Printable View
http://185.144.156.77:3000/
You need Global 25 Coordinates to run this nMonte. It is an Auto-Run program with only 4-Way population mixture. For more combinations you need to donate to sponsor. Once you have your coordinates you need to submit them to user Poi(on anthro) to be added to the program.
I can't seem to get fits closer than 2-3 unfortunately.
Moderns:
https://s8.postimg.cc/xmvem159x/arbn1.png
Ancients:
https://s8.postimg.cc/8tlulnox1/ancientarb.png
You need to keep mixing different samples.
I use it too. Is this scaled or unscaled?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
also, do you know how to use nMonte yourself?
I'm still getting good results.
Model Sample Sample Age BCE Fit Austrian English Iranian Persian Ukraine N O
1 Austrian +English +Iranian_Persian +Ukraine_N_o Custom_-_AGUser_mixed 1.5138 52.5 34.17 9.17 4.17
Been trying. With limited user access/samples I imagine I can't get it much closer. A user on anthro got it to 1.9 on his closest run. Same modern samples with I think one ancient.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slavic Italian
I'm using limited. Keep trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
Unscaled I believe. I can never seem to get the program to work. Idk what I am doing wrong. Followed all the tutorials. Still receive errors/crashes on my own runs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gründig
So far I am pleased with this calc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
It is a little closer now: According to one paper the Lasinja sample is from Croatia from the Vucedol culture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slavic Italian
https://s8.postimg.cc/c6yom0kph/arb2.png
You do realize that some of the populations on the data sheet are ancient and some are modern, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
This is the closest I can get it:
https://s8.postimg.cc/mv2fkz505/fit3.png
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
I had these problems too. When do the issues occur?
Yea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gründig
This is actually fairly close. Rotate out Trabzon with other samples. Two Greek samples are hurting your distance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
I'm going to suggest switching out Trabzon with other Balkan samples in your case. Keep the other three samples as is and rotate all other Balkan samples and see if you get a closer fit. I bet you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arborean
Can you please help me for the run this program? I don't have a computer and i use android phone.
That is a real pain in the ass. You need a computer. Can you even get the proper internet servers on your phone?Quote:
Originally Posted by canadienne
no way it's so hard thank you so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slavic Italian
I messed around with the "individual" populations with nMonte3 on R for awhile and got this:
[1] "distance%=0.8726"
_S (unscaled)
German,58.2
Shetlandic,13.4
English,9.4
Austrian,8.8
Moldovan,6.6
Albanian,2
Ju_hoan_North,1.6
I was told a solid distance to aim for is between .5% and 1%.
I always get a little Moldovan when using Davids calculators, not sure why. The Ju_hoan_North may be noise.
Surprisingly you can use Poi's calculator on your phone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slavic Italian
I think anything under 2% is good. Those numbers are outstanding. I do not believe in noise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gründig
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slavic Italian
It could be under 2%, im not sure. It all depends if you're using scaled or unscaled and also which data sheet. I used unscaled and individual references which naturally has a little bit smaller of a distance. Im not sure what Poi's calculator uses. From reading the eurogenes blog, i think between 2% and 3% is what you want for scaled coordinates.
I said it may be noise because im just repeating what i was told by david and a few others who ran my coordinates. It doesn't matter too much to me either way.
This is what he sent me scaled. I have gotten closer fits unscaled on my own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gründig
[1] "distance%=1.9074"
English,48.2
Ukrainian,26.6
Sephardic_Jew,25.2
This is what poi says.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gründig
So many factors play into what is "great", not just the mathematical fit. Assuming all else being of the same quality, fit distance 0% is the optimal. But anything below 2% is great. Unrealistic outgroups could also lower the fit distance, but the quality of the selection is bad, despite mathematical fit being awesome. When it comes to fit distance of 0.5% vs 1%, it is a wash. Both are great, assuming the outgroups are realistic. IMO of course.
There's no two ways about it.
You have to proceed with caution.
There's a reason, after all, why it's called "Runner." You can easily run things up and can change up things to quickly make things bigger, better and more impressive.
In other words: Results look better, (look) more substantial, and (look) much more impressive than they actually are.
Data manipulation and/or fabrication.
Fakery and manipulation of content to suit agendas and preferences.
And so now I'm reading that even the "steppe ancestry" scores for South Asians (or Indians) are inflated.
And they are likely inflated because CHG/Iran is, or is increasingly being, lumped together with Yamnaya.
Now, that is nonsense. That is disingenuous and misleading and they know it, or should know it.
In other words, they (Steppe ancestry scores) have been overreported/exaggerated, but it's anyone's guess as to how much or to what extent.
I would go as far as to say they are over the top and they have been grossly inflated and exaggerated and distorted.
These things should not be lumped together, and least of all when it comes to testing and when it interferes with the Steppe or Yamnaya component.
Indeed, it should be avoided, even when they are clearly related, as they are here, and even if they (IVC/Iran and Aryans) are virtually inseparable and are a true family, as pointed out here. True cousins.
Importantly this study points out that CHG/Iran was genetically so different from EHG and WHG that it must have remained isolated from them during most of the Upper Paleolithic. And that, in some genomes, CHG is mixed together with a small amount of EHG. Which in turn suggests a contact between CHG and the EHG from the steppes earlier than the Yamnaya period. Most likely, it says, the CHG/Iran element in Yamnaya ancestry was derived from a population living in eastern Anatolia already during the Neolithic. Thus, from the above assumptions, CHG in Bronze Age Anatolian samples does not imply steppe ancestry, and the CHG/Iran element in the Yamnaya admixture should come from a third source. So far, it goes on to say, an ancestor for the CHG/Iran element present in Yamnaya has not been identified.
See this meme: https://i.imgflip.com/6lm223.jpg, https://i.ibb.co/m4yNtqx/bha.jpg
Apparently you can make this stuff up.
It just makes no sense. People can just make shit up, and unless you can address and/or debunk them, they'll just keep churning or replaying it "over and over again" causing severe and debilitating emotional distress including depression, loss of sleep, humiliation, anxiety, and shame.
:picard1::picard2::crazy::speechless-smiley-0:2headsalt::icon_mad::icon_arghhh::Pruegelknabe:
I'll post more details later, but you can read more about it here and here.
AND ALSO HERE TO CHALLENGE THINGS, OR TO CHALLENGE THE WAY THINGS HAVE BEEN DONE:
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...29#post7518729
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...81#post7519381
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7533603
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...92#post7530192
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7500972
And I'm "not okay" with things being exaggerated. It's not OK with me. :no::comp26::aufsmaul_2:Quote:
Originally Posted by VikLevaPatel
Every (Nmonte) runner is of course unique, but they may appear meltingly indistinct. One of these Genoplot NMONTE calculators, described as a "steppe ancestry" estimator for South Asians, states that it calculates 'non-inflated' steppe numbers for South Asians. This certainly implies that "steppe ancestry" scores are being twisted and manipulated and increased.
I think we could now be rating it either non-inflated (Good job!) or inflated (That sounded magnificent!).
And just as DNA can be manipulated in the laboratory. Perhaps this should come as no surprise.
I'm always quite careful about what I post. And I know I'm quite right about things, but how quickly I get proven as such is frankly, unnerving. And I keep getting it right every time and keep being proven "right" just about every time.
See this post for more details.
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7535512
To me, that was almost as unsettling as the earthquake.
You can also rack up high scores on the Genoplot site pretty easily, to the extent that you start to sound like a mindless Liberal robot! Look at this inchworm and beta cuck from India and at the comments he's made, even going so far as to claim that "lower castes like Yadavs are 20% IE and even Southern Indian Dalits are 12% IE."
This guy is suffering from something that is very Indian. He is suffering from an inferiority complex, a massive, chronic, nagging, crippling inferiority complex.
See this post: https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7528434
And while not recommending against using the Genoplot site, I certainly urge users "to exercise caution" and to exercise the "utmost caution". On the contrary, I fully recommend using the excellent Genoplot site or app to add finishing touches to your genealogical project.