Iberian DNA haplogroups from 20,000-4,340 years ago exactly like modern Europeans

[Hweinlant]

Just look at the mtDNA your self don't trust PCA graphs
*

Stop mumbling, right now. I asked you an specific question:
Who else was living in "Russia and else in Eastern Europe" during Copper Age ?

the vast majority of U5 in Finnish is under U5b so no connection there. All 28 of 28 pre historic U5 samples from Ukraine and Russia had U5a so once again no connection.

I've no idea where you pull your data (probably from Eupedia or some other trash source). Both types of U5 are present in East Baltic area, including in Finns. U4 is also present.

Lappalainen et al 2008, Migration Waves to the Baltic Sea Region

There is also a high amount of U4 and U2e in Mesolithic people of Russia(including Karelia) while both those haplogroups are almost completely non existent in Finnish-Sami, so once again no maternal connection.

There is no such population as Finnish-Saami, there are Finns and there are Saamis, two separate population having very different genetic makeup. You really think someone could take you seriously if you don't even know basic stuff ?

Finnish have a very low amount of R1a1a1 M417 and R1b L11(Swedish inter marriage) so low amount of Indo European paternal ancestry. Finnish are dominated by N1c1(probably connected with Uralic languages in Europe)

Indeed but I was not writing about y-dna. Finns are rarity within Finno-Ugric speaking populations for having so very little of R1a1a*, all other F-U speaking populations have much much more of it. R1b-L11 has nothing to do with Indo-Europeans and there is absolutely no evidence for it ever been present in the Volga-Urals, where from both Finno-Ugric and Indo-European language groups originate from. Strain of R1b which MIGHT have been present at Volga-Urals is R1b-M73 which is pretty much nill at Europe (excluding Ukraine, Russia). It's mostly found from Turkic speaking populations today.

[Äijä]

Just look at the mtDNA your self don't trust PCA graphs Ancient Eurasian DNA organized 2, Ancestral Journeys. mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e probably dominated almost all European hunter gatherers during the Mesolithic. U5's lineage came to Europe over 30,000 years ago(proven by ancient mtDNA) subclades of U5 really matter. All 13 of the 13 subclades from U5 of the bronze and iron age kurgan people of Asia(Indo Iranians) was under U5a the vast majority of U5 in Finnish is under U5b so no connection there. All 28 of 28 pre historic U5 samples from Ukraine and Russia had U5a so once again no connection. There is also a high amount of U4 and U2e in Mesolithic people of Russia(including Karelia) while both those haplogroups are almost completely non existent in Finnish-Sami, so once again no maternal connection. Finnish have a very low amount of R1a1a1 M417 and R1b L11(Swedish inter marriage) so low amount of Indo European paternal ancestry. Finnish are dominated by N1c1(probably connected with Uralic languages in Europe), and I1a2 L22(non Germanic and non Uralic source). I have just started learning about the possible origins of Finnish-Sami it makes the most sense to me to say they came from Russia in the copper age. Who knows there may be a genetic connection with early Indo Europeans of Russia but maybe not, I haven't seen any evidence yet.

Why are you obsessed with the Sami? They are a mix of Fennoscandian paleo-people, Finnic (the language they shifted to) and Germanic.

Sami name btw comes from Proto-Germanic, it means dark or black.

N1c story is not solved yet, Finnic people have a lot of R1a also and look at the maternal lines you connect to IE, Finns have a lot of W for example (most in Europe).

[Atlantic Islander]

mtDNA V originated 15,000ybp in the northern Spain so this means those Iberian refuge people did not just migrate across Europe four of the samples had mtDNA H but 14 more could have had H since so many where undecided but H was a possibility in all of them

modern north west Africans have 15-35% mtDNA H1 and H3 the Turags in Libya have 61% mtDNA H1
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013378"]http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0013378[/URL] the rest of North Africa and mid east is less 5% uselly less than 1% in the rest of Europe they average about 10-20% it is highest inn northern Spain at 40% and central and southern Scandnavia at 25-35%

also north west Africans have about 5% mtDNA V this haplogroups is almost never found in the mid east and other parts of North Africa it is about 3-5% in Europe and highest in northern Spain at 15-25% and in far northern Scandinavian Sami people at 50%. since 12,000ybp mtDNA in Morocco had V and alot of H these people where probably Spanish immigrants and represent Iberians mtDNA 12,000ybp and they had mainly mtDNA H same with pre Neolithic Iberian remains so Iberian over 12,000ybp probabley had 40-60% mtDNA H

North west Africans also have 1-5% mtDNA U5b which also originated in Europe and is the most popular group for pre Neloithci Europeans the subclade of North African U5b is most relted to Sami in northern Scandnavia the common ancester of north African and Sami U5b is estimated at 9,600ybp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populat...cs_of_the_Sami this U5b subclade takes up about 50% of Sami mtDNA this means Sami people and north Africans got their U5b from the Iberian refuge the other 50% of Sami mtDNA is V which also came from the Iberian refuge

so mtDNA haplogroups from this group that spread out of northern Spain 15,000ybp is found all over Europe and north west Africa which means they made migrations in those areas

V is also very common on the two western islands in the Azores, probably as a result of bottle-necking.

[Argang]

MtDna and Y-dna tells just a tiny part of the story anyway. Only once we have actual autosomal admixture tests on the proto-Indo-Europeans can anything be deduced.

About Y-dna I1 and relation to so-called WHG's though...who's to say the line did not mutate originally from someone like those I* hunter-gatherers in Motala? It is after all supposed to be younger than I2 if Nordtvedt is to be believed.

[Äijä]

It is easy to write Middle Earth theories if you intentionally forget the Uralic people, but they are a fact and leaving them out makes it fantasy.

[Fire Haired]

MtDna and Y-dna tells just a tiny part of the story anyway. Only once we have actual autosomal admixture tests on the proto-Indo-Europeans can anything be deduced.

We don't know who the proto Indo Europeans were, there are hypothesis with great evidence of who very early Indo Europeans where but that's it. We have already learned a lot about the early indo Iranians, next it will be probably very early Indo Europeans from Yamna culture(click here), and after that we will learn about the people who spoke the ancestral language to Balto Slavic aka Corded ware people(click here). The Yamna stuff was suppose to come out about a month and a half ago and their study started 2 years ago. They have all the results but have taken over half a year to write their paper, I wouldn't be surprised if they are already done just they like to see people wait.

There is no indo European race there were a people who were the first Indo European speakers but who knows how well their blood survived. Even 6,000 years ago there were probably many different people who spoke Indo European languages.

About Y-dna I1 and relation to so-called WHG's though...who's to say the line did not mutate originally from someone like those I* hunter-gatherers in Motala? It is after all supposed to be younger than I2 if Nordtvedt is to be believed.

You should read the original study there were no I*'s. Just some that were tested for I1 or I2 subclades and were negative for all of them, all that were tested for I2 were positive. All probably had I2a1b*. Nordtvedt made a new branch in his Y DNA I tree for the Motola and Luxemburg Mesolithic samples. He said half the SNP's were ancestral or derived of I2a1b. I have heard that modern I1 is estimated to be 4,000-5,000 years old, that it split from I as long ago as I2 did, and for a very long time there were intermediates between modern I1 and I*. I guess through a founder effect all the relatives of I1 are not extinct.

[Atlantic Islander]

[Fire Haired]

This is an old stuff I can tell by the names they give to haplogroups. These people are just Iberians with I guess maybe some extra north African. The ones with 33% V there were only 36 samples and if they really do have a very high amount of V then it probably is founder effect.

[Atlantic Islander]

The ones with 33% V there were only 36 samples and if they really do have a very high amount of V then it probably is founder effect.

Yeah, it's old and not many samples were used. Those two islands have a small population (3,907 Flores island, 468 Corvo island).

[Argang]

You should read the original study there were no I*'s. Just some that were tested for I1 or I2 subclades and were negative for all of them, all that were tested for I2 were positive. All probably had I2a1b*.

I've read the study, hence "someone like". Regarding WHG and I1 connection, it's quite plausible. These HG's while not true I* were closer to it than modern I2 types, hence we can assume real I*'s, who were also ancestral to these guys and I1 were mostly WHG as well. After all if I1 in North Europe was anything but WHG origin, there should be evidence suggesting it, like I1 found in neolithic farmer remains or from areas where Indo-European expansions originated. And, of course, if I1 was spread by neolithic farmers, other farmer haplos like G should be common in North Europe too.