PDA

View Full Version : R1b in Native Americans



Ricardo Canedo
01-13-2020, 01:56 AM
Did all of the R1b in Native Americans come from the Europeans or did some of it come from the Ancient North Eurasians? Do we know enough subclades to be sure?

Ricardo Canedo
01-13-2020, 09:14 PM
So, does anyone have any comments on this?

Wing Genealogist
01-13-2020, 09:36 PM
There has not been ANY pre-Columbian Native American remains to date who have been found to fall under R1b.

Ricardo Canedo
01-13-2020, 10:38 PM
There has not been ANY pre-Columbian Native American remains to date who have been found to fall under R1b.

Thanks for the answer, that does indicate that all of the R1b in Native Americans came from the European colonists. I asked because the Mal'ta boy, an Ancient North Eurasian, had basal R.

Megalophias
01-13-2020, 11:05 PM
This has been discussed a few times before, try searching the forum (if you haven't already). In a nutshell, all the Native American R1b that's been tested at high resolution has been European, but not much of it has been so tested. The only evidence for any of it *not* being from the Old World is: some had unusual (for Europeans) STR values in one old study; some groups have higher proportions of R1b than some people think can be plausibly attributed to intermarriage with Europeans. AFAIK none of these have been retested properly to actually settle the issue, but no candidate for indigenous American R1b, ancient or modern, has turned up either.

Wing Genealogist
01-14-2020, 02:40 PM
Thanks for the answer, that does indicate that all of the R1b in Native Americans came from the European colonists. I asked because the Mal'ta boy, an Ancient North Eurasian, had basal R.

The predominent Y-DNA haplogroup of Native Americans is haplogroup Q. Q and R are both direct subclades of Haplogroup P1. IIRC Haplogroup Q is also found in Asia (but I could be wrong), but to date, no haplogroup R has been found in Ancient Western Hemisphere.

Ricardo Canedo
01-14-2020, 10:35 PM
This has been discussed a few times before, try searching the forum (if you haven't already). In a nutshell, all the Native American R1b that's been tested at high resolution has been European, but not much of it has been so tested. The only evidence for any of it *not* being from the Old World is: some had unusual (for Europeans) STR values in one old study; some groups have higher proportions of R1b than some people think can be plausibly attributed to intermarriage with Europeans. AFAIK none of these have been retested properly to actually settle the issue, but no candidate for indigenous American R1b, ancient or modern, has turned up either.


Could you, please, indicate me some of those previous threads?

McCown
01-17-2020, 03:04 PM
Everyone thinks I'm nuts, but I posted this years ago on how Y-DNA appears to show a migration across North American to Europe.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7425-Ice-Age-European-migration-hypothesis-from-Siberia-gt-America-gt-Europe

McCown
01-17-2020, 03:18 PM
AFAIK none of these have been retested properly to actually settle the issue, but no candidate for indigenous American R1b, ancient or modern, has turned up either.

Only two ancient R1b over 10K years old have been found. One from Siberia and one from Italy. In other words, we don't have much aDNA evidence for R1 migration. My guess is that Northern Ice Age people's aDNA melted in the ice to the bottom of the sea or is still frozen there.

Generalissimo
01-17-2020, 07:24 PM
Only two ancient R1b over 10K years old have been found. One from Siberia and one from Italy. In other words, we don't have much aDNA evidence for R1 migration. My guess is that Northern Ice Age people's aDNA melted in the ice to the bottom of the sea or is still frozen there.

Which ancient R1b from Siberia are you talking about?

McCown
01-18-2020, 04:30 PM
Which ancient R1b from Siberia are you talking about?

Technically it wasn't R1b found in Mal'ta Siberia. It was R*. It's descendant R1b was next found in Italy(12K to 14K ) before present. Therefore, the oldest ancient Y-DNA for R1b was found in Europe but yet everyone thinks it came from the Steppes. The R1 aDNA from the Steppes isn't that old and the R1 branching continues to get younger as you head east. The highest Genetic Distance for R1 is in Western Europe.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=362af77c6ad145c8a4a5026a9177b945

There was some 8700 ybp R1b found in Romania( technically still Europe ). The Romanian aDNA is still younger than Italy aDNA and fits with my eastward migration from Western Europe for R1( which I think came eastward from North America ). There is probably some old R1 aDNA Somewhere in the frozen permafrost of Canada waiting to be found.

Romilius
01-18-2020, 04:37 PM
Technically it wasn't R1b found in Mal'ta Siberia. It was R*. It's descendant R1b was next found in Italy(12K to 14K ) before present. Therefore, the oldest ancient Y-DNA for R1b was found in Europe but yet everyone thinks it came from the Steppes. The R1 aDNA from the Steppes isn't that old and the R1 branching continues to get younger as you head east. The highest Genetic Distance for R1 is in Western Europe.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=362af77c6ad145c8a4a5026a9177b945

There was some 8700 ybp R1b found in Romania( technically still Europe ). The Romanian aDNA is still younger than Italy aDNA and fits with my eastward migration from Western Europe for R1( which I think came eastward from North America ). There is probably some old R1 aDNA Somewhere in the frozen permafrost of Canada waiting to be found.

The Romanians and Balkan samples are V88 or on their path to V88...

McCown
01-18-2020, 04:41 PM
Here's the current potential SNPs for R/R1 branching from the bottleneck.

R*
M207/Page37/UTY2, CTS207/M600/PF5992, CTS2426/M661/PF6033, CTS2913/M667, CTS3229/M672/PF6036/YSC0001265, CTS3622/PF6037, CTS5815/M696, CTS6417/Y480, CTS7876/PF6052, CTS7880/M725/PF6053, CTS8311/M732, CTS9005/M741, CTS10663/M788, CTS11075/M795/PF6078, CTS11647/Y369, F33/M603/PF6013, F47/M607/Y472, F63/M614/PF6016, F82/M620, F154/M636, F295/M685, F356/M703/PF5919, F370/M708/Y479, F459/Y482, F652/M805, F675, FGC1168, L248.3/M705.3, L747/M702/PF5918/YSC0000287, L760/M642/PF5877/YSC0000286, L1225/M789/YSC0000232, L1347/M792/PF6077/YSC0000233, M613, M628/PF5868, M651/Y296, M718, M734/PF6057/S4/YSC0000201, M760/Y506, M764/PF5953, M799, P224/PF6050, P227, P229/PF6019, P232, P280, P285, PF5938

R1*
M173/P241/Page29, CTS916/M611/PF5859, CTS997/M612/PF6111, CTS1913/M654, CTS2565/M663, CTS2680, CTS2908/M666/PF6123, CTS3123/M670, CTS3321/M673, CTS4075/M682, CTS5611/M694, CTS7085/M716/Y481, CTS8116/M730, F93/M621/PF6114, F102/M625/PF6116, F132/M632, F211/Y290, F245/M659/Y477, FGC189/Y305, L875/M706/PF6131/YSC0000288, L1352/M785/YSC0000230, M306/PF6147/S1, M640/PF6118, M643, M689, M691/CTS4862/PF6042/YSC0001281, M710/PF6132/YSC0000192, M748/YSC0000207, M781, P225, P231, P233, P234, P236, P238/PF6115, P242/PF6113, P245/PF6117, P286/PF6136, P294/PF6112

razyn
01-18-2020, 05:08 PM
Technically it wasn't R1b found in Mal'ta Siberia. It was R*. It's descendant R1b was next found in Italy(12K to 14K ) before present. Therefore, the oldest ancient Y-DNA for R1b was found in Europe but yet everyone thinks it came from the Steppes.

Everyone except willful contrarians, phylogenetic ostriches and the grossly underinformed now realizes that the significant movement from the steppe -- westward -- took place later than 4,000 BC. The line between ancient Mal'ta boy's clan and Villabruna dude's dead-end (among others) has nothing to do with the phylogeny below R1b1a2a1a -- the very much later genetic successes of which have shaped modern European male populations. And, by extension, have shaped those Native American lineages that descend (in the Y chromosome) from European bearers of R1b1a2a1a subclades.

Beringia was real, and is very interesting to the American story. But not to the story of how Europe got to be such a pileup of R1b.

McCown
01-18-2020, 06:00 PM
Everyone except willful contrarians, phylogenetic ostriches and the grossly underinformed now realizes that the significant movement from the steppe -- westward -- took place later than 4,000 BC.

The phylogeny( for both ancient and modern R1 Y-DNA ) indicates the opposite occurred, there was a migration from Western Europe to the Steppes.

jdean
01-18-2020, 06:13 PM
razyn forgot to list myopic : )

razyn
01-18-2020, 07:32 PM
The phylogeny( for both ancient and modern R1 Y-DNA ) indicates the opposite occurred, there was a migration from Western Europe to the Steppes.

Not of American-derived R1b. Vaguely steppish or "Siberian" YDNA stuff that happened before the LGM, or the Neolithic Revolution, or the introduction of agriculture to Europe from Mesopotamia (give or take a little geography) -- and in some small measure might theoretically have gone east across ice, the sea, or Beringia -- did not affect the contemporary (modern) R1b population of Europe. Which is pretty much what you find in contemporary (modern) Native Americans, who are R1b-anything. You know, McGillivray and them (as a pretty late example).

rms2
01-18-2020, 08:36 PM
The phylogeny( for both ancient and modern R1 Y-DNA ) indicates the opposite occurred, there was a migration from Western Europe to the Steppes.

You need to bring yourself up to date with ancient dna results. Have you read David Reich's book, Who We Are and How We Got Here?

The only R1b in Europe west of the steppe before the third millennium BC was R1b-V88, plus a couple of dead end Mesolithic hunter-gatherers who were R1b-L754 and probably related to the line leading to V88. And V88 probably came from the east to begin with.

R1b-M269 doesn't show up west of the steppe until the third millennium BC, and when it does, it's always in a man with steppe dna, which was also absent from Europe west of the steppe before the third millennium BC.

ArmandoR1b
01-18-2020, 10:59 PM
You need to bring yourself up to date with ancient dna results. Have you read David Reich's book, Who We Are and How We Got Here?

The only R1b in Europe west of the steppe before the third millennium BC was R1b-V88, plus a couple of dead end Mesolithic hunter-gatherers who were R1b-L754 and probably related to the line leading to V88. And V88 probably came from the east to begin with.

R1b-M269 doesn't show up west of the steppe until the third millennium BC, and when it does, it's always in a man with steppe dna, which was also absent from Europe west of the steppe before the third millennium BC.

Perfect. Logical deductions have to be made off the important data points including absence of both Y-DNA and autosomal DNA that all of the sudden appear in the archaeological record in Western Europe after a certain period and his posts ignore them while your post explains it in plain and simple English that anyone with a basic understanding of DNA should be able to understand.

McCown
01-19-2020, 02:32 PM
You need to bring yourself up to date with ancient dna results. Have you read David Reich's book, Who We Are and How We Got Here?

The only R1b in Europe west of the steppe before the third millennium BC was R1b-V88, plus a couple of dead end Mesolithic hunter-gatherers who were R1b-L754 and probably related to the line leading to V88. And V88 probably came from the east to begin with.

R1b-M269 doesn't show up west of the steppe until the third millennium BC, and when it does, it's always in a man with steppe dna, which was also absent from Europe west of the steppe before the third millennium BC.

I haven't read it, but everytime someone says that Europeans have Steppe DNA, I think the evidence points the other way, that the Steppe has European DNA( which has Amerindian DNA ). I'm unaware of any way to demonstrate the flow with autosomal DNA. You can prove the branching/flow with with mtDNA and Y-DNA which both have haplogroups that branch outward from Western Europe. To me, it simply looks like everyone has preconceived notions about Bell Beakers and is ignoring the obvious Y-DNA branching of R1. If you take away all of your notions about Bell Beakers and only have the Y-DNA of R1 branching to base your conclusions, do you still think R1 wasn't born in Europe? Everything points to Europe. The split of R1a and R1b, The aDNA of Villabruna Man. R1's brother Q and his sisters X and C also making the trip across the pond. The similar technology of Clovis and Solutrean, both were mound builders, Gaelic and Algonquin share a few words... everything I mention in the original debate on this topic. But no... because we think Bell Beakers came from the Steppe, R did too. Bell Beakers could have flowed the other way as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Ameri cas#Haplogroup_R1

rms2
01-19-2020, 08:23 PM
You're way off. You really need to read Reich's book.

Before about 5,000 years ago, Europeans west of the steppe were a combination of Anatolian Neolithic Farmer and Western Hunter Gatherer. Modern Europeans, on the other hand, have a third component which shifts them to a position intermediate between Sardinians, who are heavily like Anatolian Neolithic Farmers, and Native Americans. This led Reich and Nick Patterson to theorize that there was an "Ancient North Eurasian" population ancestral to both Europeans and Native Americans. In 2013 Danish geneticist Eske Willerslev published the results of the 24k-year-old remains of Mal'ta Boy, whose genome fit the profile predicted for that Ancient North Eurasian population.

Of course, Mal'ta Boy's remains were found near Lake Baikal in Siberia, far to the east of Europe, and Mal'ta Boy belonged to y-dna haplogroup R-M207.

Subsequent ancient dna results show that the third ancestral component in Europeans west of the steppe, Ancient North Eurasian, was injected into the European population by steppe pastoralists, most of whom arrived from the steppe in the third millennium BC.

So, you see, your position is impossible because of the genomic sequence of events. Before ~5000 years ago, there was no third autosomal component (ANE) and no R1b-M269 in Europe west of the steppe. After that time, both steppe dna, with its ANE, and y-dna R1b-M269 began arriving in Europe west of the steppe and show up in ancient remains.

35955 35956

McCown
01-19-2020, 08:39 PM
You're way off. You really need to read Reich's book.

Before about 5,000 years ago, Europeans west of the steppe were a combination of Anatolian Neolithic Farmer and Western Hunter Gatherer. Modern Europeans, on the other hand, have a third component which shifts them to a position intermediate between Sardinians, who are heavily like Anatolian Neolithic Farmers, and Native Americans. This led Reich and Nick Patterson to theorize that there was an "Ancient North Eurasian" population ancestral to both Europeans and Native Americans. In 2013 Danish geneticist Eske Willerslev published the results of Mal'ta Boy, whose genome fit the profile predicted for that Ancient North Eurasian population.

Of course, Mal'ta Boy's remains were found near Lake Baikal in Siberia, far to the east of Europe, and Mal'ta Boy belonged to y-dna haplogroup R-M207.

Subsequent ancient dna results show that the third ancestral component in Europeans west of the steppe, Ancient North Eurasian, was injected into the European population by steppe pastoralists, most of whom arrived from the steppe in the third millennium BC.

So, you see, your position is impossible because of the genomic sequence of events. Before ~5000 years ago, there was no third autosomal component (ANE) and no R1b-M269 in Europe west of the steppe. After that time, both steppe dna, with its ANE, and y-dna R1b-M269 began arriving in Europe west of the steppe and show up in ancient remains.

35955

It's hard to say how Sardinian may have gotten into the mix. It could have migrated to Europe via another haplogroup as there are many haplogroups in Europe. R1b-M269's ancestor was found in aDNA from NE Italy 12k years ago. Therefore there is R1b is found west of the Steppe well before 5000 years ago. Then again in Romania 8700 ybp aDNA.

Fact: R1 split into R1a and R1b. It is very difficult to argue that this split didn't take place in Western Europe. I've heard all the attempts to explain this away with migration waves into new territory, but it just doesn't add up. Wherever the highest genetic diversity is for a branch is likely it's origin. In this case, R1's genetic hub is in Western Europe... and potentially from a North American bottleneck prior.

rms2
01-19-2020, 08:54 PM
It's hard to say how Sardinian may have gotten into the mix. It could have migrated to Europe via another haplogroup as there are many haplogroups in Europe. R1b-M269's ancestor was found in aDNA from NW Italy 12k years ago. Therefore there is R1b is found west of the Steppe well before 5000 years ago. Then again in Romania 8700 ybp aDNA . . .



You're not paying attention.

The only R1b found west of the steppe before the third millennium BC is R1b-V88, which split from the line leading to R1b-M269 way back at L754 (their mrca), and a couple of stray, dead-end R1b-L754 hunter-gatherers, who were probably on lines related to the one leading to R1b-V88. And all of that came from the east originally.

Had any other kind of R1b been in Europe, it would be turning up in Neolithic remains, and it's not.

There was no R1b-M269, and no R1b-L389 for that matter, in Europe west of the steppe before the arrival of the steppe pastoralists, some of whom may have begun arriving in the late 4th millennium BC, but most of whom began arriving in the third millennium BC.

It isn't that "Sardinian may have gotten into the mix". It's that Sardinians are the modern Europeans most like ancient Anatolian Neolithic farmers, with the lowest level of ANE.


Fact: R1 split into R1a and R1b. It is very difficult to argue that this split didn't take place in Western Europe. I've heard all the attempts to explain this away with migration waves into new territory, but it just doesn't add up. Wherever the highest genetic diversity is for a branch is likely it's origin. In this case, R1's genetic hub is in Western Europe... and potentially from a North American bottleneck prior.

That's just strange and runs entirely counter to the actual evidence.

R1 descends from R, which is part of Supergroup K, which pretty obviously originated in Asia, which is why R and its closest cousins (L, M, N, O, P, and Q) largely have an eastern center of gravity.

Are you saying you think R1 came from North America?

Read Reich's book. It's very well written. I think you'll enjoy it.

McCown
01-19-2020, 09:19 PM
You're not paying attention.

The only R1b found west of the steppe before the third millennium BC is R1b-V88, which split from the line leading to R1b-M269 way back at L754 (their mrca), and a couple of stray, dead-end R1b-L754 hunter-gatherers, who were probably on lines related to the one leading to R1b-V88. And all of that came from the east originally.

Had any other kind of R1b been in Europe, it would be turning up in Neolithic remains, and it's not.

There was no R1b-M269, and no R1b-L389 for that matter, in Europe west of the steppe before the arrival of the steppe pastoralists, some of whom may have begun arriving in the late 4th millennium BC, but most of whom began arriving in the third millennium BC.

It isn't that "Sardinian may have gotten into the mix". It's that Sardinians are the modern Europeans most like ancient Anatolian Neolithic farmers, with the lowest level of ANE.



That's just strange and runs entirely counter to the actual evidence.

R1 descends from R, which is part of Supergroup K, which pretty obviously originated in Asia, which is why R and its closest cousins (L, M, N, O, P, and Q) largely have an eastern center of gravity.

Are you saying you think R1 came from North America?

Read Reich's book. It's very well written. I think you'll enjoy it.

You're basically dismissing the evidence by saying the aDNA R1b findings are a one off. As far as R1b not showing up in Neolithic remains, it's not showing up anywhere. There is a 10K+ year gap between Mal'ta and Villabruna. Until we find the missing links I don't think we can say it won't be found in Neolithic sites. Villabruna man is Neolithic in Europe. We might also ask why aren't we finding it. One possibility is all the evidence has melted away when the ice melted because they weren't in the Steppe, they were in Arctic North America.

As far as the branching.... R( Siberia ) -> R1( 1000s of years of SNP bottleneck, probably North America ) > R1a/R1b( Western Europe ).

You can read all about my 4 year old argument here:

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7425-Ice-Age-European-migration-hypothesis-from-Siberia-gt-America-gt-Europe

I recommend viewing my "Big Picture Migration Map" for 2 Y-DNA haplogroups and 2 mtDNA haplogroups that migrated from North America to Europe during the last ice age.

Chad Rohlfsen
01-19-2020, 09:53 PM
Villabruna is Epilaleolithic. You're way off and need to listen. People here are telling you correct information. Let it go.

rms2
01-19-2020, 09:55 PM
McCown -

Villabruna was R1b-L754 and not ancestral to R1b-M269. He belonged to an autosomal cluster whose other male members were I2a. He was the lone R1b-L754.

Nothing R1b-M269 or on the line leading to R1b-M269 is showing up in Neolithic remains west of the steppe, but your argument about it not being found anywhere is no good, because we are getting plenty of other Neolithic remains from Europe west of the steppe. They belong to y haplogroups other than R1b-M269, and they are autosomally either ANF, WHG, or a combination of those two. The ANE "third component" is missing, along with R1b-M269.

I think most people would acknowledge that David Reich is one of the foremost experts on ancient dna, if not the foremost expert. You haven't read his book, so it isn't really likely that you're up to date on this subject. Evidently I am not doing a good job explaining it to you, because you keep repeating ideas that were current or regarded as possible several years ago but which are no longer accepted by almost anybody.

Read the book.

MitchellSince1893
01-19-2020, 10:09 PM
According to Yfull, R1b is ~18000 years old and M269 formed ~13,300 years ago
Per the Bering Land Bridge
from c. 24,000 – c. 13,000 BP the Laurentide Ice Sheet fused with the Cordilleran Ice Sheet, which blocked gene flow between Beringia (and Eurasia) and continental North America.[37][38][39] The Yukon corridor opened between the receding ice sheets c. 13,000 BP, and this once again allowed gene flow between Eurasia and continental North America until the land bridge was finally closed by rising sea levels c. 10,000 BP.[40]

So there is this 13000 to 10000 BP window when R1b could have walked from Eurasia to the New World. But it would have to have a TMRCA no later than ~10000 BP. i.e. No L23 or PF7562 or their subclades.

R1b subclades old enough to make that trip (according to Yfull dates)
R-M478
R-V1636
R-V2219
R-PH155

Yet to be discovered subclade of:
R-L754
R-L389
R-P297
R-M269

Is it possible, Yes, but nothing I'm aware of fits the bill. It only takes one ancient sample in the Americas to prove it. Until then I will remain skeptical.

McCown
01-19-2020, 10:17 PM
McCown -

Villabruna was R1b-L754 and not ancestral to R1b-M269. He belonged to an autosomal cluster whose other male members were I2a. He was the lone R1b-L754.

Nothing R1b-M269 or on the line leading to R1b-M269 is showing up in Neolithic remains west of the steppe, but your argument about it not being found anywhere is no good, because we are getting plenty of other Neolithic remains from Europe west of the steppe. They belong to y haplogroups other than R1b-M269, and they are autosomally either ANF, WHG, or a combination of those two. The ANE "third component" is missing, along with R1b-M269.

I think most people would acknowledge that David Reich is the one of the foremost experts on ancient dna, if not the foremost expert. You haven't read his book, so it isn't really likely that you're up to date on this subject. Evidently I am not doing a good job explaining it to you, because you keep repeating ideas that were current or regarded as possible several years ago but which are no longer accepted by almost anybody.

Read the book.

R-L754(R1b1) is ancestral to R-M269(R1b1a1b). You're doing a fine job of explaining it, I just don't agree with the conclusions. As I've stated in the beginning of this thread, everyone thinks I'm nuts, but the R1 Y-DNA branching is very very clear. I've found that most academics have too much to lose by claiming that there was a reverse Solutrean into Europe despite the very clear technology and DNA evidence. The good news is, that one day, there will be evidence to disprove one of us. Again, there are not other R1b remains, other than Villabruna from that period, so to speculate on their Neolithic homeland in the Steppe is pure guess work. It's not even based on modern Y-DNA branching. The Y-DNA isn't lying. It's painting a very clear picture of it's branching.

rms2
01-20-2020, 12:10 AM
R-L754(R1b1) is ancestral to R-M269(R1b1a1b).

I never said it wasn't. I said Villabruna was R1b-L754 and not ancestral to M269. In other words, he was a relative, but not the ancestor of any living R1b-M269 man or probably of any man at all. He was probably more closely related to the line leading to R1b-V88, since R1b-V88 has been found in Neolithic Europe, but R1b-L389 (including R1b-M269) has not (V88 is L389-).



You're doing a fine job of explaining it, I just don't agree with the conclusions. As I've stated in the beginning of this thread, everyone thinks I'm nuts, but the R1 Y-DNA branching is very very clear. I've found that most academics have too much to lose by claiming that there was a reverse Solutrean into Europe despite the very clear technology and DNA evidence. The good news is, that one day, there will be evidence to disprove one of us. Again, there are not other R1b remains, other than Villabruna from that period, so to speculate on their Neolithic homeland in the Steppe is pure guess work. It's not even based on modern Y-DNA branching. The Y-DNA isn't lying. It's painting a very clear picture of it's branching.

It's not guesswork. It's clear. There was no R1b-M269 in Europe west of the steppe during the Neolithic Period, and Europeans west of the steppe before about 5,000 years ago were a mix of Anatolian Neolithic Farmer and Western Hunter Gatherer. Modern Europeans have a third component, Ancient North Eurasian, and they have R1b-M269 because both of those elements plainly arrived with steppe pastoralists in the third millennium BC, as the ancient dna of those steppe pastoralists clearly shows.

Both y haplogroup R and Ancient North Eurasian have their oldest example in the 24,000-year-old remains of Mal'ta Boy, and he was found not in western Europe but in Asian Siberia, near Lake Baikal.

Native Americans share ANE with Europeans because the ancestors of Native Americans went from Siberia to North America. Europeans share ANE with Native Americans because the ancestors of Europeans included steppe pastoralists, who brought ANE with them to Europe west of the steppe along with Indo-European language, culture, and religion.

Here's that graphic from Reich's recent lecture at the Allen Frontiers Symposium (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d78fERhnrNc) again:

35957

McCown
01-20-2020, 01:22 AM
I never said it wasn't. I said Villabruna was R1b-L754 and not ancestral to M269. In other words, he was a relative, but not the ancestor of any living R1b-M269 man or probably of any man at all. He was probably more closely related to the line leading to R1b-V88, since R1b-V88 has been found in Neolithic Europe, but R1b-L389 (including R1b-M269) has not (V88 is L389-).

35957

I really don't understand why you keep saying that M269's ancestor was not L754. L754 was an ancestor of M269.

R1: M173
R1a: L146 modern descendants found in Western Europe
R1b: M343
R1b1: L754 aka Villabruna aDNA found in Western Europe
R1b1a: L388
R1b1a1: P297
R1b1a1b: M269 ... descendant of Villabruna - Mostly found in Western Europe.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JvXoBCBBk42DIF7BYPaLsQ1jojN3etgDR8pByaTRnq4/edit#gid=1078904281

The tree for R1 stems out of Western Europe.

rms2
01-20-2020, 01:32 AM
Why is it you don't understand what I wrote? I know the R1b tree by heart. I know L754 is ancestral to M269.

What I said, and you apparently do not understand, is that VILLABRUNA, the man, the individual, was not the ancestor of any living R1b-M269 man and probably not of any man at all.

There was an L754 man who was the ancestor of the first M269 man, and of all subsequent R1b-M269 men, but he wasn't the individual we call Villabruna. If Villabruna was our ancestor, we would see his descendants popping up in Italy and central Europe in subsequent centuries, including in the Neolithic Period, but we don't.

L754 is also ancestral to V88, and V88 has been found in Neolithic Europe, whereas L389, including M269, has NOT. V88, unlike M269, is L389-.

The R1 tree does not stem from western Europe. To say that it does is patently ridiculous.

If R1 stemmed from western Europe, we should be finding lots of R1a and R1b in Neolithic Europe, but we're not. Instead, those two are present on the steppe and absent from Europe west of the steppe until the third millennium BC.

McCown
01-20-2020, 02:42 AM
Why is it you don't understand what I wrote? I know the R1b tree by heart. I know L754 is ancestral to M269.

What I said, and you apparently do not understand, is that VILLABRUNA, the man, the individual, was not the ancestor of any living R1b-M269 man and probably not of any man at all.

There was an L754 man who was the ancestor of the first M269 man, and of all subsequent R1b-M269 men, but he wasn't the individual we call Villabruna. If Villabruna was our ancestor, we would see his descendants popping up in Italy and central Europe in subsequent centuries, including in the Neolithic Period, but we don't.

L754 is also ancestral to V88, and V88 has been found in Neolithic Europe, whereas L389, including M269, has NOT. V88, unlike M269, is L389-.

The R1 tree does not stem from western Europe. To say that it does is patently ridiculous.

If R1 stemmed from western Europe, we should be finding lots of R1a and R1b in Neolithic Europe, but we're not. Instead, those two are present on the steppe and absent from Europe west of the steppe until the third millennium BC.

Do tell, where is all the Neolithic R1a, R1b and R1*? It's not yet found in the Steppe. The only relevant aDNA for R1b1 is in Italy and then Romania. Then 5000 years ago some moved eastward into the Steppe. But for some reason you think this very straight forward branching is irrelevant, even though the preceding Y-DNA( R1a split ) and following Y-DNA splits( M269 ) have most all of it's oldest Y-DNA branches in Western Europe. If you want to argue that R1* isn't from North America that's one thing, but to argue that R1 subclades don't branch from Western Europe is ignoring the very obvious phylogeny for the R-tree. It sounds like you're saying the admixture of Europe is solely explained by the R1b haplogroup, and some of it is( the North Amerindian component ). But not the other stuff. Look toward the other haplogroups to find these components. For R1, look at the branching as it's the most reliable predictor. Trying to tie mixed DNA to a Y-DNA haplogroup is going to be data filled with noise. The Y-DNA branching is very straight forward but for some reason, when it comes to haplogroup R, everybody ignores it.

Generalissimo
01-20-2020, 03:20 AM
Do tell, where is all the Neolithic R1a, R1b and R1*? It's not yet found in the Steppe. The only relevant aDNA that for R1b1 is in Italy and then Romania. Then 5000 years ago some moved eastward into the Steppe. But for some reason you think this very straight forward branching is irrelevant, even though the preceding Y-DNA( R1a split ) and following Y-DNA splits( M269 ) have most all of it's oldest Y-DNA branches in Western Europe. If you want to argue that R1* isn't from North America that's one thing, but to argue that R1 subclades don't branch from Western Europe is ignoring the very obvious phylogeny for the R-tree. It sounds like you're saying the admixture of Europe is solely explained by the R1b haplogroup, and some of it is( the North Amerindian component ). But not the other stuff. Look toward the other haplogroups to find these components. For R1, look at the branching as it's the most reliable predictor. Trying to tie mixed DNA to a Y-DNA haplogroup is going to be data filled with noise. The Y-DNA branching is very straight forward but for some reason, when it comes to haplogroup R, everybody ignores it.

First of all, Villabruna is an Upper Paleolithic sample and has nothing to do with any sort of Neolithic.

Secondly, there is plenty of R1, R1a and R1b in Mesolithic, Neolithic and Eneolthic samples from all over Eastern Europe, including the steppe area.

McCown
01-20-2020, 03:34 AM
First of all, Villabruna is an Upper Paleolithic sample and has nothing to do with any sort of Neolithic.

Secondly, there is plenty of R1, R1a and R1b in Mesolithic, Neolithic and Eneolthic samples from all over Eastern Europe, including the steppe area.

Please share it here as I have not seen it in the Steppe. Does Eastern Europe show up after Villabruna in an Eastward migration?

Generalissimo
01-20-2020, 05:03 AM
Please share it here as I have not seen it in the Steppe. Does Eastern Europe show up after Villabruna in an Eastward migration?

Once you become aware what the steppe is, that is, where it begins and ends, then you can study the relevant data and see it in the steppe during the Neolithic.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25778

xenus
01-20-2020, 09:03 AM
I don't understand how you guys have been dragged into multiple threads about this guy's pet theory.

I highly doubt that someone who has developed their own pet theory over many years is going to suddenly drop the axe they've been grinding.

There are plenty of things out there where our lack of information means we can argue back and forth while we are waiting for new studies to be published. This however, is not one of those things.

He doesn't have to believe in all the evidence gathered to date, but we don't have to waste or time either.

McCown
01-20-2020, 12:24 PM
Once you become aware what the steppe is, that is, where it begins and ends, then you can study the relevant data and see it in the steppe during the Neolithic.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25778

I'll take that as a yes, it does branch eastward after Villabruna, just as I've said. 5000 years ago R1 kept going East into the Steppe. R1 branching data is very clear, yet people explain it away in every way possible.

jdean
01-20-2020, 01:14 PM
I'll take that as a yes, it does branch eastward after Villabruna, just as I've said. 5000 years ago R1 kept going East into the Steppe. R1 branching data is very clear, yet people explain it away in every way possible.

Yes, it's bizarre !!!


I don't understand how you guys have been dragged into multiple threads about this guy's pet theory.

As you say, completely pointless, ho hum : )

rms2
01-20-2020, 02:05 PM
It's goofy. The "R1 branching data" do not show that R1 originated in western Europe. That's just ridiculous.

If Villabruna, the individual paleolithic hunter gatherer, were the ancestor of European R1b-M269 men, and if R1 originated in western Europe, then we should be seeing R1 pop up all over western and central Europe in subsequent ages, but we don't. It's conspicuous by its absence until the arrival of steppe pastoralists in the third millennium BC.



. . . He doesn't have to believe in all the evidence gathered to date, but we don't have to waste or time either.


That's very true, and I'm about done wasting my time. On the other hand, it afforded me the opportunity to review what I already knew to be true and to keep it fresh in my mind. So it wasn't a complete waste of time, only very nearly a complete waste of time. ;)

McCown
01-20-2020, 02:40 PM
It's goofy. The "R1 branching data" do not show that R1 originated in western Europe. That's just ridiculous.

If Villabruna, the individual paleolithic hunter gatherer, were the ancestor of European R1b-M269 men, and if R1 originated in western Europe, then we should be seeing R1 pop up all over western and central Europe in subsequent ages, but we don't. It's conspicuous by its absence until the arrival of steppe pastoralists in the third millennium BC.



All I can say is, keep looking... Just because R1b fossils before/after Villabruna haven't been found in a cave somewhere doesn't mean it wasn't there. The branching of modern Y-DNA populations for R1 still stem out of Europe with or without aDNA( which we have - Villabruna the oh so lonesome hunter straying so far from his family it could make a modern day scientist cry and come up with all sorts of work a rounds for his appearance ).

You can all shut me up if you show me a Y-tree for R1 that demonstrates I'm incorrect. But R1 > R1a(Europe) . R1 > R1b1 Villabruan( Europe ) > V88( Europe ). R1b1(M269) > Europe. Best I can tell, PH155 is found in Albania(Europe) and M73 is in Latvia( Europe ). Find me a branch older than these for R1a/R1b and we'll consider the matter settled. All of these stem out of Europe.

rms2
01-20-2020, 03:01 PM
It's pretty elementary really. The oldest R-M207 and ANE we know about were found in the 24,000-year-old remains of the male child known as Mal'ta Boy, found not in western or even central or eastern Europe but in Asian Siberia near Lake Baikal.

Before about 5,000 years ago, Europeans west of the steppe were a combination of Anatolian Neolithic Farmer and Western Hunter Gatherer. They lacked Ancient North Eurasian, which all Europeans now have, and they lacked y-dna R1b-M269 and R1a-M417. Missing in action. Not there.

Other things that were missing were Indo-European languages, culture, and religion.

Steppe pastoralists began arriving in Europe west of the steppe in the late 4th millennium - early 3rd millennium BC. They carried with them Ancient North Eurasian autosomal dna and both R1b-M269 and R1a-M417, all of which were lacking in Europeans west of the steppe before they arrived. The ancient dna of the steppe pastoralists makes all this clear.

These steppe pastoralists arrived in a Late Neolithic Europe already partly devastated by Yersinia Pestis, the Plague. They took surviving Neolithic Farmer women as wives and in many cases killed male Neolithic Farmers. The success of the steppe pastoralists, most of whom were male, enabled them to father many children. As a consequence, their y-dna lines expanded and branched in their new homes in Europe west of the steppe in rapid, bush-like fashion.

A simple before-and-after scenario:

Europe before the steppe pastoralists: no ANE, no R1b-M269 or R1a-M417, and no Indo-European package.

Europe after the steppe pastoralists: ANE, R1b-M269 and R1a-M417, and the Indo-European package spread far and wide.

McCown
01-20-2020, 03:17 PM
It's pretty elementary really. The oldest R-M207 and ANE we know about were found in the 24,000-year-old remains of the male child known as Mal'ta Boy, found not in western or even central or eastern Europe but in Asian Siberia near Lake Baikal.

Before about 5,000 years ago, Europeans west of the steppe were a combination of Anatolian Neolithic Farmer and Western Hunter Gatherer. They lacked Ancient North Eurasian, which all Europeans now have, and they lacked y-dna R1b-M269 and R1a-M417. Missing in action. Not there.

Other things that were missing were Indo-European languages, culture, and religion.

Steppe pastoralists began arriving in Europe west of the steppe in the late 4th millennium - early 3rd millennium BC. They carried with them Ancient North Eurasian autosomal dna and both R1b-M269 and R1a-M417, all of which were lacking in Europeans west of the steppe before they arrived. The ancient dna of the steppe pastoralists makes all this clear.

These steppe pastoralists arrived in a Late Neolithic Europe already partly devastated by Yersinia Pestis, the Plague. They took surviving Neolithic Farmer women as wives and in many cases killed male Neolithic Farmers. The success of the steppe pastoralists, most of whom were male, enabled them to father many children. As a consequence, their y-dna lines expanded and branched in their new homes in Europe west of the steppe in rapid, bush-like fashion.

A simple before-and-after scenario:

Europe before the steppe pastoralists: no ANE, no R1b-M269 or R1a-M417, and no Indo-European package.

Europe after the steppe pastoralists: ANE, R1b-M269 and R1a-M417, and the Indo-European package spread far and wide.

Show me the Y-DNA branching not the mixed DNA which is convoluting everyone's perspective on R1. There is very likely other haplogroups that explain ANE mix. R1 isn't that haplogroup. Show me the Y-tree! We both agree that Mal'ta was in Siberia. It's the missing 10K years after this we disagree on. No matter which way they came to Europe, R1a/b stemmed out of Europe 10K years after Mal'ta boy. I think they came via North America ice sheets and you think they arrived 4000 years ago crossing the Steppe. A 4000 year ago arrival doesn't jive with the R1 branching in Europe.

rms2
01-20-2020, 03:28 PM
Show me the Y-DNA branching not the mixed DNA which is convoluting everyone's perspective on R1. There is very likely other haplogroups that explain ANE mix. R1 isn't that haplogroup. Show me the Y-tree! We both agree that Mal'ta was in Siberia. It's the missing 10K years after this we disagree on. No matter which way they came to Europe, R1a/b stemmed out of Europe 10K years after Mal'ta boy. I think they came via North America ice sheets and you think they arrived 4000 years ago crossing the Steppe. A 4000 year ago arrival doesn't jive with the R1 branching in Europe.

Read Reich's book.

There is no evidence that R1 began in western Europe, none whatsoever. Your R1 branching argument is simply a variation of the old argument that because there is a lot of R1 in western Europe now, it must have originated there. The ancient dna shows us that is just not the case.

How do you explain the advent of Indo-European languages, culture, and religion, which just happens to coincide with the arrival of steppe pastoralists, who also carried ANE, R1b-M269, and R1a-M417?

To what non-R1 haplogroups do you attribute ANE and the Indo-European package?

McCown
01-20-2020, 03:50 PM
Read Reich's book.

There is no evidence that R1 began in western Europe, none whatsoever. Your R1 branching argument is simply a variation of the old argument that because there is a lot of R1 in western Europe now, it must have originated there. The ancient dna shows us that is just not the case.

How do you explain the advent of Indo-European languages, culture, and religion, which just happens to coincide with the arrival of steppe pastoralists, who also carried ANE, R1b-M269, and R1a-M417?

To what non-R1 haplogroups do you attribute ANE and the Indo-European package?

I'm not familiar enough will all of the Steppe and European haplogroups to know who else could have brought ANE to Europe. I still think that the mixed DNA is data noise and that R1 Europe migrated to the Steppe in the time frame that you think it came to Europe. I'm not entirely convinced that R1 didn't bring ANE to the Steppe from Europe. I have shown a very reasonable R1 tree out of Europe using both aDNA and modern Y-DNA. Show me an R1 tree branching from the Steppe. Let's see the hub and the spokes. I think the reason nobody has posted one in here, is because it can't be done. I promise you that I will zip my lip if anyone can post a R1-tree stemming from the Steppes that isn't fraught with errors.

K33
01-20-2020, 04:17 PM
I'm not familiar enough will all of the Steppe and European haplogroups to know who else could have brought ANE to Europe. I still think that the mixed DNA is data noise and that R1 Europe migrated to the Steppe in the time frame that you think it came to Europe. I'm not entirely convinced that R1 didn't bring ANE to the Steppe from Europe. I have shown a very reasonable R1 tree out of Europe using both aDNA and modern Y-DNA. Show me an R1 tree branching from the Steppe. Let's see the hub and the spokes. I think the reason nobody has posted one in here, is because it can't be done. I promise you that I will zip my lip if anyone can post a R1-tree stemming from the Steppes that isn't fraught with errors.The portion of the "steppe" that forms the Indo-European homeland IS Europe, it's just in eastern and not western Europe.

ANE ancestry only becomes significant in Western Europe with Bell Beaker circa 2500 BC. But there are dozens of Paleolithic and Mesolithic Eastern Euro and Central Asian samples loaded with ANE dating from 24,000 BC to 5,000 BC and all time periods in between.

Others have told you this, and you're not listening.

McCown
01-20-2020, 04:33 PM
The portion of the "steppe" that forms the Indo-European homeland IS Europe, it's just in eastern and not western Europe.

ANE ancestry only becomes significant in Western Europe with Bell Beaker circa 2500 BC. But there are dozens of Paleolithic and Mesolithic Eastern Euro and Central Asian samples loaded with ANE dating from 24,000 BC to 5,000 BC and all time periods in between.

Others have told you this, and you're not listening.

Oh I'm listening. I'm not agreeing. Can anyone make a case for R1 branching WITHOUT using mixed DNA? R1 is a Y-DNA haplogroup not an autosomal mixture. If someone want's to argue East vs Western Europe, I'll concede. If someone wants to argue that R1 comes from the rest of the Steppe.... show me the Y-tree. Use all the *lithic aDNA you like just show it to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Steppe#/media/File:Pontic_Caspian_climate.png

spruithean
01-20-2020, 04:41 PM
Oh I'm listening. I'm not agreeing. Can anyone make a case for R1 branching WITHOUT using mixed DNA? R1 is a Y-DNA haplogroup not an autosomal mixture. If someone want's to argue East vs Western Europe, I'll concede. If someone wants to argue that R1 comes from the rest of the Steppe.... show me the Y-tree. Use all the neolithic aDNA you like just show it to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Steppe#/media/File:Pontic_Caspian_climate.png

I think you’re missing the forest for the trees.

rms2
01-20-2020, 04:45 PM
. . . Show me an R1 tree branching from the Steppe. Let's see the hub and the spokes. I think the reason nobody has posted one in here, is because it can't be done. I promise you that I will zip my lip if anyone can post a R1-tree stemming from the Steppes that isn't fraught with errors.

The current R1 Tree is a 21st century AD tree. Much of its branching is comparatively recent history. Ancient dna tells us the older history and informs us that R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 were brought to Europe west of the steppe by steppe pastoralists, the same steppe pastoralists who also brought us ANE and the Indo-European package. Subsequent branching took place in Europe west of the steppe because that is where our steppe pastoralist y-dna ancestors settled, prospered, and fathered many children, including many male children, who likewise fathered many male children.

Similarly, my own y-dna fathers arrived in Maryland from Wales in the 17th century. Since that time a lot of branching has taken place right here in North America. However, because I know some of my family history, I am not fooled into thinking my y-dna line was born here in North America. I know better.

The modern R1 tree tells us about the R1 situation now. It does not tell us where R1 began or how it got where it is found today, but it is apparently the only argument you have, an extremely weak one.

McCown
01-20-2020, 04:53 PM
The current R1 Tree is a 21st century AD tree. Much of its branching is comparatively recent history. Ancient dna tells us the older history and informs us that R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 were brought to Europe west of the steppe by steppe pastoralists, the same steppe pastoralists who also brought us ANE and the Indo-European package. Subsequent branching took place in Europe west of the steppe because that is where our steppe pastoralist y-dna ancestors settled, prospered, and fathered many children, including many male children, who likewise fathered many male children.

Similarly, my own y-dna fathers arrived in Maryland from Wales in the 17th century. Since that time a lot of branching has taken place right here in North America. However, because I know some of my family history, I am not fooled into thinking my y-dna line was born here in North America. I know better.

The modern R1 tree tells us about the R1 situation now. It does not tell us where R1 began or how it got where it is found today, but it is apparently the only argument you have, an extremely weak one.

Your Y-DNA arrived in Maryland from Wales, but Wales has more branching from your haplogroup than Maryland. Your Maryland branch SNPs are brand new and are creating a new branch that we can trace back to Wales. In other words, Wales has more genetic distance/diversity and branching because Wales is the older origin. The Mixed DNA that you've acquired from other American immigrants does not reflect itself in your Y-DNA haplogroup. I bet you have all sorts of mixture, not from Wales in you. The same principles apply to ancient R1( especially before they had transcontinental travel ).

rms2
01-20-2020, 05:10 PM
Your Y-DNA arrived in Maryland from Wales, but Wales has more branching from your haplogroup than Maryland.

I'm not sure that's actually true. Most of the branching on my actual y-dna line has occurred here in North America.

Besides that, I'm pretty sure there's a lot of R1b-M269 diversity right here in North America, certainly more than in Wales.



Your Maryland branch SNPs are brand new and are creating a new branch that we can trace back to Wales. In other words, Wales has more genetic distance/diversity and branching because Wales is the older origin. The Mixed DNA that you've acquired from other American immigrants does not reflect itself in your Y-DNA haplogroup. I bet you have all sorts of mixture, not from Wales in you. The same principles apply to ancient R1( especially before they had transcontinental travel ).

All that autosomal mixture can be explained from its sources and their history, which is actually my argument, the argument you ignore in favor of your ahistorical, there's-lots-of-R1-in-western Europe-now argument.

But you must explain why both ANE and R1b-M269 were conspicuously absent from Europe west of the steppe prior to 5,000 years ago, why they're present in modern Europeans west of the steppe, and why they first appear in Europe west of the steppe in the remains of invading steppe pastoralists (if those steppe pastoralists are not responsible for them).

If R1 is absolutely native to western Europe, why did it disappear from there, with only a couple of L754 and V88 exceptions, until the third millennium BC?

rms2
01-20-2020, 05:20 PM
Another thing one must keep in mind is the history of the Eurasian steppe, which has served as a highway from East Asia to Central Europe for millennia. A lot has happened since the third millennium BC, when most of our steppe pastoralist ancestors left the steppe for Europe west of it. Many subsequent peoples have swept over it, changing its genetic profile.

Given that history, it is silly to expect an R1 Tree that branches from the modern steppe.

Our ancestors went to Europe over five thousand years ago. That is where they set down roots and where their y-dna branches of the R1 Tree bushed out and spread.

Pretty obviously they didn't stay on the steppe. They migrated west using horses, oxen, and wagons. Because of ancient dna, linguistics, and archaeology, however, we know where they came from.

SakaDo
01-20-2020, 05:30 PM
Read Reich's book.

There is no evidence that R1 began in western Europe, none whatsoever. Your R1 branching argument is simply a variation of the old argument that because there is a lot of R1 in western Europe now, it must have originated there. The ancient dna shows us that is just not the case.

How do you explain the advent of Indo-European languages, culture, and religion, which just happens to coincide with the arrival of steppe pastoralists, who also carried ANE, R1b-M269, and R1a-M417?

To what non-R1 haplogroups do you attribute ANE and the Indo-European package?

How do you connect Indo-European languages with these" lineages ANE, R1b-M269, R1a-M417" and their arrival ?
I think your statement is within of pure speculation.
In this case we must have PIE with an Asian origin. Where are the Asian branches of this groups we can connect with an early PIE?
On the other hand we have now the earliest known scripts which are at least 7000 years old.
The simple logic indicates that the language precedes the letter, letters found in Europe -Gradeshnica, Karanovo, Vincha, Vulchi dol... and of course their natural development/continuity into linear A and B...
We must admit in this case the PIE is older than 7000 years and originate somewhere closer to that first known scripts.
How come these oldest scripts invented before arrival of "lineages ANE, R1b-M269, R1a-M417", are connected to them?
PIE is connected to agriculture and organized agriculture, connected to the inventions like wheel for example.
How you will protect your theory about these newcomers gave such a precious knowledge came from Asia?
The "steppes" is too voluminous and vague concept when we talking about something specific and important like the origin of IE languages.
Which culture they represent? Maybe you can convince me somehow...

McCown
01-20-2020, 05:31 PM
I'm not sure that's actually true. Most of the branching on my actual y-dna line has occurred here in North America.

Besides that, I'm pretty sure there's a lot of R1b-M269 diversity right here in North America, certainly more than in Wales.




All that autosomal mixture can be explained from its sources and their history, which is actually my argument, the argument you ignore in favor of your ahistorical, there's-lots-of-R1-in-western Europe-now argument.

But you must explain why both ANE and R1b-M269 were conspicuously absent from Europe west of the steppe prior to 5,000 years ago, why they're present in modern Europeans west of the steppe, and why they first appear in Europe west of the steppe in the remains of invading steppe pastoralists (if those steppe pastoralists are not responsible for them).

If R1 is absolutely native to western Europe, why did it disappear from there, with only a couple of L754 and V88 exceptions, until the third millennium BC?

If I saw nothing but the raw data from your haplogroup found both in American and Wales( presuming we tested people in Wales ), I'd know it was from Wales based on the branching. If I saw your haplogroup was on a person mixed with other non-Wales autosomal DNA, I wouldn't assume your Y-DNA came from non-Wales country... but that's what everyone is doing with R1b and ANE.

R1 has far from disappeared in Europe. It's the most common haplogroup. As more and more people test, we uncover more and more ancient branches with European origins. R-M269 is just one of them and it's been there longer than anywhere else. Is there evidence that R-M269 has been in the Steppe longer than Europe? If so, share it. As far as ANE, I don't think it's anything you can draw conclusions on for Y-DNA. Sure it found it's way into the mix but that doesn't mean it came via R-M269 from the Steppe. Even if they are connected, there is bound to be an explanation other than ignoring the Y-tree branching.

rms2
01-20-2020, 05:44 PM
If I saw nothing but the raw data from your haplogroup found both in American and Wales( presuming we tested people in Wales ), I'd know it was from Wales based on the branching. If I saw your haplogroup was on a person mixed with other non-Wales autosomal DNA, I wouldn't assume your Y-DNA came from non-Wales country... but that's what everyone is doing with R1b and ANE.

If you tested ancient North American dna, you wouldn't find my y-dna haplogroup. You wouldn't find it until you tested European immigrant remains from the 17th century.

You would find ANE in Native American remains, however, because their ancestors came from Siberia to North America, and in the remains of those 17th century European immigrants, thanks to their R1-M173 steppe pastoralist ancestors.

Gee, that's kind of like the Europe west of the steppe story.



R1 has far from disappeared in Europe. It's the most common haplogroup.

No kidding, now, but R1b-M269 wasn't there in Europe west of the steppe until it arrived with steppe pastoralists beginning around 5,000 years ago.

Likewise, there was no ANE there and no Indo-European package.

Then, with the arrival of steppe pastoralists in the third millennium BC, all three of those things made a huge impact and became commonplace.



As more and more people test, we uncover more and more ancient branches with European origins. R-M269 is just one of them and it's been there longer than anywhere else. Is there evidence that R-M269 has been in the Steppe longer than Europe? If so, share it. As far as ANE, I don't think it's anything you can draw conclusions on for Y-DNA. Sure it found it's way into the mix but that doesn't mean it came via R-M269 from the Steppe. Even if they are connected, there is bound to be an explanation other than ignoring the Y-tree branching.

There are M269 samples from the Russian steppe dating to the 4th millennium BC. No such old M269 remains exist from Europe west of the steppe.

No one is "ignoring the Y-tree branching". I already explained to you how our y-dna lines came to expand and become bush-like in Europe west of the steppe. One has to ignore the ancient dna, as well as linguistics and archaeology, to persist in asserting that the Y-tree shows that R1 originated in western Europe.

jdean
01-20-2020, 05:46 PM
If I saw your haplogroup was on a person mixed with other non-Wales autosomal DNA, I wouldn't assume your Y-DNA came from non-Wales country

I was mildly tempted to ask why but at the end of the day anybody who can come up with a statement like this clearly can't tell the difference between where food goes in as opposed to comes out.

rms2
01-20-2020, 05:59 PM
How do you connect Indo-European languages with these" lineages ANE, R1b-M269, R1a-M417" and their arrival ?
I think your statement is within of pure speculation.
In this case we must have PIE with an Asian origin. Where are the Asian branches of this groups we can connect with an early PIE?
On the other hand we have now the earliest known scripts which are at least 7000 years old.
The simple logic indicates that the language precedes the letter, letters found in Europe -Gradeshnica, Karanovo, Vincha, Vulchi dol... and of course their natural development/continuity into linear A and B...
We must admit in this case the PIE is older than 7000 years and originate somewhere closer to that first known scripts.
How come these oldest scripts invented before arrival of "lineages ANE, R1b-M269, R1a-M417", are connected to them?
PIE is connected to agriculture and organized agriculture, connected to the inventions like wheel for example.
How you will protect your theory about these newcomers gave such a precious knowledge came from Asia?
The "steppes" is too voluminous and vague concept when we talking about something specific and important like the origin of IE languages.
Which culture they represent? Maybe you can convince me somehow...

I don't really want to launch off into a discussion of Renfrew's Anatolian Farmer Hypothesis. Clearly the evidence is all on the side of the Kurgan Hypothesis (Gimbutas, Mallory, Anthony, Pereltsvaig, et al).

McCown
01-20-2020, 05:59 PM
Another thing one must keep in mind is the history of the Eurasian steppe, which has served as a highway from East Asia to Central Europe for millennia. A lot has happened since the third millennium BC, when most of our steppe pastoralist ancestors left the steppe for Europe west of it. Many subsequent peoples have swept over it, changing its genetic profile.

Given that history, it is silly to expect an R1 Tree that branches from the modern steppe.

Our ancestors went to Europe over five thousand years ago. That is where they set down roots and where their y-dna branches of the R1 Tree bushed out and spread.

Pretty obviously they didn't stay on the steppe. They migrated west using horses, oxen, and wagons. Because of ancient dna, linguistics, and archaeology, however, we know where they came from.

What's more likely, the "old argument" that the Y-DNA likely originates from where it's stems ( now and in the past ) or the "new argument" that ALL the branches moved at the same time leaving no trace of where they stem?

rms2
01-20-2020, 06:10 PM
What's more likely, the "old argument" that the Y-DNA likely originates from where it's stems ( now and in the past ) or the "new argument" that ALL the branches moved at the same time leaving no trace of where they stem?

Oh, our ancestors left a trace. It's called ancient dna. It actually shows us where our ancestors were in the past.

It also shows us where they weren't (hint: western Europe).

McCown
01-20-2020, 06:20 PM
Oh, our ancestors left a trace. It's called ancient dna. It actually shows us where our ancestors were in the past.

It also shows us where they weren't (hint: western Europe).

Are you saying that R-M269 wasn't in Western Europe? Is that your argument? Y-DNA testing shows us clearly where they were( hint: Western Europe ). And as I've gone over repeatedly, aDNA shows M269's ancestors were too.

rms2
01-20-2020, 06:24 PM
Are you saying that R-M269 wasn't in Western Europe? Is that your argument? Y-DNA testing shows us clearly where they were( hint: Western Europe ). And as I've gone over repeatedly, aDNA shows M269's ancestors were too.

Yes, I'm saying R1b-M269 wasn't in western Europe until the third millennium BC.

I'm sitting in my house right now, but I didn't get here until we bought the place in July of 2007. Before then, I lived elsewhere.

Our y-dna ancestors were absent from western Europe until they first got there in the third millennium BC.

Get it?

McCown
01-20-2020, 06:29 PM
Yes, I'm saying R1b-M269 wasn't in western Europe until the third millennium BC.

I'm sitting in my house right now, but I didn't get here until we bought the place in July of 2007. Before then, I lived elsewhere.

Our y-dna ancestors were absent from western Europe until they first got there in the third millennium BC.

Get it?

That's simply not true. R-M269 moved from Europe to the Steppe in the third millennium BC. I know this because all the of R1 branches that precede/surround M269 originate in Europe( including M269 itself ). Do I really need to show another R1 tree showing the branches?

ADW_1981
01-20-2020, 06:30 PM
1. Where's the ancient R1b in North America?
-- Oh right, there's none, and yes I believe we have dozens of male samples now.

2. How could R1b(L389?) populate Europe from Arctic Greenland or Iceland without Q1a accompaniment?
-- Oh yeah, it couldn't. Yes there are a few divergent branches of Q1 in Scandinavia and Germanic countries but absolutely none through the core of BA Europe where we have been finding aDNA of R1b, probably pushing 100-200 samples now. There's no reasonable explanation why we would have R1b but no Q1 if they arrived together.

You're facing an uphill battle, just give up now. Sure you are entitled to an opinion, but it's not at all supported by any data.

EDIT: The aDNA of North America is distinctive as some sort of combination (at a high level) of ANE and East Asian. There is nothing of the sort in mesolithic Europe or earlier.

Ruderico
01-20-2020, 06:35 PM
That's simply not true. R-M269 moved from Europe to the Steppe in the third millennium BC. I know this because all the of R1 branches that precede/surround M269 originate in Europe( including M269 itself ). Do I really need to show another R1 tree showing the branches?

M478 is a brother clade to M269 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-M478/
Modern individuals in yfull are in Russia and Ukraine


There's also a few R-M269 ancient samples, yet unpublished, from Russia. That, combined with everything else people have told you (including the books and studies you apparently have not yet read) seems to strongly support an eastern European origin for R-M269 and its upstream clade, which eventually moved into western Europe during the IE migrations of the Copper/Bronze age. Villabruna is a dead end and left no male descendants.

rms2
01-20-2020, 06:37 PM
. . . And as I've gone over repeatedly, aDNA shows M269's ancestors were too.

No, you're utterly wrong about that.

Villabruna was L754xL389 at a time when not only L389 but even its offspring P297 probably already existed, which means that Villabruna could not have been the ancestor of M269, since M269 is downstream of both L389 and P297.

And, as I said before, if Villabruna himself was the ancestor of European R1b-M269, we should see M269 popping up in ancient Italian and Central European remains in the centuries following Villabruna, but we don't.

Villabruna was a stray forager probably related to the line leading to V88 but whose own line died out, and foragers wandered far and wide in search of game.

rms2
01-20-2020, 06:39 PM
That's simply not true. R-M269 moved from Europe to the Steppe in the third millennium BC. I know this because all the of R1 branches that precede/surround M269 originate in Europe( including M269 itself ). Do I really need to show another R1 tree showing the branches?

I'm beginning to think that you're simply a person immune to reason and evidence.

The statement of yours I put in bold above is just incredible.

My jaw dropped when I read it.

Phew! But maybe there are others reading this thread who will benefit from the instruction you are getting but ignoring.

jdean
01-20-2020, 06:40 PM
That's simply not true. R-M269 moved from Europe to the Steppe in the third millennium BC. I know this because all the of R1 branches that precede/surround M269 originate in Europe( including M269 itself ). Do I really need to show another R1 tree showing the branches?

No but perhaps you could provide a bona fide West European M269 sample from this time. Oh and the last time I heard the area the yamnaya people lived in is called Europe, just not West

spruithean
01-20-2020, 06:42 PM
1. Where's the ancient R1b in North America?
-- Oh right, there's none, and yes I believe we have dozens of male samples now.

2. How could R1b(M269) populate Europe from Arctic Greenland or Iceland without Q1a accompaniment?
-- Oh yeah, it couldn't. Yes there are a few divergent branches of Q1 in Scandinavia and Germanic countries but absolutely none through the core of BA Europe where we have been finding aDNA of R1b, probably pushing 100-200 samples now. There's no reasonable explanation why we would have R1b but no Q1 if they arrived together.

You're facing an uphill battle, just give up now. Sure you are entitled to an opinion, but it's not at all supported by any data.

Reading through this thread and the thread linked in the early pages of this one have me scratching my head. It's clear that the studies which support the current hypotheses for R1a and R1b have not been read by the proponent of this R1b/R1a from North America theory.

Not to mention the ridiculous notion that Gaelic and Algonquin languages share words with each other, try hard enough and you'll find this sort of thing in many languages.


M478 is a brother clade to M269 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-M478/
Modern individuals in yfull are in Russia and Ukraine


There's also a few R-M269 ancient samples, yet unpublished, from Russia. That, combined with everything else people have told you (including the books and studies you apparently have not yet read) seems to strongly support an eastern European origin on R-M269 and its upstream clade, which eventually moved into western Europe during the IE migrations of the Copper/Bronze age.

Pet theories are a hard thing to break, remember the poster who thought that Indo-Iranians came from Scandinavia? He's extremely active on academia.edu "publishing" articles.

McCown
01-20-2020, 06:45 PM
No but perhaps you could provide a bona fide West European M269 sample from this time. Oh and the last time I heard the area the yamnaya people lived in is called Europe, just not West

You already know my thoughts on Yamnaya branching from my post 4 years ago...

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9698&d=1464007379

Either way, here's yet another R1 tree for you to ignore.

rms2
01-20-2020, 06:45 PM
No but perhaps you could provide a bona fide West European M269 sample from this time. Oh and the last time I heard the area the yamnaya people lived in is called Europe, just not West

Right, and there are ancient M269+ samples from the Russian steppe that date to the 4th millennium BC, much older than the very oldest western European M269+ samples.

McCown
01-20-2020, 06:55 PM
1. Where's the ancient R1b in North America?
-- Oh right, there's none, and yes I believe we have dozens of male samples now.

2. How could R1b(L389?) populate Europe from Arctic Greenland or Iceland without Q1a accompaniment?
-- Oh yeah, it couldn't. Yes there are a few divergent branches of Q1 in Scandinavia and Germanic countries but absolutely none through the core of BA Europe where we have been finding aDNA of R1b, probably pushing 100-200 samples now. There's no reasonable explanation why we would have R1b but no Q1 if they arrived together.

You're facing an uphill battle, just give up now. Sure you are entitled to an opinion, but it's not at all supported by any data.

EDIT: The aDNA of North America is distinctive as some sort of combination (at a high level) of ANE and East Asian. There is nothing of the sort in mesolithic Europe or earlier.

If you read my original post from 2016, you'll see plenty of links to articles on DNA shared with Europeans and Amerindians.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7425-Ice-Age-European-migration-hypothesis-from-Siberia-gt-America-gt-Europe

I show the branching of Q1 in the same post. Q1 made it to Europe from North America just like I'm proposing R1 did. It's hard to say if R1 was already R1b/R1a in North America or not yet since we don't have conclusive data. Even if R1 didn't branch off and survive in North America, it's what would be known as a bottleneck where the only surviving lineages arrived in Europe. Personally, I think we will find evidence of early R1 branching in North America, but time and more data will tell.

jdean
01-20-2020, 06:57 PM
You already know my thoughts on Yamnaya branching from my post 4 years ago...

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9698&d=1464007379

Either way, here's yet another R1 tree for you to ignore.

Now provide at least some sort of real evidence to support it, but you can't can you because it's a load of toffee !!!

McCown
01-20-2020, 07:09 PM
Now provide at least some sort of real evidence to support it, but you can't can you because it's a load of toffee !!!

Which part of Y-DNA branching isn't considered evidence? I'm the only one posting a Y-DNA tree to support my claim.

jdean
01-20-2020, 07:26 PM
Which part of Y-DNA branching isn't considered evidence? I'm the only one posting a Y-DNA tree to support my claim.

But it contains no real evidence that supports your claims.

This is a detail from a tree produced purely from aDNA and all the samples were found in close proximity. Whilst I would never use it as evidence for the source of P297 it provides a massive problem for your turn of events.

35973

spruithean
01-20-2020, 07:28 PM
Which part of Y-DNA branching isn't considered evidence? I'm the only one posting a Y-DNA tree to support my claim.

Except you aren't really supporting it, ancient samples and other data are clearly contrary to your viewpoint...

McCown
01-20-2020, 07:43 PM
But it contains no real evidence that supports your claims.

This is a detail from a tree produced purely from aDNA and all the samples were found in close proximity. Whilst I would never use it as evidence for the source of P297 it provides a massive problem for your turn of events.

35973

That is only a branch of M269 which I have repeatedly said migrated to the Steppe from Europe. Show me the prior branches leading up to M269. I think it's amazing that nobody considers modern Y-DNA evidence but dismiss the aDNA that contradicts their viewpoint( Villabruna ).

jdean
01-20-2020, 07:56 PM
That is only a branch of M269 which I have already said migrated to the Steppe from Europe.

There are two branches of M297 in that diagram


Show me the prior branches leading up to M269.

Tell you what, you go first : )


I think it's amazing that nobody considers modern Y-DNA evidence but dismiss the aDNA that contradicts their viewpoint( Villabruna ).

Who died 1500 yrs after P297 was formed but wasn't found to be positive for any SNP at that level, by all means keep banging that drum.

McCown
01-20-2020, 08:00 PM
There are two branches of M269 in that diagram



Tell you what, you go first : )


I have gone first and second and third and .... 10th...

Your M269 branch is missing Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R-M269

jdean
01-20-2020, 08:14 PM
I have gone first and second and third and .... 10th...

Your M269 branch is missing Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R-M269

But still you've yet to provide anything that constitutes evidence save a dead end Italian (who couldn't have had anything to do with the vast majority of European R1b) and modern DNA distribution, none of which comes even close to proving your original thesis or what we are talking about now.

SakaDo
01-20-2020, 08:54 PM
I don't really want to launch off into a discussion of Renfrew's Anatolian Farmer Hypothesis. Clearly the evidence is all on the side of the Kurgan Hypothesis (Gimbutas, Mallory, Anthony, Pereltsvaig, et al).

Donít you know there are kurgan burials much older than 3000 BC at Europe? Thatís in contradiction with your theory again. The PIE is local language for Europe and much older than 5000 years old, that is what all the evidence show, not from Asian newcomers as you pointed.
The meaning of Hypothesis (kurgan)is enough clear that nothing is really clear here.

jdean
01-20-2020, 09:01 PM
Don’t you know there are kurgan burials much older than 3000 BC at Europe? That’s in contradiction with your theory again. The PIE is local language for Europe and much older than 5000 years old, that is what all the evidence show, not from Asian newcomers as you pointed.
The meaning of Hypothesis (kurgan)is enough clear that nothing is really clear here.

Sorry I missed the part of the Kurgan Theory where it states they were Asian, could you point it out please.

SakaDo
01-20-2020, 09:04 PM
Sorry I missed the part of the Kurgan Theory where it states they were Asian, could you point it out please.

Well, that was the point of all the explanations here about ANE, R1b-M269, and R1a-M417. We can not meet those earlier in Europe, right?

jdean
01-20-2020, 09:50 PM
Well, that was the point of all the explanations here about ANE, R1b-M269, and R1a-M417. We can not meet those earlier in Europe, right?

True but they are all a lot older than PIE which is thought to be about 6,000 yrs old.

McCown
01-20-2020, 10:01 PM
Well, that was the point of all the explanations here about ANE, R1b-M269, and R1a-M417. We can not meet those earlier in Europe, right?

Does this count?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newgrange

McCown
01-20-2020, 10:02 PM
Does this count?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newgrange

or this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mound_Builders

SakaDo
01-20-2020, 10:47 PM
True but they are all a lot older than PIE which is thought to be about 6,000 yrs old.

...someone does not follow the line of this conversation and this is definitely not me.
Who are a lot older? And who’s thoughts about “6000 years old” are these? I wrote already the PIE is much older than 7000 years.
Not only because the oldest local scripts are dated 5000 BC but the analytic structure of PIE it requires this.

SakaDo
01-20-2020, 10:50 PM
or this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mound_Builders

...we are talking here about Europe and I meant European burials from that type.

jdean
01-20-2020, 11:18 PM
Sounds like this thread could turn into a magnet for even more fringe theories, I'm out of here !!!

rms2
01-20-2020, 11:52 PM
Donít you know there are kurgan burials much older than 3000 BC at Europe? Thatís in contradiction with your theory again. The PIE is local language for Europe and much older than 5000 years old, that is what all the evidence show, not from Asian newcomers as you pointed.
The meaning of Hypothesis (kurgan)is enough clear that nothing is really clear here.

I never said PIE was from Asia. I said the oldest ANE we know about, as well as the oldest R-M207, was found in the 24,000-year-old remains of Mal'ta Boy, and he was recovered from near Lake Baikal in Asian Siberia.

R-M207 and R1-M173 are both much older than PIE, and they may have come from Asia originally. The Urheimat of PIE, on the other hand, is evidently the Pontic-Caspian steppe, and PIE dates to about 4500 BC at the oldest.

This thread is beginning to bore me, plus it seems to be immune to reason, evidence, and logical argument. That way lies madness, so I think I'll go do something else.

Rumor has it that soon some ancient dna papers are coming that will render a lot of these types of discussions superfluous. I'm looking forward to them.

McCown
01-21-2020, 03:36 PM
Rumor has it that soon some ancient dna papers are coming that will render a lot of these types of discussions superfluous. I'm looking forward to them.

It will only become superfluous if they aDNA test some Solutrean remains and FGS test lots of R1 Amerindians, and provide a R1 branching tree.

McCown
01-21-2020, 04:54 PM
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/130989v3.full

These results strongly suggest that El Miron-related people were among the direct ancestors of Anzick-1. Given the location of El Miron and the associated Magdalenian culture (immediately preceded by the Solutrean), the results here are most compatible with the Solutrean model.

...

Our results suggest that South West Europeans of ∼15000-20000 years ago such as El Miron had a special genetic connection with the Clovis people Anzick-1 in North America, more so than East Europeans and Siberians of that age.


Naturally, I think this is just as easily( if not more ) true for Anzick-1 to be the ancestor DNA of El Miron in a "Reverse Solutrean" model aka The McCown Model.

Either way, R1 stems from Europe/America.

falconson1
01-21-2020, 06:48 PM
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/130989v3.full

These results strongly suggest that El Miron-related people were among the direct ancestors of Anzick-1. Given the location of El Miron and the associated Magdalenian culture (immediately preceded by the Solutrean), the results here are most compatible with the Solutrean model.

...

Our results suggest that South West Europeans of ∼15000-20000 years ago such as El Miron had a special genetic connection with the Clovis people Anzick-1 in North America, more so than East Europeans and Siberians of that age.


Naturally, I think this is just as easily( if not more ) true for Anzick-1 to be the ancestor DNA of El Miron in a "Reverse Solutrean" model aka The McCown Model.

Either way, R1 stems from Europe/America.

Thanks for including the Biorxiv reference. This appears to be a highly "unusual" study, for example relying on correlational methods that I used in the 1980s. It would be fairly straight forward to "go for the jugular" here in terms of multiple critiques - but I do give the authors credit for providing some controversial fodder for closer examination. I must admit my own biases in that whenever the "Solutrean Hypothesis" is noted, and estimates that humans may have been in the Americas for 60,000 years, red flags go up immediately. Also many of the conclusions (e.g., Neanderthals being in the Americas) are so far from the mainstream as to be in orbit. Really wonder where this paper will be published, but I look forward to responses from the academic community wherever the venue might be found.

McCown
01-21-2020, 07:01 PM
I must admit my own biases in that whenever the "Solutrean Hypothesis" is noted, and estimates that humans may have been in the Americas for 60,000 years, red flags go up immediately.

You don't have to make it back to 60,000 years ago in the America's, 24,000 years ago( Post Mal'ta Boy ) to America to Ice Age Europe would make this work. And for the record, I'm proposing a "Reverse Solutrean".

Here is a random article from 2012 and even though it is pro-Solutrean, I am using this data in a claim of a reverse migration( America to Europe ):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/radical-theory-of-first-americans-places-stone-age-europeans-in-delmarva-20000-years-ago/2012/02/28/gIQA4mriiR_story.html

Smithsonian research associate Darrin Lowery found blades, anvils and other tools found stuck in soil at least 20,000 years old.
...

Further, the Eastern Shore blades strongly resemble those found at dozens of Solutrean sites from the Stone Age in Spain and France, Stanford says. “We can match each one of 18 styles up to the sites in Europe.”
...

Lowery dated the soil layer holding the anvil and other stone tools with two methods, radiocarbon dating and a newer technique, optical stimulated luminescence. Both returned an age of at least 21,000 years.

spruithean
01-21-2020, 08:02 PM
Yet, it still isn’t supported by current data that we have from ancient DNA.

McCown
01-21-2020, 08:09 PM
Yet, it still isn’t supported by current data that we have from ancient DNA.

You should re-read post #90.

spruithean
01-21-2020, 08:26 PM
You should re-read post #90.

Perhaps you should re-read that paper.

R.Rocca
01-21-2020, 08:42 PM
You should re-read post #90.

Haplogroup is not haplogroup R1. As many have already mentioned, no ancient DNA proof, but plenty to suggest the opposite.

RP48
01-21-2020, 09:04 PM
One of my favorite songs of the 60s is The Boxer written by Paul Simon and recorded by Simon and Garfunkel.

I am just a poor boy, though my story's seldom told
I have squandered my resistance for a pocketful of mumbles, such are promises
All lies and jest, still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest, hmmmm

This very human tendency is always at work. Recent research suggests there is an advantage to not being logical. I think we can see this in Dr. Spock on Star Trek long ago. Humans don’t react well to logic because our feelings are often stronger. What lies beneath those feelings is a desire to believe what is unsupportable. Lots of reasons for that. One of the most common is that a belief can strengthen our bond with others who believe the same. That can be a survival plus for humans because we are so social and need others to survive and thrive. Being cast out of the band or tribe was often a death sentence in the past.

nuadha
01-22-2020, 04:25 PM
These steppe pastoralists arrived in a Late Neolithic Europe already partly devastated by Yersinia Pestis, the Plague. They took surviving Neolithic Farmer women as wives and in many cases killed male Neolithic Farmers.


No. Modern North Europeans would not be half steppe if EBA Steppe migrants took on average of more than one farmer wife over the 300 - 500 years of interaction.

The male invaders taking local wives is a tired theory that does not apply whatsoever to the neolithic or bronze age migrations. Those men came with wives genetically similar to them.

McCown
01-22-2020, 04:48 PM
This also helps show the flow of DNA from ANE(Mal'ta) eastward into America then into Europe.

https://indo-european.eu/2018/01/earliest-modern-humans-outside-africa-and-ancient-genomic-history/

35981

R1 dispersion is very easy to follow if you just follow the Y-DNA tree... or even the mixed aDNA.

R.Rocca
01-22-2020, 04:52 PM
This also helps show the flow of DNA from ANE(Mal'ta) eastward into America then into Europe.

https://indo-european.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/eurasia-americas-populations.jpg

35981

R1 dispersion is very easy to follow if you just follow the Y-DNA tree... or even the mixed aDNA.

Or if you follow the ancient DNA. Oh, never mind, ancient DNA completely falsifies your argument.

ADW_1981
01-22-2020, 05:01 PM
No. Modern North Europeans would not be half steppe if EBA Steppe migrants took on average of more than one farmer wife over the 300 - 500 years of interaction.

The male invaders taking local wives is a tired theory that does not apply whatsoever to the neolithic or bronze age migrations. Those men came with wives genetically similar to them.

I'm not sure what the answer is on the male neolithic lines dying out, but the data does support a gradual EEF increase over time, just as we see the transition between CWC and BBC. This data has been available for a number of years now. Since there is a good deal of support that R1b, at least M269+ lineages arrived from further east with negligible or non-existant EEF ancestry, connecting the dots that the acquisition of this type of ancestry was lopsided on the female side of the equation, isn't a giant leap of faith.

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 05:03 PM
There's no link between Solutrean and Clovis. ElMiron is not linked to Native Americans, but to the ANE in their Epigravettian admixture.

All R1b in Native Americans is m269, except for two with little resolution. Likely a limited marker test. Let this thread die in peace.

McCown
01-22-2020, 05:10 PM
There's no link between Solutrean and Clovis. ElMiron is not linked to Native Americans, but to the ANE in their Epigravettian admixture.

All R1b in Native Americans is m269, except for two with little resolution. Likely a limited marker test. Let this thread die in peace.

See post #90 and #99. ANE is linked to El Miron and to Villabruna through Aznik. ANE > Aznik > El Miron > Villabruna > M269 Europe > M269 Steppe.

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 05:13 PM
No it's not. ElMiron gets all ANE via Epigravettian admixture. Give it a rest.

McCown
01-22-2020, 05:19 PM
No it's not. ElMiron gets all ANE via Epigravettian admixture. Give it a rest.

Epigravettian seems connected to Solutrean which I think comes from R1 out of America. Epigravettian also looks like it stems out of Europe which stems from America which stems from ANE.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/GARP-prediction-based-on-both-Solutrean-and-Epigravettian-sites-dated-to-21-AE-1-kyr-cal_fig6_222645216

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 05:25 PM
Epigravettian has nothing in common with Solutrean. Jesus Christ man. Have you ever looked at the lithics? Where's the R1b in Upper Paleolithic Europe?

And you use some quack multiregion paper as your evidence? Did you even read that garbage?

spruithean
01-22-2020, 05:29 PM
Epigravettian seems connected to Solutrean which I think comes from R1 out of America. Epigravettian also looks like it stems out of Europe which stems from America which stems from ANE.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/GARP-prediction-based-on-both-Solutrean-and-Epigravettian-sites-dated-to-21-AE-1-kyr-cal_fig6_222645216

I know you mention Anzick-1 a fair bit, so here is a paper from 2014: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4878442/ and an associated BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26172174, and another paper pertaining to the Clovis people: https://www.nature.com/articles/506162a

Your hypothesis is quite clearly not supported by the current data that we have. In previous threads and this one people have recommended certain published papers to read which quite clearly lay out the situation, and it is not in your favour here.

McCown
01-22-2020, 05:31 PM
Epigravettian has nothing in common with Solutrean. Jesus Christ man. Have you ever looked at the lithics? Where's the R1b in Upper Paleolithic Europe?



R1 arrived in Europe from North America during the Upper Paleolithic when it the crossed the Ice Sheet and brought with them Solutrean culture which is in Europe with your Epigravettian society.

McCown
01-22-2020, 05:34 PM
I know you mention Anzick-1 a fair bit, so here is a paper from 2014: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4878442/ and an associated BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26172174, and another paper pertaining to the Clovis people: https://www.nature.com/articles/506162a

Your hypothesis is quite clearly not supported by the current data that we have. In previous threads and this one people have recommended certain published papers to read which quite clearly lay out the situation, and it is not in your favour here.

I post #92 I show that Solutrean technology was in the America's at least as early as 21K BP. 10K years later Later Clovis and Aznik take place after Solutrean moved to Europe during the Ice Age, which BTW, lines up very well with the age of R1.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 05:36 PM
R1 arrived in Europe from North America during the Upper Paleolithic when the crossed the Ice Sheet and brought with them Solutrean culture which is in Europe with your Epigravettian society.


"Crossed" the ice sheet from North America to Europe? Do you realize what your saying here?

I'll take things that didn't happen for $500, Alex

McCown
01-22-2020, 05:40 PM
"Crossed" the ice sheet from North America to Europe? Do you realize what your saying here?

I'll take things that didn't happen for $500, Alex

Yes as I've been saying it for 4 years now and through the bulk of this thread.

I'll take that bet.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 05:43 PM
Yes as I've been saying it for 4 years now and through the bulk of this thread.

I'll take that bet.

With the large body of evidence that is directly contrary to your viewpoint? Neat.

So I recommend you read the links I shared earlier which discuss Anzick-1 and how the Clovis people are most definitely not connected to Solutreans. This theory no matter which direction appears dead in the water and has been for a while now.

McCown
01-22-2020, 05:47 PM
With the large body of evidence that is directly contrary to your viewpoint? Neat.

So I recommend you read the links I shared earlier which discuss Anzick-1 and how the Clovis people are most definitely not connected to Solutreans. This theory no matter which direction appears dead in the water and has been for a while now.

I've been doing nothing but showing the evidence. You should take a gander at all the articles that do show a connection on my original post...

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7425-Ice-Age-European-migration-hypothesis-from-Siberia-gt-America-gt-Europe

which has these links...


DNA links Native Americans with Europeans:
http://sciencenordic.com/dna-links-n...cans-europeans

Americas’ natives have European roots
http://www.nature.com/news/americas-...-roots-1.14213

Montana Boy: Bones Show Ancestral Links to Europe
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-954675.html

Genetic history of indigenous peoples of the Americas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneti...#Haplogroup_R1

Upper Palaeolithic Siberian genome reveals dual ancestry of Native Americans
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4105016/

Upper Palaeolithic Siberian genome reveals dual ancestry of Native Americans
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture12736.html

Selection in Europeans, But It Still Sweeps! "...the weirdest aspect of the Scandinavian samples is that they carry the East Asian/Native American variant of EDAR at appreciable frequencies!"
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/selection-in...-still-sweeps/

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 05:56 PM
Go home! You're drunk....


35982

McCown
01-22-2020, 06:05 PM
35982

It would be more helpful if you provide some context to your image rather than attack my character. What are we looking at in this image?

Ruderico
01-22-2020, 06:12 PM
What's the point of any discussion about genetics if you don't even recognise a qpGraph when you see one? You are horribly outdated, this discussion is a total waste of everyone's time, including yours. Go read the latest scientific literature and then come back.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 06:12 PM
I've been doing nothing but showing the evidence. You should take a gander at all the articles that do show a connection on my original post...

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7425-Ice-Age-European-migration-hypothesis-from-Siberia-gt-America-gt-Europe

which has these links...


DNA links Native Americans with Europeans:
http://sciencenordic.com/dna-links-n...cans-europeans

Americas’ natives have European roots
http://www.nature.com/news/americas-...-roots-1.14213

Montana Boy: Bones Show Ancestral Links to Europe
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-954675.html

Genetic history of indigenous peoples of the Americas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneti...#Haplogroup_R1

Upper Palaeolithic Siberian genome reveals dual ancestry of Native Americans
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4105016/

Upper Palaeolithic Siberian genome reveals dual ancestry of Native Americans
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture12736.html

Selection in Europeans, But It Still Sweeps! "...the weirdest aspect of the Scandinavian samples is that they carry the East Asian/Native American variant of EDAR at appreciable frequencies!"
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/selection-in...-still-sweeps/

The first couple of links are dead unfortunately. I managed to search for the Spiegel article, which I am suspicious of the authors intent, considering other publications (and the paper they are discussing) don't come to the same conclusions as the Spiegel article. The Willerslev paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4105016/ does not come to the same conclusions. Neither does the slightly later Willerslev paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4878442/

Here is a read that is directly referenced on the wiki page for R1 in Native American populations: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6157/409

EDAR has been discussed ad nauseam for your case here and it has been refuted by several other people in previous threads, I don't feel like rehashing that, so go back and read their responses.

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 06:13 PM
It's pretty straight forward. ANE from Villabruna to ElMiron. Not the other way around.

Magdalenian is a mix of Aurignacian, Gravettian, and Epigravettian.

McCown
01-22-2020, 06:22 PM
It's pretty straight forward. ANE from Villabruna to ElMiron. Not the other way around.

Magdalenian is a mix of Aurignacian, Gravettian, and Epigravettian.

R* ANE(24K BP)Mal'ta > R1* (22K BP)Solutrean North America > R1a/b Epigravettian Europe > El Miron(18K BP) Europe > R1b1 Villabruna(14K BP) Europe > Steppe(6K BP)

spruithean
01-22-2020, 06:28 PM
R* ANE(24K BP)Mal'ta > R1* (22K BP)Solutrean North America > R1a/b Epigravettian Europe > El Miron(18K BP) Europe > R1b1 Villabruna(14K BP) Europe > Steppe(6K BP)

Um, no, not at all.

Token
01-22-2020, 06:59 PM
It's pretty straight forward. ANE from Villabruna to ElMiron. Not the other way around.

Magdalenian is a mix of Aurignacian, Gravettian, and Epigravettian.

Does Pinarbasi show any trace of ANE?

McCown
01-22-2020, 07:00 PM
R* ANE(24K BP)Mal'ta > R1* (22K BP)Solutrean North America > R1a/b Epigravettian Europe > El Miron(18K BP) Europe > R1b1 Villabruna(14K BP) Europe > Steppe(6K BP)

All of the puzzle pieces fit. We're missing a couple of puzzle pieces( namely R1* aDNA buried under 21K years of ice age soil/seabed ) but it fully explains R1 Y-DNA branching and it explains the migration of mixed aDNA of ANE into Europe via Solutrean which originates in North America.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 07:07 PM
All of the puzzle pieces fit. We're missing a couple of puzzle pieces( namely R1* aDNA buried under 21K years of ice age soil/seabed ) but it fully explains R1 Y-DNA branching and it explains the migration of mixed aDNA of ANE into Europe via Solutrean which originates in North America.

Exactly how does it explain the branching of R1? How does it explain the aDNA of ANE? We have an explanation for this, and it isn't complicated and fits with data from periods subsequent to the one we are discussing. Do you mind detailing how you've determined that the Solutrean culture originated in North America when the papers from Willerslev and his team (published a few weeks apart, seemingly) are very clearly proving no connection between Solutrean and Clovis?

I'm waiting for ancient remains being dredged up from the bottom of the north Atlantic and Arctic, perhaps under the ice sheet you mentioned. Across that massive and desolate distance.

The ancient samples we have for R1b (hell, and R1a) are quite contrary to your hypothesis, have you looked at the information on this? I'm sure you can find some on just about every genetics oriented website (like this one, or Eurogenes, or elsewhere in the many publications featuring ancient R1b and R1a). Have you read any of Reich's work? I would strongly recommend it.

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 07:19 PM
Does Pinarbasi show any trace of ANE?

No need for it or anything but itself as its own branch.

McCown
01-22-2020, 07:21 PM
Exactly how does it explain the branching of R1? How does it explain the aDNA of ANE? We have an explanation for this, and it isn't complicated and fits with data from periods subsequent to the one we are discussing. Do you mind detailing how you've determined that the Solutrean culture originated in North America when the papers from Willerslev and his team (published a few weeks apart, seemingly) are very clearly proving no connection between Solutrean and Clovis?

I'm waiting for ancient remains being dredged up from the bottom of the north Atlantic and Arctic, perhaps under the ice sheet you mentioned. Across that massive and desolate distance.

The ancient samples we have for R1b (hell, and R1a) are quite contrary to your hypothesis, have you looked at the information on this? I'm sure you can find some on just about every genetics oriented website (like this one, or Eurogenes, or elsewhere in the many publications featuring ancient R1b and R1a). Have you read any of Reich's work? I would strongly recommend it.

I have explained R-Tree, ANE and Solutrean in America to Europe over the previous 120 posts. If there is something specific about my proposed hypothesis that you think isn't plausible, I'd love to hear it. Share the Willerslev paper, I'd love to read it. I bet they disproved Solutrean going from Europe to America not the other way around.

The R1a/b aDNA fits my proposal.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 07:28 PM
I linked both of them a few pages back. Many of your own links mentioned them, but the conclusions the paper made are much different from your own.

R1a/b ancient DNA does not fit your proposal, you can keep claiming this but it doesn’t make the current body of data that proves you wrong go away, sorry.

Ruderico
01-22-2020, 07:29 PM
If there is something specific about my proposed hypothesis that you think isn't plausible, I'd love to hear it.

People have been trying, you're just ignoring it. This makes the whole topic pointless and a strong candidate for closing.

McCown
01-22-2020, 07:31 PM
I linked both of them a few pages back. Many of your own links mentioned them, but the conclusions the paper made are much different from your own.

R1a/b ancient DNA does not fit your proposal, you can keep claiming this but it doesn’t make the current body of data that proves you wrong go away, sorry.

If you shared ANY data that proved me wrong, I'd go away. I have shared a lot of data that supports my claim.

R.Rocca
01-22-2020, 07:46 PM
If you shared ANY data that proved me wrong, I'd go away. I have shared a lot of data that supports my claim.

No. You have shown opinions based on irrelevant data, but not one shred of proof. The only real proof is ancient DNA and again, for the tenth time, you have no provided that.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 07:52 PM
If you shared ANY data that proved me wrong, I'd go away. I have shared a lot of data that supports my claim.

I don't feel like I really need to post links when you could easily google these things, or read the posts that other members have posted both in this thread and other (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7276-R1-Native-American-dispersion-hypothesis-into-Western-Europe/page2) threads of yours, obviously you don't read them (you should). Many have suggested several things for you to read that are evidence against you in all regards and it's obvious you've either ignored it or simply dismissed it because it doesn't suit your theory. Besides, I've posted links to papers that directly state that they refute the Solutrean hypothesis (the directionality of it, be it the normal Solutrean or your reverse hypothesis, does not matter). You are the one challenging the "status quo", so it is really your responsibility to provide solid evidence that supports your theory. Unfortunately for you, you've not done this.

Token
01-22-2020, 07:56 PM
No need for it or anything but itself as its own branch.

How does this branch relates to Epigravettians though?

McCown
01-22-2020, 07:58 PM
No. You have shown opinions based on irrelevant data, but not one shred of proof. The only real proof is ancient DNA and again, for the tenth time, you have no provided that.

Yes I have.

See posts #90, #99 and all the previous posts on R* Mal'ta, Aznik, El Miron, R1b1 Villabruna, and even the Romanian samples. What I haven't seen is data that says I must be incorrect. Rather that just saying I'm wrong, how about showing me how I'm wrong. Show me where I went wrong in my conclusion. What data or evidence shows I can't be correct?

Chad Rohlfsen
01-22-2020, 08:00 PM
I showed you that you are wrong. Any more dense and a black hole may form on this thread.

McCown
01-22-2020, 08:02 PM
I showed you that you are wrong. Any more dense and a black hole may form on this thread.

Calling me a drunk and now dense doesn't qualify as proving me wrong.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 08:24 PM
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/130989v3.full

These results strongly suggest that El Miron-related people were among the direct ancestors of Anzick-1. Given the location of El Miron and the associated Magdalenian culture (immediately preceded by the Solutrean), the results here are most compatible with the Solutrean model.

...

Our results suggest that South West Europeans of ∼15000-20000 years ago such as El Miron had a special genetic connection with the Clovis people Anzick-1 in North America, more so than East Europeans and Siberians of that age.


Naturally, I think this is just as easily( if not more ) true for Anzick-1 to be the ancestor DNA of El Miron in a "Reverse Solutrean" model aka The McCown Model.

Either way, R1 stems from Europe/America.

This paper, which is still a pre-print does issue a caveat within the discussion portion that their result must be held as "uncertain". Besides there has been discussion about certain authors and their biases. Besides that, they show no evidence for your reverse Solutrean and simply argue for a regular Solutrean model. Which considering the state of things still doesn't hold up well.



This also helps show the flow of DNA from ANE(Mal'ta) eastward into America then into Europe.

https://indo-european.eu/2018/01/earliest-modern-humans-outside-africa-and-ancient-genomic-history/

35981

R1 dispersion is very easy to follow if you just follow the Y-DNA tree... or even the mixed aDNA.

The map you've posted and the Quiles post about it do not support your argument at all. Sorry.


Calling me a drunk and now dense doesn't qualify as proving me wrong.

Yes, but the qGraph proves that you're wrong.

McCown
01-22-2020, 08:50 PM
This paper, which is still a pre-print does issue a caveat within the discussion portion that their result must be held as "uncertain". Besides there has been discussion about certain authors and their biases. Besides that, they show no evidence for your reverse Solutrean and simply argue for a regular Solutrean model. Which considering the state of things still doesn't hold up well.

This is not the only paper to link Amerindian DNA with European DNA. It does very specifically link Anzick with El Miron and even though he suggests that it aligns with a traditional model of Solutrean, I think it works even better for my reverse Solutrean model and would eliminate the need for some of his other conclusions that everyone thinks are off base.



The map you've posted and the Quiles post about it do not support your argument at all. Sorry.

It shows DNA flow from ANE to North America to Northern Europe.



Yes, but the qGraph proves that you're wrong.

That graph doesn't show anything as far as I can tell. Perhaps a more comprehensive explanation of said graph would help.

Megalophias
01-22-2020, 08:57 PM
This paper, which is still a pre-print does issue a caveat within the discussion portion that their result must be held as "uncertain".
It will most likely remain a pre-print indefinitely. This is not one of those nice preprints from a reputable group that we are accustomed to, which will end up being published in a prestigious journal later on. In the very unlikely event that Shi Huang's theory is right, it would overturn everything - not just human genetics, but plants, animals, everything. In the very likely event that it's wrong, then his work is completely useless.


..would eliminate the need for some of his other conclusions that everyone thinks are off base.
If you actually read the preprint you'd realize that this is absolutely wrong. You can't accept any of the results in this preprint and *anything else* you think you know about genetics at the same time.

McCown
01-22-2020, 09:00 PM
It will most likely remain a pre-print indefinitely. This is not one of those nice preprints from a reputable group that we are accustomed to, which will end up being published in a prestigious journal later on. In the very unlikely event that Shi Huang's theory is right, it would overturn everything - not just human genetics, but plants, animals, everything. In the very likely event that it's wrong, then his work is completely useless.

I"m not saying his theory is right, His data correlation is right linking Anzick with El Miron. My conclusions are far different from his.

Megalophias
01-22-2020, 09:05 PM
I"m not saying his theory is right, His data correlation is right linking Anzick with El Miron.
If you don't accept his theory, then his "data correlation" is not valid. You can't use something for evidence if you think it came to the right conclusion using mistaken methodology. If you don't agree with it, stop citing it.

McCown
01-22-2020, 09:07 PM
If you don't accept his theory, then his "data correlation" is not valid. You can't use something for evidence if you think it came to the right conclusion using mistaken methodology.

Data and interpretation of data are two different things. His data correlation can be spot on, but his interpretation of that data can be way off. I don't accept any of the theories connected to the data I'm providing since I'm the ONLY person using this data for an alternate explanation.

Megalophias
01-22-2020, 09:16 PM
Data and interpretation of data are two different things. His data correlation can be spot on, but his interpretation of that data can be way off. I don't accept any of the theories connected to the data I'm providing since I'm the ONLY person using this data for an alternate explanation.
Shi Huang's analysis, that claims this connection between El Miron and Anzick, is also interpretation of the data, not the data itself. The data itself is the DNA sequences. Read the preprint and attempt to understand it.

McCown
01-22-2020, 09:19 PM
Shi Huang's analysis, that claims this connection between El Miron and Anzick, is also interpretation of the data, not the data itself. The data itself is the DNA sequences. Read the preprint and attempt to understand it.

I think his correlation is correct and his interpretation of it going from Europe to America is backwards. It's possible to arrive at different conclusions for those two things, is it not?

Megalophias
01-22-2020, 09:22 PM
Sure, if you think he is right about everything but the direction of gene flow - pretending for a moment that you actually know jack shit about any of this - then cite Shi Huang only, and accept that every other genetic study you might want to use as a source is wrong.

McCown
01-22-2020, 09:27 PM
Sure, if you think he is right about everything but the direction of gene flow - pretending for a moment that you actually know jack shit about any of this - then cite Shi Huang only, and accept that every other genetic study you might want to use as a source is wrong.

I'll cite as I see fit, you don't get to make arbitrary citation rules. I've clearly stated what parts I agree with( not everything ) and how I think he is backwards on his gene flow. If you disagree, that's fine, but it doesn't disprove my case. How does reversing the gene flow not work for that specific correlation?

Megalophias
01-22-2020, 09:49 PM
I'll cite as I see fit, you don't get to make arbitrary citation rules. I've clearly stated what parts I agree with( not everything ) and how I think he is backwards on his gene flow. If you disagree, that's fine, but it doesn't disprove my case.
Look, you are using an ancient and infallible method for winning arguments: make sure not to understand, or even attempt to understand, what you are talking about. Then, having no ability to judge any evidence or argument offered against your pet idea, you can freely ignore it, and carry on happily cobbling together scraps of 'evidence' to your heart's content. Quit it.

McCown
01-22-2020, 09:51 PM
Look, you are using an ancient and infallible method for winning arguments: make sure not to understand, or even attempt to understand, what you are talking about. Then, having no ability to judge any evidence or argument offered against your pet idea, you can freely ignore it, and carry on happily cobbling together scraps of 'evidence' to your heart's content. Quit it.

I'll take that as reversing the gene flow for that specific correlation is possible.

And yes, cobbling together evidence is an ancient and infallible method for winning arguments.

Megalophias
01-22-2020, 10:01 PM
No, it means you win the argument! In fact, you've beaten all comers; many people have tried to take down your idea, but none of their logic or evidence has checked out, has it? In the end they're just reduced to calling you names, or trying to arbitrarily tell you what sources you can use. This just goes to show the strength of the theory; you can be more confident than ever that you're on the right track.

spruithean
01-22-2020, 10:07 PM
No, it means you win the argument! In fact, you've beaten all comers; many people have tried to take down your idea, but none of their logic or evidence has checked out, has it? In the end they're just reduced to calling you names, or trying to arbitrarily tell you what sources you can use. This just goes to show the strength of the theory; you can be more confident than ever that you're on the right track.

The sarcasm is so strong, it hurts.

David Mc
01-22-2020, 10:11 PM
We should have a fringe subforum that threads like these can be dropped into. Let people speculate to their hearts content but make it clear to newcomers that if they choose to go down this path they're going to be entering "Ancient Aliens" territory where evidence and logic have no place.

R.Rocca
01-22-2020, 11:33 PM
Yes I have.

See posts #90, #99 and all the previous posts on R* Mal'ta, Aznik, El Miron, R1b1 Villabruna, and even the Romanian samples. What I haven't seen is data that says I must be incorrect. Rather that just saying I'm wrong, how about showing me how I'm wrong. Show me where I went wrong in my conclusion. What data or evidence shows I can't be correct?

Those samples everyone knows and nobody is arguing with. Now show us one single ancient DNA sample from anywhere in the AMERICAS that belongs to haplogroup R. You can't, so please stop telling everyone you have provided proof.

McCown
01-23-2020, 12:10 AM
Those samples everyone knows and nobody is arguing with. Now show us one single ancient DNA sample from anywhere in the AMERICAS that belongs to haplogroup R. You can't, so please stop telling everyone you have provided proof.

I never said I had proof. I said we need more data from R1 Amerindians and aDNA from Solutrean remains which I suspect will come eventually and I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is arguing with those samples because I'm not arguing with myself.

And as I've said, I have as much R1* aDNA from America as you do from the Steppe.

jdean
01-23-2020, 12:12 AM
Those samples everyone knows and nobody is arguing with. Now show us one single ancient DNA sample from anywhere in the AMERICAS that belongs to haplogroup R. You can't, so please stop telling everyone you have provided proof.

Clearly you haven't been following this properly, they're all lost at sea and consequently no proof is needed : ))))

Are Americans familiar with the phrase 'a right load of old bollocks ' ?

BTW I've just eaten some very old Spanish ham I found at the back of the fridge, I was actually looking for some slightly less old sausage but the misses must have thrown that out, anyway if I go quiet for a few days that might be why I'm not participating in this extraordinarily usefully discussion.

spruithean
01-23-2020, 12:36 AM
Clearly you haven't been following this properly, they're all lost at sea and consequently no proof is needed : ))))

Classic method of shifting the burden of proof! Reich or others better get comfortable with deep sea diving.


BTW I've just eaten some very old Spanish ham I found at the back of the fridge, I was actually looking for some slightly less old sausage but the misses must have thrown that out, anyway if I go quite for a few days that might be why I'm not participating in this extraordinarily usefully discussion.

Strategic food poisoning, eh? Interesting way of going about things!

falconson1
01-23-2020, 12:58 AM
Those samples everyone knows and nobody is arguing with. Now show us one single ancient DNA sample from anywhere in the AMERICAS that belongs to haplogroup R. You can't, so please stop telling everyone you have provided proof.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. I am willing to encourage this, some might say radical, theory to stand until it can be conclusively shown to be incorrect. I still get requests (yesterday for example) from Scandanavian academics for more information re my Mongolian - Hun - Scandinavian theory. Recent DNA evidence has made my assertions concerning R1a completely untenable (although the data re haplogroups Q and K/T in Norway, not yet).

What would be immensely helpful would be for a "heavyweight" such as Eske Willerslev, who has an excellent relationship with Native Americans, conduct ancient DNA (pre - Columbian) investigations in Eastern North America. There is a huge gap in this important geographical area since there is massive opposition to any sort of DNA testing in both Canada and the USA here. An exception is the Huron - Wendat of Ancienne Lorette, Quebec who have shown a strong desire to learn what light science can shine on their ancestors - they being among the few groups of Huron who survived the Haudenosaunee (5 Nations) genocide of the 1640s. Their homeland in historic times is Southern Ontario - particularly Simcoe County. If the many ossuaries and other burial sites known for this group were tested for all Y chromosome variants it could help illuminate the early genetic landscape of eastern and central Canada. If R1-M173 is observed, that would be eye opening.

None the less, the logistics of travel across the ice (there was no land bridge) to Europe (in either direction) is mind boggling; as is how once reaching Iberia, R1 could have fanned out to create the genetic landscape of Europe today (let alone reconciling the theory with recent European ancient DNA data).

Skepticism aside, as long as this does not spiral into a discussion of an involvement of ancient aliens, I am more than willing to listen. Somewhere along the line we need to contact Dr. Willerslev and see if he is amenable to working with Huron - Wendat elders.

spruithean
01-23-2020, 01:02 AM
The travel logistics across those many kilometres of ice, cold and desolate with not much shelter along the way is a major issue for this hypothesis. Is it possible? Maybe. But does such a trek seem feasible or realistic at all?

Megalophias
01-23-2020, 01:19 AM
Thousands of kilometres of ice, with no plants or animals, not even liquid water or stone for tools; no food, no fuel, just an immense, lifeless, bitterly cold desert. The Solutrean hypothesis proposed that people kayaked along the edge of the Atlantic sea ice hunting sea mammals, Eskimo-style, going further and further until some discovered the other side.

R.Rocca
01-23-2020, 01:40 AM
I never said I had proof. I said we need more data from R1 Amerindians and aDNA from Solutrean remains which I suspect will come eventually and I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is arguing with those samples because I'm not arguing with myself.

And as I've said, I have as much R1* aDNA from America as you do from the Steppe.

Then the jokes on you, because I never said R1* was from the steppe, nor do I care.

spruithean
01-23-2020, 01:48 AM
Then the jokes on you, because I never said R1* was from the steppe, nor do I care.

I don't think I've seen anyone argue that R1* was from the Steppe.

Anyways,

So, I'm curious McCown, how do you propose that these people survived such a massive trek across inhospitable ice all the way into Europe?

McCown
01-23-2020, 02:05 AM
So, I'm curious McCown, how do you propose that these people survived such a massive trek across inhospitable ice all the way into Europe?

I'm not sure how they did it, but I did post two links in my original post( shown below ) about how it might have happened. These are the same species that we are with the same problem solving skills, so if you think you and your tribe could do it with no formal education then I think they could too. Eskimos still do it. I suspect a nomad diet of fish, seals and mammoth but I'll leave that for other people to figure out. I think the DNA shows that they did do it, I'll leave the how to someone else.

Here is how mammoths and humans survived in the Ice Age Arctic:

Woolly mammoth diet mystery solved by DNA analysis
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/wo...ysis-1.2524015

Grisly find suggests humans inhabited Arctic 45,000 years ago
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...5000-years-ago

MitchellSince1893
01-23-2020, 02:05 AM
.....
Now look: Here's a house full of bees. Do you think the honey badger cares? It doesn't give a shit, it goes right into the house of bees to get some larvae. How disgusting is that? It eats larvae. Eew, that's so nasty.

But look! The honey badger doesn't care! It's getting stung like a thousand times. It doesn't give a shit. It's just hungry. It doesn't care about being stung by bees. Nothing can stop the honey badger when it's hungry.

Honey Badger doesn’t care about stings of logic. You all are just killing yourselves as your stingers are ripped from your thorax. But hey, keep swarming if it’s entertaining.

spruithean
01-23-2020, 02:12 AM
I'm not sure how they did it, but I did post two links in my original post( shown below ) about how it might have happened. These are the same species that we are with the same problem solving skills, so if you think you and your tribe could do it with no formal education then I think they could too. Eskimos still do it. I suspect a nomad diet of fish, seals and mammoth but I'll leave that for other people to figure out. I think the DNA shows that they did do it, I'll leave the how to someone else.

Here is how mammoths and humans survived in the Ice Age Arctic:

Woolly mammoth diet mystery solved by DNA analysis
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/wo...ysis-1.2524015

Grisly find suggests humans inhabited Arctic 45,000 years ago
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/...5000-years-ago

This vegetation would have to be present where land was located. The trek to Europe had rather large swathes of well, sea ice that you are proposing they trekked across?

You may think the DNA shows they did it, but that is not what the DNA appears to be saying, but alrighty then.

McCown
01-23-2020, 04:05 AM
This vegetation would have to be present where land was located. The trek to Europe had rather large swathes of well, sea ice that you are proposing they trekked across?

You may think the DNA shows they did it, but that is not what the DNA appears to be saying, but alrighty then.

If the Polynesians could cross the vast open Pacific, I'm sure others could cross the smaller gaps of the North Atlantic with the aid of the Gulf Stream or Ice fishing or seaweed. But I'm not here to postulate on how they did it, I"m simply following the DNA.

GTC
01-23-2020, 04:09 AM
This subject has run its course and this thread is now closed.