Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 69 of 69

Thread: R2 - Origo.

  1. #61
    Registered Users
    Posts
    464
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Assyrian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2a2b1 (SK522+)
    mtDNA (M)
    T1

    Quote Originally Posted by redifflal View Post
    4) R2 - R2 haplogroup is in India pre-IVC and everyone else is newcomers. R2 outside Indian subcontinent are children of gypsies.
    While not impossible, it's highly unlikely that every R2 outside of India is a descendant of the Roma. There are two main reasons for that:

    - R2 among the Roma is rare, based on this latest paper only 5 out or 1934 samples were found to be R2, that's less than 1% (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v...g2015201a.html)
    - The diversity of R2 outside of India is way too high, which means multiple waves of R2 migrations likely happened and possibly throughout many periods in history.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Tomasso29 For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-04-2015),  DMXX (11-04-2015),  parasar (11-05-2015)

  3. #62
    Administrator
    Posts
    3,865
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2a*-M124 (L295-)
    mtDNA (M)
    D4j5*

    England
    Further to Tomasso's point, the frequent linking of R2a-M124 with the Roma in genealogy boards stems solely from Wells et al.'s reporting of 53% of Uzbek Romany paternal lines belonging to it.

    As Y-DNA R2a-M124 is very rare among all other Romany cohorts sampled to date, we can safely exclude it as a prominent founding lineage among them, and should consider the Uzbek result as another example of genetic drift.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DMXX For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-04-2015),  parasar (11-05-2015)

  5. #63
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,441
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian

    Of course, if you are unable to admitte any cultural, social and historical facts then this is really pointless. In the world without rules, everything is nothing - even if was long ago something.
    By "admit any facts" you mean "agree with my assertions made with no supporting evidence". I have discussed a lot of facts, you have spouted rhetoric based on your personal feelings. Provide some real evidence or shut up. And I don't care for you insulting my country either.

    North Americans generally do like to know about their origins. But their origin is more than the origin of their Y chromosome (or I suppose their father's Y chromosome, if they are women?). There is no objective reason that everyone should make the origin of their patrilineal ancestors specifically the one true aspect of their origin. People in North America tend to be of mixed origin, it is very common that you will be part Scottish, part Ukrainian, and part Norwegian, or something of that sort. So people who are interested in it are not going to ignore all of it but one place that their Y chromosome comes from.

    I study Y haplogroups because am interested in history and prehistory. I probably know more about haplogroups in Siberia and Indonesia than I do about the ones in Europe. I don't even know what my Y chromosome is, some day when I have money to waste I will get it checked, but first I will check my mtDNA because I have many relatives who share my mtDNA but very few with my Y DNA.

    The Queen of Canada is essentially a figurehead, she does not actually govern the country by virtue of her birthright, nor is hereditary aristocracy permitted here.
    Last edited by Megalophias; 11-04-2015 at 07:52 PM.

  6. #64
    Registered Users
    Posts
    333
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    By "admit any facts" you mean "agree with my assertions made with no supporting evidence". I have discussed a lot of facts, you have spouted rhetoric based on your personal feelings. Provide some real evidence or shut up.
    And what kind of evidence will be for you good enough?

    How can I shut up, if you are negating evrything.
    Or maybe you dont know nothing about history and customs, so say so, becouse I assume, that you are aware of basic facts...
    I elaborate couple of things quite well, but you are ingnoring this which not fit to your unspeakible concept (becouse you still did
    not explain what do you want) and you did not answer on any question I ask. Why - probably because it not support your claims
    of negation every thing. I give you some examples, and you were looking for exeptions or ignore them as well. So what do you expect?

    If you do not see patrylinear society in european culture, which Canada is part too, then I do not know what can I show you more.
    Probably evey peerage in Canada is inherited by patrylinear system. Every monarch in your country was made a king because of his
    patrilinear ancestry (with some exeptions) until this knew horrible Succession of the Crown Act from 2013. Almost every surname in
    your country is traditionally inherited by patrylinear system. So or you are a huge ignorant do not see evidences in your own society,
    or you are doing this negation of everything on purpose... I do not know what is worse...

    Maybe something about Indoeuropeans:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans

    "a patrilineal kinship-system based on relationships between men.

    The Proto-Indo-Europeans had a patrilineal society"

    So, every one, who is born from Indoeuropean father is Indoeuropean.
    Either he likes it or not. Period. And no one can tell such a person, that
    he is not an Indoeuropean because he don't speak indoeuropean language.

    In France, in Germany, Italy, until XVI century in England, in Poland, in Lithuania,
    in Russia etc the kings was only from male lineage with very very rare exeptions.

    In Poland, in Russia, in Germany, in England aso every nobleman can inherited
    his nobleness only having a noble father - mother mostly was not important.

    The groups of people in Europe had very clearly digfferent hg.
    Indoeuropeans brought to Europe R1.
    Farmers brought mostly G2.
    Pelasgians brought E-V13.
    Aurgnanians were C1.
    So called Cromagnianias (grawettians) were I.
    Semites are mostly and clearly J1.
    Bantu are clearly E-something.
    Uralic peoples in Europe brought to Europe hg N1.
    Aso, aso,

    In Rome the bigest power in family had pater potestas.
    At the beginnig and long after that, only agnates were consider as family.
    Onlu agnates were able to inherite inheritance.

    In Jews and Arabic cultures only manly lineages were recorded and honour.
    Messiah could be only from davidic male line.
    In the Bible you have in every cases only patrylinear genealogies.
    Only the seed of Abraham can be a chosen nation, kings and priests - not the strangers.

    In muslim religion, the real male lineage is consider as only true and sacred.
    This is the reason why they banned legal adoptions by Mohammed once and for all - to not false lineages.

    According to japanese and chenese customs, only male lines are consider as kinship.
    Every samurai family, and every chenese lineage is consider as ancestral tradition inheritance.
    This is the reason, why in China are 300.000.000 more males than females.

    As descendants of Confucius are consider only peoples descending from him by patrylinear lines.

    Confucius himself was consider as descendant of Shang dynasty becose of his patrylinear line.

    In european countries not so long ago, wife was a citizen of the country of her husband.

    In every european country surnames are inherited by male line. The same in Japan and China.
    Surname means, that you are part of that family, and that your indentity is coming from your fathers family.

    And every normal male new this instictivly, and is no need to explain this to him.

    In Island, Slavic countres, Holland, Scandinvia, Arabia, among Jews, and Anglosaxons, were existing patronimics.

    Do you need more evidences?

    THE BEST EVIDENCE EVER IS THAT FEMINISTS STILL ARE FIGHTING AGAINST PATRIARCHY.

    If patriarchy never existed - what they are still fighting against?

    And I don't care for you insulting my country either.
    WHAT? Where?!

    North Americans generally do like to know about their origins. But their origin is more than the origin of their Y chromosome (or I suppose their father's Y chromosome, if they are women?). There is no objective reason that everyone should make the origin of their patrilineal ancestors specifically the one true aspect of their origin.
    So explain, from what lineage are you 20 generantions ago? From every 1.000.000?!?

    And if some one wants to know, are he is Oldeuropean or New, what should he do?
    Can you tell? Or you still will ignore the problem because you do not know how to
    answer, or the answer does not fit to your unreveld perpouse?

    People in North America tend to be of mixed origin, it is very common that you will be part Scottish, part Ukrainian, and part Norwegian, or something of that sort.
    And what? When Vikings captured the women, they did't do this for changing or mixing indentity of
    their children. If they would hear you now, they would be thinking that you are talking a nonsense.

    The same, was, when Turks were spending a women to sultans harems - they
    didn't do this because they wanted to change the nationality of the children of sultan.
    And if sultan have children from many concubines from different countries, then what?
    Children from every concubine were of different nationality? Then who was ruling in Turkey?
    Every sultan was of different nationality and family?

    And you still didn't show me a tribe of women coming from one premother, who go to their neighbours to kill
    every women of that tribe, and rape or captured the males. Why nowhere in the world was none captue of
    "sabinian" males? And did Romans became Sabinians, becouse Romulus and his guys captured sabininas women?

    You wanted prooves? This is two anothers... add them to the list.

    So people who are interested in it are not going to ignore all of it but one place that their Y chromosome comes from.
    Ask king Salman, who he is and why? Or maybe Akihito can tell you, if you do not know.
    They cetainly are not indentify themselves with 1000000 ancestors in 20th generetion.

    I study Y haplogroups because am interested in history and prehistory. I probably know more about haplogroups in Siberia and Indonesia than I do about the ones in Europe.
    And you can do this, only, because this societies were partylinear. Period. Especially at the beginnigs. Can you understand this?
    You cannot do the same thing with mt haplogroups, and with haplogroups of the gen of the smallest toe in the left leg - because
    they are so mixed that it is unable make any conclusions about nationalities. You only can treat this as some help to some degree.
    Y haplogroups are a subject of your interest only because they showing you ancient patriarchal structure and which tribe is who
    and from where - because of the patrylinear societies, which create this groups of haplotypes. Whithout patrylineary, there will
    be no interesting haplotypes, no interesting groups of people carring haplotypes, and no interest about this theme at all.

    I don't even know what my Y chromosome is, some day when I have money to waste I will get it checked, but first I will check my mtDNA because I have many relatives who share my mtDNA but very few with my Y DNA.
    But your relatives whith common mt do not make any social structure,
    so this results can be only a proof for... I do not even know for what.
    Only for curiosity which letter of the alphabeth you have with your
    very limitted farest cousins from non existing socialy line of women,
    who do not were even awere of their importance for genetic study.

    The Queen of Canada is essentially a figurehead, she does not actually govern the country by virtue of her birthright, nor is hereditary aristocracy permitted here.
    But she is the queen, because her father was, her paternal uncle was, and
    her paternal grandfather was, and paternal greatgranfather. She isn't a queen
    because of her 20 generations of women line... do you understand this?

    You wanted prooves of patrylinearity, so you have.
    Last edited by Rethel; 11-05-2015 at 01:17 AM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Rethel For This Useful Post:

     paulgill (11-05-2015)

  8. #65
    Generic Mod Account
    Posts
    1,491
    Sex
    Omitted

    All members are reminded to stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks. This thread is being monitored.
    Forum Reminders - Please remember to:
    Report any problematic content Adhere to Anthrogenica Hidden Content Discuss respectfully Be mindful of sharing user data (both yours and others) English language only in main forum area PM 'Moderator' for basic maintenance tasks or information about member suspensions or bans

  9. #66
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,441
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian

    You wanted prooves of patrylinearity, so you have.
    Did I not just say the patrilinear kinship was common? Were we not just talking about patrilinear clans? Did I not say that surnames were patrilinear? Did I not say that even in the matrilinear cultures the men had most of the power? So why do you think I want proof that patrilinearity exists? Of course it exists and it is very widespread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    And what kind of evidence will be for you good enough?
    We were talking about the origin of R2, remember? So evidence that people in the Middle-Late Upper Paleolithic had an incredibly long-lasting and close-knit system of patrilineal kinship such that people with the same patrilinear ancestor 20 000 years before would still be speaking the same language and forming part of the same tribe. Because that is what you were claiming, and that is what I was disagreeing with, before we got into this off-topic stuff.

    The off topic stuff is all just opinion, there is no proof. Which is about whether your patrilinear ancestry is somehow most important in defining your identity. Well, of course that is just whatever you believe and not something that can be proven.

    Your relatives are just as related to you whether they have the same Y chromosome or not. You care about your sister or your mother or your niece more than you care about your fifth cousin who has the same Y haplogroup as you, of course, because he is hardly related to you at all. A society can organize itself around patrilinear kinship, that has certain advantages, but that is not magically the one true way to organize a society.

    If I found out that, say, my patrilinear ancestor was an Ottoman Turk, should I convert to Islam and move to the Mediterranean, because that is "who I am"?

    And if some one wants to know, are he is Oldeuropean or New, what should he do? Can you tell? Or you still will ignore the problem because you do not know how to answer, or the answer does not fit to your unreveld porpouse?
    I don't know what an Oldeuropean is, that is not a term I am familiar with in English. Is it something from thousands of years ago? Then I will tell him he is a person from the 21st century, and he should go see a pyschiatrist if he thinks he is someone living thousands of years ago.

    And what? When vikings captured the women, they did't do this for changing or mixing indentity of their children. If they would hear you now, they would be thinking that you are talking a nonsense.
    And when Mohawks adopted captured boys and young men into their tribe, they didn't do it to mix the identity of their children either, they did it to grow their tribe. Adopting into the tribe is a good strategy.

    If you go up to the Northwest Coast, at Kitwanga there is a steep-sided hill with an archaeological site on the top, it is called Battle Hill. There was a Gitxsan noblewoman living near there who was captured by a Haida and brought back to his island to be a concubine. She had a child by him, but then when she got the opportunity she killed him and escaped back to her own people. Her boy grew up to be a great warlord, who built his fortress on that hill and fought against the Nisgaa, and the Tsimshian, and the Haida. Now would you tell him that he is really a Haida and not a Gitxsan?

    Why nowhere was none captue of sabinians males? And did Romans became Sabinians, becouse Romulus and his guys captured sabininas women?
    And what happened after the Rape of the Sabine Women? The Sabines attacked Rome and captured the Capitoline Hill. The Sabine King became co-ruler for a while. The Sabines joined with the Romans (well, some of them anyway), learned Latin, and became Roman gens, including noble ones. So their haplogroups became Roman haplogroups, and they changed their language. And pretty much the same thing happened with Etruscans, and everyone else in Italy.

    Y haplogroups are a subject of your interest only because they showing you ancient patriarchal structure and which tribe is who and from where - because of the patrylinear societies, which create this groups of haplotypes. Whithout patrylineary, there will be no interesting haplotypes, no interesting groups of people carring haplotypes, and no interest about this theme at all.
    Did you notice that people also study mtDNA, even though according to you it is useless and doesn't matter? That's because they can still trace populations. I already said reasons that Y chromosomes are useful for tracing history, and one of those reasons is because of migration and conquest by groups of men who are often patrilineal. Which is great, but it doesn't tell you languages and cultures very well. If you see a Lithuanian with the N1c-L550, which is originally Finnish even though it is the most common Baltic haplogroup, does it mean he is really Finnish? Or then if you have a Finn who has the Baltic kind of N1c-L550 does he now have to be Baltic, or can he still be Finnish?

    But your relatives whith common mt do not make any social structure, so this results can be only a proof for... I do not even know for what. Only for curiosity which letter of the alphabeth you have with your very limitted farest cousins from non existing socialy line of women, who do not were even awere of their importance for genetic study.
    It is because they might be curious about this useless piece of information, which does not matter any more than the Y chromosome matters.

  10. #67
    Banned
    Posts
    4,169
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Nationality
    N/A
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1-L621- PH 908
    mtDNA (M)
    H 47

    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    Did I not just say the patrilinear kinship was common? Were we not just talking about patrilinear clans? Did I not say that surnames were patrilinear? Did I not say that even in the matrilinear cultures the men had most of the power? So why do you think I want proof that patrilinearity exists? Of course it exists and it is very widespread.


    We were talking about the origin of R2, remember? So evidence that people in the Middle-Late Upper Paleolithic had an incredibly long-lasting and close-knit system of patrilineal kinship such that people with the same patrilinear ancestor 20 000 years before would still be speaking the same language and forming part of the same tribe. Because that is what you were claiming, and that is what I was disagreeing with, before we got into this off-topic stuff.

    The off topic stuff is all just opinion, there is no proof. Which is about whether your patrilinear ancestry is somehow most important in defining your identity. Well, of course that is just whatever you believe and not something that can be proven.

    Your relatives are just as related to you whether they have the same Y chromosome or not. You care about your sister or your mother or your niece more than you care about your fifth cousin who has the same Y haplogroup as you, of course, because he is hardly related to you at all. A society can organize itself around patrilinear kinship, that has certain advantages, but that is not magically the one true way to organize a society.

    If I found out that, say, my patrilinear ancestor was an Ottoman Turk, should I convert to Islam and move to the Mediterranean, because that is "who I am"?


    I don't know what an Oldeuropean is, that is not a term I am familiar with in English. Is it something from thousands of years ago? Then I will tell him he is a person from the 21st century, and he should go see a pyschiatrist if he thinks he is someone living thousands of years ago.


    And when Mohawks adopted captured boys and young men into their tribe, they didn't do it to mix the identity of their children either, they did it to grow their tribe. Adopting into the tribe is a good strategy.

    If you go up to the Northwest Coast, at Kitwanga there is a steep-sided hill with an archaeological site on the top, it is called Battle Hill. There was a Gitxsan noblewoman living near there who was captured by a Haida and brought back to his island to be a concubine. She had a child by him, but then when she got the opportunity she killed him and escaped back to her own people. Her boy grew up to be a great warlord, who built his fortress on that hill and fought against the Nisgaa, and the Tsimshian, and the Haida. Now would you tell him that he is really a Haida and not a Gitxsan?


    And what happened after the Rape of the Sabine Women? The Sabines attacked Rome and captured the Capitoline Hill. The Sabine King became co-ruler for a while. The Sabines joined with the Romans (well, some of them anyway), learned Latin, and became Roman gens, including noble ones. So their haplogroups became Roman haplogroups, and they changed their language. And pretty much the same thing happened with Etruscans, and everyone else in Italy.


    Did you notice that people also study mtDNA, even though according to you it is useless and doesn't matter? That's because they can still trace populations. I already said reasons that Y chromosomes are useful for tracing history, and one of those reasons is because of migration and conquest by groups of men who are often patrilineal. Which is great, but it doesn't tell you languages and cultures very well. If you see a Lithuanian with the N1c-L550, which is originally Finnish even though it is the most common Baltic haplogroup, does it mean he is really Finnish? Or then if you have a Finn who has the Baltic kind of N1c-L550 does he now have to be Baltic, or can he still be Finnish?


    It is because they might be curious about this useless piece of information, which does not matter any more than the Y chromosome matters.
    Lol megaphilias I admire your persistence and bother

    Patriliniality is but one (oversubscribed) organisational principle. In fact most prehistoric societies were not patrilineal. Many different dimensions of organization and identity operated at multiple levels. These included nuclear family, extended households, clans and temporary tribal alliances in what were often segmentary societies in the pre-Iron age period. In addition to this people could associate on the basis of gender, class, religion, craft, etc etc etc

    Importantly people also identified in terms of matrimonial alliances. Marrying a prominent bride not only brought status but important distant alliances in one-upping and defeating your cousins down the road
    Last edited by Gravetto-Danubian; 11-05-2015 at 02:36 AM.

  11. #68
    Registered Users
    Posts
    333
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    Did I not just say the patrilinear kinship was common? Were we not just talking about patrilinear clans? Did I not say that surnames were patrilinear? Did I not say that even in the matrilinear cultures the men had most of the power? So why do you think I want proof that patrilinearity exists? Of course it exists and it is very widespread.
    As I said befoe: you get lost among your own claims
    and now you're changing your mind twisting what you
    were claiming earlier during most of this subdisscussion.

    Amazing.

    If you were not negating patrylineary, then why
    you have a problem whith that, when I am talking
    something according to patrylinear rule?

    Or the rule is ok, and my claim too, or my
    claim is not ok, and the same whith the rule?
    You must decide, what you want...

    You like it or not, you live in traditional patrylinear civilization
    so the rules of that system should be obvious for you.

    I hope that you won't again tell me: no because no...

    We were talking about the origin of R2, remember?
    Wow, now you remember about first theme?
    You amazed me again...

    So evidence that people in the Middle-Late Upper Paleolithic had an incredibly long-lasting and close-knit system of patrilineal kinship such that people with the same patrilinear ancestor 20 000 years before would still be speaking the same language and forming part of the same tribe. Because that is what you were claiming, and that is what I was disagreeing with, before we got into this off-topic stuff.
    First, I wasn't claiming that it was really 20.000 years, but I said only, that
    if it even was so long ago then it is no problem from lingustic point of view,
    becasue lingusts are caliming, that Proto-IE language could exist 4000 y.a.
    as well as 40.000. So what do you see here what could be impossible?

    About kin-system, I gave you as a proof the whole Y-haplogroups subject.
    Every people in the long past (even if it really was 20.000 ya or whatever)
    had in majoryty cases one Y-haplotype. This is the reason, why most people
    on this forum are disscusing about Y-haplotyopes, because their existance
    is based on patrylinear structure of early HG tribes during Ice Age, when
    surrvive could only this tribe, which was patriarchal. And this is patrarchal
    reason, why different groups of people today, living in different parts of the
    world had different Y haplotypes. Do you understand this reasnon, or not?
    If not, say it clearly, because you're always claiming something, but never
    about the particular subject, and it is hard to know what do you want exactly
    to achieve.

    The off topic stuff is all just opinion, there is no proof.
    Are you ok?
    At the beginning you wrote yourself that you do not nagate patrylinearity,
    and now you write, that this is only my opinion, and there is no proof...

    Do you feel yourself good?
    I am begin to worry...

    Which is about whether your patrilinear ancestry is somehow most important in defining your identity. Well, of course that is just whatever you believe and not something that can be proven.
    The same as above...

    Your relatives are just as related to you whether they have the same Y chromosome or not.
    Yes they are. did I tell that they are not?
    Maybe you simply do not understand what the partrylinear system is?
    So say it...

    You care about your sister or your mother or your niece more than you care about your fifth cousin who has the same Y haplogroup as you, of course, because he is hardly related to you at all.
    The same as above.

    A society can organize itself around patrilinear kinship, that has certain advantages, but that is not magically the one true way to organize a society.
    But you live in civilisation which is organized in this pattern minimum 6000 years.

    Btw, you are contradicting yoursef again, and you're doing this in one sentence!

    If I found out that, say, my patrilinear ancestor was an Ottoman Turk, should I convert to Islam and move to the Mediterranean, because that is "who I am"?
    No, I wasn't say that. This is overinterpretation whith which you are probably disscusing from the beginnig.

    I don't know what an Oldeuropean is, that is not a term I am familiar with in English. Is it something from thousands of years ago? Then I will tell him he is a person from the 21st century, and he should go see a pyschiatrist if he thinks he is someone living thousands of years ago.
    Finally I see... you get here two reasons, or even three, why speaking with you, have no sense at all...

    And when Mohawks adopted captured boys and young men into their tribe, they didn't do it to mix the identity of their children either, they did it to grow their tribe. Adopting into the tribe is a good strategy.
    This is a different subject, different civilisation, but even in this circumstances is fully agree with that what I am talking about.
    But you do not want see the point, then I will not elaborate this nuance.

    If you go up to the Northwest Coast, at Kitwanga there is a steep-sided hill with an archaeological site on the top, it is called Battle Hill. There was a Gitxsan noblewoman living near there who was captured by a Haida and brought back to his island to be a concubine. She had a child by him, but then when she got the opportunity she killed him and escaped back to her own people. Her boy grew up to be a great warlord, who built his fortress on that hill and fought against the Nisgaa, and the Tsimshian, and the Haida.
    As above...

    Now would you tell him that he is really a Haida and not a Gitxsan?
    Of course that I would... I have no douts.
    It does not mean, that he cannot be the Chief of Gitxsan.

    And what happened after the Rape of the Sabine Women? The Sabines attacked Rome and captured the Capitoline Hill. The Sabine King became co-ruler for a while. The Sabines joined with the Romans (well, some of them anyway), learned Latin, and became Roman gens, including noble ones. So their haplogroups became Roman haplogroups, and they changed their language. And pretty much the same thing happened with Etruscans, and everyone else in Italy.
    You really do not get the point... on purpose... nevermind...

    Did you notice that people also study mtDNA, even though according to you it is useless and doesn't matter?
    Yes they do, did I forbidden do this?

    That, that you live in patrylinear society, doesn't mean
    that you cannot do mt reaserch, or that your maternal
    grandma isn't close to you. This is not what I'm saying.

    And this, that mt genetic study has very limited
    usefullness it is obvious, and the interest in that
    subject is from obvious reasnons lower. Even in
    this forum, number of mt posts and threats isn't
    so big, as posts and threats about Y. Why?

    Because Y reaserching is very usefull.

    Why is usefull?

    Because societies were patrylinear.

    And why people are more interested in their Y haplotype?
    Because this is natural, and because they live in patrylinear society.

    That's because they can still trace populations.
    No, not populations; but usefullnes of mt studies can help understand
    why some group of people has different aDNA than their neighbour, or
    than has earlier/later. Mts are a tool - but dont have the same role as Y.
    Btw, noone can give you ceirtenty, that mt is exactly as it was in your
    unnamed gradma, becouse of the possibilyty that mt comes from male.

    And even, if you have your mt 100% true - it means nothing, because
    is not exactly corelated with any family, tribe or nationality, because
    women didn't create tribes and nations. But Y haplotypes correlated
    very often and very well, even if in the past were some mixes.

    Everyone who saw maps of haplotypes or was reading about them will
    see this huge difference between mts and Ys - and this 1 thing, proofs
    that structure so many thousand years ago was patrylinear - because
    musted be - this tribes who were matriarchal - if they were - they were
    dead this tens of thousands years ago. Mostly, they die, becasue of the
    enviroment, and secondly, even if they by mirracle survive, they were
    conquerd and assimilated by patriarchal tribes...

    I already said reasons that Y chromosomes are useful for tracing history, and one of those reasons is because of migration and conquest by groups of men who are often patrilineal.
    You are progressing
    Not only often, but in 99,99%.

    Which is great, but it doesn't tell you languages and cultures very well.
    The point is, that they are.
    Mt - do not.
    Y - yes.
    If you would know, who Oldeuropeans were and
    some similar stuff, you wouldn't be talking like that.

    And, as I'm aware good enough, in present time, there is no such nationality
    as Indoeurpean (becouse it is the most important group in this disscussion) or
    Oldeuropean, so if you lived in USA, China or Turkey, why cannot you admitt
    that you are Indoeuropean? This certainly does not hurt

    If you see a Lithuanian with the N1c-L550, which is originally Finnish even though it is the most common Baltic haplogroup, does it mean he is really Finnish?
    If I would be a Lithuanian with N1c - I would feel myself Ugrofinian,
    not particularly Finish, but if this is exact clade... then maybe?

    Or then if you have a Finn who has the Baltic kind of N1c-L550 does he now have to be Baltic, or can he still be Finnish?
    The same as above plus this person can be finish
    quite well, becasue Finishmen are Ugrofinians.

    You are a Canadian with english (?) ancestry, and your neighbour is Japanese, and second from Indian tribe.
    Did your Canadian citizenship anulate yours neighbours' japaneseness and indiannesness or whatever?
    I dont think so...
    Are not living in your country people, who have their old identity, but they are good Canadians as well?
    Did you hier about Polonia in Canada, or Japanese society, or some Indian tribes...
    Even Eskimos are living in Canada a couple hundret of years, but they are still Eskimos,
    as they were before John Cabot, Jacob cartier and Hudson Bay company... Why they are
    still carring so useless information as their ancestry and culture... they should be only
    Canadians, and they should be mix with whites and yellows, and blaks, and whatever...

    It is because they might be curious about this useless piece of information, which does not matter any more than the Y chromosome matters.
    I do not exactly understand, what you mean?
    Last edited by Rethel; 11-05-2015 at 09:51 PM.

  12. #69
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,441
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian

    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    As I said befoe: you get lost among your own claims and now you're changing your mind twisting what you were claiming earlier during most of this subdisscussion
    I think maybe you are not understanding my English. Or I am not understand your English, or both. I am saying the same as I said before, just repeating myself.

    Let me try to understand you clearly. You say that if a Lithuanian has that Finnic haplogroup, he should feel Finnic. But can he also be Indo-European, or can he only be one or the other? If I am descended from an Ottoman Turk in the patriline, then I am really an Ottoman Turk, or not? Or am I mostly English but partly Turk? Why I am I what *you* say I am and not what *I* say I am? If it is because that is the tradition of my culture, why is the Gitxsan chief whose father is Haida really Haida, when the tradition of Gitxsan and Haida is matrilineal? I don't understand.

    If you were not negating patrylineary, then why you have a problem whith that, when I am talking something according to patrylinear rule?
    Because you are not just saying that there are patrilineal cultures, and talking about importance of patrilinear organization in history, which is fine and normal, you are talking about a very strong rule of patrilinearity, so that 99.99% of the time cultures are patrilinear and have one ancestor and one language and one haplogroup. It is not all or one, what you are talking about is real but you are making much too strong claims about it.

    First, I wasn't claiming that it was really 20.000 years, but I said only, that if it even was so long ago then it is no problem from lingustic point of view, becasue lingusts are caliming, that Proto-IE language could exist 4000 y.a. as well as 40.000. So what do you see here what could be impossible?
    There is really only the one guy and few associates who claim 40 000 years old, everyone else thinks it's ridiculous. Seriously, even the idea that Proto-Indo-European is related to Manchu and Eskimo is a much more respectable theory, with many more linguists and much more evidence supporting it.

    About kin-system, I gave you as a proof the whole Y-haplogroups subject. Every people in the long past (even if it really was 20.000 ya or whatever) had in majoryty cases one Y-haplotype. This is the reason, why most people on this forum are disscusing about Y-haplotyopes, because their existance is based on patrylinear structure of early HG tribes during Ice Age, when surrvive could only this tribe, which was patriarchal. And this is patrarchal reason, why different groups of people today, living in different parts of the world had different Y haplotypes. Do you understand this reasnon, or not?
    That is *one* reason, but there are also other reasons. Do you notice that people in China have (say) mtDNA haplogroup B, and people in Europe do not? That isn't because of matrilineal tribes, it is just because they are very far away, you can't marry someone on the other side of the continent. If you look at the ancient DNA of Paleo-Eskimos, there were many samples from Greenland and from Canada, at different times, and all had the same mtDNA, D2a. Is it because they were matrilineal originally? Probably not, it is just they are a small population, so one haplogroup drifts to fixation by chance. This is why you can study populations with mtDNA even though few societies are matrilineal, because geography and drift also play a role. The same applies to Y haplogroups. Patrilineal and patrilocal societies are common so tracking clans and tribes with Y chromosomes is easier, but it is not the only reason.

    At the beginning you wrote yourself that you do not nagate patrylinearity, and now you write, that this is only my opinion, and there is no proof
    Whether some society is patrilineal or not is (depending on definition of course) objective fact, it can be proved. What someone's *identity* should be is opinion. Maybe you do not know what that word is in English? It means who you think you are. Someone's identity comes from their own beliefs and traditions, not yours - it is their own feeling! Nekt will not feel he is Haida because *you* think he is Haida, he will feel he is Gitxsan because that is how his society works. If *you* think he is really Haida, that is your feeling, your opinion, how can you prove it? God does not lean down and stamp on someone's forehead "Haida" or "Polish" or "Finnish".

    But you live in civilisation which is organized in this pattern minimum 6000 years.
    So what? I don't have to do what my civilization used to do. My civilization liked to hunt witches, well, that was stupid. We liked to have wars with each other all the time, now we can't do that anymore because our armies are too big and our weapons are too powerful. Up till 200 years ago we had slaves and serfs, now we ban that. We had hereditary nobility, in Canada and the US it is not allowed (there are a few leftovers from the British Empire days but no one knows or cares about them). Why should I care about patrilineage? For a long time now we have hardly had it anyway. (Maybe it is different where you live, I am talking about my own culture, though I think we are pretty close.)

    Think of a real patrilineal culture, we don't do the things they do. Do you marry your first cousin, your father's brother's daughter, like Arabs do? Or is there some family, you always marry a girl from that family, and then your daughter marries a boy from there, and so on? Can you marry your first cousin on your mother's side, but you couldn't marry someone who was your patrilineal tenth cousin (which you known because it is memorized), like an Evenki? When you are married, do you go live with or near the husband's parents and not the wife's, or when they get old do the parents always live with the son and not the daughter? Do you always pass on inheritance to the son, and men always own the property? If a businessman has a son who is stupid, and a daughter who is clever and good at business, does he pass the business on to his son anyway? Do you go to war when your paternal grandfather calls you up, with your brothers and paternal cousins? Back in the days of slaves, if someone had a white father and black slave mother, did that mean he was more white than someone whose mother was white and father was black?

    Even with patrilineal surnames, I can go right now and change my surname to Windsor (like the Queen) or Hirohito or McDonald or Quraysh and no one would stop me. When people come from some non-British culture often they used to change their name to something English and easy to pronounce. This would not be allowed if a surname really told a clan you belong to.

    So we are not a real patrilineal society, we have some patrilineal institutions, not even very many anymore. And if you want to argue, think about the Y haplogroups - does our society make it so one haplogroup is common? Or one haplogroup is concentrated in one place? No, everyone moves around and marries whoever they want. It is a state, we organize people on much bigger lines than patrilineage; you can't have a huge army based on true relatives, only fictional ideas like "fatherland".

    Finally I see... you get here two reasons, or even three, why speaking with you, have no sense at all...
    Oldeuropean is not English. If you don't know the English word, you have to explain what you mean better. You don't mean Old Europe in the Donald Rumsfeld sense, I am sure. Do you mean like Gimbutas, the Neolithic people before the Indo-Europeans? Or Alteuropaeisch, the Indo-European speakers before the spread of Celtic, Germanic, and so on? Maybe you mean the hunter-gatherers before the farmers came?

    This is a different subject, different civilisation, but even in this circumstances is fully agree with that what I am talking about. But you do not want see the point, then I will not elaborate this nuance.
    The point is that they adopted new Y haplogroups into their tribe, so now the Alqonquian (for instance) lineage is speaking Iroquioan, and the Mohawks have an Algonquian Y haplogroup. Remember the actual topic of the thread.

    You really do not get the point... on purpose... nevermind...
    Well, what is the point? That Romans did not take their identity from captured women? Well, so what, I am not an ancient Roman and my mother was not kidnapped, why do I care? That they brought in new mitochondrial haplogroups? Yes, we know that. My point is that they brought new, Sabine Y haplogroups into their tribe. Or from the point of view of the Sabine Y haplogroups, now that lineage is speaking Latin.

    And this, that mt genetic study has very limited usefullness it is obvious, and the interest in that subject is from obvious reasnons lower. Even in this forum, number of mt posts and threats isn't so big, as posts and threats about Y.
    Why don't you look at scientific papers instead of a forum for laymen, you will see many many studies about mtDNA.

    Btw, noone can give you ceirtenty, that mt is exactly as it was in your unnamed gradma, becouse of the possibilyty that mt comes from male.
    That is an incredibly slim possibility, it is far more likely that your mtDNA is not your grandmother's because you were switched at birth in the hospital, and of course much more likely than that is that your Y DNA is not your grandfather's because someone had an affair.

    And even, if you have your mt 100% true - it means nothing, because is not exactly corelated with any family, tribe or nationality, because women didn't create tribes and nations. But Y haplotypes correlated very often and very well, even if in the past were some mixes.
    Okay, can maybe we come to an agreement? mtDNA does not mean *nothing*, but it is rarely as good for tracing a tribe or nationality. Y haplogroups are *better* for this, but they are not *exactly* correlated, they are frequently mixed but often one is common or typical.

    this tribes who were matriarchal - if they were - they were dead this tens of thousands years ago. Mostly, they die, becasue of the enviroment, and secondly, even if they by mirracle survive, they were conquerd and assimilated by patriarchal tribes...
    Nobody is talking about *matriarchy*, if such a thing even exists. There are *matrilineal* people like Mohawks and Tlingit, who are not matriarchal. If you know anything about the people of America you know *they* were not the ones getting conquered and assimilated, they were the most powerful. Societies do not have to be *patrilineal* to survive, that is just one way of social organization.

    Not only often, but in 99,99%.
    You say 99.99%, what is the evidence? Do you know ten thousand cultures and their kinship systems, or did you just make it up? What textbook of anthropology can I read in, about how 99.99% of societies are patrilineal?

    I do not exactly understand, what you mean?
    I mean genetic tests are expensive, and because I have many sisters, cousins, and nieces with my mtDNA, but only my brother with my Y DNA, many people would learn something if I got my mtDNA tested, but only a couple if I tested my Y DNA.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Megalophias For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (12-29-2016)

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •