Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eurogenes K13 and K15 4-Ancestors Oracle

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

  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by N21163 View Post
    He wasn't talking about either one of these points.
    Either you were trying to be funny (and it fell flat) or you did not pick up on the sarcasm. Either way you missed the point.



    Ok I'll play...

    What is it that you think you know about these calculators that the calculator creators don't?

    You seem to believe that because one calculator fits your ancestry that it works for everyone else. It doesn't work like that.

    To paraphrase one of MMaddi's previous questions that wasn't addressed:

    What is the point of getting ancient DNA if you think that present day sample populations can accurately demonstrate the admixture of ancient populations?

    Using Lochsbour as a sample and comparing it to modern day Lithuanians will tell you far more than trying to do it the other way around.

    Clovis F999919 K15
    Population
    North_Sea 0.95%
    Atlantic 0.14%
    Baltic 0.08%
    Eastern_Euro 3.52%
    West_Med -
    West_Asian -
    East_Med -
    Red_Sea -
    South_Asian -
    Southeast_Asian 1.63%
    Siberian 4.58%
    Amerindian 88.51%
    Oceanian 0.34%
    Northeast_African 0.26%
    Sub-Saharan -

    1 Anzick-1 + Pima + Pima + Pima @ 2.099648

    Clovis was a NA. Is this not correct? K15 looks okay to me but it may need a little tweaking.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by Subwoofer View Post
    As a general rule I don't get involved with arguments with trolls but Anthrogenica has a very low tolerance for that kind of behavior so they tend to get band quite quickly, as I'm sure you know : )

    BTW The fact that Mal'ta boys skin was dark is not a winning argument in any shape or form.
    Academics in Ireland don't know who exactly the Celts where or when they first came to Ireland. And then someone who is not from Ireland writes that they know the type of blood the Celts had.

    Leave a comment:


  • Subwoofer
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    If you call people names that don't agree with your theory then they have won.


    Mal'ta Boy "R" was dark skinned.

    "Blood of the Celts" is one thread that I laugh at because there are those writing stuff who haven't a clue about the Celts.
    As a general rule I don't get involved with arguments with trolls but Anthrogenica has a very low tolerance for that kind of behavior so they tend to get band quite quickly, as I'm sure you know : )

    BTW The fact that Mal'ta boys skin was dark is not a winning argument in any shape or form.

    Leave a comment:


  • N21163
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    The fact that Hinxton 4 from 2000 ybp was L21 a few posters jumped on the bandwagon. If they are so convinced that they are also Celts why did not post their gedmatch autosomal results to show that they are close to H4?
    What has any of this got to do with any of the questions in my previous post?

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by N21163 View Post
    He wasn't talking about either one of these points.
    Either you were trying to be funny (and it fell flat) or you did not pick up on the sarcasm. Either way you missed the point.



    Ok I'll play...

    What is it that you think you know about these calculators that the calculator creators don't?

    You seem to believe that because one calculator fits your ancestry that it works for everyone else. It doesn't work like that.

    To paraphrase one of MMaddi's previous questions that wasn't addressed:

    What is the point of getting ancient DNA if you think that present day sample populations can accurately demonstrate the admixture of ancient populations?

    Using Lochsbour as a sample and comparing it to modern day Lithuanians will tell you far more than trying to do it the other way around.
    The fact that Hinxton 4 from 2000 ybp was L21 a few posters jumped on the bandwagon. If they are so convinced that they are also Celts why did not post their gedmatch autosomal results to show that they are close to H4?
    Last edited by 1798; 20 April 2015, 04:33 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Naughtius
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    If you call people names that don't agree with your theory then they have won.


    Mal'ta Boy "R" was dark skinned.

    "Blood of the Celts" is one thread that I laugh at because there are those writing stuff who haven't a clue about the Celts.
    Please elaborate.

    Leave a comment:


  • N21163
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    So what you are saying is that the whole modern Lithuanian population came from western Europe or 50% of the modern western European population came from Lithuania.
    He wasn't talking about either one of these points.
    Either you were trying to be funny (and it fell flat) or you did not pick up on the sarcasm. Either way you missed the point.

    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    It is you that is not able to understand the calculator results and you are not on your own in that respect. It seems to me that even those who create the calculators can't even understand them.
    Ok I'll play...

    What is it that you think you know about these calculators that the calculator creators don't?

    You seem to believe that because one calculator fits your ancestry that it works for everyone else. It doesn't work like that.

    To paraphrase one of MMaddi's previous questions that wasn't addressed:

    What is the point of getting ancient DNA if you think that present day sample populations can accurately demonstrate the admixture of ancient populations?

    Using Lochsbour as a sample and comparing it to modern day Lithuanians will tell you far more than trying to do it the other way around.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by Subwoofer View Post
    Oh there are jokers on all forums that's for sure. I don't tend to bother with eurogene's that much but anthrogenica has a wide range of talent going all the way up to true experts but has a lot of knowledgeable and enthusiastic amateurs, unfortunately it's suffering from undue attention of trolls at the moment who seem to have crept out from under their bridges in an effort to create noise and confusion after the Haak paper.

    That said for giggles this thread is heard to beat : )
    If you call people names that don't agree with your theory then they have won.


    Mal'ta Boy "R" was dark skinned.

    "Blood of the Celts" is one thread that I laugh at because there are those writing stuff who haven't a clue about the Celts.
    Last edited by 1798; 20 April 2015, 03:35 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    If you want a really good laugh you could read some of the eurogene's and anthrogenica blog posts.
    Translation from 1798-speak: The posters at those forums don't agree with my firmly held (but agenda-driven) beliefs. Therefore, I laugh at them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Subwoofer
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    If you want a really good laugh you could read some of the eurogene's and anthrogenica blog posts.
    Oh there are jokers on all forums that's for sure. I don't tend to bother with eurogene's that much but anthrogenica has a wide range of talent going all the way up to true experts but has a lot of knowledgeable and enthusiastic amateurs, unfortunately it's suffering from undue attention of trolls at the moment who seem to have crept out from under their bridges in an effort to create noise and confusion after the Haak paper.

    That said for giggles this thread is heard to beat : )

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by Subwoofer View Post
    Fairplay we really get our money's worth out of you. Nice to have a chuckle first thing Monday morning, thanks : )))
    If you want a really good laugh you could read some of the eurogene's and anthrogenica blog posts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Subwoofer
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    It seems to me that even those who create the calculators can't even understand them.
    Fairplay we really get our money's worth out of you. Nice to have a chuckle first thing Monday morning, thanks : )))

    Leave a comment:


  • 1798
    replied
    Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
    Oh right, the present day Lithuanian people have remained in place since the Mesolithic period, so it's entirely accurate on your part to describe the ancient DNA results from Lochsbour as "50% Lithuanian." NOT!

    That's my snarky way of stating the same objection as N21163 posted just before this post. Can you tell me why you even think we need DNA from ancient remains if you think that present day populations can be used as a reference sample for the admixture of ancient populations??!! Something like a time machine or time reversal that makes modern populations appropriate to describe more ancient ones?

    Your circular reasoning and lack of scientific rigor in your thinking continue to boggle my mind. Everything is self-evident to you and all data confirms your firmly held beliefs, although it really confirms the opposite in most cases.
    So what you are saying is that the whole modern Lithuanian population came from western Europe or 50% of the modern western European population came from Lithuania. It is you that is not able to understand the calculator results and you are not on your own in that respect. It seems to me that even those who create the calculators can't even understand them.

    Leave a comment:


  • MMaddi
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    He seemed to be 50% Lithuanian so we will need a lot more ancient samples from western Europe.
    Oh right, the present day Lithuanian people have remained in place since the Mesolithic period, so it's entirely accurate on your part to describe the ancient DNA results from Lochsbour as "50% Lithuanian." NOT!

    That's my snarky way of stating the same objection as N21163 posted just before this post. Can you tell me why you even think we need DNA from ancient remains if you think that present day populations can be used as a reference sample for the admixture of ancient populations??!! Something like a time machine or time reversal that makes modern populations appropriate to describe more ancient ones?

    Your circular reasoning and lack of scientific rigor in your thinking continue to boggle my mind. Everything is self-evident to you and all data confirms your firmly held beliefs, although it really confirms the opposite in most cases.
    Last edited by MMaddi; 19 April 2015, 09:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • N21163
    replied
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    He seemed to be 50% Lithuanian....
    The Lochsbour sample is not 50% Lithuanian. The limitations of admixture calculators have been explained to you numerous times but you choose to ignore such posts.

    You are commenting on misinformation.

    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    ...so we will need a lot more ancient samples from western Europe.
    I would have thought most people would know this anyway, and you have stated this and variants numerous times already. Repeating statements such as this one will not speed up discoveries of ancient samples in Western Europe.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X