36 Odpowiedź „łowcom ruskich trolli”, czyli dlaczego twierdzenie o 10.000 latach bytności R1a na Bałkanach,.. to jak dotąd niczym nie potwierdzona… tylko czysta fantazja 01

https://i1.wp.com/e.snmc.io/lk/f/l/93bdf2a5d38fea2bfdf0b7dc114dfeba/2331773.jpg

Wpis ten podzielę na co najmniej trzy części. W części pierwszej omówię jak „wiarygodne” były i nadal są twierdzenie pustynnego „łowcy ruskich trolli” zwącego siebie „Orlicki”. W części następnej lub w częściach wykażę jak „wiarygodne” są „źródła” na które on, ale także i ci, którzy go wspierają powołują się, patrz min. „ruski troll” Anatole Klysov. W części ostatniej napiszę podsumowanie.

UWAGA!!! Część 1b dotycząca „dowodu”, jaki upowszechnił Orlicki została dodana na dole wpisu 28.03.2017

…..

Niniejszym ja SKRiBHa uroczyście oświadczam, że poświęcam mój cenny czas na napisanie tego tekstu, BO ZALEŻY MI  NA UPOWSZECHNIANIU TYLKO PRAWDY, A NIE PUSTYNNEJ PROPAGANDY, CZYLI „PRAWD JAKOŚ OBJAWIONYCH” I INNYCH PRZECIW-LOGICZNYCH I PRZECIW-SŁOWIAŃSKICH ZABOBONÓW. Robię to  po to, żeby ostatecznie pokazać, że WSZYSTKICH OBOWIĄZUJĄ TE SAME ZASADY I STANDARDY, min. co do udowadniania wiarygodności swojej i głoszonych przez siebie racji, ale i że niestety… NIE WSZYSCY ICH PRZESTRZEGAJĄ… 😦

Taki stan rzeczy trwa już stanowczo za długo (ponad trzy lata – wyjaśnię to dalej) i powstał nie z mojej winy. Niestety muszę zajmować się tym raz po raz, co mnie już zupełnie znudziło,.. więc tym razem postanowiłem z tym skończyć RAZ NA ZAWSZE

Oświadczam, że bezpodstawne zarzucanie komuś czegoś, jak np. rzekomego głoszenia nieprawdy lub bycia rzekomym „ruskim trollem”, tylko dlatego, że ten ktoś, np. ja… ośmiela się mieć inne zdanie, niż to „jedynie słuszne”, jakie mają i jakie upowszechniają różne, często samozwańcze „ałtorytety”,.. jest poniżej najniższego ciągnącego się po ziemi i przydeptanego butem wora i WYMAGA OSTATECZNEGO NAPIĘTNOWANIA I POTĘPIENIA, CO NINIEJSZYM ROBIĘ!!! 🙂

Wygląda na to, że nie od dziś, ci o których mowa będzie dalej, ci którzy rzekomo wskazują drogę innym,.. tak naprawdę to widocznie sami wielu spraw nadal nie chcą lub nie są w stanie zrozumieć,.. jak i ciągle nie umieją przyznać się do tego, jak i do popełnianych przez nich błędów. Ponadto osoby te ZUPEŁNIE NIE UMIEJĄC W WIARYGODNY SPOSÓB UDOWODNIĆ TYCH ICH RZEKOMO SŁUSZNYCH RACJI, brną dalej w fantazje i oczywiste kłamstwa, patrz poniżej… 😦

…..

18.03.2017 upowszechniłem tu wpis: 33 Nowe źródła genetyczne,.. czyli czy to śmierć teorii o 10,000 lat bytności R1a w Anatolii, na Bałkanach, Puszcie, i pochodzeniu szlachty polskiej od Sarmatów, itp?!!,.. w którym poddałem pod wątpliwość twierdzenie, jakoby ludność z haplogrupą R1a, czyli inaczej Pra-Słowianie,.. rzekomo była obecna na Bałkanach nawet 14,000 wg „rudaweb.pl”, czy też 11,000 jak stwierdził „Orlicki”, czy 10,000 jak to od dawna utrzymuje „Białczyński”.

Wg nich wszystkich Pra-Słowiańskie były już kultury archeologiczne, jak np. Starcevo, Vinca, itd,.. ale nikt z nich nie określił, jak ludność rzekomo posiadająca haplogrupę R1a dostała się na Bałkany… Domniemam, że dostała się tam od strony Anatolii,.. albo przez bagna powstałe z topniejącego lodowca,.. czyli przez dzisiejsze stepy nadczarnomorskie… albo jakoś inaczej… Może tak było, nie wiem, wiem natomiast, że wielokrotnie poddawałem to pod wątpliwość i prosiłem o wskazanie jakichkolwiek dowodów to potwierdzających,.. niestety bezskutecznie.

Wystarczy jednak chcieć poznawać nowe źródła, a nawet  tylko takie „źródło”, jakim jest wikipedia, by zobaczyć i przeczytać to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star%C4%8Devo_culture

The Starčevo culture, sometimes included within a larger grouping known as the Starčevo–Kőrös–Criş culture,[1] is an archaeological culture of Southeastern Europe, dating to the Neolithic period between c. 6200 and 4500 BCE.[2][3]

The village of Starčevo, the type site, is located on the north bank of the Danube in Serbia (Vojvodina province), opposite Belgrade. It represents the earliest settled farming society in the area, although hunting and gathering still provided a significant portion of the inhabitants’ diet.

(…) Origins

There are different opinions about the ethno-linguistic origin of the people of Starčevo culture. According to one opinion, Neolithic cultures of the Balkans were of non-Indo-European origin[9] and Indo-European peoples (originating from eastern Europe) did not settle in this area before the Eneolithic period. According to other opinions, Neolithic cultures of the Balkans were also Indo-European[10] and originated from Anatolia, which some researchers identified with a place of origin of Indo-European peoples.[11] These differing theories are termed the Kurgan hypothesis and the Anatolian hypothesis (see also; Proto-Indo-European Urheimat hypotheses).

In human remains of Starčevo culture in four investigated samples (Lipson et al., 2017) were found three different Y haplogroups: H2, G2a2a1 and G2a2b2b1a. Also there were found four different mtDNA lineages: T1a, N1a1a1, K1a4 and W5. All male and female lineages correspond to those that were found in European Neolithic farmers. (…)

…..

http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/neolithic-europe-its-complicated-lipson.html

Neolithic Europe: it’s complicated (Lipson et al. 2017 preprint)

The dam is breaking. Just in at bioRxiv:

Abstract: Ancient DNA studies have established that European Neolithic populations were descended from Anatolian migrants who received a limited amount of admixture from resident hunter-gatherers. Many open questions remain, however, about the spatial and temporal dynamics of population interactions and admixture during the Neolithic period. Using the highest-resolution genome-wide ancient DNA data set assembled to date—a total of 177 samples, 127 newly reported here, from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Hungary (6000-2900 BCE, n = 98), Germany (5500-3000 BCE, n = 42), and Spain (5500-2200 BCE, n = 37)—we investigate the population dynamics of Neolithization across Europe. We find that genetic diversity was shaped predominantly by local processes, with varied sources and proportions of hunter-gatherer ancestry among the three regions and through time. Admixture between groups with different ancestry profiles was pervasive and resulted in observable population transformation across almost all cultural transitions. Our results shed new light on the ways that gene flow reshaped European populations throughout the Neolithic period and demonstrate the potential of time-series-based sampling and modeling approaches to elucidate multiple dimensions of historical population interactions.

Lipson et al., Parallel ancient genomic transects reveal complex population history of early European farmers, bioRxiv, Posted March 6, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/114488

Update 08/03/2017: In fact, there’s nothing overly complicated in this manuscript. The table below says it all: Neolithic farmers across space and time in most of Europe were very closely related, and only differed in their levels of Western Hunter-Gatherer (HG) admixture. Admittedly, things would look a lot simpler if not for that somewhat unexpected R, R1 and R1b1 in Middle Neolithic Germany, but this doesn’t appear to be a game changer, and is not flagged as such in the preprint.


See also…

Iberian Bell Beakers: zero steppe admix, no R1b?

Posted by Davidski at 12:52:00 AM

…..

No ale nie uprzedzajmy faktów… 🙂 Co myślicie, że już to spaliłem? Wyprowadzam was wszystkich z błędu, bo wieczorem dokończę ten wpis, także czytajcie to powyższe źródło, zacytowane już przeze mnie tu:

https://skrbh.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/33-nowe-zrodla-genetyczne-czyli-czy-to-smierc-teorii-o-10000-lat-bytnosci-r1a-w-anatolii-na-balkanach-puszcie-i-pochodzeniu-szlachty-polskiej-od-sarmatow-itp/

… i czekajcie cierpliwie na ciąg dalszy,.. bo obiecuję, że będzie i strasznie… i śmiesznie… Także i „łowcy ruskich trolli”, czy inni „wolni ludzie”, itp… czekajcie, bo jeszcze zabawię się wami i to nie raz… 🙂

Aku zadowolony i idę z nim na spacer i na piwko, bo jest bardzo ładny, ciepły, słoneczny wiosenny dzień i mamy co razem oblewać… hehehe Także „łowcy ruskich trolli” i wyznawcy 10,000 lat R1a na Bałkanach,.. nie chowajcie się „odważnie” po najciemniejszych i najgłębszych norkach, bo i tak was stamtąd wyciągnę,.. tylko stawajcie w końcu do walki i zacznijcie się jakoś bronić… albo… od razu gińcie zhańbieni!!! Ja SKRiBHa, „ruski troll”, jak mnie nazywacie, wyzywam was na bitwę śmiertelną, wszystkich na raz!!! Rechrechrech 🙂

A… Mieczy nie mam, ale za to już wkrótce podeślę wam więcej źródeł i dowodów, do przemyślenia… Tymczasem nara i przesyłam wam buziaczki słodko lukrowane,.. jak te wasze „prawdziwie objawione dowodzenia” ! 🙂

…..

No i nagle i niespodziewanie dla mnie wszystko zmieniło się i przyznaję się bez bicia, że sam na to nie wpadłem… 😦

Traf chciał, że tego samego dnia, czyli 08.03.2017 dwie osoby które bardzo szanuję, bo min, mają spore pojęcie o genetyce i potrafią samodzielnie myśleć, niezależnie od siebie napisały do mnie o tym samym… Pierwszy napisał do mnie o tym „Robert”, patrz:

https://skribh.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/400-skrbh-11-adrian-leszczynski-krotka-historia-rodu-genetycznego-r1a/#comment-9956

(…) Publikacje w tym roku zyskują inny wymiar, ogromnie wzrasta liczebność probek, po tym jak pojawiło się aż 15 wyników z R1a z Pribałtyki, wczoraj opublikowano 172 wyników neolitycznych próbek, w tym kilkadziesiąt z Węgier, kilkadziesiąt z zachodnich Niemiec i Hiszpanii.

Na Węgrzech z tych kilkudziesięciu probek z przedziału 7500-4500 lat temu nie ma żadnego R1a. Teoria o naddunajjskim, pochodzeniu R1a, a co za tym idzie Słowian upadła. Teoria o pochodzeniu Słowian z k.Vinca również jest przekreślona i jej propagator Cz.Białczyński będzie musiał się z tym pogodzić. I to nie jest już zabawa w jedna próbkę, tych z Węgier mamy ich, jak pobieżnie policzyłem, aż 80, z czego więcej niż połowa to mężczyźni.

Link do pracy, dane są na str.27 i 28:
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/03/06/114488

W Niemczech w tej pracy pojawia się jeden przypadek R1b sprzed 5000 lat oraz jeden z Iberii sprzed 7000 lat, charakterystyczny R1b V88 dla Bliskiego Wschodu i Afryki. Z drugiej strony R1a jakie mamy dotąd z tego regionu Niemczech to kilkanascie próbek sprzed 4600-3000 lat, tymczasem z drugiej strony, z zach. Rosji i Pribałtyki znamy już kilkadziesiąt próbek R1a datowanych na 6000-3000 lat, w tym jedną wyjątkową z Karelii sprzed 8500 lat do którego pod względem genetycznego podobieństwa współcześni Polacy są na miejscu 1. (…)

Drugi był nie kto inny, jak „Adrian Leszczyński”, którego część wiadomości wysłanej do mnie osobiście, ośmieliłem się upowszechnić tu, patrz:

https://skrbh.wordpress.com/2017/03/09/32-dr-c-george-boeree-the-evolution-of-the-indo-european-languages/#comment-313

(…) „Zatem Panie Skribha chyba nie przez Anatolię i Bałkany przyszli R1a do Europy. Proszę zwrócić uwagę, że nie ma zarówno R1a jak i R1b w tym czasie na tym obszarze (chyba tylko jedna próbka). Ciekawe! Wygląda na to, że jednak przyszli z Azji przez step albo północną stroną od Karelii (patrz: najstarsza próbka R1a z Karelii – Jeleni Ostrów).” (…)

Odczekałem z tydzień, w między czasie poczytałem to i owo i ponieważ nikt nigdzie indziej jakoś nie palił się do zajęcia się tym niesamowitym odkryciem, no to zgadzając się z powyższym sam napisałem swój wpis, w którym nie twierdziłem, że TAK BYŁO LUB MUSIAŁO BYĆ,.. ale że WYGLĄDA NA TO, ŻE R1a NIE BYŁO NA BAŁKANACH, ITP,.. BO NIE MA NA TO ŻADNYCH DOWODÓW!!! Na poparcie moich wątpliwości podałem wiele odnośników do źródeł i prac genetycznych, w tym i na tę, traktującą o tym, czyli:

Parallel ancient genomic transects reveal complex population history of early European farmers

Tak znów złożyło się, że zbiegło się to z wpisem autorstwa „Adam Smoliński” o podręczniku pisanym przez osobę zwącej siebie „Dragomira”, traktującym o dziejach Słowian, a dodatkowo „Bez Chwili Zwątpienia” 18 marca 2017 o 17:36 wkleił tam odnośnik, na mój wspomniany wpis. Po kolejnym tygodniu jakoś nikt szczególnie nie bronił, tezy, której wiarygodność podważałem, za to od razu olano o czym napisałem i ponownie przyklejono mi łatkę „ruskiego trolla”…:-(  Tylko Orlicki raczył jakoś szerzej wypowiedzieć się na ten temat, a do tego podpierając to co napisał, nazwijmy to „dowodami”…

Z tego powodu w pierwszej kolejności odpowiem na to, co napisał ten pustynny „łowca ruskich trolli” i zwolennik pomysłu, o rzekomej bytności ludów z haplogrupa R1a na terenie tzw. Bałkanów od 11,000 lat,.. a w kolejnej części lub częściach, (zobaczymy jak to wyjdzie) odniosę się do tego, co napisały, (bądź nie) pozostałe wymienione tu osoby.

Dodatkowo postaram się wyjaśnić jak sprawy mają się z tym obecnie, że czytanie ze zrozumieniem, jak i wyciąganie logicznych wniosków ma sens,.. i dlaczego BRAK DOWODÓW… RÓWNIEŻ MOŻE CZEGOŚ DOWODZIĆ

…..

Całą sprawę z osobą o zwącą siebie Orlicki, można zamknąć w tych słowach, które 2017-03-22 o 12:18 napisałem tu:

https://skribh.wordpress.com/2017/03/21/443-skrbh-34-polnocna-droga-r1a-czyli-min-koniec-bredni-o-tzw-starozytnosci-jezyka-litewskiego-pochodzeniu-tzw-scytow-tocharow-itd/#comment-10195

Karelczyk to czyste EHG R1a M417, pochodzące w prostej linii z R1 Chłopca z Mal’ta z nad Bajkału,.. a tzw. Yamnaja to z okolic stepu WSZYSTKO ZMIESZANE ZE SOBĄ, ale… TAM NIE MA JUŻ R1a M417, tylko Z93, patrz Afanasiewo, jako wschodnia Yamnaya!!! Kliosow walnął kolejnego babola, i ja to temu „łowcy ruskich trolli” i bystremu inaczej schizofrenikowi od „goja” wygarnę w twarz pod koniec tygodnia… Tym razem ostatecznie urwę mu jego pusty łeb i znów wtłukę go nim w glebę, jak młotkiem, aż będzie huczało i dudniło… 🙂

Przejrzyj to w całości, bo tam masz jak na dłoni wszystko wyjaśnione na podstawie źródeł! 🙂

https://skrbh.wordpress.com/2017/03/21/34-polnocna-droga-r1a-czyli-min-koniec-bredni-o-tzw-starozytnosci-jezyka-litewskiego-pochodzeniu-tzw-scytow-tocharow-itd/

Wyjaśniam o co chodziło mi w tych słowach, ale najpierw w tych bystremu inaczej schizofrenikowi od „goja”

Nie tylko ja od bardzo dawna uważam, że Orlicki jest zupełnie niewiarygodnym i baaardzo podejrzanym osobnikiem, a to co głosi niczym od tego jak go oceniam nie odbiega. Wielokrotnie nie tylko ja dawałem temu wyraz, począwszy od tego dnia jak ośmielił się określić Polski i Polaków rasistowskim mianem „goi”, za co NIGDY NIE PRZEPROSIŁ,.. jak i za niezliczoną ilość innych pustynnych krętactw, patrz:

http://bialczynski.pl/2014/05/12/12-05-2014-falszowanie-na-eurowizji-czyli-jakim-sposobem-zawsze-wygrywa-kobieta-z-broda/#comment-16573

(…) Żydzi od wieków się asymilowali kulturowo i obywatelsko z Polakami na polskiej ziemi i często walczyli w obronie Polski z Żydami zdrajcami, których szczególnie przysporzył światu; hitleryzm niemiecki, komunizm rosyjski, syjonizm amerykański, talmudyzm izraelski. Polska II RP, a jeszcze wcześniej Rzeczpospolita szlachecka wykształciła wielkie warstwy żydowstwa współpracującego pokojowo z gojami, zachowującego swoją wiarę, nie uprawiającego talmudyzmu poniżającego gojów, zdolnego do zupełnie innej roli w świecie niż to co obecne izraelsko – amerykańskie lobby żydowskie wyprawia. Dlatego być może rękoma niemieckich bandytów, za przyzwoleniem tego lobby siedzącego w Ameryce i trzymającego banki oraz amerykański przemysł zbrojeniowy w swoich rękach, musiało być wymordowane. Bo służyć mieli talmudo-syjonizmowi, rasowo-narodowej idei panowania nad światem a nie idei łączenie świata w duchu pokoju i przenikania się kultur wszelkich ras oraz tych religii które nie uznają wyższości człowieka nad człowiekiem. (…)

Jego kolejne pokrętne „tłumaczenia”, że raz „i on jest gojem”… albo… że  „i on gojem nie jest”,.. itd, to tylko ciąg dalszy jego zwykłych miłosiernych zagrywek, nic więcej, patrz:

http://bialczynski.pl/2017/03/18/adaqm-smolinski-czy-nowe-podreczniki-do-historii-sa-potrzebne/#comment-34712

(…) Odsyła nas Pani na strony SKHRIBY ale to tutaj ktoś przytoczył jego wypowiedź. Poza tym, na stronie SKHRIBY nie zdołałem nic zamieścić. Nie mogłem. Nie wiem czy to blokada, ale nie udało mi się. I jest ona napisana w sposób ciężki, bardzo niejasny. Trudno dyskutować nad czymś takim. Poruszam tu tylko wątek lodowcowy w stosunku do tej strony, bo jest tutaj mowa o książce Dragomiry, aby przypadkiem nie palnęła za SKHRYBA takiej głupoty.

Widzę że ceni Pani sobie A.S na tyle mocno, że ślepo za nim powtarza kalumnię o „gojach”. Ja droga Pani sam jestem gojem, więc sam siebie epitetowałem. A tak naprawdę nie jest to epitet, tylko określenie odrębności ogólnorasowej wobec rasowych Żydów od nich odmiennej )ich zdaniem). Takie samo, jak nie jest epitetem „czarny” czy „murzyn” czy „Cygan” w polskiej kulturze, tylko takim określeniem rasowym. Rasistowskie określenia są epitetami wtedy, gdy kogoś mają poniżyć, zdyskredytować. Np; ‚cyganienie – oszukiwanie, ty judaszu – ty zdrajco’. Ale to musi być wyraźnie zaznaczone, kontekstowo. Napisałem kiedyś, że Żydzi używają pojęcia goim dla dyskredytowania innych niż oni, w talmudyzmie jako nie – ludzi, pół zwierzęta. I że dlatego nie jestem goim, bo nie jestem zwierzęciem. Ale to był mój protest wobec ich talmudycznej stygmatyzacji takimi kontekstowymi epitetami. Pani Mistrz tego kompletnie nie zrozumiał. Niestety posługuje się Pani jego socjotechniczną zagrywką, co rozumiem, bo lubi jego dorobek, ostre wypowiedzi. Jest ona ukuta tutaj dawno przez tego pana w celu zdyskredytowania mnie,.. (…)

Zwracam uwagę, że tylko w tym powyższym tekście Orlicki PRZYZNAJE SIĘ, że JEDNOCZEŚNIE i nazywał także siebie „gojem”.. i nie nazywał, a dodatkowo twierdzi, że rzekomo TYLKO SIEBIE tak określał, podczas gdy w rzeczywistości nazwał tak co najmniej WSZYSTKIE POLKI I WSZYSTKICH POLAKÓW OBYWATELI 2RP!!! Takich miłościwych tekstów spłodził był już baaardzo wiele…

I dalej do dziś, za każdym razem, kiedy jest przyłapywany na takim miłosiernym lub mondrym mataczeniu, zawsze odstawia ten jego tradycyjny pustynny tradycyjny pustynny teatrzyk, przemienia się w „biedną ofiarę napaści złych pogan”, woła o poszanowanie „jego godności”, jako niczemu nie winnego krześcijanina,.. i takie tam.

Adam Smoliński nie od dziś pisze o tym, co wyprawia ten nad wyraz uparty i obłudny pustynny kłamca i oszczerca… ale to jest jak rzucanie grochem o ścianę… Ja też tak miałem, ale od końca 2014 nie biorę udziału w tej zabawie w kotka i myszkę,.. no przynajmniej nie na stronie „wolnych ludzi”,.. bo gdzie indziej, tylko Orlicki zaczyna sprzedawać te jego pustynne odpusty, tam tępiłem go jak tylko mogłem, patrz np. wspanialarzeczpospolita.pl. Także bez skutku,.. bo jakoś tak składa się, że wielu ma dziwnie miękkie i miłosierne serduszka… Od trzech lat nic nie zmieniło się w tej sprawie… i jest to dla mnie dowód, że ani ten osobnik, ani to co głosił i nadal głosi NIGDY NIE ZASŁUGIWALI na poważne traktowanie, a KAŻDY KTO GO WSPIERA jest jego współpracownikiem!!! 😦

Wg mnie, po tym jak zachowuje się „od zawsze”, i on i to co wypisuje BYŁO I JEST ZUPEŁNIE NIEWIARYGODNE, nie zasługiwało i nadal nie zasługuje na żadną uwagę, bo jest to schizofreniczne i wzajemnie sprzeczne, nawet pomijając to,.. że nigdy niczym nie było udowodnione… Wg nie tylko mnie, Orlicki jest zwykłym pustynnym trollem, który zatruwa swoimi mondrościami każde miejsce, gdzie tylko pojawia się…

I to dlatego jakiekolwiek uwagi tego odrażającego typa z automatu, bez ich czytania wylądują u mnie w oT+(c)HL”aNi albo w C”eLo”S’C/Ti, więc niech i tak nie wysila się, a „odważne bajki”, że rzekomo nie mógł u mnie czegoś napisać, itp. pozostawiam bez komentarza…

Widzisz „goju” lub „nie-goju” Orlicki, rzeczywistość już poznała się na tobie i nawet mój wordpress nie chce cię krętaczu znać!!! 😉 LOL 🙂

I to dlatego na określenie tego wielokrotnego krętacza i kłamcy, wzbudzającego we mnie jedynie skrajne obżydzenie, odrazę i pogardę, użyłem określenie bystremu inaczej schizofrenikowi od „goja””.

Tu jest dodatkowo wyjaśnienie znaczenia słowa schizofrenia:

Schizofrenia (stgr.σχίζειν, schizein, „rozszczepić” i stgr.φρήν, φρεν-, phrēn, phren-, „umysł”) – zaburzenie psychiczne zaliczane do grupy psychoz, czyli stanów charakteryzujących się zmienionym chorobowo, nieadekwatnym postrzeganiem, przeżywaniem, odbiorem i oceną rzeczywistości.Osoby będące w stanie psychozy mają poważnie upośledzoną umiejętność krytycznej, realistycznej oceny własnej osoby, otoczenia i relacji z innymi, a nawet mogą nie być do niej zdolni. (…)

…..

Przejdę teraz do omówienia „dowodów”, jaki Orlicki przedstawił na poparcie swoich poglądów.

1a)

Proszę porównać daty i treść uwag, jakie zamieścił odnosząc się do mojego artykułu:

 

14 uwag do wpisu “36 Odpowiedź „łowcom ruskich trolli”, czyli dlaczego twierdzenie o 10.000 latach bytności R1a na Bałkanach,.. to jak dotąd niczym nie potwierdzona… tylko czysta fantazja 01

  1. Widzę, że teraz nadejszła wiekopomna nowa moda i „łowcy ruskich trolli” bazują na starych i „dobrych” rosyjskich źródłach… 🙂 W porządku, rozumiem, bo jak ktoś z czymś walczy, no to trochę nasiąka tym co zwalcza… Żeby było wam miło, no to puszczam tu cytat ze strony z rosyjskojęzycznej wikipedii poświęconą nowym odkryciom genetycznym, dotyczącym pierwszych europejskich rolników z kultury Starcevo,.. wśród których niestety jak do teraz NIE MA ZNALEZIONYCH PRÓBEK HAPLOGRUPY R1A… Puściłbym też stronę w języku polskim,.. ale niestety taka strona NIE ISTNIEJE…

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%9A%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%88%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BA%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B0

    Старчево-кришская культура (Starčevo-Körös-Criş)неолитическая культура Подунавья VII—V тысячелетий до н. э. Название получила по древнейшим поселениям в Сербии (Старчево), Венгрии (Кёрёш) и Румынии (Криш). Основное занятие — земледелие (пшеница, просо, ячмень), скотоводство, охота и рыболовство. Носители культуры селились в обмазанных глиной плетеных домах, стоявших вблизи рек. Артефакты представлены шлифованными каменными топорами и грубой кухонной керамикой. Сменяется новой волной анатолийских земледельцев — культурой Винча.

    Генезис

    Старчево-кришская культура имеет анатолийские истоки[3]. Она возникла в местах, где ранее существовала мезолитическая культура Лепенски-Вир, однако не продолжает её традиции, а является новой в антропологическом и культурном плане. Древнейшими памятниками старчево-кришской культуры (прото-Старчево) являются болгарские памятники Анзабегово-Вршник, Гълъбник и Слатина, где найдена характерная белая расписная старчевская керамика[4]. В то же время, старчевская культура не является древнейшей неолитической культурой Балкан – ей предшествует культура монохромной керамики (Крайницы), Ходжа-Чешме III/IV и Неа-Никомедия (красная на кремовом керамика), синхронные анатолийским культурам Улуджак V/IV и Хаджилар VI. (…)

    Палеогенетика

    У представителя культуры Кёрёш из венгерского местонахождения Tiszaszőlős-Domaháza, жившего примерно 5650—5780 лет до н. э., была обнаружена Y-хромосомная гаплогруппа I2a и митохондриальная гаплогруппа R3. У жившей примерно 5570—5710 лет до н. э. представительницы культуры Кёрёш из венгерского местонахождения Berettyóújfalu-Morotva-liget была обнаружена митохондриальная гаплогруппа K1[10]. У представителей старчевской культуры из местонахождения Alsónyék-Bátaszék, живших около 5700 лет до н. э., были обнаружены Y-хромосомная гаплогруппа F и митохондриальные гаплогруппы T1a и T2b[11]. Также у представителей старчево-кришской культуры были обнаружены Y-хромосомные гаплогруппы G2a, G2a2b, H2 и митохондриальные группы H, H5, HV0, J, J1c, K, K1, K1a, N1a1, N1a1a, N1a1a1b, T2, T2c, T2e, X2, V, V6, W, U3, U4[12].(…)

    …..

    Nie ma znalezionych tam próbek haplogrupy R1a,.. ale za to znaleziono haplogrupę F!!! 🙂 LOL 🙂

    Polubienie

  2. Sława SKRIBHa- mam pytanie, odrzucamy teorie Bałkanów, wiec zostaje Nam albo droga z Bajkału, albo z bliskiego Wschodu, wtedy Paweł Szydłowski ma racje i wpisujemy się w nurt oficjalnej wersji biblii jak to tutaj:http://www.tropie.tarnow.opoka.org.pl/polacy_korzenie.htm
    Oczywiście, źródła rosyjskie są nafaszerowane propagandą, jak z resztą zachodnie, na czele z największym ADL, – jaka jest Twoja teoria przybycia „korzeni SlovYan” na tereny Białych Lędźwi- czy idziemy drogą lingwistyczną, kulturową, genetyczną – jaki Etnos?!!! Biorąc pod uwagę, tradycje, czyli przekazy ustne, z Oyca na syna – to ten raczej praktykował całopalne rytuały pogrzebowe, jeżeli przyjmiemy tradycje Matki, czyli domniemywam, że obcego kręgu kulturowego, to może jest tworzony nowy kult pochówków w mogiłach.
    Genetyka, nie jest w stanie odzwierciedlić zachowań kulturowych, lecz wskazuje pewien rodzaj ewolucji zasięgu cech kulturowych na danym obszarze. Proszę abyś jedną z tych dróg wykluczył, która Twoim zdaniem jest mniej wiarygodna, w odniesieniu do genetyki.

    Polubienie

    • No dobra Laxim, mi wystarczy już tego dobrego! Otrzymujesz pierwsze ostrzeżenie!!!

      Uprzejmie proszę przestań w końcu pieprzyć, jak potłuczona 7 letnia dziewczynka, bo to nie strona „wolnych ludzi” i ucuciowe pieprzenie tu nie przechodzi!!! Nie che mi się ciągnąć tego wątku dalej, ale ja widzę, co wypisujesz nie tylko tu… Masz coś do powiedzenia, to przemyśl to i poprzyj to źródłami, ale jeśli masz w zanadrzu tylko takie coś, co puściłeś,.. to sobie lepiej odpuść puszczanie tu pustynnej propagandy, bo wykopię cię do oT(c)HL”aNi w trybie natychmiastowym!!! Obiecuję!!! 🙂

      „(…) odrzucamy teorie Bałkanów, wiec zostaje Nam albo droga z Bajkału, albo z bliskiego Wschodu, wtedy Paweł Szydłowski ma racje i wpisujemy się w nurt oficjalnej wersji biblii „(…)

      Jakie „My”, co to qfa, jest „My”… Orlicki, Białczyński, rudaweb.pl, ty i inni wam podobni!?!! A od kiedy to ja należę do „My”, co to do teraz jeszcze wierzyli i teraz dopiero odrzucili te fantastyczne niczym nie poparte pobożne życzenia, hm? Masz na to że i ja tak samo myślałem jakiś dowód, hm? Zwycięstwo ma wielu ojców, a porażka jest zawsze sierotką… hehehe…

      Niech sobie „łowcy troli ruskich” przypomną „północną drogę R1b”… i jak ja zachowałem się, kiedy mi udowodniono, na podstawie źródeł i próbek, że R1b bytowała na północ od Jeziora / Morza Czarnego… Oto mój wzór zachowania… Czekam na ich odpowiedź… Doczekam się?

      Jaka „droga z bliskiego Wschodu”, no żesz qfa mać, przez co przez tunele nad przestrzenne?!! Jaki Paweł Szydłowski, jakie pustynne źródła, jakie Białe Lędźwie, itd?!! 😦

      Wykluczyłem, co miałem wykluczyć…

      Polubienie

  3. Dosłownie SKRIBHA – jesteś alfa i omega, przepraszam, że naginam Twój jasny i nie zahamowany pęd do tego, czego tak bardzo nie chcesz napisać. Każdy z Was próbuje udowadniać sobie racje – no ale,….. gdybyś śledził uważnie, a nie zaciągał się swoją pychą, wyniosłością, to byś wiedział – że to co chcesz udowodnić – jest nie do udowodnienia. Bo zarzucasz wszystkim – jak to piszesz – sianie propagandy -No cóż, jak to juz mi napisano – bądź zdrów. Życzę Ci dużo przyjaciół, bo najgorsze zostać przy swojej racji – samemu. Wykluczyłeś wszystko i wszystkich – oczywiście, że Zwycięstwo smakuje lepiej jak sie jest samemu. Myślenie – internet wszystko przyjmie, – dziękuje, za pozytywne słowa. Pogody ducha życzę. Nikt nie poluje, na Twoje racje – bo odnoszę takie wrażenie, poparte Twymi słowami – w przeciwieństwie – uważam, że gdyby świat był taki prosty jak Ty próbujesz to podtrzymywać „źródłami” to dzisiaj zapewne nie musiałbyś tracić swego cennego czasu na „ludzkie odpowiedzi”.
    A co do tego, filmu – Watykan ma mld euro, i mln wyznawców – myślisz, że pozwolą Tobie na udowodnienie twych tez, niestety w propagandzie sa niedoścignieni – jak z resztą to widać na załączonym linku. Z serca Ci życzę, sukcesu.
    Pozdrawiam

    Polubienie

    • Otrzymujesz drugie ostrzeżenie, patrz powyżej. Jeśli chcesz móc pisać tu… Powtarzam, to nie jest strona „wolnych ludzi” i należy przestrzegać MOICH ZASAD, albo… droga wolna… Została ci jeszcze jedna szansa, więc jej nie zmarnuj…

      Uważam, że straszliwie marudzisz i piszesz same dęte bzdedy, coś jak drugi mały Orlicki… Jeśli tylko to masz mi do „przekazania”, patrz powyżej, to pożegnajmy się lepiej od razu już teraz, a zaoszczędzisz sobie wstydu, a mi klepania w klawiaturę… równie „sensownego”, jak twoje „racje”… Twoje „opinie” o mnie i o „niemożliwości udowodnienia” tego, czy tamtego nie obchodzą, więc zachowaj je dla siebie lub tobie podobnych i nie męcz mnie, ani nie pouczaj, bo uważam że o poruszanych przeze mnie sprawach wiesz nic, albo i mniej. Dotarło?

      Polubienie

  4. Polecam, choć trochę starawe, ale i tak ciekawe:

    https://aleximreh.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/the-getes-big-bang-theory/

    The Getes big-bang theory

    neolithic-expansionfarming

    Byzantine Creation Era ”The Making of the World”- Facerea Lumii – 5600 BCthe Indo-European_isoglossesbreaking of the Bosphorus, the Fresh Water Lake becomes the Salt Water Black Sea.
    The Proto Getes living around the banks of Black Sea migrate outwards. ProtoGetes going up the Danube to Western Europe became ProtoCelts and ProtoGetes going east became Massagetae / IndoAryans – vedic & iranian cultures. Present day Romania is the turntable, the intersection of all indo-european branches!!

    5kBC1pastoralR1b origin is SE of Caspian sea. R1b goes round S of Caspian Sea than to the N of Black Sea. Here we have the SECOND BIG BANGThe southern Steppe R1b culture culture mixed with northern forest-steppe R1a culture AND Old Europe I2+J1/E1/G Cucuteni farming culture!! This mixture produced the Arian Getes.

    r1b-migration-mapBut the center of gravity in my opinion is not the N of the Black Sea – it is the Cucuteni/Vinca/Hamangia area, ie Old Europe around present day Romania, which is the area with BIGGEST population. I2 is the basic layer which absorbed first Haplogroup_I-bordersthe J1/E1/G neolithic farmers that came from Middle Asia producing the Old Europe civilization. This is the FIRST BIG BANG, based on FARMING the first mixture that produced a stronger culture, better technologies, better living conditions, population growth!! The farming, the east shores of the Black Sea and the lower Danube basin produced the biggest population growth &concentration whichlater started to expand, to Western Europe – the ProCelts and than through the Aryan migrations, to the Pontic Caspian steppes and down to the vedic and iranian cultures (…)

    Polubienie

  5. http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/neolithic-europe-its-complicated-lipson.html

    Romulus said…
    The I2a2a1b1 from Neolithic Hungary LBK 5300-4900 (B.C.?) is on the same line as Yamnaya / Catacomb Russia Ulan IV, kurgan 4, grave 8 [RISE552] M 2849-2146 BC 971,022 I2a2a1b1b L699; Malyshev reads I2a2a1b1b2 (S12195) T2a1a

    With the exception of the new I2a2 from Ukraine Vasilyevka 3 [skeleton 37; HG1] M 11,143-10,591 cal BP I2a2a-P220 /S119+ U5b2

    I2a2 is only found in a Neolithic farmer context and now there sure is a lot of it. Safe to call it a Neolithic Farming lineage indigenous to Easter Balkans.

    Unetice Germany Esperstedt [I0114/ESP 2] M 2131-1979 BC I2a2b L368+, L181+, P218+, P217+, M438+, L34-, P223-, M223-, [L39+] I3a

    Vatya Hungary Erd 4 [RISE479] M 2000-1500 BC
    884,093 I2a2a1a2a L1229
    T2b

    Vatya Hungary Szazhalombatta-Foldvar [RISE247] M 1746-1611 BC 237,322
    I2a2a1
    CTS9183 H11a

    Urnfield Germany Lichtenstein Cave, near Dorste, Lower Saxony [M1, M2, M7] M 1000 BC I2a2b Ii in table 2; Z5REF in Ysearch H 3 samples Schilz 2006
    Urnfield Germany Lichtenstein Cave [M3, M6] M 1000 BC I2a2b Iii in table 2 H 2 samples Schilz 2006
    Urnfield Germany Lichtenstein Cave [M14] M 1000 BC I2a2b? Iii? in table 2 H Schilz 2006
    Urnfield Germany Lichtenstein Cave [M4, M5, M19] M 1000 BC I2a2b Iiii in table 2 H 3 samples Schilz 2006
    Urnfield Germany Lichtenstein Cave [M8, M16] M 1000 BC I2a2b Ii in table 2; Z5REF in Ysearch U5b
    March 7, 2017 at 9:43 AM

    Matt said…
    At the moment, it seems in ancient dna the solid deep link of R to ANE is MA-1 having R (basal to R1 / R2 or sidebranch), and then, in extremely simplified terms, so far you have WHG related cultures (EHG and WHG proper) usually in Eastern Europe, having the R1 descending clades, possibly from this ANE source, and Iran_Neolithic, which is highly diverged from WHG but seems to have some link to ANE, having R2.
    March 7, 2017 at 3:02 PM

    UWAGA!!! BARDZO CIEKAWE DOTYCZĄCE ZMIAN KLIMATU

    batman said…
    Please note that the climatical fluctations at the end of ice-time (23.000 – 12.000 yrs BP) strongly decimated all the largers species that existed during the Eurasian paleolithic.

    At the very end of this extreme fluctations – during the Younger Dryas – the continent went through a „Megafaunal Mass-extinction Event” – where 2/3 of the mamalian species of Europe and northern Eurasia (above the 40th parallel) – such as giant deer, elk and mamoths – went completely EXTINCT.

    A similar extinction is also recorded in the North Americas, during the very same millenia; 12.900 – 12.000 yrs BP.

    Among the few surviviors were a bunch of humans, who apparently had a biology and a culture very well adapted to the cold and dim environment of ice-age Europe. Besides, among the large animals surviving where species like dogs and ducks, goats and cows, pigs and horses, deers and reindeers, wolves and wolverines, bears and beavers.

    Half of them may have needed human assistance to manage the extremes of the YD. Which may explain the extensive use of domesticated animals that evolves as the arctic and semi-arctic climate-zones are re-populated.

    Due to the extreme decimation of these species they all went through a generic and gentic bottle-neck during the Younger Dryas. Consequently we have a strong genetic „re-shuffle” (or „re-start”) after the YD.

    Checking the genetic maps of Eurasia before and after the LGM (23-18.000 yrs BP) we see a genetic re-shuffle. Then a similar and even stronger re-shuffle takes place with the YD.

    Which means that the specific y-dna and mt-dna of the Paleolithic gene-pools were decimated and bottle-necked at least twice. Which again means that MOST of the dna-types and lines from Paleolithic samples are basically extinct – and thus „blindgates” in runs with mesolithic Eurasians and all their present descendants.

    Which again begs the question of locating the Caucasian „urheimat”, to explain the mesolithic, neolithic and present distribution of y-dna-lines.

    Then we may find the origin of agriculture and the historical stem of the I-E languages to evolve from the same area of origin – as a quintessence of the traditions that made the genetic ancestors of the Caucasians able to survive 40.000 years of ice-time, north of the 55th parallel.
    March 7, 2017 at 3:46 PM

    Polubienie

  6. Ktoś pewno powie, że jestem okrutny,.. ale to nie ja… to prawda bywa bolesna… hehehe To jest tak dobre, że przetłumaczę komentarz załączony do nowego artykułu zacytowanego poniżej:

    http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/heavily-sex-biased-population.html

    Tuesday, March 28, 2017

    „Heavily sex-biased” population dispersals into the Indian Subcontinent

    And so it begins. BMC Evolutionary Biology has a very interesting, but hardly surprising, new paper on the population history of the Indian Subcontinent. Emphasis is mine:

    Background: India is a patchwork of tribal and non-tribal populations that speak many different languages from various language families. Indo-European, spoken across northern and central India, and also in Pakistan and Bangladesh, has been frequently connected to the so-called “Indo-Aryan invasions” from Central Asia ~3.5 ka and the establishment of the caste system, but the extent of immigration at this time remains extremely controversial. South India, on the other hand, is dominated by Dravidian languages. India displays a high level of endogamy due to its strict social boundaries, and high genetic drift as a result of long-term isolation which, together with a very complex history, makes the genetic study of Indian populations challenging.

    Results: We have combined a detailed, high-resolution mitogenome analysis with summaries of autosomal data and Y-chromosome lineages to establish a settlement chronology for the Indian Subcontinent. Maternal lineages document the earliest settlement ~55–65 ka (thousand years ago), and major population shifts in the later Pleistocene that explain previous dating discrepancies and neutrality violation. Whilst current genome-wide analyses conflate all dispersals from Southwest and Central Asia, we were able to tease out from the mitogenome data distinct dispersal episodes dating from between the Last Glacial Maximum to the Bronze Age. Moreover, we found an extremely marked sex bias by comparing the different genetic systems.

    Conclusions: Maternal lineages primarily reflect earlier, pre-Holocene processes, and paternal lineages predominantly episodes within the last 10 ka. In particular, genetic influx from Central Asia in the Bronze Age was strongly male-driven, consistent with the patriarchal, patrilocal and patrilineal social structure attributed to the inferred pastoralist early Indo-European society. This was part of a much wider process of Indo-European expansion, with an ultimate source in the Pontic-Caspian region, which carried closely related Y-chromosome lineages, a smaller fraction of autosomal genome-wide variation and an even smaller fraction of mitogenomes across a vast swathe of Eurasia between 5 and 3.5 ka.

    There are now sufficient high-quality Y-chromosome data available (especially Poznik et al. [58]) to be able to draw clear conclusions about the timing and direction of dispersal of R1a (Fig. 5). The indigenous South Asian subclades are too young to signal Early Neolithic dispersals from Iran, and strongly support Bronze Age incursions from Central Asia. The derived R1a-Z93 and the further derived R1a-Z94 subclades harbour the bulk of Central and South Asian R1a lineages [55, 58], as well as including some Russian and European lineages, and have been variously dated to 5.6 [4.0;7.3] ka [55], 4.5-5.3 ka with expansions ~4.0-4.5 ka [58], or 4.7 [4.0;5.5] ka (Yfull tree v4.10 [54]). The South Asian R1a-L657, dated to ~4.2 ka [3.3;5.1] (Yfull tree v4.10 [54]]), is the largest (in the 1KG dataset) of several closely related subclades within R1a-Z94 of very similar time depth. Moreover, not only has R1a been found in all Sintashta and Sintashta-derived Andronovo and Srubnaya remains analysed to date at the genome-wide level (nine in total) [76, 77], and been previously identified in a majority of Andronovo (2/3) and post-Andronovo Iron Age (Tagar and Tachtyk: 6/6) male samples from southern central Siberia tested using microsatellite analysis [101], it has also been identified in other remains across Europe and Central Asia ranging from the Mesolithic up until the Iron Age (Fig. 5).

    The other major member of haplogroup R in South Asia, R2, shows a strikingly different pattern. It also has deep non-Subcontinental branches, nesting a South Asian specific subclade. But the deep lineages are mainly seen in the eastern part of the Near East, rather than Central Asia or eastern Europe, and the Subcontinental specific subclade is older, dating to ~8 ka [55].

    Altogether, therefore, the recently refined Y-chromosome tree strongly suggests that R1a is indeed a highly plausible marker for the long-contested Bronze Age spread of Indo-Aryan speakers into South Asia, although dated aDNA evidence will be needed for a precise estimate of its arrival in various parts of the Subcontinent. aDNA will also be needed to test the hypothesis that there were several streams of Indo-Aryan immigration (each with a different pantheon), for example with the earliest arriving ~3.4 ka and those following the Rigveda several centuries later [12]. Although they are closely related, suggesting they likely spread from a single Central Asian source pool, there do seem to be at least three and probably more R1a founder clades within the Subcontinent [58], consistent with multiple waves of arrival. Genomic Y-chromosome phylogeography is in its infancy compared to mito-genome analysis so it is of course likely that the picture will evolve with sequencing of further South Asian Y-chromosomes, but the picture is already sufficiently clear that we do not expect it to change drastically.

    Silva et al., A genetic chronology for the Indian Subcontinent points to heavily sex-biased dispersals, BMC Evolutionary Biology, Published: 23 March 2017, DOI: 10.1186/s12862-017-0936-9

    See also…

    Children of the Divine Twins

    The Aryan Trail (3500 – 1500 BC)

    The Poltavka outlier

    Indian genetic history in three simple graphs

    The peopling of South Asia: an illustrated guide

    Caste is in the genes

    Posted by Davidski 2017-03-28

    …..

    Davidski said…
    Davidski powiedział / napisał…

    South Asian R1a is irrelevant, since we already have Mesolithic R1a samples from Northeastern Europe.

    R1a z Azji południowo-zachodniej nie ma znaczenia, ponieważ mamy już próbki R1a z mezolitu (ze średniej epoki kamiennej) z Europy północno-wschodniej.

    https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mezolit

    Mezolit[1] (gr. mesos ‚średni’ i lithos ‚kamień’), środkowa epoka kamienia, epipaleolit[2] – środkowy okres epoki kamienia trwający od około 11000 – 7000 p.n.e. na Bliskim Wschodzie i około 8000 – 4800 p.n.e. na terenach Niżu Środkowoeuropejskiego, stanowiący stopniowe przejście od paleolitu do neolitu i związany z postępującymi przemianami klimatycznymi (schyłek zlodowacenia). (…)

    There’s no way that R1a can be a Mesolithic Northeastern European lineage, and at the same time indigenous to South Asia or even Iran.

    Nie ma możliwości, aby (haplogrupa) R1a mogła mieć rodowód mezolityczny (pochodzić ze średniej epoki kamiennej) z (terenów) Europy północno-wschodniej, a jednocześnie być rodzimą (pochodzić z) dla Azji południowej, a nawet Iranu.

    It obviously arrived in South Asia during the Bronze Age mostly as R1a-Z645(Z93+), in a population closely related to the early Corded Ware rich in R1a-Z645.

    (Haplogrupa R1a) oczywiście przybyła do Azji Południowej w czasie tzw. Epoki Brązu, głównie jako R1a-Z645 (Z93 +), w ludności ściśle związanej z wczesną tzw. kulturą ceramiki sznurowej, bogatej w R1a-Z645.

    March 29, 2017 at 4:53 AM

    Polubienie

  7. No i co wy na te dane?

    http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/ancient-dna-points-to-eurasian-steppe.html

    Monday, January 19, 2015

    Ancient DNA points to the Eurasian steppe as a proximate source for Indo-European migrations into Europe

    This is yet another teaser for the upcoming Corded Ware/Yamnaya paper from the Reich lab. Sadly, it doesn’t mention Y-chromosome haplogroups, so perhaps the authors are going to tackle this issue later. However, check out what they say about the German and Spanish farmers being of the same stock, and the resurgence of hunter-gatherer ancestry in Western Europe after the early Neolithic. Fascinating stuff.

    Ancient DNA points to the Eurasian steppe as a proximate source for Indo-European migrations into Europe
    David Reich and Nick Patterson

    Abstract: We generated genome-wide data from 65 Europeans who lived between 8,000-3,000 years ago by enriching ancient DNA libraries for a target set of about 390,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms. This strategy decreases the sequencing required to obtain genome-wide data from ancient DNA samples by around 1000-fold, allowing us to study an order of magnitude more individuals than previous studies and to obtain new insights about the past. We show that in western Europe, the farmers of both Germany and Spain >7,000 years ago were descended from a common ancestral stock. These farmers did not replace the earlier hunter-gatherers, but continued to mix with them, leading to a resurgence of hunter-gatherer ancestry in both Germany and Spain ~1,000-2,000 years later. In eastern Europe, the hunter-gatherers of Russia >7,000 years ago were distinct from those of the west, having an increased affinity to a ~24,000 year old individual from Siberia, but this affinity was reduced by ~5,000 years ago in the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists because of admixture with a population of Near Eastern ancestry. Western and Eastern Europe collided ~4,500 years ago with the appearance of the Corded Ware people in Central Europe, who derived at least two thirds of their ancestry from an eastern population closely related to the Yamnaya. The evidence for mass migration into Europe thousands of years after the arrival of agriculture, in combination with linguistic and archaeological data, makes a compelling case for the steppe as a proximate source for the spread of Indo-European languages into Europe.

    Source: INA Kolloquium Ws 2014/15

    Update 11/02/2015: Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe (Haak et al. 2015 preprint) .

    Posted by Davidski at 8:07:00 AM

    Maju said…
    „These farmers did not replace the earlier hunter-gatherers, but continued to mix with them, leading to a resurgence of hunter-gatherer ancestry in both Germany and Spain ~1,000-2,000 years later”.

    Exactly as I expected. The resurgence must be attributed to Megalithic (and BB) expansion.

    „In eastern Europe, the hunter-gatherers of Russia >7,000 years ago were distinct from those of the west, having an increased affinity to a ~24,000 year old individual from Siberia”…

    Again exactly as I expected.

    „… but this affinity was reduced by ~5,000 years ago in the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists because of admixture with a population of Near Eastern ancestry”.

    This is interestingly novel. Is it maybe when the R1a people arrived from Iran/Turkey (as per Underhill)?

    Archaeologically speaking, we know little of the exact origins of the PIE or early Kurgan people. Samara has only been dug up to the Neolithic layer, before it is a mystery.

    In any case it seems to imply that IE-speaking Kurgan peoples, carriers of ANE into Europe, were also carrying an unknown fraction of both WHG-like and EEF-like genomes (although surely subtly different from those Western references), rendering the analysis even more complicated.

    „Corded Ware people in Central Europe (…) derived at least two thirds of their ancestry from an eastern population closely related to the Yamnaya”.

    That’s a figure. And a big one indeed! Wonder how Corded compares with their Eastern BB successors, my impression is that they were not fully related, as BB probably gathered rather the pre-IE substrate, even if under IE language and still coalescing identity clues.
    January 19, 2015 at 11:30 AM

    Maju said…
    „It’s very confusing why Yamna genomes from Samara which is pretty far east had so much WHG(maybe our estimations were wrong and they had under 30% WHG), when Asians have so little WHG”.

    That’s because both Western and Eastern pre-Neolithic Europeans descended from the same original founder populations, associated to Aurignacian and Gravettian cultures. Soon they diverged, with the Eastern group admixing with paleo-Siberians (different from East Asians and rather akin by origin to Europeans, West Asians and maybe Indians, as well as partly to Native Americans), but they still retained a „European aboriginal” affinity, detected here as WHG.

    It’s important to understand that:

    1. Earliest UP or „Aurignacoid” expanded from probably West Asia (Iran?, Uzbekistan?) to Europe, Altai, West Asia and probably much of NE Africa, as well as maybe India as well (not too clear how earliest UP procceded in the southern arch yet).
    2. Already in Europe, Aurignacian expanded from Central Europe in West and East directions c. 41 Ka BP.

    3. Later, also in Europe, a second wave (maybe of West Asian origin) known as Gravettian and associated with the famous „Crô-Magnon” man, spread in the same fashion from Central Europe, reaching as far as Central Siberia (Mal’ta for example belongs to Gravettian culture). This happened after c. 32 Ka BP.

    4. After that, Western and Eastern Europe evolved separately. So the affinity between Eastern and Western paleo-Europeans must be attributed to steps 1, 2 and 3, and shouldn’t be any more recent.
      January 19, 2015 at 11:41 AM

    Davidski said…
    Okay, firstly, I find it very difficult to believe that the Near Eastern farmers who lowered the levels of ANE on the steppe by ~5,000 YBP (but probably appeared there much earlier during the Neolithic) also brought R1a to Eastern Europe.

    What I think happened is what we already know happened in Central Europe, which is that is male hunter-gatherers often mated with female farmers. In other words, R1a looks to me like an eastern hunter-gatherer lineage that expanded during the Chalcolithic with a subset of the mixed hunter-gatherer/farmer population from the Russian steppe. It arrived in the Near East with ANE and the Indo-Europeans.

    Also, I find it hard to believe that there’s no WHG in Central Asia, considering that this is what the K8 results show, and also that Tajiks have higher affinity to Loschbour than Armenians do (so their WHG affinity can’t be mediated entirely via farmer gene flow from the Near East).

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQMkNod1ZNZldvUHc/view?usp=sharing
    January 19, 2015 at 1:23 PM

    apostateimpressions said…
    „In eastern Europe, the hunter-gatherers of Russia … The evidence for mass migration into Europe”

    If the Eastern HG were long in Russia, then why do the authors say that there is evidence for „mass migration into Europe”? Why could then EHGs not have just spread from eastern Europe into the West?

    „These farmers did not replace the earlier hunter-gatherers, but continued to mix with them, leading to a resurgence of hunter-gatherer ancestry in both Germany and Spain ~1,000-2,000 years later.”

    Surely a resurgence of HGs would have depended on those who did not mix. The claim that Neos did not replace HGs seems false. They took over most of the land.

    The authors seem to have a preset agenda of mass migration into Europe and mixing. Maybe they are just PC?
    January 19, 2015 at 2:22 PM

    Davidski said…
    When I read the line „mass migration into Europe” in the context of the entire abstract I actually see „mass migration from the Russian steppe deeper into Europe”.

    Also, even if the farmers took over most of the land (which doesn’t sound right to me, because only some of the land in Europe at the time was suitable for the early Neolithic farming package), that doesn’t mean pure hunter-gatherers didn’t manage to hang on for over a thousand years on the peripheries of the Neolithic settlements. It’s these people who would have mixed with the farmers very gradually, as both groups became more familiar with each other and less hostile. As a result, hunter-gatherer ancestry would rise among the farmer population, and thus hunter-gatherer ancestry would increase as part of the total ancestry in Europe, because farmers had the demographic advantage.
    January 19, 2015 at 2:31 PM

    apostateimpressions said…
    Well, we have a common use of the word Europe and migration from the eastern half of Europe into the western is correctly stated as „migration ACROSS Europe” and not „into Europe”.

    To say that HGs survived on the periphery does not mean that farmers did not replace them in much of Europe. The statement that farmers „did not replace” HGs misses all of the replacement that did take place.

    And the suggestion that „mixing led to” a resurgence of HGs is crass.

    A better statement would have been that „farmers gradually replaced HGs in much of Europe, although some mixing did take place; HGs survived on the peripheries, which led to a resurgence, and some HGs spread from east Europe to the west.”

    But no, they are clearly pushing the idea of „mass immigration into Europe and mixing.”

    It is plain PC.
    January 19, 2015 at 3:00 PM

    Chad Rohlfsen said…
    Yamnaya is modeled as 50% Armenian and 50% Karelian. You can’t get 51% WHG with that. Our model follows the outline of the study. It could be that Yamnaya is 23%ANE, Corded at 16%, and Bell Beaker at 13%. Either way, they have to be close to 40% Near Eastern, as that is about half of what Armenians are.
    January 20, 2015 at 5:04 PM

    Davidski said…
    Kurti, The Karelian genomes are from the Mesolithic, so they probably have 0% Near Eastern admixture. Thus, 50/50 Armenian/Karelian is much less than 50% Near Eastern.
    January 20, 2015 at 7:26 PM

    Davidski said…
    Ryan, There’s no evidence at the moment that Near Eastern R1a is ancestral to European R1a.

    The last Underhill paper doesn’t provide such evidence, even though the authors think that it does, and many people believe them.

    The data in that paper show the presence of a rare form of R1a-M420* in the Near East, which, judging by its haplotypes, is the result of a recent founder effect in the region.

    We don’t know when and how that R1a-M420* ended up in the Near East, and what its origins are. But it’s not ancestral to R1a-M417, and thus to European R1a.

    Also, like I said, why would a population that lowered the level of ANE on the steppe bring R1a to the steppe? Mal’ta boy, the main ANE proxy, belonged to R* and lived on the steppe.

    The Near East is not a plausible source of Y-DNA R for Europe. To me it looks like a sink.

    Also, Iberia could not have been a reservoir of ANE, because if it was, then we’d hear about it in this last Reich abstract, because it features samples from Spain.
    January 21, 2015 at 3:20 PM

    Polubienie

    • A tu dalsze zagadki dla tych zwolenników teorii himalajsko-anatolijsko-bałkańskiej. Umiecie to przeczytać, zrozumieć i wytłumaczyć, hm?

      Ryan said…
      Davidski – „We don’t know when and how that R1a-M420* ended up in the Near East, and what its origins are. But it’s not ancestral to R1a-M417, and thus to European R1a.”

      Fair enough. They’re operating under the assumption that the greatest diversity will be found close to the origin, but the diversity in the Zagros may just be because it is from one of the earliest migrations from the Urheimat, with that diversity subsequently being lost in the steppe due to the various demographic turnovers there.

      It really won’t be settled until we get many more ancient DNA samples from the steppe, the Zagros and Siberia that predate the expansion of R1a.

      I’d like to point you back to this post of yours from last year again though: http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2014/01/another-look-at-lazaridis-et-al-ancient.html

      You say you don’t really know where the Near Eastern R1a comes in. The microblades figure from that posts suggests it could also be a parallel migration from Siberia that occurred simultaneous to a migration to the Pontic steppe. Just throwing that out there.

      We’re not really talking about the Near East there though so much as we’re talking about the interface between the Caucasus, the Near East and Central Asia.

      „Also, like I said, why would a population that lowered the level of ANE on the steppe bring R1a to the steppe?”

      A counter intuitive suggestion I suppose. The introduction of agriculture to Europe seemed to bias the genomes of the population in favour of the migrants in terms of the Y DNA, and in favour of the indigenous people in terms of the mitochondrial DNA. Why would we expect something different in the Ukraine?

      But yah, I am arguing that the surviving R1 lineage came from the group that had less ANE heritage (though not none), which I suppose isn’t all that logical.

      Re: R1b in Spain – the coverage in terms of samples isn’t exactly impressive. There doesn’t seem to be evidence of ancient R1b anywhere else that I’m aware of either, so it must be „hiding” somewhere unsampled so far.

      So we just haven’t been lucky enough to find ancestral R1b yet, or it was present in an area that is now inaccessible – under water or in the Sahara or something, though I think that’s unlikely.

      Definitely a big mystery so far. It seems to predate IE expansion to the region at least, so while IE is probably the largest source of ANE in Europe, it may not be the only one.
      January 21, 2015 at 5:12 PM

      Nirjhar007 said…
      @David
      „There’s no evidence at the moment that Near Eastern R1a is ancestral to European R1a.”
      Its more about the Iranian just wait for the aDNA from there and you will get it.

      The last Underhill paper doesn’t provide such evidence, even though the authors think that it does, and many people believe them.

      ”The data in that paper show the presence of a rare form of R1a-M420* in the Near East, which, judging by its haplotypes, is the result of a recent founder effect in the region.”
      The Basal clades are in Iran believe or not.

      ”We don’t know when and how that R1a-M420* ended up in the Near East, and what its origins are. But it’s not ancestral to R1a-M417, and thus to European R1a.”
      But 420 is present in Iran last time i checked can you please clarify these conclusion of Underhill et al. then?
      ”Of the 24 R1a-M420*(xSRY10831.2) chromosomes in our data set, 18 were sampled in Iran and 3 were from eastern Turkey.”

      ”Similarly, five of the six observed R1a1-SRY10831.2*(xM417/Page7) chromosomes were also from Iran, with the sixth occurring in a Kabardin individual from the Caucasus. Owing to the prevalence of basal lineages and the high levels of haplogroup diversities in the region, we find a compelling case for the Middle East, possibly near present-day Iran, as the geographic origin of hg R1a.”

      Anyway there is the migration from Zagros to Urals starting from 6000 bc that you can’t deny.
      ”As per above, I don’t really know. South Asian forages might well have been very mixed for a very long time, even perhaps in very different proportions depending on which part of South Asia they were from? Or perhaps ANE and ASI shared an ancestral branch and the split between them was never really a clean break anyway?”

      ANI-ASI admixture didn’t become rapid before the 4.2 kilo year event that is my confident bet though they shared the ancestral branch.
      January 21, 2015 at 8:42 PM

      Davidski said…
      Nirjhar, R1a-M420* lineages have also been recorded in Europe in various FTDNA projects, they just weren’t reported for Europe in Underhill et al. because the authors simply didn’t manage to find them there.

      Underhill et al. did nothing more than report a Near Eastern founder effect in an R1a-M420 lineage far removed on the R1a tree from European R1a. This finding has no significance whatsoever for the origins and spread of R1a. But most people have a very difficult time correctly interpreting even simple genetic data, hence these sorts of pointless debates that we’re now having.

      As for the admixture dating of ANI and ASI, as I’ve already explained to you, the algorithms that date admixtures are often confused when they have to deal with ongoing mixture processes or multiple mixtures events. As a result they just report the average date, more or less.

      Why don’t you e-mail the authors of Roloff and Alder and ask them how these programs work. I’m sure they will be happy to explain to you their limitations.
      January 21, 2015 at 9:14 PM

      Davidski said…
      Neolithic farmers moved into Ukraine and southern Russia about 7,000 years ago, and by 5,000 years ago they mixed with the local foragers there so that the mtDNA across this region became mostly Near Eastern and the level of ANE also dropped.

      This is the same process that took place in most of Europe at the same time, except in most of Europe the ANE didn’t drop, because it wasn’t there.

      We also know from other parts of Europe that for some reason male foragers were able to join the farming communities and mate with their women, so it’ll be interesting to see if the same thing happened on the steppe.

      My bet is that’s how R1a survived the Neolithic transition on the steppe, and also why Yamnaya mostly showed Near Eastern mtDNA haplogroups.
      January 22, 2015 at 12:07 AM

      Nirjhar007 said…
      @Wesolowski
      ”Neolithic farmers moved into Ukraine and southern Russia about 7,000 years ago, and by 5,000 years ago they mixed with the local foragers there so that the mtDNA across this region became mostly Near Eastern and the level of ANE also dropped.

      This is the same process that took place in most of Europe at the same time, except in most of Europe the ANE didn’t drop, because it wasn’t there. We also know from other parts of Europe that for some reason male foragers were able to join the farming communities and mate with their women, so it’ll be interesting to see if the same thing happened on the steppe.”

      Okay I understand but how we know for example the ~3000 BC population which reduced the ANE didn’t came from West Asian-Near Eastern Area itself which also had R1a?? add to that there are migration towards E Europe from Iran and West Asia before that…..
      January 22, 2015 at 12:16 AM

      Davidski said…
      Consider the following…

      – the most ancient sample we know of that belonged to Y-DNA R*, ANE proxy MA-1, lived on the Mammoth steppe, which also stretched into Eastern Europe, not into the Near East.

      – Neolithic farmers who populated Europe ~7,000 years ago came from the Near East and carried a grand total of 0% ANE and 0% Y-DNA R.

      – the Near Eastern population that entered the steppe sometime before ~5,000 years ago (when the mixing with the local foragers was all done), lowered the level of ANE on the steppe.

      – in France and Hungary male foragers were able to join farming communities and it’s thanks to them that Y-DNA I2, an European hunter-gatherer marker, is now one of the most common Y-haplogroups in Europe today.

      So why should we conclude that R1a is a Near Eastern marker that arrived on the steppe during the Neolithic? Because of the so called basal clades of R1a found today in the Near East? How do we know they didn’t get there during, say, the Bronze Age?
      January 22, 2015 at 12:29 AM

      Davidski said…
      Nirjhar, It actually took 1,000 to 2,000 years for Near Eastern farmers and European foragers to really start mixing in Western and Central Europe.

      So what makes you think the Near Eastern people arrived on the steppe around 3,000 BC and mixed at once with the local foragers to create the Yamnaya culture? Don’t you think it’s more reasonable to expect that they arrived somewhere in Europe south of the Samara a couple of thousand years earlier?

      Also, Armenia and northern Iran are too close to the Fertile Crescent for us to reasonably expect Y-DNA R to have been there during the Neolithic, when it wasn’t present among any of Europe’s Neolithic farmers tested to date, but suddenly showed up in Yamnaya-related Corded Ware samples from Germany from the Chalcolithic.
      January 22, 2015 at 12:58 AM

      Davidski said…
      Maju, Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the Trypillian mega-settlement somewhere around Kiev dated to at least 4,000 BC? And in fact, weren’t the Trypillians already present in Ukraine 5,000 years ago?

      Again, feel free to correct me, but I’d say these people were of Near Eastern origin. They were not simply local foragers who took up farming and decided to build a few towns and temples all of a sudden.
      January 22, 2015 at 1:16 AM

      Maju said…
      „Makes me wonder if the whole paradigm of glacial refuges is wrong, or if there was extensive movements between refugiums”.

      Right now it seems hard to argue that the modern European genetics derive from such scenarios anymore, at least not in any simple way. Anyhow, the reality of the „refugia” is that they have been simplified and idealized in the genetic literature often. The main process seems rather a switch of centrality from Central Europe to SW Europe with the LGM and later to „middle” West Europe in general as conditions improved again (Magdalenian and later). There are other regions and pockets of activity but they kept low densities (notably Dniepr-Don, Italy-Dalmatia and Moravia-Hungary). There’s no such thing as a Balcanic refugium (very low densities and no unity between west and east) and there is no detectable influence on Northern Europe from anywhere but the Southwest (Magdalenian expansion, maybe with some Solutrean precursors, particularly affecting Hungary-Poland), except naturally the Northern regions of Eastern Europe, which seem rather influenced by the Dniepr-Don and Siberian areas.

      A good read is (archaeo-statistics of UP Europe by Bocquet-Appel): http://www.evolhum.cnrs.fr/bocquet/jas2005.pdf
      January 22, 2015 at 1:19 AM

      Davidski said…
      Maju, But we do have ancient DNA evidence that the Yamnaya nomads were a thorough mixture of Near Eastern people and Eastern European foragers already by ~5,000 years ago. More or less a 50/50 mixture in fact.

      Logically this couldn’t have happened straight away, and indeed we do have evidence that farmers from the Near East entered what is now Ukraine ~7,000 years ago.

      However, you seem to be arguing that there was a sudden mixture process ~5,000 years ago between Eastern European foragers and new arrivals from the Near East that produced the above mentioned 50/50 mix? If so, what’s the logic behind that?
      January 22, 2015 at 2:21 AM

      Davidski said…
      Interesting news. The Chinese have tested the ancient R1a from the Tarim Basin mummies for Z93, and they’re negative. Here’s what one of the researchers posted online…

      „Our results show that Xiaohe settlers carried Hg R1a1 in paternal lineages, and Hgs H, K, C4, M* in maternal lineages. Though Hg R1a1a is found at highest frequency in both Europe and South Asia, Xiaohe R1a1a more likely originate from Europe because of it not belong to R1a1a-Z93 branch (our recently unpublished data) which mainly found in Asians.”

      See the comment by Hui Zhou (2014-07-18 16:14) Jilin University here:

      http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/8/15/comments

      January 22, 2015 at 12:16 PM

      Krefter said…
      Maju, „very interesting indeed. It tells us two things: (1) that Xiahoe (and by extension at least part of the Afanesevo people, surely at the origin of historical Tocharians) were probably of European origin and (2) that their lineages did not manage to leave a durable legacy in Central Asia (nor anywhere else in Asia).”

      The Z93-negative thing is a surprise, but doesn’t defute Z93’s connection to Yamna. When were speaking of R1a from 4,000 years ago, we can’t call one European and one Asian, because the main R1a branches of Asia and Europe had just recently separated.

      I’m not sure where you’re going with that statement, but there’s a load of other evidence in ancient DNA that Z93 is a Yamna-derived lineage.

      Z93 was found in a western/eastern admixed population in bronze age Mongolia, along with Yamna-type mtDNA.

      http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/06/r1a-z93-from-bronze-age-mongolia.html

      Add, to that a common R1a STR-haplotype found in Andronovo, Sycthians, and modern Asians. The Andronovo and Sycthians had Yamna-type mtDNA.

      http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/01/eleven-y-chromosome-descent-clusters-in.html

      There’s no explaining away historical Indo Iranian speakers and their cultural ancestors living deep in Asia having a Z93-associated STR haplotype and Yamna-type mtDNA.
      January 22, 2015 at 2:00 PM

      Davidski said…
      Nirjhar, Read the whole comment by Hui Zhou. He says the new data suggests that the Tarim Basin mummies came from the Afanasevo culture, which came from Europe.
      January 22, 2015 at 7:51 PM

      Davidski said…
      Err…no, I think PIE had a lot more than 10-15% WHG. It’s a long way from the western steppe to India, and languages can be learned. But I think R1a survived the journey because the early Indo-Europeans were highly patriarchal and patrilineal.
      January 22, 2015 at 7:55 PM

      Polubienie

    • Wiem, że to dla wielu wolnych umysłów straszne i straszliwie niezrozumiałe, ale lepiej zapoznać się z tymi danymi, jak i z komentarzami napisanymi tam, zwłaszcza te od Goga, który twierdzi, podobnie do mnie, że BYŁY DWIE FALE OSIEDLEŃCZE ZE „STEPU” (wg mnie z laso-stepu!).

      Pierwsza „Karelczycy” z ich starym R1a (tym, czy tamtym), a potem druga, czyli już potomkowie ich ale zmieszani z „armeńskimi kobietami”, którzy przynieśli ze sobą hodowlę np. koni, i uprawę ziemi!!!

      Zmieszali się na stepie nadczarnomorskim, rozmnożyli, bo mieli „nadwyżkę żywności”, bo nie musieli TYLKO POLOWAĆ… i „zalali” ziemie swoich „karelskich” Przodków… To wyjaśnia też BRAK PODKŁADU JĘZYKOWEGO W JĘZYKU SŁOWIAŃSKIM I ZAPOŻYCZENIA OD PRA-SŁOWIAŃSKIE (GiL+GaL / Ko”L”+Ko) W J. KARTWELSKICH I SEMICKICH!!!

      „Karelczycy” wędrowali przez pustkę, pozostali w pustce, a potem tylko zalała ich ludność pochodna od R1a M417, ale nie R1b, bo ci „wyszli” ze stepu „tzw. droga południową R1b”, przez Skałkaz, Anatolię, Egipt, itd. Kamerun jest chyba znacznie starszy, więc byłaby to wcześniejsza fala R1b, patrz także Villbruna!!!

      http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-32990.html

      New map of Yamna admixture (Eurogenes Steppe K10)

      Maciamo 18-10-16, 15:58
      I finally found some time to make the map of Yamna admixture using the data from Eurogenes Steppe K10. There was no data for some countries, so I had to guess based on neighbouring countries or isolated samples reported on forums. That is the case for Portugal, Ireland, Wales, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria, Slovenia, Slovakia and Azerbaijan.

      I would especially need regional samples from all over Iberia. There are huge variations from nearly 0% of Yamna among some Basques to 16% in some Spaniards (but their region of origin is unknown). The Eurogenes data just shows a lower percentage in northern Spain, but that is not very helpful as Galicia, Cantabria and Catalonia probably have very different levels.

      Regional data from Britain, France and Germany are also welcome.

      Even though Yamna chieftains from kurgan belonged almost exclusively to R1b, among modern Europeans it is the Uralic, Baltic, Slavic, Germanic and North Caucasian people who inherited the highest share of Yamna ancestry, not Western Europeans, who now have the highest percentage of haplogroup R1b. One of the reasons for this is that R1b arrived in Western Europe after over a thousand years of genetic dilution through intermarriages with Balkanic and Central European people. In contrast, in the eastern half of Europe, R1b lost its position of dominance and was replaced by R1a and N1c lineages, starting from the Catacomb culture in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, and continuing until the Middle Ages. Nevertheless Yamna ancestry was passed maternally in the Steppe and in neighbouring populations, which explains the high Yamna admixture from the Baltic to the North Caucasus.

      Maciamo19-10-16, 08:55
      I disagree, imo it makes more sense that Basques got their ~80+ of R1b from 25% of their ancestry than just 0-5% of it. So much founder effect is just ridiculous. Not even in India is the aDNA of the R1a bearers so low.

      No it doesn’t make sense because the Basque R1b-M153 is only 2800 years old and has a TMRCA of 2500 years. Most Basques belong to the subclade just under that, with a TMRCA of 2100 years. This means that the Basque R1b is a very recent phenomenon starting in Roman times. But who knows, R1b might have continued to expand little by little each generations among the Basques for over 1000 years before reaching today’s frequencies. I now believe that the Basque only got their R1b very gradually over the last 2500 years and that it has nothing to do with Bronze Age PIE invasions. That has the benefit to explain why they kept speaking Basque. I don’t know why R1b increased gradually. Maybe increased fertility compared to the native male lineages (I2-M26 + G2a ?), or a noble lineage of some sort. It was probably a combination of factors. Anywau, if R1b entered the Basque gene pool from, say, neighbouring Aquitaine or Castille c. 500 BCE or even 100 BCE, it could have been autosomally low in Yamna ancestry (say 15-20%). After diluting it slowly over 1000 to 2000 more years with relatively pure Basque women, there would be very little Yamna left, surely under 5%. If Haak et al. are right and the Basque have 27% of Yamna, then it becomes much harder to explain with such a young TMRCA for their R1b, especially that Haak found 5% less Yamna among other Spaniards (22%). Spanish branches of DF27 are between 3500 and 4400 years old, so Late Bronze Age, and match the arrival of foreign Bronze Age cultures like El Argar. So there is no doubt that R1b was in many parts of Spain long before it spread among the Basques.

      It’s good that you mention India. Indian Brahmins have at most 15-20% of Steppe DNA. In fact, since they descend from Sintashta rather than Yamna, their Steppe DNA should be higher in EHG than CHG. Using Dodecad K12, they have about 18% of East European + West European + Mediterranean, but the latter also includes non-IE Neolithic ancestry. Using K12b, they have only 5% of Atlantic_Med + North European, but that doesn’t include the Gedrosian that came with the IE. So depending on the calculator, we get somewhere between 7 and 18% of Steppe admixture. Unfortunately neither the Haak paper nor the Steppe K10 data have any Indian sample. But the Indo-Aryans invaded India from 1800 BCE, almost exactly at the same time as IE invaded Iberia with El Argar. And we get a similar percentage of Steppe admixture (10-20%) both in Spaniards and upper-caste Indians. But it took another 1500 years before R1b-M153 started spreading among the Basques, so a considerably lower Steppe admixture is to be expected.

      MarkoZ 19-10-16, 10:42
      People with Baltic Hunter Gatherer genomes said they’re WHG. Before that I thought they’d be EHG admixed as well. The error lies in assuming that the Baltic populations are the result of a simple coalescence of Neolithic Corded Ware and Mesolithic elements. We already know that North-Eastern Europe received substantial input from further east by way of Russia, since N1c is the dominant paternal marker in all North-Eastern populations barring Belarusians. The preponderance of this marker transcends linguistic and national affiliation.

      Olympus Mons
      19-10-16, 11:53
      Finally! 🙂 I’ve been saying this since Haak et al came out, but so far no one has seen that possibility. I said then that maybe the title of the paper „Massive Migration from the steppe”, was incorrect.

      If there was a large reservoir of SHG (which was an admixture, supposedly, of WHG and the EHG) in the north, or maybe other groups we haven’t yet sampled, or EHG further west elsewhere, wouldn’t that inflate the „Yamnaya” percentages beyond what actual Yamnaya people brought who moved there?

      YES. What I don’t get it is why every time I raise those options I get immediately eviscerated by ten guys (especially at eurogenes!).

      Maybe you Angela can enlighten me a little bit.

      If Karelia was EHG (and already R1a). If there is SHG which is a mix of EHG and WHG, if apparently there is even EHG and SHG in the Balkans 7000bc… why in hell people insistently talk about a bunch of guys that show up near the freaking urals, as a uber event in Europes ancestry?

      Also how do we know that CWC = massive Yamnya migration (sort of) if the region where they thrived might have been loaded up with EHG and even guys that were R1a?

      Tomenable 19-10-16, 14:04
      so how do we know that CWC = massive Yamnya migration (sort of) if the region where they thrived might have been loaded up with EHG and even guys that were R1a?

      Kunda and Narva cultures = no any R1a and no any EHG, 100% WHG and their Y-DNA was haplogroup I. Today areas formerly occupied by Kunda and Narva cultures are dominated by R1a and N1c haplogroups.

      UWAGA!!! Nowe dane z 2017r PRZECZĄ TEMU, patrz:
      https://skrbh.wordpress.com/2017/03/21/34-polnocna-droga-r1a-czyli-min-koniec-bredni-o-tzw-starozytnosci-jezyka-litewskiego-pochodzeniu-tzw-scytow-tocharow-itd/

      Goga 19-10-16, 18:48
      But the map I made was only for the ‚Steppe’ component, Then you should rename it into the ‚map of Steppe admixture’. Since it doesn’t correspondent well with the ‚Yamnaya admixture’. At this moment your map is MISLEADING and full of contradictions. Like now according to your map there is more Yamnaya admixture in Finno-Ugric/Saami people than European Indo-Europeans. Like you said Yamnaya Admixture is more than Steppe Admixture.

      Steppe admixture in NorthEastern Europe existed even before the arrival of late second stage Yamnaya PIE. So, a lot Steppe ancestry in NorthEastern Europe has nothing to do with second stage Proto-Indo-European speakers from Yamnaya.

      Yamnaya = Steppe + NorthWest Asia.

      So, you should rename your map into ‚map of Steppe admixture’ or change your percentages about the Yamnaya ancestry.

      Goga19-10-16, 19:04
      I knew N1c couldn’t be a Baltic hunter gatherer. N1c, Siberian admixture, and Uralic languages in Northeast Europe all probably have the same post-CWC source. Then again its arrival might be different for different regions.I started to think that to, before I realized that this map is WRONG on many levels. After seeing his map I started to believe that Saami have more Corded Ware admixture than Norwegians, lol. But I was mislead by a wrong map. It was stupid of me, not to make additional examination of data.

      So, hold on a minute. The map of Maciamo doesn’t hold any ground and is at least misleading. I don’t think Maciamo tried to mislead us on purpose. He is still making mistakes by using sources from people with hidden twisted agenda.

      His map is not about Yamnaya but the Steppes. And there IS a correlation between the Steppes admixture AND Y-DNA hg. like N1c1 & Q.

      Goga19-10-16, 19:14
      Absolutely crazy, no way to deal with it, if I have understood well Gedrosia was the actual Chalco_Iran component… but it is near to absent in the steppe.

      Very simple. Modern European Steppe folks (like Russians) have NOTHING to do with the ancient Iranic Central Asian Steppe folks. Only the ancient Indo-Iranized Steppes folks were full of Gedrosia. While modern Eastern Europeans don’t have that admixture, sicne Eastern Europeans have nothing in common with the ancient Indo-Iranized Steppes folks. The only common thing between ancient Indo-Iranized tribes and modern day Eastern Europeans is the Steppes admixture.

      Those ancient Indo-Iranized Steppes folks are now Turkified and speak Turkic language as their native language and do consider themselves as Turks/Tatars.

      With other words. Eastern Europeans (Balto-Slavs) are NOT directly related to Indo-Iranized cultures in the Steppes. And those ancient Indo-Iranized folks of the Steppes are now native Turkic/Tatar people of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan.

      Those Shintashta/Androno Steppes folks who were once Indo-IRANIZED by people (Aryans) from the Iranian Plateau were later Turkified and those Indo-Iranized Steppe cultures became Tatars/Turks.

      Kristiina20-10-16, 14:53
      Proto-Uralic is dated ~ 2000 BCE Jaakko Häkkinen who has given the most recent dating for different protolanguage levels based on linguistic criteria does not propose that Proto-Uralic is dated 2000 BCE.

      In his model pre-Proto-Uralic and Proto-Uralic is dated between 3500 and 2800. The late Proto-Uralic is dated 2300 BC. However, the early history is quite blurred and the time margins are wide, but, by 2000 BC, Proto-Uralic had probably already disintegrated.

      Polubienie

    • http://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7007-8-15

      Evidence that a West-East admixed population lived in the Tarim Basin as early as the early Bronze Age

      Chunxiang Li, Hongjie Li, Yinqiu Cui, Chengzhi Xie, Dawei Cai, Wenying Li, Victor H Mair, Zhi Xu, Quanchao Zhang, Idelisi Abuduresule, Li Jin, Hong Zhu and Hui ZhouEmail author

      BMC Biology20108:15
      DOI: 10.1186/1741-7007-8-15
      © Li et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010

      Received: 21 September 2009
      Accepted: 17 February 2010
      Published: 17 February 2010

      Abstract

      Background
      The Tarim Basin, located on the ancient Silk Road, played a very important role in the history of human migration and cultural communications between the West and the East. However, both the exact period at which the relevant events occurred and the origins of the people in the area remain very obscure. In this paper, we present data from the analyses of both Y chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) derived from human remains excavated from the Xiaohe cemetery, the oldest archeological site with human remains discovered in the Tarim Basin thus far.

      Results
      Mitochondrial DNA analysis showed that the Xiaohe people carried both the East Eurasian haplogroup (C) and the West Eurasian haplogroups (H and K), whereas Y chromosomal DNA analysis revealed only the West Eurasian haplogroup R1a1a in the male individuals.

      Conclusion
      Our results demonstrated that the Xiaohe people were an admixture from populations originating from both the West and the East, implying that the Tarim Basin had been occupied by an admixed population since the early Bronze Age. To our knowledge, this is the earliest genetic evidence of an admixed population settled in the Tarim Basin. (…)

      Table 3 Analysis strategy of the samples.

      Sample

      MtDNA-HVRI

      MtDNA

      Y chromosome

      Sexing

      Independent

      No.

      haplotype

      haplogroup

      haplogroup

      Morphological

      Molecular

      repetition

      100

      298-327

      C4

      Female

      Female

      102

      298-327

      C4

      Female

      106

      298-327

      C4

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

      107

      223-298-309-327

      C4

      Female

      109

      298-327

      C4

      Female

      110

      298-327

      C4

      Female

      111

      223-298-309-327

      C4

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

      115

      298-327

      C4

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

      117

      223-304

      M*

      Female

      Female

      119

      93-134-224-311-390

      K

      Female

      Female

      120

      189-192-311

      R*

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

      121

      183-189-192-311

      R*

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

      127

      223-298-309-327

      C4

      Female

      Female

      128

      260

      H

      Female

      Female

      131

      189-192-311-390

      R*

      Female

      Female

      132

      298-327

      C4

      Female

      Female

      135

      223-298-309-327

      C4

      Female

      Female

      136

      298-327

      C4

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

      138

      298-327

      C4

      Female

      139

      298-327

      C4

      R1a1a

      Male

      Male

       

      Polubienie

  8. A tu taka ciekawostka… Ciekawe jak wyznawcy południowej drogi R1a przełkną to:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51220788_Croatian_genetic_heritage_Y-chromosome_story

    Croatian genetic heritage: Y-chromosome story

    Article · June 2011 with 89 Reads
    DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2011.52.225 · Source: PubMed
    Dragan Primorac at Pennsylvania State University, Peter A Underhill Stanford University

    Abstract
    The aim of this article is to offer a concise interpretation of the scientific data about the topic of Croatian genetic heritage that was obtained over the past 10 years. We made a short overview of previously published articles by our and other groups, based mostly on Y-chromosome results. The data demonstrate that Croatian human population, as almost any other European population, represents remarkable genetic mixture. More than 3/4 of the contemporary Croatian men are most probably the offspring of Old Europeans who came here before and after the Last Glacial Maximum. The rest of the population is the offspring of the people who were arriving in this part of Europe through the southeastern route in the last 10,000 years, mostly during the neolithization process. We believe that the latest discoveries made with the techniques for whole-genome typing using the array technology, will help us understand the structure of Croatian population in more detail, as well as the aspects of its demographic history.

    Croatian genetic heritage: Y-chromosome story (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51220788_Croatian_genetic_heritage_Y-chromosome_story [accessed Dec 19 2017].

    Polubienie

Odpowiedz na SKRiBHa Anuluj pisanie odpowiedzi

Wprowadź swoje dane lub kliknij jedną z tych ikon, aby się zalogować:

Logo WordPress.com

Komentujesz korzystając z konta WordPress.com. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Google

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Google. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie z Twittera

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Twitter. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Facebooku

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Facebook. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Połączenie z %s

Ta witryna wykorzystuje usługę Akismet aby zredukować ilość spamu. Dowiedz się w jaki sposób dane w twoich komentarzach są przetwarzane.