Search results

Thank you!

What we do know for certain is that the Myceanean/Empuriote genetic profile *did not* dissapear after the iron-ages/antiquity, HUN_MA_Szolad_o1 retains this profile, and he is a medieval guy. So the anthrogenica viewpoint about population replacement during the hellenistic era seems to be fake...

I can't seem to find it anywhere.

Can you link that quote on athenians here? That's interesting.

That's true, but he is 2x more Thracian-shifted than the most Thracian-shifted Myceanean. We can only talk about probabilities with such few samples but id wager there was a thracian-like northern influence coming in with the dorians. I could be wrong though.

I agree with everything you said, but Empuries_I8125 is a dorian colonist from Phoecea, and he is closer to BGR_IA than the Myceanean average. So that represents a thracian northern shift right? Ofc they wouldnt have been drastically northern but yeah.

Also it's as if Tuscans don't have significant northern-European ancestry as well. They aren't a relic population. Even south-italians can have 5-10% generally.

This is my first eupedia account, I do notice ive been arguing with italians quite a lot recently though to be fair. (I did have a burner account that I didn't post on though, it was called Arianiti11 or something)

I'm not so ignorant as to posit that Natufians are 75% Dzudana + 25% Morrocan in October 2021

Anatolia Neolithic is 75% Natufian <Without north african> + 25% WHG Crown Eurasian Whether natufian introgression occured will be readily apparent in the p-values with such differentiation. Pure Natufians are like Bedouin Arabs, Pure Anatolian-Hunter Gatherers are like Sardinians.

Qpadm <used as a left-pop>, tools like G25(???), ADMIXTURE

Ok then, show me a run where R850 scores no Levantine when its used as a left-pop in qpadm. Until then, you also have no legitamate admixture proof.

What does that even mean? I know I'm not exactly 20.1% slavic and 5.6% ancient Greek colonist... its just a good approximation. People post models all the time, if you think mine is especially bad id like to know why.

Also I want to add, you can get passing qpadm runs by not using all ancestral components; if Levantine is not used as a left-pop and you get a passing model without it, it doesn't mean you don't have levantine.

What kind of statement is that? Lol Again, if you have a valid critique of the model please forward it, and if you think I missed a source population feel free to tell me.

In G25 he has 12% Natufian, here is the EG K13 R850_Lazio_Rome_Italy_Iron_Age,11.28,5.60,21.22,17.29,32.58,9.69,0.00,0.86,1.06,0.00,0.00,0.42,0.00 32.58 East Med, 9.69 red sea. Come on now.

No.... that's not true. Natufians also have WHG ancestry in addittion to their Dzuduana and Nafri admix.

My model is fine: Bulgarian Iron-Age (thracian reference), Rus sunghir medieval (slavic), Empuries I8215 (ancient greek without anatolian (plots between BGR_IA and Myceanean), Logkas (high affinity tumulus/Illyrian like reference, this always gets chosen over Croatia_IA for me), Rome_Imperial...

1. Yeah, I know Albanians/Iron-Age Albanians had elevated CHG compared to basques for example, Balkans IA and Myceaneans were on a more eastern cline already compared to the rest of Europe. No disagreement with this fact. 2. It's not true Levant_N and Natufians are that similar to Anatolia_N...

Is this "R1" sample on G25? I can't find him anywhere.