4 Charts of Autosomal DNA Ancestry Components of Indo-European Ethno-Linguistic Groups/Subdivisions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wandal

You are just copying and pasting from very speculative and often biased sources which were more propaganda than scientific.
For example "Pre-Greek Anatolian=Armenid" Ridiculous.

---

Pre-Greek Anatolian groups like the Hittites were overwhelmingly Armenid, so I don’t see the controversy in stating that Pre-Greek Anatolian=Armenid, as I thought this was one of the most obvious of my pairings of Autosomal DNA Ancestry Components in the Charts I posted with their dominant Subrace/Phenotype, out of curiosity do you agree with any of my pairings, :confused3::icon_ask::confused:?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Lear

Pre-Greek Anatolian groups like the Hittites were overwhelmingly Armenid

---

According to whose opinion?
It's nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Lear

I originally had both Proto-Baltic and Proto-Slavic=Osteuropid/East Europid and East Nordid, which is probably more accurate and I will probably edit it back to that after reading your In-depth critique citing Schwidetzky’s work, but the reason I removed East Nordid as one of the dominant Subraces amongst Proto-Slavs and Proto-Balts, is due to the fact that the Osteuropid/East Europid Subrace is a stabilized mixture of East Nordids and Lappids, that first emerged when Balto-Slavic Indo-Europeans first mixed with Uralic people in Northeastern Europe around 4000 years ago, so I thought it was redundant to mention it because Osteuropids/East Europids are partially East Nordid by definition, with the same logic applying to why I removed East Nordid from the Proto-Iranian, Proto-Indo-Aryan, and Tocharian components as well, because Iranids (an Orientalid variety that are basically Arabids with slight East Nordid admixture from the Indo-European migration of Iranian tribes to the Iranian plateau and southern Central Asia 3000-3500 years ago), North Indids (an Indid variety that is essentially a stabilized mixture of Iranids and Gracile Indids that emerged during the Indo-European migration of Indo-Aryans to the Northern Indian subcontinent 3500 years ago), and Turanids (a stabilized Europid-Mongolid Transitional Subrace that combines Iranid, East Nordid, and Tungid elements, that slowly emerged in Central Asia over the past 3000 years of interactions between Indo-European, Turkic, and Mongolic populations) all involved East Nordids in their formation, :):p:thumb001::ranger!

---

Eickstedt’s ‘East Europid’ is not any kind of late stabilized mix (there is no genetic evidence (neither autosomal nor Y-chromosome) for all Slavs having absorbed any Finno-Ugric groups, let alone the Sámi). Czekanowski already proved over 100 years ago at the Anthropological Conference in Helsinki that Osteuropid is nothing other than the Paleo-Europid (Cro-Magnon type). Genetically, this Cro-Magnon surplus in the Baltic refugium is very pronounced. It is also worth noting that this Baltic hunter-gatherer and his close relative from Motala are the primary source of depigmentation in Northern Europe.

The situation with the descendants of the Andronovo culture is completely different, and their centuries-long coexistence with non-European populations is a genetically confirmed fact. Nevertheless, for example, Afghans remain the closest living non-European genetic relatives of Northern European populations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cass

Eickstedt’s ‘East Europid’ is not any kind of late stabilized mix (there is no genetic evidence (neither autosomal nor Y-chromosome) for all Slavs having absorbed any Finno-Ugric groups, let alone the Sámi). Czekanowski already proved over 100 years ago at the Anthropological Conference in Helsinki that Osteuropid is nothing other than the Paleo-Europid (Cro-Magnon type). Genetically, this Cro-Magnon surplus in the Baltic refugium is very pronounced. It is also worth noting that this Baltic hunter-gatherer and his close relative from Motala are the primary source of depigmentation in Northern Europe.

---

Eickstedt clearly states that the Osteuropid/East Europid is a Contact/Intermediate form between Nordid and Lappid, in this quote on Pg. 368-369 of “Rassenkunde Und Rassengeschichte Der Menschheit”, :):p:thumb001::ranger:

“Although the Osteuropids are a homogeneous somatic form circle today, this must not have been the case in ancient times of racial history. This restriction provides a room for consolidation with those who do not recognize the Osteuropid independence. Because MongolOid traits (similiar to those of Mongolids) can be noticed in Osteuropids, next to their distinct traits. On the other hand there are several, even more numerous, Europid traits, thus these individuals must be considered part of the Europid racial circle. Those “Mongoloidisms” one may see in the oblique eye-openings and the forward-deployed cheekbones. How can their emergence be explained? Is it the result of an independent mutation (or as a better term, a peristatic transformation, in the way of Osborn, 1927) of a Europid population, e.g. one out of the short-headed belt? Osteuropids are short-headed. But this is just a hypothesis.

Not an hypothesis but reality is that Osteuropids live and have lived in the borderlands of Europids and Mongolids and it is not just an assumption but an obvious fact that everywhere were great races meet each other vast areas of contact forms can be found. Even at the time of the emergences of the modern races – which are anything but static and stable constants – in those areas those various tendencies of differentiatial development already interacted. This does not concern, like it was already hinted at with the blond hair of the Nordics, the groups of today we can unite as races because of their trait combinations, but simply a form circle that has the biological and geographical potential to develop into them. As strictly as one must deny the term “Mongolian admixture” when it comes to the Osteuropids of today; when it comes to racial history it is entirely possible (and in my opinion the only explanation of the obvious facts) that the early occurance of heritage tendencies we can call “Mongoloidisms” played a part in the formation of the Osteuropid type. Transistional traits and races exist, there is no clear cut in nature in the way we would want to have (and need) it when working in our labratories or at our desks. Following the racial movements in the European space will provide the geographical opposition to the described genetic approach. The Osteuropids are thus a typical intermediate form, an independently differentiated and developed body form group out of the contact area of the North-Europid-directed and “East Asian”-influenced proto-Hominids.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Lear

Eickstedt clearly states that the Osteuropid/East Europid is a Contact/Intermediate form between Nordid and Lappid, in this quote on Pg. 368-369 of “Rassenkunde Und Rassengeschichte Der Menschheit”, :):p:thumb001::ranger:

“Although the Osteuropids are a homogeneous somatic form circle today, this must not have been the case in ancient times of racial history. This restriction provides a room for consolidation with those who do not recognize the Osteuropid independence. Because MongolOid traits (similiar to those of Mongolids) can be noticed in Osteuropids, next to their distinct traits. On the other hand there are several, even more numerous, Europid traits, thus these individuals must be considered part of the Europid racial circle. Those “Mongoloidisms” one may see in the oblique eye-openings and the forward-deployed cheekbones. How can their emergence be explained? Is it the result of an independent mutation (or as a better term, a peristatic transformation, in the way of Osborn, 1927) of a Europid population, e.g. one out of the short-headed belt? Osteuropids are short-headed. But this is just a hypothesis.

Not an hypothesis but reality is that Osteuropids live and have lived in the borderlands of Europids and Mongolids and it is not just an assumption but an obvious fact that everywhere were great races meet each other vast areas of contact forms can be found. Even at the time of the emergences of the modern races – which are anything but static and stable constants – in those areas those various tendencies of differentiatial development already interacted. This does not concern, like it was already hinted at with the blond hair of the Nordics, the groups of today we can unite as races because of their trait combinations, but simply a form circle that has the biological and geographical potential to develop into them. As strictly as one must deny the term “Mongolian admixture” when it comes to the Osteuropids of today; when it comes to racial history it is entirely possible (and in my opinion the only explanation of the obvious facts) that the early occurance of heritage tendencies we can call “Mongoloidisms” played a part in the formation of the Osteuropid type. Transistional traits and races exist, there is no clear cut in nature in the way we would want to have (and need) it when working in our labratories or at our desks. Following the racial movements in the European space will provide the geographical opposition to the described genetic approach. The Osteuropids are thus a typical intermediate form, an independently differentiated and developed body form group out of the contact area of the North-Europid-directed and “East Asian”-influenced proto-Hominids.”

---

This only shows how idiotic Eickstedt’s theses were. Genetically, there are no Asian traces in the core Slavic population.

https://i.ibb.co/QFVJbX24/Zrzut-ekra...ringer-com.jpg

source: Genes reveal traces of common recent demographic history for most of the Uralic-speaking populations
Published: 21 September 2018
Volume 19, article number 139, (2018)

Ale czy Czekanowski (1934) był w błędzie gdy postawił taką hipotezę, że Europejczycy ze wschodu wykazali wpływ lapanoidalny? Co miał na myślę?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wandal

Ale czy Czekanowski (1934) był w błędzie gdy postawił taką hipotezę, że Europejczycy ze wschodu wykazali wpływ lapanoidalny? Co miał na myślę?

---

Yes and no. He likely identified the Alpine/Laponoid core of Central Europe correctly. In Czekanowski’s view, this core referred to the mountain belt stretching from France to the Carpathians. No, because—like all anthropologists of his time—he relied on the idea of the relative stability of anthropometric traits. In reality, however, within-population (environmental) plasticity plays a much greater role than external influences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cass

This only shows how idiotic Eickstedt’s theses were. Genetically, there are no Asian traces in the core Slavic population.

https://i.ibb.co/QFVJbX24/Zrzut-ekra...ringer-com.jpg

source: Genes reveal traces of common recent demographic history for most of the Uralic-speaking populations
Published: 21 September 2018
Volume 19, article number 139, (2018)

---

This study still shows that Eickstedt was right that Osteuropids/East Europids have Lappid influence due to mixing with Uralic people, particularly in Finland and Northern Russia, though I will admit that it is probably more accurate to describe Osteuropids/East Europids as a stabilized East Nordid-Alpinid-Lappid mixture instead of just a stabilized East Nordid-Lappid mixture, :):p:thumb001::ranger!