Are Cretans Levantines (genetically)?

[Sikeliot]

This is far more accurate, where the Greeks up near Kosovars and Tuscans are the mainlanders, and those down near southern Italians would be all of your Cretans and islanders. If you see the real plot, it is not that Greeks plot the whole spectrum there, there is one cluster near the top, one near the bottom and a big gap... it only looks like this because someone drew a box around all of them.

[brennus dux gallorum]

As you could see from some results (Epirote, Thessalian, Istanbul Greek) some Greeks are indeed closer to Bulgarian than to Sicilian (they do not have enough Near Eastern admixture to be identical to Sicily) and others are closer to people much north of that (Tuscan for instance) or Albanian. So no, it is not true that Italians are closer to Greeks than are Albanians.



A few points. "West Sicily" on there is Trapani and that region is outlying as a whole. If you used Palermo or Agrigento you'd find it would be the most Near Eastern out of everyone (though it would have more to do with SW Asian and North African being higher rather than Caucasian).



What does this have to do with what he said? He said Peloponnesian and southern Balkan, and neither group plots close to Sicilian anyway but way north of them so what he said could still be true with you getting Sicilian above Turkish.

Italians are not sicilians, to begin with. Also 90% of Greek regions plot closer to parts of the Italian Peninsula than Bulgaria and balkans

[Sikeliot]

Italians are not sicilians, to begin with. Also 90% of Greek regions plot closer to parts of the Italian Peninsula than Bulgaria and balkans

Ok let's put it this way. Most mainland Greeks are like Tuscans to Apulians but shifted east toward Bulgaria because of their higher NE European than any Italians have. But surely you can agree when you compare Bulgaria to Sicily most mainland Greeks are intermediate between the two.

Can you at least agree to that?

[Sikeliot]

There was an article written on Haaretz about this. I find this funny, what I bolded. Why would this not be expected when it is exactly what everyone has known for years?

http://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/1.798089

"The scientists did find the expected degree of genetic continuity extending from Sicily to Cyprus.

The scientists were not expecting to find that the people in the Greek islands appear genetically closer to southern Italians than to the people in continental Greece.

Meanwhile, the mainland Greeks, including the Peloponnese in southern Greece, had become slightly differentiated. They clustered with populations from the southern Balkans, including Kosovo and Albania."

[Laberia]

Italy is almost always the closest foreign distance in Greek results, meanwhile Greece is genetically (and from most of aspects) non balkanic population, in contrast to what you said in your post

Italians are not sicilians, to begin with. Also 90% of Greek regions plot closer to parts of the Italian Peninsula than Bulgaria and balkans

If we accept your posts, than we have to ask you: When your ancestors arrived in Balkans and from what place?

[brennus dux gallorum]

Ok let's put it this way. Most mainland Greeks are like Tuscans to Apulians but shifted east toward Bulgaria because of their higher NE European than any Italians have. But surely you can agree when you compare Bulgaria to Sicily most mainland Greeks are intermediate between the two.

Can you at least agree to that?

I agree with that, but if you know that this is the truth, why do you insist with that "Balkan " thing in all of your posts?

BTW I also find it funny to post such "accurate academic articles" like the above, after so many academic studies or individual results here

The first island they show is Santorini, in cyclades, and cyclades as you know are according to no study closer to South Italy than to Greece

Have you ever seen results from lesvos? There is nothing closer to South Italy than to Greece

[brennus dux gallorum]

BTW I have just entered the original academic article in nature, that inspired this bs in haaretz and it already provides much different things from what haaretz suggests

First of all, it speaks about particular islands, NOT Santorini or cyclades like the idiots of haaretz suggest

Second, it separates Greece from most of what is known as balkans, it doesn't associate them

Also it seems to overemphasize that "south Italians are closer to Greek Islands than to mainland" but not vice versa

[Sikeliot]

Also it seems to overemphasize that "south Italians are closer to Greek Islands than to mainland" but not vice versa

I think the better way of saying it is, "Aegean islanders are often closer to southern Italians than to mainland Greeks" or that they are closer to one another, but as I have pointed out, many North Aegean and Cyclades islanders are intermediate between Sicily/Crete and mainland Greece.

[Tauromachos]

...but as I have pointed out, many North Aegean and Cyclades islanders are intermediate between Sicily/Crete and mainland Greece.

So?
They are close to Mainland Greece as well,and you must admit even to your own words and theories:
There is no real gap between the Islands and the Mainland!

It is a bullshit you made up and even contradicts other things you are saying yourself.

[MysteriousWays]

The bolded parts make sense. So Cretans can be modelled as 60-70% Cypriot + 30-40% mainland Greek basically, which makes them closer to Cypriots. I was right when I said they cluster between Cypriots and mainlands, though they are closer to Cypriots.

If this is actually a Cretan, it is a large outlier.