Prehistoric Romanian (~40,000 years old) in GEDmatch

[Hithaeglir]

So the only true european in this forum is Mortimer.

[Harkonnen]

So the only true european in this forum is Mortimer.

No he fucking is not. Do not trust the Polish propaganda machine.

[Hithaeglir]

No he fucking is not. Do not trust the Polish propaganda machine.

[Harkonnen]

Kostenki, Ust-Ishim and Oase are the only pure West Eurasian samples.

All others are mixed with East Eurasian (Mal'ta, WHGs) or Basal Eurasian (Stuttgart etc)

https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article...dFrom=fulltext

After the divergence of Dinka from non-Africans, the next split point on the modern human lineage in our model is that between the major eastern and western clades (the node labeled “Non-African”—although we note that the split point of Basal Eurasian would be deeper.) This split is soon followed on the western Eurasian branch by the split between K14 and Ust’-Ishim (i.e., their respective modern-human ancestry components). The original Ust’-Ishim analysis (Fu et al., 2014) inferred a near-trifurcation at this point, and we wished to test whether K14 (and other western Eurasians) and Ust’-Ishim form a statistically supported clade. In fact, while the best-fitting position for Ust’-Ishim is on the western lineage (0.6 shared drift), the inferred 95% confidence interval for this point overlaps the eastern/western split (standard error 0.4 for the Ust’-Ishim split position), so that we cannot confidently resolve the branching order. We therefore continue to regard this cluster as approximately a trifurcation; while we show Ust’Ishim at its best-fitting split point in Figure 1, we color-code it as a basal non-African rather than a member of the western clade.

[Harkonnen]

Oase-1 (facial reconstruction):





Versus modern Onge people:

https://www.google.pl/search?q=Onge+...ih=658#imgrc=_







Ancestral South Eurasians were ancestors of:

- Australian Aborigines
- Papuans, Melanesians
- Negrito populations
- South Indians

Etc.

lol you fucking idiot. It is obvious you haven't read any literature on Oase. Oase was a massive archaic specimen. It was such a huge bitch (well actually Oase is two different specimen) that it actually fits better metrically with tens of thousands years older specimens. Ridiculous to suggest it had anything to do with Negritos physically.

[Harkonnen]

[Rethel]

Oase-1 (facial reconstruction):

Versus modern Onge people:

Not similar.
Oase is more bantu/papuan faced.

Ancestral South Eurasians were ancestors of:

- Australian Aborigines
- Papuans, Melanesians
- Negrito populations
- South IndiansEtc.

So it is another evidence, that mongolian C is a founder
effect, and whole C-D was australoid originaly...

So, assuming, "I" had to be something
beteen Saudis and Australians, but,
but with square face nad more darker
as among hybrids ala natufian skin.

Did I assume correctly?

[Rethel]

Also Kostenki14 carried Y-DNA haplogroup C1b, the same as modern Australian Aborigines.

Is it not amazing, that first and last land, which IEs
colonized were previously inhabited by Aborigens
And in both cases, they were ab-origo indeed.

[Grab the Gauge]

Not similar.
Oase is more bantu/papuan faced.



So it is another evidence, that mongolian C is a founder
effect, and whole C-D was australoid originaly...

So, assuming, "I" had to be something
beteen Saudis and Australians, but,
but with square face nad more darker
as among hybrids ala natufian skin.

Did I assume correctly?

Oase has nothing to do with Bantus or Papuans. The skull and mandible are Neandethaloid. They looked nothing like Saudis or Australians. C was never Australoid and ancient Europeans have NOTHING to do with Australoids. Haplogroup D in Oceania is a result of a very recent turnover event. Oase 2 has several Mongoloid features.

[Rethel]

Oase has nothing to do with Bantus or Papuans.

I only said, that they look like. Negrito from the photo
does not have such flat face and nose and is more round.