Unmasking AIT

[Husky]

Not important.



Something funny that has to do with these earlier posted extracts:

[quote name='Husky' date='14 March 2016 - 12:49 PM' timestamp='1457939483' post='118011']

snplogic.blogspot.com/2015/04/how-little-we-know-about-ancient-dna.html

These same "experts" even go so far as to claim to be able to tie specific haplogroups to languages, tribes, and epochs. They will make broad statements, like, "all of Europe was populated by [this haplogroup or that], which represented the [Cro-Magnons or whatever], until they were replaced, en masse, by the [new Haplogroup.]"



(Often the dominant invader haplogroup in their theories tends to be the one of the posting "expert," but that's just coincidence, I'm sure.)



snplogic.blogspot.com/2015/12/how-little-we-know-about-ancient-dna.html

They also rely on the aDNA evidence to express 100% confidence in wild notions of sex selection that have more in common with dimestore novels than anything scientific. The proponents of said theories also happen to be mostly males bearing R1b. Yes folks, in a world where racial identity is taboo, any sense of ingroup-outgroup dynamics for Western Europeans has simply been transferred to tiny markers on one chromosome.



A comment:

Thomas Alan

December 21, 2015 at 11:52 PM

Re: R1b and related, you may need to add one: since the R1b marker is clearly associated with superior abilities to fake historical evidence, they cleverly wrote all the other Europeans out of history.

[/quote]



On all the above excerpts, note the following entertainment - from a euro genetics site (and I was right about Spency Wells). Be aware the comments start from 2013. There is STILL no data public about the Y haploroups in Maykop, let alone for the 2013 assumption by the first person commenting below (an R1b person of course, and 'coincidentally' the admin of that euro genetics site) that Maykop was R1b and that therefore bronze smelting, PIE kultur etc was brought to the world by R1b:

(Maciamo)

...

The paper brings additional evidence regarding the origins of the Early Bronze Age Maykop culture in Mesopotamia, confirming my theory that R1b people from the Middle East migrated across the Caucasus and established the Maykop culture, before expanding throughout the Pontic-Caspian Steppes and mixing with the indigenous R1a steppe people.



The author also argues that the tradition of burial mounds did not originated in the Pit-Grave culture from the steppes because new radiocarbon dating seemingly points that the burial mounds from the Maykop culture actually predate those found in the steppes. Those of Maykop could trace their origins back to the Levant and Mesopotamia, two regions with relatively high levels of R1b, where the oldest subclades of R1b are to be found. This is new. Although I had always thought that R1b migrated from the Middle East to the North Caucasus, founded the Maykop culture and spread the Bronze Age to the steppes then to Europe, I had previously assumed too that burial mounds (i.e. kurgan or tumulus) was a practice that they picked up from the R1a people in the steppes, because that is what the archaeological data was saying so far.



This doesn't change anything to the R1b migration path or chronology though. I had thought that a two-way exchange took place between R1b and R1a people during the Yamna period. I imagined that R1b brought bronze working, while R1a provided the burial customs. If this new radiocarbon dating is correct, then it would seem that R1b brought both. In that case, it becomes increasingly likely that the Proto-Indo-European language itself was also brought by the more advanced and dominant partner (R1b), and adopted by the R1a population at the same time as the rest of the cultural package from Maykop.



I still maintain though that the Satem branch of Indo-European languages (associated with R1a) diverged from the original Centum (R1b) because of the influence of the original R1a languages, which altered the pronunciation of IE words (namely, the sound change by which palatovelars became fricatives and affricates in satem languages). Obviously Centum languages were later influenced by, and adopted words from the Chalcolithic people of Southeast Europe, then of Central and Western Europe. I strongly believe that languages evolve faster when new people are integrated into a linguistic community, bringing their own idioms with them.

Oh the hysteria. Sadly another commenter rained on his parade:

(kamani)

The paper does not mention R1b. If the pre-Maykop civilization came from Mesopotamia, then they probably had a lot of E1b1b and J. I think you're taking the most common western european gene and trying to prove that it was a dominant marker of the first ancient advanced civilizations, but it doesn't work because they're all in Levant/Anatolia/Middle East.

Other comments there also repeat what I already suspected. Not just my joke on Spencer Wells - which turned out to be true, apparently - but that supremacists may try to claim Gobekli Tepe (even by means of IE, say via PCT. Although that last specific case is not discussed here):

(nordicwarbler, haplogroup I1)

"Quote Originally Posted by ebAmerican View Post

...and it would be interesting if R1b was the dominate haplogroup in the middle east during the Mesolithic and early Neolithic (before J1-J2 pushed them out), and were responsible for stone monuments like Gobekli Tepe."

Those of you who have followed my ramblings for awhile may remember that I stated it was only a matter of time before R1b would claim Gobekli Tepe.

[...]

My comment about R1b "claiming" Gobekli Tepe have more to do with this haplogroup's tendencies to grab ahold of the good stuff no matter what science has to say of the matter. For example-- Spencer Wells and his R1b first into Europe comments, his tale of R1b being the group that founded Cro-Magnon, even R1b garnering the "highest" spot on the alphabetic nomenclature. I said my earlier comment on this thread tongue-in-cheek, but only partially so.



While it is possible that R1b had outposts at the start of Gobekli Tepe (which was over 11,000 years ago)... it's far more likely the groups laying the foundation of this settlement where members of hg. I, J1, J2, or G2a. I would think branches of hg. E would have a greater chance of being present during the construction than either R1b or R1a.

Poor Spency. Only R1b. Probably heart-broken when he discovered there were no chariots in R1b-dominated Yamna (c.f. R1aZ93-dominated Sintashta). Spencer Wells is considering alternatives... of the kind Thomas Alan further above complained about: "since the R1b marker is clearly associated with superior abilities to fake historical evidence, they cleverly wrote all the other Europeans out of history". (But it's not the Euros that have been written out of history.)



Must be loser men - you know, the kind who got beat up by all the girls in high school - who try to compensate for their loserness by aggrandising their haplogroups. If R1b really was propagated by losers like Spencer Wells, it should have become extinct long ago. Crazy people, who want to live vicariously through others, but can't achieve anything themselves (except claiming stuff for themselves).



Curious how important to losers is patrilineality (or even its converse) - going by the Ra-Ra discussions like the above (they're usually adults, btw cary, when both Y and mtDNA haplogroups show only a small portion of their genetic inheritance.



Another interesting thing is how little - in general - of a person's autosomal DNA may have been obtained from any randomly selected ancestor from 10+ generations ago:



ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking/understanding

3) An autosomal DNA test provides information from the great majority of your DNA (the autosomes are the chromosomes other than the X, Y and mtDNA). Although full genome-sequencing is not far away, it remains unaffordable for most and autosomal DNA tests usually examine up to around 1 million genetic markers (SNPs) spread across the genome. These give information about all your ancestors in recent generations, but once you go beyond about 10 generations back into the past (roughly 300 years) only a small fraction of your ancestors have contributed directly to your DNA: so even if William Shakespeare were your ancestor (born ~450 years ago), you almost certainly inherited no DNA from him.[/b] This can be a bit confusing: you did inherit almost all your DNA from ancestors alive at that time, but because there are so many of them (very roughly 30,000 thousand ancestors), you only actually inherited your DNA from a small fraction of them. The unilineal Y and mtDNA are exceptions: you inherited them from all your patrilineal and matrilineal ancestors respectively (the former only if you are male), and so in a sense they can provide a link with very remote ancestors, but they represent only a small fraction of your genes, they provide little information about your ancestors and with only limited inferences about time depth.