Piling wrote:I know the benefits of DNA and genetic analysis for the history of demography and migrations. If some people like you have specific ancient local mutations it shows informations about the history of your parents' region (if they are from the same place) : no much foreigners' interference, far from roads and melting pot populations, quite strictly endogamic marriages.
The markers only tell of ancient haplogroups(related mutations that are inherited together). The latest defining mutations are from 15000-8000 years ago. And it's only one small bit of your entire genome. What makes them interesting is the fact that the mutations can be given approxomite dates of their coalsence time, and then cross referenced to pre-historic and historic groups. But when you look at other tests and other parts of the DNA, kurds and overwhelming majority of people, are anything but endogamous. Rather they're a mixture of different ancestral groups inbreeding with each other over time. There are no people in the world who descend only from one pure group, perhaps amazonian indians and some isolated bantu groups.
Piling wrote:Such isolated places like Dersim or Hawraman (for example) could have such genetic results, or social/religion endogamy (like Jews). Concerning your own historical background (place/family-tribe) it can give clues. For example : all DNA tests which have similar results could be compared with non feyli Kurds in the neighborhood and with other feylis. These typology can belong to a religious group of a geographical area.
Some genetic studies do that. It's a shame that the middle-east is understudied in that regard. Most studies are from north-america and europe, and usually uniform in their results.
Piling wrote:But for a personal self identity I am not sure it means anything. A Kurd in 2013 is a Kurd, whatever his ancestral lineage could be : 2000 B.C there was no 'Kurdish people' and in 4013 A.D probably no Kurds anymore (as Europe, Middle East is an unstable area, not like China or Japan).
Obviously Kurd is mostly a social identity, not a neccesarily biological one. Even if you can isolate kurds from other groups genetically, no one obviously demands a genetic test to prove your belonging. I don't think i've ever seen anyone argue identity based purely on genetics, perhaps KKK or nazi scientists with their primitive understanding of it(who'd be embarrased about the truth). But obviously genetics plays a broader role, F.ex physical appearance. Whether you look African, European, Middle-eastern, East-asian, native american, south-asian and so on. That stuff matters.
Assuming humans survive to 4013 and progress technologically, I highly doubt ethnicity/race will be an important categorey. There will probably be entirely different categories for social identity. Who knows, maybe there will be synthetic species of cyborgs and maybe future humans discover extra terrestrial. Human technology will render todays society useless.
I love onions, especially the red sort. It's eatable to almost any dish , save for sweet ones. Middle-eastern and mediterranean food is arguably the best in the western part of eurasia.