User Tag List

Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 213

Thread: Phenotype of the Proto-Indo-Europeans3102 days old

  1. #21
    Established Member
    LEGEND Alexander's Avatar
    Last Online
    2018-11-12 @ 10:06
    Join Date
    2016-09-17
    Posts
    285
    Gender
    Metaethnos
    Xiongnu Elite Cemetery

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flechera View Post
    Could you link me to that please, I’m really interested!
    http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...-etc-split-mod
    “At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races."

    - Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man

    https://youtu.be/BBz_z-hZk80?t=2m7s

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

    flechera (2017-01-01), Power77 (2017-09-03)

  3. # ADS
    Advertisement bot
    Join Date
    2013-03-24
    Posts
    All threads
       
     

  4. #22
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 22:56
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,779
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alexander View Post
    EliasAlucard has already gone through this. The remains that were tested by Allentoft were early to middle PIE, a lot of stuff could've happened before they left for Central Europe. We also have to keep in mind that the PIE were a large and heterogenous group with a wide cluster. Some Yamna tribes could've easily been wholly blond and blue-eyed.

    As for why their modern descendants are blond and blue-eyed, the best explanation is probably selective migration. Corded Ware people did not allow darker PIE tribes to integrate.

    By the way, isn't Arch Hades some butthurt Med who believes in the Anatolian hypothesis? Perhaps I have him confused with Dienekes.
    I believed the Anatolian hypothesis some 5 years ago...and 'believed' as in favored it just barely over competing hypothesis. But I was never that loyal to any particular hypothesis. Not to mention, This was before the last 5 years of ancient DNA. I now definitely favor the Kurgan hypothesis and consider the Anatolian hypothesis mostly dead. It was always a weak linguistic hypothesis and although there was a huge demic expansion from Anatolia during the Neolithic we know there were very big steppe expansions too later in time. The Armenian highland hypothesis seems a little plausible to me though. Considering whatever the case, the "Caucasus Hunter Gatherer" component has a very intimate relationship with the spread of Indo-European languages throughout Eurasia.

    Secondly, I don't know why you're trying to align blonde haired and blue eyed populations to the Proto Indo-Europeans. That 19th century hypothesis is even more dead than the Anatolian hypothesis. Only scientifically cluelesss nationalist idiots from Northern Europe subscribe to it now. 3,500-3,000 BC steppe populations definitely were not and were mostly dark pigmented [although about 1 in 10 had blue eyes].

    The Northern European phenotype evolved when dark Indo-European speaking steppe tribes migrated to Northern Europe and mixed with the local Hunter Gatherers, with sexual selection favoring the eye color of hunter gatherers, while natural selection favored lighter skin which was present in some Hunter Gatherers as well as Neolithic farmers..and also the taller height of the invading steppe tribes. In other words the Northern European phenotype [tall, heavily depigmented typically] is of heterogenous origin and post dates Proto Indo-European language and culture. It evolved in Northern/Central/Eastern Europe when those 3 genetic groups mingled.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Also, anyone posting pictures of modern people and labeling them as representative of Steppe populations that existed 5,000 years ago is retarded. Modern populations are genetically mixed and not to mention have obviously undergone some phenotypical selection in 5,000 years.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2017-02-01 at 18:17.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

    Bones (2017-02-04), voyager (2017-02-01)

  6. #23
    Junior Member harena's Avatar
    Last Online
    2017-04-20 @ 16:30
    Join Date
    2014-10-03
    Posts
    24
    Gender
    Race
    Europid
    Metaethnos
    Romance
    Phenotype
    Acromegalithic
    Religion
    Backsteingotik

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    The Northern European phenotype evolved when dark Indo-European speaking steppe tribes migrated to Northern Europe and mixed with the local Hunter Gatherers, with sexual selection favoring the eye color of hunter gatherers, while natural selection favored lighter skin which was present in some Hunter Gatherers as well as Neolithic farmers..and also the taller height of the invading steppe tribes. In other words the Northern European phenotype is of heterogenous origin and post dates Proto Indo-European language and culture.

    It doesn't make much sense though when you look at North Italians vs Sardinians. Both have negligible/nil levels of HG and can be modeled as:

    Sardinians = overwhelmingly Late Neolithic Europeans
    North Italians = Late Neolithic Europeans (Ötzi/Remedello) + some EBA steppe IE

    How would you explain the stark difference in pigmentation between these populations? (mind you blondism in Sardinia is virtually inexistent, lower than even levantine-shifted Southern Italy/Sicily)

    If only 25-30% steppe admixture is responsible for such variance, then it can easily also explain the nordic phenotype in populations with nearly twice as much said admixture
    Last edited by harena; 2017-02-01 at 20:34.

  7. #24
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 22:56
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,779
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harena View Post
    It doesn't make much sense though when you look at North Italians vs Sardinians. Both have negligible/nil levels of HG and can be modeled as:

    Sardinians = overwhelmingly Late Neolithic Europeans
    North Italians = Late Neolithic Europeans (Ötzi/Remedello) + some EBA steppe IE

    How would you explain the stark difference in pigmentation between these populations? (mind you blondism in Sardinia is virtually inexistent, lower than even levantine-shifted Southern Italy/Sicily)

    If only 25-30% steppe admixture is responsible for such variance, then it can easily also explain the nordic phenotype in populations with nearly twice as much said admixture
    The Nordic phenotype in Northern Europe did not get it's pigmentation from the Proto Indo-Europeans. That much is certain. Only it's stature. How do we know this? Because the Steppe populations were DARK. 9 out of 10 had dark eyes, and they were darker skinned than modern Spaniards and Southern Europeans.

    Furthermore Northern Italians have 3-4x the Western Hunter Gatherer ancestry Sardinians do, according to Haak et al. That explains the higher prevalence of light hair and eyes.



    Sardinians are only 3.2% while Northern Italians are 10.8% WHG.

    Selection in Europe for light pigmentation seems to have been heavily influenced by latitude. Northern Italy is more Northern than Sardinia, and has a different climate. So the lighter skin you find at higher frequency in Northern Italy may just be from the genes of the light farmers getting selected for more in the Northern regions of Europe while not so much in Sardinia.

    My point is you don't get "Nordic phenotypical" populations until steppe tribes mixed with WHGs and EEFs in North/Central/Eastern Europe. The later light pigmented steppe tribes north of the Caspian like the Andronovo ulture [circa 1800 BC] were back migrants from Europe and were descended from the Corded Ware Culture..which was mixed between steppe and EEF/WHG.

    I don't think Northern Italians get their steppe ancestry directly from the PIE speaking steppe anyway, but rather probably from much later IE speaking cultures like Corded Ware and Bell Beaker/La Tene cultures who were mixed of Bronze age steppe [PIE] and WHG and EEF.

    No one, certainly not me anyway.... is saying that all later IE cultures around 1,000 BC or 500 BC were dark..especially in more Northern and Western geographical areas Just the PROTO IEs who lived North of the Black Sea, North of the Caucasus, and North of the Caspian before 3,000 BC were dark, which they were. That is a fact. The later IE speaking cultures were genetically [and linguistically] MIXED. No one is saying the Vikings were dark lol.

    If it make some pale skinned blue eyed modern Northern European nationalist butthurt, sorry. But these people who had domesticated the horse and had wheeled vehicles, and likely spoke Proto Indo-Europans were tall and dark.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2017-02-02 at 05:30.

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

    SomaliSuldaan (2017-02-02), voyager (2017-02-02), voyager14 (2017-09-03)

  9. #25
    Junior Member harena's Avatar
    Last Online
    2017-04-20 @ 16:30
    Join Date
    2014-10-03
    Posts
    24
    Gender
    Race
    Europid
    Metaethnos
    Romance
    Phenotype
    Acromegalithic
    Religion
    Backsteingotik

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    The Nordic phenotype in Northern Europe did not get it's pigmentation from the Proto Indo-Europeans. That much is certain. Only it's stature. How do we know this? Because the Steppe populations were DARK. 9 out of 10 had dark eyes, and they were darker skinned than modern Spaniards and Southern Europeans.

    Furthermore Northern Italians have 3-4x the Western Hunter Gatherer ancestry Sardinians do, according to Haak et al. That explains the higher prevalence of light hair and eyes.



    Sardinians are only 3.2% while Northern Italians are 10.8% WHG.

    Selection in Europe for light pigmentation seems to have been heavily influenced by latitude. Northern Italy is more Northern than Sardinia, and has a different climate. So the lighter skin you find at higher frequency in Northern Italy may just be from the genes of the light farmers getting selected for more in the Northern regions of Europe while not so much in Sardinia.

    My point is you don't get "Nordic phenotypical" populations until steppe tribes mixed with WHGs and EEFs in North/Central/Eastern Europe. The later light pigmented steppe tribes north of the Caspian like the Andronovo ulture [circa 1800 BC] were back migrants from Europe and were descended from the Corded Ware Culture..which was mixed between steppe and EEF/WHG.

    I don't think Northern Italians get their steppe ancestry directly from the PIE speaking steppe anyway, but rather probably from much later IE speaking cultures like Corded Ware and Bell Beaker/La Tene cultures who were mixed of Bronze age steppe [PIE] and WHG and EEF.

    No one, certainly not me anyway.... is saying that all later IE cultures around 1,000 BC or 500 BC were dark..especially in more Northern and Western geographical areas Just the PROTO IEs who lived North of the Black Sea, North of the Caucasus, and North of the Caspian before 3,000 BC were dark, which they were. That is a fact. The later IE speaking cultures were genetically [and linguistically] MIXED. No one is saying the Vikings were dark lol.

    If it make some pale skinned blue eyed modern Northern European nationalist butthurt, sorry. But these people who had domesticated the horse and had wheeled vehicles, and likely spoke Proto Indo-Europans were tall and dark.
    First of all, I'm from Southern Europe so I really have no axe to grind here. The study from Haak et al. has been around for several years and is probably not the best (Maltese 100% Neolithic farmers? Ok...) as we have much better proxies now with fresh new ancient genomes being tested in the past couple of years.
    Tuscany (Ancient Etruria) with more steppe input than Lombardy (ex Cisalpine Gaul) doesn't look right.
    This actually looks more consistent with what we know about the history of these two regions:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...tZWm93XtA/edit

    But for the sake of argument let's stick to the data you provided, here's a few points:

    - +7% WHG in North Italians seems too meager an admixture to justify the stark difference in pigmentation, unless of course WHG were literally albino-pigmented
    - IIRC European WHG from Labrana was tested for those alleles and used to be described as a very dark individual, darker than modern europeans
    - Tuscans have less WHG than Sardinian in that paper, 0% to be exact, yet they are still significantly lighter than Sardinian
    - Tuscany climate does not differ much from that of Sardinia, so whatever point you might have had with North Italians is not enough to justify the differences
    - Same applies to iberians: 0% WHG, similar climate, yet noticeably lighter than Sardinians
    - Basque have a shitload of WHG but I doubt they're lighter than North Italians or significantly lighter than other Iberians
    - Mediterranean southern France seem to have the same amount of WHG as Sardinians yet they are probably lighter than both North Italians and Basques
    - Scottish with twice as much WHG as the English, similar climate but no particular differences in pigmentation

    Frankly, looking at that chart, it seems to be all about the steppe admixture when it comes to pigmentation.
    Regardless of WHG, notice the consistency:
    0-25% steppe: Woggy Mediterranean
    25-35% steppe: Southern Euro
    35-45% steppe: Central Euro
    45-70% steppe: North European

    Now I'm aware the data's not reliable, just find it bizarre that you would share it to strengthen your narrative yet the numbers appear to point in the opposite direction (relevance of steppe input/low relevance of WHG); and again, I have no problem with the idea of swarthy proto-IE as long as it's not just narrative disregarding all contradictory evidence.
    Last edited by harena; 2017-02-02 at 14:02.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to harena For This Useful Post:

    NixYO (2017-02-02), Power77 (2017-09-03)

  11. #26
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 22:56
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,779
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    You're over complicating things.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2017-02-02 at 14:25.

  12. #27
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 22:56
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,779
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harena View Post
    First of all, I'm from Southern Europe so I really have no axe to grind here. The study from Haak et al. has been around for several years and is probably not the best (Maltese 100% Neolithic farmers? Ok...) as we have much better proxies now with fresh new ancient genomes being tested in the past couple of years.
    Tuscany (Ancient Etruria) with more steppe input than Lombardy (ex Cisalpine Gaul) doesn't look right.
    This actually looks more consistent with what we know about the history of these two regions:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...tZWm93XtA/edit

    But for the sake of argument let's stick to the data you provided, here's a few points:

    - +7% WHG in North Italians seems too meager an admixture to justify the stark difference in pigmentation, unless of course WHG were literally albino-pigmented
    - IIRC European WHG from Labrana was tested for those alleles and used to be described as a very dark individual, darker than modern europeans
    - Tuscans have less WHG than Sardinian in that paper, 0% to be exact, yet they are still significantly lighter than Sardinian
    - Tuscany climate does not differ much from that of Sardinia, so whatever point you might have had with North Italians is not enough to justify the differences
    - Same applies to iberians: 0% WHG, similar climate, yet noticeably lighter than Sardinians
    - Basque have a shitload of WHG but I doubt they're lighter than North Italians or significantly lighter than other Iberians
    - Mediterranean southern France seem to have the same amount of WHG as Sardinians yet they are probably lighter than both North Italians and Basques
    - Scottish with twice as much WHG as the English, similar climate but no particular differences in pigmentation

    Frankly, looking at that chart, it seems to be all about the steppe admixture when it comes to pigmentation.
    Regardless of WHG, notice the consistency:
    0-25% steppe: Woggy Mediterranean
    25-35% steppe: Southern Euro
    35-45% steppe: Central Euro
    45-70% steppe: North European

    Now I'm aware the data's not reliable, just find it bizarre that you would share it to strengthen your narrative yet the numbers appear to point in the opposite direction (relevance of steppe input/low relevance of WHG); and again, I have no problem with the idea of swarthy proto-IE as long as it's not just narrative disregarding all contradictory evidence.
    Whats there to even dispute here? The PIE steppe tribes circa 3,000 BC or so were tall and dark. We know that cause we have their ancient DNA remains and that's what the data has repeatedly shown in at least 3 separate studies. Modern Northern Europeans can have a lot of their ancestry without having their general pigmentation traits. There was just a selection process in Northern Europe that favored light pigmentation...and my guess that much of this came from the non steppe side of their ancestry. Today There are populations with high Bronze age steppe ancestry that are still very dark by Eurocentric standars. Lazardis et al 2016 estimated the Pashtuns to be 50% steppe which is similar to Northern European admixture estimates...and the Pashtuns are a lot darker in every aspect than Northern Italians who are 25% steppe. lol

    [IMG]
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...59311.full.pdf


    Different selection process happened in different areas and populations throughout the last 5,000 years. Nothing more needs to be said. This isn't that complicated.

    Any data on modern population pigmentation is meaningless regarding the pigmentation of ancients if we actually have the ancient DNA remains.

    If you have actual "contradictory evidence" you'll show me the ancient DNA evidence that shows Steppe tribes north of Black sea, Caucasus, and Caspian Sea before or around 3,000 BC were predominately light pigmented. Because those are the populations linguists ascribe to speakers of Proto Indo-European. Not modern Northern Europeans.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2017-02-02 at 15:05.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

    Simi (2017-02-02), voyager (2017-02-02)

  14. #28
    Junior Member harena's Avatar
    Last Online
    2017-04-20 @ 16:30
    Join Date
    2014-10-03
    Posts
    24
    Gender
    Race
    Europid
    Metaethnos
    Romance
    Phenotype
    Acromegalithic
    Religion
    Backsteingotik

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Whats there to even dispute here? The PIE steppe tribes circa 3,000 BC or so were tall and dark. We know that cause we have their ancient DNA remains and that's what the data has repeatedly shown in at least 3 separate studies. Modern Northern Europeans can have a lot of their ancestry without having their general pigmentation traits. There was just a selection process in Northern Europe that favored light pigmentation...and my guess that much of this came from the non steppe side of their ancestry. Today There are populations with high Bronze age steppe ancestry that are still very dark by Eurocentric standars. Lazardis et al 2016 estimated the Pashtuns to be 50% steppe which is similar to Northern European admixture estimates...and the Pashtuns are a lot darker in every aspect than Northern Italians who are 25% steppe. lol

    [IMG]
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...59311.full.pdf


    Different selection process happened in different areas and populations throughout the last 5,000 years. Nothing more needs to be said. This isn't that complicated.

    Any data on modern population pigmentation is meaningless regarding the pigmentation of ancients if we actually have the ancient DNA remains.

    If you have actual "contradictory evidence" you'll show me the ancient DNA evidence that shows Steppe tribes north of Black sea, Caucasus, and Caspian Sea before or around 3,000 BC were predominately light pigmented. Because those are the populations linguists ascribe to speakers of Proto Indo-European. Not modern Northern Europeans.
    Pashtuns have both ASI (peaking in Paniya at 85%) and Iran Neolithic (peaking in Baluch Makranis at 75%) that North Italians lack, the comparison is pointless as both those components are far swarthier than any EEF-rich population. Moving on.
    You attributed the lighter pigmentation of North Europeans to HG admixture but the results from Mathieson actually tell a different story:

    https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9faAor2hs...600/change.jpg

    As you can see from the picture WHG are actually the darkest skinned, followed by SHG, then EEF and finally Yamnaya as the lightest with SLC24A5 having twice the effect of SLC45A2.
    Yamnaya were darker skinned than any modern European population albeit among the lightest around at the time; input from them could have sped up the process (see Late Neolithic/Bronze Age spike) though eventually all Europeans became lighter skinned.
    Admixture from HG doesn't look like a viable explanation even for light eyes as HERC2 actually dropped in EEF during the Middle Neolithic despite them being more WHG-shifted at this point (perhaps correlated to vitamin D levels/dietary changes).
    In conclusion, it seems like we're both wrong as there are more relevant factors than simple steppe/HG admixture.
    Last edited by harena; 2017-02-03 at 00:43.

  15. #29
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 22:56
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,779
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harena View Post
    Pashtuns have both ASI (peaking in Paniya at 85%) and Iran Neolithic (peaking in Baluch Makranis at 75%) that North Italians lack, the comparison is pointless as both those components are far swarthier than any EEF-rich population. Moving on.
    You attributed the lighter pigmentation of North Europeans to HG admixture but the results from Mathieson actually tell a different story:

    https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9faAor2hs...600/change.jpg

    As you can see from the picture WHG are actually the darkest skinned, followed by SHG, then EEF and finally Yamnaya as the lightest with SLC24A5 having twice the effect of SLC45A2.
    Yamnaya were darker skinned than any modern European population albeit among the lightest around at the time; input from them could have sped up the process (see Late Neolithic/Bronze Age spike) though eventually all Europeans became lighter skinned.
    Admixture from HG doesn't look like a viable explanation even for light eyes as HERC2 actually dropped in EEF during the Middle Neolithic despite them being more WHG-shifted at this point (perhaps correlated to vitamin D levels/dietary changes).
    In conclusion, it seems like we're both wrong as there are more relevant factors than simple steppe/HG admixture.


    Who says Iranian Neolithics were any swarthier than Aegean/Anatolian Neolithics [which is the ultimate source of Central European Neolithics]? How do we know about that?

    Anyway.



    Mesolithic WHGs and SHGs are uniformly blue eyed, more blue eyed than modern Finns. So I believe the majority of Blue eyes in Europe is from WHGS.

    If Northern Europeans are a 3 way mix of

    WHGs, EEFs, and Yamnaya/steppe related populations. EEFs in Central Europe were like 25% blue eyed, Yamnaya/steppe related populations are 10% blue eyed, and WHGs are basically 100% blue eyed. So where do you think the majority of blue eyes comes from in Northern Europe? Obviously from pre Indo-European Western Hunter Gatherers.


    Skin color may be another story. Although Yamnaya were lighter skinned than WHGs, they were still darker skinned than Early and Middle Neolithic Farmers in Central Europe. So of the 3 main components Yamnaya are the swarthiest component. Not to mention Scandinavian HGs were light skinned.

    Anyway, my point is we can find populations of the Middle East that have nearly as much steppe admixture as Northern Europeans, and they're no where near as light eyed or skinned as Northern Europeans. But these populations of the Middle East don't have EEF or WHG or SHG admixture. Which is where the majority of the light pigmentation in EUropeans both North and South comes from. At least as far as skin and eyes are concerned. Hair may be a different story, but the small amount of data we have on hair that i've seen shows the steppe tribes around 3,000 BC or before were not very light haired either.

    Anyway, the only reasonable conclusion of the data is that the so called Nordic phenotype is a hybrid of steppe/WHG and EEF..and evolved in Northern-Eastern Europe roughly a thousand years AFTER Proto Indo-European expansion and culture. The idea of the Proto Indo-Europeans looking almost entirely Nordic is totally discredited by Ancient DNA.

    This of course does not mean that certain later Indo-European speaking cultures were not Nordic looking. There really is no such thing as an "Indo-European" phenotype anyway. The original Indo-Europeans who were confined to the steppe may have had a rather uniform phenotype [tall, rather swarthy skinned, 90% dark eyed] but as the language evolved, split apart, etc..so did the phenotypes of Indo-European speakers.


    BTW, regarding Southern Europeans, in particular Southeastern Europeans. I don't think the 3 way model is the best model of their origins. Southeastern Europeans are IMO a 4 way mix of WHG, Aegean-Anatolian Farmer, Yamnaya/steppe, and CHG migrations unrelated to steppe ancestry. The CHG related ancestry where the majority of haplogroup J2 stems from IMO.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2017-02-03 at 08:43.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

    Power77 (2017-09-03), voyager (2017-02-03)

  17. #30
    Established Member
    Junior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Last Online
    Today @ 22:56
    Join Date
    2012-02-28
    Posts
    1,779
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Race
    Caucasoid
    Metaethnos
    White American
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Phenotype
    Pompeii frescoe
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Religion
    Panentheism
    Germany Japan Italy

    Default

    I wonder how accurate these Yamnaya reconstructions are?




    So the late proto Indo-Europeans who had domesticated the horse and had wheeled vehicles looked like these reconstructions facially? But then also had swarthy skin and were mostly brown-black haired, and 9 out of 10 had dark eyes and we know they were also genetically tall..taller than the Hunter Gatherer and farmer populations they subdued in Europe....so they were probably physically imposing for their time.
    Last edited by Arch Hades; 2017-02-03 at 08:52.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

    Power77 (2017-09-03), voyager (2017-02-03)

Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Questions Old Europeans and Indo Europeans
    By wronski feint in forum History
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2018-09-05, 11:16
  2. Replies: 665
    Last Post: 2018-09-05, 11:11
  3. Proto-Indo-European
    By Sevastopol in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 2017-09-01, 18:48
  4. Proto Indo European nouns
    By Ubirajara in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 2014-01-15, 05:41
  5. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2010-07-13, 22:14

Posting Permissions

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