You'll have to excuse the Slavs. They think they have the answer to everything. 😂
Printable View
ATTENTION PLEASE: FINGOLIA ALARM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKrrJLWCAx0
Oase was just K and lived cca. 37800 ybp, while NO was formed cca. 41500 ybp, so no, nothing descends from him. Also, you cleverly omitted Ust-Ishim man, which was K2a, much older than Oase 1 (45000 ybp), and he lived in Siberia.
So no- N is not native to Europe by any means, as all ancient DNA suggests (no Finnic N1c whatsoever in Mesolithic northern Europe, plus, its ancestral clades today live in Siberia).
They have no resemblance whatsoever, niggerish nose means nothing compared to overall morphology.
According to this http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/palaeolithicdna.shtml, the Oase male was K2a. Still though I do agree with the eastern origin of N1c
No. Finns are more European then Samiis.
Becouse Finnish DNA is influenced different from Samii.
Look it:
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/europ...logroups.shtml
you have 61% N (who originate in Asia, deal with it), but western Finland is more influenced with I (Or R1a or R1b who already mutated into a European group), so this N is not very visible.
I am sorry if you are N by haplogroup, but this haplogroup is not a factor of your European looking. That is I. That is your grandfather !
Here is the list of Slavic Y-haplogroups (various branches of R1a and I2a):
http://www.historycy.org/index.php?s...post&p=1685377
Michał estimates, that in year 1 AD Proto-Slavs numbered just 6000 men!:
http://www.historycy.org/index.php?s...post&p=1683001
Can you imagine? From 6000 to hundreds of millions during just 2000 years!
one of this two was Slavicised, but if Russians and Poles want be "Slavic as fuck" then I2a1 can be Celtic (like Bosnensis claim) or Persian (another one theory from all those "porjeklo Hrvata, Srbina etc.)