Are Scandinavian people Euromutts?

Hail Odin.

r1b master race

So R1a Scandis are more evolved version of Slavs?Makes sense they call them subhuman niggers to me.

Why is Finland so little Viking?

Are you mentally ill? Do you not understand how yDNA and mtDNA classification works? The difference between one classification is basically a flipped or altered base pair. R1a-Z283 and R1a-Z284 evolved convergently and theere by each having a single flipped base pair at separate locations. A couple thousand years has basically no effect evolution wise. Learn how genetics work ffs.

>Learn how genetics work ffs.
Well said armchair pro
Now post Eupedia maps so we all can see how smart you are

Yes, in the same way Serbs are devolved Turks

Nice lack of any argument

>i1 is white
>r1b is white
>r1a is NOT white
>Scandinavians are NOT white

Attached: 1508851448926.png (1104x927, 56K)

So what you meant to say is that Scandinavians and Slavs had a common ancestor and evolved separately for thousands of years,and now the connection there is left is a single chromosome,which pretty much irrelevant considering there can be 99% niggers with a "European" yDNA.
Thanks for clarifying before somebody could take you seriously.

Actually it’s all very dynamic, R1a in Europe isn’t a story of single directional drift. For instance Z283/Z284 is found all over Eastern Europe too, not just Germany.

For instance I’m Ukrainian, my YDNA is R-CTS3402(R1a1a1b1a2b3) which is actually a subclaude of Z283(R1a1a1b1). Europeans are heavily mixed one one another, the relation is far more than just YDNA and MTDNA.

Source btw
isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

Fuck off turk

Kek Serbians arent even human, I met a guy who I though was some sort of Arab once and he swore he was 100% Serbian. I didn’t even know you fags were that dark

If you think thats suggesting that Europeans are mutts then you don't actually understand what you're looking at

t. haggis muncher

Attached: 71F9D7B4-9592-46B3-99A7-6711BD642AE7.jpg (1127x987, 910K)

>logical fallacy: The post
The fact of the matter is that Scandis have recent Slavic ancestors. Cope with it however you want, wont change that fact.

Euromutts, as in they have ancestry from all over Europe. Actually the UK is heavily mixed, your history consists of all sort of Europeans invading you.

>Scythians
Whats your YDNA? If you know

>Seething American replies
No surprise really,sorry James DeShawn Sturmberg but your 34% Sub-Saharan African 21% South American 45% Broad Western European Autosmal DNA ass is not white because it inherited R1b from some caveman 40k years ago.
>The fact of the matter is that Scandis have recent Slavic ancestors
>Nords received their Western Euro and Eastern Euro admixture far before the viking age.
At least try to chose which story you are selling,unless you count more than thousand years and tens of generations to be "recent"

>matching that closely to Scythian
Mate, you’re part Slavic and it’s probably really recent like last couple hundred years

Yeah, it’s I-CTS6433

Tut tut. Let's go back in time a little bit.

Because Danes came to dominate Scandinavia.

>The poo and loo got their R1a from Aryan invaders but they were then mixed with Dravidian which made them essentially subhuman therefore not relevant to this discussion.
exactly
also daily remainder that "dravidians" are australoids

"dravidian" is just a word indians use in order to avoid saying australoid

A couple thousand years is recent you dingus. Also a African that has a yDNA (or mtDNA) haplogroup obviously has a European ancestor at some point. In the same sense a European that has a certain haplogroup from a certain part of the war has a (or several) anestor from that part of the world.

You’re pretty fucking stupid if you don’t know how haplogroups work, a 99% nigger with a euro haplogroup obviously has a euro ancestor. Your essentially proved his point that scandis have slav ancestors

No slavic countries come up in my dna results. I’ve heard a few theories that scythians ad picts were the same people. I dunno how true that is.

Pic related, my haplogroup comes under “germanic”.

Attached: 1BDFFF8A-C553-460B-ABA8-55995E821C4B.png (780x572, 62K)

also haplogroups are not very accurate because of the way they are inherited

you should look at admixture charts, PCAs, F3 or g25
not that haplobullshits

Take off the proxy faggot

>vikings took foreign wives during the raids.

Attached: 5f9.jpg (1280x720, 64K)

They're not full proof in that they don't give all information since yDNA is passed from father to son only and mtDNA is passed from mother to both children. They're flawed in that they only show the male paternal line and the female maternal line. However the information they give isn't wrong, it's just incomplete. PCAs reflect that all Europeans are very closely related so there isn't much to prove.

Wrong. yDNA is only transferred from father to son. This means Slavic males took Scandinavian wives and settled in Scandinavia. If you want to see female impact on the genetic pool you would look at mtDNA, which happens to be nearly homogeneous spread throughout Europe.

Attached: mtdnamapworld.jpg (512x376, 76K)

Hell Odin

Slavic males in 2800 BC?

R1a males, but R1a has Yamanya origins which is also Scythian/Slavic origins. It's a modern day comparison. It would be the same case of if a Scandinavian had a N haplogroup, it would be obvious they have Finnish/Ugric origins no matter how long ago it was introduced.

i know, that's what i was saying
it's not that haplogroups are not correct, but they were never intended to be used to determine admixture like POLtards do

tone of negroes in the USA with only 20% white admixture or even less are R1b or other european haplogroups

The viking raids were between 793 and 1066 stupid chink

Happlogroups and DNA give a lot of information about the distant past. But to me it's cold information. I rather dig into genealogy and find out (as far as possible) who were my ancestors.
Also, R1b is master race

Attached: r1b.png (800x628, 115K)

>Yamanya origins which is also Scythian/Slavic origins
Which one is it? Why don't we consider it Ukrainian/Karelian forager male speaking oogabooga?

I don't think you have the IQ for this discussion, my little small tiny non-white friend.

No,as i said they have a common ancestor,neither "Slavs" no"Nordics" existed in 3700 BC,and thousands of years means tens if not a hundred generations to mix with the native inhabitants.Now a half nigger is 50% European 50% African,his son if mixed with another black will be 75% African and 25% European.Now that is only 2 generations,think about what tens of generations of mixing do(which OP claims is relatively short),and of course Europe was inhabited before the R1a migration.
Now yes,the niggers have European ancestors,but can you call them "european"?I think not.
Or would you call a group 100 niggers with,33 of them having a single European ancestor ten generations ago 1/3 European,the same way OP calls Scandinavians 1/3 Slavic merely because of R1a?
Probably not.
So yes Scandinavians and Slavs do have a common ancestor(all humans according to scientist do as well),but do Scandis have 1/3 Slavic admixture because 1/3 of their yDNa is R1a?The very idea is laughable.

a 99% nigger with an european haplogroup has europ ancestor, but he is still a 99% nigger, hence almost all of his ancestors were black, because as you said he's 99% black

hence haploshits should not be used to determine admixture

You can consider it that if you want, it isnt exactly relevant though.

Oh, so you get to sit there and say which modern group has the copyrights to common ancestors?

>Poland
The true aryan race

Because it was invaded by mongols and denmark didn't touch finland