Transylvanian/Romanian GEDmatch Results

[Aspirin]

Double post.

[Ion Basescul]

I know, but that freak constantly insulting you because the results show totally a different story.

Which is why he is in my ignored list. But even if hundreds of samples are being ignored, we should get roughly similar averages with simply the data from Apricity users.

[aherne]

I think the reason you're skeptical of dna tests is because you did it yourself and it shows you're mostly Romanian by ancestry.

It has nothing to do with that. I'm very very mixed (not just German/Romanian): lately I found out I have Hungarian ancestry as well on my "Romanian" side. So far: Romanian, German, Slovak, Hungarian, Croat, Greek and likely Indian (my great-grandfather looked Gypsy, which is also visible in my aunt and one of my cousins). For some reason, out of all this mix, I happen to look German and this is why I mostly identify with this ethnic group...

It has everything to do with scientific accuracy (results being independently replicable), historical accuracy (results being ignorant of historic and demographic events) and common sense (if you think with your own mind, you are able to see things that do not add up). I could continue to explain the inaccuracies I found, but it will fall on deaf ears... So let's believe that:

- Romanians have 1% east asian
- Hungarians have negligible to no Magyar admixture
- Gypsies are 40% West Asians and only 25% Indian
- Western European Hunter Gatherers were dark skinned while neolithic farmers were light skinned

[Leto]

Truth be told, Aspirin's and Nurzat's obsession with Gypsies is no good either. Huge exaggeration IMO. Just because you don't like the country for whatever reason doesn't mean reality can be distorted. When I post actual Gypsy results and analyze their components to the best of my ability, both individuals are nowhere to be found.

[Leto]

- Gypsies are 40% West Asians and only 25% Indian

More like 35%. There was a study on them and it's also consistent with Gedmatch results.

[Scandal]

- Romanians have 1% east asian
- Hungarians have negligible to no Magyar admixture
- Gypsies are 40% West Asians and only 25% Indian
- Western European Hunter Gatherers were dark skinned while neolithic farmers were light skinned

1) When you combine Amerindian+East Asian+Siberian Romanians get between 2.0 and 2.5% on Vahaduo Eurogenes k13, but that's just an avarage, individually the scores can be different. Seya scores 4%. Chris the hungarian guy scores 2% and look very Asian influenced.
Don't historians say Romanians descend from Dacians? If so, why should the mong score be higher than 1 or 2%?
2) Why not? Some individuals show it, many others don't show it at all. You have experience mostly with Hungarians from Romania, who on avarage score more Mongoloid than do Hungarians from other places and phenotypically show Mongoloid influence more often. I don't know if you know who Chris is and how he looks like but he said he has been called chinese looking and gypsy looking by his countrymen, so it's not a look you see on every corner in Hungary.
3) Why not? On avarage they don't look the same as Indian people
4) I don't know. On the other hand the notion that he was a black man is certainly politically motivated propaganda.

[Ion Basescul]

1) When you combine Amerindian+East Asian+Siberian Romanians get between 2.0 and 2.5% on Vahaduo Eurogenes k13, but that's just an avarage, individually the scores can be different. Seya scores 4%. Chris the hungarian guy scores 2% and look very Asian influenced.
Don't historians say Romanians descend from Dacians? If so, why should the mong score be higher than 1 or 2%?
2) Why not? Some individuals show it, many others don't show it at all. You have experience mostly with Hungarians from Romania, who on avarage score more Mongoloid than do Hungarians from other places and phenotypically show Mongoloid influence more often. I don't know if you know who Chris is and how he looks like but he said he has been called chinese looking and gypsy looking by his countrymen, so it's not a look you see on every corner in Hungary.
3) Why not? On avarage they don't look the same as Indian people
4) I don't know. On the other hand the notion that he was black skinned or straight up black is certainly politically motivated propaganda.

Well I score 3.6% or 4.6% depending on the test and aherne for example thought that I don't look Romanian (Alpine+Turanid). But that's just a coincidence IMO, which doesn't depend on the EA/Siberian/Amerind score. You need something like 20% to guarantee having a visible influence on the phenotype. And then there are smaller cases, where one barely needs to have any Mong. admixture for the phenotype influences to resurface. At the end of the day it's just a lottery.

[aherne]

Don't historians say Romanians descend from Dacians? If so, why should the mong score be higher than 1 or 2%?

Because Turkic tribes were stationed in and around for more than a thousand years: Huns, Bulgars, Pechenegs, Cumans, Tatars. Many placenames have Turkic origin, many early historical figures had Turkic names. Turkic looks are not that uncommon either... That's why I find 1-2% to be out of touch with history and demography, but here maybe the error is somewhat acceptable due to narrow margins.

You have experience mostly with Hungarians from Romania, who on avarage score more Mongoloid than do Hungarians from other places and phenotypically show Mongoloid influence more often. I don't know if you know who Chris is and how he looks like but he said he has been called chinese looking and gypsy looking by his countrymen, so it's not a look you see on every corner in Hungary.

Chris fits better as a Turanid inspired Romanian. Also, ancient Magyars were not Mongoloid but as I correctly guessed by mapping their remnants on modern Hungarians they were Scythian-Uralic-Turkic mixes (see wiki article). Originally only Aryo-Uralic, then got a Turanid influence during migration era. I encourage you to visit Szekeler region: quite some people there look like original Magyars.

Why not? On avarage they don't look the same as Indian people

Because there is no historical basis for them being 45% West Asian. It's pure bullshit! They are what they look like: Indo-Europeans (ranging from Indian to European look). Much more similar to Europeans than Middle Easterners or even Turks... There is indeed rare overlap with Eastern Iranians but that's normal considering they came from NW India.

What I think in their case is a small founding population size, lots of inbreeding (if you've noticed, Gypsies are prone to genetic diseases and much less diverse in looks than NW Indians). When such cases happen, there is something called "genetic drift": random mutations in founders' pool gets maxed out over time giving inaccurate final ancestry results.

[Scandal]

Because Turkic tribes were stationed in and around for more than a thousand years: Huns, Bulgars, Pechenegs, Cumans, Tatars. Many placenames have Turkic origin, many early historical figures had Turkic names. Turkic looks are not that uncommon either... That's why I find 1-2% to be out of touch with history and demography, but here maybe the error is somewhat acceptable due to narrow margins.



Chris fits better as a Turanid inspired Romanian. Also, ancient Magyars were not Mongoloid but as I correctly guessed by mapping their remnants on modern Hungarians they were Scythian-Uralic-Turkic mixes (see wiki article). Originally only Aryo-Uralic, then got a Turanid influence during migration era. I encourage you to visit Szekeler region: quite some people there look like original Magyars.



Because there is no historical basis for them being 45% West Asian. It's pure bullshit! They are what they look like: Indo-Europeans (ranging from Indian to European look). Much more similar to Europeans than Middle Easterners or even Turks... There is indeed rare overlap with Eastern Iranians but that's normal considering they came from NW India.

What I think in their case is a small founding population size, lots of inbreeding (if you've noticed, Gypsies are prone to genetic diseases and much less diverse in looks than NW Indians). When such cases happen, there is something called "genetic drift": random mutations in founders' pool gets maxed out over time giving inaccurate final ancestry results.

On which calculator are Gypsies 45% West Asian? They aren't on k13 and they can be modeled as 45% Greek, 45% North indian and 10% middle eastern or so, but it's a calculator for Europeans so I'm not sure.

[Leto]

On which calculator are Gypsies 45% West Asian? They aren't on k13 and they can be modeled as 45% Greek, 45% North indian and 10% middle eastern or so, but it's a calculator for Europeans so I'm not sure.

Nah. From Vahaduo, reduced to only 3 populations:


Target: Balkan_Gypsy
Distance: 0.8493% / 0.84933619 | R3P
49.6 Greek_Thessaly
34.9 North_Kannadi
15.5 Armenian

I guess Kannadi is Kannada? That's a Dravidian language spoken in the state of Karnataka, Southern India. However, the Indian part of the Gypsy ethnogenesis is said to have come from low-caste tribes of Northwestern India. So I guess they were racially Dravidian with little to no Steppe.
The ancestors of the Gypsies came to Southeastern Europe from Northern India through Pakistan, Iran and Anatolia, as far as I know.