Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bell Beakers in Ireland

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stevo
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    The R1b dna found in Germany is dated to 4,600. The two R1b men could be descended from an R1b line that was in that region for 2000 years. They just didn't arrive there and then died that very year.
    Think about it.

    There is a lot of R1b in Europe now. That is one of the reasons that eight or ten years ago almost everyone thought R1b was the first y haplogroup to repopulate Europe after the LGM. They also mistakenly carried on the old, erroneous, 19th-century notion that the Basques were a Paleolithic relic population; therefore, because Basques have a high frequency of R1b, R1b must likewise be a Paleolithic relic in Europe.

    But R1b in Western Europe is almost 100% R-L11 of too little diversity to be that old there, and the SNP trail leads back to the east, to places like Armenia and northern Iran, where L23 and M269* prevail. The Basques are about 95% lactase persistent, not a Paleolithic trait, and their language contains words for Neolithic and metal age items, words that were not borrowed from other languages. In other words, the Basques aren't an Old Stone Age relic population. That was a 19th century fiction.

    Now, add to all that the fact that NO R1b has turned up at ANY Neolithic or older sites, despite the fact that R1b is the single most frequent y haplogroup in Europe today and the fact that ancient y-dna test results from Europe are mounting.

    Yes, some R1b could be recovered from a Mesolithic European site tomorrow, but that is looking less and less and less likely.

    If those two R1b Beaker men were descended from other R1b men who had been in Europe for thousands of years already, one would think some older R1b would be turning up there, but it isn't. Another thing is that the Beaker Folk, especially the males, were an intrusive population. They differed from the older inhabitants not only culturally but physically, as well. In other words, they were newcomers.
    Last edited by Stevo; 15 June 2014, 08:57 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stevo
    replied
    Originally posted by ironroad41 View Post
    . . .

    Your comment about climate is a little inane . . .
    No it isn't. Your constant harping on the climate in Western Europe during the Paleolithic Period and into the Mesolithic is meaningless for R1b unless one assumes R1b was already there.

    There is no evidence it was, so whether it was snowy or rainy or sunny, whether there was a tsunami engulfing "Doggerland" or not, the climate in Western Europe had little to no impact on people who were not there at the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • ironroad41
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
    I agree with what you've written above and I think that Stevo would also agree with at least your last sentence, which I've bolded. Climate, especially extreme climate changes, have a lot to do with human migrations.

    However, Stevo's point is addressing the question of what were the haplogroups of Europeans at various times in the past.

    So, merely knowing that climate change caused or contributed to migration into Europe at this or that time doesn't tell us the haplogroup of those who migrated. DNA results tell us this. The fact is that what we know so far from DNA results of ancient remains tells us that there was no R1b in Europe more than about 4,600 years ago.

    Hence, as Stevo wrote, "The climate in Western Europe is the climate in Western Europe. It has little bearing on people who are not there at the time." If the DNA results are right in telling us that there was no R1b in Europe before 4,600 years ago, the European climate before that time has nothing to do with R1b, since it wasn't there then!
    I guess I would advocate what Jean M. is advocating, have patience. We know that wooly mammoths and aurochs and such were in Western Europe pre-Holocene, but I'm not sure their remains have been found? It requires certain kinds of climactic conditions or well protected caves to leave fossil remains in the climate of W. Europe over the period of the Holocene.

    You and Steve say there is no evidence; That is not proof! If all the remains of certain Hgs, are "gone", then there is no evidence, but you haven't proven they weren't there? The evidence we have is of a different nature, the sheer numbers of R1b in Western Europe now; The fact that went East and is the dominant haplogroup in the native americans. The scenario seems to be that R began in SE Asia or its predecessor P, that as the oceans rose, migrations from that area occurred and R travelled north and West to Siberia and parts of Eastern Asia. (The proof of that has only become available in the last few years(Malt'a boy, Karafet paper). The Climate in the early Holocene was ideal in northern Europe east to Siberia. Why wouldn't some form of R migrate West?

    Megaliths, Stonehenge, etc. aren't the beginning of early cultures in the west, they are a culmination of sorts. The Druid university, which is also very old, and may be tied to the Stonehenge complex, didn't begin when Rome destroyed Anglesby Island (sp) off the coast of Wales.

    Consider all the Petroglyphs and other remnants of early civilizations, such as above, that remain; I sure wish that stones talked, and it may be, one day, we'll find out they do?

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    I don't see how testing ancient dna is going to resolve the origin problem. R* was found in the Siberian boy. I didn't see any posts about an origin for R in Siberia.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post

    So, merely knowing that climate change caused or contributed to migration into Europe at this or that time doesn't tell us the haplogroup of those who migrated. DNA results tell us this. The fact is that what we know so far from DNA results of ancient remains tells us that there was no R1b in Europe more than about 4,600 years ago.
    The R1b dna found in Germany is dated to 4,600. The two R1b men could be descended from an R1b line that was in that region for 2000 years. They just didn't arrive there and then died that very year.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
    Why don't you calm down? Some people might take your words that I bolded as a threat, whether you meant it that way or not.
    It was not meant as a threat. I can read and I can make up my own mind about things.

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by ironroad41 View Post
    Your comment about climate is a little inane. I look at Climate at a major force in population displacements! The whole Neolithic movement into western Europe was probably due to shift of the Trade winds south c. 5K BC and which dried up the Sahara, moderated Southern Europe and cooled down northern Europe a tad. I think there is a little argument that changes in climate affect food production and water availability which are both necessary for human life to exist and thrive.

    A good knowledge of climactic conditions over the Millenia is very helpful in understanding population movements.
    I agree with what you've written above and I think that Stevo would also agree with at least your last sentence, which I've bolded. Climate, especially extreme climate changes, have a lot to do with human migrations.

    However, Stevo's point is addressing the question of what were the haplogroups of Europeans at various times in the past.

    So, merely knowing that climate change caused or contributed to migration into Europe at this or that time doesn't tell us the haplogroup of those who migrated. DNA results tell us this. The fact is that what we know so far from DNA results of ancient remains tells us that there was no R1b in Europe more than about 4,600 years ago.

    Hence, as Stevo wrote, "The climate in Western Europe is the climate in Western Europe. It has little bearing on people who are not there at the time." If the DNA results are right in telling us that there was no R1b in Europe before 4,600 years ago, the European climate before that time has nothing to do with R1b, since it wasn't there then!

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    Who are you to to tell me what I should and should not say? I know who you are and where you come from.
    Why don't you calm down? Some people might take your words that I bolded as a threat, whether you meant it that way or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • ironroad41
    replied
    Originally posted by Stevo View Post
    What does that mean? Are you saying Hubert is not a competent source on the Beaker Folk? Hubert wrote back in the early 20th century. He had nothing to say about dna, but what he said about archaeology and linguistics is still valuable. The point of the quote from him was to provide information on the Beaker Folk in the British Isles, information which is still valid.

    The climate in Western Europe is the climate in Western Europe. It has little bearing on people who are not there at the time.
    As you know DNA as we understand it only began about 50 years ago, and 20 to 30 years ago if you are talking about the properties of the Y Chromosome.

    I can look at almost any DNA paper prior to 2000 and probably find errors in it. There simply wasn't enough data to make a statement about what is or isn't in this field.

    Your comment about climate is a little inane. I look at Climate at a major force in population displacements! The whole Neolithic movement into western Europe was probably due to shift of the Trade winds south c. 5K BC and which dried up the Sahara, moderated Southern Europe and cooled down northern Europe a tad. I think there is a little argument that changes in climate affect food production and water availability which are both necessary for human life to exist and thrive.

    A good knowledge of climactic conditions over the Millenia is very helpful in understanding population movements.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by marietta View Post
    1798: Please do not disrespect MMaddi. He is one of our most knowledgeable and valuable contributors who gives generously of his time to this forum. Thank you.
    He gives his opinions the same as I and others. He is not right about a lot of stuff but he writes as if he is.He should also show me a bit of respect. I didn't have to get dna tested nor even make my results public.Some people are crying out for people born in Ireland to dna test and then when they do they try to tell them that they have the wrong dna because it doesn't fit in with their ideology.
    Who are you to to tell me what I should and should not say? I know who you are and where you come from.

    Leave a comment:


  • Biblioteque
    replied
    1798: Please do not disrespect MMaddi. He is one of our most knowledgeable and valuable contributors who gives generously of his time to this forum. Thank you.
    Last edited by Biblioteque; 13 June 2014, 12:50 PM. Reason: spell

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    What lab do you work in?
    I don't need to state my credentials. I wasn't the one who made an incorrect statement about getting a result for U106 but not M269 in SNP testing. You are the one who did.

    Stevo answered your objection in his post, just before mine. As he pointed out, individual SNPs can be tested for - it's not necessary to get a result for M269 in order to get a result for U106.

    It's well-known that ancient DNA has been degraded to one degree or another and sometimes one location on a chromosome will get a clear result, but another location on the same chromosome will get a no-call. In fact, that happens with DNA from living people. A test like 23andMe or Family Finder will get a very small percentage of no-calls at some locations. DNA from ancient remains will have even more no-calls.
    Last edited by MMaddi; 13 June 2014, 12:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
    I didn't know that you're a technician in a DNA testing lab. You write as if you know something about that. In which lab do you work?
    What lab do you work in?

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    They couldn't get a clear M269 result but they could get a clear U106 result. LOL
    I didn't know that you're a technician in a DNA testing lab. You write as if you know something about that. In which lab do you work?

    Leave a comment:


  • Stevo
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    They couldn't get a clear M269 result but they could get a clear U106 result. LOL
    What is it about that you do not understand?

    It is not necessary to reconstruct the entire genome of a set of remains in phylogenetic order to be able to test for one specific SNP like U106 and get a clear result.

    In other words, simply because M269 is well upstream of U106 does not mean one must have a clear M269 result in order to be able to get a clear U106 result.

    If it were necessary, a la carte SNP testing would be impossible.

    One set of remains was clearly M269+ and U106-. The other set was clearly M343+ and U106-.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X