Haplogroups

Cont. from the Dagestan thread ()

>Going by haplogroups, the British are more similar to Spaniards than they are to Austrians or Poles
NOPE. The map in question just wasn't detailed enough. Pic related is.
>It doesn't matter that Serbians have only a minute amount of G, because again, haplogroups are very misleading.
You still haven't provided any proof that Serbia (or the Balkans except albos), have any kind of Caucasus admixture. If it didn't arrive patrilineally (Y-DNA Haplogroup G), then it must've arrived matrilineally, i.e. mtDNA, because there simply isn't a third option.

Attached: Haplogroup-R1b-S21.gif (800x546, 84K)

Here's the Serbian Haplogroup J2b, a completely different subclade from the J2 in Caucasus.

Attached: Distribution-of-haplogroup-J2b-M102-in-Europe-the-Middle-East-North-Africa.png (800x581, 87K)

>still haven't provided any proof that Serbia (or the Balkans except albos), have any kind of Caucasus admixture. If it didn't arrive patrilineally (Y-DNA
The only "Serbs" that can have subhuman armenoid caucasus blood are those that mixed with gayreek sandnigger mulattoes during Byzant occupation and (((Serbofication)))

Normal Serb is Slav + Illyrian/Danubian + sometimes Vlach/Hungarian/Romanian

And here's the main Caucasus Haplogroup G, as I said, not any more common in Serbia than anywhere else in Europe.
We're not Caucasians, and we're not related Caucasians any more than anyone else in Europe, regardless of how much we look alike (or not, if you look close enough).

Attached: Haplogroup_G2a.gif (760x550, 56K)

Hey, I don't mind keeping it going. I was going to post this before the thread got archived:

See this graph here?
(originally posted by:)
See the pale-red color? That's Caucasian admixture (dark blue is Nordic/Steppe, light blue is Mediterranean Neolithic, gold is Arabian, yellow is Siberian. Not sure about the pea-green). Serbians are like 25% Caucasian, plus whatever the Caucasian component is among your steppe admixture (not sure about the number, it varies from time and place. "Nordic/steppe is actually a combo of euro hunter-gatherer, caucasian, andancestral north eurasian).

Attached: admx.jpg (320x320, 30K)

>See the pale-red color? That's Caucasian admixture
That's your interpretation. Why don't you post the full pic? It's from the study "Standing at the Gateway to Europe - The Genetic Structure of Western Balkan Populations Based on Autosomal and Haploid Markers". Whatever "Caucasus" may mean, it cannot be anything else but a very distant relation, +10.000 years ago, because as you can see, France has a significant "Caucasus" admixture too, and it's on the other end of Europe, absolutely impossible to have any genetic relation.

Attached: ADMIXTURE-analysis-of-autosomal-SNPs-of-the-Western-Balkan-region-in-a-global-context-on.png (850x333, 169K)

Does all this matter? If you’re European, you’re white.

Caucasians aren't European, as you can see in .
OP is accusing us of being related to Caucasians and therefore less European, which we aren't.

>OP
I mean this guy

As for haplogroups, they have little relation to a persons genetic makeup. For example, let's say that you had a R1b Englishman move to an uninhabited island off the coast of China where he married a Chinese woman. They had 3 children, and all of those children and all of their children married Chinese people who came to the island from the mainland. After 100 generations, the population of the island would be like 99.9999999999% Chinese genetically, but all of his male descendants would still have the R1b lineage.

>They had 3 children, and all of those children and all of their children married Chinese people who came to the island from the mainland. After 100 generations, the population of the island would be like 99.9999999999% Chinese genetically, but all of his male descendants would still have the R1b lineage.
Yes, but your fantasy scenarios don't happen IRL and with large populations, therefore Haplogroups absolutely do matter.

if somebody 'accusing' you in being less European bothers you so much, you were probably somewhat insecure from the very beginning

just be a decent man, love your culture and support other cultures that you feel affinity with.

I couldn't give a flying fuck about beign European or Asian. I'm just proud to be Georgian, Caucasian and orthodox christian. that's enough for me and some random russians larping doesn't bother me at all

of course, Serbians are pure europeans. if serbs aren't pure euros, then pure euros don't exist

I didn't post the original pic, I'm just reposting what Georgia-flag user posted. And that enlarged pic, if anything, just corroborates what I'm saying.

>Whatever "Caucasus" may mean

It means a distinct genetic signature which has its highest level in the caucasus, but which is nevertheless dispersed across a wide area... including about 12% in France.

That graph is FAR more instructive for determining relations than anything to do with haplogroups. (although some of these components are more similar than they are to others, for instance light red and light blue are MUCH closer to each other than either is to yellow or brown).

I'm not saying that you are "less" anything. You are Serbian, and that's what matters. Trying to create some kind of pan-identity that accommodates everyone equally will never work.

You and Caucasians are Europeans. I don’t care what these unreliable graphs say. If your ancestry is from within the borders of modern Europe, you are European.

Ancient migrations were often very small affairs, possibly involving only hundreds of even dozens of people.

In short: Haplogroups are a meme

does this map suggest a former landmass where the 30-40% or is it all just boat travel
it seems a little too lined up and around a central area under the north sea. boat travel in my mind would produce a more sporadic pattern and more evenly distributed along the coasts rather than the centralized areas where the 30-40% groups are most prominent

Doggerland (North Sea landmass) became submerged WAY before the arrival or R1b-carrying Indo-European people. The Pre-IE Britons were almost completely replaced (~90%) by continentals around 2,500 BC. None of these images should be taken as complete fact. also, keep in mind that OPs image only shows a specific R1b subclade.

Research Doggerland.

There USED to be a real place there, but the land is sunken now...

>bothers you so much, you were probably somewhat insecure
I have no insecurities. I'm from the part of Montenegro that was never under Ottoman rule, I'm 6'7, Jow Forums, I look like the Illyrian Emperors of old. I traced my heritage on all sides, all good, heroic families, some even noble. I'm as certain of my heritage as anyone can be, and I like it very much, that's why I won't be accused of being a foreigner.
>It means a distinct genetic signature
Yes, but how old is it? 50,000 years, 20,000 years? If it's that old it's irrelevant.
>highest level in the caucasus
>including about 12% in France
No part of me is from the Caucasus, and neither is 12% of France.
>Haplogroups are a meme
They're hard proofs of patrilineal ancestry. It's not possible for a population to have significantly different genetics from it's forefathers, unless a small group of men managed to out-compete a much larger group of natives, generation after generation, always taking their women. It's a fantasy scenario.
>Ancient migrations were often very small affairs
What does that have to do with anything? If these populations grew over the millennia then so did their genetic material and their haplogroups in equal measure.
You're an idiot, trying to build and argument around a cropped image you yourself don't understand to draw some political conclusion (?).

>Yes, but how old is it? 50,000 years, 20,000 years? If it's that old it's irrelevant.

It probably arrives in the Balkans sometime between 3,000 BC and 1,000 BC. Perhaps earlier, but definitely not earlier than 6,000 BC. Perhaps someone on here more familiar with the period between the Mesolithic-Iron Age can chime in.

>No part of me is from the Caucasus, and neither is 12% of France.

A large part of your ancestry (25% according to that graph, plus whatever is hidden in your steppe ancestry) is part of the Caucasian genetic signature. This is just a fact. Nobody is "pure." All populations are a composite of older groups.

French people are about 12% differentiated Caucasian, plus about another 15% due to their steppe ancestry. Not even people living in the Caucasus are pure Caucasian.

>They're hard proofs of patrilineal ancestry. It's not possible for a population to have significantly different genetics from it's forefathers

Haplogroups aren't genes, they're chromosomal markers.

>What does that have to do with anything? If these populations grew over the millennia then so did their genetic material and their haplogroups in equal measure.

Yes, they grow over millennia, usually incorporating genetic material from nearby populations. so if a group of men settle a far off land, and their male descendants continue to have reproductive success, their descendants will still carry their Y-chromosome markers, even though genetically they will resemble nearby peoples rather than their old-country ancestors.

Haplogroups are a useful tool for studying migrations and the diffusion of languages and culture, but they are not a useful tool for determining the genetic makeup of a people. Jow Forums-tards constantly spam haplogroup maps thinking that they constitute some kind of "proof," but the fact is that they are, again, just a meme.

see: