Will we ever reach a point where the misconceptions and myths about ancient populations are finally rectified through the use of population genetics? Or will the general populace always stay ignorant of such knowledge?
I've noticed that people seem to reject or ignore information that comes out about ancient European populations, instead choosing to believe in fantasies.
I'm afraid that people will still just assume that geography is the persons heritage. Like people think Egyptians were black because they lived in Africa.
I hope so, but probably not. Everything is politicized and ideological. And people, for whatever reasons, cling on to their ideas about what they think about ethnic groups' histories. Or just history in general.
I think Jews are probably the biggest example. Even some Jews believe in things that contradict what studies show.
Other examples:
Egyptians
Berbers
Romans
Greeks
Phoenicians
MesoAmericans
It could just be though that cranks and pseudohistorians make a lot of noise and are extremely persistent.
The fuck is that picture supposed to represent?
Egypt is a good example of this.
>Egyptian genomes from New Kingdom to Roman Egypt found - all are Near Eastern
They are too new! They are Hyksos! Real Egyptians were black!
>older samples appear
Still not old enough!
>pre-dynastic Egyptian samples
Those were commoners, not the elites!
>some old elite sample found
This is not Narmer!
Naturally it's impossible to find Narmer's body, so there will be people always denying the truth.
>Mycenaean sample with 13% Yamna ancestry
>yup, they were Slavs
Real thing I've seen on some forum or maybe on Eurogenes.
Our understanding of genetics is just getting started so, whatever side of the argument you are coming from, whatever you are implying are "myths and fantasies" are indeed probably bullshit just like whatever you think are "facts" are probably also myths and fantasies.
Another marxist bullshit thread
sage this shit
Slavs? They didn't exist until like 300 AD.
Slavs are now larping as everything with R1a. From Corded Ware to Tocharians.
1. generic modern-day Aryanist
2. Proto-Indo-European man
3. generic modern-day Mediterraneanist
4. Funnelbeaker man
Why do you think "Mediterraneasits" give a shit about Funnelbeaker?
Ah yes, we know these fairytales. "Indo-Iranians changed to blond and blue eyed because of low and non-existant ENF admixture, and Sardinia is full of Nordics while Norway is swarthy".
Who's closer to the original PIEs though?
The specific individual in the image is a Funnelbeaker man, but he is representative of other pre-IE "farmers".
Norwegians are the closest. He is a butthurt polish retard who forces his bullshit.
>he hasn't heard of selection
Yeah, and for 200-300 years conquered half of Europe. Magic...
Or maybe they where there long before 300 AD under other name/s.
So blond hair genes from Siberia magically became farmersoy and Early Indo-Iranians became closer to siberians by mixing with people they barely had contact with?
You are not funny, neither a good troll, just boring and cringy.
Hard to tell, maybe some people in Russia.
No, that's only in Europe (and Fins and Estonians are more related). I'm sure some people living close to the Caucasus are more closely related to them.
Literally what? Norwegians DONT carry more PIE-ancestry than Russians, especially Kargopol Russians. That's so retarded to even say so.
I think youre getting mixed up since theres a graph floating around showing them as #1.
>(and Fins and Estonians are more related)
Mongoloids don't count, and they are predominantly light pigmented too due to Nordic admixture.
>I'm sure some people living close to the Caucasus are more closely related to them.
There is not.
>Literally what? Norwegians DONT carry more PIE-ancestry than Russians, especially Kargopol Russians
So now you think that Russians are swarthy? Lmaoo...
Mordvinians and Kargopol Russians pretty much overlap with Andronovo. Not PIE but quintessentially Aryan.
Indo-Europeans came from the South (Pontic-Caspian steppe) . EHG were not Indo-Europeans (nor were they blond). Blond hair generally was the most common in the North, even before Indo-European migration. That's why to this day people from the North are light-haired.
Also this "steppe" includes Finnic genes as part of "IE" admixture, trash.
Never claimed they were. Neolithic europeans had light skin, not blond hair.
It does not. Stop trying so hard.
>there is not
Considering they probably don't have EEF admixture they definitely are.
>Indo-Europeans came from the South (Pontic-Caspian steppe) .
And R1b-Z2103 became R1a-M173, yup, we know these fairytales as well...
Also you do realize that blond hair is still from Siberia? It means non-farmer.
So lapps are purely Aryan? Lol.
It clearly includes finnic.
>magically
Not really. They got them by mixing with EHG-admixed populations like SHG. Obviously they weren't pure "Nordics", but they were fairer than the incoming swarthy IEs. Both carried the genes for blonde hair and blue eyes and over time through selection they became fairer, leading to the likes of Andronovo.
>Early Indo-Iranians became closer to siberians by mixing with people they barely had contact with?
????
>You are not funny, neither a good troll
I'm not trying to be either. I'm trying to get your head out of your ass.
>Considering they probably don't have EEF admixture they definitely are.
And more mongoloid. Your point?
>Mongoloids don't count, and they are predominantly light pigmented too due to Nordic admixture.
What a load of bullshit. Finns and Estonians are light pigmented since they are among the closest to the populations that spread them.
>Not really. They got them by mixing with EHG-admixed populations like SHG. Obviously they weren't pure "Nordics", but they were fairer than the incoming swarthy IEs. Both carried the genes for blonde hair and blue eyes and over time through selection they became fairer, leading to the likes of Andronovo.
So:
>EHG were light
>PIE are descendants of EHG
>ENF are NOT descendants of EHG, except some EHG spies in Sweden
>This makes Minoans light pigmented and Indo-Europeans dark pigmented
Lol
>Finns and Estonians are light pigmented since they are among the closest to the populations that spread them.
They are light pigmented because they Asiatic barbarian ancestors invaded Europe and intermixed with local Indo-Europeans.
Not my post you nonce, try again. Finns are around as east-shifted from Euros as Euros are from Sardinians.
I can tell by your post that you dont really grasp biological concepts such as blood phenotyping or genetic inheritance as you have conflated them with feel good Racial doctrine.
How is this different from IE barbarian ancestors invading Europe and intermixing with the local Neolithics?
will sw*rthoids ever stop with their inferiority complex?
That IEs were of the perfect Nordic race, while Finics are of the infamous ugly uralid race.
There are not Swarthoids in this thread, it's just you Eastern Europeans (Inlcuding Fins) obsessing over this genetic bullshit because you have no ancient history
Yet they are closer to your precious Aryans than you are. How did that happen?
>and more Mongoloid
I don't know about that.
Are you are really this dumb? Blond hair were common in Northern populations due to their EHG ancestry. Pretty much all later Indo-European groups also had this ancestry, but also CHG ancestry and some early EEF ancestry (maybe from Yamna). Those pre-IE Hunter Gatherers didn't have this CHG ancestry, and because light skin is more advantageous in the North many of them were light skinned and some of them were blond. They were also less admixed with farmers than others.
Your dreams about a beautiful race of blue-eyed blond warriors enslaving swarthy farmers isn't based on evidence.
They lack Mediterrenean admixture, but have more Mongoloid admixture instead.
Yet Mediterrenean admixture doesn't spoil one's blood as much, although I hate meds at least they can create proper art.
>Also you do realize that blond hair is still from Siberia? It means non-farmer.
Are you away that genes can spread? Obviously the original farmers from the Middle East weren't blondes, but later farmers in Europe did carry the genes for blonde hair.
>So:
More like this.
>Cline exists between WHG and ANE
>This includes EHG who were light (but brown-eyed so you can fuck off with your Nordic fantasy)
>Also includes SHG who were also light (and blue-eyed)
>PIE is the result of EHG mixing with CHG and creating swarthoids
>ENF are not the descendants of EHG, but later European farmers are admixed with EHG-related populations and fairer than PIE swarthoids
>IEs and farmers mix and light features are selected for
Finns do have neolithic admixture though. How can someone be this ignorant?
EEF from Cucuteni-Trypillia*
>I don't know about that.
Never heard of the N1c haplogroup?
>Are you are really this dumb? Blond hair were common in Northern populations due to their EHG ancestry.
Yes, this is what I claim too.
>Pretty much all later Indo-European groups also had this ancestry
Yes.
>but also CHG ancestry ancestry
No except Anatolians.
>and some early EEF
This is why the CWC and the BBC were not 100% Nordic
>Those pre-IE Hunter Gatherers didn't have this CHG ancestry,
They had. Never heard of G2a haplogroup, or the Alpine race?
>and because light skin is more advantageous in the North many of them were light skinned and some of them were blond.
Yes, and these were EHG descendants...
just like the IEs.
In smaller proportion.
And they also lack Western Indo-European (Unetice) influence, at least in a relevant frequency.
For an example: the famous mummy found in Austria, was a CHG immigrant of the G haplogroup and the Alpine race.
Do you feel a particular connection with the Unetice? Do you think they harbored many of the favorable mutations leading to higher intelligence seen in Europeans? Or perheps their stellar beauty, it came straight from the famed Unetice people.
Lol Oetzi didn't have CHG admixture
>the alpine race
I thought genetics already punched the cunt in from all you autists clinging to 19th century anthropology.
But Otzi was mesocephalic.
Kind of. My Vandalic ancestors probably had their blood just like the Corded blood.
>Do you think they harbored many of the favorable mutations leading to higher intelligence seen in Europeans?
Possibly, their Hallstatt Nordic race is heavily correlated with the high IQ.
He did. Look at the "Iceman".
Proto-Alpinid form possibly then, or simply Cro-Magnid from the Caucasus.
>Never heard of the N1c haplogroup?
Do those Russians have N1c haplogroup?
>No except Anatolians.
No, all Indo-Europeans had CHG. Yamna nearly 50% of CHG.
>They had. Never heard of G2a haplogroup
Most of them were I2, some Baltic ones I think were even R1a. And Anatolian farmers didn't have CHG.
>I1 Funnelbeakers
>R1b-M269 Yamna warriors
Keep dreaming, Northern Basque
You know that Anatolian and CHG populations were different? The ones with most Yamnaya had the most CHG.
>Do those Russians have N1c haplogroup?
What "those"?
>Most of them were I2
In Germany we have much G samples. In Poland they were mostly I2 maybe.
>Yamna nearly 50% of CHG.
Yes, because it's Yamna. Literally Caucasian borderland! And they were ancestors of the Hittites, not of the Indo-Europeans proper...
>R1b-M269
>yamna
You're not a German, but a Pole.
>Hallstatt race
>correlated with high IQ
Are you literally from the 19th century? Do you have ANY evidence to back this up?
First of all you need to establish that Hallstat people are closer to each other than they are to their countries of origin to constitute a meaningful group.
Silesian, but my allegiance is to the German Vaterland :)
>Do you have ANY evidence to back this up?
IQ stats?
Look at Sweden and the Netherlands. Both predominantly Hallstatt Nordic...
>jakubmarian.com
And going by your logic, shouldn't Alpines and whatever term you use for Finns be considered the smartest "races"? Finns have the highest IQ according to that image and many Swiss, Germans, Austrians and Czechs are Alpines and they're all 99+.
Well I'm Slavic and we don't. Only some Polish autists on the internet.
hold up
But Finns are mongoloids?
>shouldn't Alpines and whatever term you use for Finns be considered the smartest "races"?
No, because the East Baltic in Russia and the Baltics lower the average IQ of the type.
No one seriously thinks this.
Whats the controversy with Mesoamericans?
Would be interesting to see how much "barbarian" ancestry modern Northern Chinese have compared to their ancestors.
>Tocharians.
any proof they were r1a? iirc they were probably a breakaway isolate
>unironically still believing the "Aryans= all IE people " meme
If you aren't
1. R1a
2. Of Indo-Iranian heritage you have no business calling yourself Aryan
does anyone here post on the Eupedia forum? is it worth it?
True E-M78/E-V13(Balkans and Iberia) Farmers didn't produce Venus figurines unlike Matriarchal WHG Funnelbeakers and Matriarchal Indo-Europeans.
Go play with your Venus figurines, Siberianboi
Mezine site is Proto-Indo-European :)
>Caring about maternal haplogroups
lmao faggot
There are better forums that don't have crazy owners, e.g. Anthgrogenica.
All of these are WHG. R1 warriors were still chilling in Siberia back then.
Craniology doesn't correlate with IQ anywhere in the world, it's monkey pseudoscience.
Proof of Funnelbeaker Venuses?
Ancestral Pre-Proto-Indo-Europeans :)
Nope, those were made by the irrelevant branch of R (not even R1) who were mutts.
If you search for matriarchy, go to E3b anatolia :)
what goes on there?
>being subservient to a dominant obese woman who rules you from a throne
Honestly fucking disgusting. It enrages me that a "man" actually made this.
It serves the exact same role as the Eupedia genetics forum, but it's better.
there's a reason why they were annihilated so easily
>still no Funnelbeaker Venuses have been posted
Hmm....
my trust in eupedia is pretty low since they claimed the Ottoman dynasty is r1a
there's a nigger who is shilling West Africa, claiming that all SSA share a gene with West Africans, then using that as a spring board he claims that West Africans share a gene with North Africans and that North Africans were related to Egyptians and thus all Africans are related to Egyptians.
Why don't you believe it? Ottomans were perhaps heirs of the Nordic Scythians, it makes perfect sense.
>GIQ isn't correlated with brain size
>denying the natural superiority of the Alpine race
>forgetting that Alpines are asiatic
>true indo-europeans
Nordcucks are Paleo-Euros larping as Alpine Indo-Europeans.
>E3b
>Anatolia
Anatolia was and still is a R-dominated land. Fortunately, E3b Patriarchs brought manliness and farming to these SOIvages :?)
I don't have any but Aurignacians were most likely IJ.
>Anatolia was and still is a R-dominated land
Uhmm... noo sweetie.
It's E3b land, this is why they were having fat whores as their rulers :)
>I don't have any
Funnelbeaker now confirmed for being Nordic AND patriarchal. They just keep growing stronger...
>true indo-europeans
Uhmm.. nah.
Indo-Europeans were dolichocephalic, tall and progressive, so Nordic...
It isn't unbelievable in itself though kind of suspect...
its just the fact that literal DNA testing on the modern day memebers of the Osmani dysnasty found them to be of Q haplogroup. anyways r1a isnt nordic btw
>its just the fact that literal DNA testing on the modern day memebers of the Osmani dysnasty found them to be of Q haplogroup.
Nope, they were R1a-Z93 Scythians :)
>anyways r1a isnt nordic btw
Original R1a people had Nordic skulls.