Search results

And yet here we are, the direct descendants of the ERE, in flesh, language, culture and faith.

Eastern Romans, Western Romans, we are all brothers from another mother.

Relevant leak from upcoming Hellenistic Macedonia samples, it's a leak so not confirmed, the samples show heavy Anatolian overlap.

I've seen some pictures of a video of a lecture floating around on the web, showing the evolution of the haplogroup distribution from mesolithic and BA all the way to Roman times? It showed confirmed Z2103s on the chart, anyone knows if there's a study coming with such Balkan (and Thracian)...

Egyptians: https://egyptindependent.com/egyptian-lawyer-sues-netflix-over-queen-cleopatra/ Greeks:

There's three of them, though. Not saying it's impossible, but 3/3? Maybe the dating?

R1b1a1b1a1 is R-P312. R1b1a1b1a1a2b1a is S255/Z367, which is downstream of R-P312.

Your issue ultimately lies with the fact that you are convinced that high EHG signals are the absolute and sole vector of PIE in ancient Greeks, which, as Southern Arc has demonstrated, could well not be the case at all.

The PF7563 should be the PIE vectors in the Mycenean civ, I had a quick look at the Albanian and Armenian projects over at FTDNA, and they both have quite a few members carrying PF7562/3, further strengthening the Albanian/Armenian/Greek linguistic branch hypothesis.

These are the new samples from Greece introduced in the study, for reference, with their haplos: I14916 GRC_Minoan_Zakros_BA Crete, Zakros, Karaviadaina Greece F n/a (female) H I6420_d GRC_Mycenaean_Lokris_BA Fthiotis, Lokris, Proskynas Greece M J .. I15582 GRC_Mycenaean_Attica_BA...

Banter aside, I don't understand what the big deal is, mate. The highest EHG seems to be around 9% which would put the sample around 18%ish "Steppe" (extrapolation to Yamnaya_Samara breakdown) and the lowest 0, averaging around 4%ish (or 8% Steppe). That is similar to the previous study...

Meltdowns? You mean like those in the countless Albanian threads (e.g. latest drama: E-V13) that end up being locked and several of its participants banned due to their inability to control their emotions? Funny projections, mate. :laughing:

I am just trying to figure out the new angle of online anthro-tardism you're peddling. I know you, lot, constantly seethe about anything MENA-related when it comes to Greeks (ancients and moderns). Projecting, much? :laughing:

Why would the 14% PPN in a historical population known to border and engage with that part of the world bother someone is beyond my humble understanding, but I am sure you have your compelling reasons.

Well, you should let Lazarides know that your feelings got hurt with the inclusion of PPN in his modeling. I've heard he's really active on his twitter account.

PPN and Anatolia co-exist on a cline. Trying to nit-pick is pointless. The PPN in Myceneans was probably brought over by the Anatolian majority if we go by haplogroups alone (e.g. J2a-M92 in Kura-Araxes).

I don't understand the name, which HG is EHG for example. Also, you might want to look at this: https://uqrmaie1.github.io/admixtools/articles/admixtools.html#comparing-results-between-admixtools-and-admixtools-2-1

There's probably a mistake in the .ind file somewhere in there, misnomer or something like that. If you can be bothered, give me the right/left lists with the original naming and I will run them on my machine.

Is there a particular model you'd like a second opinion on? I don't follow dorkagenica's spiels, sorry, mate.

I compared the results of admixtools1 and admixtools2, using the same dataset, to check for inconsistencies between the two. Here are the results (right list included in the admixtools1 output file below): Admixtools1 on ubuntu wsl: ./qpAdm: parameter file: parqpadm.txt ### THE INPUT...