/313275388/figure/fig1/AS:614032209891335@1523408095472/PCA-and-ADMIXTURE-Analysis-for-Ancient-Latvian-and-Ukrainian-Samples-A-Ancient-data.png

Ancient Hittites looked to have no Steppe Indo European influx. Note I wrote Steppe Indo European. But that is also the reason why scientists argue that the Anatolian branch split from the Indo European core, before they reached the Steppes. This findings also totally refute the Balkan route theory and scientists agree that the Anatolian_branch came from the East rather the West.

the Anatolian branch is also the most divergent among Indo European languages. It is almost divergent enough to consider it not part of what we know as "Proto" Indo European but rather a sister branch to "Proto" Indo European.

So they talk about Late Proto Indo European when they speak about Steppe Indo European. And Early Proto Indo European when the Anatolian_branch is included.

[FinalFlash]

Just clarify: i dont deny anyones ethnical belonging or attack soneone, also i am not obsessed about the 100% NE european theory to be IE, just stated that this sample like many others dont show appreciable IE influence. I dont understand why every culture on this world shold be heavily IE influenced. Its a wide accept fact that IE anatolians were just natives whos accepted the language of their new rulers.

The problem with that theory is that it doesn't explain why Anatolians have heavy CHG/Iran_N input when considering the fact that those new rulers were also rich in CHG/Iran_N admixture. The IE invaders surely assimilated among the Anatolian locals, don't you think? Plus, Gedmatch calculators for some reason always understate and underestimate real steppe admixture in West Asia. For example, if you run Central Anatolian Greeks on G25/Vahaduo, you can see that they score 10-15% steppe admixture. Even Cypriots have somewhere around 10% give or take, which is something that isn't captured on these relatively outdated Gedmatch calcs.

[Rabbit Hole]

The problem with that theory is that it doesn't explain why Anatolians have heavy CHG/Iran_N input when considering the fact that those new rulers were also rich in CHG/Iran_N admixture. The IE invaders surely assimilated among the Anatolian locals, don't you think? Plus, Gedmatch calculators for some reason always understate and underestimate real steppe admixture in West Asia. For example, if you run Central Anatolian Greeks on G25/Vahaduo, you can see that they score 10-15% steppe admixture. Even Cypriots have somewhere around 10% give or take, which is something that isn't captured on these relatively outdated Gedmatch calcs.

I think his horse vomited, on the way over the 500 B.C Steppe period.

[Leto]

Yamnaya are literally like 45% CHG, 45% EHG and about 10% Farmer. Nordicists are just retarded like they always were.
Depends on what one means by Nordicism. The Yamnaya ancestry is the highest in Northern Europe. For that matter, swarthy or brown supremacism is just as retarded (if not more looking at where their countries are) but they aren't condemned or mocked as quickly as whites (maybe except for some blatant Afrocentrists).

[Demhat]

LOL, not very indo-european...

They are the oldest branch of Indo Europeans. Maybe our understanding of "Indo European" is basically wrong or has been influenced too much by the ideology of the various bloggers we follow.

[Demhat]

Based on what? There is a possibility earliest IE were of Caucasus ancestry, not steppe.
Yamnaya was half CHG half EHG, and we still don't know which half brought the language.

Some people are quite limited. Sample like this speaks in favour of Armenian Highland theory which David Reich also speaks about.

The average Anthro-Board members knowledge does not exceed what they learn from their favorite bloggers. The scientists have been crying out in literally every study they have published that the Hittites actually could lead to a whole new theory but people literally followed the agenda of their favorite bloggers.

Even for basic Indo Europinization you literally need at least 15-30% of pioneers. The Hittites didn't Indo Europinize themselves. Anatolian_branch is the oldest branch. Them not showing certain ancestry doesn't mean they are not Indo Europeans. It means our understanding of what "Indo Europeans" are is flawed.

[Ion Basescul]

Depends on what one means by Nordicism. The Yamnaya ancestry is the highest in Northern Europe. For that matter, swarthy or brown supremacism is just as retarded (if not more looking at where their countries are) but they aren't condemned or mocked as quickly as whites (maybe except for some blatant Afrocentrists).

So are those, I don't support any camp.

The Yamnaya ancestry is highest in non-Indo-Europeans, Finnic mixed Russians like Kostroma, Central Asians like Tajiks and Caucasus folk. That makes perfect sense, because as it was already mentioned, they were an almost even split of EHG and CHG.


<tbody>
Distance to:
Yamnaya_RUS_Samara


0.13015875
Ingrian


0.13049538
Mordovian


0.13131984
Russian_Kostroma


0.13149922
Finnish_East


0.13150821
Tajik_Rushan


0.13152009
Darginian


0.13154862
Finnish


0.13184238
Karelian


0.13436035
Komi


0.13516542
Vepsian


0.13537240
Russian_Tver


0.13626778
Kaitag


0.13692776
Russian_Pinega


0.13701683
Kubachinian


0.13805651
Avar


0.13828611
Tajik_Shugnan


0.13844552
Lak


0.13902410
Russian_Kursk


0.13985429
Cossack_Kuban


0.14110624
Estonian


0.14158761
Russian_Orel


0.14179243
Tajik_Yagnobi


0.14280499
Tatar_Mishar


0.14358617
Tabasaran


0.14439741
Moldovan_o

</tbody>


<tbody>
Distance to:
Yamnaya_UKR


0.12305419
Mordovian


0.12428538
Russian_Kostroma


0.12475078
Ingrian


0.12493022
Finnish_East


0.12499177
Karelian


0.12527065
Finnish


0.12534439
Tajik_Rushan


0.12563947
Komi


0.12709356
Darginian


0.12811921
Vepsian


0.12931778
Russian_Pinega


0.13039088
Russian_Tver


0.13213020
Kaitag


0.13248583
Tajik_Shugnan


0.13304968
Tatar_Mishar


0.13316221
Cossack_Kuban


0.13345084
Russian_Kursk


0.13353846
Avar


0.13399094
Kubachinian


0.13454393
Lak


0.13518530
Tajik_Yagnobi


0.13569174
Estonian


0.13576382
Russian_Orel


0.13839850
Moldovan_o


0.13931115
Tabasaran

</tbody>

Just go here http://g25vahaduo.genetics.ovh/G25modern-scaled-averages.htm and put in target:

Yamnaya_RUS_Samara,0.1255849,0.089028,0.0426986,0. 1153479,-0.0287232,0.0450564,0.0036033,-0.0025642,-0.0559032,-0.0728943,0.0018222,3.32e-05,-0.0026924,-0.0233041,0.0366141,0.0157633,-0.0012316,-0.0017879,-0.0038408,0.0137704,-0.0031749,0.0007557,0.0110649,0.0186102,-0.004537
Yamnaya_UKR,0.119514,0.0873355,0.0452545,0.1106285 ,-0.028313,0.042531,0.00846,-0.003461,-0.0521535,-0.0707985,0.0002435,0.004421,-0.0043115,-0.0202305,0.0323015,0.0107395,-0.0002605,-0.011529,-0.005531,0.002376,-0.0028075,0.0004325,-0.009367,0.0192795,0.0031135





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5evnNSxbio

[Jana]

The average Anthro-Board members knowledge does not exceed what they learn from their favorite bloggers. The scientists have been crying out in literally every study they have published that the Hittites actually could lead to a whole new theory but people literally followed the agenda of their favorite bloggers.

Even for basic Indo Europinization you literally need at least 15-30% of pioneers. The Hittites didn't Indo Europinize themselves. Anatolian_branch is the oldest branch. Them not showing certain ancestry doesn't mean they are not Indo Europeans. It means our understanding of what "Indo Europeans" are is flawed.

Absolutely. Well said.

[Babak]

Distance to: OP_sample
9.06609067 Cypriots
12.85940123 Greek_Cappadocia
14.75958333 Greek_Pontus
15.36369422 Druze
16.55296952 Turk_East_Black_Sea
17.46178971 Nusayri_Turkey
17.47093300 Armenian_West
18.55734356 Hemshin
18.99757090 Laz
19.31735489 Assyrian
19.71218405 Azerbaijan_Jews
20.02557615 Armenian_East
20.22560259 Sephardic_Jews
20.27194613 Georgia_Jews
21.46204324 Assyrian
21.78317240 Greek_Crete
21.88438256 Lebanese
21.91129617 Georgian_Adjara
21.94481943 Turk_East
22.17481003 Iraq_Jews
22.25310540 Ashkenazy_Jews
22.74363208 Turk_Ahiska
22.77212990 Samaritians
22.88755557 Ashkenazi
23.17839080 Georgian_Turkey

So they're hellenized natives?

[SharpFork]

They are the oldest branch of Indo Europeans. Maybe our understanding of "Indo European" is basically wrong or has been influenced too much by the ideology of the various bloggers we follow.
Magically everyone but Hittites has fake Indo-European ancestry? Either the Steppe or the Hittites got their language without getting much from their genetics from Indo-Europeans and considering how influential the Steppe were I'd bet that the Hittites were simply a small caste of people with minor Steppe admixture, just as little as Armenians, Cappadocians, Pontics and Cypriots have today.

[FinalFlash]

Magically everyone but Hittites has fake Indo-European ancestry? Either the Steppe or the Hittites got their language without getting much from their genetics from Indo-Europeans and considering how influential the Steppe were I'd bet that the Hittites were simply a small caste of people with minor Steppe admixture, just as little as Armenians, Cappadocians, Pontics and Cypriots have today.

Armenians and Cappadocians have more steppe admixture than what's been said over the years in this forum.

[SharpFork]

The average Anthro-Board members knowledge does not exceed what they learn from their favorite bloggers. The scientists have been crying out in literally every study they have published that the Hittites actually could lead to a whole new theory but people literally followed the agenda of their favorite bloggers.

Even for basic Indo Europinization you literally need at least 15-30% of pioneers. The Hittites didn't Indo Europinize themselves. Anatolian_branch is the oldest branch. Them not showing certain ancestry doesn't mean they are not Indo Europeans. It means our understanding of what "Indo Europeans" are is flawed.
You can't teach a Khoisan an Indo-European language and culture, it wouldn't make is genetics indo-european nor necessarily mean our entire understanding of Indo-European is flawed when a century later there is an empire of Indo-European speakers without Steppe ancestry in south Africa.

Also your claim that you need 15-30% Indo-European is just that, an empty claim.

[SharpFork]

Armenians and Cappadocians have more steppe admixture than what's been said over the years in this forum.
How much exactly? G25 says 5-10%, Armenians having 5%.

[Kamal900]

Not surprising considering that I have a very close ancient relative from the Hittite kingdom more than 3,500 years ago according to MyTrueAncestry results:
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?316000-My-Updated-MyTrueAncestry-Results

[Jana]

Magically everyone but Hittites has fake Indo-European ancestry? Either the Steppe or the Hittites got their language without getting much from their genetics from Indo-Europeans and considering how influential the Steppe were I'd bet that the Hittites were simply a small caste of people with minor Steppe admixture, just as little as Armenians, Cappadocians, Pontics and Cypriots have today.

What are you blabbing about? ''Steppe'' itself is 45% CHG, 10% farmer and rest is EHG just as Ion said.
Just because steppe rich cultures spread IE languages around does not mean they represent most original IE genetics.

If something is oldest IE branch just as Anatolian languages are, it makes them stronger candidate than something that is younger.

[SharpFork]

What are you blabbing about? ''Steppe'' itself is 45% CHG, 10% farmer and rest is EHG just as Ion said.
Just because steppe rich cultures spread IE languages around does not mean they represent most original IE genetics.

If something is oldest IE branch just as Anatolian languages are, it makes them stronger candidate than something that is younger.
It doesn't matter if Anatolian is the oldest or not, what matters is how deep the connection is and if Proto-IE was dated around 4500 BCE I don't believe there is any population at the time that could reliably be a good amount of the admixture in both the Steppe and Anatolia given we have CHG already in the Eneolithic Steppe.

http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~garrett/Garrett-PAPS-2018.pdf

[FinalFlash]

How much exactly? G25 says 5-10%, Armenians having 5%.

10-15% when you use RUS_Catacombs(which you should anyway) on Vahaduo. Keep in mind that most of those "academic" samples differ noticeably to real individuals with real names. Using Eurogenes K15, real people score more combined Atlantic, Baltic, North Sea and East Euro than those "Armenia_179" samples so it's like that real individuals on Vahaduo and G25 would score 15% steppe, if not slightly higher than that.

[FinalFlash]

How much exactly? G25 says 5-10%, Armenians having 5%.

Target: Greek_Central_Anatolia
Distance: 1.2916% / 0.01291564
49.0 Anatolia_Barcin_N
16.8 IRN_Wezmeh_N
13.4 GEO_CHG
13.4 RUS_Catacomb
7.4 Levant_Natufian

Target: Armenian
Distance: 1.6548% / 0.01654813
37.6 Anatolia_Barcin_N
22.8 IRN_Wezmeh_N
16.2 GEO_CHG
13.0 RUS_Catacomb
10.4 Levant_Natufian


13% to be exact based off these shitty samples. Real individuals would likely score 15% or higher than that.

[SharpFork]

10-15% when you use RUS_Catacombs(which you should anyway) on Vahaduo. Keep in mind that most of those "academic" samples differ noticeably to real individuals with real names. Using Eurogenes K15, real people score more combined Atlantic, Baltic, North Sea and East Euro than those "Armenia_179" samples so it's like that real individuals on Vahaduo and G25 would score 15% steppe, if not slightly higher than that.

Using Catacomb I get just 7% for the average and between 4.6 and 10.2% for the individuals. You know where the Armenian samples come from exactly?

[Leto]

Armenians are no more Steppe than Kurds and Persians who don't have a lot either. If Pashtuns are about 25% Steppe, Armenians must be 15% at most.

[FinalFlash]

Armenians are no more Steppe than Kurds and Persians who don't have a lot either. If Pashtuns are about 25% Steppe, Armenians must be 15% at most.

Kurds and Persians score steppe in the high teens low 20s so 15-17% for Armenians seems realistic to me.

[FinalFlash]

Using Catacomb I get just 7% for the average and between 4.6 and 10.2% for the individuals. You know where the Armenian samples come from exactly?

They are supposedly academic samples yet their oracles differ greatly from real individuals. I even created a custom oracle using the R program for EUK15 splitting Armenian individuals between East and West and they were noticeably different to these "armenia_86" samples. For one, as I mentioned earlier, real individuals seemed to score higher combined Atl, baltic etc while scoring a bit more West Asian and less East Med on average. I'm going to try to locate it for you and show them to you.

[Halgurd]

cant be comparing ancients to modern samples and then claim hes not indo european lol

[Babak]

Kurds and Persians score steppe in the high teens low 20s so 15-17% for Armenians seems realistic to me.

Yea we if use Kashkarchi as a reference for Sintashta, this is what Iranians can get:

Target: Iranian_Zoroastrian
Distance: 1.5925% / 0.01592535
Aggregated
54.0 IRN_Tepe_Hissar_C
17.6 Anatolia_Barcin_N
14.6 UZB_Kashkarchi_BA
8.4 Levant_Natufian
2.8 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA_o1
1.6 IRN_Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA1
1.0 Mongola

[FinalFlash]

Yea we if use Kashkarchi as a reference for Sintashta, this is what Iranians can get:

Target: Iranian_Zoroastrian
Distance: 1.5925% / 0.01592535
Aggregated
54.0 IRN_Tepe_Hissar_C
17.6 Anatolia_Barcin_N
14.6 UZB_Kashkarchi_BA
8.4 Levant_Natufian
2.8 RUS_Sintashta_MLBA_o1
1.6 IRN_Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA1
1.0 Mongola

Check mine out. Seems to be a slightly better fit.

Target: Iranian_Zoroastrian
Distance: 1.0101% / 0.01010067
35.6 IRN_Wezmeh_N
27.2 RUS_Catacomb
25.6 Anatolia_Barcin_N
8.8 Levant_Natufian
2.8 GEO_CHG

[Leto]

What is RUS_Catacomb? Where in Russia were they found and and when did they live?

[FinalFlash]

What is RUS_Catacomb? Where in Russia were they found and and when did they live?

According to Token, they were likely responsible for Steppe admixture in Northern West Asia. He says that it is widely regarded as Proto-Armenian and that it likely contributed to the steppe admixture in present day Armenians hence why I used them in my run.

[Zoro]

Armenians are no more Steppe than Kurds and Persians who don't have a lot either. If Pashtuns are about 25% Steppe, Armenians must be 15% at most.

First we need to define what is steppe. Are we talking Iron Age Sarmatians or are we talking MLBA Sintashta or a combination or anything in between or Turkic related. So basically are we talking how much steppe since Neolithic, Chalcolithic, or Iron Age.

Even Haji-Firuz-IA which is a little less steppe shifted than modern Kurds can be formally modeled with qpAdm as about 70% Iran-Chl + 30% IA Sarmatian.

Modern Kurds are even more Sarmatian shifted than Haji-Firuz-IA. For example:


<colgroup width="135"></colgroup> <colgroup width="58"></colgroup> <colgroup width="102"></colgroup> <colgroup width="75"></colgroup> <colgroup width="123"></colgroup> <colgroup width="78"></colgroup> <colgroup width="85"></colgroup> <colgroup width="77" span="4"></colgroup> <tbody>
Sample (Test)
P-value
Haji-Firuz-IA (Source1)
Standard Error
Sarmatian-Kazakhstan (Source2)
Standard Error
Outcome
Test SNPs
Source1 SNPs
Source2 SNPs
SNPs used


Kurd-Kurmanji-IQ
0.23
82%
11%
18%
11%
Feasible
708897
292807
474638
158282


Armenian-DG
0.44
120%
12%
-20%
12%
Infeasible
690525
292807
474638
153738

</tbody>
<style type="text/css"> body,div,table,thead,tbody,tfoot,tr,th,td,p { font-family:"Liberation Sans"; font-size:x-small } a.comment-indicator:hover + comment { background:#ffd; position:absolute; display:block; border:1px solid black; padding:0.5em; } a.comment-indicator { background:red; display:inline-block; border:1px solid black; width:0.5em; height:0.5em; } comment { display:none; }</style>



numthreads: 8
## qpAdm version: 634
seed: 1215982657

left pops:
Iran_IA_HajjiFiruz
Iran_C_HajjiFiruz
Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG

right pops:
Mbuti.DG
Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG
Onge_1000G
Russia_MA1_HG.SG
Chinese_Han_1000G
Karitiana.DG
Anatolia_N
Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic
Georgia_Kotias.SG

0 Iran_IA_HajjiFiruz 1
1 Iran_C_HajjiFiruz 4
2 Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG 2
3 Mbuti.DG 4
4 Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG 1
5 Onge_1000G 6
6 Russia_MA1_HG.SG 1
7 Chinese_Han_1000G 211
8 Karitiana.DG 3
9 Anatolia_N 29
10 Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 10
11 Georgia_Kotias.SG 1
jackknife block size: 0.050
snps: 709309 indivs: 273
number of blocks for block jackknife: 711
## ncols: 709309
coverage: Iran_IA_HajjiFiruz 292807
coverage: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz 624648
coverage: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG 474638
coverage: Mbuti.DG 690580
coverage: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG 654138
coverage: Onge_1000G 704593
coverage: Russia_MA1_HG.SG 493659
coverage: Chinese_Han_1000G 709306
coverage: Karitiana.DG 690550
coverage: Anatolia_N 709269
coverage: Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 709182
coverage: Georgia_Kotias.SG 708661
dof (jackknife): 639.275
numsnps used: 154924
codimension 1
f4info:
f4rank: 1 dof: 7 chisq: 7.220 tail: 0.406371316 dofdiff: 9 chisqdiff: -7.220 taildiff: 1
B:
scale 1.000
Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG 0.182
Onge_1000G 0.323
Russia_MA1_HG.SG 1.249
Chinese_Han_1000G 0.915
Karitiana.DG 1.548
Anatolia_N -1.191
Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 1.269
Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.207
A:
scale 734.456
Iran_C_HajjiFiruz -0.547
Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG 1.304


full rank
f4info:
f4rank: 2 dof: 0 chisq: 0.000 tail: 1 dofdiff: 7 chisqdiff: 7.220 taildiff: 0.406371316
B:
scale 1.000 1.000
Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG 0.199 0.121
Onge_1000G 0.324 0.590
Russia_MA1_HG.SG 1.234 -0.251
Chinese_Han_1000G 0.892 1.134
Karitiana.DG 1.545 0.215
Anatolia_N -1.181 0.885
Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 1.298 -0.464
Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.262 2.290
A:
scale 748.617 2653.477
Iran_C_HajjiFiruz -0.655 -1.132
Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG 1.254 -0.848


best coefficients: 0.704 0.296
Jackknife mean: 0.704624134 0.295375866
std. errors: 0.068 0.068

error covariance (* 1000000)
4689 -4689
-4689 4689


summ: Iran_IA_HajjiFiruz 2 0.406371 0.705 0.295 4689 -4689 4689

fixed pat wt dof chisq tail prob
00 0 7 7.220 0.406371 0.704 0.296
01 1 8 24.876 0.00163144 1.000 0.000
10 1 8 83.531 9.49035e-15 0.000 1.000
best pat: 00 0.406371 - -
best pat: 01 0.00163144 chi(nested): 17.657 p-value for nested model: 2.64607e-05

coeffs: 0.704 0.296

## dscore:: f_4(Base, Fit, Rbase, right2)
## genstat:: f_4(Base, Fit, right1, right2)

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG -0.000301 -0.479523
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG 0.000231 0.321952
dscore: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG f4: -0.000144 Z: -0.240060

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Onge_1000G -0.000612 -1.057869
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Onge_1000G 0.000288 0.443516
dscore: Onge_1000G f4: -0.000346 Z: -0.630565

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Russia_MA1_HG.SG -0.001029 -1.354396
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Russia_MA1_HG.SG 0.002093 2.330573
dscore: Russia_MA1_HG.SG f4: -0.000106 Z: -0.145244

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Chinese_Han_1000G -0.001320 -2.749701
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Chinese_Han_1000G 0.001089 1.979980
dscore: Chinese_Han_1000G f4: -0.000608 Z: -1.332328

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Karitiana.DG -0.001525 -2.377830
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Karitiana.DG 0.002446 3.271362
dscore: Karitiana.DG f4: -0.000352 Z: -0.566976

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Anatolia_N 0.000583 1.180980
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Anatolia_N -0.002324 -4.105589
dscore: Anatolia_N f4: -0.000276 Z: -0.583845

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic -0.001013 -1.939311
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 0.002256 3.544665
dscore: Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic f4: -0.000047 Z: -0.092013

details: Iran_C_HajjiFiruz Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.000884 -1.152117
details: Kazakhstan_Sarmatian.SG Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.001299 -1.522396
dscore: Georgia_Kotias.SG f4: -0.001006 Z: -1.382609

gendstat: Mbuti.DG Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG -0.240
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Onge_1000G -0.631
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Russia_MA1_HG.SG -0.145
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Chinese_Han_1000G -1.332
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Karitiana.DG -0.567
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Anatolia_N -0.584
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic -0.092
gendstat: Mbuti.DG Georgia_Kotias.SG -1.383
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Onge_1000G -0.341
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Russia_MA1_HG.SG 0.049
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Chinese_Han_1000G -0.902
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Karitiana.DG -0.327
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Anatolia_N -0.240
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 0.172
gendstat: Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG Georgia_Kotias.SG -1.110
gendstat: Onge_1000G Russia_MA1_HG.SG 0.315
gendstat: Onge_1000G Chinese_Han_1000G -0.630
gendstat: Onge_1000G Karitiana.DG -0.010
gendstat: Onge_1000G Anatolia_N 0.139
gendstat: Onge_1000G Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 0.629
gendstat: Onge_1000G Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.898
gendstat: Russia_MA1_HG.SG Chinese_Han_1000G -0.751
gendstat: Russia_MA1_HG.SG Karitiana.DG -0.342
gendstat: Russia_MA1_HG.SG Anatolia_N -0.243
gendstat: Russia_MA1_HG.SG Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 0.085
gendstat: Russia_MA1_HG.SG Georgia_Kotias.SG -1.002
gendstat: Chinese_Han_1000G Karitiana.DG 0.614
gendstat: Chinese_Han_1000G Anatolia_N 0.822
gendstat: Chinese_Han_1000G Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 2.061
gendstat: Chinese_Han_1000G Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.579
gendstat: Karitiana.DG Anatolia_N 0.140
gendstat: Karitiana.DG Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 0.651
gendstat: Karitiana.DG Georgia_Kotias.SG -0.844
gendstat: Anatolia_N Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic 0.488
gendstat: Anatolia_N Georgia_Kotias.SG -1.092
gendstat: Russia_Shamanka_Eneolithic Georgia_Kotias.SG -1.309

## end of run

[Leto]

According to Token, they were likely responsible for Steppe admixture in Northern West Asia. He says that it is widely regarded as Proto-Armenian and that it likely contributed to the steppe admixture in present day Armenians hence why I used them in my run.
I think it should be less North_European than those "proper" Steppe nomads like the Sintashta. Hence the higher Steppe score in Armenians.

[Mejgusu]

The problem with that theory is that it doesn't explain why Anatolians have heavy CHG/Iran_N input when considering the fact that those new rulers were also rich in CHG/Iran_N admixture. The IE invaders surely assimilated among the Anatolian locals, don't you think? Plus, Gedmatch calculators for some reason always understate and underestimate real steppe admixture in West Asia. For example, if you run Central Anatolian Greeks on G25/Vahaduo, you can see that they score 10-15% steppe admixture. Even Cypriots have somewhere around 10% give or take, which is something that isn't captured on these relatively outdated Gedmatch calcs.

I dont know about these results, maybe they were just preiranic. Ok lets say they have 10-15% steppe ancestry, that doesnt means it comes from IE. In other ways the non steppe admix in protoIEs isnt an indication for nonIE ancestry.


Magically everyone but Hittites has fake Indo-European ancestry? Either the Steppe or the Hittites got their language without getting much from their genetics from Indo-Europeans and considering how influential the Steppe were I'd bet that the Hittites were simply a small caste of people with minor Steppe admixture, just as little as Armenians, Cappadocians, Pontics and Cypriots have today.

exactly

[FinalFlash]

I think it should be less North_European than those "proper" Steppe nomads like the Sintashta. Hence the higher Steppe score in Armenians.

Well, proto-Armenians were roughly around 25-30% steppe if memory serves which is less than Yamnaya and Sintasha cultures so its not a surprise that present day Armenians would score less than that. Besides, I ran other components along with RUS_catacomb so I don't think RUS_catacomb really masks anything else.

[Demhat]

Magically everyone but Hittites has fake Indo-European ancestry?


No one said this. If that's all you catched up from what I wrote you certanly didn't read the post properly or your understanding of all this stuff is simply not very high.

The theory I threw out into the room and which scientists also agree on works very well with the genetic data. It's not like the Steppe Indo Europeans you label as fake here have nothing in common with the Hittites. Let me give you a hint There is a component called Iran_CHL/Caucasus_CHL. That you find in high frequency among the "fake" Indo Europeans and the very archaic Anatolian_branch.

take a look at that
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ron_Pinhasi/publication/313275388/figure/fig1/AS:614032209891335@1523408095472/PCA-and-ADMIXTURE-Analysis-for-Ancient-Latvian-and-Ukrainian-Samples-A-Ancient-data.png



Either the Steppe or the Hittites got their language without getting much from their genetics from Indo-Europeans and considering how influential the Steppe were I'd bet that the Hittites were simply a small caste of people with minor Steppe admixture, just as little as Armenians, Cappadocians, Pontics and Cypriots have today.

I explained above why that's not how it works. And no one claimed the Hittites were natives to West-Central Anatolia.

[Zoro]

cant be comparing ancients to modern samples and then claim hes not indo european lol

Exactly because the modern references will be more steppe shifted than it so how can we expect the Hittite to score N. European or Russian or whatever because that would mean it's even more steppe shifted than the modern caucasians and mediterranean calculator references.

[Demhat]

You can't teach a Khoisan an Indo-European language and culture, it wouldn't make is genetics indo-european nor necessarily mean our entire understanding of Indo-European is flawed when a century later there is an empire of Indo-European speakers without Steppe ancestry in south Africa.

Also your claim that you need 15-30% Indo-European is just that, an empty claim.

Comparing 20th Century colonialization to ancient population movements....

Please show me one example in ancient history that resemble in anyways South Africa. Even in South Africa you got a decent amount of European settlers who forced that language upon the locals. Among the Hittites you literally have 0% sign of that.

[Zoro]

The average Anthro-Board members knowledge does not exceed what they learn from their favorite bloggers. The scientists have been crying out in literally every study they have published that the Hittites actually could lead to a whole new theory but people literally followed the agenda of their favorite bloggers.

Even for basic Indo Europinization you literally need at least 15-30% of pioneers. The Hittites didn't Indo Europinize themselves. Anatolian_branch is the oldest branch. Them not showing certain ancestry doesn't mean they are not Indo Europeans. It means our understanding of what "Indo Europeans" are is flawed.

It's not a big secret lol. You are talking about the mystery knucklehead guy who goes by Davidski.

[Demhat]

It doesn't matter if Anatolian is the oldest or not, what matters is how deep the connection is and if Proto-IE was dated around 4500 BCE I don't believe there is any population at the time that could reliably be a good amount of the admixture in both the Steppe and Anatolia given we have CHG already in the Eneolithic Steppe.

http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~garrett/Garrett-PAPS-2018.pdf

By linguistic view alone the proto Anatolian branches are expected to have been in Anatolia by around 4000-3000 BCE.

You have CHG already in mesolithic H&G samples but one thing you would expect to find in Hittites if this CHG/Iran_Neo came from the Steppes, would be significant EHG ancestry. What you don't have.

[Babak]

Comparing 20th Century colonialization to ancient population movements....

Please show me one example in ancient history that resemble in anyways South Africa. Even in South Africa you got a decent amount of European settlers who forced that language upon the locals. Among the Hittites you literally have 0% sign of that.

What about bulgarians though? They barely have any East asian ancestry despite being named after a Turkic elite.

[Rabbit Hole]

It depends on the Hittite samples perhaps they marking different branches Luwian or something else

[Mejgusu]

I dont understand why its a problem that Hittites werent IEn genetically. They were a great culture, thats the only point whats matter. Their gods, architecture and culture were basically anatolian.

[SharpFork]

What is RUS_Catacomb? Where in Russia were they found and and when did they live?
A mostly Steppe(as in Yamnaya-like) individual from the Catacomb culture, the territorial successor to Yamnaya in the Steppe.

[Zoro]

What about bulgarians though? They barely have any East asian ancestry despite being named after a Turkic elite.

I bet they do though if you use formal statistics.

[Zoro]

I dont understand why its a problem that Hittites werent IEn genetically. They were a great culture, thats the only point whats matter. Their gods, architecture and culture were basically anatolian.

Absolutely none if by using proper methods they end up having none. The problem is people here use methods totally unsuitable for the task to come up with conclusions. You'll notice that in research papers they use a slew of formal methods before they conclude something

[Hudayar]

I thought a Caucasian-like population brought the IE languages to Anatolia since there's increase in Caucasian components after the neolithic era (IE expansion happens).

[Babak]

I bet they do though if you use formal statistics.

Idk man. They don't score any lol.

https://abload.de/img/tablododecadk12b3oco7.png

https://abload.de/img/tabloeurogenesk13dzfcx.png

[Leto]

Idk man. They don't score any lol.

[Img]https://abload.de/img/tablododecadk12b3oco7.png

[Img]https://abload.de/img/tabloeurogenesk13dzfcx.png
That guy will tell you we aren't using proper calcs and in reality they are like quater East Eurasian :lol: :swl

[Ion Basescul]

I dont understand why its a problem that Hittites werent IEn genetically. They were a great culture, thats the only point whats matter. Their gods, architecture and culture were basically anatolian.

Do we even have Hittite samples? I thought that those Hittites that OP referenced were actually later identified as Hattians instead. If they are Hattians then it makes sense that they don't bear a noticeable steppe admixture.

[Mejgusu]

I thought a Caucasian-like population brought the IE languages to Anatolia since there's increase in Caucasian components after the neolithic era (IE expansion happens).

Some historians think IEs came across caucasus. Maybe with them came a lot of caucasian people, there could be different reason for this happening: Caucasian-like people came with IE upper class both groups could came because of causes of migration or flight, maybe diseases, other people who were warlike etc, looking for new land, etc...


Do we even have Hittite samples? I thought that those Hittites that OP referenced were actually later identified as Hattians instead. If they are Hattians then it makes sense that they don't bear a noticeable steppe admixture.

Ask that to @Hudayar, idk. But i think he presented real Hittite sample.

[Halgurd]

That guy will tell you we aren't using proper calcs and in reality they are like quater East Eurasian :lol: :swl

Do you think its logical to use modern references to find out the ancestry of a man who lived thousands of years ago? It doesn't make sense to me.

Also I think people are forgetting that IE is a language group so I don't see what all the fuss is about really. What does a Scott and a Pashtun have in common genetically, other than a distinctly related language?

[Leto]

Do you think its logical to use modern references to find out the ancestry of a man who lived thousands of years ago? It doesn't make sense to me.

Also I think people are forgetting that IE is a language group so I don't see what all the fuss is about really. What does a Scott and a Pashtun have in common genetically, other than a distinctly related language?
You didn't get the point of the message that was addressed to Babak. Move on.

[Halgurd]

You didn't get the point of the message that was addressed to Babak. Move on.

No I did get the point of it. And I replied to you with a question of logic because what Zoro says actually makes sense lol

[Leto]

No I did get the point of it. And I replied to you with a question of logic because what Zoro says actually makes sense lol
Bulgarians are 1 percent Mongoloid on average, that's a fact.

I don't wanna attack the person (according to Hadouken Zoro is female) but his posts are largely incomprehensible and I personlly find his runs BULLSHIT. A giant conspiracy to de-Steppify the Kurds, etc. LOL

[Zoro]

That guy will tell you we aren't using proper calcs and in reality they are like quater East Eurasian :lol: :swl

I don't think you'll laugh if formal statistics shows that they have 5% E. Asian. Then again you'll probably say that ADMIXTURE calculators trump formal methods haha

[Leto]

I don't think you'll laugh if formal statistics shows that they have 5% E. Asian. Then again you'll probably say that ADMIXTURE calculators trump formal methods haha
I find your "formal methods" shit and don't care about them. Sorry, don't take it personally but I had to say this.

[Leto]

Zoro's agenda is to debunk Davidski and his models/methods, from what I could gather. And also to promote Dilawer/Kurd's ideas.

[Zoro]

Bulgarians are 1 percent Mongoloid on average, that's a fact.

I don't wanna attack the person (according to Hadouken Zoro is female) but his posts are largely incomprehensible and I personlly find his runs BULLSHIT. A giant conspiracy to de-Steppify the Kurds, etc. LOL

Formal stats and qpAdm are bullshit. An appropriate response from someone who doesn't understand formal statistics because if you actually did I would see you post some qpAdm runs for change. Has it ever occurred to you why scientists use formal methods when modeling and not ADMIXTURE. Oh right I forgot formal methods are BULLSHIT.

[SharpFork]

The theory I threw out into the room and which scientists also agree on works very well with the genetic data. It's not like the Steppe Indo Europeans you label as fake here have nothing in common with the Hittites. Let me give you a hint There is a component called Iran_CHL/Caucasus_CHL. That you find in high frequency among the "fake" Indo Europeans and the very archaic Anatolian_branch.
Using which tool/model exactly?


take a look at that
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ron_Pinhasi/publication/313275388/figure/fig1/AS:614032209891335@1523408095472/PCA-and-ADMIXTURE-Analysis-for-Ancient-Latvian-and-Ukrainian-Samples-A-Ancient-data.png
I don't see any smoking gun there, either in graph B and or A, both Steppe Neolithic and Steppe BA is showns as more or less pure mixture of CHG and EHG there while Iranian Chl is not pure CHG.


I explained above why that's not how it works. And no one claimed the Hittites were natives to West-Central Anatolia.
I didn't claim you did.


Comparing 20th Century colonialization to ancient population movements....

Please show me one example in ancient history that resemble in anyways South Africa. Even in South Africa you got a decent amount of European settlers who forced that language upon the locals. Among the Hittites you literally have 0% sign of that.
It was a rethoric exaggeration, regardless some proponents of the Indo-Europenization of Steppe from the Caucasus do indeed push the idea that Maykop Indo-Europeanized the Steppe withouth genetic input, Alexander Kozintsev does for example.

In any case I'd wait for more samples from the period, we know that Anatolia was probably full of non-IE people and the phenomenon we see here, of 3 samples have 0 Steppe and one having 9%(in G25 anyway) could be similar to what happened in early IE Europe with wildly different populations living alongside. I mean we know that from the existence of the Hatti I believe and even Assyrian mercantile exclaves.

[SharpFork]

Formal stats and qpAdm are bullshit. An appropriate response from someone who doesn't understand formal statistics because if you actually did I would see you post some qpAdm runs for change. Has it ever occurred to you why scientists use formal methods when modeling and not ADMIXTURE. Oh right I forgot formal methods are BULLSHIT.
How much origian IE Steppe ancestry woudl Armenians and Kurds have in non-Admixture runs?

[Zoro]

Zoro's agenda is to debunk Davidski and his models/methods, from what I could gather. And also to promote Dilawer/Kurd's ideas.


If seeking the truth and unveiling crap is an agenda. Then so be it that's my agenda. I think I have had enough head wall banging with you. It's useless. I'm done.

[SharpFork]

NVM

[Ion Basescul]

I don't think you'll laugh if formal statistics shows that they have 5% E. Asian. Then again you'll probably say that ADMIXTURE calculators trump formal methods haha

We do have formal stats on some Euro pops that Davidski did a while ago. Their fit is only 0.56 out of a maximum of 1, but they score almost 3% EastAsian/Siberian-like admixture.

<google-sheets-html-origin>

<colgroup><col style="width: 156px;"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="115"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"></colgroup><tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Udmurd
9.749
0.462805
0.0%
18.4%
29.5%
0.0%
50.1%
2.0%
0.0%


Russian_North
9.404
0.400816
0.0%
23.2%
14.0%
1.3%
48.5%
13.0%
0.0%


Finnish
14.471
0.152584
0.0%
29.9%
10.4%
0.0%
45.3%
14.4%
0.0%


Estonian
6.732
0.66503
0.5%
30.1%
5.7%
0.0%
48.0%
15.6%
0.0%


Romanian
2.96
0.88868
1.5%
55.6%
3.6%
1.1%
35.9%
1.3%
1.0%


Italian_EastSicilian
10.619
0.224218
8.0%
70.5%
3.3%
0.9%
13.7%
0.0%
3.6%


Hungarian
4.3
0.829127
0.0%
46.6%
3.3%
0.8%
41.4%
7.0%
0.9%


Polish
9.325
0.315661
2.1%
39.8%
3.3%
0.2%
42.8%
11.7%
0.0%


Ukrainian_West
2.579
0.957966
1.5%
41.3%
3.3%
0.0%
44.4%
8.5%
1.0%


Russian_West
13.831
0.128463
0.0%
32.7%
3.2%
3.0%
46.1%
15.0%
0.0%


Ukrainian_East
3.057
0.962002
0.0%
42.5%
3.1%
1.8%
42.2%
10.4%
0.0%


Belarusian
4.971
0.836844
0.0%
40.2%
3.1%
1.4%
43.3%
12.0%
0.0%


Swedish
4.97
0.893149
0.0%
38.6%
3.0%
0.0%
47.2%
11.2%
0.0%


Greek
10.416
0.237016
6.8%
64.7%
2.8%
1.5%
22.9%
0.0%
1.3%


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%


Norwegian
5.885
0.751357
0.0%
42.4%
2.7%
1.3%
43.9%
9.7%
0.0%


Albanian
7.095
0.526421
7.5%
65.6%
2.7%
1.0%
21.9%
0.0%
1.2%


Sardinian
3.892
0.792135
0.4%
84.0%
2.7%
0.2%
10.0%
1.2%
1.5%


Latvian
5.141
0.821879
0.0%
31.1%
2.5%
0.9%
48.3%
17.2%
0.0%


French
2.332
0.939239
1.4%
52.3%
2.5%
0.3%
36.0%
6.3%
1.1%


Italian_WestSicilian
12.863
0.116636
10.4%
67.0%
2.4%
2.3%
14.7%
0.0%
3.2%


Croatian
5.479
0.601745
0.7%
52.9%
2.4%
1.2%
38.0%
4.4%
0.4%


Lithuanian
3.845
0.921313
0.0%
34.8%
2.4%
0.7%
46.6%
15.4%
0.0%


Italian_Bergamo
4.707
0.695623
2.3%
67.1%
2.3%
0.6%
26.5%
0.5%
0.7%


Italian_Tuscan
4.71
0.788053
7.0%
67.3%
2.2%
1.2%
20.9%
0.0%
1.3%


English
7.838
0.449438
0.3%
46.9%
2.1%
0.4%
41.9%
8.4%
0.0%


German
2.183
0.949048
3.8%
46.4%
1.9%
1.6%
39.1%
6.8%
0.4%


Hungary_LBA
9.595
0.294645
1.9%
59.8%
1.3%
2.0%
21.0%
14.0%
0.0%


Srubanya
5.617
0.846366
0.0%
26.8%
1.2%
0.0%
64.2%
7.8%
0.0%


Spanish
1.605
0.978452
1.4%
60.7%
1.1%
1.3%
27.3%
5.9%
2.1%


Scottish
6.467
0.692382
0.0%
43.5%
1.0%
1.4%
45.5%
8.6%
0.0%


Basque_French
3.485
0.900346
0.0%
59.0%
0.9%
1.5%
28.5%
9.6%
0.6%


Unetice
8.337
0.401266
0.8%
36.4%
0.7%
0.2%
50.0%
11.9%
0.0%


Poltavka
7.084
0.792269
0.0%
1.0%
0.0%
0.4%
98.7%
0.0%
0.0%


Corded_Ware_Germany
6.445
0.842068
0.0%
24.3%
0.0%
0.0%
68.6%
7.1%
0.0%


Bell_Beaker_Germany
7.023
0.797202
0.0%
41.5%
0.0%
0.0%
48.2%
10.3%
0.0%


Hungary_EBA
13.547
0.259073
0.0%
54.5%
0.0%
0.0%
20.8%
24.7%
0.0%














Outgroups











AG3-MA1











Chukchi











Dusun











Igorot











Iran_Neolithic











Karitiana











Kosipe











Kostenki14











Lebbo











Levant_Neolithic











Mbuti











Satsurblia











Ust_Ishim











Villabruna








</tbody>
</google-sheets-html-origin>

[Leto]

I'm not a geneticist or a specialist by any means, I just enjoy data and models which I can personally understand and make sense of. Some stuff is just beyond me. Commercial tests, GEDmatch and some good G25 models are what I can interpret.

[Zoro]

How much origian IE Steppe ancestry woudl Armenians and Kurds have in non-Admixture runs?

Post 80 page 8

[yamagi]

This sample is definitely not an elite one, elites were probadly high in Yamnaya ancestry.

[SharpFork]

By linguistic view alone the proto Anatolian branches are expected to have been in Anatolia by around 4000-3000 BCE.

You have CHG already in mesolithic H&G samples but one thing you would expect to find in Hittites if this CHG/Iran_Neo came from the Steppes, would be significant EHG ancestry. What you don't have.
Mycenean Greeks were like 10% Steppe and one sample has no or very little Steppe as well, Hittites are just a stronger version of that with only 1 out of 4 samples having some EHG. I'm using G25 there, if you don't like it fine but let's find some other common ground in the tools at least.

[SharpFork]

Post 80 page 8

No I mean the Steppe adxmiture that first brought Iranic, as in Srubnaya or whatever group you think brought Iranic, so a mixture between IRN_Haiji_Firuz_C and this Steppe population.

[Mejgusu]

This sample is definitely not an elite one, elites were probadly high in Yamnaya ancestry.

Idk, but the first generations were probably more steppe influenced. But after some generations i dont think they show much steppe.

[Daos777]

Y-DNA ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zoro]

We do have formal stats on some Euro pops that Davidski did a while ago. Their fit is only 0.56 out of a maximum of 1, but they score almost 3% EastAsian/Siberian-like admixture.

<google-sheets-html-origin>

<tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Udmurd
9.749
0.462805
0.0%
18.4%
29.5%
0.0%
50.1%
2.0%
0.0%


Russian_North
9.404
0.400816
0.0%
23.2%
14.0%
1.3%
48.5%
13.0%
0.0%


Finnish
14.471
0.152584
0.0%
29.9%
10.4%
0.0%
45.3%
14.4%
0.0%


Estonian
6.732
0.66503
0.5%
30.1%
5.7%
0.0%
48.0%
15.6%
0.0%


Romanian
2.96
0.88868
1.5%
55.6%
3.6%
1.1%
35.9%
1.3%
1.0%


Italian_EastSicilian
10.619
0.224218
8.0%
70.5%
3.3%
0.9%
13.7%
0.0%
3.6%


Hungarian
4.3
0.829127
0.0%
46.6%
3.3%
0.8%
41.4%
7.0%
0.9%


Polish
9.325
0.315661
2.1%
39.8%
3.3%
0.2%
42.8%
11.7%
0.0%


Ukrainian_West
2.579
0.957966
1.5%
41.3%
3.3%
0.0%
44.4%
8.5%
1.0%


Russian_West
13.831
0.128463
0.0%
32.7%
3.2%
3.0%
46.1%
15.0%
0.0%


Ukrainian_East
3.057
0.962002
0.0%
42.5%
3.1%
1.8%
42.2%
10.4%
0.0%


Belarusian
4.971
0.836844
0.0%
40.2%
3.1%
1.4%
43.3%
12.0%
0.0%


Swedish
4.97
0.893149
0.0%
38.6%
3.0%
0.0%
47.2%
11.2%
0.0%


Greek
10.416
0.237016
6.8%
64.7%
2.8%
1.5%
22.9%
0.0%
1.3%


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%


Norwegian
5.885
0.751357
0.0%
42.4%
2.7%
1.3%
43.9%
9.7%
0.0%


Albanian
7.095
0.526421
7.5%
65.6%
2.7%
1.0%
21.9%
0.0%
1.2%


Sardinian
3.892
0.792135
0.4%
84.0%
2.7%
0.2%
10.0%
1.2%
1.5%


Latvian
5.141
0.821879
0.0%
31.1%
2.5%
0.9%
48.3%
17.2%
0.0%


French
2.332
0.939239
1.4%
52.3%
2.5%
0.3%
36.0%
6.3%
1.1%


Italian_WestSicilian
12.863
0.116636
10.4%
67.0%
2.4%
2.3%
14.7%
0.0%
3.2%


Croatian
5.479
0.601745
0.7%
52.9%
2.4%
1.2%
38.0%
4.4%
0.4%


Lithuanian
3.845
0.921313
0.0%
34.8%
2.4%
0.7%
46.6%
15.4%
0.0%


Italian_Bergamo
4.707
0.695623
2.3%
67.1%
2.3%
0.6%
26.5%
0.5%
0.7%


Italian_Tuscan
4.71
0.788053
7.0%
67.3%
2.2%
1.2%
20.9%
0.0%
1.3%


English
7.838
0.449438
0.3%
46.9%
2.1%
0.4%
41.9%
8.4%
0.0%


German
2.183
0.949048
3.8%
46.4%
1.9%
1.6%
39.1%
6.8%
0.4%


Hungary_LBA
9.595
0.294645
1.9%
59.8%
1.3%
2.0%
21.0%
14.0%
0.0%


Srubanya
5.617
0.846366
0.0%
26.8%
1.2%
0.0%
64.2%
7.8%
0.0%


Spanish
1.605
0.978452
1.4%
60.7%
1.1%
1.3%
27.3%
5.9%
2.1%


Scottish
6.467
0.692382
0.0%
43.5%
1.0%
1.4%
45.5%
8.6%
0.0%


Basque_French
3.485
0.900346
0.0%
59.0%
0.9%
1.5%
28.5%
9.6%
0.6%


Unetice
8.337
0.401266
0.8%
36.4%
0.7%
0.2%
50.0%
11.9%
0.0%


Poltavka
7.084
0.792269
0.0%
1.0%
0.0%
0.4%
98.7%
0.0%
0.0%


Corded_Ware_Germany
6.445
0.842068
0.0%
24.3%
0.0%
0.0%
68.6%
7.1%
0.0%


Bell_Beaker_Germany
7.023
0.797202
0.0%
41.5%
0.0%
0.0%
48.2%
10.3%
0.0%


Hungary_EBA
13.547
0.259073
0.0%
54.5%
0.0%
0.0%
20.8%
24.7%
0.0%














Outgroups











AG3-MA1











Chukchi











Dusun











Igorot











Iran_Neolithic











Karitiana











Kosipe











Kostenki14











Lebbo











Levant_Neolithic











Mbuti











Satsurblia











Ust_Ishim











Villabruna








</tbody>
</google-sheets-html-origin>

Thanks about time someone posted some qpAdm runs. The joke is on Leto haha. See I told you Bulgarians will show about 5% E. Asian. Next time Leto should listen to me instead of running his mouth. Bulgarian about 5% E Eurasian.

From your table

<colgroup width="134"></colgroup> <colgroup width="85" span="9"></colgroup> <tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%

</tbody>
<style type="text/css"> body,div,table,thead,tbody,tfoot,tr,th,td,p { font-family:"Liberation Sans"; font-size:x-small } a.comment-indicator:hover + comment { background:#ffd; position:absolute; display:block; border:1px solid black; padding:0.5em; } a.comment-indicator { background:red; display:inline-block; border:1px solid black; width:0.5em; height:0.5em; } comment { display:none; }</style>

[SharpFork]

This sample is definitely not an elite one, elites were probadly high in Yamnaya ancestry.
It's not a matter of being elite or not, the Hatti populations were prominent, I don't recall anyone theorizing they were IE(but I wouldn't be surprised if someone did) and other than them there is a plethora of other people like Hurrians, Assyrians etc.

And given that Hittites were either long in Anatolia or at least long separated from the Steppe I think it's less likely you would see spikes of Steppe ancestry like you see in early Indo-Euroepanized Europe.

[Zoro]

Thanks about time someone posted some qpAdm runs. The joke is on Leto haha. See I told you Bulgarians will show about 5% E. Asian. Next time Leto should listen to me instead of running his mouth. Bulgarian about 5% E Eurasian.

From your table

<colgroup width="134"></colgroup> <colgroup width="85" span="9"></colgroup> <tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%

</tbody>
<style type="text/css"> body,div,table,thead,tbody,tfoot,tr,th,td,p { font-family:"Liberation Sans"; font-size:x-small } a.comment-indicator:hover + comment { background:#ffd; position:absolute; display:block; border:1px solid black; padding:0.5em; } a.comment-indicator { background:red; display:inline-block; border:1px solid black; width:0.5em; height:0.5em; } comment { display:none; }</style>


BTW any p-value above 0.05 is a pass in scientific papers

[Ion Basescul]

BTW any p-value above 0.05 is a pass in scientific papers

I know, but what is the explanation for that? That's one aspect that I've yet to understand.

[AncientGreek]

Why do people still use outdated GEDmatch calculators for samples already on G25 spreadsheet?

https://imgur.com/tqtti67.png

https://imgur.com/ucCCckd.png

This all geographically makes sense, their closeness reflects the locations of the modern populations (ignoring Turkish people who have been admixed with Turkic DNA). Being equally distant to modern Dodecanese Greeks and Levantines also makes sense, they are geographically in the middle of those two places by distance. Nothing surprising here.

[Babak]

Thanks about time someone posted some qpAdm runs. The joke is on Leto haha. See I told you Bulgarians will show about 5% E. Asian. Next time Leto should listen to me instead of running his mouth. Bulgarian about 5% E Eurasian.

From your table

<colgroup width="134"></colgroup> <colgroup width="85" span="9"></colgroup> <tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%

</tbody>
<style type="text/css"> body,div,table,thead,tbody,tfoot,tr,th,td,p { font-family:"Liberation Sans"; font-size:x-small } a.comment-indicator:hover + comment { background:#ffd; position:absolute; display:block; border:1px solid black; padding:0.5em; } a.comment-indicator { background:red; display:inline-block; border:1px solid black; width:0.5em; height:0.5em; } comment { display:none; }</style>


Oh ok, so bulgarians DO have some East asian then.

[Leto]

Thanks about time someone posted some qpAdm runs. The joke is on Leto haha. See I told you Bulgarians will show about 5% E. Asian. Next time Leto should listen to me instead of running his mouth. Bulgarian about 5% E Eurasian.

From your table

<colgroup width="134"></colgroup> <colgroup width="85" span="9"></colgroup> <tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%

</tbody>
<style type="text/css"> body,div,table,thead,tbody,tfoot,tr,th,td,p { font-family:"Liberation Sans"; font-size:x-small } a.comment-indicator:hover + comment { background:#ffd; position:absolute; display:block; border:1px solid black; padding:0.5em; } a.comment-indicator { background:red; display:inline-block; border:1px solid black; width:0.5em; height:0.5em; } comment { display:none; }</style>
I don't consider Onge and Nganassan to be the same race at all. They are like day and night. Also, the Nganassans may not be fully EE to begin with. I am not sure.

[Leto]

Oh ok, so bulgarians DO have some East asian then.
On Gedmatch and in G25 models it will be 0-2% only.

[SharpFork]

Oh ok, so bulgarians DO have some East asian then.
...I mean so does almost every European there, the question is why do modern Europeans have it when the ancient samples don't.

[Zoro]

Oh ok, so bulgarians DO have some East asian then.

Exactly. I learned a while ago that you can't use ADMIXTURE calculators unless they only have 4 components or something to figure out E. Asian admixture because all those calculator references like Caucasians, E. Europeans already have E. Asian in their makeup.

But whenever I point something out some idiot says I'm siding with Dilawer and conspiring against Davidski. I wished that more people here would learn something basic as that.

[Babak]

On Gedmatch and in G25 models it will be 0-2% only.

Yea because they barely score any East asian on most calculators. Bulgarian Turks, on the other hand are a mix of Bulgarians, Anatolian Turks and other Turkic populations with higher East Asian ancestry

[Abdelnour]

One thing to take from this thread:

The Hittites were white!

[Zoro]

I don't consider Onge and Nganassan to be the same race at all. They are like day and night. Also, the Nganassans may not be fully EE to begin with. I am not sure.

It doesn't matter. They're not West Eurasian but of course you'll say even your hero Davidski is wrong for using qpAdm. He should have used ADMIXTURE.

[SharpFork]

We do have formal stats on some Euro pops that Davidski did a while ago. Their fit is only 0.56 out of a maximum of 1, but they score almost 3% EastAsian/Siberian-like admixture.

You know why the fit vary so much? There doesn't seem to be a logic.

[Babak]

...I mean so does almost every European there, the question is why do modern Europeans have it when the ancient samples don't.

Yea..that I don't know. I've been wondering about that for awhile.

[Zoro]

...I mean so does almost every European there, the question is why do modern Europeans have it when the ancient samples don't.

Obviously because of geneflow from east to west starting in the Iron Age

[SharpFork]

Exactly. I learned a while ago that you can't use ADMIXTURE calculators unless they only have 4 components or something to figure out E. Asian admixture because all those calculator references like Caucasians, E. Europeans already have E. Asian in their makeup.

But whenever I point something out some idiot says I'm siding with Dilawer and conspiring against Davidski. I wished that more people here would learn something basic as that.
I think people have a problem with the idea of claiming that Kurds are like 25% East Eurasian more than minor East Eurasian dna in Europeans...(which I'm still not sure where it supposedly comes from)

[Ion Basescul]

I don't consider Onge and Nganassan to be the same race at all. They are like day and night. Also, the Nganassans may not be fully EE to begin with. I am not sure.

Yet they are. They are the perfect example of phenotype != genotype

https://i.imgur.com/Q3wVgZx.png

[SharpFork]

Obviously because of geneflow from east to west starting in the Iron Age
Somehow this geneflow hits all corners of Europe, Basques and Scots included? I don't know what that 1-3% Nganassan translates in terms of Iron Age Steppe ancestry but if it's a lot it's inherently dubious given we don't have such evidence of Scythians and Turks in every corner of Europe.

[Zoro]

I know, but what is the explanation for that? That's one aspect that I've yet to understand.

p-value is NOT fit. It's the probablity of the null hypothesis being true https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value

In this case the NULL hypothesis is whether the target can be modeled as the sources in the run. A p-value above 0.05 is used in scientific papers as YES or PASS. I don't expect most people here to understand it.


The p-value is used in the context of null hypothesis testing in order to quantify the idea of statistical significance of evidence.[note 1] Null hypothesis testing is a reductio ad absurdum argument adapted to statistics. In essence, a claim is assumed valid if its counter-claim is improbable.

As such, the only hypothesis that needs to be specified in this test and which embodies the counter-claim is referred to as the null hypothesis (that is, the hypothesis to be nullified). A result is said to be statistically significant if it allows us to reject the null hypothesis. That is, as per the reductio ad absurdum reasoning, the statistically significant result should be highly improbable if the null hypothesis is assumed to be true.

[Dr_Maul]

Looks to me like they are an intermediary between Greek Anatolians and Levantine Semitics, with mild Steppe. Makes sense I guess, the 'IE' factor probably comes from the Caucasus

[Leto]

It doesn't matter. They're not West Eurasian but of course you'll say even your hero Davidski is wrong for using qpAdm. He should have used ADMIXTURE.
He isn't my hero by any means.

[Zoro]

Somehow this geneflow hits all corners of Europe, Basques and Scots included? I don't know what that 1-3% Nganassan translates in terms of Iron Age Steppe ancestry but if it's a lot it's inherently dubious given we don't have such evidence of Scythians and Turks in every corner of Europe.

They didn't go to every corner of Europe. It was spread to western Europe by proxy. The proxy being E. Europeans who had it. The other thing is SW Europeans who show about 1% it's probably noise or really ancient ancestral alleles.

Also Scotts and Basques shouldn't be put in the same boat because I would think Scotts should have a tad Siberian from Scandanavia

[Leto]

Yet they are. They are the perfect example of phenotype != genotype

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/Q3wVgZx.png
They are not Mongoloid.

[Ion Basescul]

You know why the fit vary so much? There doesn't seem to be a logic.

Why not? You can't expect all the people in Europe to be modelled correctly with the Lengyel Farmer, which is a sample that sits at the Southern tip of the Danube in Hungary, at the crossroads with Croatia, Serbia and Romania.
For Italians and Greeks for example, those Farmers like Bulgaria's Krepost Neoltithic or some of the Neolithic Peloponnese would have probably worked better.

[Rabbit Hole]

Looks to me like they are an intermediary between Greek Anatolians and Levantine Semitics, with mild Steppe. Makes sense I guess, the 'IE' factor probably comes from the Caucasus

Levantine Semitic samples are post Iron age

Levantine samples that are Greco Anatolian are Middle to late Bronze Age

Levantine samples should be Levantine Greco Anatolian anything other than that is ''other''.

[SharpFork]

They didn't go to every corner of Europe. It was spread to western Europe by proxy. The proxy being E. Europeans who had it. The other thing is SW Europeans who show about 1% it's probably noise or really ancient ancestral alleles.
Ok but Eastern Europeans were not that numerous, certainly not in France or Britain, does this include Scandinavians too?

[Rabbit Hole]

Looks to me like they are an intermediary between Greek Anatolians and Levantine Semitics, with mild Steppe. Makes sense I guess, the 'IE' factor probably comes from the Caucasus

Levantine Semitic samples are post Iron age

Levantine samples that are Greco Anatolian are Middle to late Bronze Age

Levantine samples should be Levantine Greco Anatolian anything other than that is ''other''.

[SharpFork]

Why not? You can't expect all the people in Europe to be modelled correctly with the Lengyel Farmer, which is a sample that sits at the Southern tip of the Danube in Hungary, at the crossroads with Croatia, Serbia and Romania.
For Italians and Greeks for example, those Farmers like Bulgaria's Krepost Neoltithic or some of the Neolithic Peloponnese would have probably worked better.
Because neighbouring close populations show different fits while far away ones like French and Ukrainians show both good fits, that's what I mean by no pattern.

[Ion Basescul]

They are not Mongoloid.

Are you profiling them based on how they look? Why then even bother with data? We can just return to calipers and colour gradients.

https://i.imgur.com/i2ilm1S.jpg?fb

[Rabbit Hole]

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/07/canaanite-bible-ancient-dna-lebanon-genetics-archaeology/?fbclid=IwAR0vRtt9k6hivI7-6cv9YljdVvCmkCTDrBbPu6yll3GwOTDU-bbO4xhhvqA

Close as Cypriots

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24653570?seq=1

[Ion Basescul]

Because neighbouring close populations show different fits while far away ones like French and Ukrainians show both good fits, that's what I mean by no pattern.

It just shows that the Farmers that contributed to their admixture had similar profiles to the Lengyel guys. They didn't necessarily receive any admixture from them directly.

[Leto]

Are you profiling them based on how they look? Why then even bother with data? We can just return to calipers and colour gradients.

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/i2ilm1S.jpg?fb
I am a conservative person and believe in the four (or is it five?) major races of mankind.

[Dr_Maul]

Levantine Semitic samples are post Iron age

Levantine samples that are Greco Anatolian are Middle to late Bronze Age

Levantine samples should be Levantine Greco Anatolian anything other than that is ''other''.

Well they are mildly more Semitic than other Greco Anatolians. It is probably due to their proximity with Assyrians

[Mejgusu]

These samples clusters with east med. semitic people, so i yes they were a bit related to common lebanon area living people.

[Zoro]

Ok but Eastern Europeans were not that numerous, certainly not in France or Britain, does this include Scandinavians too?

E. Asian or Siberian admixture is probably at noise levels in parts of west Europe but don't forget that people within Europe did move around alot over the past few hundred years. Some of the noise level is due to very ancient common alleles between WHG and E. Eurasians. Admixture is not an exact science it's all about probabilities.

You'll be shocked to find out even in the 23andme and ancestry SNPs Europeans, Asians and Africans share a huge amount. Some of those shared ones end up showing up as noise

[SharpFork]

Well they are mildly more Semitic than other Greco Anatolians. It is probably due to their proximity with Assyrians

Where are you from?

[Demhat]

Using which tool/model exactly?


Are you doubting Iran_Neo/CHG derived admixture in Yamnaya? Are blogger tools the only reliable source? Have you red the various papers published in scientific journals to this day? Do I need to present a blogger tool, to prove what the scientists who analysed the ancient samples are telling us is true?

I think you are not exactly in the position to ask me for prove. If anything it's the opposite. :) I don't take blogger tools as serious facts without having to assume any agenda behind it.


I don't see any smoking gun there, either in graph B and or A, both Steppe Neolithic and Steppe BA is showns as more or less pure mixture of CHG and EHG there while Iranian Chl is not pure CHG.

CHG is literally Iran_Meso/Neo derived/like with a little more ANE like admixture. You are confusing the Iran_Chl samples with that one Iran_Neo line at the beginning the more "orange" mixed samples are Iran_Chl. And it is not me presenting this to you it is what the papers write themselves. Steppe is literally Iran_CHL+ "CHG" + EHG. Patterson and Lazaridis reject the CHG + EHG model. The CHG samples are simply too old to be of any importance for Yamnaya. Therefore something CHG like from the late Neolithic(Calcolthic) era must be the source. That is what the scientists try to tell us.

Also whatever it is CHG or Iran derived what kind of importance does it have for our argument since I didn't specify which ancestry exactly it is. You are arguing against a "statement" that was never made.



I didn't claim you did.

Where exactly did I claim Steppe Indo Europeans are fake and Proto Hittite speakers are native West-Central Anatolians please quote the exact words



It was a rethoric exaggeration, regardless some proponents of the Indo-Europenization of Steppe from the Caucasus do indeed push the idea that Maykop Indo-Europeanized the Steppe withouth genetic input, Alexander Kozintsev does for example.

You are the first who actually brought up Maykop into this debate . I clearly mentioned the Eastern Caucasus with Leyla Tepe. But also if we take Maykop into consideration. Could you please explain how Yamnaya could culturally be so influenced by Maykop without "having any genetic influence on Yamnaya"? Maykop is split into two regions, which genetically differ but probably spoke the same language. Maybe it was the Steppe Maykop guys who influenced Yamnaya? This is called Bottle-Neck Effect in the scientific world. So can we exclude the possibility that South Maykop was the influx responsible for the Anatolian_Branch while Steppe Maykop for Yamnaya? What about a culturally related culture such as Leyla Tepe?



In any case I'd wait for more samples from the period, we know that Anatolia was probably full of non-IE people and the phenomenon we see here, of 3 samples have 0 Steppe and one having 9%(in G25 anyway) could be similar to what happened in early IE Europe with wildly different populations living alongside. I mean we know that from the existence of the Hatti I believe and even Assyrian mercantile exclaves.

We literally have EHG admixture in cultures supposedly not Indo European speaking such as Kura Araxes era samples and Hurrian era samples. But we try to explain the absence of EHG admixture in Hittite era samples by, I quote "non Indo European neighbors"?

[SharpFork]

E. Asian or Siberian admixture is probably at noise levels in parts of west Europe but don't forget that people within Europe did move around alot over the past few hundred years. Some of the noise level is due to very ancient common alleles between WHG and E. Eurasians. Admixture is not an exact science it's all about probabilities.

You'll be shocked to find out even in the 23andme and ancestry SNPs Europeans, Asians and Africans share a huge amount. Some of those shared ones end up showing up as noise
Seems to me that G25 is really close to qpadm when the single admixture are not smaller than 5%, I'm not seeing crazy results when we get to higher numbers, the 2 are consistent.

[Fedora]

There is no modern population which is very similar to them.

[Ion Basescul]

I am a conservative person and believe in the four (or is it five?) major races of mankind.

It's Aspirin all over again. Guys, you either trust the scientists on this, or you don't and carry on using whatever tools were available prior to this revolution in bioinformatics. It's hypocritical to cherrypick IMO.

[Mejgusu]

There is no modern population which is very similar to them.

I would count some but i am just a troll.

[Daos777]

We do have formal stats on some Euro pops that Davidski did a while ago. Their fit is only 0.56 out of a maximum of 1, but they score almost 3% EastAsian/Siberian-like admixture.

<google-sheets-html-origin>

<colgroup><col style="width: 156px;"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="115"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"><col width="100"></colgroup><tbody>
Pop
chisq
tail_prob
Caucasus_HG
Lengyel_LN
Nganasan
Onge
Steppe_EBA
Western_HG
Yoruba


Udmurd
9.749
0.462805
0.0%
18.4%
29.5%
0.0%
50.1%
2.0%
0.0%


Russian_North
9.404
0.400816
0.0%
23.2%
14.0%
1.3%
48.5%
13.0%
0.0%


Finnish
14.471
0.152584
0.0%
29.9%
10.4%
0.0%
45.3%
14.4%
0.0%


Estonian
6.732
0.66503
0.5%
30.1%
5.7%
0.0%
48.0%
15.6%
0.0%


Romanian
2.96
0.88868
1.5%
55.6%
3.6%
1.1%
35.9%
1.3%
1.0%


Italian_EastSicilian
10.619
0.224218
8.0%
70.5%
3.3%
0.9%
13.7%
0.0%
3.6%


Hungarian
4.3
0.829127
0.0%
46.6%
3.3%
0.8%
41.4%
7.0%
0.9%


Polish
9.325
0.315661
2.1%
39.8%
3.3%
0.2%
42.8%
11.7%
0.0%


Ukrainian_West
2.579
0.957966
1.5%
41.3%
3.3%
0.0%
44.4%
8.5%
1.0%


Russian_West
13.831
0.128463
0.0%
32.7%
3.2%
3.0%
46.1%
15.0%
0.0%


Ukrainian_East
3.057
0.962002
0.0%
42.5%
3.1%
1.8%
42.2%
10.4%
0.0%


Belarusian
4.971
0.836844
0.0%
40.2%
3.1%
1.4%
43.3%
12.0%
0.0%


Swedish
4.97
0.893149
0.0%
38.6%
3.0%
0.0%
47.2%
11.2%
0.0%


Greek
10.416
0.237016
6.8%
64.7%
2.8%
1.5%
22.9%
0.0%
1.3%


Bulgarian
6.759
0.562881
2.2%
58.9%
2.7%
2.2%
33.2%
0.0%
0.8%


Norwegian
5.885
0.751357
0.0%
42.4%
2.7%
1.3%
43.9%
9.7%
0.0%


Albanian
7.095
0.526421
7.5%
65.6%
2.7%
1.0%
21.9%
0.0%
1.2%


Sardinian
3.892
0.792135
0.4%
84.0%
2.7%
0.2%
10.0%
1.2%
1.5%


Latvian
5.141
0.821879
0.0%
31.1%
2.5%
0.9%
48.3%
17.2%
0.0%


French
2.332
0.939239
1.4%
52.3%
2.5%
0.3%
36.0%
6.3%
1.1%


Italian_WestSicilian
12.863
0.116636
10.4%
67.0%
2.4%
2.3%
14.7%
0.0%
3.2%


Croatian
5.479
0.601745
0.7%
52.9%
2.4%
1.2%
38.0%
4.4%
0.4%


Lithuanian
3.845
0.921313
0.0%
34.8%
2.4%
0.7%
46.6%
15.4%
0.0%


Italian_Bergamo
4.707
0.695623
2.3%
67.1%
2.3%
0.6%
26.5%
0.5%
0.7%


Italian_Tuscan
4.71
0.788053
7.0%
67.3%
2.2%
1.2%
20.9%
0.0%
1.3%


English
7.838
0.449438
0.3%
46.9%
2.1%
0.4%
41.9%
8.4%
0.0%


German
2.183
0.949048
3.8%
46.4%
1.9%
1.6%
39.1%
6.8%
0.4%


Hungary_LBA
9.595
0.294645
1.9%
59.8%
1.3%
2.0%
21.0%
14.0%
0.0%


Srubanya
5.617
0.846366
0.0%
26.8%
1.2%
0.0%
64.2%
7.8%
0.0%


Spanish
1.605
0.978452
1.4%
60.7%
1.1%
1.3%
27.3%
5.9%
2.1%


Scottish
6.467
0.692382
0.0%
43.5%
1.0%
1.4%
45.5%
8.6%
0.0%


Basque_French
3.485
0.900346
0.0%
59.0%
0.9%
1.5%
28.5%
9.6%
0.6%


Unetice
8.337
0.401266
0.8%
36.4%
0.7%
0.2%
50.0%
11.9%
0.0%


Poltavka
7.084
0.792269
0.0%
1.0%
0.0%
0.4%
98.7%
0.0%
0.0%


Corded_Ware_Germany
6.445
0.842068
0.0%
24.3%
0.0%
0.0%
68.6%
7.1%
0.0%


Bell_Beaker_Germany
7.023
0.797202
0.0%
41.5%
0.0%
0.0%
48.2%
10.3%
0.0%


Hungary_EBA
13.547
0.259073
0.0%
54.5%
0.0%
0.0%
20.8%
24.7%
0.0%














Outgroups











AG3-MA1











Chukchi











Dusun











Igorot











Iran_Neolithic











Karitiana











Kosipe











Kostenki14











Lebbo











Levant_Neolithic











Mbuti











Satsurblia











Ust_Ishim











Villabruna








</tbody>
</google-sheets-html-origin>

Did he give the coordinates for each component in that post so I don’t have to individually get each component from the list
?

[Rabbit Hole]

Well they are mildly more Semitic than other Greco Anatolians. It is probably due to their proximity with Assyrians

There isn't any proof in that it says Levantine and Cypriots. Greek Cypriots and Bronze Age Levantine samples aren't Semitic.

Only post Iron Age Levantine samples are.

[Rabbit Hole]

I would count some but i am just a troll.

Naw, only if you bait and post trollish unfounded crap.

[Leto]

It's Aspirin all over again. Guys, you either trust the scientists on this, or you don't and carry on using whatever tools were available prior to this revolution in bioinformatics. It's hypocritical to cherrypick IMO.
I think (yes, it is my opinion but not only mine) there is a lot of leftist bullshit masqueraded as "science" out there. David Reich is a liberal Jew for example and he is the last person who would want to reinforce what the likes of him see as "raci(al)ist stereotypes and misconceptions". Remember that "science" has hardly ever been totally unbiased, not just in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.

Anyway, I think I should leave this thread as I don't have much to say beside some wild off-topic ramblings.

[Zoro]

Seems to me that G25 is really close to qpadm when the single admixture are not smaller than 5%, I'm not seeing crazy results when we get to higher numbers, the 2 are consistent.

They aren't. qpAdm tells you if a model is a pass or fail. G25 doesn't. Distance doesn't mean it's pass or fail.

qpAdm uses outgroups to filter out common shared ancestral alleles that confound calculations G25 doesn't

G25 coordinates change depending on what populations are in the run. There is no such problem with qpAdm

If the results are consistent in some cases it's probably conincidence.

Can you show me a G25 output that would be consistent with the model for Kurds I posted in post 80 page 8

[Mejgusu]

Naw, only if you bait and post trollish unfounded crap.

You have a big problem.

[Dr_Maul]

There isn't any proof in that it says Levantine and Cypriots. Greek Cypriots and Bronze Age Levantine samples aren't Semitic.

Only post Iron Age Levantine samples are.

Why aren't bronze age Levant semitic? They spoke it

[Rabbit Hole]

These samples clusters with east med. semitic people, so i yes they were a bit related to common lebanon area living people.

It says Bronze Age samples are related to Canaanites from Bibical times who were Hittite matching up to Lebanon or Cyprus during the Bronze Age does not equal ''large amounts of Semitism''

''Post Iron Age'' samples are when it was mixed with Israelites who actually tried to genocide the original Canaanites who were Hittite and that's also what it said in the Bible, they were enemies.

[Dr_Maul]

Where are you from?

Ethnic Persian but with Gulf (semitic) ancestry

[Ion Basescul]

I think (yes, it is my opinion but not only mine) there is a lot of leftist bullshit masqueraded as "science" out there. David Reich is a liberal Jew for example and he is the last person who would want to reinforce what the likes of him see as "raci(al)ist stereotypes and misconceptions". Remember that "science" has hardly ever been totally unbiased, not just in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.

Anyway, I think I should leave this thread as I don't have much too say beside some wild off-topic ramblings.

Don't worry, even though I don't agree with you, everyone is entitled to an opinion, so you don't have to leave.

[Rabbit Hole]

Why aren't bronze age Levant semitic? They spoke it

Because it's a language the samples during that time period were partly Greco-partly PIE Anatolian the Hittite were PIE Anatolian.

So apart from Cyprus Bronze Age samples Levantine Bronze Age samples are close. That's what the article above says.

[Ion Basescul]

Did he give the coordinates for each component in that post so I don’t have to individually get each component from the list
?

No, but they are in the Global 25 spreadsheet.
CaucasusHG will be CHG, WesternHG - WHG and Steppe_EBA - Yamnaya_RUS. The rest are similar.

[Rabbit Hole]

Why aren't bronze age Levant semitic? They spoke it

Because it's a language the samples during that time period were partly Greco-partly PIE Anatolian the Hittite were PIE Anatolian.

So apart from Cyprus Bronze Age samples Levantine Bronze Age samples are close. That's what the article above says.

[Mejgusu]

I think (yes, it is my opinion but not only mine) there is a lot of leftist bullshit masqueraded as "science" out there.

I dont think its just leftist, but sometimes scientific works are very political motivated.

[Dr_Maul]

Because it's a language the samples during that time period were partly Greco-partly PIE Anatolian the Hittite were PIE Anatolian.

So apart from Cyprus Bronze Age samples Levantine Bronze Age samples are close. That's what the article above says.

Well yes they were largely Greco-Anatolian but you can't really say they were not Semitic influenced at all. What about the red sea component? It is evidence of that

[Reis-i Cumhur]

I thought Hittites were half greek half armenoid.I was wrong.It looks like they were closer to natufians than armenians or eastern turks

[Demhat]

What about bulgarians though? They barely have any East asian ancestry despite being named after a Turkic elite.

They are named after the Bulgars but as their language (Slavic) indicates they are not Turkics which explains the low East Asian admixture.

[Rabbit Hole]

Well yes they were largely Greco-Anatolian but you can't really say they were not Semitic influenced at all. What about the red sea component? It is evidence of that

Cypriots have more Red Sea than Ashkenazi Jews

Does that mean Ashkenazi Jews are less Arabic than Cypriots?

Red sea is a Ancient Egyptian coastal mix Eastern Med is a coastal Levantine mix

anyone from a coast would have high amounts of Red Sea and Levantine admixture anyone inland would have high amounts of West Asian.

[Rabbit Hole]

Well yes they were largely Greco-Anatolian but you can't really say they were not Semitic influenced at all. What about the red sea component? It is evidence of that

Cypriots have more Red Sea than Ashkenazi Jews

Does that mean Ashkenazi Jews are less Arabic than Cypriots?

Red sea is a Ancient Egyptian coastal mix Eastern Med is a coastal Levantine mix

anyone from a coast would have high amounts of Red Sea and Levantine admixture anyone inland would have high amounts of West Asian.

[Rabbit Hole]

I thought Hittites were half greek half armenoid.I was wrong.It looks like they were closer to natufians than armenians or eastern turks

No evidence of Bronze Age samples being Armenoid

Bronze Age samples are Mycenaean and PIE Anatolian, that's what Ged match samples say on k36.

[Demhat]

Bulgarians are 1 percent Mongoloid on average, that's a fact.

I don't wanna attack the person (according to Hadouken Zoro is female) but his posts are largely incomprehensible and I personlly find his runs BULLSHIT. A giant conspiracy to de-Steppify the Kurds, etc. LOL

I don't think anyone is trying to de-Steppify Kurds or any sane person claims that the most important Indo European expansion didn't start from the Steppe. Probably all today surviving Indo European languages evolved in the Steppes. Iranic is a prime example rather than exception. In fact the territory where Steppe Indo European evolved is very much territory that was inhabited by cultures connected to Indo_iranic speakers. This might be a reason why some ancient historians tended to call Europeans of "Scythic" origin. With Scythic ancient Greeks probably reffered to the lands the Scythians inhabidet rather than the actual Scythian people.

[Demhat]

Exactly. I learned a while ago that you can't use ADMIXTURE calculators unless they only have 4 components or something to figure out E. Asian admixture because all those calculator references like Caucasians, E. Europeans already have E. Asian in their makeup.

But whenever I point something out some idiot says I'm siding with Dilawer and conspiring against Davidski. I wished that more people here would learn something basic as that.

If common sense and using the tools actual scientists use means siding with Dilawer. Add me to that list.

[Demhat]

I think people have a problem with the idea of claiming that Kurds are like 25% East Eurasian more than minor East Eurasian dna in Europeans...(which I'm still not sure where it supposedly comes from)

I don't remember any formal stats showing Kurd score 25% East Eurasian. Where do you got all these crazy theories from? Admixture calculators show 0-3%. formal stats show probably 2-5%.

[Demhat]

Yet they are. They are the perfect example of phenotype != genotype

https://i.imgur.com/Q3wVgZx.png


careful you might burst some bubbles here. There are still people who believe people from Sri Lanka are some kind of Sub Saharan race.

[Ion Basescul]

careful you might burst some bubbles here. There are still people who believe people from Sri Lanka are some kind of Sub Saharan race.

It's not even only autosomal.

"Analysis of paternal lineages indicates that all Onge carry the Y-DNA Haplogroup D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_D-M174)"

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Haplogrupo_D_%28ADN-Y%29.png

[SharpFork]

I don't remember any formal stats showing Kurd score 25% East Eurasian. Where do you got all these crazy theories from? Admixture calculators show 0-3%. formal stats show probably 2-5%.
Zorro claimed such things, lol

[SharpFork]

Are you doubting Iran_Neo/CHG derived admixture in Yamnaya? Are bloggers tools the only reliable source for you? Have you red the various papers published in scientific journals to this day? Do I need to present a blogger tool, to prove what the scientists who analysed the ancient samples are telling us is true?
Iran_Neo is not interchangeable with CHG in this context.


CHG is literally Iran_Neo derived with a little more ANE like admixture. You are confusing the Iran_Chl samples with that one Iran_Neo line at the beginning the more "orange" mixed samples are Iran_Chl. And it is not me presenting this to you it is what the papers write themselves. Steppe is literally Iran_CHL-CHG + EHG. Patterson and Lazaridis reject the CHG- EHG model. The CHG samples are simply too old to be of any importance for Yamnaya. Therefore something CHG like from the late Neolithic(Calcolthic) era must be the source. That is what the scientists try to tell us.

Also whatever it is CHG or Iran derived what kind of importance does it have for our argument since I didn't specify which ancestry exactly it is. You are arguing against a "statement" that was never made.
You mention Iranian_CHL and there is no evidence they had themselves any relevant impact in the Steppe:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/499

I focused on Iran_CHL because I was not disputing CHG ancestry in the Steppe, in any case such ancestry existed in some amount since the 5th millenium BCE.


Could you please explain how Yamnaya could culturally be so influenced by Maykop without "having any genetic influence on Yamnaya"?
This is not my position, regardless

Maykop is split into two regions, which genetically differ but probably spoke the same language.[QUOTE]
We can't be really sure about can we?

[QUOTE]Maybe it was the Steppe Maykop guys who influenced Yamnaya? This is called Bottle-Neck Effect in the scientific world. So can be exclude the possibility that South Maykop was the influx responsible for the Anatolian_Branch while Steppe Maykop for Yamnaya?
I mean we are totally sidelining the question because you are now creating 2 quite distinct populations that both at the same time spoke the same language, how is that any less likely than a Hittite speaking group undergoing bottle neck as well? They seem the same to me.

It is possible, like everything in theory is, but I'm not sure why it is more preferable.


What about a culturally related culture such as Leyla Tepe?
What do you mean exactly? That Leyla Tepe genetically/linguistically influenced the Steppe? The Armenian Copper age samples from Areni dated around this period seem to have quite some EHG ancestry I believe:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/06/16/059311/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1


We literally have EHG admixture in cultures supposedly not Indo European speaking such as Kura Araxes era samples and Hurrian era samples. But we try to explain the absence of EHG admixture in Hittite era samples by, I quote "non Indo European neighbors"?
My point is that there is so many people in the Hittite empire than 4 samples are not necessarily going to cut the whole range of diversity, if the pattern persists universally in Anatolia then sure that's a different story.

One of the 4 samples does have some EHG:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/360/6396/eaar7711/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1

And during this period (Assyrian colony period) there were Assyrian colonies as well, now I'm not going to claim those samples must be specifically X or Y, but it does show that you can't invoke populations from Armenia or Eastern Turkey from different periods when the Hittite samples were in central Anatolia:

https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199281329.001.0001/acprof-9780199281329-chapter-02

Also yes, it's possible for non-Indo-European people to have more Steppe than Indo-European people, are you going to argue against Etruscans vs Greeks or the fact that non-IE parts of IA Spain are similar to IE parts of Spain? I see that Kura-Araxes doesn't have that much Steppe anyway so I'm not sure how that changes anything.

Later Armenian bronze age samples do have more Steppe but they come chronologically at least 2 centuries later.

[yamagi]

Any proof these are even Hittite samples?

[SharpFork]

It's not even only autosomal.

"Analysis of paternal lineages indicates that all Onge carry the Y-DNA Haplogroup D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_D-M174)"

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Haplogrupo_D_%28ADN-Y%29.png
I mean dude I get you but the split between the "Australian" portion of the Onges and NE Asians is extremely deep, taxomically grouping the 2 seems pointless.

[Kamal900]

I thought Hittites were half greek half armenoid.I was wrong.It looks like they were closer to natufians than armenians or eastern turks

No shit. I even have a closet ancient relative from the Hittite kingdom:
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?316000-My-Updated-MyTrueAncestry-Results

[Zoro]

Zorro claimed such things, lol

Can you guys stop spreading lies about me.

First Leto accuses me of siding with Dilawer and conspiring against the mysterious Davidski. When Ion Basecul posted Davidski's own qpAdm which proved me correct showing Bulgarians as 5% E. Eurasian which is what I had forcasted when I said don't rely on ADMIXTURE calculators for E. Asian since the Caucasian and European references hide E. Asian admixture now you're saying I said Kurds are 25% E. Eurasian. Show me where I said this !!!

I hope you're smart enough to know if I said Kurds were 30% Sarmatian related + 70% Iran-Chl based on qpAdm models you realize that Sarmatians ARE NOT 100% E. Eurasian. If Sarmatians are 25% E. Eurasian that would make Kurds 0.25 x 30% = 7.5% E. Eurasian. If they're 30% E. Eurasian that would make Kurds 0.3 x 30% = 10% E. Eurasian.

It never ends with you guys. I wonder what the next lie is going to be.

[Zoro]

I mean dude I get you but the split between the "Australian" portion of the Onges and NE Asians is extremely deep, taxomically grouping the 2 seems pointless.

I doubt he was grouping them in the same category. I think he just meant that Onge are E. Eurasian just like E. Asians

[SharpFork]

Any proof these are even Hittite samples?
It's around 1500-2000 BCE, just when the Hittite started expanding in Hatti. The archaeological period is either for 3 samples Assyrian IIIc(2000-1750 BCE)one of which low quality but shows Steppe signals or Old Hittite(1750-1500 BCE) for 2 samples on of which shows good amount of Steppe(~10%)

[Eline]

Looks to me like they are an intermediary between Greek Anatolians and Levantine Semitics, with mild Steppe. Makes sense I guess, the 'IE' factor probably comes from the CaucasusIt has been showen that proto-Anatolian ancestral to proto-Luwian, proto-Hittite etc. was older than Yamnaya.

[Leto]

I doubt he was grouping them in the same category. I think he just meant that Onge are E. Eurasian just like E. Asians
On this forum we usually mean Mongoloid by East Eurasian. Not Australoid or South Indian.

[SharpFork]

Can you guys stop spreading lies about me.

First Leto accuses me of siding with Dilawer and conspiring against the mysterious Davidski. When Ion Basecul posted Davidski's own qpAdm which proved me correct showing Bulgarians as 5% E. Eurasian which is what I had forcasted when I said don't rely on ADMIXTURE calculators for E. Asian since the Caucasian and European references hide E. Asian admixture now you're saying I said Kurds are 25% E. Eurasian. Show me where I said this !!!

I hope you're smart enough to know if I said Kurds were 30% Sarmatian related + 70% Iran-Chl based on qpAdm models you realize that Sarmatians ARE NOT 100% E. Eurasian. If Sarmatians are 25% E. Eurasian that would make Kurds 0.25 x 30% = 7.5% E. Eurasian. If they're 30% E. Eurasian that would make Kurds 0.3 x 30% = 10% E. Eurasian.

It never ends with you guys. I wonder what the next lie is going to be.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?244284-Iranian-GEDmatch-kits/page18&p=6163971#post6163971


No dude I’m right. You have no idea what I’m talking about. I’m not talking about the recent E. Asian within the last300 years like 23andme. I’m talking about the older E Asian in the Iron Age and the recent.

Where do you think the mongoloid looking Kurds Iranians or other W Asians get their looks from. If you think they get it from the 5 % more recent E Asian that will be hilarious . They get it from the 15 or 20% old E. Asian. All someone has to do is make a k3 calculator with SSA, ENF, and E. Asian components and all that hidden E Asian will come pouring out trust me
Maybe you used weird terminology, but East Asian has a specific meaning and is not generally associated with iron age Scythians...

[Mejgusu]

It has been showen that proto-Anatolian ancestral to proto-Luwian, proto-Hittite etc. was older than Yamnaya.

No, they emerged nearly at same time, yamnaya was maybe a bit older.

[Eline]

Could you please explain how Yamnaya could culturally be so influenced by Maykop without "having any genetic influence on Yamnaya"? Maykop is split into two regions, which genetically differ but probably spoke the same language. Maybe it was the Steppe Maykop guys who influenced Yamnaya?Steppe Maykop predate Yamnaya. Steppe Maykop was later assimialted by Yamnaya and became part of Yamnaya. You can see (Steppe) Maykop actually as proto-Yamnaya. There was clearly a migration from the south of Maykop into the north of Yamnaya around 4th millennium BCE.

Proto-Anatolian predate Yamnaya and most likely came either from Maykop/Kura-Araxes or earlier from Leyla-Tepe.


According to the Armenian Plateau hypothesis of Ivanov, proto-Anatolian came from Kura-Araxes.

[Eline]

No, they emerged nearly at same time, yamnaya was maybe a bit older.No, according to the scientists such as Kroonen, proto-Anatolian was def. older than Yamnaya.

[Eline]

No, according to the scientists such as Kroonen, proto-Anatolian was def. older than Yamnaya.


"Without any trace of Anatolian languages outside Anatolia, however, the default hypothesis remains that Proto-Anatolian split up into different dialects in Anatolia itself, probably sometime in the mid- to late 4th millennium BCE."

Kroonen, Guus; Barjamovic, Gojko; Peyrot, Michael (2018), Linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. 2018: Early Indo-European languages, Anatolian, Tocharian and Indo-Iranian

[Mejgusu]

No, according to the scientists such as Kristian Kristiansen, proto-Anatolian was def. older than Yamnaya.

They emerged nearly at same time, yamnaya is at least 100-300 years older.

[Eline]

They emerged nearly at same time, yamnaya is at least 100-300 years older.No way, the split was in the mid- to late 4th millennium, more contemporary to Maykop. Maykop is older than Yamnaya

Maykop = c. 3700 BCE
Yamnaya = c. 3300 BCE


"Without any trace of Anatolian languages outside Anatolia, however, the default hypothesis remains that Proto-Anatolian split up into different dialects in Anatolia itself, probably sometime in the mid- to late 4th millennium BCE."

"This important result offers new support for the Indo-Hittite Hypothesis (see above) and strengthens the case for an Indo-Hittite-speaking ancestral population from which both Proto-Anatolian and residual Proto-Indo-European split off no later than the 4th millennium BCE."


Kroonen, Guus; Barjamovic, Gojko; Peyrot, Michael (2018), Linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. 2018: Early Indo-European languages, Anatolian, Tocharian and Indo-Iranian

[Mejgusu]

No way, the split was in the mid- to late 4th millennium, more contemporary to Maykop. Maykop is older than Yamnaya

Maykop = c. 3700 BCE
Yamnaya = c. 3300 BCE


"Without any trace of Anatolian languages outside Anatolia, however, the default hypothesis remains that Proto-Anatolian split up into different dialects in Anatolia itself, probably sometime in the mid- to late 4th millennium BCE."

Kroonen, Guus; Barjamovic, Gojko; Peyrot, Michael (2018), Linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. 2018: Early Indo-European languages, Anatolian, Tocharian and Indo-Iranian

Just because they said such things, it isnt automatically true. btw maykop isnt related to proto anatolian.

[Eline]

If ptoto-Anatolian was younger than Yamnaya (3300 BCE) it would come into Anatolia in after Yamnaya in the 3th millennium BCE. But It was already present in Anatolia in the 4th millennium BCE.

[Eline]

Just because they said such things, it isnt automatically true. btw maykop isnt related to proto anatolian.They are scientists and linguists, they know Hittite language better than I do speak English.


And what they say is already backed now by the ancient DNA that there was a migration into Late_Maykop/Early_Yamnaya around 4th millennium BCE. Those who migrated into Yamnaya became LATE Proto-Indo-Europeans. Those who stayed behind were proto-Indo-Anatolians and probably Tocharians and proto Graeco-Aryans.

https://i.postimg.cc/W19BKyMB/maykop.jpg

[Mejgusu]

If ptoto-Anatolian was younger than Yamnaya (3300 BCE) it would come into Anatolia in after Yamnaya in the 3th millennium BCE. But It was already present in Anatolia in the 4th millennium BCE.

Even if that is true, it is well known that protoIE language eventually emerged in pontic steppe(kurgan culture). In MY opinion, IE language didnt emerge in Anatolia, neither caucasia. Maybe somewhere in steps between black and caspian sea, but not caucasia.

[Zoro]

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?244284-Iranian-GEDmatch-kits/page18&p=6163971#post6163971


Maybe you used weird terminology, but East Asian has a specific meaning and is not generally associated with iron age Scythians...

By old E. Asian I'm talking much older than Scythians. That's why it's important when discussing something to state E. Asian since Iron Age or E. Asian since Neolthic or E. Asian since Medieval. It's all about context.

Just to clarify further when I say Kurds are modeled as 60% Iran-Chl + 40% Sarmatian like I'm talking about E. Eurasian since Chalcolithic. in this case it would be a total of 8-15% E. Eurasian. Now how much of this 8 to 15% is AASI related and how much is E. Asian and Siberian combined is a different story. Although with Kurds there is a certain amount of AASI and Siberian that's included in this calculation.

By old E. Eurasian we can include some alleles which were shared in Paleolithic between Afontogora, Kurds, and E. Asians. Phenotype traits don't change as easily as a single junk SNP used in admixture calcuations

[Eline]

Even if that is true, it is well known that protoIE language eventually emerged in pontic steppe(kurgan culture). In MY opinion, IE language didnt emerge in Anatolia, neither caucasia. Maybe somewhere in steps between black and caspian sea, but not caucasia.No, they speak about the early proto-IEan and the late proto-IEan.

The language spoken in Yamnya was just LATE proto-Indo-European. From this LATE proto-Indo-European evolved languages such as Germanic, Celtic, Balto-Slavic.

While proto-Indo-Anatolian, proto-Tocharian, proto Graeco-Aryan evolved from the EARLY proto-Indo-European.

[Lucas]

IN K36 interesting very high Italian

Amerindian -
Arabian 0.31 Pct
Armenian 14.62 Pct
Basque -
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan -
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro -
East_Med 29.39 Pct
Eastern_Euro -
Fennoscandian -
French -
Iberian -
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 25.74 Pct
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 13.51 Pct
North_African -
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea -
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian 7.64 Pct
West_Med 8.78 Pct


result in K36 oracle

Cyprus 1.678098
GR_Central_Anatolia 1.810561
GR_Dodecanese 1.911004
GR_Kos 1.913228
GR_Ikaria 1.961256
GR_Kalymnos 1.979170
GR_Chios 1.989241
Romaniotes 2.050480
IT_Calabria 2.050486
GR_Smyrna 2.097877

pen=0.001

Cyprus,63
GR_Central_Anatolia,27.6
GR_Kalymnos,3.4
GR_Dodecanese,1.2
GR_Ikaria,0.8
Lebanon_Christian,0.8
GR_Chios,0.6
IT_Calabria,0.6
IT_Campania,0.4
IT_Molise,0.4
IT_Sardinia,0.4
GR_Andros,0.2
GR_Kos,0.2
GR_Smyrna,0.2
Romaniotes,0.2


pen=0

Cyprus,62.6
GR_Central_Anatolia,29.2
IT_Sardinia,4
IT_Molise,2.6
GR_Kalymnos,0.8
IT_Umbria,0.6
FR_Corsica,0.2

[Hudayar]

I thought Hittites were half greek half armenoid.I was wrong.It looks like they were closer to natufians than armenians or eastern turks

Hittites predate Greeks and there really doesn't seem to be any Greek influence on any population present in Anatolia.

[dududud]

Based on what? There is a possibility earliest IE were of Caucasus ancestry, not steppe.
Yamnaya was half CHG half EHG, and we still don't know which half brought the language.

Some people are quite limited. Sample like this speaks in favour of Armenian Highland theory which David Reich also speaks about.

I maintain: without being limited, this sample is not Indo-European.

Very Levantine shifted.

Nothing too impressive for a Hittite, however.

[Mejgusu]

I maintain: without being limited, this sample is not Indo-European.

Very Levantine shifted.

Nothing too impressive for a Hittite, however.

At least genetically. The hitites were probably the most levantine shifted IE people.

[Bosniensis]

WHERE ARE ALL THOSE TROLLS ABOUT ROME AND INDO-EUROPEAN THEORY?

When I WAS SAYING Anatolians are not Indo-Europeans people were saying I am crazy.

Apulinas = Hittite diety = Apollo Greek diety

Az Div = Hittite diety = Az Deus (Zeus) Greek diety

etc...

"muh indo europan" R1b forever.. muh...


Zeus came from Russia! hahahah

[Leto]

Zeus came from Russia! hahahah
Yes, he was white and not fucking swarthy like you!
You think you don't look "Slavic" (nobody else actually cares) and hence you are perplexed.

[Demhat]

Iran_Neo is not interchangeable with CHG in this context.
As I mentioned the difference is small to minimal. Similar to WHG and SHG. But as I wrote that shouldn't be your main focus of the debate. Since the EHG-CHG model is very much rejected not only because of the age of the CHG samples.



You mention Iranian_CHL and there is no evidence they had themselves any relevant impact in the Steppe:
Certanly there is evidence of Northwest Iran-Southeast Caucasus cultures having huge impact on the Steppes. Starting from the very earliest Kurgans. But this game can be played two ways. You don't have "any evidence" that "CHG" itself played a role in Yamnaya it could be something else similar to it. And you also have no proof that Steppe derived EHG played a role in Hittites yet you keep speculating :)




I focused on Iran_CHL because I was not disputing CHG ancestry in the Steppe, in any case such ancestry existed in some amount since the 5th millenium BCE.

Once again the sheer age of CHG makes it very very unlikely source. Also newest formal stats show Yamnaya did indeed have some little Anatolian_Neo kind of ancestry that can be well explained by Iran_Chl like admixture.



We can't be really sure about can we?


It is as likely/unlikely as any other Theory as long as disproven the opposite.



I mean we are totally sidelining the question because you are now creating 2 quite distinct populations that both at the same time spoke the same language, how is that any less likely than a Hittite speaking group undergoing bottle neck as well? They seem the same to me.

I have not sidelined a single question nord have I put words in anyonce mouth they never used :)

I am most definitely not creating two "quite distinct" populations which belong to the same culture, they are literally there and they are not as distinct as you want to make it out to be. Steppe Maykop is simply South Maykop with more EHG and a little East Eurasian admixture. And this EHG admixture seems to be from a different older source than Yamnaya. It looks like it came straight from Central Asia.

Steppe Maykop and South Maykop are literally the same culture and with very high likely-ness spoke exactly the same language. There are less things speaking against it, than for it.


It is possible, like everything in theory is, but I'm not sure why it is more preferable.

I am not talking like it is the only logical conclusion. I am literally not excluding the possibility as it is the case with the opposition in this debate. So I am fairly certain my approach is much fairer. Don't you think?



What do you mean exactly? That Leyla Tepe genetically/linguistically influenced the Steppe? The Armenian Copper age samples from Areni dated around this period seem to have quite some EHG ancestry I believe:

The Armenian samples are younger, from a different location and belong most likely to Kura-Araxes or Hurrians not Leyla Tepe. Though I would be suprised to not find any EHG like DNA there, if we already found EHG like ancestry in Iran_Hotu mesolithic sample.

What bothers me the most. Is the hypocrisy in one thing. Any type of EHG ancestry found in Western Asia is automatically considered a "sign" of Steppe Indo European influx. Totally ignoring the fact that allot of it might be (and possibly is) older. It's like me claiming any Bronze Age culture with very high amoung of Anatolian_Farmer DNA is Bronze Age Anatolian derived. For example when I discussed with certain bloggers in the past they also tended to argue that the "CHG" in the Steppes is of a much older local source ( I wasn't doubting the possibility) but in the same breath would dismiss any possibility of EHG like DNA in Western Asia prior to the Bronze Age.

Doesn't sound reasonable let alone like a fair unbiased approach to me.


https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/06/16/059311/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1


My point is that there is so many people in the Hittite empire than 4 samples are not necessarily going to cut the whole range of diversity, if the pattern persists universally in Anatolia then sure that's a different story.

One of the 4 samples does have some EHG:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/360/6396/eaar7711/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1

in My very first posts I clarified that the noise amount of EHG in found in some samples does not support a Steppe influx because it can be perfectly explained by surrounding admixture such as from Kura-Araxes like cultures. And here we go several comments later this is thrown into the room as an argument.

We are literally running in circles


And during this period (Assyrian colony period) there were Assyrian colonies as well, now I'm not going to claim those samples must be specifically X or Y, but it does show that you can't invoke populations from Armenia or Eastern Turkey from different periods when the Hittite samples were in central Anatolia:

Assyrians grew in power and bordered Hittites allot later than this samples are dating to. So Assyrian admixture is out of question imo. During that time the Hittites were bordering the Mitanni which should actually bring more CHG and some Steppe admixture than anything else.
If anything Assyrian admixture would increase Levant_Neo like DNA in Anatolia and decrease(not eradicate) the other components. But again this is literally grasping at Straws trying to explain why something is not there what should be there (from your perspective). let me tell you more. Assyrians ruled over Western Iran for far longer than they did over parts of the Hittites. I am wondering why we still find significant amount of derived Steppe ancestry in Median era samples and even mroe in their descendens. Assyrians were conquerers you could even call them the very first terrorists in world history. But they most certanly were not rapist maniacs. They would much rather massacre your people than breed childs with them.




Also yes, it's possible for non-Indo-European people to have more Steppe than Indo-European people, are you going to argue against Etruscans vs Greeks or the fact that non-IE parts of IA Spain are similar to IE parts of Spain? I see that Kura-Araxes doesn't have that much Steppe anyway so I'm not sure how that changes anything.

First of all Etruscan origin nore language has yet been identified to this day. The most recent DNA studies show. Etruscans were literally identical to the proto_Italics making it possible that they might have actually been a Italic related group. Also I don't understand how this example is of any importance for our debate. Yes some Indo Europeans have less Steppe than "non Indo Europeans" the point is not that Hittites have less Steppe than Turks. The point is that Hittites show no Bronze Age Steppe derived ancestry at all. Note before we misunderstand it again. There is a reason I called it Bronze Age Steppe derived, because when Hittites have anything Steppe like it is well explained by admixture from Calcolthic cultures to it's east.



Later Armenian bronze age samples do have more Steppe but they come chronologically at least 2 centuries later.


Armenian Calcolthic samples do have Steppe admixture and they do not come 2 centuries later than the Hittite sample.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ron_Pinhasi/publication/313275388/figure/fig1/AS:614032209891335@1523408095472/PCA-and-ADMIXTURE-Analysis-for-Ancient-Latvian-and-Ukrainian-Samples-A-Ancient-data.png


To be fair we have reached the point where we simply turn in circles. I certanly don't have the desire to repeat these things over and over again. At least you agreed that we can't exclude any of the theories I made and which the scientists support.

Let's agree to disagree and debate some other time about which theories make more sense :)

[Hudayar]

WHERE ARE ALL THOSE TROLLS ABOUT ROME AND INDO-EUROPEAN THEORY?

When I WAS SAYING Anatolians are not Indo-Europeans people were saying I am crazy.

Apulinas = Hittite diety = Apollo Greek diety

Az Div = Hittite diety = Az Deus (Zeus) Greek diety

etc...

"muh indo europan" R1b forever.. muh...


Zeus came from Russia! hahahah

I think a comparison between Teshub and Zeus would be better. Since Az Div is not even a real deity.

[Demhat]

By old E. Asian I'm talking much older than Scythians. That's why it's important when discussing something to state E. Asian since Iron Age or E. Asian since Neolthic or E. Asian since Medieval. It's all about context.

Just to clarify further when I say Kurds are modeled as 60% Iran-Chl + 40% Sarmatian like I'm talking about E. Eurasian since Chalcolithic. in this case it would be a total of 8-15% E. Eurasian. Now how much of this 8 to 15% is AASI related and how much is E. Asian and Siberian combined is a different story. Although with Kurds there is a certain amount of AASI and Siberian that's included in this calculation.

By old E. Eurasian we can include some alleles which were shared in Paleolithic between Afontogora, Kurds, and E. Asians. Phenotype traits don't change as easily as a single junk SNP used in admixture calcuations

To be honest Zoro it doesn't appear fair to call all of that East Eurasian than to begin with. What you probably try to explain and are talking about is, very ancient shared ancestry between some ancestral mesolithic time population and East Eurasians. It is as much East Eurasian as it is West Eurasian. It is shared ancestry.

I seriously doubt Post_Neolithic East Eurasian admixture exceeds ~7%(average ~4%) in any non admixed Kurd.

[Bosniensis]

I think a comparison between Teshub and Zeus would be better. Since Az Div is not even a real deity.

Daeva Az or Oz was Persian - Syrian deity of avarice and greed.

He was later Identified as Az Zazel (Az the Noble) before he got damned, according to him Mount Azazel got the name.

He is a Demon who disobeyed God, whom muslim later know as Iblis or Satan.

Greeks named Him Az Deus or later Zeus.... Romans called him Zeus Pater or Zeuspater which name through centuries became Jove or Jupiter.

Herodotus said that Ahura-Mazda is Zeus and Muhammed said that Ahura-Mazda is Satans deception.

[Zoro]

To be honest Zoro it doesn't appear fair to call all of that East Eurasian than to begin with. What you probably try to explain and are talking about is, very ancient shared ancestry between some ancestral mesolithic time population and East Eurasians. It is as much East Eurasian as it is West Eurasian. It is shared ancestry.

I seriously doubt Post_Neolithic East Eurasian admixture exceeds ~7%(average ~4%) in any non admixed Kurd.


The problem is percentages are not a good way to figure out total admixture because percentages change depending on what other components are used. Here’s a great example that will really clarify what I’m talking about:

Let’s say there are 3 black guys and 7 white guys in my town. Percentage of black guys in my town is therefore 30%
Let’s say there are 3 black guys , 10 brown guys and 7 white guys in your town. Percentage of black guys in your town is 3/20= 15%

So going by percentages someone would think my town has more black guys but in reality we both have the same number of black guys.

Now replace guys with alleles. Black is E. Asian, brown is W. Asian, and white is European.
My town replace with S. Asian guy. Your town replace with Kurd guy.

You see that S. Asian guy will show 30% E. Asian
Kurd guy will show 15% E. Asian even though he has 3 E. Asian alleles same as S. Asian

I think it’s a waste of time doing percentages. I think we should count how many E. Asian alleles Kurds have vs others

[SharpFork]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe4jnBdVxjw
The scholar there suggests Hittite/Anatolian IE came recently from the East in the early 2nd millennium BCE and proposed to look into the Kura-Axaxes culture in the future.
Some other interesting arguments is the lack of common origin for some basic words like grain, barley and possibly even milk. To me this suggests that a origin of Indo-Hittite south of the Caucasus or even in 5th millennium Iran to be dubious, which I believe a study I linked before vindicated in the genetic side.

[Eline]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe4jnBdVxjw
The scholar there suggests Hittite/Anatolian IE came recently from the East in the early 2nd millennium BCE and proposed to look into the Kura-Axaxes culture in the future.
Some other interesting arguments is the lack of common origin for some basic words like grain, barley and possibly even milk. To me this suggests that a origin of Indo-Hittite south of the Caucasus or even in 5th millennium Iran to be dubious, which I believe a study I linked before vindicated in the genetic side.
Hittite itself, just like Aryan/Kurdish, is a Western Asiatic IEan language. Hittite is derived from proto-Anatolian and evolved IN West Asia.


Proto-Anatolian is estmated to be much older than Yamnaya, and now think, tik tok.


https://i.postimg.cc/qvVMhQtN/proto-Anatolian.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/X7FCXsjP/ace.gif

[Eline]

Hittie evolved from proto-Anatolia in, where.....? ANATOLIA! How suprising, isn't it?


https://i.postimg.cc/1R21zHXb/picture1-protoindoeuropeans-0.jpg

[Konstantinos]

My cautious guess is PIE is south of the steppes, Caucasus/even southern. When and how it moved north I don't know. It will be interesting (if true) to see what kind of genetic package accompanied the movement.

[Eline]

If proto-Anatolian came from outside of West Asia, then some Anatolian languages would also be spoken outside Anatolia.


But we have got evidence that ALL Anatolian languages such as Luwian, Lydian and Hittie were all spoken inside Anatolia. That means that all those Anatolian languages derived from the proto-Anatolian in West-Asia.


That makes Hittite that evolved from proto-Anatolian a Western Asiatic language, just like Kurdish/Aryan.

[Eline]

My cautious guess is PIE is south of the steppes, Caucasus/even southern. When and how it moved north I don't know. It will be interesting (if true) to see what kind of genetic package accompanied the movement.My educated guess would be ancient Sumerian/Shemshara farmers who moved up to north. Those ancient Sumerian farmers (Ubaid/Samarra period) from around 5500 BCE. Or people from Leyla-Tepe who were directly related to those Sumerian farmers

[Konstantinos]

My educated guess would be ancient Sumerian farmers who moved up to north. Those ancient Sumerian farmers (Ubaid/Samarra period) from around 5000 BCE. Or people from Leyla-Tepe who were directly related to those Sumerian farmers

Sumerians as we know them can't be since they spoke a language isolate. I am open to the possibility that there were other groups that spoke different languages, one of them PIE.

[Eline]

Sumerians as we know them can't be since they spoke a language isolate. I am open to the possibility that there were other groups that spoke different languages, one of them PIE.I'm talking about the unknown Sumerian language of 7000 years ago. Sumerians spoke a language older than PIEan. At the time of the Sumeirans PIEan didn't exist.


Sumerian they found was very late Sumerian. And it was a 'language isolate'. 'Language isolate' means only that this language 'has not been demonstrated to descend from an ancestor common with any other language'.

It is actually an 'unclassified language'. We don't know what langauge that is. They only found very young Sumerian cuneiform clay tablets of 2500 BCE. And even that language is an 'unclassified language', since it was only written in hieroglyphs.


I'm talking about the Sumerians from 6000-5500 BCE and not of those from around 2500 BCE of the clay tablets. There is a gap between those two different types of the Sumerians of 3000 years! Totally different people/Sumerians.

[wvwvw]

Looks like that Hittites were genitically the same like cypriots/levantines with visible caucasian influence. Non Indoeuropean influence. Even modern Turks are more „european“


And I'd not call Hittites being same as Cypriots. It's the other way around most likely. Cypriots are most likely hellenized Hittites.

The Bronze Age Hittites of 1750 BC were different to Assyrian Hittites

The Hittites of 1750 BC were Eteo-cretans - Hettaioi from Crete, who had arrived to Crete thousands of years before and also populated Anatolia. They formed part of the population of mainland Greece before the arrival of the Hellenes in 2200
BC.

They also used the crypto-Minoan script for four centuries. The so-called Ioudai of the bible also originated
 from the Eteo-Cretans.

Before the arrival of Hellenes a common language was spoken throughout Greece, the Balkans and Anatolia, which was similar to proto-Greek. We can call that language Greco-Hettite. It contributed around 70% to Indo-European. The Hellenes like the Italo-Celts and Illyrians were of the R1 lineage and we know from the Basques that lineage spoke a non-IE language.

After 2200 BC the Hellenes are mixed with the indigenous lineages J2, and E-v13, and classical Hellenes are of 3 different lineages.

At around the time the sample is from the Hittites are ruled by Greek kings. All the Tudhaliyas kings of the Hittites were of Greek origin. The last Hittite king of Greek origin was Priam known to the Hittites as Zeus-Priamo(s) or Suppiluliama when he made himself their king in 1203 BC. Homer interchanged Priam with Zeus since Zeus was his epithet. Hittite records say that Priam reigned for 20 years.

Nearly 50 years before Priam, Deukalion the son of Minos made himself king of the Hittites under the name of Tudhaliya IV/Dionysus from 1252 to 1236 BC. Half the kings of the Hittite empire were either Greeks, Phrygians or Lydians. The bible calls the Hittites the Nations.

The Hittites fell under the influence of Assyrians. The Hittites who wrote in cuneiform soon lost their original
 Greco-Hittite language through through corruption by contact with the Assyrians and it became Hittite. From then on the the Hittites were known as Assyrians and were called Assyrians.