Were the Kurds and Kurdish Horses the bad Guys of Prehistory

[Kurdistano]

I already stated pre-indo-european is native. And where did you get 85% percent from? My mcdonald's certainly doesn't show that, I'#m plotted more eastern, showing my iranic component. Along with dodecad. Anyway the strong and persistant Irano-Nordoid tedencies in those regions.

Jmmuneer are this your results?

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10747&start=15#p88496


Even according to this results you are at least 85% native West Southwest Asian (Med+West Asian+ Southwest Asian).

But this results are based on dodecad v3 which is based on higher Ks and not very accurate. If you use K7b or K10b which is based on ,lower Ks you will even see that you are approximately 90% of native components.

Also dont forget that the Proto Indo-Europeans are natives of Western Asia, only the Indo-Iranian and Slavic branches are believed to have developed in the steppes.

Lol you don't know anything about Dodecad's calcualtor do you? West asian includes indo-Iranian, so I'm really not "85% native". Plus south-west asian is possibly Semitic/caucasian influence. The fact of the matter is the proto-indo Iranians were western eurasian, mostly with a signficant north european component to them. This ovbiously changed when they came into contact with southern western asians. And just look at my mcdonald's plot if you don't believe me.

Dude are you kidding me? 90% of what you know about those components, calculators you have learned from me. Do you have some issues because you often write really senseless things! Who said that West Asian is not a native component of Indo-Iranians too? BUT THIS component originated in West Asia this is why it is called WEST ASIAN.

And how do you want to know which part of your West Asian genetic component is from Indo-Iranian and which from other West Asian sources if they are identical because there is a historically known connection between West and Central Asia.

[jjmuneer]

I don't recall you ever discussing Dodecad or 23andme from me, actually you predicted my haplogroup based on my phenotype, which is un-scientific.

Anyway there is no "central asia", because the west asian component is older than the central asian one. The fact Turkmens and Tajikis score a very high "persian" and "west asian" component proves that, I mean the only other way to be certain is dig up some ancient skulls and find out, but that is impratical.

The connection of west and central asia? Do you mean in terms of genetics or geographics? Because genetically there hasn't "always been conenctions". I mean it only really started with the Eurasian nomads(Indo-Iranian), that migration was from central asia, not to. Thats where I believe minor mongoloid in Kurds is found, because of Indo-Iranian contact with Turkic and uralic tribes.

By the way I never stated you didn't state Indo-Iranians weren't considered as a "west asian" component, but I think your getting confused. I'm talking about the calculator on Dodecad, which is different to that of 'DNA tribes'. I jsut wanted to make a distinction, so need to rage because I stated something. If you want to refute me, do it with facts and sources. Kurdistano I bet you think Indo-Iranians were all pure and 100% west asian, the fact of the matter is they aren't. They most likely had a strong North European component from being in Eastern Europe 1500-1000 prior to being in central asia. You see that in today, Kurds ahev a small North Euro component, but central asia Iranic groups also do have a slightly higher one.

[thesunchild]

The connection of west and central asia? Do you mean in terms of genetics or geographics? Because genetically there hasn't "always been conenctions". I mean it only really started with the Eurasian nomads(Indo-Iranian), that migration was from central asia, not to. Thats where I believe minor mongoloid in Kurds is found, because of Indo-Iranian contact with Turkic and uralic tribes.

What are you talking about? Even a part of a country called 'Iran' is in Central Asia.'

The interaction between West and Central Asia is and was the same as an interaction between West and Central Europe.

Central Asia is like a backyard of West Asia.

[jjmuneer]

The connection of west and central asia? Do you mean in terms of genetics or geographics? Because genetically there hasn't "always been conenctions". I mean it only really started with the Eurasian nomads(Indo-Iranian), that migration was from central asia, not to. Thats where I believe minor mongoloid in Kurds is found, because of Indo-Iranian contact with Turkic and uralic tribes.

What are you talking about? Even a part of a country called 'Iran' is in Central Asia.'

The interaction between West and Central Asia is and was the same as an interaction between West and Central Europe.

Central Asia is like a backyard of West Asia.

And which populations were occupying central asia pre-indo-european migrations? If they interacted or migrated to west asia pre-indo-european, how would you distuingish what marker they were?

[thesunchild]

The connection of west and central asia? Do you mean in terms of genetics or geographics? Because genetically there hasn't "always been conenctions". I mean it only really started with the Eurasian nomads(Indo-Iranian), that migration was from central asia, not to. Thats where I believe minor mongoloid in Kurds is found, because of Indo-Iranian contact with Turkic and uralic tribes.

What are you talking about? Even a part of a country called 'Iran' is in Central Asia.'

The interaction between West and Central Asia is and was the same as an interaction between West and Central Europe.

Central Asia is like a backyard of West Asia.

And which populations were occupying central asia pre-indo-european migrations? If they interacted or migrated to west asia pre-indo-european, how would you distuingish what marker they were?

folks that belonged to Y-DNA hg. L, R1a, R2a, G-something etc.

[jjmuneer]

Do you have any evidence to suggest they were G and L in haplogroup? And who were these people exactly? You still haven't answered my second question, how would you distuingish bewteen the so called pre indo-european invading central asians(which no evidence) or the indo-european central asians? What race would they of been exactly? Caucasoid, Mongoloid?

[thesunchild]

Do you have any evidence to suggest they were G and L in haplogroup? And who were these people exactly? You still haven't answered my second question, how would you distuingish bewteen the so called pre indo-european invading central asians(which no evidence) or the indo-european central asians? What race would they of been exactly? Caucasoid, Mongoloid?

Well, just look to the haplogroup distribution of Tajikistan and Afghanistan. There's lots of native y-DNA haplogroups 'R2a', 'R1a', 'L' etc.

Also there's more West Asian haplogroups, like Y-DNA J2a etc. in central areas and not peripheral areas in central Asia, which means that J2a migrated into Central Asia together with important people.

[thesunchild]

[thesunchild]

also:

[jjmuneer]

Do you have any evidence to suggest they were G and L in haplogroup? And who were these people exactly? You still haven't answered my second question, how would you distuingish bewteen the so called pre indo-european invading central asians(which no evidence) or the indo-european central asians? What race would they of been exactly? Caucasoid, Mongoloid?

Well, just look to the haplogroup distribution of Tajikistan and Afghanistan. There's lots of native y-DNA haplogroups R2a, R1a, L etc.

Also there's more West Asian haplogroups, like Y-DNA J2a etc. in central areas and not peripheral areas in central Asia, which means that J2a migrated into Central Asia together with important people.

That doesn't mean or indicate is was a result of the Indo-Iranians, no study on the Y-dna of remains in the Andronovo region show J2a. J2a probably got to those regions later. And Y-dna doesn't mean anything, or doesn't really show genetic make-up compared to autsomal DNA. There are black Americans with R1b, probably a result of rape, but the point is their autosmal DNA will still mostly remain African, with minor European admix. Same goes for indo-Iranians.
I really doubt R1a-z93 is native to central asia, the indo-iranians probably brought it there. No doubt R1 or R2 is native to Asia, but R1a-z83 or 93 were orginally haplogroups as a desinigator for the indo-iranains. I mean R1a-z83 is proto-Slavic, whilst a later subslade R1a-z93 emerged in central asia, it only makes sense their orginis were in near the proto-slavic homeland. Hence they carry a Northern European component with a mostly a West Eurasian component. That is the thing you have to realise, all Indo-European peoples or Proto-indo-Europeans were a West Eurasian people. It is only logical considering all Indo-European descended populations in Europe have the same amount of West Asian admix as Iranic people have the same amount of Northern Euro admix.

[thesunchild]

Do you have any evidence to suggest they were G and L in haplogroup? And who were these people exactly? You still haven't answered my second question, how would you distuingish bewteen the so called pre indo-european invading central asians(which no evidence) or the indo-european central asians? What race would they of been exactly? Caucasoid, Mongoloid?

Well, just look to the haplogroup distribution of Tajikistan and Afghanistan. There's lots of native y-DNA haplogroups R2a, R1a, L etc.

Also there's more West Asian haplogroups, like Y-DNA J2a etc. in central areas and not peripheral areas in central Asia, which means that J2a migrated into Central Asia together with important people.

That doesn't mean or indicate is was a result of the Indo-Iranians, no study on the Y-dna of remains in the Andronovo region show J2a. J2a probably got to those regions later. And Y-dna doesn't mean anything, or doesn't really show genetic make-up compared to autsomal DNA. There are black Americans with R1b, probably a result of rape, but the point is their autosmal DNA will still mostly remain African, with minor European admix. Same goes for indo-Iranians.
I really doubt R1a-z93 is native to central asia, the indo-iranians probably brought it there. No doubt R1 or R2 is native to Asia, but R1a-z83 or 93 were orginally haplogroups as a desinigator for the indo-iranains. I mean R1a-z83 is proto-Slavic, whilst a later subslade R1a-z93 emerged in central asia, it only makes sense their orginis were in near the proto-slavic homeland. Hence they carry a Northern European component with a mostly a West Eurasian component. That is the thing you have to realise, all Indo-European peoples or Proto-indo-Europeans were a West Eurasian people. It is only logical considering all Indo-European descended populations in Europe have the same amount of West Asian admix as Iranic people have the same amount of Northern Euro admix.

No according to this study R1a in Central Asia is just native to Central Asia (or even West Asia) and it's not from the Eastern Europe.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ad ... ne.0034288

I don't understand you. West Asian aDNA component is also West Eurasian. Also there's a lot J2a in east European countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria etc.

According to anti-Anatolian-origin-of-Indo-Europeans folks, J2a migrated into the Central Asia in the Neolithic times. But I do agree with you that R1a was in Central Asia before J2a!

[jjmuneer]

No according to this study R1a in Central Asia is just native to Central Asia (or even West Asia) and it's not from the Eastern Europe.

It doesn't state anything of the sort, it only talks about the central asia populations. And backs me up by saying R1a1a is higher in Tajikis and Pashtuns, although it forgot to mention Turkmens who also have R1a1a.

I don't understand you. West Asian aDNA component is also West Eurasian. Also there's a lot J2a in east European countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria etc.

You don't understand what?
I never stated westn asian or west-eurasian is different, but there is East Eurasian which is more a mix of mongoloid and caucasoid groups.
There is J2a in Europe, but its more South-eastern Europe and it is not a result of indo-Europeans, but Neolthic expansions from West asia into Europe. It would be illogical for the Proto Indo-Europeans to be R1a1a and frankly spread so little R1a1a in South-eastern Europe, then spread it at extremely high frequencies in Eastern Europe.

According to anti-Anatolian-origin-of-Indo-Europeans folks, J2a migrated into the Central Asia in the Neolithic times. But I do agree with you that R1a was Central Asia before J2a!

And what other theory states otherwise?

[thesunchild]

No according to this study R1a in Central Asia is just native to Central Asia (or even West Asia) and it's not from the Eastern Europe.

It doesn't state anything of the sort, it only talks about the central asia populations. And backs me up by saying R1a1a is higher in Tajikis and Pashtuns, although it forgot to mention Turkmens who also have R1a1a.

I don't understand you. West Asian aDNA component is also West Eurasian. Also there's a lot J2a in east European countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria etc.

You don't understand what?
I never stated westn asian or west-eurasian is different, but there is East Eurasian which is more a mix of mongoloid and caucasoid groups.
There is J2a in Europe, but its more South-eastern Europe and it is not a result of indo-Europeans, but Neolthic expansions from West asia into Europe. It would be illogical for the Proto Indo-Europeans to be R1a1a and frankly spread so little R1a1a in South-eastern Europe, then spread it at extremely high frequencies in Eastern Europe.

According to anti-Anatolian-origin-of-Indo-Europeans folks, J2a migrated into the Central Asia in the Neolithic times. But I do agree with you that R1a was Central Asia before J2a!

And what other theory states otherwise?

Page 6 of this study: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ad ... ne.0034288

"The prevailing Y-chromosome lineage in Pashtun and Tajik (R1a1a-M17), has the highest observed diversity among populations of the Indus Valley [46]. R1a1a-M17 diversity declines toward the Pontic-Caspian steppe where the mid-Holocene R1a1a7-M458 sublineage is dominant [46]. R1a1a7-M458 was absent in Afghanistan, suggesting that R1a1a-M17 does not support, as previously thought [47], expansions from the Pontic Steppe [3], bringing the Indo-European languages to Central Asia and India."



? South Eastern Europeans are also Indo-European. It's an ancient marker of the ancient Indo-European groups in Europe like the greatest of them all, the Romans and the Greeks.

[jjmuneer]

"The prevailing Y-chromosome lineage in Pashtun and Tajik (R1a1a-M17), has the highest observed diversity among populations of the Indus Valley [46]. R1a1a-M17 diversity declines toward the Pontic-Caspian steppe where the mid-Holocene R1a1a7-M458 sublineage is dominant [46]. R1a1a7-M458 was absent in Afghanistan, suggesting that R1a1a-M17 does not support, as previously thought [47], expansions from the Pontic Steppe [3], bringing the Indo-European languages to Central Asia and India."

This article contridicts it self, if R1a1a7 is absent in Afghanistan, doesn't mean it wasn't around in there rest of central asia. And there is no proof of Proto Indo-Europeans migrating from central asia to Europe. Even so, it doesn't explain why Lithuanian and eastern Slavonic languages are one the most Archaic indo-Europeans languages, well along with Sanskrit.

? South Eastern Europeans are also Indo-European. It's an ancient marker of the ancient Indo-European groups in Europe like the greatest of them all, the Romans and the Greeks.

indo-European isn't a race, it's a linguistic group something you fail to realise. Even being of the same paternal HG, doesn't mean you'd be of the same phenotype. Indo-Europeans were mostly of a Nordic phenotype, and in central asia of an Irano-Nordoid or Lighter Iranid phenotype.
No study has ever stated J2a is an indo-European marker, only you have.
Romans and Greeks are mostly R1b, and Greeks do have J2a, but that isn't indo-European haplogroup or marker.

[thesunchild]

"The prevailing Y-chromosome lineage in Pashtun and Tajik (R1a1a-M17), has the highest observed diversity among populations of the Indus Valley [46]. R1a1a-M17 diversity declines toward the Pontic-Caspian steppe where the mid-Holocene R1a1a7-M458 sublineage is dominant [46]. R1a1a7-M458 was absent in Afghanistan, suggesting that R1a1a-M17 does not support, as previously thought [47], expansions from the Pontic Steppe [3], bringing the Indo-European languages to Central Asia and India."

This article contridicts it self, if R1a1a7 is absent in Afghanistan, doesn't mean it wasn't around in there rest of central asia. And there is no proof of Proto Indo-Europeans migrating from central asia to Europe. Even so, it doesn't explain why Lithuanian and eastern Slavonic languages are one the most Archaic indo-Europeans languages, well along with Sanskrit.

? South Eastern Europeans are also Indo-European. It's an ancient marker of the ancient Indo-European groups in Europe like the greatest of them all, the Romans and the Greeks.

indo-European isn't a race, it's a linguistic group something you fail to realise. Even being of the same paternal HG, doesn't mean you'd be of the same phenotype. Indo-Europeans were mostly of a Nordic phenotype, and in central asia of an Irano-Nordoid or Lighter Iranid phenotype.
No study has ever stated J2a is an indo-European marker, only you have.
Romans and Greeks are mostly R1b, and Greeks do have J2a, but that isn't indo-European haplogroup or marker.

What's your problem man? And there's no real 'proof' that Proto Indo-European is from Eastern Europe!

I never claimed that Indo-European is a race terminology. But according to me this linguistic group was born in West Asia among J2a community and spread into Central Asia and Europe.