Post anthropological opinions, stances that you do not agree with or unpopular opinions

[Roy]

I am not sure whether it's really unpopular but I've seen people claiming it many times and I disagree with


1. Ashkenazi Jews & Southern Italians being very similar to each other. I generally find a large chunk of Ashekanzis to have a very, very distinctive look, moreover Ashkenazi Jews are lighter than southern Italians.

[Immanenz]

Steppe EHG looking like Mongolids (only claimed by a few)
Steppe Herders being exclusively dolicho (claimed by some early authors- could not explain Bell Beaker/ or were not aware how much Steppe DNA they had)

[rothaer]

I am not sure whether it's really unpopular but I've seen people claiming it many times and I disagree with


1. Ashkenazi Jews & Southern Italians being very similar to each other. I generally find a large chunk of Ashekanzis to have a very, very distinctive look, moreover Ashkenazi Jews are lighter than southern Italians.

The main similarity will be the general ancestry (expressed also by genetic plotting in PCAs). As for AJ having a distinctive look and being more depigmented this imo can be well explained by having a just small gene pool due to the known bottleneck and having been exposed to other selective processes for abt. 1000 years in more northern latitudes.

[rothaer]

I disagree with the assumed or implied importance of the look (typological classification) in the context of determining the individual heritage and origin.

DNA tests demonstrate that the genetic heritage is in line with the actual ancestry regardless of the individual look.

[rothaer]

I disagree with the often heard statement that the Yamnayas hail from the Eurasian steppe(s).

They hail from the Eastern European steppe(s).

[Kess]

I disagree with the often heard statement that the Yamnayas hail from the Eurasian steppe(s).

They hail from the Eastern European steppe(s).

Not much of a change.

[Oliver109]

That Ancient North Eurasians were dark skinned, i think in all likelihood they had a brunet white complexion but still light compared to say Indians or American Indians.

[rothaer]

I disagree with taking Y-DNA haplogroups important for the identity of an individual.

Most haplogroup defining SNPs are in non coding regions and thus biologically without any effect. Only very few SNPs are considered to have a biological effect.

[Laredo]

That Ancient North Eurasians were dark skinned, i think in all likelihood they had a brunet white complexion but still light compared to say Indians or American Indians.

ANE looked more like CM with around 30% mongoloid admixtures, mean while when they were heading to the American continent they were mixing with Asians and so on and that's how the Amerindian race was born.

But real ANE were not half but more like castizo type.

[rothaer]

Not much of a change.

Well, this is said to insinuate that it's normal that non-Eurpeans in big migrations come to Europe if we consider the past 5000 years. The mentioned wrong is often supported by the also wrong formulation that the Yamnayas came "to Europe".

A resembling but milder thing is the statement about the Anatolian farmers. We do have the reference individuals from Barcin near Troy in Anatolia but this is directly bordering Thrakia and Greece and it's pretty likely that you had the same folks there at that time. Also, these "Anatolian" farmers were shaped by a huge earlier immigration from the Balkans to Anatolia. ENF (Early Neolithic Farmers) is a more neutral formulation i line with the current gaps in our knowledge.

[Oliver109]

ANE looked more like CM with around 30% mongoloid admixtures, mean while when they were heading to the American continent they were mixing with Asians and so on and that's how the Amerindian race was born.

But real ANE were not half but more like castizo type.

They were not mongoloid mixed, they were mixed with an ancestor of mongoloids, big difference.

[Laredo]

They were not mongoloid mixed, they were mixed with an ancestor of mongoloids, big difference.

Not really it's the same thing of what I said basically ANE people were 75% Caucasian /West eurasian origin.

And because of that modern amerindians are basically an indo-mestizo group 65-75% mongoloid and 20-35% west eurasian.

[Oliver109]

Not really it's the same thing of what I said basically ANE people were 75% Caucasian /West eurasian origin.

And because of that modern amerindians are basically an indo-mestizo group 65-75% mongoloid and 20-35% west eurasian.

They would have been fully caucasian like though with some differences, Mongoloids developed more after the ANE people came about and their traits specialised more.

[Eurafricanid]

I do agree that the Yamnaya's ethnogenesis was in the Eastern European Steppe and then they went out into Central and South Asia.
I've seen a lot in social media South Asians denying the Indo-European migrations, saying that "The aryans were an invention of the British Empire." that seems to be a very popular thought these days, and then when presented with the obvious linguistic evidence they just say that "The Indo-Aryan Languages had actually always been Indigenous South Asian languages, it was actually the opposite that happened and the South Asians that invaded Europe.", and I also very mutch disagree with that.

[rothaer]

I disagree with the common in athropology performed habit to make a single find and then label that find as a reference in metrics for a respective population.

It shows where we have more finds f. i. in Denmark during most of the time that you had both dolichocephal and brachycephal skulls at the same time and in the same graves. I for curiosity personally examined the excavated non-published skulls from the Tollensetal battleground (Germany). Also they were pretty diverse, in fact that diverse that it to me seemed close to pointless and arbitrary to pick out a single one and start interpreting it along the hitherto common anthropological habits.

I guess that reference fossils like some few Cro Magnon skulls are also wrongly interpreted as respresentative of a population. Rather arbitrary individuals from a naturally in metrics somewhat diverse population.

[rothaer]

I do agree that the Yamnaya's ethnogenesis was in the Eastern European Steppe and then they went out into Central and South Asia.
I've seen a lot in social media South Asians denying the Indo-European migrations, saying that "The aryans were an invention of the British Empire." that seems to be a very popular thought these days, and then when presented with the obvious linguistic evidence they just say that "The Indo-Aryan Languages had actually always been Indigenous South Asian languages, it was actually the opposite that happened and the South Asians that invaded Europe.", and I also very mutch disagree with that.

True. You have sequenced Harappa (Indus valley) fossils that are preceeding Indoeuropeans. And they have zero steppe genetics.

[Etelfrido]

I do agree that the Yamnaya's ethnogenesis was in the Eastern European Steppe and then they went out into Central and South Asia.
I've seen a lot in social media South Asians denying the Indo-European migrations, saying that "The aryans were an invention of the British Empire." that seems to be a very popular thought these days, and then when presented with the obvious linguistic evidence they just say that "The Indo-Aryan Languages had actually always been Indigenous South Asian languages, it was actually the opposite that happened and the South Asians that invaded Europe.", and I also very mutch disagree with that.
South Asians seem to be a very stubborn bunch from personal examination.

[Tooting Carmen]

The claim that Greeks are as close or even closer to Central Europeans than to Cypriots, when the latter are basically Greeks with a little more Levantine and Anatolian mix.

[PaganPoet]

I have been told many Europeans are actually for a small part Tungus, besides other components of course.

[tita]

I am not sure whether it's really unpopular but I've seen people claiming it many times and I disagree with


1. Ashkenazi Jews & Southern Italians being very similar to each other. I generally find a large chunk of Ashekanzis to have a very, very distinctive look, moreover Ashkenazi Jews are lighter than southern Italians.

Ashkenazi Jews have nothing to do with southern italians. Unless they have the same results on calculators like G25. Ashkenzi Jew have very high IQ, from memory, 125 in verbal IQ and average in non verbal ? While southern italians...

[Kess]

I think both Orientalid types and Indid types are not mediterranoids.