posted 19 January 2005 07:08 AM            

Is there any non-political reason, why M168 is known as the "Eurasian Adam"?

The excerpt says that the majority of Africans came from M168, so does this mean that there is an African group that is not included in M168?

"Some M35-bearing people migrated into Egypt, where they seem to have been among the earliest inhabitants. This provides evidence that you may be genetically linked to the Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which flourished between about 3,300 B.C. and 30 B.C. Others travelled towards eastern Africa, where M35 is today carried by almost half of Ethiopian men. Between around 30,000 and 10,000 years ago, people carrying M35 arrived in the Maghreb, the NW African region loosely centred on Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco.
Their genetic legacy still appears in some 75% of NW African men, being particularly prominent in Berber tribes. During the Moorish conquests of Iberia (A.D. 711 – A.D. 1492), Berber warriors almost
certainly carried M35 north across the Strait of Gibraltar, and it is found today in approximately 5% of southern Iberian men."

Wouldn't this mean the Ethiopoid physical features of today are actually indigenous? The M35 did originate in Africa, which means that they are tropically adapted. This means the original M35 Humans were Ethiopian looking, which makes sense.

Caucasians = M201, have a different marker than the M20 = Indus population, hence there is no way that these people are Caucasian in any way.

"M35 is also associated with the spread of agriculture out of the Near
Eastern “Fertile Crescent” (modern-day Israel, Syria, SE Turkey and
Iraq)."

posted 19 January 2005 07:20 AM            

quote:

---

Is there any non-political reason, why M168 is known as the "Eurasian Adam"?

---

quote:

---

"Some M35-bearing people migrated into Egypt, where they seem to have been among the earliest inhabitants. This provides evidence that you may be genetically linked to the Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which flourished between about 3,300 B.C. and 30 B.C. Others travelled towards eastern Africa, where M35 is today carried by almost half of Ethiopian men. Between around 30,000 and 10,000 years ago, people carrying M35 arrived in the Maghreb, the NW African region loosely centred on Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco.
Their genetic legacy still appears in some 75% of NW African men, being particularly prominent in Berber tribes. During the Moorish conquests of Iberia (A.D. 711 – A.D. 1492), Berber warriors almost
certainly carried M35 north across the Strait of Gibraltar, and it is found today in approximately 5% of southern Iberian men."

Wouldn't this mean the Ethiopoid physical features of today are actually indigenous? The M35 did originate in Africa, which means that they are tropically adapted. This means the original M35 Humans were Ethiopian looking, which makes sense.

---

Correct. It is critical to note that E3b and E3a are 'modern' haplotypes. That is, they originate in tropical Black Africa...AFTER Europeans have migrated out of Africa. These haplotypes were introduced INTO the near East and much later, into Europe from Africa. This means southern Europe is heterogenous, and distinct from Northern Europe. This is emotionally difficult for some Europeans to accept given their history of race-facism.

quote:

---

Caucasians = M201, have a different marker than the M20 = Indus population, hence there is no way that these people are Caucasian in any way.

---

Good posts.

posted 19 January 2005 08:23 PM            

Thought Writes:

Agriculture is defined as science, art, and business of cultivating the soil, producing crops, and raising livestock. This process is to be differentiated from the event of domestication. Agriculture preceded domestication by millennia. Africans were the first people to develop microliths, enabling hunters and fishers to be more efficient through the use of the Bow and Arrow, the spear and harpoons made of stone. Grinding stones and the manipulation of vegetal resources through fire management were utilized by Central Africans as early as the Upper Paleolithic. These Central African traits gradually filtered down the Nile and into the Sahara. By the LGM Nile Valley Africans in the Kom Ombo basin were gathering wild grains and processing them on grindstones. Their diet was mainly based around the aquatic resources of the Nile. As the summer monsoons shifted north, the Egypto-Nubian Nile began to overflow with the “High Nile Floods”. This disrupted the economy of Nile Valley inhabitants at this time. Traces of violence are attested at Gebel Sahaba. It is possible that the disruption of the Nilotic economy caused bands of “delayed-return” hunter-gatherer-fishers to disburse in pursuit of resources further afield. Perhaps one band of these African Nilotes pushed forward out of the Red Sea Hills and Nile Valley into the southern Levant during this timeframe. Archaeologically known as the Mushabian.

posted 02 March 2005 04:52 PM            

quote:

---

Y-Chromosome analysis of the Somali population
suggests the origin of the haplogroup E3b1
Juan J. SANCHEZ

The frequency of haplogroup E3b1*(xE3b1b) in Somali males is the highest observed in any populations to date, and we suggest that the Somali male population is the origin of this haplogroup. Furthermore, the results are in agreement with a gene flow FROM Eastern TO Northern Africa from a homeland in Somalia.

---

posted 02 March 2005 08:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
http://www.geogene.com/images/geogeneYwallchart.pdf

---

posted 02 March 2005 08:11 PM            

quote:

---

I will present data that proves this false in one or two days.

---

Should be fun.

posted 02 March 2005 08:48 PM            

quote:

---

rasol wrote:

It is critical to note that E3b and E3a are 'modern' haplotypes. That is, they originate in tropical Black Africa...AFTER Europeans have migrated out of Africa. These haplotypes were introduced INTO the near East and much later, into Europe from Africa. This means southern Europe is heterogenous, and distinct from Northern Europe. This is emotionally difficult for some Europeans to accept given their history of race-facism.

---

quote:

---

Rossi replied:

This is incorrect. I will present data that proves this false in one or two days.

---

Rossi, I assume that if you say something is incorrect, that you would at least provide the reason for saying so, to be followed up with an up-to-date corroboration. Given that you feel you have a source that backs your assertion, it should follow that you already know what is going to be in that source. The source will still be needed nevertheless, to assess its premises and authenticity.

posted 03 March 2005 07:21 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossi:
This is for laymen.

---

posted 03 March 2005 07:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:

Rossi, I assume that if you say something is incorrect, that you would at least provide the reason for saying so, to be followed up with an up-to-date corroboration. Given that you feel you have a source that backs your assertion, it should follow that you already know what is going to be in that source. The source will still be needed nevertheless, to assess its premises and authenticity.

---

You are of course correct. Please give me a little time. I might be able to get something to you today. I have been working to compile this information for at least two weeks now and have been studying M35 for over six months since I was confirmed to belong to this haplogroup....a circumstance stunning to me as a matter of fact. Indeed, my particular circumstance has led me to the understanding that the dispersion of M35 is more complex than the standard "neolithic" explanation. I thank you for your patience in advance.

posted 03 March 2005 07:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[B] Correct. It is critical to note that E3b and E3a are 'modern' haplotypes. That is, they originate in tropical Black Africa...AFTER Europeans have migrated out of Africa.

---

Disagree with the terminology modern (but I believe I understand its use here); Black (sensational); and Europeans (there were no Europeans at this time) as applied here.

quote:

---

These haplotypes were introduced INTO the near East and much later, into Europe from Africa.

---

Not necessarily so. Further data to follow.

quote:

---

This means southern Europe is heterogenous, and distinct from Northern Europe. This is emotionally difficult for some Europeans to accept given their history of race-facism.

---

I believe the author of this statement needs to clarify the two sentences. I would need to understand on what basis the author considers Northern Europe not heterogenous.

posted 03 March 2005 07:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Should be fun.

---

posted 03 March 2005 12:01 PM            

quote:

---

Rossi writes,To expand on my earlier comment:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Correct. It is critical to note that E3b and E3a are 'modern' haplotypes. That is, they originate in tropical Black Africa...AFTER Europeans have migrated out of Africa.

---

quote:

---

Rossi writes:there were no Europeans at this time as applied here.

---

????? Researchers analyzing the Y chromosome taken from 1,007 men from 25 different locations in Europe found a pattern that suggests four out of five of the men shared a common male ancestor about 40,000 years ago. (Peter Underhill) Those studies suggest that a primitive, stone-age human came to Europe, probably from Central Asia and the Middle East, in two waves of migration beginning about 40,000 years ago. - FIRST EUROPEANS (AP 2000)

Origins of E3b:
the mrca of E3b is dated at 24-27 thousand years ago and named eastern Africa as the probable place of origin. -Cruciani.

E3b entered Europe from the MiddleEast during the Neolithic (15-20 thousand years after the E3b mrca, 25-30 thousand years after mrca of 1st Europeans) and it's distribution pattern reflects this fact:

* 25% of Y chromosome in Greece,
* 15% in Italy,
* less than 10% in Spain,
* under 5% E3b in most of NorthWest Europe
* under 1% in Nordic Europe.

Hence.....

quote:

---

rasol wrote:
This means southern Europe is heterogenous, and distinct from Northern Europe.

---

quote:

---

rossi writes: I believe the author of this statement needs to clarify the two sentences.

---

quote:

---

rossi writes: I would need to understand on what basis the author considers Northern Europe not heterogenous.

---

see below...

Native African PN2 clade (e3a and e3b, blue on the map)
E3a --- SRV10831.1, M42, M94, M139, M168, P9, M145, M213, Yap, SRY4064, M96, P29, P2, DYS391p, M2, P1

E3b --- SRV10831.1, M42, M94, M139, M168, P9, M145, M213, Yap, SRY4064, M96, P29, P2, DYS391p, M35

Eurasian Haplotype R (red on the map)
R1 --- SRV10831.1, M42, M94, M139, M168, P9, P14, M89, M213, M9, M45, M74, P27, 92R7, M207, UTY-1, M173.

posted 03 March 2005 04:45 PM            

As for my mitochondria DNA, one lab has determined that it is Haplotype L3e1 which is most prevalent in East Africa and the Middle East but also found among the Ewondo tribe of Camaroon in West Africa.

Another lab has tested my y-chromosome and says it is found to be prevalent among the Taureg people. As an American of primarily African ancestry, the ancestral paper trail for me usually ends at the 1870 census.

posted 03 March 2005 05:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
The above map is apparently informative, but the resolution could perhaps be a little bit better, given that color notation of K and R haplotype can easily be confused, if one doesn't keep in mind the specific haplotypes within designated regions.

---

posted 03 March 2005 06:12 PM            

quote:

---

????? Researchers analyzing the Y chromosome taken from 1,007 men from 25 different locations in Europe found a pattern that suggests four out of five of the men shared a common male ancestor about 40,000 years ago. (Peter Underhill) Those studies suggest that a primitive, stone-age human came to Europe, probably from Central Asia and the Middle East, in two waves of migration beginning about 40,000 years ago. - FIRST EUROPEANS (AP 2000)

---

I see what you are trying to say. Probably more complicated but I won't disagree.

quote:

---

Origins of E3b:
the mrca of E3b is dated at 24-27 thousand years ago and named eastern Africa as the probable place of origin. -Cruciani.

---

Perhaps.

quote:

---

E3b entered Europe from the MiddleEast during the Neolithic (15-20 thousand years after the E3b mrca, 25-30 thousand years after mrca of 1st Europeans)

---

This is highly debatable.

Please go here: http://www.clanrossi.com/CurrentWorkingHypothesis.htm

quote:

---

and it's distribution pattern reflects this fact:

* 25% of Y chromosome in Greece,
* 15% in Italy,
* less than 10% in Spain,
* under 5% E3b in most of NorthWest Europe
* under 1% in Nordic Europe.

---

posted 03 March 2005 06:18 PM            

Perhaps the biggest hypocrisy is that for so long Egypt was presented as, and even today considered by many to be a "Near-Eastern" civilization despite little influence from the Near East, yet Greece is considered a European civilization despite much influence from the Near-East!!

posted 03 March 2005 06:43 PM            

quote:

---

I understand that the E3b lineage is associated with the spread of agriculture, even its introduction to Europe, specifically Greece, but Although the E3 haplotypes originated in Africa, I believe it was introduced indirectly to Europe from the Near-East via Anatolia and not directly from Africa.

---

Yes again,

E-M78 = East Africa to Nile Delta to Levant to Europe.

E-M81 = East Africa to NorthWest Africa to Europe.

The relatively young TMRCA (mutation divergence date) of 5.6 ky that we estimated for haplography E-M81 and the lack of differentiation between European and African heliotypes in the network of E-M81 support the hypothesis of recent gene flow between northwestern Africa and Iberia.
Cruciani et al. 2002

the M81 mutation arose within North Africa and expanded along with the Neolithic population INTO an environment containing FEW Humans Arredi et al. 2004

Cruciani et al concluded that the distribution of the E3b1-alpha cluster in Europe indicates a Neolithic or post-Neolithic expansion out of the Balkans into Europe that spread as far west as the Iberian peninsula, and southeast to Turkey. STR diversity analysis gives an estimate of about 8 thousand years ago for that expansion. The cluster may have been part of a pre-Neolithic group indigenous to the Balkans, or it may have "leap-frogged" from Anatolia, to the Balkans, and then into Europe. The alpha cluster signature makes it possible to distinguish the E3b1 that expanded out of the Balkans from other E3b1's that came to Europe from the Near East
E3b2 is also seen in Iberia - perhaps as a result of the centuries of Islamic domination of much of the Iberian peninsula http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~dgarvey/DNA/hg/YCC_E3b.html

posted 03 March 2005 07:05 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Rossi: Good reply. Quite reasonable. I respect you and appreciate your civility.

---

Thank you for your very kind words. Best.

posted 03 March 2005 08:15 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I understand that the E3b lineage is associated with the spread of agriculture, even its introduction to Europe, specifically Greece, but Although the E3 haplotypes originated in Africa, I believe it was introduced indirectly to Europe from the Near-East via Anatolia and not directly from Africa.

---

Thought Writes:

I am not certain what point your getting at here? ANYTHING being transmitted from Africa to Europe would have to travel through the Middle East or across the Aegean, that in no way negates the Sub-Saharan origin of these lineages.

posted 03 March 2005 09:34 PM            

Earlier...

rasol posted:

E3b entered Europe from the MiddleEast during the Neolithic (15-20 thousand years after the E3b mrca, 25-30 thousand years after mrca of 1st Europeans)

Rossi replied:

This is highly debatable.

Please go here: http://www.clanrossi.com/CurrentWorkingHypothesis.htm

Of interest from the link is this:

"The most striking results are that contemporary NW African and Iberian populations were found to have originated from distinctly different patrilineages and that the Strait of Gibraltar seems to have acted as a strong (although not complete) barrier to gene flow.

In NW African populations, an Upper Paleolithic colonization that probably had its origin in eastern Africa contributed 75% of the current gene pool.

In comparison, »78% of contemporary Iberian Y chromosomes originated in an Upper Paleolithic expansion from western Asia, along the northern rim of the Mediterranean basin. Smaller contributions to these gene pools (constituting 13% of Y chromosomes in NW Africa and 10% of Y chromosomes in Iberia) came from the Middle East during the Neolithic and, during subsequent gene flow, from Sub-Saharan to NW Africa.

[earlier Evil referred to Bosch et al study, which basically claimed there was no flow from sub-Saharan Africa, but here we get a different story...forget the origins of the haplogroup]

Finally, bidirectional gene flow across the Strait of Gibraltar has been detected: the genetic contribution of European Y chromosomes to the NW African gene pool is estimated at 4%, and NW African populations may have contributed 7% of Iberian Y chromosomes. The Islamic rule of Spain, which began in A.D. 711 and lasted almost 8 centuries, left only a minor contribution to the current Iberian Y-chromosome pool.
The high-resolution analysis of the Y chromosome allows us to separate successive migratory components and to precisely quantify each historical layer." - Bosch et al.

posted 04 March 2005 07:46 AM            

Super car, no...other than the Pasiegos study there is nothing definitive as of yet. The accompanying studies are circumstantial. I am perusing citations and probably will be for quite some time. In addition I am emailing the study contacts to see if I can speak to someone much more knowledgable than myself to help clarify or perhaps stir up some interest.

Just to be clear, I have no particular "axe to grind" with regard to the E3b haplogroup. I am only seeking to solve this puzzle that has been thrown on me as a result of a genetic test. Unfortunately, my position stands partially in opposition to current thought on E3b dispersion. But I can't yet just give in and say "Yes, current theory is exactly correct". There are just too many tantalizing peculiaralities.

The really exciting part for me is my change as a result of this exercise. My concepts of race, phenotype and culture have taken on new, and, I would like to think, a more enlightened perspective, not in a small part due to the postings of some very intelligent people on a number of forums.

I will keep banging away at it when I have time.

posted 04 March 2005 07:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:

Of interest from the link is this:

"The most striking results are that contemporary NW African and Iberian populations were found to have originated from distinctly different patrilineages and that the Strait of Gibraltar seems to have acted as a strong (although not complete) barrier to gene flow.

In NW African populations, an Upper Paleolithic colonization that probably had its origin in eastern Africa contributed 75% of the current gene pool.

In comparison, »78% of contemporary Iberian Y chromosomes originated in an Upper Paleolithic expansion from western Asia, along the northern rim of the Mediterranean basin. Smaller contributions to these gene pools (constituting 13% of Y chromosomes in NW Africa and 10% of Y chromosomes in Iberia) came from the Middle East during the Neolithic and, during subsequent gene flow, from Sub-Saharan to NW Africa.

[earlier Evil referred to Bosch et al study, which basically claimed there was no flow from sub-Saharan Africa, but here we get a different story...forget the origins of the haplogroup]

Finally, bidirectional gene flow across the Strait of Gibraltar has been detected: the genetic contribution of European Y chromosomes to the NW African gene pool is estimated at 4%, and NW African populations may have contributed 7% of Iberian Y chromosomes. The Islamic rule of Spain, which began in A.D. 711 and lasted almost 8 centuries, left only a minor contribution to the current Iberian Y-chromosome pool.
The high-resolution analysis of the Y chromosome allows us to separate successive migratory components and to precisely quantify each historical layer." - Bosch et al.

---

I think that what Bosch et al are saying here is that ...yeah, pretty much the Straits of Gibralter blocked off much of interaction between North Africa and Iberia...and that the indigenous peoples of each area pretty much remained the major population group....but it looks like there was some "leakage" both ways. North Africa contributed to the Iberian population in a small way, possibly early on...and that the Arab occupation was not really significant in altering this overall ancient genetic makeup.

Then on top of that you get this from the other studies:

"These U6 haplotypes are ascribed to a pre-historic African colonisation that influenced all the Iberian Peninsula."

"This supports the evidence that the Algerian population, mainly its paleo-North African component (Berbers), has a common descent with Basques and Spaniards, probably reflecting a preneolithic relationship between Iberians and paleo-North Africans."

"Based on this peculiar distribution and the high diversity pi value (0.014 +/- 0.001) in this area compared to North Africa (0.006 +/- 0.001), we reject the proposal that only historic events such as the Moslem occupation are the main cause of this gene flow, and instead propose a pre-Neolithic origin for it. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc."

"Pasiegos are peculiar for their high frequencies of Y chromosomal markers (E-M81) with North African assignation, and Y chromosomal (R-SRY2627) and mtDNA (V, I, U5) markers related to northern European populations. This dual geographic contribution is more in agreement with the complex demographic history of this isolate, as opposed to recent drift effects. The high incidence in Cantabrians with pre-V and V mtDNA haplotypes, considered as a signal of Postglacial recolonization in Europe from south-western refugees, points to such refugees as a better candidate population than Basques for this expansion. However, this does not discount a conjoint recolonization."

"Taking the genetic, linguistic, anthropological, and archeological evidence together with the documented Saharan area desiccation starting about 10,000 years ago, we believe that it is possible that a genetic and cultural pre-Neolithic flow coming from southern Mediterranean coasts existed toward northern Mediterranean areas, including at least Iberia and some Mediterranean islands."

I favor the idea of conjoint recolonization based on current geographic dispersion of the haplotype in question and the haplogroups in general....similar to what Rasol posted earlier.

[This message has been edited by Rossi (edited 04 March 2005).]

posted 04 March 2005 08:18 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Example of how complicated and surprising genetic realities can be, this is an entry from Kerchner's DNAPrint Test Results Log from a white-american:

Comments: I expected IE- 100% and was only surprised by the EA of 7%. I knew there was NA ancestry on my mothers side and assumed that it was far enough back that my test would not show it. The EA has to be NA. The big surprise and incredible shocker came with the results of my Y -DNA STR test and the follow up SNP test for confirmation. The results of this test was Haplogroup E3a =African Bantu. The SNP was P1+. This is absolutely a shocking and incredible result. The oldest known male in my father's line is Christian Gabinish of Lothringen born there in 1820 (death certificate). Lothringen was a part of Alsace-Lorraine but I don't know its exact location in 1800. How and when did an African-Bantu get there? This paternal event had to take place no sooner than 1300.I show no SA in the print test.

---

posted 04 March 2005 02:23 PM            

Some questions on the various studies provided in the link: http://www.clanrossi.com/CurrentWorkingHypothesis.htm

"Basques and Spaniards closer to Algerians than to other Europeans. Also, characteristic Basque and/or Spanish haplotypes are found in Algerians; i.e., A30-B18-Cw5-DR3-DQ2 and A1-B57-Cw7-DR7-DQ2. This supports the evidence that the Algerian population, mainly its paleo-North African component (Berbers), has a common descent with Basques and Spaniards, probably reflecting a preneolithic relationship between Iberians and paleo-North Africans." - Villena Arnaiz et al.

• On what basis do the above study make the common HLA haplotypes a development of a preneolithic relationship? Even so, how does that follow that the E-M81 spilt through in that timeframe?

Someone posted this earlier, though I have no idea about its source, or from which source it derives its assertions on the highlighted statement:

"The two main genetic clusters found in Modern Egypt are Haplogroups E (E-M2, E-M78 and E-M81) and J-M267. The E clusters are all originate within Sub-Saharan East Africa or Central Africa. E-M81 derived from the ancestral East African E-M35 lineage that spread to North Africa along with E-M78 during the early Holocene."

Again from your earlier link:

"Basques, Portuguese, Spaniards, and Algerians have been studied for HLA and mitochondrial DNA markers, and the data analysis suggests that pre-Neolithic gene flow into Iberia came from ancient white North Africans (Hamites)." - Villena Arnaiz et al.

• What era do these folks come from?
  

posted 05 March 2005 02:13 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YuhiVII:

I totally agree with you Supercar it seems rather outdated to be talking about "Hamites". However there seem to be many interpretations(some would say distortions) made claiming to have a ground in genetic studies (as can be seen by Mr.Evil's 'original' 'white' East Africans!). It becomes a bit difficult to filter out the 'noise' but I think an interdisciplinary method eventually will carry the day and I am eagerly awaiting Rossi's hypothesis/take on E3b migrations!

---

There is no scientific ground for "Hamitic"; it was used in the 19th century and up to a certain period in 20th century as a distortion tool. Indeed when one tries to make a case out of such, it runs into the kind of problems now being faced by Evil. This is because many findings deal with serological anaylsis-DNA footprint or distribution, along with archeological and linguistic evidence, which were often overlooked or simply ignored by various anthropologists in the early days. Those days are long gone, and no credible bio-anthropologist today can simply ignore these details that are crucial in determining the populating of regions around the globe.

posted 05 March 2005 07:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
There is no scientific ground for "Hamitic"; it was used in the 19th century and up to a certain period in 20th century as a distortion tool. Indeed when one tries to make a case out of such, it runs into the kind of problems now being faced by Evil. This is because many findings deal with serological anaylsis-DNA footprint or distribution, along with archeological and linguistic evidence, which were often overlooked or simply ignored by various anthropologists in the early days. Those days are long gone, and no credible bio-anthropologist today can simply ignore these details that are crucial in determining the populating of regions around the globe.

The "Hamitic" term has long been outdated, just as terms like "negroid" or "caucasoid" have been outdated. The availability of more resources or tools to bio-anthropologists than in the past, makes any contemporary bio-anthropologist who resorts to early 20th century tactics, a very questionable (mentally speaking) character among peers. Even Brace, who tried to cleverly (fraudulently would be a more appropriate term) use clusters without having to actually make direct references to terms like negroid, caucasoid and the like, has been called on it by his peers.

---

Right, all correct....but as a few members above and I think you are saying....and I do not presume to lecture to you all as most of you think very clearly and have much knowledge in the these areas....there is much "noise" that needs to be filtered out. And good data is good data regardless of what field it comes from and even if it is found couched in some very dubious terms or beliefs.

Super car, I need to address your previous question but I have been very tied up with other activities (two teenagers; soccer and tennis) AND I need to study more to be able to answer your first question intelligently.

The second question: Hum Biol. 1999 Oct;71(5):725-43. Iberia: population genetics, anthropology, and linguistics. Arnaiz-Villena A, Martinez-Laso J, Alonso

posted 05 March 2005 09:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossi:
BTW, "just to muddy up the waters", I am thinking that there might have been some E3b (M35) dispersion along with I1b2 out of the Balkans to repopulate after the LGM in additon to the early Iberian/North Africa contact.

---

Rossi, I accept your information on the basis of being hypothesis presented in good faith. I would suggest that you continue your work and hopefully get the information published and peer reviewed.