GS,
Do not fall for Anatole Klosyov's young age for Chenchu r1a1 line. He is another joker. Underhill has known about S Asian origin of the R clan for a long time and has been sitting on the data. In fact, he apprised Witzel of R's origin in S Asia during a so-called harvard roundatable and Witzel had to subsequently cut back on his herrenvolk propagandeering. Underhill, Metspalu, Kivisild, Semino, Chaubey, Singh, Battaglia, Mehdi, Thangaraj, Majumder, Villems, Rootsi, and Sengupta are the authors of this 2009 paper; these are not lightweights like Kloysyov.
The easiest thing is to trace the operational constraints of Spencer's eurocentric model for the R clan. Spencer Wells (natgeo genographic project) has K devolve into P in C Asia and then further devolve into R1 (173) which penetrates into Europe from C Asia (and in europe gives rise to R1b in situ). Then M17 makes an 180' turn back into C Asia and further into S Asia. The first constraint is: why not have P directly in Europe (Russia/E. Eur); why is there this caveat for a huge C Asian "detour" in the first place?? The answer is because no one will fall for P as original to Europe since there is no evidence for it. To maintain a haplogroup (as opposed to 'initate') in a stable (ie non-island) population is not difficult. Even then, there is no evidence for P (undefined R and Q) in Europe. The exception which proves the rule is P on the island of hvar in croatia; this is explained as an input from C Asian Avars precisely because it is so exceptional.
The second constraint is Q in NE Asia. unlike India, Europe does not have Q except for some herrenvolk E Siberians who intruded into one of the N europe islands. It has required island genetics to maintain this haplaogroup in Europe, which is nonetheless in a much derived form. In contrast India has basal Q as well as India-specific Q clades. This entire line of argumentation was not in Spencer's head when he dreamt up the C Asia route for K, but is nonetheless relevant.
Further...
Do not fall for Anatole Klosyov's young age for Chenchu r1a1 line. He is another joker. Underhill has known about S Asian origin of the R clan for a long time and has been sitting on the data. In fact, he apprised Witzel of R's origin in S Asia during a so-called harvard roundatable and Witzel had to subsequently cut back on his herrenvolk propagandeering. Underhill, Metspalu, Kivisild, Semino, Chaubey, Singh, Battaglia, Mehdi, Thangaraj, Majumder, Villems, Rootsi, and Sengupta are the authors of this 2009 paper; these are not lightweights like Kloysyov.
The easiest thing is to trace the operational constraints of Spencer's eurocentric model for the R clan. Spencer Wells (natgeo genographic project) has K devolve into P in C Asia and then further devolve into R1 (173) which penetrates into Europe from C Asia (and in europe gives rise to R1b in situ). Then M17 makes an 180' turn back into C Asia and further into S Asia. The first constraint is: why not have P directly in Europe (Russia/E. Eur); why is there this caveat for a huge C Asian "detour" in the first place?? The answer is because no one will fall for P as original to Europe since there is no evidence for it. To maintain a haplogroup (as opposed to 'initate') in a stable (ie non-island) population is not difficult. Even then, there is no evidence for P (undefined R and Q) in Europe. The exception which proves the rule is P on the island of hvar in croatia; this is explained as an input from C Asian Avars precisely because it is so exceptional.
The second constraint is Q in NE Asia. unlike India, Europe does not have Q except for some herrenvolk E Siberians who intruded into one of the N europe islands. It has required island genetics to maintain this haplaogroup in Europe, which is nonetheless in a much derived form. In contrast India has basal Q as well as India-specific Q clades. This entire line of argumentation was not in Spencer's head when he dreamt up the C Asia route for K, but is nonetheless relevant.
Further...