My true ancestry.com

[Bosniensis]

You are wasting your time, mate. They are not listening to you, they are happy to pay hundreds of euros to some scammer to tell them they are the direct descendant of Conan the barbarian, or something.

Sums up the collective IQ of this forum, lately.

Free part is nice though.

It correctly identified me, so I can't complain.

[Figaro]

It's still neat to see one compared to some ancient samples, even if this is a novelty/not a perfect science.

Speaking of which, just realised I have a "match", in Asia: The Androvono sample around Tuva, Russia (near the crossroads with Mongolia and Kazakhstan), dated 1500BC. Neato.

[Pausanias]

My results:






Very accurate for a Spanish-Greek.

[Gallop]

New valors

[Grace O'Malley]

People might want to check because they have updated their ancient samples so your results might have changed. These are my matches and I get a small match with Hallstatt which I'm pleased with. This is entertaining at least even if people are skeptical.

[Vyacheslav]

They compared https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...eaat4457?rss=1 to these Scythian samples. They all have different origins, you need to order an additional test for a specific definition from which Scythians

[Vyacheslav]

My first level data!

1. Kievan Rus (1130 AD) (7.728) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. Avar (590 AD) (8.52) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Avar (590 AD) (9.345) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. Viking Sweden (1100 AD) (10.44) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Western Pommerania Unetice (2000 BC) (10.67) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. Western Pommerania Unetice (1860 BC) (10.67) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Scythian Ukraine (600 BC) (11.94) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. Scythian Ukraine (600 BC) (12.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Siberia Andronovo (1500 BC) (15.48) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. Medieval Czech Brandysek (710 AD) (16.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Ancient Gotlander (2750 BC) (16.84) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. Caspian Steppes (1550 BC) (17.14) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Neolithic Gotlander (5000 BC) (17.77) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. Hungary Vatya (0 AD) (18.0) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Bell Beaker Salisbury (2200 BC) (18.16) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. Bell Beaker Oxford (2150 BC) (18.81) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Halstatt (775 BC) (19.35) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. Ancient Gotlander (2750 BC) (19.48) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Ancient Siberia Tagar (850 BC) (19.66) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. Viking Sweden (1100 AD) (19.73) - [Upgrade for more details]

1. Polish (5.286)
2. Estonian_Polish (7.092)
3. Russian_Smolensk (7.096)
4. South_Polish (7.359)
5. Southwest_Russian (7.549)
6. Kargopol_Russian (7.664)
7. Belorussian (7.867)
8. East_Finnish (8.235)

[Lucas]

People might want to check because they have updated their ancient samples so your results might have changed. These are my matches and I get a small match with Hallstatt which I'm pleased with. This is entertaining at least even if people are skeptical.
]

I'm even more sceptical because first some of their presumable "bots" or "sockpuppets" on foras (here also, few accounrs created on March or April)) and FB groups defended those high cM values for matches, even if they were ridicuolusly stupid like 80cM with Jutland Bronze Age for Spaniard.

And when many people started to compare their matches with the same samples which are uploaded on Gedmatch, they quietly lowered cM values. If someone is their paid customer may ask them why they changed their algorhitm. and if they admit they were utterly wrong before ?


When I find time I will massively upload all ancient samples they were using to Gedmatch and everyone could make one-to-one for free, and check real cM values with normal treshold of course... List of kits will be published here.

[Vyacheslav]

But about samples from the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea, 5 thousand years BC, with which MyTrueAststry.com also compares - "Scientists noted that the ancient ancestors of the Scandinavians have nothing in common with modern inhabitants of the peninsula. It turned out that the Vikings were closer in their DNA structure to the ancient inhabitants of northern Russia and the Baltic states than to their neighbors from the southern part of Scandinavia. Experts believe that their genomes were similar to the genetic material of hunter-gatherers. " https://mir24.tv/amp/news/16286186/p...mi-skandinavii

[Vyacheslav]

About why many Russian Vikings of the 12th century are highlighted, this does not mean that the ancestors were Vikings, the Vikings had Slavic ancestors, here’s an article about those samples from Sigtuna- "The combination of genetic and isotopic data showed that out of 38 people in the vicinity of Sigtuna grew less than half. The rest turned out to be migrants - “regional” (southern Scandinavia, modern Norway and Denmark) and visitors from more distant places (modern British islands, Ukraine, Lithuania, northern Germany and other regions of central Europe, as well as Novgorod city) Among the "newcomers" were men 44%, women -. 70%. " There is also a version that it was the Slavs who destroyed Sigtuna in 1187. In Sigtuna in the XII century. there was a Slavic trade court with Slavs who were constantly there.
https://nauka.vesti.ru/article/1048799
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1...D0%BA0D0%B8%D0 % B9_% D0% BF% D0% BE% D1% 85% D0% BE% D0% B4