Iberia: East Bell Beakers spread Indo-European languages; Celts expanded later

New paper (behind paywall), The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years, by Olalde et al. Science (2019).

NOTE. Access to article from Reich Lab: main paper and supplementary materials.

Abstract:

We assembled genome-wide data from 271 ancient Iberians, of whom 176 are from the largely unsampled period after 2000 BCE, thereby providing a high-resolution time transect of the Iberian Peninsula. We document high genetic substructure between northwestern and southeastern hunter-gatherers before the spread of farming. We reveal sporadic contacts between Iberia and North Africa by ~2500 BCE and, by ~2000 BCE, the replacement of 40% of Iberia’s ancestry and nearly 100% of its Y-chromosomes by people with Steppe ancestry. We show that, in the Iron Age, Steppe ancestry had spread not only into Indo-European–speaking regions but also into non-Indo-European–speaking ones, and we reveal that present-day Basques are best described as a typical Iron Age population without the admixture events that later affected the rest of Iberia. Additionally, we document how, beginning at least in the Roman period, the ancestry of the peninsula was transformed by gene flow from North Africa and the eastern Mediterranean.

Interesting excerpts:

From the Bronze Age (~2200–900 BCE), we increase the available dataset (6, 7, 17) from 7 to 60 individuals and show how ancestry from the Pontic-Caspian steppe (Steppe ancestry) appeared throughout Iberia in this period (Fig. 1, C and D), albeit with less impact in the south (table S13). The earliest evidence is in 14 individuals dated to ~2500–2000 BCE who coexisted with local people without Steppe ancestry (Fig. 2B). These groups lived in close proximity and admixed to form the Bronze Age population after 2000 BCE with ~40% ancestry from incoming groups (Fig. 2B and fig. S6).

Y-chromosome turnover was even more pronounced (Fig. 2B), as the lineages common in Copper Age Iberia (I2, G2, and H) were almost completely replaced by one lineage, R1b-M269. These patterns point to a higher contribution of incoming males than females, also supported by a lower proportion of nonlocal ancestry on the X-chromosome (table S14 and fig. S7), a paradigm that can be exemplified by a Bronze Age tomb from Castillejo del Bonete containing a male with Steppe ancestry and a female with ancestry similar to Copper Age Iberians.

iberian-adna

For the Iron Age, we document a consistent trend of increased ancestry related to Northern and Central European populations with respect to the preceding Bronze Age (Figs. 1, C and D, and 2B). The increase was 10 to 19% (95% confidence intervals given here and in the percentages that follow) in 15 individuals along the Mediterranean coast where non-Indo-European Iberian languages were spoken; 11 to 31% in two individuals at the Tartessian site of La Angorrilla in the southwest with uncertain language attribution; and 28 to 43% in three individuals at La Hoya in the north where Indo-European Celtiberian languages were likely spoken (fig. S6 and tables S11 and S12).

This trend documents gene flow into Iberia during the Late Bronze Age or Early Iron Age, possibly associated with the introduction of the Urnfield tradition (18). Unlike in Central or Northern Europe, where Steppe ancestry likely marked the introduction of Indo-European languages (12), our results indicate that, in Iberia, increases in Steppe ancestry were not always accompanied by switches to Indo-European languages.

I think it is obvious they are extrapolating the traditional (not that well-known) linguistic picture of Iberia during the Iron Age, believing in continuity of that picture (especially non-Indo-European languages) during the Urnfield period and earlier.

What this data shows is, as expected, the arrival of Celtic languages in Iberia after Bell Beakers and, by extension, in the rest of western Europe. Somewhat surprisingly, this may have happened during the Urnfield period, and not during the La Tène period.

Also important are the precise subclades:

We thus detect three Bronze Age males who belonged to DF27 (154, 155), confirming its presence in Bronze Age Iberia. The other Iberian Bronze Age males could belong to DF27 as well, but the extremely low recovery rate of this SNP in our dataset prevented us to study its true distribution. All the Iberian Bronze Age males with overlapping sequences at R1b-L21 were negative for this mutation. Therefore, we can rule out Britain as a plausible proximate origin since contemporaneous British males are derived for the L21 subtype.


New open access paper Survival of Late Pleistocene Hunter-Gatherer Ancestry in the Iberian Peninsula, by Villalba-Mouco et al. Cell (2019):

BAL0051 could be assigned to haplogroup I1, while BAL003 carries the C1a1a haplogroup. To the limits of our typing resolution, EN/MN individuals CHA001, CHA003, ELT002 and ELT006 share haplogroup I2a1b, which was also reported for Loschbour [73] and Motala HG [13], and other LN and Chalcolithic individuals from Iberia [7, 9], as well as Neolithic Scotland, France, England [9], and Lithuania [14]. Both C1 and I1/ I2 are considered typical European HG lineages prior to the arrival of farming. Interestingly, CHA002 was assigned to haplogroup R1b-M343, which together with an EN individual from Cova de Els Trocs (R1b1a) confirms the presence of R1b in Western Europe prior to the expansion of steppe pastoralists that established a related male lineage in Bronze Age Europe [3, 6, 9, 13, 19]. The geographical vicinity and contemporaneity of these two sites led us to run genomic kinship analysis in order to rule out any first or second degree of relatedness. Early Neolithic individual FUC003 carries the Y haplogroup G2a2a1, commonly found in other EN males from Neolithic Anatolia [13], Starçevo, LBK Hungary [18], Impressa from Croatia and Serbia Neolithic [19] and Czech Neolithic [9], but also in MN Croatia [19] and Chalcolithic Iberia [9].

See also

46 thoughts on “Iberia: East Bell Beakers spread Indo-European languages; Celts expanded later

  1. Few PCA images based on the samples from the current paper that might interest you:

    With some North and sub-Saharan African populations included: https://imgur.com/a/irvTgaY

    Without: https://imgur.com/a/pMIUoGd

    Also as I indirecly alluded to in the previous post here and you mentioned, the results here definitely and obviously strengthen the Central European view for Celtic. Want the shift of Ireland towards the continent compared to Ireland_EBA clarified as well.

    1. Can’t see Ireland_EBA in your plots, but I guess they will cluster more “northern/central-eastern European” than modern Irish, in line with their Dutch BBC origin, as we already know, due to the higher ‘CWC steppe’ contribution.

      Anyway, the Celtic from the West theory is a linguistic one, so its proponents may argue that BBC was an old Celtic wave that was later replaced by another, Central European one.

      I guess it all depends on how you see Lusitanian. If you see it as ‘Pre-Celtic’ (however un-Celtic it may be), or ‘archaic Italo-Celtic’ (even if it is clearly not within the Italo-Celtic group), then I would mostly agree with that, because it’s basically saying that the BBC wave expanded the Old European ancestor of Celtic and Italic (and Germanic).

      I doubt the theory can hold, though, because Koch tried to link Tartessian with very specific Celtic traits…You would need to propose an Old European Celtic-like-but-non-Celtic dialect…

      Better to reject what can’t be supported anymore and go on, IMHO. Which does not even mean rejecting the IE substrate/adstrate of Tartessian, or the IE nature of Bell Beakers expanding into the British Isles and Iberia, obviously.

      1. My bad, the wording was a bit misleading. I didn’t include Ireland_EBA in that one, just modern Europeans (plus some ancient and modern Africans in the one set to illustrate the African pull in some genomes) and the paper’s samples.

        Here’s a zoom-in of a West Eurasian plot that includes Ireland_EBA, Irish, Hallstatt_Bylany and Ireland_MN:

        https://imgur.com/a/VCg4zYX

        There’s an obvious shift towards the EEF-HG side of things like you said since Ireland_EBA has higher steppe ancestry. A continental population that looks like the eastern Hallstatt one makes sense but this particular one doesn’t seem like it fits well. It seems closer to modern eastern Europeans in other dimensions which probably implies that only a population similar to it, not this exact one, would have contributed to the Isles. And there are some questions about the potential varieties spoken in eastern Hallstatt itself.

      2. My bad, the wording was a bit misleading. I didn’t include Ireland_EBA in that one, just modern Europeans (plus some ancient and modern Africans in the one set to illustrate the African pull in some genomes) and the paper’s samples.

        Here’s a zoom-in of a West Eurasian plot that includes Ireland_EBA, Irish, Hallstatt_Bylany and Ireland_MN:

        https://imgur.com/a/VCg4zYX

        There’s an obvious shift towards the EEF-HG side of things like you said since Ireland_EBA has higher steppe ancestry. A continental population that looks like the eastern Hallstatt one makes sense but this particular one doesn’t seem like it fits well. It seems closer to modern eastern Europeans in other dimensions which probably implies that only a population similar to it, not this exact one, would have contributed to the Isles. And there are some questions about the potential varieties spoken in eastern Hallstatt itself.

        1. Also, to elaborate a bit on the one Hallstatt sample, DA112:

          https://i.imgur.com/Ffc31Xo.png

          Compared to the other Hallstatt sample, DA111, it seems to have a certain attraction to Baltic_BA-like populations, part of the kind of ancestry that seems at least partially responsible for the western/eastern European split.

    2. Can’t see Ireland_EBA in your plots, but I guess they will cluster more “northern/central-eastern European” than modern Irish, in line with their Dutch BBC origin, as we already know, due to the higher ‘CWC steppe’ contribution.

      Anyway, the Celtic from the West theory is a linguistic one, so its proponents may argue that BBC was an old Celtic wave that was later replaced by another, Central European one.

      I guess it all depends on how you see Lusitanian. If you see it as ‘Pre-Celtic’ (however un-Celtic it may be), or ‘archaic Italo-Celtic’ (even if it is clearly not within the Italo-Celtic group), then I would mostly agree with that, because it’s basically saying that the BBC wave expanded the Old European ancestor of Celtic and Italic (and Germanic).

      I doubt the theory can hold, though, because Koch tried to link Tartessian with very specific Celtic traits…You would need to propose an Old European Celtic-like-but-non-Celtic dialect…

      Better to reject what can’t be supported anymore and go on, IMHO. Which does not even mean rejecting the IE substrate/adstrate of Tartessian, or the IE nature of Bell Beakers expanding into the British Isles and Iberia, obviously.

    3. Can’t see Ireland_EBA in your plots, but I guess they will cluster more “northern/central-eastern European” than modern Irish, in line with their Dutch BBC origin, as we already know, due to the higher ‘CWC steppe’ contribution.

      Anyway, the Celtic from the West theory is a linguistic one, so its proponents may argue that BBC was an old Celtic wave that was later replaced by another, Central European one.

      I guess it all depends on how you see Lusitanian. If you see it as ‘Pre-Celtic’ (however un-Celtic it may be), or ‘archaic Italo-Celtic’ (even if it is clearly not within the Italo-Celtic group), then I would mostly agree with that, because it’s basically saying that the BBC wave expanded the Old European ancestor of Celtic and Italic (and Germanic).

      I doubt the theory can hold, though, because Koch tried to link Tartessian with very specific Celtic traits…You would need to propose an Old European Celtic-like-but-non-Celtic dialect…

      Better to reject what can’t be supported anymore and go on, IMHO. Which does not even mean rejecting the IE substrate/adstrate of Tartessian, or the IE nature of Bell Beakers expanding into the British Isles and Iberia, obviously.

    4. Can’t see Ireland_EBA in your plots, but I guess they will cluster more “northern/central-eastern European” than modern Irish, in line with their Dutch BBC origin, as we already know, due to the higher ‘CWC steppe’ contribution.

      Anyway, the Celtic from the West theory is a linguistic one, so its proponents may argue that BBC was an old Celtic wave that was later replaced by another, Central European one.

      I guess it all depends on how you see Lusitanian. If you see it as ‘Pre-Celtic’ (however un-Celtic it may be), or ‘archaic Italo-Celtic’ (even if it is clearly not within the Italo-Celtic group), then I would mostly agree with that, because it’s basically saying that the BBC wave expanded the Old European ancestor of Celtic and Italic (and Germanic).

      I doubt the theory can hold, though, because Koch tried to link Tartessian with very specific Celtic traits…You would need to propose an Old European Celtic-like-but-non-Celtic dialect…

      Better to reject what can’t be supported anymore and go on, IMHO. Which does not even mean rejecting the IE substrate/adstrate of Tartessian, or the IE nature of Bell Beakers expanding into the British Isles and Iberia, obviously.

    1. Also this:

      Only one 2-way model fits the ancestry in Iberia_CA_Stp with P-value>0.05: Germany_Beaker + Iberia_CA (Table S11). Finding a Bell Beaker-related group as a plausible source for the introduction of steppe ancestry into Iberia is consistent with the fact that some of the individuals in the Iberia_CA_Stp group were excavated in Bell Beaker associated contexts (9). Models with Iberia_CA and other Bell Beaker groups such as France_Beaker (P-value=7.31E-06), Netherlands_Beaker (P-value=1.03E-03) and England_Beaker (P-value=4.86E-02) failed, probably because they have slightly higher proportions of steppe ancestry than the true source population.

      For Iberia_BA, we added Iberia_CA_Stp to the outgroup set as a possible source. The same Germany_Beaker + Iberia_CA model shows a good fit, but with less ancestry attributed to Germany_Beaker (Table S11). Another working model is Iberia_CA+Iberia_CA_Stp, suggesting that Iberia_BA is a mixture between the local Iberia_CA population and the earliest individuals with steppe ancestry in Iberia.

      So ancient Bell Beakers (ca. 24th century) in Iberia from Germany Beakers, while later Bell Beakers of hg. R1b in the North™ show excess steppe ancestry through exogamy with Corded Ware peoples?

      Who would’ve thunk…

    2. Also this:

      Only one 2-way model fits the ancestry in Iberia_CA_Stp with P-value>0.05: Germany_Beaker + Iberia_CA (Table S11). Finding a Bell Beaker-related group as a plausible source for the introduction of steppe ancestry into Iberia is consistent with the fact that some of the individuals in the Iberia_CA_Stp group were excavated in Bell Beaker associated contexts (9). Models with Iberia_CA and other Bell Beaker groups such as France_Beaker (P-value=7.31E-06), Netherlands_Beaker (P-value=1.03E-03) and England_Beaker (P-value=4.86E-02) failed, probably because they have slightly higher proportions of steppe ancestry than the true source population.

      For Iberia_BA, we added Iberia_CA_Stp to the outgroup set as a possible source. The same Germany_Beaker + Iberia_CA model shows a good fit, but with less ancestry attributed to Germany_Beaker (Table S11). Another working model is Iberia_CA+Iberia_CA_Stp, suggesting that Iberia_BA is a mixture between the local Iberia_CA population and the earliest individuals with steppe ancestry in Iberia.

      So ancient Bell Beakers (ca. 24th century) in Iberia from Germany Beakers, while later Bell Beakers of hg. R1b in the North™ show excess steppe ancestry through exogamy with Corded Ware peoples?

      Who would’ve thunk…

    3. We’ve discussed this before and we both understand the problems with the reflux kind of model but to be fair to the proponent of that theory, his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well. In general, I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other since you both contribute valuable stuff, whatever differences in interpretation. 😉

      This paper has a lot of stuff to go through so a more careful look is in order but via a cursory look at the more recent events:

      – Basques as Iberia_IA population. This was hinted at with modelling in various tools and PCA positions with the Beaker and BA samples being a bit too western for modern Basques. You needed extra steppe/Central European ancestry.

      – Rest of Iberians have additional Central-Eastern Med (“Greco-Roman”, best modeled as modern Greek, Bergamo and Tuscan in the paper) and North African kind of ancestry. Not a particular surprise either I think since it was a basic, sensible model you’d get in various tools where modern Iberians essentially looked like Iberia_BA + extra Celtic-like ancestry + Central/Eastern Southern Europe + North Africa with Basques only having the first two and in fact less Celtic-like ancestry and more Iberia_BA than the rest of Iberians. You can get modern Iberians basically via mixing between the early medieval northern Iberian cluster and the Southeast Iberian North African-heavy medieval one (as the Christian states expanded towards the south?) but it’s interesting that at least some North African ancestry in the latter predates the Muslim conquest from what I can see.

      – The West Med Emporion cluster looks Iberian. The East Med Emporion cluster basically Mycenaean-like and J-dominated but I wonder if that points towards complete continuity with the Mycenaean samples we have or a model like Mycenaean + some extra northern ancestry + Anatolia_MLBA-like considering that Emporion was an Ionian Greek colony and the Anatolian Greek colonies had an important Anatolian substrate in onomastics, including male ones, that speaks to important local input. Need samples equivalent to the Iberian ones here, i.e. metropolitan ones, to clarify things. Some samples appear expectedly as a mix between the two clusters.

      Some interesting mtDNA and lactase persistence results too. It’s interesting how late the latter appears to increase in both Iberia and Italy, in Italy based on descriptions of the coming Roman-era paper.

      1. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      2. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      3. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      4. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      5. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      6. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      7. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      8. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      9. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      10. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      11. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      12. his view wasn’t that Iberian Beakers would have been direct descendants of Dutch Beakers. Rather that there was a genetic cline that goes Netherlands -> Central Europe -> South France -> Iberia and the latter two are the sources used here as well.

        I disagree. Despicable me and his minions have obsessively tested Dutch Beaker and EBA as a source for every single Beaker and Beaker-derived BA sample out there (and late CW as a source for Dutch Beakers) in the past two months, including Iberian individuals, and published the results interpreted as supporting the emergence and expansion of super steppe-like Bell Beakers from Single Grave peoples in the Netherlands, in an attempt to show that tens of thousands of Yamna settlers of hg. R1b-L51 in the Carpathian Basin disappeared because they could not cross the Tisza River… This idea emerged after I published ASoSaH, for obvious reasons, among people who were previously O.K. with the concept of Yamna expanding into Bell Beakers, until they realized Bell Beakers replaced Corded Ware basically everywhere where IE languages were later spoken.

        And this is not ‘a theory’ (like its archaeological counterpart is); this is the latest amateur geneticists’ brain fart that will now be supported by them by testing ancient Dutch samples for everything new published in Iberia, getting (surprise!) ‘good fits’, saying that Harvard people are ‘charlatans’ or ‘dilettantes’, or ‘neurotic’, and that ‘they obviously missed that’. This whole house of cards will soon be replaced by “Alsace Beakers as the original beakers from CW in the Rhine” (when the R1b-P312 from France shows more Yamna ancestry than any Corded Ware individual), and then with “South German Beakers from CW in Germany” or with “Moravia BBC from CW in Poland” or whatever, when early samples in the Upper Danube close to Hungary show more Yamna-like ancestry. This strategy of publishing newer and newer pet theories consists solely of “anything but Yamna Hungary” and “southern R1b from northern R1a”; again, for obvious reasons (stemming from ideas proper of the 2000s).

        It doesn’t matter whether some ideas are eventually proven right or wrong. What matters is the research process: a good initial hypothesis, solid data, and a reasonable interpretation. You can say that “there is life in the Moon because the Bible”, and throw Bible quotes and numbers and personal attacks to anyone who says otherwise. No matter if you are eventually ‘right’ and life is found in the Moon, your whole reasoning process (and your attitude) are plainly wrong, and you need to correct that or face backlash. So no matter whether “CWC and R1a are the origin of the white civilization” thingy is eventually believed or not, the whole idea and the process to demonstrate it are flawed.

        I don’t get why you guys have to take snipes at each other

        There are hundreds of people (researchers, commenters, bloggers) I read and comment to, some of whom I fully disagree with, and I don’t resort to personal attacks because it’s never necessary. In fact, it’s basically impossible to find someone you fully agree with in anything regarding ancient migrations or languages. You can even say some reasoning or concepts are absurd, or stupid, or the consequence of ignorance or bias, without attacking the person who said that as “crazy” or “stupid”, because we are all bound to say stupid and crazy things: the more we speak/write, the more often we do that.

        There are obvious trollish comments in this blog and elsewhere, and I don’t ever bother to answer or delete them (unless they are openly and merely offensive, of course), because a silence wall is the best way to deal with that. You just laugh at the comment, and leave it there for everyone to see the newest stupidity (like some consistent ‘anonymous’ R1a-supremacist trolls or Armenian homeland trolls spitting something here from time to time).

        Despicable me and his minions are simply online bullies who go around throwing some numbers coupled with simplistic interpretations and LOTS of ad hominems whenever they don’t like what someone argues, whether it’s reasonable or not, but accept unending stupid arguments whenever they fit their narrative. This obsession with demeaning other people tells me that Voldemort is a narcissist (i.e. suffers from a huge inferiority complex that needs the constant harassing of others to be compensated), further confirmed by the obsession with his haplogroup grandpapa R1a being pure white Indo-European from the North™ and nothing else.

        Maybe I am wrong, because I am not a trained Psychiatrist, but something tells me that every time we have a good laugh at some of their stupid comments and wrong interpretations (stupid comments and wrong interpretations that we ALL do) there are huge temper tantrums coupled with a lot of teeth grinding and perseveration of revenge ideas, which lead to still stupider brain farts (the latest one revived the use of cephalic index 😄), and that alone is a good reason for me to throw some sarcastic comments from time to time to see what kind of comedy happens next…

        EDIT: I guess what I am saying is that I am not going to ask these nobodies for the most basic decency when it comes to public conversations. I am going to demand it using the same strategy they use, in an action-reaction kind of behavior, and see what happens. Fortunately, I don’t have much use or need for online reputation. I can’t believe it’s really that difficult for some so-called genetic genealogists to behave as normal human beings, and I don’t understand the sad drift of Anthrogenica (a community which has respectable long-time contributors) in the past months, where personal attacks and hatred are tolerated on a daily basis, and they are even led or encouraged by some moderators just because they are arse-licking fans of this Stormfront guy…

      13. The paper has some quite interesting data, including continuous contacts with North Africa, especially since the Roman Empire (which connected the whole Mediterranean). The finding of so little North African ancestry in recent times (compared to what one would have expected) in recent papers is striking, though, and may have to do with the effective size of the African population that admixed in Iberia, even more than the so often talked about Reconquest and expulsion of Muslims. Maybe Y-chromosome will be more revealing in this sense.

        Lactase persistence, like hair or eye color, or cephalic size, or ABO group, was bound to fail in general (IMHO) as a marker of anything. I still don’t see why they insist on selective pressure for the increase in the past 2,000 years, when chance is the most likely option (before selection). I don’t know what I am missing here, but it seems they try to look for a plausible explanation of everything that is genetically defined as selection, as if humans were a collection of successful genetic markers…

    4. Also this:

      Only one 2-way model fits the ancestry in Iberia_CA_Stp with P-value>0.05: Germany_Beaker + Iberia_CA (Table S11). Finding a Bell Beaker-related group as a plausible source for the introduction of steppe ancestry into Iberia is consistent with the fact that some of the individuals in the Iberia_CA_Stp group were excavated in Bell Beaker associated contexts (9). Models with Iberia_CA and other Bell Beaker groups such as France_Beaker (P-value=7.31E-06), Netherlands_Beaker (P-value=1.03E-03) and England_Beaker (P-value=4.86E-02) failed, probably because they have slightly higher proportions of steppe ancestry than the true source population.

      For Iberia_BA, we added Iberia_CA_Stp to the outgroup set as a possible source. The same Germany_Beaker + Iberia_CA model shows a good fit, but with less ancestry attributed to Germany_Beaker (Table S11). Another working model is Iberia_CA+Iberia_CA_Stp, suggesting that Iberia_BA is a mixture between the local Iberia_CA population and the earliest individuals with steppe ancestry in Iberia.

      So ancient Bell Beakers (ca. 24th century) in Iberia from Germany Beakers, while later Bell Beakers of hg. R1b in the North™ show excess steppe ancestry through exogamy with Corded Ware peoples?

      Who would’ve thunk…

      1. Don’t worry about those frustrated neckbeards so much, Carlos.
        Continue being objective. You guys are catering to different interest groups: those interested in science vs. those wanting to validate their insecurities with science

        1. Thank you, I don’t think I worry about them, tho.

          I just want to explain (once more, see here or here) to any potential new reader where the hate-mongering and bigotry comes from. This here is no ‘chicken or egg’ paradox..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.