Ghurier
Regular member
- Messages
- 193
- Reaction score
- 130
- Points
- 43
- Location
- Many
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- J-L283-->J-Z631
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U5b2b
If I was petty I would have rubbed it in your face when the paper came, but I am not about such childish behavior, although I thought and laughed about it.
Yet I wonder what time it is where you at, you might wanna double check that clock of yours.
What paper ?
Something I often say about debates is that claiming that "you won't do something" is only a way to "do it without assuming doing it".
Apparently, you seems to believe that the fact we obtained a Z597+ sample from southern Germany EIA, exactly where I claimed for years that we have signal of a IA-related sub-diversity spot, would somehow invalidate my claims !!!
You realize that you start to have an incoherent behavior ?
I already showed that for some peoples with a big cognitive dissonance when they are confronted to the reality.
Or do you think that the lack of sample in France and Czechia during IA will make dispear MAG006 and RMPR116 ?
Because, this is not how are working data.
Look MAG006 and his admixture, the lineage have been there for centuries.
We have ancient DNA, we have statistical diversity signal, we have clade segregation signal ... we have everything.
Yet you refuse the data because it didn't fits with your narrative.
At this point it is a comedy.
PS: as this is a Picene-related topic ... I will stop here this non-discussion. No point in polluting this topic with your issues about recent data. Feel free to take the final non-sense !
Last edited: