Strong statements from a Basque Intellectual:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Maju said...
<i>There was no "colonization of West Eurasia from India". What happened is roughly this: South and Southeast Asia were inhabited by the descendants of the Out of Africa migrants who stayed in the south. To this aboriginal population were added in the Neolithic and later Caucasoids in India and Mongoloids in Southeast Asia.</i>
..you surprise me a lot with that comment. <b>All West Eurasian mtDNA (excepted a couple of minor clades like X) and Y-DNA (only E1b1b1 is exceptional in this) is much more diverse in South Asia than the West. It's fairly clear that West Eurasians are derived from the older and more diverse South Asian population, </b>surely at a time after South and East Asians were already differentiated. I think this is almost beyond any doubt.
[[[[my comment: East Asian differentiation preceeds that of Europe.]]]]]]]]]]
Reviewing by clade:
MtDNA: R is clearly of South Asian origin, N1'5 and N2 (including W) are shared between South and West Asia. Only X would seem anomalous of all Western lineages in this.
Y-DNA: all non-E1b1b1 is<b> F, which is clearly more diverse in South Asia than anywhere else.</b>
Additionally <b>several technologies later used in the west, like bladelets and eventually microliths too are apparently South Asian creations and have there an older age than anywhere else.</b>
But if you think otherwise, you'd still have to think that the ANI/ASI divide is about as old as post OOA Eurasian expansion, what should make things practically the same.
You could maybe argue that the ANI/ASI divide relates with the expansion of microlithism worldwide and that this would be a more recent phenomenon allowing for the return of ANI to be Indoaryan. But this would pose many challenges in the West, as well as demanding an explanation for what happened with the Neolithic colonists, now suddenly vanished from the genetic landscape of India.
A good idea would be to compare with an outgroup like East Asians. That would give us a better perspective but I feel quite sure that East Asians would diverge from above the ANI/ASI split.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Maju said...
<i>There was no "colonization of West Eurasia from India". What happened is roughly this: South and Southeast Asia were inhabited by the descendants of the Out of Africa migrants who stayed in the south. To this aboriginal population were added in the Neolithic and later Caucasoids in India and Mongoloids in Southeast Asia.</i>
..you surprise me a lot with that comment. <b>All West Eurasian mtDNA (excepted a couple of minor clades like X) and Y-DNA (only E1b1b1 is exceptional in this) is much more diverse in South Asia than the West. It's fairly clear that West Eurasians are derived from the older and more diverse South Asian population, </b>surely at a time after South and East Asians were already differentiated. I think this is almost beyond any doubt.
[[[[my comment: East Asian differentiation preceeds that of Europe.]]]]]]]]]]
Reviewing by clade:
MtDNA: R is clearly of South Asian origin, N1'5 and N2 (including W) are shared between South and West Asia. Only X would seem anomalous of all Western lineages in this.
Y-DNA: all non-E1b1b1 is<b> F, which is clearly more diverse in South Asia than anywhere else.</b>
Additionally <b>several technologies later used in the west, like bladelets and eventually microliths too are apparently South Asian creations and have there an older age than anywhere else.</b>
But if you think otherwise, you'd still have to think that the ANI/ASI divide is about as old as post OOA Eurasian expansion, what should make things practically the same.
You could maybe argue that the ANI/ASI divide relates with the expansion of microlithism worldwide and that this would be a more recent phenomenon allowing for the return of ANI to be Indoaryan. But this would pose many challenges in the West, as well as demanding an explanation for what happened with the Neolithic colonists, now suddenly vanished from the genetic landscape of India.
A good idea would be to compare with an outgroup like East Asians. That would give us a better perspective but I feel quite sure that East Asians would diverge from above the ANI/ASI split.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->