Prehistoric Romanian (~40,000 years old) in GEDmatch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daco Celtic

Romania is also the center for Eastern wisdom. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism started in Romania land and went east back to India.

---

That result is not much different then a gypsy, even if a gypsy is a more modern phenomenon something similar existed 40.000 years back then, before whites. So a Gypsy can be a European, i mean if those genetics can be ancient european why not gypsy genetics? Usually people exclude gypsies because of their genetics. Also in another thread someone said Sunghir was gypsy like too, and Sunghir is the proto-caucasian cromagnid or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aherne

Based on reconstructions he looked somewhat similar to certain Moluccans: a mix of australoid and proto-mongoloid. Totally alien face here...

---

Ancient Malakas ?

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 28.53
2 East_Asian 18.24
3 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 16.79
4 Natufian 15.61
5 Sub_Saharan 11.06
6 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 9.77

Actually that is not similar to a Gypsy, too much east asian, too much SSA, and all that... a gypsy would be mostly farmer, with some whg etc. and indo-european, eventhough both have a similar amount of south indian, but the other components do not fit, that proto-romanian was much less white then a gypsy even....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petalpusher

Neanderthal admix also comes out SSA in calculators, but really what it means, is more genetically archaic/older, so it has to choose something. SSA and Oceanians nowadays are the closest to that. In the same even more extreme way, Chimps score full SSA as well. It needs to show 100% of something regardless if it's that close or not.

---

Then they are using SSA as a basket for anything out of database. ERROR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sacrificed Ram

Then they are using SSA as a basket for anything out of database. ERROR.

---

Not willingly, African SSA is more archaic, makes all very old samples or Neanderthal look African in calculators and Oase had a fairly recent Neanderthal ancestor, estimated at up to 10% Neanderthal (that's possibly almost 1/8). Africans also have ancestry from a ghost archaic not yet discovered. On top of all that, Eurasians acquired new genotype progressively from genuine selection/evolution, the infamous 10 000 years explosion in the pleistocene. The results we see is likely a combination of both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petalpusher

Not willingly, African SSA is more archaic, makes all very old samples or Neanderthal look African in calculators and Oase had a fairly recent Neanderthal ancestor, estimated at up to 10% Neanderthal (that's possibly almost 1/8). Africans also have ancestry from a ghost archaic not yet discovered. On top of all that, Eurasians acquired new genotype progressively from genuine selection/evolution, the infamous 10 000 years explosion in the pleistocene. The results we see is likely a combination of both.

---

Even if I put the DNA of an orange it will score 100% SSA, due the absence of data, the algorithmic will find the most basal data in databank and SSA is the most basal. Neanderthal has noting special content to relate them with SSA, just it is a fail of chip/database used.

But an interesting result is if Nigeria/Cameroon area shows the most basal data, it tend to be the source of humans, even because it makes sense because in this area is also founding the most basal Y-DNA like A0 and even A00.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sacrificed Ram

Even if I put the DNA of an orange it will score 100% SSA, due the absence of data, the algorithmic will find the most basal data in databank and SSA is the most basal. Neanderthal has noting special content to relate them with SSA, just it is a fail of chip/database used.

But an interesting result is if Nigeria/Cameroon area shows the most basal data, it tend to be the source of humans, even because it makes sense because in this area is also founding the most basal Y-DNA like A0 and even A00.

---

Certainly an orange would score SSA, that orange still share 50% or so of dna with us. Before hominids there were chimps, mamal primates, etc.. and if you go back enough through all living branches... plants/fruits. So even if Africans are ever so slightly closer than all other humans to that, it will show up as SSA. Neanderthals are the oldest things we have therefore they score full SSA, despite the fact Africans are the least Neanderthal admixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petalpusher

Certainly an orange would score SSA, that orange still share 50% or so of dna with us. Before hominids there were chimps, mamal primates, etc.. and if you go back enough through all living branches... plants/fruits. So even if Africans are ever so slightly closer than all other humans to that, it will show up as SSA. Neanderthals are the oldest things we have therefore they score full SSA, despite the fact Africans are the least Neanderthal admixed.

---

It just shows algorithmic must be improved, because it isn't capable to identify a so divergent comparison as SSA is from Neanderthal.