Asia map
Printable View
Asia map
Just did..Quote:
Originally Posted by Markos
https://i.imgur.com/5tcCeMh.png
So you have only three REAL matches and your wholelist of 60 "ancient matches" was simply crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty74
These are my results in Deep Dive
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-G8dxQKG9Y...EEP%2BDIVE.jpg
It is not even funny...
This is just biggest bullshit lately on Genetic Internet...
Do you know your one-to-many list on Gematch? What is your highest match (besides close family like parents) for me about 30 cM. And Gedmatch says common ancestor was about 4.5 generation ago.
https://i.postimg.cc/0yC2j0PF/Bez-nazwy-9.png
So what the hell means if you have common 80 cM with sample from Bronze Age Jutland? How many generation ago it was? Go figure:) It is impossible and completely biased result.
https://screenshotscdn.firefoxuserco...304623d26a.png
Posting it, is like posting random numbers taken from the ass. Nobody can defend those cM values in two post above. Unless you believe you match 3500 years old sample on the same level as 3rd cousin...
Is the Rise47 kit in Gedmatch?
https://oi1283.photobucket.com/album...psribmmdcn.png
https://oi1283.photobucket.com/album...psrcy6nhcd.png
This was a pretty good action film. Liked the character of Kunitza, but the old chieftan was bad-ass too. Also liked how the knyaz (the ruler) referred to the scythians as wolves. In Russian the title of the film is Скиф (The Schythian) not the crappy Last Warrior English translation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8781LdaKxM
My results. Deep matches comes out way more accurate since the Roman falls off. Looks like we’re roman like but dna matches show Thracian and Illyrian and Hittites.
https://i.postimg.cc/TPb39wLB/91-F82...802-E5-B16.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/50Qqpx4G/BA519-...045-B693-D.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/SR0LvwjK/463940...-B7-D2-E17.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/tJhdQ2VN/1-DCF1...968-A35974.jpg
Random question bro, where you from Moldova?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmey Gorynych
You are wasting your time, mate. They are not listening to you, they are happy to pay hundreds of euros to some scammer to tell them they are the direct descendant of Conan the barbarian, or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by LukaszM
Sums up the collective IQ of this forum, lately.
Free part is nice though.Quote:
Originally Posted by dosas
It correctly identified me, so I can't complain.
It's still neat to see one compared to some ancient samples, even if this is a novelty/not a perfect science.
Speaking of which, just realised I have a "match", in Asia: The Androvono sample around Tuva, Russia (near the crossroads with Mongolia and Kazakhstan), dated 1500BC. Neato.
My results:
https://i.imgur.com/vrpU9pN.png
https://i.imgur.com/X6cqg11.png
Very accurate for a Spanish-Greek.
People might want to check because they have updated their ancient samples so your results might have changed. These are my matches and I get a small match with Hallstatt which I'm pleased with. This is entertaining at least even if people are skeptical.
http://i65.tinypic.com/2zollhl.jpg
http://i68.tinypic.com/xbml1.jpg
http://i66.tinypic.com/v81um8.jpg
They compared https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...eaat4457?rss=1 to these Scythian samples. They all have different origins, you need to order an additional test for a specific definition from which Scythians
My first level data! :D
1. Kievan Rus (1130 AD) (7.728) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. Avar (590 AD) (8.52) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Avar (590 AD) (9.345) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. Viking Sweden (1100 AD) (10.44) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Western Pommerania Unetice (2000 BC) (10.67) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. Western Pommerania Unetice (1860 BC) (10.67) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Scythian Ukraine (600 BC) (11.94) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. Scythian Ukraine (600 BC) (12.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Siberia Andronovo (1500 BC) (15.48) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. Medieval Czech Brandysek (710 AD) (16.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Ancient Gotlander (2750 BC) (16.84) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. Caspian Steppes (1550 BC) (17.14) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Neolithic Gotlander (5000 BC) (17.77) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. Hungary Vatya (0 AD) (18.0) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Bell Beaker Salisbury (2200 BC) (18.16) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. Bell Beaker Oxford (2150 BC) (18.81) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Halstatt (775 BC) (19.35) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. Ancient Gotlander (2750 BC) (19.48) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Ancient Siberia Tagar (850 BC) (19.66) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. Viking Sweden (1100 AD) (19.73) - [Upgrade for more details]
1. Polish (5.286)
2. Estonian_Polish (7.092)
3. Russian_Smolensk (7.096)
4. South_Polish (7.359)
5. Southwest_Russian (7.549)
6. Kargopol_Russian (7.664)
7. Belorussian (7.867)
8. East_Finnish (8.235)
I'm even more sceptical because first some of their presumable "bots" or "sockpuppets" on foras (here also, few accounrs created on March or April)) and FB groups defended those high cM values for matches, even if they were ridicuolusly stupid like 80cM with Jutland Bronze Age for Spaniard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace O'Malley
And when many people started to compare their matches with the same samples which are uploaded on Gedmatch, they quietly lowered cM values. If someone is their paid customer may ask them why they changed their algorhitm. and if they admit they were utterly wrong before:) ?
When I find time I will massively upload all ancient samples they were using to Gedmatch and everyone could make one-to-one for free, and check real cM values with normal treshold of course... List of kits will be published here.
But about samples from the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea, 5 thousand years BC, with which MyTrueAststry.com also compares - "Scientists noted that the ancient ancestors of the Scandinavians have nothing in common with modern inhabitants of the peninsula. It turned out that the Vikings were closer in their DNA structure to the ancient inhabitants of northern Russia and the Baltic states than to their neighbors from the southern part of Scandinavia. Experts believe that their genomes were similar to the genetic material of hunter-gatherers. " https://mir24.tv/amp/news/16286186/p...mi-skandinavii
About why many Russian Vikings of the 12th century are highlighted, this does not mean that the ancestors were Vikings, the Vikings had Slavic ancestors, here’s an article about those samples from Sigtuna- "The combination of genetic and isotopic data showed that out of 38 people in the vicinity of Sigtuna grew less than half. The rest turned out to be migrants - “regional” (southern Scandinavia, modern Norway and Denmark) and visitors from more distant places (modern British islands, Ukraine, Lithuania, northern Germany and other regions of central Europe, as well as Novgorod city) Among the "newcomers" were men 44%, women -. 70%. " There is also a version that it was the Slavs who destroyed Sigtuna in 1187. In Sigtuna in the XII century. there was a Slavic trade court with Slavs who were constantly there.
https://nauka.vesti.ru/article/1048799
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1...D0%BA0D0%B8%D0 % B9_% D0% BF% D0% BE% D1% 85% D0% BE% D0% B4
A full report on the Vikings in Sigturna of the 12th century is a jumble of Scandinavians, Russians, Estonians, Mediterranean .... To understand which particular model you correspond to, you need to do a more expensive test https://www.cell.com/current-biology...822(18)30844-3
Answer me about about Gotland from MyTrueAncestry- "Ancient Gotlanders are more Finnish type people. The germanic Swedes migrated later into the area, which is why northern Swedes are similiar to Finns."
Ancient Fennoscandian https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07483-5
It is necessary to compare what number match, some Scythian samples have European descent https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...eaat4457?rss=1
It is necessary to compare what number match, some Scythian samples have European descent https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...eaat4457?rss=1Quote:
Originally Posted by Slavic Italian
Got a complete set) Here are my results, please do not copy)
Not every archaeological match has any link to you personally, it means that their ancestry is similiar. The deep dive comparison, meanwhile, is a direct comparison of your DNA 1-to-1. This is a much more definitive way to show direct common ancestry with a sample although similiar ancestry is also useful.
Hope this clarifies!
- The MyTrueAncestry Team
Somebody e-transfer me money so I can do the deep dive
With Deep Dive Caesar Kit you can download 10 sets for analysis, so collect 9 friends to buyQuote:
Originally Posted by Markos
This is my card deep dive :D I did not pay anything, i was presented with the one who purchased the Caesar set
https://b.radikal.ru/b24/1905/62/5a6b8d837fbb.png
https://a.radikal.ru/a15/1905/9e/515dc92ad211.png
https://d.radikal.ru/d30/1905/a4/3144449e00fe.png
https://c.radikal.ru/c08/1905/50/571e93ec93ef.png
https://a.radikal.ru/a26/1905/f8/1d0a19d7be36.png
https://d.radikal.ru/d01/1905/7e/cd25e7422bd6.png
https://i.postimg.cc/B69XRYKK/MTA.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/cHB42sWp/mta2.jpg
Celts + Vikings probably make up a minority of my 'true' ancestry, and Longobards none, but whatever, a website for low information individuals.
I got the same as you but what they call Celts are some of the Roman Britons and others so it just depends on what they label the samples as. I don't think people are taking this too seriously. It mostly appears to be based on population distances.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Ketch
http://i63.tinypic.com/m9li8l.jpg
The answer is-
"1. We suggest considering the sample quality in addition to the age as both play a role in the final cM figure. e.g. a high quality sample buried in snow and ice is typically better despite being older.
2. Not every archaeological match has any link to you personally, it means that their ancestry is similiar. The deep dive comparison, meanwhile, is a direct comparison of your DNA 1-to-1. This is a much more definitive way to show direct common ancestry with a sample although similiar ancestry is also useful.
Hope this clarifies!
- The MyTrueAncestry Team"
You need to compare your particular DNA match with archaeological finds. Here is a map https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map...6/51.000/2.000
:D
Mother's Day Sale
My fathers cross posted. True barbarian.
https://i.imgur.com/vOShXNc.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/qvyfGP8.jpg
Bosniensis was right as usual. We are slavicized Gallo-ScythiansQuote:
Originally Posted by Ayetooey
New Feature. Ancestral Timeline. Kits reactivated for 40 hours
https://i.postimg.cc/zv1r1cN5/Ancestral-Timeline.jpg