Nearly all Europeans are in fact Russians...

Domen

Misico dux Vandalorum
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
8,088
Location
Doggerland
... who colonized Europe, immigrating from Russia and Central Asia, after year 3000 BCE:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf

Discussion

In Table S4.3 we summarize results from previously studied samples of 61 ancient European and 25 ancient
Siberian/Central Asian Y-chromosomes >1,000BCE. In combination with our own results (Table
S4.2), this summary makes it clear that only a single R1b Y-chromosome has been found in 70
ancient Europeans outside Russia (1.4%) before the Late Neolithic period. In contrast, all 9 ancient
individuals (100%) from Russia belonged to haplogroups R1a and R1b, and 18/23 (78%) Bronze Age
individuals from Central Asia/Siberia belonged to haplogroup R1a. In Europe except Russia, both R1a
and R1b have been found in the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age periods for a combined frequency of
6/10 (60%). Present-day Europeans have high frequencies4,17 of haplogroups R1a and R1b.
Thus, it appears that before ~4,500 years ago, the frequency of R1a and R1b in Europe outside Russia
was very low, and it rose in the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age period. The young, star-like phylogenies
of these two haplogroups24 also suggest relatively recent expansions.
The ubiquity of these
haplogroups in Russia, Siberia, and Central Asia suggest that their rise in Europe was likely to have
been due to a migration from the east, although more work is needed to trace these migrations and
also to correlate them with regions of the world that have not yet been studied with ancient DNA
(such as southern Europe, the Caucasus, the Near East, Iran, and Central and South Asia).
Nonetheless, the Y-chromosome results suggest the same east-to-west migration as our analysis of
autosomal DNA.

So - is it time to face the truth and wave Russian flags from windows ??? :confused:

================================

More info here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=543271

================================
 
No. This is getting boring now.

Anglo Saxons, Greeks and Romans and Scandinavians etc etc etc. I don't need to say anything more.
 
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!11111111oneoneoneone. I refuse to believe.
 
Why stop at that time period? Why not just go back further to the beginning of humanity and say we are all Africans?

"All humans are in fact Africans..."
 
Why stop at that time period? Why not just go back further to the beginning of humanity and say we are all Africans?

"All humans are in fact Africans..."

Or humans are in fact humans. They are one and the same species!

Well, now I'm just being pedantic.
 
Time to believe. :lol: Modern Europeans are mostly descendants of two massive waves of immigration - one during the Early Neolithic (immigrants were Middle Eastern farmers), the other one during the Copper Age (immigrants were Russian / Central Asian herders).

"Native European" ancestry of course exists as well, but is relatively minor (we are not even as Native European as Mexicans are Native American):

attachment.php


For Ancient populations:

EN = Early Neolithic
MN = Middle Neolithic
CA = Copper Age
LN = Late Neolithic
BA = Bronze Age
EBA = Early Bronze Age
LBA = Late Bronze Age

Iceman = Ötzi the Iceman (he had only a very minor "Russian" ancestry - yet he was probably killed by those "Russian" immigrants). :)
 

Attachments

  • Ancestries.png
    Ancestries.png
    94.8 KB · Views: 861
Nearly all Europeans are demonstrably human. Film at eleven.
 
Alright, I'll play. This will probably be my only serious post in this thread however.

Why stop at that time period? Why not just go back further to the beginning of humanity and say we are all Africans?

"All humans are in fact Africans..."
All humans are Africans, but most Scandinavians are not East Asians, and most French are not Native Americans.

There can still be had serious discussions on this topic.

So - is it time to face the truth and wave Russian flags from windows ??? :confused:
Well, no. Because the people living in Caucasus, Central Asia or west of the Ural Mountains during the Copper Age would never have accepted that they were part of the same ethnicity nor polity, and they would never have recognised a concept like 'Russian'.
 
Nearly all. The Serbians are obviously not human.

And the Dutch are obviously above human.

Actually, you ain't much if you ain't Dutch (though certain exceptions apply, both ways).
 
Owen - you've just mentioned ethnicity while quoting a post in which I did not mention ethnicity, but geographic origin of migrants. :confused:

Except for two things:

1) We've known that most modern Europeans migrated from the Steppe for quite awhile.

2) The terminology is fundamentally flawed here. What does "Russians" mean? "Russia" is a very modern concept so I can almost guarantee you that no, not nearly all Europeans are in fact "Russians"

Which brings about the larger question - what is the point of this thread? What are you trying to say here? That modern Europeans migrated westward from the steppe? We already knew that. That this amazing fact is going to suddenly make people not French and German and Polish, but in fact Russian? I just don't understand what you're trying to say here.
 
And the Dutch are obviously above human.

Actually, you ain't much if you ain't Dutch (though certain exceptions apply, both ways).

What I get from this is that the biggest advantage conferred upon those who are Dutch is that Dutch happens to rhyme with much. Did I miss something?
 
Owen Glyndwr said:
1) We've known that most modern Europeans migrated from the Steppe for quite awhile.

Well, not really. Until recently most scholars maintained that Europeans are mostly a mixture of local Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and farmers who immigrated into Europe via Anatolia and the Balkan Peninsula during the Neolithic. Steppe immigration on a large scale was suggested by a 2014 study - "Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans", but this new 2015 study seems to prove that migration from the steppes was on an even larger scale (while the 2014 study maintained that immigration from the steppes contributed less ancestry than the other two populations).

That this amazing fact is going to suddenly make people not French and German and Polish, but in fact Russian?

Well, the title of this thread is modelled on Der Spiegel's statement: "the nation which most dislikes the Germans were once Krauts themselves." :)

2) The terminology is fundamentally flawed here. What does "Russians" mean?

If you want a serious answer, then perhaps a similar thing as "Europe", "the Middle East", "Anatolia", or "Australia" - a certain geographical area.
 
Back
Top Bottom