Yamnaya

Life isn't coherent. It's chaotic. If you look deeper into the origins of R it gets weirder and weirder but that's not relevant for this discussion.

R1b-V88(African R1b) is a very basal branch of R1b.
I can't tell you how it got to Africa for a fact but Mediterranean Europe could be the source.

Reminder that the Yamna were shitskins: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna_culture#Physical_characteristics

>The genetic basis of a number of physical features of the Yamnaya people were ascertained by the ancient DNA study conducted by Haak et al. (2015), Wilde et al.(2014), Mathieson et al. (2015) : they were genetically tall (phenotypic height is determined by both genetics and environmental factors), overwhelmingly dark-eyed (brown), dark-haired and had a skin colour that was moderately light, though somewhat darker than that of the average modern European.[18][5] Surprisingly, given their pastoral lifestyle, there was little evidence of lactase persistence.[

doesnt make any sense when you look at the descendants of indo european people in other places

>genetic studies over Nordicist memes which have been debunked

You go, boy.

>The descendants

Iranians don't have that much Indoeuropean blood, and those groups might appear light comapred to other Middle Easterners but they're still pretty dark aver all on average

occupycorporatism.com/blue-eyes-originated-10000-years-ago-in-the-black-sea-region/

>A team of researchers from Copenhagen Universityhave located a single mutation that causes the mysterious phenomenon of blue eyes. And all blue eyed people are genetically related to a person who lived in the Black Sea region sometime between 6 – 10,000 years ago.

>black sea
>corresponds to where the yamna culture was
I'm not a scientist or anything but the evidence backs up my claim

>Iranians don't have that much Indoeuropean blood, and those groups might appear light comapred to other Middle Easterners but they're still pretty dark aver all on average
They used to be far more white but got mongrelized by waves of arabs and turks.

>posting outdated studies

dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3330674/Europeans-owe-height-ASIAN-nomads-blue-eyes-hunter-gatherers-Ancient-DNA-plots-centuries-genetic-changes-shaped-modern-man.html

>Their results, published in the journal Nature, show how genes that determine increased height appeared in northern Europe around 5,000 years ago.

>Blue eyes, by contrast, appear to be something that was selected by the early European hunter gatherers – all of the samples tested from this period had the genes responsible for light eye colour in modern European populations.

inb4 dailymail. Too lazy to find a better source, but they're probably going to say the same thing.

It doesn't matter, tan skin and dark hair are aesthetic anyway especially on women.

Genetically they were Nordic because the word Nordic doesn't have any meaning outside Indo-European. Scandinavia was inhabited by weird looking animals of the forest before the Aryan invasion and no they were not "Nordic" looking unless your definition of Nordic is a Downs syndrome individual.

either way, there were blue eyes around the black sea which is where the Yamna culture was. in the areas which they migrated to, you can see people with blue eyes and light hair

like pic related, a kalash from afghanistan iirc

therefore, it is easy to presume that the indo europeans had fair skin, blue eyes and light hair

Yamnaya people had a frequence of like 11% light eyes, they were dark than modern Southern Euros, they also had dark hair, Neolithic Hungarians on the other hand developed blonde hair

still doesnt explain my previous point

>either way, there were blue eyes around the black sea which is where the Yamna culture was

A minority of it and it didn't originate from them.

>pic related, a kalash from afghanistan

Kalash look like gypsies on average. Pic related. I don't think blondism is very common among them despite the cherry picked examples.

>hurrr everything is about le pigment durr albinos are irish hurr

Yamnas were neurologically Nordic. Their brain chemistry was derived from intense adaptation in paleolithic Siberia and refined by endemic steppe warfare for thousands of years. It doesn't matter what color their hair or eyes were.

...

>I don't think blondism is very common
It isn't, absolutely everyone in the middle east got ARABed and TURKed until everyone were swarthy monkeys, same with kalash

There are still some though

pic related, girl on the border of afghanistan and india iirc

>Says something completely retarded but adds a "hurr" to my post

What a fuckhead you are.

>muh cold weather gives humans superhuman intelligence /pol/tardish myth

>there are a minority of light featured people among them, that means all of them were light featured once

How about no? Studies on the Kalash have proved they have very unique genetics, yet he majority of them look no different than regular poo in loos.

You're the one obsessing over pigmentation like a fucking retard.

If humans were bred like dogs you could turn Yemenis into Scandinavian pigmented in 5-10 generations.

>>there are a minority of light featured people among them, that means all of them were light featured once

pic very much related

girl from afghanistan

>ignoring the genetic study that proves the original Yamna were dark featured

Also, pic related for the Kalash.

>>ignoring the genetic study that proves the original Yamna were dark featured

read my other posts retard

You're only clinging on to the dark feature nonsense because you're that Iranian autist with an inferiority complex.

>a few cherry picked people vs credible genetic studies done by professionals

Hmm, I wonder which one I'll choose to believe.

And you're a butthurt stormfag Nordicist who can't accept the facts.

>And you're a butthurt stormfag Nordicist who can't accept the facts.

Dumb nordicists ruin another discussion with feelz>realz and sourceless "facts".

The facts are that Yamna were genetically identical to no extant group but closest to Nordic and similar populations(Mordvins like Ovechkin being the closest to them).

You're just autistically trying to claim them as Iranians even though Iranians genetically have nothing to do with them.

Back to retard.

>Veeky Forums is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates.

heh, nothing personall kid. Reality just has a pol bias

...

>Is their a common link between N.Indians/Iranians and Europeans at that point or earlier?

More recent studies have begun isolating the proto-Aryans as emerging from north of eastern Iran or northwestern Pakistan.

It is very doubtful that the proto-PIE people where wholl unrelated to the Iranians due to the extreme genetic closeness Iranians have with the proto-PIE people.

There is also emerging proof that the r1b people where not PIE as their haplotype can be found in strong amounts in North Africa. r1a however was probably the older cluster and r1b split off thousands of years earlier.

This would mean that the paleo-Siberians and the PIE people were not the same, or at least did not arrive in Europe at the same time.

>due to the extreme genetic closeness Iranians have with the proto-PIE people.

There is actually no closeness.
Iranians have about 5% Yamna-Andronovo admixture.
It was a land densely settled by the Elamites and other such natives and the Aryan invasion of Iran didn't even leave much of a dent there.

...

Iran has more of the Indo-Aryan haplo than Europe.

>haplomemes

Lol, even Central Africans have like 80% r1b, they must be pure Yamnaya

Wikipedia says otherwise

>According to Jones et al. (2015) and Haak et al. (2015), autosomic tests indicate that the Yamnaya-people were the result of admixture between two different hunter-gatherer populations: distinctive "Eastern European hunter-gatherers" with high affinity to the Mal'ta-Buret' culture or other, closely related Ancient North Eurasian(ANE) people from Siberia[21] and to Western Hunter Gatherers(WHG) and a population of "Caucasus hunter-gatherers" who probably arrived from somewhere in the Near East, probably the Caucasus or Iran.[22][web 1] Each of those two populations contributed about half the Yamnaya DNA.[23][web 1] According to co-author Dr. Andrea Manica of the University of Cambridge:

>The question of where the Yamnaya come from has been something of a mystery up to now [...] we can now answer that, as we've found that their genetic make-up is a mix of Eastern European hunter-gatherers and a population from this pocket of Caucasus hunter-gatherers who weathered much of the last Ice Age in apparent isolation.[web 1]

Also R type haplotypes are found in big doses in Iranians, I don't know where you get that 5% from. They also cluster very closely with Caucasian and Black Sea ethnic groups, also likely locations for the Urheimat hypothesis.

It's just one subclade of R1a and the oldest types of Z93 are found in Central Europe which makes sense since the origins of Indo-Iranian languages and genes are not in the old Yamna steppe but the Corded Ware horizon which moved back into the steppe after mixing with Central Europeans.

eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml#Indo-Iranian

>Proto-Indo-Iranian speakers, the people who later called themselves 'Aryans' in the Rig Veda and the Avesta, originated in the Sintashta-Petrovka culture (2100-1750 BCE), in the Tobol and Ishim valleys, east of the Ural Mountains. It was founded by pastoralist nomads from the Abashevo culture (2500-1900 BCE), ranging from the upper Don-Volga to the Ural Mountains, and the Poltavka culture (2700-2100 BCE), extending from the lower Don-Volga to the Caspian depression.

>The Sintashta-Petrovka culture, associated with R1a-Z93 and its subclades, was the first Bronze Age advance of the Indo-Europeans west of the Urals, opening the way to the vast plains and deserts of Central Asia to the metal-rich Altai mountains. The Aryans quickly expanded over all Central Asia, from the shores of the Caspian to southern Siberia and the Tian Shan, through trading, seasonal herd migrations, and looting raids.

>Iranian AZERIS

Yeah best to use a fucking group of people that isn't originally Iranian as your proof.

Anyway, Yamnas were genetically close to Northern Europeans not Iranians.
They did use Georgian women as breeding vessels which gave them CHG but Georgians are not Iranians and not even Indo-European.
Modern Europeans also have this specifically Georgian CHG from the Yamna ancestors.

Their ancestors came from Central Europe.

corded ware is not the same as the Yamna

Also Corded Ware is a very late culture, emerging 2500 bc, it is separated by wide gulf of time from the Yamna who may have been far earlier colonisers of Europe, probably as early as 10.000-8000 bc

There is no proof the Yamna emerged from central Europe. It is a very weak claim, while the steppe PIE were related to the Yamna, there is no proof they originated there.

And Central Asians are the modern descendants of those people, not Europeans. Otherwise there would be more of the Indo-Aryan haplo subclade there.

sorry

Yamna didn't originate in Central Europe. Corded Ware did but had largely steppic origins with a local CE substrate.

There was female mediated homogenization across the steppe prior to westward migration of the group ancestral to Corded Ware so they had pretty much the same genes as the Yamna in faraway places like the Volga and even Altai mountains but they were almost exclusively R1a because of a founder effect.

MASTER RACE
A
S
T
E
R

R
A
C
E

>be iranian
>try to wewuz with aryanz and shiit
>get schooled

Daily reminder that J2 and E3b are the master race haplos. Started civilization and was the source of all ancient civilizations. Indo-nigger nomads go back to your shithole steppe.

This looks to be of southern and eastern origin.

But if it was dominant in Greece and Italy, as you're implying, why is it so thin there, trapped in little corners, as if a large invasion of horse nomads took all the green pastureland that would later yield cities?
If it dominated Egypt, why is it so shy about going down the Nile?

I'd guess it's a first farmers thing. The first farmers, not the best farmers, but they had a head start.

Interesting facts:

>the Latins were civilized by a non-Indo-European speaking J2 people (Etruscans), before that they were literally tribal niggers living in mudhuts
>Minoans, the first civilization in Europe were a J2 people
>Napoleon belonged to the E3b haplo

Iranians are still largely the same my man

Its about half added with caucasus and I haplomemes

Azeris are turkified iranians m8. Tehran has also a lot of people with R1a and Tehran and the towns around it are pretty much the iranian population centre.

>Almost half of Golestan is Q

The hell?

Are you actually bragging about getting raped by Indo-Europeans or just ironically shitposting?

>OTHERS

WHAT THE FUCK IS IT. I WANT TO KNOW.

>Are you actually bragging about getting raped by Indo-Europeans

Why is that a problem, considering that Iran's languages and cultural heritage comes from Indo-Europeans?

Ayy Lmao admixture, maybe.

No idea desu. I dont even know why it is so huge in iran

Its where the turkmen minority lives

There used to be people in Europe before the Indo-European migrations as well, you know. Every haplo that isn't R1a and R1b is pre-Indo-European.

The difference is that Northern Europeans have 10 times more Yamna ancestry than Iranians so they are the rapists.

>10 times more
Twice as much, 50% in most Europeans vs 25% for Iranians, as shown in all these haplogroup maps.

Haplogroups don't reflect reality 1:1 or else people from Chad would be European.

Iranians aren't shifted towards Europe on genetic maps. There's just about no European admixture there.

>iranians arent shifted towards europe

Because they lack other european haplogroups. Or because their R haplogroup is from a different branch

>Iranians aren't shifted towards Europe on genetic maps. There's just about no European admixture there

We're talking about Yamnaya admixture though, not modern day European.

Modern Europeans are a mix between invading Indo-Europeans and the native Europeans.

While I do agree that Indo-European admixture in Iranians is a minority, saying the Yamnaya were "European Whites" is stretching it.

If haplorgoups don't reflect genetic reality, what makes you think that modern Europeans are majority Indo-European?

I should remind you that Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, and Northern India are all majority R1a/R1b.

Genetic maps, admixture estimates made with qpAdm etc all say the same thing.

Northern Europeans are closest to Yamna.

Iranians are simply unmixed. I'll grant you that those eastern cousins of yours are pulling towards Yamna/Andronovo but still in terms of overall genetic similarity they lose to Northern Europeans.

I'll concede that point then.

Also I find it interesting that the graph you showed puts Saami as so close to both Yamna and Eastern Europeans in general. Aren't Saami supposed to be Asiatic in race?

As for Iranians, they being farther away from Yamna than Europeans are doesn't mean that Iranians have no Indo-European admixture.

I'd wager that 25% is a good estimate, given by all of the other haplogroup maps.

Is this map accurate?

Normally Sardinians are much more isolated, here they cluster very close to Iberiand and Central Italians, or maybe I'm reading it wrong

I reckon the Kargopol Saami would be heavily mixed with Russians but anyway this is a two dimensional distance map based on similarity to paleolithic North Eurasians from Siberia(right) and mesolithic West European Hunters(up). It's not 100% accurate because of that but overall produces a very nice looking and broadly reasonable structure.

>Tajiks are closer to them than Europeans on average
>Saami mongoloids are the closest

Ayy lmao.

You know, this isn't very good evidence for Yamnaya being "blonde and blue eyed Aryans".

Saami have around 20% Mongoloid admixture but the 80% is unsurprisingly disproportionately related to pre-Neolithic Europeans and paleolithic Siberians.

Anyway the key point here is that there's zero evidence that Iranians are shifted towards the Yamna because since Yamnas had such copious amounts of paleolithic Siberian influence, Iranians absolutely should have inherited some of it if they were related.
Yet even Iranian Jews have similar levels of it.

But Tajiks are. They're Northeast of Iran and they speak an Indo-Iranian language as well.

There's a chance that the BMAC cultural complex which predated Indo-Iranians in the region had similar genetics to the Yamna because of shared Central Asian ancestors from thousands of years ago.