|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Nov 30, 2020 19:28:59 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2020 20:30:36 GMT -5
Po genealoskim tesovima Srbi su oko 50-60% Sloveni. DNK nije podlozan slobodnoj interpretaciji i zelji neke individue
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Nov 30, 2020 23:32:39 GMT -5
Po genealoskim tesovima Srbi su oko 50-60% Sloveni. DNK nije podlozan slobodnoj interpretaciji i zelji neke individue
Imas neki link za to sto pises?
Šta kaže genetika – poreklo Srba
POREKLO SRBA - Šta zaista kažu genetika i arheologija
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2020 3:31:32 GMT -5
Po genealoskim tesovima Srbi su oko 50-60% Sloveni. DNK nije podlozan slobodnoj interpretaciji i zelji neke individue
Imas neki link za to sto pises?
Šta kaže genetika – poreklo Srba
POREKLO SRBA - Šta zaista kažu genetika i arheologija
Ne mogu sada da trazim ali, I2a "dinarci" su isto Sloveni, jer je sedamstota godina poprilicno kasno te su plemena vec tada bila pomesana. O monolitnim plemenima u ovom delu Evrope mozemo da pricamo u doba paleolita. U kulturi Lepenskog Vira su pronadjeni mahom R1b, kasnije u toku bronzanog doba nadjene su haplogrupe J i E. Rumuni npr. su poprilicno izmesan narod jer imaju I2a u slicnim procentima kao Srbi, itd. Geneologija je dosta otisla napred od tih glupih nagadjanja tipa "dinarci", "vikinzi" itd.
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Dec 1, 2020 7:18:51 GMT -5
however all those stories (because this is not science) are based on the premise that for each "category" there exist today the absolute original reference population (e.g. Slavs should be like .... <place your favorite northern=pure slavic group, most frequently Poles> ). What if those northern Slavs did absorb a great deal of germans/saxans? I think the whole deal is skewed. Or southern Slavs absorbed ALL existent Tru Greeks (as is my theory, cause Greece was practically empty in 500 AD). (by Greek I mean smth Tru like Cyprus/Crete/Lakonia/Tsakonia/Rhodes/majority of south Aegean islands/Cyclades/12nisa/Ionian sea (except Lefkada), South Italy, i.e. not fake).
The historical alternations of the definitions and the selection of terms can cause such a chaotic situation that we gotta be ULTRA careful.
If we want to study a specific context in time, we gotta go with the specific set of ideas, terminology, definitions, axioms and values. Otherwise this is just a plain wrong failed adventure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2020 9:03:50 GMT -5
however all those stories (because this is not science) are based on the premise that for each "category" there exist today the absolute original reference population (e.g. Slavs should be like .... <place your favorite northern=pure slavic group, most frequently Poles> ). What if those northern Slavs did absorb a great deal of germans/saxans? I think the whole deal is skewed. Or southern Slavs absorbed ALL existent Tru Greeks (as is my theory, cause Greece was practically empty in 500 AD). (by Greek I mean smth Tru like Cyprus/Crete/Lakonia/Tsakonia/Rhodes/majority of south Aegean islands/Cyclades/12nisa/Ionian sea (except Lefkada), South Italy, i.e. not fake).
The historical alternations of the definitions and the selection of terms can cause such a chaotic situation that we gotta be ULTRA careful.
If we want to study a specific context in time, we gotta go with the specific set of ideas, terminology, definitions, axioms and values. Otherwise this is just a plain wrong failed adventure.
This is science. Genetics is science. Principal component analysis, the methods they used, is statistics. They used both genetics from ancient samples and compared them to modern - as you can see:
1) Image Hellenthal et al. 2014, Greece 1054 CE is DNA sample taken from medieval population in Greece. Bulgaria 854 CE is medieval population of Bulgaria from roughly that year. Multiple studies suggest 60% genetic material of modern South Slavs is from Great Migration period, which is Central and Northern European.
2) Image Kovacecic et al. (2014) provides you with data for current population. Beneath it you can see the composition.
3) Image Kushniarevich et al. 2015 provides you with similar data. Dark Blue is northern European ancestry, light blue is south European ancestry.
4) Image Delser et al. 2018 provide you with similar data.
You can see how modern Greeks are primarily southern European. Medieval Greeks from ~1054 were more Slavic. This is confirmed with 3 independent studies. One of them is by our own guy Kovacevic. Does that sound ok?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2020 9:55:20 GMT -5
To avoid confusion, I need to say also that this is both haplogroup and autosomal DNA data. What is the difference?
DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid) is molecule with two chains that create double helix. DNA carries genetic information that instructs how cells should function, grow... Also:
Now, each cell has nucleus and inside nucleus there are 23 pairs of chromosomes, so a total of 46 chromosomes within each cell. One chromosome pair is sex related, 22 chromosome pairs are autosomal. Sex related chromosome pair is usually XX (female) or XY (male). Of course, I'm not talking about mutations, which means that it can be 1 sex chromosome or 3 sex chromosomes. I'm talking about common case. Origins from X chromosomes are investigated by so called mtDNA haplogroup, which stands for "mitochondrial DNA", which is the part of the cell that carries DNA information. Y haplogroup is self explanatory. That leaves with other 22 pairs of autosomal chromosomes. These chromosomes can also provide genetical material to the organism. So by studying both the haplogroups and autosomal DNA you can get complete picture.
This is what these researchers did. And that's the reason why its science.
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Dec 1, 2020 12:28:36 GMT -5
there are solid grounds to support that the said imaginary migration never happened. How can someone migrate to somewhere where he is majority already... How can huge number of ppl migrate overnight VIA BOATS to not so friendly places of the south, like the Slavs supposedly did in southern Greece, where a supposedly SUPERIOR culture already is established?. Absolutely no reason. Because this theory could not be more broken beyond repair.
Boiling down to simple maths, logistics and observations is enough to debunk this pseudotheory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2020 12:55:03 GMT -5
there are solid grounds to support that the said imaginary migration never happened. How can someone migrate to somewhere where he is majority already... How can huge number of ppl migrate overnight VIA BOATS to not so friendly places of the south, like the Slavs supposedly did in southern Greece, where a supposedly SUPERIOR culture already is established?. Absolutely no reason. Because this theory could not be more broken beyond repair.
Boiling down to simple maths, logistics and observations is enough to debunk this pseudotheory.
Does it matters?
Point is South Slavs are not yer average Southrons, like Greeks, Spanish, or Italians. We're more like 50%:50%. Unless you would willingly close your eyes to evidence and blindfully believe magic fairy tales in which case I can't help
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Dec 1, 2020 13:18:14 GMT -5
there are solid grounds to support that the said imaginary migration never happened. How can someone migrate to somewhere where he is majority already... How can huge number of ppl migrate overnight VIA BOATS to not so friendly places of the south, like the Slavs supposedly did in southern Greece, where a supposedly SUPERIOR culture already is established?. Absolutely no reason. Because this theory could not be more broken beyond repair.
Boiling down to simple maths, logistics and observations is enough to debunk this pseudotheory.
Does it matters?
Point is South Slavs are not yer average Southrons, like Greeks, Spanish, or Italians. We're more like 50%:50%. Unless you would willingly close your eyes to evidence and blindfully believe magic fairy tales in which case I can't help
^^^ very scientific.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2020 15:33:39 GMT -5
Does it matters?
Point is South Slavs are not yer average Southrons, like Greeks, Spanish, or Italians. We're more like 50%:50%. Unless you would willingly close your eyes to evidence and blindfully believe magic fairy tales in which case I can't help
^^^ very scientific.
More so than a history books or history hypotheses. History shouldn't even be considered science.
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Dec 1, 2020 21:55:53 GMT -5
the evidence is that only Bosnians are as a whole blonder than Greeks. In Serbia you can find blonder ppl in villages (excluding the huge number of gypsies of course), but in the cities i'd say Greeks are blonder and more north euro-looking, just like the albs. of course all of this has zero significance but since you tend to drag any convo to this direction i thought to explain a thing or two.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2020 2:49:01 GMT -5
the evidence is that only Bosnians are as a whole blonder than Greeks. In Serbia you can find blonder ppl in villages (excluding the huge number of gypsies of course), but in the cities i'd say Greeks are blonder and more north euro-looking, just like the albs. of course all of this has zero significance but since you tend to drag any convo to this direction i thought to explain a thing or two.
I think we spoke about this before, but I didn't see the point to continue at one point as it involved a lot of personal opinions based on shaky grounds. Something similar happens again.
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Dec 2, 2020 3:02:07 GMT -5
ok
|
|