Iberian DNA haplogroups from 20,000-4,340 years ago exactly like modern Europeans

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

Finns are non Indo Europeans and have a very small amount of ancestry from Indo European speakers. R1a1a1b1 Z284 was spread in Europe by Corded ware culture, its is very rare in Scandinavia but around 20-30% in Norway-Sweden. R1b L11 may have been spread by Indo Europeans and almost all of the R1b in Finland is found in western Finland and probably from mixing with Swedes. In my opinion Finnish mainly descend from Uralic's who came in the copper or bronze age from Russia or somewhere else in eastern Europe. mtDNA and Y DNA from hunter gatherers of Scandinavia and mtDNA from hunter gatherers of Karelia show little evidence of genetic continuum with the people there today. mtDNA of Finland is mainly European farmer descended. There is mtDNA J1c, J2b1a, J2a1a1a, T2b, H5, H1, K1, K2, etc. like in the rest of Europe. There is a high amount of U5 in Finland but the majority is under U5b1b1a or U5b1b2 both estimated to be about 4,000 years old and I have heard may have originated in eastern Europe. The U5's from Scandinavians and Karelia hunter gatherers was all U5a. There Is close to 0% I2a1 in Scandinavia and hardly any I2a1b, so the first settlers of Scandinavia left hardily any blood in modern Scandinavians. Finnish and Sami though have about the highest about of European hunter gatherer ancestry overall it definitely takes up the majority of their ancestry.

---

You actually believe all this? :bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ukko

You actually believe all this? :bored:

---

It is all true, so yeah. Why in the world would you believe Finns have the most Indo European ancestry when all evidence says the opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthropologique

I agree. Another reason why an increasing number of informed people believe Celticity may have first spread along the Atlantic Facade - Iberia to Scotland.

---

But according to this theory The Megalithic people who settled Iberia, and the British Isles were Celts, resulting ultimately from the Neolithic farmer settlement of the Mediterranean, so this theory basically supports the Anatolian hypothesis of Indoeuropean origins which has a lot of problems with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

so i have probably mainly R1b L11 INdo European ancestry because i have red hair that is why if u look atwhere my name is and it mentions ethnicty i but over 60% R1b L11 Indo European

---

Ouh, I respect your interest in genetics and the work of your threads but you might want to be more cautious in asserting such vague things, sometimes the mind wants to find a reason, a placement order for all kind of things and does lead us to erroneous theories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

even though iberians and italiens have mainly Y DNA R1b L11 subclades that does not means they have mainly R1b L11 Indo European ancestry the reason why they have so much is that when Celtic people migrated to Iberia about 3,000ybp they won most of teh wars and conquered most of Iberia because they had superior iron weapons and the Celts who had R1b killed off the old Y DNA haplogroups like I2a1a1 and G2a so then most Iberian got R1b even though the Celts in Iberia where genetically mainly Iberia they still had Celtic R1b and Celtic culture and they though of themselves as Celts most of spain before Rome conquered them spoke a Celtic language but the Celts did not completly conquer spain not all of it was celtic and many parts where celt iberians because neither group could conquer each other

---

Alexdelarge is trying to tell you that the areas of Spain with the highest R1b are the Iberian, not the Celts areas, so the R1B rained from heaven or was not brought there by the Celts. You may want to remodel your theory because Alex is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

the reason why R1b is so popular in Italy but red hair is not is because the Italian speakers migrated to Italy about 3,100ybp they quikley conquered most of it because they had iron weapons but like in Spain they inter married alot and quikley became mainly like the people who already lived there but they still kept R1b and the language but red hair still exsists in north spain and northern italy

---

Red hair is presents in the whole Spain, including the South but for my fun the place that most natural redheads shows that I know are Alicante and Valencia, both old Iberian areas with not Celts settlements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

It is all true, so yeah. Why in the world would you believe Finns have the most Indo European ancestry when all evidence says the opposite.

---

I used "Indo-Europeans", as Im not claiming we speak that pidgin.

If you think that Iberians are genetically or culturally closer to ancient East Eurasian pastoralists than Finnics, I cant help but to disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lábaru

Ouh, I respect your interest in genetics and the work of your threads but you might want to be more cautious in asserting such vague things, sometimes the mind wants to find a reason, a placement order for all kind of things and does lead us to erroneous theories.



Alexdelarge is trying to tell you that the areas of Spain with the highest R1b are the Iberian, not the Celts areas, so the R1B rained from heaven or was not brought there by the Celts. You may want to remodel your theory because Alex is right.




Red hair is presents in the whole Spain, including the South but for my fun the place that most natural redheads shows that I know are Alicante and Valencia, both old Iberian areas with not Celts settlements.

---

Your arguing with myself from 6 months ago I don't exactly think the same things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ukko

I used "Indo-Europeans", as Im not claiming we speak that pidgin.

If you think that Iberians are genetically or culturally closer to ancient East Eurasian pastoralists than Finnics, I cant help but to disagree.

---

Why do you think Finnish are the most Indo European genetically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

Why do you think Finnish are the most Indo European genetically.

---

I said more than most Europeans, Im not claiming first place in a hypothetical competition, NE Europeans are all very much alike.

What is the genetical composition you imagine they had?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

In my opinion Finnish mainly descend from Uralic's who came in the copper or bronze age from Russia or somewhere else in eastern Europe.

---

Who else was living in "Russia and else in Eastern Europe" during Copper Age ? :D

Hint: Proto-Indo-Europeans.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4fyGtwWJTM...preironage.png
HG = Eastern and Central Europen hunter-gathers (dimension is created by mtdna U4 and U5)
KUR-BA (Bronze Age Steppe Kurgan builders aka ARYANS).
KR = Karelians
MO = Mordvinians
UD = Udmurts
KO = Komi
FIN = Finns

All of the Finno-Ugric posse is closer to Steppe Kurgan builders AND Central/Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers than ANY other European populations. PIEs were our brothers from the same mothers.

Title: Mitochondrial DNA in ancient human populations of Europe.
Author: Dersarkissian, Clio Simone Irmgard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hweinlant

Who else was living in "Russia and else in Eastern Europe" during Copper Age ? :D

Hint: Proto-Indo-Europeans.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4fyGtwWJTM...preironage.png
HG = Eastern and Central Europen hunter-gathers (dimension is created by mtdna U4 and U5)
KUR-BA (Bronze Age Steppe Kurgan builders aka ARYANS).
KR = Karelians
MO = Mordvinians
UD = Udmurts
KO = Komi
FIN = Finns

All of the Finno-Ugric posse is closer to Steppe Kurgan builders AND Central/Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers than ANY other European populations. PIEs were our brothers from the same mothers.

Title: Mitochondrial DNA in ancient human populations of Europe.
Author: Dersarkissian, Clio Simone Irmgard

---

Just look at the mtDNA your self don't trust PCA graphs Ancient Eurasian DNA organized 2, Ancestral Journeys. mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e probably dominated almost all European hunter gatherers during the Mesolithic. U5's lineage came to Europe over 30,000 years ago(proven by ancient mtDNA) subclades of U5 really matter. All 13 of the 13 subclades from U5 of the bronze and iron age kurgan people of Asia(Indo Iranians) was under U5a the vast majority of U5 in Finnish is under U5b so no connection there. All 28 of 28 pre historic U5 samples from Ukraine and Russia had U5a so once again no connection. There is also a high amount of U4 and U2e in Mesolithic people of Russia(including Karelia) while both those haplogroups are almost completely non existent in Finnish-Sami, so once again no maternal connection. Finnish have a very low amount of R1a1a1 M417 and R1b L11(Swedish inter marriage) so low amount of Indo European paternal ancestry. Finnish are dominated by N1c1(probably connected with Uralic languages in Europe), and I1a2 L22(non Germanic and non Uralic source). I have just started learning about the possible origins of Finnish-Sami it makes the most sense to me to say they came from Russia in the copper age. Who knows there may be a genetic connection with early Indo Europeans of Russia but maybe not, I haven't seen any evidence yet.