It's quite obvious that we are dealing with the kind of E found in Europe, because we were talking about europeans, not about africans. Please, read the thread before embarrassing yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by alzo zero
Printable View
It's quite obvious that we are dealing with the kind of E found in Europe, because we were talking about europeans, not about africans. Please, read the thread before embarrassing yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by alzo zero
Sorry if I upset you. Agrippa has already schooled you enough so I wouldn't be speaking about "embarassing" one's self if I were you. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Iberia
We were actually agreeing pretty much in everything we said. No schooling whatsoever dude. It's about having different interpretations, not about schooling anyone. Even scientists don't agree between them.Quote:
Originally Posted by alzo zero
The West Asian area is a very old cradle of the Europid race, so more than one wave left it at different times, never forget that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iberia
So an earlier wave was melted into the "Northern colonisers", a later being still better recognisable - and a lot stood behind.
You get it? There were waves of distinguished Northern strains back too, but the major movements went in one direction, from the West Asian cradle in all directions.
I would like to know what exact kind of Northern European, because the longer term isolation and drift made them special, hard to split up like Sardinians.Quote:
On the other hand, Basques lack any west or southwest asian, yet they are 40% northern-european.
Yet I guess they have their fair share of the early Mesolithic colonisers from the East, those which, most likely, brought the R1b too.
How the West Asian component was crucial in forming the racially and culturally more progressive "Northern colonisers" might be explainable through this archaeologically researched process:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...3&postcount=22
Do you think the South West Asian came through the Caucasus into Eastern Europe, especially the Black Sea region, in the late Mesolithic and early Neolithic?Quote:
Im pretty sure the west-asian and southwest component came to Europe at about the same period.
Spain is highly differentiated by regions in this respect though.Quote:
The known least neolithic countries in Europe, like Spain or Portugal, have also the least west-asian of all Western Europe. While the known countries with more neolithic admixture have the highest west-asian (Sicilians, South-Italians, Greeks, Balkans). Also, the least southwestasian of all southern Europe is in Spain.
Ever looked at the individual results of general samples or Dodecad participants?
Also, Belorussians have about as much West Asian, but much less South West Asian than the Spaniards.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PQgoNZLt0J...MIXTURE_10.png
Also compare the 12-component analysis, only Basque is slightly closer to North Western in this run than West Asian, this shows a very clear relation:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-po3ry04KyL...MIXTURE_12.png
Whereas North Eastern became more of a representant of the fringe-archaic Mesolithics in it, being fairly distant from virtually all the rest, but still closest to NW, which is the "early coloniser component" with different roots-closer relations (especially Basque, West Asian, Sardinian) in this run in my opinion.
Also note that West Asian was shrinking, with more of it being inclusive in North Western I guess.
Note the different ratios of WA vs. SWA then.
I think some things will be just revealed if more of the ancient DNA was tested, like here:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05...somal-dna.html
No, I don't think, because the Caucasas have small SWA. The southwest-asian came from the near-east, from areas already high in West-asian component, such as levantines, mesopotamians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
They have more west-asian because they are much closer to the area of neolithic invasions. We are probably dealing with different routes, one north of the caucasus towards the rest of Europe, and another route via Anatolia towards the Balkans and Central-Europe. The southwest asian in spaniards, which is very small at least for south-european standards, it's probably due to a combination of Romans, and ancient neolithic movements through the sea.Quote:
Also, Belorussians have about as much West Asian, but much less South West Asian than the Spaniards.
Yet I would guess, in the crucial late Mesolithic and early Neolithic period, they hadn't...Quote:
No, I don't think, because the Caucasas have small SWA.
So in a nutshell, because Iberia has little neolithic influence, you now feel obliged to call other Europeans "non-European" in order to elevate your own grouping. This is nonsense. European culture and civilization was formed and spread by neolithic Greek culture. What is more European than that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iberia
No, im not calling other non-europeans, only the west-asian component, otherwise we might also consider the southwest asian as european, when the two came in about the same period, and outside of Europe. The west-asian component is representative of ancient Anatolian/caucasus/Iranid populations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Well that is the same. Many, if not most, Europeans seem to have 10-15% West Asian. So ... we are all mongrels and not pure Europeans, except for the glorious Spaniards?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iberia
So you mean to say that classical European civilization was essentially Iranid? Ahmadinejad would be pleased.
Yes indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
The West Asian cluster is the closest to Europeans and especially Northern European component, and unlike the South West Asian component it's not dragged into SSA Africa. This does seem to be the case for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
Indeed West Asian component does seem to have strong relationship to the Northern European component. What is interesting about it does not fall anywhere else or draged into other places, but rather into Europe. Showing a close relationship between West Asians and Europeans. Today the most European looking people outside of Europe tend to live in the Caucasus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
These groups mentioned Bedouins, Yemenite Jews, Saudis, and Iraqis score very high levels of the South West Asian component some are even 100% a large number, and some have higher but no less than 85%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
What is interesting it seems to fall once it hits Northern Iraq and Syria even among the Arab populations, and in Anatolia and other regions there is very minimal of the South West Asian component. In the Caucasus it becomes 0%. The expansion of the South West Asian component might be linked to the spread of the Semitic languages that might have originated in Arabia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
The West Asian is probably the closest West Eurasian cluster outside of Europe and they are the closest people related to Europeans. It's the South West Asian cluster that is very distantly related to Europeans, and it peaks heavily among Arabians but it dwindles in the Northern Middle East.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki