That makes it even more accurate because I got about 88% on the McDonald test. I see a lot of people have West Asian.:) Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Printable View
That makes it even more accurate because I got about 88% on the McDonald test. I see a lot of people have West Asian.:) Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
No, the West Asian is not european, otherwise Georgians would be 98% europeans, and of course they are not, since they genetically cluster with Iranians and Turks. Going by North+South they are only 23% european.
West Asian is caucasoid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iberia
If West Asian should be considered un-Europid, then I would be about 90% European in the Dodecad-analysis. In Dr. McDonalds analysis, I am 100% European.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iberia
Yes, because the McDonalds analysis is K=7 while Dodecad is K=10, which means the European at McDonalds includes already the west Asian, while Dodecad is able to splitt the west-asian component from europeans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olavsson
West Asian is an integral part of the European genetic make up since many thousands of years and other European components appear outside of Europe in the geographical sense as well.
Now Anatolians are heavily mixed with other elements too and Caucasians had a long development on their own and other admixture as well.
So from a racial point of view, the racial type of those people which carried West Asian genetic influences into Europe were most likely different from todays carriers in the Caucasian areas, after Armenoidisation took place.
This is therefore more a difference of evolution SINCE THEN, rather than a difference per se, if you get what I mean.
Fact is, that the Southern and West Asian components are part of the European make up, you can't subtract it, that would be insane, because as the distribution shows, it is an integral part of the European genetic make up since thousand of years and very close to other European components - some European components are closer to this component than to others in Europe, so it can be hardly seen as "non-European" in a meaningful way.
It does seem likely, below is my interpretation of the data on my Dienekes' test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
North European: 44%
My North European genetype is much higher than South European. Could be attributed to my Slavic ancestors who lived in the Carpathians.
South European: 27%
My South European genetype is second highest which suggests Paleobalkan and Hellenic influence.
West Asian: 19%
Neolithic wave influence? My Egyptian ancestors from many millennias ago who migrated out of East Africa and into the Balkans could be the primary cause of West Asian score.
Southwest Asian: 7.7%
Southwest Asian could mean either Anatolian or Iranian. I think former is more likely than the latter but if there is any truth to Serbian Iran origins theory then the latter could be attributed to Iranian/Scythian influence.
Northeast Asian: 0.7%
Northeast Asia is around Mongolia so my guess is Tatar/Cuman influence but obviously this influence was limited to very few ancestors way back.
East Asian: 0.8%
China, Japan, Korea and Mongolia are the only countries in East Asia. Only Mongolians made it all the way to Europe so this could be either Magyar or Mongolian influence from an already mixed person.
Northwest African: 0.2%
Carthaginian/Phoenician remnants?
^ Not a bad idea, here's mine.
West Asian - 38.5%
I'm 1/4 South Ossetian so no suprise that this would be my dominating component, since West Asian peaks in Georgians.
North European - 37.1%
Mostly from Slavs but also from East Germanic tribes & Scythian too.
South European - 19.5%
Probably from Dacians/Thracians, the Kurganized Anatolian farmers.
South-West Asian - 2.5%
Glad my ancestors kept this one at bay. 2.5% is not that much. :D
North-East Asian - 2.4%
Mostly from Bulgars.
It is never that easy and whether we deal with ancestral components in reality is open to debate, but if wanting to overstretch things and putting them into context, my ideas, as speculative as they are, would be like this now:
North European:
Currently I see different components in it, pre-Mesolithic, Mesolithic and early Neolithic influences from North of a certain line.
Probably it could be split up in "archaic" and "colonisers", like suggested before, with the archaic being pre- and early Mesolithic, especially from the fringes (extreme North and North East), the "colonisers" late Mesolithic and Neolithic from the Southern parts of Eastern Europe.
The colonisers already had an old West Asian influence probably, being essentially the population which was formed after the Ice Age and the beginning of higher hunter culture and Neolithic culture North of a certain line.
The archaic component can be associated with the mtDNA U5 and U4 in particular.
South European:
Essentially the same as the "early colonisers" before, just for the parts of Europe South of a certain line (around the Alps) where this populations were largely formed.
Again they can be split up in an earlier wave and later coming colonisers.
West Asian:
The orginal core region of Europids from which many waves came to other regions and differentiated from it.
Again, this influence was present in earlier colonisers already, but is largely melted and deviated already, while the later waves are still better recognisable. These can be associated with late Neolithic and Metal Age expansions from the South East-West Asia.
Southwest Asian:
Essentially from the Southern region of Arabia, most likely Afro-Asiatic in origin, spread in the Metal Ages and with Semitic people in Europe, like Phoenicians, Jews, Arabs, but also Metal Age specialists and latest immigrant waves in prehistoric times.
Northeast Asian:
Essentially Siberian people, mostly of Sibirid race in Europe, secondly Tungid (Turko-Mongol) possible.
Came to Europe primarily with Finno-Ugrians/Uralics and Turkic people.
East Asian:
Mostly the same, but more likely to be Turko-Mongol in origin if talking about Europe.
In both "Asian cases", a common and very old Proto-Euromongoloid Siberian component could be present, related to Indianids, too.
Northwest African:
North West African could have come with various people, but most likely being associated with regional inhabitants, the autochthonous people of North Africa.
Like other elements, this could be carried on by different people which made contacts with the North African Europids.
So according to you the Georgians are 98% european, that's insane considering they genetically cluster with Iranians and Turks, and it's higher than most europeans. Besides, the Basques don't have this west-asian component. Yes, this component probably came in the neolithic waves from the near-east, carrying haplogroups E,J,G, mostly. It's not authoctnous europeans. So, the purest europeans are Basques, making them 99% european by adding only South and North components.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa