1
What a load of crap. Pardon my French.
1) Ancient Levantine weren't mainly Basal Eurasian. They were a mixture of WHG-related West Eurasian and Basal Eurasian. Basically 77%, 28% each. It's the basic ancient Middle Eastern profile provided by Dzudzuana paper. Natufians are Dzudzuana-like so are all other Ancient Middle Easterners deriving from a Dzudzuana-like source.
2) you can't score more Steppe than FennoScandinavians on G25 you're French, and from Southern French. You are either kidding, trolling or your dumb not sure which.
And there's no '0%' CHG/EHG in Berbers especially not coastal Berbers who are the biggest group.
3) as I showed, the paper which is very recent (2020) shows that a Basal Eurasian or a population closest to Basal Eurasian contributed alot of ancestry to modern SSAs.
There's little doubt there's a big correlation between ydna E/DE, the ANA ancestry of Iberomaurusians, and the spread of this Basal Eurasian-related ancestry into Africa. Since the split of Eastern Eurasians and Western Eurasians would have also caused the split of ydna DE and a first back migration.
All in all, we already suspected the amount of SSA wasn't correct 10 years ago, there were already people doubting the now outdated Eurogenes K7 or Dodecad results. They've been debunked for good. No idea you are still stuck in outdated stuff. Seems like a trend among marginal thinkers.
But keep marginalizing thinking.
Bookmarks