Scandinavian origin of Rurik confirmed

[Finnish Swede]

They aren't real Scandinavians either. Just people we enslaved or let in because they had stuff we wanted like metal.

So for you, ''the real Scandinavians'' (men) are I1 ?

Rethel tried to convince me opposite ... with bad results.

[Token]

No, he is from before the ancestors of East Eurasians and West Eurasians completely split and closer to Kostenki 14 (Caucasoid) than modern East Asians.

Do you even know the basics dude? Tianyuan is temporally closer to Kostenki, but biologically closer to modern-day East Asians. Can't you see the tree partitioning into two branches just after Ust' Ishim split? This is the West Eurasian split from East Eurasians, and Tianyuan is a fully differentiated East Eurasian.

No it isn't and Earnest Hooton's "Iranian plataeu Caucasoid" racial type has nothing to do with CHG or Iranian farmers. It's a racial taxonomic classification he gave to living people. You are confused.

It is a taxonomic classification he gave to living people who are overwhelmingly descended from Iranian farmers. What are you trying to tell me? That there was a mass migration of Iranians into the Americas?

This says nothing about CHG in Amerindians who have none.

Double digit IQ.
MA-1 is directly ancestral to Amerindians. By consequence, Amerindians got CHG too.

They have Caucasoid features.

Melanesians have nothing to do with Caucasoids, they are full blown East Eurasians. Bury it in your brain.

It is a Caucaaoid skull from West Eurasia. You are putting words in to my mouth and playing semantics.
It doss not "remotely" resemble Caucasoid skulls but was in fact described hy Keith and McGowan as a Caucasoid of the "proto-Cromagnon" variety.

Skhul IV didn't even went through post-OOA bottleneck, this is the fossil of a undifferentiated early Homo Sapiens, not more related to Cromagnons than to modern-day Africans or East Asians. It isn't the skull of a Eurasian, since Eurasians didn't exists at the time besides in a pure geographic way. I see where you are trying to reach, your obssession with Neanderthals is blinding you.

You haven't offered a single proof that anthropologists were "wrong" and you are again interchanging geographical and racial terms mistakenly. Fact: your statement that Y-DNA R was originally Mongoloid was wrong and so are your fledgling attempts to make R look "Australoid". R = Caucasoid and basal R/P people today are mixed with non-Caucasoids, and local Denisovans.

West and East Eurasians are genetic terms that encompasses biologically related populations. You shame yourself when you talk about genetics, which you visibly know shit of.

[PaleoEuropean]

You are fucking retarded.




t. gets his info from sciencemag excerpts


Actually, Baltic hunter gatherers got those attributes from Eastern Hunter Gatherers living in Russia and Siberia:





https://journals.plos.org/plosbiolog...l.pbio.2003703





90% of the light pigmentation in Scandinavian Hunter Gatherere is explained by EHG admixture, except that blue eyes likely also have an EHG origin as well, as WHG didn't get them until after the Last Glacial Maximum and they appear to have entered from the East.
So essentially 100% of the depigmentation in SHGs ultimately has a Russian/Siberian origin and evolved first among the Ancient North Eurasians/Eastern Hunter Gatherers/Ancient North Siberians.

I would rather be a retard than whatever abomination you are . You don't know sheeeeet about sheeeeet and know less about where what attributes come from kiddo.

[PaleoEuropean]

Y-DNA R was never Mongoloid.

Mal'ta-Buret was 75% West Eurasian, 25% East Asian. Soviet anthropologists exaggerated the Mongoloid features of his fragmentary skull.

The Mongoloid phenotype did not even exist when R mutated from P*. Amerindians are also not fully anatomically Mongoloid, but also partially Caucasoid despite being 70% East Eurasian autosomally.

The original Y-DNA R and P people would have looked similar to Skhul IV -- 90,000 year old out-of-Africa Caucasoid from Palestine:





Earnest Hooton said Amerindians had elements of "Iranian plateau Caucasoid".

R split from the Mongloids and became Central Asian/Iranian . Deep down they are still Mongloid.

[PaleoEuropean]

So for you, ''the real Scandinavians'' (men) are I1 ?

Rethel tried to convince me opposite ... with bad results.

Well I mean I1 and I2, I2 isn't as common and is more Danish but it's still been up in Sweden and Norway since before the Doggerland events. I think all I guys are brothers, but we Norse I's are still the best

[farke1]

Deep down they are still Mongloid.

In what way? I'm R1b and I'm probably more northwestern-shifted (i.e. less Mongoloid) than you autosomally. Serious question: do you actually have any evidence to support what you're saying at all or do you just enjoy trying to think of ways that make the haplogroup you belong to superior?

[PaleoEuropean]

In what way? I'm R1b and I'm probably more northwestern-shifted (i.e. less Mongoloid) than you autosomally. Serious question: do you actually have any evidence to support what you're saying at all or do you just enjoy trying to think of ways that make the haplogroup you belong to superior?

I very highly doubt that XD. you can go look at my Autosomal tests I have posted. Like I said I am half joking, I have a troll in my display pic, you are getting emotionally involved in a half joke. Does my haplogroup make me more Norse? Yes it does. My ancestors where in Scandinavian when yours were milking goats in Kazakhstan.

[farke1]

I very highly doubt that XD. you can go look at my Autosomal tests I have posted. Like I said I am half joking, I have a troll in my display pic, you are getting emotionally involved in a half joke. Does my haplogroup make me more Norse? Yes it does. My ancestors where in Scandinavian when yours were milking goats in Kazakhstan.

Aren't you part Alsatian and part Eastern European? I'm 100% Northwestern European autosomally, so go ahead and doubt whatever you want, but I'm most likely more northern-shifted (not that it matters at all). I don't think your haplogroup makes you more Norse considering that you don't even have a Norse haplogroup - I1 was the haplogroup associated with Norse Scandinavia, and not I2, which is found as far south as places like Serbia. I'm around 17% Norwegian and I don't consider myself 'Norse' whatsoever - and nobody in Scandinavia would consider you Norse, either, unless at least 50% of your DNA comes from the region. I can promise you that.

As for getting emotionally invested in a joke, I'm not upset at all and I don't know why you'd assume I am. I like you as a user overall and don't have anything against you. I just wanted to call you out on one of the many ridiculous and baseless statements you've made on this forum regarding the relevance of haplogroups in modern times. If you go back far enough, all Europeans are either African or a different species entirely - where our ancestors lived 10,000 years ago has no relevance or bearing upon us as people today.

[Ayetooey]

I very highly doubt that XD. you can go look at my Autosomal tests I have posted. Like I said I am half joking, I have a troll in my display pic, you are getting emotionally involved in a half joke. Does my haplogroup make me more Norse? Yes it does. My ancestors where in Scandinavian when yours were milking goats in Kazakhstan.

Us.




Them

[PaleoEuropean]

Aren't you part Alsatian and part Eastern European? I'm 100% Northwestern European autosomally, so go ahead and doubt whatever you want, but I'm most likely more northern-shifted (not that it matters at all). I don't think your haplogroup makes you more Norse considering that you don't even have a Norse haplogroup - I1 was the haplogroup associated with Norse Scandinavia, and not I2, which is found as far south as places like Serbia. I'm around 17% Norwegian and I don't consider myself 'Norse' whatsoever - and nobody in Scandinavia would consider you Norse, either, unless at least 50% of your DNA comes from the region. I can promise you that.

As for getting emotionally invested in a joke, I'm not upset at all and I don't know why you'd assume I am. I like you as a user overall and don't have anything against you. I just wanted to call you out on one of the many ridiculous and baseless statements you've made on this forum regarding the relevance of haplogroups in modern times. If you go back far enough, all Europeans are either African or a different species entirely - where our ancestors lived 10,000 years ago has no relevance or bearing upon us as people today.

You are still venting over a half joke, calm down. I look cro-magnon af, my dad looks cro magnon af, his dad and his dad. I trace my lineage back to the Normans, autosomal dna tests and calculators are novelties, they have never been of great value and there is a thing called recombination. My lineage is Norse, it will never change, for eternity my children, my 4 brothers children and all my ilk will be Norse because we come from an ancient Norse lineage. Your lineage will forever be Indo-Aryan. Lets see your father and who you are sired from. Everyone has seen pictures of me, my dad, my dads and even middle ages ancestors. I am an archetypal Nordic looking person, very ancient phenotype and looks.