World Families Forums - One of the Last of the Paleo Holdouts Goes Neolithic!

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 31, 2014, 06:26:55 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  One of the Last of the Paleo Holdouts Goes Neolithic!
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: One of the Last of the Paleo Holdouts Goes Neolithic!  (Read 1923 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« on: January 01, 2009, 09:30:03 PM »

Anyone who remembers any of the fierce debates over the newer, younger age estimates for R1b1b2 (M269) will be amazed to read the following, although I for one am very pleased. Regardless of your opinion of this person (and Lord knows, I've had my battles with him), he influences people, so this is a good thing (IMHO).

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2009-01/1230853744

Quote
While I do understand the arguments made by many on this List to the effect
that M269 is much younger than most population geneticists have allowed, it
would be correct to say that I have stubbornly adhered to the "party line".
In other words, 80% of European Y lineages (primarly M269) are
from Paleolithic (aboriginal) sources; and 20% from Neolithic demic
diffusion (e.g., Semino et al., 2000). This view is still reflected in
almost every "authoritative" website from National Geographic to 23andme
etc. etc. In an instant I "did a 360". I recall an expression, "The Lord
loves a sinner come to His understanding". I wonder if this applies to
genetic genealogy.

First I might ask if anyone has read, "The Peopling of Europe" by Arredi,
Poloni and Tyler-Smith (Ch. 13, "Anthropological Genetics", Edited by
Michael Crawford, 2007, pp. 380-408). I must admit that I had really put it
aside since in the Preface the editor complains about all of the promises of
manuscripts that were never fulfilled and that this would be the last volume
he ever edits - not exactly inspiring me to closely examine the contents.
In my quest to find out more about the X chromosome, it seemed that I should at least see what this volume contained since it is quite recent. I came
upon the article above quite by chance.

I have a great deal of respect for Tyler-Smith, and as far as I know he is
considered to be among the top population geneticists. The authors
acknowledged the contributions of Kivisild and Richards, other well
respected population geneticists, who reviewed the manuscript. So why did
they "hide" this important material in a book that likely few would read? I
can think of a few scenarios but this is marginal to the point I am going to
make.

Considering the number of pages, the authors cover a lot of ground from
exploring evidence that archaic hominids and Neanderthals may have
contributed to the European gene pool, climatological information that
relates to the settlement of Europe, to the autosomal, Y and mtDNA data, to
linguistic matters, skin pigmentation, lactase persistence, and so on. A
great overview and the authors pull no punches in their analysis (or rather
re-analysis) of the evidence (e.g., published articles looking at M269
haplotype diversity).

As I see it the most compelling data is in their exploration of haplogroups
R1b in Europe and E3b2 in North Africa. They interpret their data as
supporting a two pronged neolithic migration (true demic diffusion) from the
Fertile Crescent) which split into two branches due to the geographic
barrier of the Mediterranean Sea. R1b moved west through sourthern Europe
and E3b2 west across North Africa being in a sense mirror images of each
other. Their meta analysis of the diversity data provided an age estimate
of R1b-M269 as about 5 to 8 KYA!
Hence this supports "a Neolithic timing for the expansion of R1b3 in Europe rather than a Paleolithic one." They
state that the earliest entrant of R1b into Europe was in the Neolithic.

They looked at diversity levels and observed a cline of decreasing diversity
from east to west. Actually they even state that, the data show, "a
Neolithic or even later origin for most Y-chromosomal diversity seems
likely."
They also see other evidence sources such as the spread of lactase persistence and even particular strains of H. pylori bacteria as consistent with this date.

It appears that many of us will be required on the force of the evidence to
abandon any assertion that M269 in Europe is Paleolithic, and have little
choice but to agree that it is considerably younger. This is not a surprise
to many here I know, but to the old stubborn cranky folk such as myself,
this means I may, along with many population geneticists, have to say those
dreadful words, "I was wrong". However evidence is evidence, and it seems
to be reaching compelling levels. Kudos to those genetic genealogists here
who stuck to their guns.

David K. Faux.

The underlining is mine, for emphasis.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2009, 09:31:07 PM by rms2 » Logged

Nolan Admin - Glenn Allen Nolen
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 02, 2009, 12:11:35 AM »

Revisionism!
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #2 on: January 02, 2009, 12:22:39 PM »

Revisionism!

I wouldn't call admitting that one was wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence "revisionism."

It's not like DKF is rewriting history to claim he was in on the right ideas from the first. Too many people know he argued against a Neolithic date for R1b1b2.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2009, 12:25:06 PM »

Here's something I wrote back on 13 July 2006.

http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=18986&postcount=47

Quote
DNA Heretic

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think I am becoming a Y-DNA heretic: I am beginning to doubt there ever was an Ice Age refuge for R1b in Iberia.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2009, 05:26:57 PM »

As I said elsewhere (I love to quote myself), its shock value is akin to reading in the newspaper that the Pope has publically announced his conversion to Mormonism.
Logged
Nolan Admin - Glenn Allen Nolen
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2009, 06:49:54 PM »

Faux's views today can only be determined as revisionist. Faux has continually stated that not one population geneticist adhered to the new dating techniques. Now all of a sudden he changes his tune and produces something revised in 2007 reportedly based on 2004 data. By 2007, we all had doubts such as your quote above. 

OK, he revised his views again. So What! Who Cares! That is what the man does! He argues untill he has worn out his welcome and when he has no alternative then he changes his views again to gain favor within the genetic genealogy amateur community so he can start the whole process over again.


Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2009, 09:45:26 PM »

Anyway, even though DKF and I have had our differences, I'm glad he came around and did this, because he does have some influence over people. His announcement may give them pause to rethink their own positions.

And maybe he knows about something coming down the pike that we don't know about?
« Last Edit: January 02, 2009, 10:37:02 PM by rms2 » Logged

vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2009, 10:53:06 PM »

Anyway, even though DKF and I have had our differences, I'm glad he came around and did this, because he does have some inlfuence over people. His announcement may give them pause to rethink their own positions.

And maybe he knows about something coming down the pike that we don't know about?
DKF has been accused many times of "hero-worship" of the "pop-gen's" and their peer-reviewed published literature.  The fact that he is now changing his viewpoint in light of new published material (well actually not-so-new published material) is perfectly within character.  I hope this is an indicator that the knowledge base of the scientific genetics community is now making efforts to catch up with that of the genealogical genetics community.
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2009, 11:15:51 PM »

As I said elsewhere (I love to quote myself), its shock value is akin to reading in the newspaper that the Pope has publically announced his conversion to Mormonism.

Okay. here's me quoting myself paraphrasing W.B. Yeats:

"All is changed, changed utterly, a terrible beauty is born".

Thanks,  Miles
« Last Edit: January 02, 2009, 11:49:40 PM by eochaidh » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
Nolan Admin - Glenn Allen Nolen
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2009, 11:29:17 PM »

"he does have some influence over people"

True! Sad but true!
Logged
Oisin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2009, 07:13:22 AM »

[
Okay. here's me quoting myself paraphrasing W.B. Yeats:

"All is changed, changed utterly, a terrible beauty is born".

Thanks,  Miles
Hello Miles
according to the FTDNA map on my personal page R1b entered Europe 25,000 years ago and what is all the fuss about the age of M269.Does it really matter whether it happened 5,000 or 15,000 years ago?Could you help me out on this?What is the relevance to all of this.
Logged
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2009, 04:36:04 PM »

[
Okay. here's me quoting myself paraphrasing W.B. Yeats:

"All is changed, changed utterly, a terrible beauty is born".

Thanks,  Miles
Hello Miles
according to the FTDNA map on my personal page R1b entered Europe 25,000 years ago and what is all the fuss about the age of M269.Does it really matter whether it happened 5,000 or 15,000 years ago?Could you help me out on this?What is the relevance to all of this.
Ah, well, that's the travesty of it.  There really is no evidence to support the presence of R1b in Europe 25,000 years ago.  If there was, it has completely vanished, which is moot point because scientific inquiry requires observable evidence.  What we do know, is that the observable evidence, i.e. the vast majority of those of us who do test positive for M343 (R1b) also testing positive for M269 (R1b1b2) and the combined diversity of all of us who test M269+ in Europe, indicates a much more recent origin of R1b1b2 in Europe - likely in the neolithic era somewhere in the vicinity of 5,000 - 8,000 years ago.

As far as those Cro-Magnon dudes and the folks who painted the caves at Lascaux go, they simply weren't our ancestors.  M343+ haplotype diversity indicates that our ancestors of some 25,000 years ago were much more  likely somewhere in west Asia, if M343+ (R1b) is even that old.

But I agree - that far back really doesn't matter all that much for trying to find out things in genealogical time.  The point was really that noted organizations such as National Geographic and some (cough) DNA testing companies insist on marketing the Cro-Magnons as ancestors of R1b, when they were probably more likely the ancestors of some flavour of Haplogroup I.  Trivial, but some simply couldn't let it go.

Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

Oisin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2009, 07:00:25 PM »

[
Okay. here's me quoting myself paraphrasing W.B. Yeats:

"All is changed, changed utterly, a terrible beauty is born".

Thanks,  Miles
Hello Miles
according to the FTDNA map on my personal page R1b entered Europe 25,000 years ago and what is all the fuss about the age of M269.Does it really matter whether it happened 5,000 or 15,000 years ago?Could you help me out on this?What is the relevance to all of this.
Ah, well, that's the travesty of it.  There really is no evidence to support the presence of R1b in Europe 25,000 years ago.  If there was, it has completely vanished, which is moot point because scientific inquiry requires observable evidence.  What we do know, is that the observable evidence, i.e. the vast majority of those of us who do test positive for M343 (R1b) also testing positive for M269 (R1b1b2) and the combined diversity of all of us who test M269+ in Europe, indicates a much more recent origin of R1b1b2 in Europe - likely in the neolithic era somewhere in the vicinity of 5,000 - 8,000 years ago.

As far as those Cro-Magnon dudes and the folks who painted the caves at Lascaux go, they simply weren't our ancestors.  M343+ haplotype diversity indicates that our ancestors of some 25,000 years ago were much more  likely somewhere in west Asia, if M343+ (R1b) is even that old.

But I agree - that far back really doesn't matter all that much for trying to find out things in genealogical time.  The point was really that noted organizations such as National Geographic and some (cough) DNA testing companies insist on marketing the Cro-Magnons as ancestors of R1b, when they were probably more likely the ancestors of some flavour of Haplogroup I.  Trivial, but some simply couldn't let it go.


So,FTDNA are wrong? Thats what is on my FTDNA page.  [Note - The Balance of this message was removed by the Forum Management.]
« Last Edit: January 05, 2009, 01:42:37 AM by terry » Logged
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2009, 08:09:21 PM »

[
Okay. here's me quoting myself paraphrasing W.B. Yeats:

"All is changed, changed utterly, a terrible beauty is born".

Thanks,  Miles
Hello Miles
according to the FTDNA map on my personal page R1b entered Europe 25,000 years ago and what is all the fuss about the age of M269.Does it really matter whether it happened 5,000 or 15,000 years ago?Could you help me out on this?What is the relevance to all of this.
Ah, well, that's the travesty of it.  There really is no evidence to support the presence of R1b in Europe 25,000 years ago.  If there was, it has completely vanished, which is moot point because scientific inquiry requires observable evidence.  What we do know, is that the observable evidence, i.e. the vast majority of those of us who do test positive for M343 (R1b) also testing positive for M269 (R1b1b2) and the combined diversity of all of us who test M269+ in Europe, indicates a much more recent origin of R1b1b2 in Europe - likely in the neolithic era somewhere in the vicinity of 5,000 - 8,000 years ago.

As far as those Cro-Magnon dudes and the folks who painted the caves at Lascaux go, they simply weren't our ancestors.  M343+ haplotype diversity indicates that our ancestors of some 25,000 years ago were much more  likely somewhere in west Asia, if M343+ (R1b) is even that old.

But I agree - that far back really doesn't matter all that much for trying to find out things in genealogical time.  The point was really that noted organizations such as National Geographic and some (cough) DNA testing companies insist on marketing the Cro-Magnons as ancestors of R1b, when they were probably more likely the ancestors of some flavour of Haplogroup I.  Trivial, but some simply couldn't let it go.


So,FTDNA are wrong?  Thats what is on my FTDNA page.Are you a Scientist or an A.S.  [Rest of message removed by Forum Management]

I was born in Edmonton, Alberta, but my father was born in Holland.  No, FTDNA is no longer wrong as they have recently removed their ancestral origins bit regarding paleolithic R1b, and no, I never pretended to be an Irishman, although I know of one who would have insisted I am if I wind up testing L21+.  I have over five years of post-secondary education - I am an applied sciences (architectural/engineering) technologist, and I wouldn't call L21 strictly an Irish SNP quite yet, at least not until there is an equivalent test representation from the continent, and definitely not if Germany and France continue to indicate a 50% presence or thereabouts of L21+ vs. L21-.

My apologies if my comment out-of-turn offended you, but I do not apologize for commenting out-of-turn.

My name is Vince, and I am Canadian!

;)

EDIT: Please suffice it to be said that I have already agreed to turn the administration of the R-L21 Project over to someone who is L21+, should my test result be L21 negative --- if FTDNA ever gets a result.

PS: Miles, over to you!
« Last Edit: January 05, 2009, 01:45:22 AM by terry » Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2009, 08:46:58 PM »

Dear God, Oisin, calm down! Mr. Tilroe here is one of the nicest, fairest and most respected men on these boards. He did nothing more than try to help you by giving an answer. His not being Irish is irrelevant. The two men who have done the most for determining the age of R1b-M269 and its subclades are neither Irish NOR R1b!

Unfortunately, Oisin, neither I nor anyone can be absolutely certain as to the age of R1b in Europe. It would appear that the most accepted estimates right now are that R1b-P312 is approximately 4000 years old and that R1b-L21 is approximately 3500 years old. So, we are looking at a Neolithic time frame instead of the Paleolithic, which was accepted/and or postulated by people like Sykes and Oppenheimer. We will know more as time goes by and more tests are done. Perhaps new SNPs will be found that can define us better.

Yes, I'm an Irishman. I am a first generation Irishman on my father's side and a second generation Irishman on my mother's side. Yet, I don't have any better answers than others when it comes to R1b-M269 and its subclades. L21 may be found at it's greatest percentages in Ireland, but I wouldn't call it an Irish subclade. Yes, it gave birth to M222 which is an Irish subclade, but that doesn't mean L21 came into existence in Ireland.

By the way, to my cousins in Ireland, I'm a Yank.

Le gach dea-ghui (with every good wish),  Miles
« Last Edit: January 03, 2009, 10:09:42 PM by eochaidh » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2009, 02:34:03 AM »

Quote
PS: Miles, over to you!
By the way, to my cousins in Ireland, I'm a Yank.

And fine gentlemen the both of you!!
Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


Oisin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2009, 06:47:05 AM »

Quote
PS: Miles, over to you!
By the way, to my cousins in Ireland, I'm a Yank.

And fine gentlemen the both of you!!

A chara,
my American cousins are home for Christmas and they are very welcome.I have cousins in Iberia as well and they are also welcome.

Slan
Logged
eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #17 on: January 04, 2009, 12:43:29 PM »

A chara,
my American cousins are home for Christmas and they are very welcome.I have cousins in Iberia as well and they are also welcome.

Slan
[/quote]

A Chara,

Enjoy your time with your cousins.

Slan anois agus siochain,  Maolmordha
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 19 queries.