3
I didn't say that, I said Ireland is genetically peripheral, due to relative isolation/genetic drift, but I never said it was the only one. I would apply the same logic for Latvians, Finns, Basques, or whatever. I also didn't say you can't model Ireland between countries that are all genetically East of it, only that it's unrealistic/uninformative. You could model Irish between Swedes and Germans on G25 if you want:
Target: Irish
Distance: 2.3798% / 0.02379779
53.4 Swedish
46.6 German
But I would wager most people would see this model as unrealistic and uninformative, altogether a bad fit. So I try not to waste people's time.
On a deep ancestry level or global scale Ireland is not peripheral, but comparing against other modern nations based on deep Neolithic ancestry is better demonstrated by simply showing their Steppe vs Farmer levels, or their position on a European cline vs non-Europeans. Modern European populations are post-Bronze Age creations and largely mixtures of each other, so I don't see why you brought up Bell Beakers, as this thread had been about modelling vs other modern populations.
This is another strawman as I've never said Ireland forms a separate cluster, nor that it's had no foreign input since the Bronze Age. If anything I've been arguing for a greater Celtic+Germanic input than most people, many on anthrofora in recent years have been saying that Irish are essentially unchanged since the Bronze Age because of the dominance of R-L21, which I thought was retarded. My only point regarding this thread was that the Irish don't plot between other European nations, so any such model is a bad fit, unrealistic and uninformative. I would have thought modelling Irish against other, more Gaelic Irish would be of the greatest interest, as it pertains to actual historical competing influences in the island.
Bookmarks