World Families Forums

General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse. => R1b General => Topic started by: Mkk on July 29, 2012, 02:29:37 PM



Title: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 29, 2012, 02:29:37 PM
On British nationalist websites and forums the works of Sykes and Oppenheimer's books on the origins of British people are cited to prove that British people are infact "indigenous" and haven't been affected my historical migrations by e.g Celts and anglo-Saxons, as many/most people believe.

The main theory of these two men is that most British people are descendants of hunter gatherers that expanded from North Iberia after the last ice age. Both considered historical migrations to have affected little of the British blood pool, although apparently Sykes was more open to this.

For example, in Arthur Kemp's "Four flags" booklet which he wrote for the BNP, he argues that the british are   infact (one of) the oldest indigenous peoples in the world, with "nearly 80 percent" are descendants of Paleolithic Iberians. He goes on to claim that the aforementioned migrations to Britain contributed only 5 percent each to the British gene pool.

I contacted Mr. Kemp alerting him to some of the recent research on y-chromosomal and mtDNA genetics, which seem to have refuted what Sykes and Oppenheimer wrote. In response he said that he would only rectify the book if a definite refutation is released.

So...Do their books still hold any weight on the question of British origins, and if not, why? Thanks in advance for your responses.

Note: The reason this thread is in the R1b section is approx 70 percent of British men belong to that hg, and it was something discussed a lot in the two books, so the origins of the British rests a lot on the origins of R1b.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Bren123 on July 29, 2012, 03:56:28 PM
On British nationalist websites and forums the works of Sykes and Oppenheimer's books on the origins of British people are cited to prove that British people are infact "indigenous" and haven't been affected my historical migrations by e.g Celts and anglo-Saxons, as many/most people believe.

The main theory of these two men is that most British people are descendants of hunter gatherers that expanded from North Iberia after the last ice age. Both considered historical migrations to have affected little of the British blood pool, although apparently Sykes was more open to this.

For example, in Arthur Kemp's "Four flags" booklet which he wrote for the BNP, he argues that the british are   infact (one of) the oldest indigenous peoples in the world, with "nearly 80 percent" are descendants of Paleolithic Iberians. He goes on to claim that the aforementioned migrations to Britain contributed only 5 percent each to the British gene pool.

I contacted Mr. Kemp alerting him to some of the recent research on y-chromosomal and mtDNA genetics, which seem to have refuted what Sykes and Oppenheimer wrote. In response he said that he would only rectify the book if a definite refutation is released.

So...Do their books still hold any weight on the question of British origins, and if not, why? Thanks in advance for your responses.

Note: The reason this thread is in the R1b section is approx 70 percent of British men belong to that hg, and it was something discussed a lot in the two books, so the origins of the British rests a lot on the origins of R1b.

I think sykes and oppenheimer have alot to answer for!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Arch Y. on July 29, 2012, 09:50:18 PM
On British nationalist websites and forums the works of Sykes and Oppenheimer's books on the origins of British people are cited to prove that British people are infact "indigenous" and haven't been affected my historical migrations by e.g Celts and anglo-Saxons, as many/most people believe.

The main theory of these two men is that most British people are descendants of hunter gatherers that expanded from North Iberia after the last ice age. Both considered historical migrations to have affected little of the British blood pool, although apparently Sykes was more open to this.

For example, in Arthur Kemp's "Four flags" booklet which he wrote for the BNP, he argues that the british are   infact (one of) the oldest indigenous peoples in the world, with "nearly 80 percent" are descendants of Paleolithic Iberians. He goes on to claim that the aforementioned migrations to Britain contributed only 5 percent each to the British gene pool.

I contacted Mr. Kemp alerting him to some of the recent research on y-chromosomal and mtDNA genetics, which seem to have refuted what Sykes and Oppenheimer wrote. In response he said that he would only rectify the book if a definite refutation is released.

So...Do their books still hold any weight on the question of British origins, and if not, why? Thanks in advance for your responses.

Note: The reason this thread is in the R1b section is approx 70 percent of British men belong to that hg, and it was something discussed a lot in the two books, so the origins of the British rests a lot on the origins of R1b.

Unfortunately, it appears both men are not staying "up-to-date" with the latest trends in DNA and are quickly making money off of outdated material and false assertions. Credibility is everything and I just can't see it or their concern for it.

Arch


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 30, 2012, 05:41:03 AM


I contacted Mr. Kemp alerting him to some of the recent research on y-chromosomal and mtDNA genetics, which seem to have refuted what Sykes and Oppenheimer wrote. In response he said that he would only rectify the book if a definite refutation is released.


He wouldn't change his mind,regardless whoever told him because he's a fascist! person  
Whether he is "fascist" or not, let's not resort to ad hominems.


It is hardly resorting to ad hominems in calling a person who is writing for the BNP,a fascist!

I agree, these people are from the sewer, acknowledging them, even to refute there ideas, only builds their egos.
Please, this debate should be about Sykes and Oppenheimer, not what problems you have with Kemp politically and/or as a person. I only talked about Kemp as a example of British nationalists using (and abusing?) their works for their own ends.



Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jdean on July 30, 2012, 05:56:10 AM


I contacted Mr. Kemp alerting him to some of the recent research on y-chromosomal and mtDNA genetics, which seem to have refuted what Sykes and Oppenheimer wrote. In response he said that he would only rectify the book if a definite refutation is released.


He wouldn't change his mind,regardless whoever told him because he's a fascist! person  
Whether he is "fascist" or not, let's not resort to ad hominems.


It is hardly resorting to ad hominems in calling a person who is writing for the BNP,a fascist!

I agree, these people are from the sewer, acknowledging them, even to refute there ideas, only builds their egos.
Please, this debate should be about Sykes and Oppenheimer, not what problems you have with Kemp politically and/or as a person. I only talked about Kemp as a example of British nationalists using (and abusing?) their works for their own ends.



OK but I agree with Arch Y. though I have reason to be thankful to Sykes as one of the people in his Blood of the Isles study was a Stedman which helped us confirm a haplotype in our project.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: avalon on July 30, 2012, 06:32:51 AM
On British nationalist websites and forums the works of Sykes and Oppenheimer's books on the origins of British people are cited to prove that British people are infact "indigenous" and haven't been affected my historical migrations by e.g Celts and anglo-Saxons, as many/most people believe.

The main theory of these two men is that most British people are descendants of hunter gatherers that expanded from North Iberia after the last ice age. Both considered historical migrations to have affected little of the British blood pool, although apparently Sykes was more open to this.

For example, in Arthur Kemp's "Four flags" booklet which he wrote for the BNP, he argues that the british are   infact (one of) the oldest indigenous peoples in the world, with "nearly 80 percent" are descendants of Paleolithic Iberians. He goes on to claim that the aforementioned migrations to Britain contributed only 5 percent each to the British gene pool.

I contacted Mr. Kemp alerting him to some of the recent research on y-chromosomal and mtDNA genetics, which seem to have refuted what Sykes and Oppenheimer wrote. In response he said that he would only rectify the book if a definite refutation is released.

So...Do their books still hold any weight on the question of British origins, and if not, why? Thanks in advance for your responses.

Note: The reason this thread is in the R1b section is approx 70 percent of British men belong to that hg, and it was something discussed a lot in the two books, so the origins of the British rests a lot on the origins of R1b.

Unfortunately, it appears both men are not staying "up-to-date" with the latest trends in DNA and are quickly making money off of outdated material and false assertions. Credibility is everything and I just can't see it or their concern for it.

Arch

My understanding, based on a limited knowledge of genetics/dna, and from reading blogs such as Dienekes and genealogy-dna is that  the main criticism of Oppenheimer was in the method he used to calculate the age of y-dna haplogroups/clusters. Basically, he put R1b much older than many amateur genetic genealogists now consider it to be. From this Oppenheimer concluded that there was considerable genetic continuity in Britain from its Mesolithic hunter-gatherers to the modern population.

It now seems as though European hunter-gatherers did not survive in large numbers and that a major population replacement took place by farmers from the Neolithic onwards.

The key to all this is of course ancient DNA. In Britain the only example we currently have is Cheddar Man and his mtDna suggested genetic continuity. Brian Sykes obviously became over reliant on this one sample for his arguments.

Personally, I remain unconvinced either way. Genetic genealogy is a young science that is constantly changing so I think there is a way to go before we get a conclusive answer.




Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 30, 2012, 06:45:37 AM
I had to delete several messages in this thread because of their controversial political nature or the fact that they quoted the controversial political posts. Sorry to those whose posts merely quoted the objectionable stuff.

Please refrain from political controversy, especially of the kind that involves name calling.

Thanks!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 30, 2012, 07:03:41 AM
Rich, please ask Kkk to declare who he is, and after delete my post.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 30, 2012, 07:11:45 AM
Rich, please ask Kkk to declare who he is, and after delete my post.

You mean Mkk?

Screen names exist for privacy reasons. I could ask him, but he doesn't have to answer.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 30, 2012, 07:15:38 AM
Ask if his haplogroup is J2a?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 30, 2012, 07:18:57 AM
Ask if his haplogroup is J2a?

Er . . . okay. But whether or not to answer is up to him.

@Mkk, are you by chance J2a?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 30, 2012, 07:46:18 AM
Message Removed.

Please stop these personal comments!

Terry


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 30, 2012, 07:55:38 AM
That's all personal stuff and really not my business. Although I am pretty open here about my own background (probably to my own detriment), not everyone has to be.

And - right, left, or center - politics are off limits here.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 30, 2012, 10:21:15 AM
Maliclavelli,

What does my political affiliation, ancesterey or haplogroup have to do with the subject of this thread? Please, let's get back on topic to Oppenheimer and Sykes.



Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on July 30, 2012, 11:20:57 AM
So...Do their books still hold any weight on the question of British origins, and if not, why?

I quote Professor Mark Jobling (Leicester University) in his lecture at the conference  Ancient Britons, Wales, and Europe: New research in Genetics, Archaeology and Linguistics (National Museum of Wales Cardiff 4 June 2011)

Quote
Archaeologists by contrast like to write books. They are used to books. They like books such as Stephen Oppenheimer, The Origins of the British (2006). They read Oppenheimer and even quote him. They seem to believe this book. Geneticists don't believe it. His dating is wrong. His clusters are wrong.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: inver2b1 on July 30, 2012, 11:59:13 AM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?
Was it just his R1b & R1a stuff that was flawes, or was his I haplogroup stuff wrong?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 30, 2012, 12:03:00 PM
Oppenheimer's book is worthless.  He basically gets everything wrong.  Sykes is not so bad because he didnt claim too much and stayed rather vague.  He did however get a lot wrong too.  I have both books but they are now useless.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: avalon on July 30, 2012, 12:11:56 PM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?
Was it just his R1b & R1a stuff that was flawes, or was his I haplogroup stuff wrong?

I wouldn't be surprised. If I recall correctly, Oppenheimer believed that English was spoken in pre-Roman Britain.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: inver2b1 on July 30, 2012, 12:12:30 PM
Oppenheimer's book is worthless.  He basically gets everything wrong.  Sykes is not so bad because he didnt claim too much and stayed rather vague.  He did however get a lot wrong too.  I have both books but they are now useless.

Regarding the Irish tv show "Blood of the Irish", was that just a re-hash of the main ideas of both books?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 30, 2012, 12:19:54 PM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?
Was it just his R1b & R1a stuff that was flawes, or was his I haplogroup stuff wrong?
I don't know what Oppenheimer wrote on hg I in origins of the British but in Celtic from the West he apparently now believes hg I was Celtic (!) and is still sticking to his belief the majority of Brits are Paleolithic.

Quote
Regarding the Irish tv show "Blood of the Irish", was that just a re-hash of the main ideas of both books?
Yeah. Oppenheimer's work has, uh, contaminated other TV documentaries, such as How God made the English where there was a interview with him.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Castlebob on July 30, 2012, 12:22:32 PM
I'd imagine writing a book concerning DNA is fraught with problems. The situation with monthly magazines is that the Xmas edition is often compiled towards the end of summer, & that can cause journalists endless embarrassment.
Because DNA is a rapidly-moving science, I'd guess that authors would be extremely fretful lest a new test was about to scupper their new work's assertions.
I occasionally re-read Henri Hubert's incredible work, then have to check recent studies to see how they compare. I would think the pressure put on Oppenheimer & others was similar to the newspaper industry.  I can imagine publisher's wouldn't be too impressed with phrases like "R-P312  MIGHT have been present in the year X, but I really need more need more hard data to state that with confidence." They are probably looking for something 'sexy'  to push book sales with.
As has been pointed out, there's probably a fair degree of professional rivalry between the various scientific branches. I dare say that an archaeologist wouldn't particularly enjoy stating that a site dated from 200 AD, only for a DNA expert to later state that the human  remains were   from 1,000 years earlier.
I find the internet is also problematic: I sometimes start absorbing info about Y-DNA  on a website, then realise it's from 2004. Find a more recent site & you realise the earlier work was flawed.
Being charitable, I suppose all we can do is applaud Oppenheimer & others for being brave enough to dip their toe, thereby generating public awareness.
Cheers,
Bob


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: inver2b1 on July 30, 2012, 12:24:25 PM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?
Was it just his R1b & R1a stuff that was flawes, or was his I haplogroup stuff wrong?
I don't know what Oppenheimer wrote on hg I in origins of the British but in Celtic from the West he apparently now believes hg I was Celtic (!) and is still sticking to his belief the majority of Brits are Paleolithic.

Quote
Regarding the Irish tv show "Blood of the Irish", was that just a re-hash of the main ideas of both books?
Yeah. Oppenheimer's work has, uh, contaminated other TV documentaries, such as How God made the English where there was a interview with him.

Thanks.

Barry Cunliffe has a book coming out in October where he uses more recent DNA findings. Should be interesting.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 30, 2012, 12:32:32 PM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?
Was it just his R1b & R1a stuff that was flawes, or was his I haplogroup stuff wrong?
I don't know what Oppenheimer wrote on hg I in origins of the British but in Celtic from the West he apparently now believes hg I was Celtic (!) and is still sticking to his belief the majority of Brits are Paleolithic.

Quote
Regarding the Irish tv show "Blood of the Irish", was that just a re-hash of the main ideas of both books?
Yeah. Oppenheimer's work has, uh, contaminated other TV documentaries, such as How God made the English where there was a interview with him.

Thanks.

Barry Cunliffe has a book coming out in October where he uses more recent DNA findings. Should be interesting.
It's called Britain begins. Description from Amazon:

Quote
The last Ice Age, which came to an end about 12,000 years ago, swept the bands of hunter gatherers from the face of the land that was to become Britain and Ireland, but as the ice sheets retreated and the climate improved so human groups spread slowly northwards, re-colonizing the land that had been laid waste. From that time onwards Britain and Ireland have been continuously inhabited and the resident population has increased from a few hundreds to more than 60 million. Britain Begins is nothing less than the story of the origins of the British and the Irish peoples, from around 10,000BC to the eve of the Norman Conquest. Using the most up to date archaeological evidence together with new work on DNA and other scientific techniques which help us to trace the origins and movements of these early settlers, Barry Cunliffe offers a rich narrative account of the first islanders - who they were, where they came from, and how they interacted one with another. Underlying this narrative throughout is the story of the sea, which allowed the islanders and their continental neighbours to be in constant contact. The story told by the archaeological evidence, in later periods augmented by historical texts, satisfies our need to know who we are and where we come from. But before the development of the discipline of archaeology, people used what scraps there were, gleaned from Biblical and classical texts, to create a largely mythological origin for the British. Britain Begins also explores the development of these early myths, which show our ancestors attempting to understand their origins. And, as Cunliffe shows, today's archaeologists are driven by the same desire to understand the past - the only real difference is that we have vastly more evidence to work with.

From the wording of the description it seems Cunliffe subsribes to the Paleolithic hypothesis.




Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Arch Y. on July 30, 2012, 12:54:54 PM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?
Was it just his R1b & R1a stuff that was flawes, or was his I haplogroup stuff wrong?
I don't know what Oppenheimer wrote on hg I in origins of the British but in Celtic from the West he apparently now believes hg I was Celtic (!) and is still sticking to his belief the majority of Brits are Paleolithic.

Quote
Regarding the Irish tv show "Blood of the Irish", was that just a re-hash of the main ideas of both books?
Yeah. Oppenheimer's work has, uh, contaminated other TV documentaries, such as How God made the English where there was a interview with him.

Thanks.

Barry Cunliffe has a book coming out in October where he uses more recent DNA findings. Should be interesting.

I have great respect and admiration for Cunliffe, I certainly hope his new book is well informed on the subject of ancient DNA and not contaminated by Sykes or Oppenheimer.

Arch


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: glentane on July 30, 2012, 01:42:33 PM
Quote from: Jobling
Archaeologists by contrast like to write books. They are used to books. They like books such as Stephen Oppenheimer, The Origins of the British (2006). They read Oppenheimer and even quote him. They seem to believe this book. Geneticists don't believe it. His dating is wrong. His clusters are wrong.
He must mix with a rather more exalted class of archaeologist than I do. The sort that write books, for instance.
I've yet to run across one of the less fragrant sort, who, if they've bothered to read it in the first place, usually when it first came out, didn't regard the archaeological content as anything less than risible, verging on fantasy-genre fiction, or WoW.
And you really don't want to know what they call Barry Cunliffe, either ..
He seems to have inherited some of the flak that Grahame Clark used to get for his hypothetical long-range deep-sea mesolithic fisherfolk, with especial vitriol being reserved for those who linked it with  the onset of "Atlantic Facade" megalithism as some sort of unitary Kulturkreis. Rather than a lack of suitable timber ...

But at least he gets off his big end and writes books, instead of grumbling in the boozer. Agree with Bob. God loves a tryer!

On the other hand, being simple souls, those few who even tried to understand it were mightily impressed by the sciency stuff. All that genetics. Must be right, 'e's a scientist an' that, innit? Bound to know what he's talking about .. them other scientists wouldn't let 'im talk rot, would they, hey?
"Paging Professor Jobling ..."

The hazards of countenancing the interdisciplinary carpetbagger, eh?
I can think of more than a few who've made a lucrative career in or out of archaeology by pretending expertise in the one, but only in the presence of practitioners of the other.
Usually something harmless and not too costly, like bones, or statistics, or petrology. And computers most of all, in the days when they were grey and ate 5.25" floppies, with the processor made of flint or something. Now that I.T. is a proper trade they've been outed, one by one :)


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Bren123 on July 30, 2012, 04:02:19 PM
Didn't Oppenheimer also get a lot of criticism from linguists?


Yes!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Bren123 on July 30, 2012, 04:14:48 PM

And you really don't want to know what they call Barry Cunliffe, either ..
He seems to have inherited some of the flak that Grahame Clark used to get for his hypothetical long-range deep-sea mesolithic fisherfolk, with especial vitriol being reserved for those who linked it with  the onset of "Atlantic Facade" megalithism as some sort of unitary Kulturkreis. Rather than a lack of suitable timber ...



So these archaeologists you know;what do they think of the celtic from the west hypothesis?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: glentane on July 30, 2012, 05:22:06 PM
So these archaeologists you know;what do they think of the celtic from the west hypothesis?
Insofar as they think of anything at all, other than where their next meal is coming from, I think it's completely unknown even as a conjecture.
There's a vague acceptance of beaker "package" a la Shennan being the terminus post quem for arrival, some minority burbling over it even being a dialect of some sort of imaginary pan-european neolithic language continuum (yah! rilly!) in which the NW groups gradually became more "celtic" (a bit like John Boardman's answer to the question "who were the greeks?". Ans. "they were always becoming greek"), and a bit of speculating over iberian peninsula inscriptions, with the tacit understanding that the celtic element there is intrusive from 'somewhere to the east'.

Don't get me wrong, they're smart people. But all that theoretical stuff is for the linguists, anthropologists and prehistorians.
Way above their pay grade, as they'd be the first to insist. They deal strictly in the concrete and tangible.
Language is an irrelevance to them, unless it's been scratched on a rock by some grieving tribesman.

Most at a guess would be quite happy with its oldest forms drifting in on top of some already not-too-dissimilar substrate during Dev.-Rim./Middle Bronze Age/Urnfield times, from roots as far back as Unetice at a push.
Before that it would be I suppose unwise and anachronistic to even use such terms as "celtic", "italic", "german" or "slavonic".

But I don't know anyone who requires a non-central-europe-in-the-broadest-most-handwaving-sense origin to fit in with whatever they might be working on. Irremediably provincial, yer diggers and the like.
 tl;dr
Sorry Bren I have no data on that. Language just isn't part of their mental landscape, I'd guess.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 31, 2012, 05:56:21 AM
I read Oppenheimer's book, The Origins of the British, three or four times soon after it was published. It was entertaining, but I always thought it was wrong, mainly because it just assumed up front that R1b was in the F-C Ice Age refuge and expanded from there after the LGM. Oppenheimer also used 6-marker haplotypes, which are much too small to be of much use. For example, I fit in his "FMH" (Frisian Modal Haplotype) category (I think it was called that), but I am L21+.

That book has done a lot of damage because it popularized error.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 31, 2012, 06:26:10 AM
I read Oppenheimer's book, The Origins of the British, three or four times soon after it was published. It was entertaining, but I always thought it was wrong, mainly because it just assumed up front that R1b was in the F-C Ice Age refuge and expanded from there after the LGM. Oppenheimer also used 6-marker haplotypes, which are much too small to be of much use. For example, I fit in his "FMH" (Frisian Modal Haplotype) category (I think it was called that), but I am L21+.

That book has done a lot of damage because it popularized error.
On Oppenheimer's clans, Campbell did a pretty good "deconstruction" of them.

http://www.jogg.info/32/campbell.pdf

His use of 6 markers was a major flaw, as Campbell points out.

Quote
Analysis of the results of Oppenheimer’s genotyping has
been illuminating.  When Oppenheimer Clans are
viewed on Ron Scott’s Web site as series of 12- or 25-
marker haplotypes, there does not appear to be any
obvious pattern among the Clan designations. 
However, when each participant’s markers are reduced
to the six microsatellites present in the underlying
Capelli/Oppenheimer dataset,  a definite pattern begins
to emerge –   i.e. a unique combination of these six
markers seem to result in a unique Oppenheimer cluster.

Ofcourse we now know most British sub-clades of R1b are rare-ish in Iberia.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 31, 2012, 06:48:19 AM
Exactly. In short, "clusters" or "clans" at 6 markers come apart at 12 and 25 markers. And 12 and 25 markers aren't a lot either. Clusters at 12 and 25 markers come apart at 37, and some 37-marker clusters start to come apart at 67 markers.

I think it was Ken Nordtvedt who dubbed Oppenheimer's str data "bikini haplotypes".


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 31, 2012, 07:07:30 AM
Exactly. In short, "clusters" or "clans" at 6 markers come apart at 12 and 25 markers. And 12 and 25 markers aren't a lot either. Clusters at 12 and 25 markers come apart at 37, and some 37-marker clusters start to come apart at 67 markers.

I think it was Ken Nordtvedt who dubbed Oppenheimer's str data "bikini haplotypes".
It was John McEwan, in a discussion of rootsweb. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/genealogy-dna/2007-01/1169267906


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 31, 2012, 07:55:14 AM
Exactly. In short, "clusters" or "clans" at 6 markers come apart at 12 and 25 markers. And 12 and 25 markers aren't a lot either. Clusters at 12 and 25 markers come apart at 37, and some 37-marker clusters start to come apart at 67 markers.

I think it was Ken Nordtvedt who dubbed Oppenheimer's str data "bikini haplotypes".
It was John McEwan, in a discussion of rootsweb. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/genealogy-dna/2007-01/1169267906

A voice from the dim past . . .  :-)


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 31, 2012, 07:55:33 AM
It was John McEwan, in a discussion of rootsweb. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/genealogy-dna/2007-01/1169267906
For being a newbie, Mkk demonstrates a deep knowledge and frequence of the forums!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 31, 2012, 08:09:09 AM
It was John McEwan, in a discussion of rootsweb. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/genealogy-dna/2007-01/1169267906
For being a newbie, Mkk demonstrates a deep knowledge and frequence of the forums!

I did think only us old timers remembered John McEwan, but maybe googling "bikini haplotype" would do it?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on July 31, 2012, 10:11:30 AM
It was John McEwan, in a discussion of rootsweb. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/genealogy-dna/2007-01/1169267906
For being a newbie, Mkk demonstrates a deep knowledge and frequence of the forums!
I did think only us old timers remembered John McEwan, but maybe googling "bikini haplotype" would do it?
I just searched the rootswebs Mailing List archives for that term (knowing that that's where Nordvedt posts a lot)


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 31, 2012, 11:13:26 AM
The problem with ivory tower academia is they dont admit when its obvious they are wrong.  The man/woman who never got things wrong in the man/wowen who never did anything as they say. 


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 31, 2012, 05:06:38 PM
One giveaway about these books is that you can pick them up for the price of a beer now.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Arch Y. on July 31, 2012, 07:20:33 PM
One giveaway about these books is that you can pick them up for the price of a beer now.

Actually, the price of a gumball is more like it (check eBay or Amazon). BTW, beer will always be better than books--it brings us wisdom in the most profound ways.

Arch


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on July 31, 2012, 07:22:25 PM
It looks good on my bookshelf. I bought the nice, fat, hardcover version.

And I make my own beer anyway.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: razyn on August 12, 2012, 08:52:55 AM
I paid actual money for Celtic from the West -- because the local public libraries (which are big) don't have it, and it's hard to park at the ones that do (Library of Congress, several universities).  And I've been chugging along through the thing... came to the chapter by Oppenheimer, and it was like stepping back in time.  Where has this guy been?  Oh... I see, in his library.  Which seems well stocked with DNA studies by, hmm, Oppenheimer.

Anyway, it's hard to read and wince at the same time, so it took a while, but I've plowed through.  I agree with Alan T.H. that he basically got everything wrong (the dates, the clusters).  But then this was for a conference way back in 2008, the infancy of our burgeoning science.  And he kept citing his own 2006 work, which was probably written in about 2004.  And if that was "juried," the jury was at least as underinformed as the author; who knew anything, then?  Not I, certainly.

Still, it seems intrusive, in an otherwise fairly interesting book.  Now, all I need to do is learn to read Tartessian, and I can move on to the more innovative parts.  For instance, whatever was scratched on rocks by grieving tribesmen.  (Good one, Glentane.)

Oh, one other thing -- the lengthy essay by Raimund Karl ("The Celts from Everywhere and Nowhere") is actually good stuff, that almost certainly needed to be said; but the author's penchant for use of quotation marks around every fourth word or so gets old, before one is very far into it.  I kept thinking about this website:

http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/

The essay could also have been read aloud by Victor Borge, with phonetic punctuation.  Too late, I guess.

 


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 12, 2012, 09:05:22 AM
Razyn,

What were Oppenheimer's main points in his contribution to Celtic from the west? Apparently he's still pushing his stone age British stuff.



Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: razyn on August 12, 2012, 09:47:49 AM
I wouldn't want to say what he's pushing now.  The paperback edition of Celtic from the West says 2012 on the title page, but it's still the report from a 2008 conference.  At that time, he was just quoting himself, saying the 2006 vintage things this thread has objected to.  Using Zhivotovsky magical multipliers (I assume), to make events that interest him happen about three to seven times earlier than they actually did happen.  R1b guys who had wintered in Spain, swarming back to populate the thawing British Isles 18K ybp, and that sort of thing.

I believe the British term for this is a "load of bollocks."  May be mistaken, I just have a reading knowledge of British.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 12, 2012, 10:27:34 AM
Quote
I wouldn't want to say what he's pushing now.
As I noted earlier in the thread, in the 3rd episode of How God made the English, there was a interview with him and he was still supporting his old ideas. I'm not sure when the interview was filmed, probably last year.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: alan trowel hands. on August 12, 2012, 02:15:33 PM
One giveaway about these books is that you can pick them up for the price of a beer now.

Actually, the price of a gumball is more like it (check eBay or Amazon). BTW, beer will always be better than books--it brings us wisdom in the most profound ways.

Arch

lol true.  You could hardly give away a copy now.  Still, it was briefly interesting and provided a talking point.  Hopefully a new popular book will undo the new myths this created.  Maybe Jean's book will do the job!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jdean on August 12, 2012, 02:23:01 PM
I wouldn't want to say what he's pushing now.  The paperback edition of Celtic from the West says 2012 on the title page, but it's still the report from a 2008 conference.  At that time, he was just quoting himself, saying the 2006 vintage things this thread has objected to.  Using Zhivotovsky magical multipliers (I assume), to make events that interest him happen about three to seven times earlier than they actually did happen.  R1b guys who had wintered in Spain, swarming back to populate the thawing British Isles 18K ybp, and that sort of thing.

I believe the British term for this is a "load of bollocks."  May be mistaken, I just have a reading knowledge of British.

Yep, 'total tosh' would work to but a little old fashioned, bollocks sounds right :)


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Castlebob on August 12, 2012, 02:33:06 PM
Cockneys might call it a 'Lot of pony!'
Cheers,
Bob


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jdean on August 12, 2012, 02:51:30 PM
Cockneys might call it a 'Lot of pony!'
Cheers,
Bob

I'm probably going to regret asking this but what does pony rhyme with ? I only just learnt where 'Burk' came from and the answer couldn't be repeated here !!!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: razyn on August 12, 2012, 02:53:52 PM
Wouldn't it be something like "pony and cart," and then we have to guess not only the rhyme, but also the missing word it's actually rhyming?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Castlebob on August 12, 2012, 03:02:25 PM
Pony & trap!
Cheers,
Bob
PS Burk, pronounced as per lurk, is pretty commonly used on TV, however they did actually slip in the cruder 'Berk' pronounced Bark during an episode of BBC TV's 'Fools & Horses' once. They didn't get a single complaint. I can't fully explain it here, except to say there was a famous hunt in Berkshire!


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jdean on August 12, 2012, 04:57:59 PM
Pony & trap!
Cheers,
Bob
PS Burk, pronounced as per lurk, is pretty commonly used on TV, however they did actually slip in the cruder 'Berk' pronounced Bark during an episode of BBC TV's 'Fools & Horses' once. They didn't get a single complaint. I can't fully explain it here, except to say there was a famous hunt in Berkshire!

Thanks

Baloney kept coming into my head, which wouldn't make any sense for a Cockney phrase.

Congrats on managing to explaining Burk to the uninitiated as well :)

Edit : Just thought I ought to make it clear to people outside of the UK, just in case they aren't familiar with the phrase, 'burk' now refers to an idiot and I don't think many people even over here know it's true origin though it is in the complete OED.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: A.D. on August 12, 2012, 09:39:13 PM
is it from 'Burke and Haire' the grave robbers I think?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 13, 2012, 09:49:37 AM
The important paper which started the continuity theory in Britain is Jim Wilson's Genetic evidence for different male and female roles during cultural transitions in the British Isles (2000).

Wilson starts:

"Archeologists once assumed that the British Isles were settled by successive waves of continental invaders, from Neolithic times onward. Today the pendulum has swung the other way, with archeologists tending to postulate considerable cultural exchange such as the establishment of trading networks, with little or no movement of people. It is likely, however, that the extent of genetic continuity in the face of cultural change has varied from case to case."

He goes on to explain why there may be continuity in the paternal lineages, arguments based on linguistic, mtDNA diveristy and blood type of the Basques, not yDNA of the British at all and warns the reader:

"We know of no other study, however, that provides direct evidence of a close relationship in the paternal heritage of the Basque and the Celtics peaking populations of Britain."

In 2005, Santos Alonso comments:

"the idea of a Basque genetic pool that shows little influence from both the Neolithic and later population flows, has spread through the literature as a circular argument that has led to use the Basque population as the representative gene pool of the first modern human settlers of Europe" and the study, 'The place of the Basques in the European Y-chromosome diversity landscape' concluded:

"However, the strong genetic drift experienced by the Basques does not allow us to consider Basques either the only or the best representatives of the ancestral European gene pool. Contrary to previous suggestions, we do not observe any particular link between Basques and Celtic populations beyond that provided by the Paleolithic ancestry common to European populations, nor we find evidence supporting Basques as the focus of major population expansions."

This was published around the same time as Oppenheimer's book but Oppenheimer does not take this evidence into account. Rather, Oppenheimer asumes Jim Wilson's hypothesis to be true despite Jim Wilson's warning that there is no proof of it.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: gtc on August 13, 2012, 10:30:58 AM
is it from 'Burke and Haire' the grave robbers I think?

See Castlebob's explanation.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jdean on August 13, 2012, 08:36:54 PM
is it from 'Burke and Haire' the grave robbers I think?

See Castlebob's explanation.

Yep, or look it up in the OED


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: A.D. on August 13, 2012, 10:11:16 PM
Castlebobs right, Ilooked up 'Burke and Haire' and found nothing. It was in the extreme SE of England I heard it used didn't know what it ment and still don't,  it's probably just made up. 


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: gtc on August 14, 2012, 11:53:07 AM
See Castlebob's explanation.

Yep, or look it up in the OED

All of this talk puts me in mind of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBdLhCbgJy8


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Castlebob on August 14, 2012, 12:12:48 PM
There are  a lot of modern Cockney sayings these days - some are made up & stick. Some of the young lads struggle to make themselves understood when speaking to the  older generations. Young lads say thing have gone 'Pete Tong' for wrong. I'm not sure , but think Pete Tong was a 1970s  star?
Anyway, I think I'd better stop now & leave the topic to get back on track!
Cheers,
Bob


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Castlebob on August 14, 2012, 12:33:20 PM
Back in serious mode: Has Oppenheimer made any comments in recent months re his original theories? It would be fascinating to know if he still stands by his work.
Cheers,
Bob
PS I have to say it must be a thankless task going into print on a fast-moving science such as DNA.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: inver2b1 on August 14, 2012, 01:17:59 PM
Back in serious mode: Has Oppenheimer made any comments in recent months re his original theories? It would be fascinating to know if he still stands by his work.
Cheers,
Bob
PS I have to say it must be a thankless task going into print on a fast-moving science such as DNA.

What about Spencer Wells and natonal geographic, last time I cheked their site has the Iberia refuge idea for R1b and the Basques described as descendants of cro magnons.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: gtc on August 14, 2012, 01:27:47 PM
What about Spencer Wells and natonal geographic, last time I cheked their site has the Iberia refuge idea for R1b and the Basques described as descendants of cro magnons.

Wells is about to publish again in association with Geno 2.0

And I was told earlier this year that a revised edition his Deep Ancestry is supposedly in the works.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: inver2b1 on August 14, 2012, 01:37:27 PM
Good, I think Wells is a good public face for the field of genetics.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on August 14, 2012, 01:49:13 PM
I would be surprised if he changes his original position much, although he did leave himself an out in Deep Ancestry when he spoke of the disconnect in Europe between y-dna and mtDNA.

Quote from: Spencer Wells
Although we see connections between western Asia and European mtDNA lineages, it is not at all clear that these lineages entered Europe from Central Asia. This may be due to incomplete sampling, or perhaps incomplete knowledge about the extent of mtDNA diversity in Central Asia (only a few hundred Central Asian samples have been studied, as opposed to tens of thousands of Europeans). At the moment it appears that most mtDNA diversity in Europe came from the Middle East, while the large R1a1 and R1b clans on the male side have an ultimate origin in Central Asia. Reconciling these stories is one of the goals of the Genographic Project (Deep Ancestry, p. 104).


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 14, 2012, 02:18:55 PM
Back in serious mode: Has Oppenheimer made any comments in recent months re his original theories? It would be fascinating to know if he still stands by his work.
Cheers,
Bob
PS I have to say it must be a thankless task going into print on a fast-moving science such as DNA.

What about Spencer Wells and natonal geographic, last time I cheked their site has the Iberia refuge idea for R1b and the Basques described as descendants of cro magnons.
Yep, it still says that on it's website.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: inver2b1 on August 14, 2012, 02:38:43 PM
One giveaway about these books is that you can pick them up for the price of a beer now.

Actually, the price of a gumball is more like it (check eBay or Amazon). BTW, beer will always be better than books--it brings us wisdom in the most profound ways.

Arch

lol true.  You could hardly give away a copy now.  Still, it was briefly interesting and provided a talking point.  Hopefully a new popular book will undo the new myths this created.  Maybe Jean's book will do the job!

When is Jean's book coming out?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 14, 2012, 03:38:16 PM
One giveaway about these books is that you can pick them up for the price of a beer now.

Actually, the price of a gumball is more like it (check eBay or Amazon). BTW, beer will always be better than books--it brings us wisdom in the most profound ways.

Arch

lol true.  You could hardly give away a copy now.  Still, it was briefly interesting and provided a talking point.  Hopefully a new popular book will undo the new myths this created.  Maybe Jean's book will do the job!

When is Jean's book coming out?
The provisional publication date is September 2013.

This from the building history website. For a preview you can put it's into Way Back machine.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 05:36:26 AM
In the meantime, there is a new review paper out, which gives a similar overall picture to mine:
Ron Pinhasi, Mark G. Thomas, Michael Hofreiter, Mathias Currat, Joachim Burger, The genetic history of Europeans (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2012.06.006), Trends in Genetics.

For those who have access, there is a copy in the Mini-Library > Population Genetics > Europe.

Or Dienekes sucks out the marrow (http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/the-genetic-history-of-europeans.html).


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 15, 2012, 01:41:24 PM
In the meantime, there is a new review paper out, which gives a similar overall picture to mine:
Ron Pinhasi, Mark G. Thomas, Michael Hofreiter, Mathias Currat, Joachim Burger, The genetic history of Europeans (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2012.06.006), Trends in Genetics.

For those who have access, there is a copy in the Mini-Library > Population Genetics > Europe.

Or Dienekes sucks out the marrow (http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/the-genetic-history-of-europeans.html).


Here is a pre press version of The Genetic History of Europeans, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/publications/articles/2012/TIGS_972_final_1_.pdf (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/publications/articles/2012/TIGS_972_final_1_.pdf)


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 15, 2012, 02:18:02 PM
The experts are still several steps behind the amateurs, it seems.

While they begin to consider Neolithic migrations to Europe, they seem almost oblivious to the fact that the two most common European lineages - r1a and r1b - are absent so far from Neolithic sites.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 02:26:11 PM
@ Mkk

This paper is actually up to speed. Though it does not talk specifically about R1a or  R1b, and it is careful not to make too much of the astonishing dominance of G2a in  the Neolithic Y-DNA published so far (after all we haven't got that much), the authors have got the message alright. They make that clear both in the abstract:

Quote
The evolutionary history of modern humans is characterized by numerous migrations driven by environmental change, population pressures, and cultural innovations. In Europe, the events most widely considered to have had a major impact on patterns of genetic diversity are the initial colonization of the continent by anatomically modern humans (AMH), the last glacial maximum, and the Neolithic transition. For some decades it was assumed that the geographical structuring of genetic diversity within Europe was mainly the result of gene flow during and soon after the Neolithic transition, but recent advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, computer simulation modeling, and ancient DNA (aDNA) analyses are challenging this simplistic view. Here we review the current knowledge on the evolutionary history of humans in Europe based on archaeological and genetic data.

and these snippets.

Quote
The inferred patterns of discontinuity between Neolithic and modern populations in Europe raise questions about which demographic processes reshaped European genetic variation after the Neolithic transition.... Future research should also reveal the effects of post-Neolithic demographic processes, including migration events, which preliminary data suggest had a major impact upon the distribution of genetic variation. These include events associated with Bronze Age civilizations, Iron Age cultures, and later migrations, including those triggered by the rise and fall of Empires.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 15, 2012, 03:03:34 PM
they seem almost oblivious to the fact that the two most common European lineages - r1a and r1b - are absent so far from Neolithic sites.

Given that yDNA degenerates so readily and that we have only a tiny handful of results, one cannot say that there was no R1b or R1a at the start of the neolithic, even if one suspects it. In time, a picture will emerge but there is no point in rushing to unsafe conclusions.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Richard Rocca on August 15, 2012, 03:05:07 PM
That is my main gripe with the paper - it does not mention R1a nor R1b and yet it is labeled "The Genetic History of Europeans". Perhaps they did not know about the Bell Beaker R1b, but the discovery of R1a in Corded Ware is quite 'old' now (2008) and should have been included.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 15, 2012, 03:56:42 PM
they seem almost oblivious to the fact that the two most common European lineages - r1a and r1b - are absent so far from Neolithic sites.

Given that yDNA degenerates so readily and that we have only a tiny handful of results, one cannot say that there was no R1b or R1a at the start of the neolithic, even if one suspects it. In time, a picture will emerge but there is no point in rushing to unsafe conclusions.
I agree. But still, along with the evidence from TRMCA's, which fall around the 4500 mark, at the present there's doesn't seem to be much of a case those two haplogroups were common in central-western Europe in the Neolithic. The authors of the paper should atleast have considered these preliminary results.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 04:33:24 PM
@ Mkk

I suspect that falls into the category of

Quote
Future research should also reveal the effects of post-Neolithic demographic processes, including migration events, which preliminary data suggest had a major impact upon the distribution of genetic variation.

This crew had already developed suspicions that there was limited continuity from the Neolithic on the basis of ancient mtDNA. That and the lack of continuity from the few autosomal results as well is enough I think to be going on with. They have been willing to put down a marker for where things are headed.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 04:38:08 PM
By the way, Spencer Wells appears to approve of the paper. At least he linked to the post on it by Dienekes (from his Facebook account.)  


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 15, 2012, 04:49:15 PM
I often wonder what these authors and researchers would think if they were to read this forum and others like it. I wonder what their reaction would be to the term SNP; a term with which I am certain none are familiar.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 04:52:26 PM
@ eochaidh

The acronym SNP for single-nucleotide polymorphism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-nucleotide_polymorphism) was in fact coined by geneticists. We are using it because they do.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 15, 2012, 04:56:46 PM
@ eochaidh

The acronym SNP for single-nucleotide polymorphism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-nucleotide_polymorphism) was in fact coined by geneticists. We are using it because they do.

Is the term used in this new book, "The Genetic History of Europeans"?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: razyn on August 15, 2012, 05:07:21 PM
I was a little surprised, maybe even concerned, to read this (in Box 2 of the new paper):

Quote
Although the end of classical PCR methods is near, the use of NGS is no guarantee for reliable data

Reliability aside, what will we (the living, or nearly so) get, if FTDNA and the other commercial labs switch over to NGS?  I kind of thought PCR based Sanger sequencing was what enabled the allele-counting, STR technique.  Not that I really understand this stuff, mostly I just look at the pictures.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 05:48:22 PM
Is the term used in this new book, "The Genetic History of Europeans"?

It is not a book. It is a review paper i.e. not an original genetic study, but an overview covering broad trends in the research into the peopling of Europe. It is seven A4 pages of text, plus references. It does explain the acronym SNP (on page 4).

If you are talking about my book, yes I explain the acronym SNP.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 15, 2012, 05:58:06 PM
I would think that even in a paper called "The Genetic History of Europeans" that the term SNP would be used. I can't even imagine that if someone started a thread on this forum called "The Genetic History of Europeans", they wouldn't use the term SNP in their opening post.

I'm almost completely stupid, yet if I were to try to explain The Genetic History of Europeans to a 14 year old, I would use the term SNP in even a 10 minute talk. Why, I have even done so!  :)


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 15, 2012, 06:00:31 PM
@ eochaidh

My apologies. I skimmed through to check, when you asked your question, and missed the point at which they do indeed explain the ancronym SNP - near the top of page 4.

Why not read the paper yourself?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 15, 2012, 06:07:09 PM
I have attempted to download it with no luck. I'll try again later at home.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: OConnor on August 15, 2012, 10:00:38 PM
I believe it has been questioned before, that cremation may be why no pre-beaker adna R1b types have been found yet. I guess it's a very long shot.

Finding G and other adna groups other than R1b it is a wonder to me that no one has questioned if they were slaves. Like when L21 types were found in Norway.

I am not seriously suggesting this is what transpired.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 15, 2012, 10:33:59 PM
I may be way off base, but I get the feeling these guys left out R1b and R1a purposely. I think they are leaning toward an older age of R1b; one that would put it in the Neolithic expansion.



Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: OConnor on August 15, 2012, 11:55:37 PM
do you mean an early neolithic instead of a late neolithic.?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 16, 2012, 04:01:36 AM
do you mean an early neolithic instead of a late neolithic.?
The Neolithic is defined as the time between the adoption of agriculture, and the working of copper. That's why it's called neolithic = new stone. It was theorized my Myres and other authors that R1b spread into Europe with the initial migration of Near Eastern farmers to Europe beggining about 10,000 years ago. But, neither the TRMCA dates nor the aDNA samples have supported this theory. So online hobbyists have theorized that the spread of R1b into Europe took place later, 6000-5000 years ago.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 16, 2012, 05:42:10 AM
I think they are leaning toward an older age of R1b; one that would put it in the Neolithic expansion.

If they wanted to say that, nothing could be easier. They could have cited several published papers which do so. Instead they criticised the whole approach of using modern DNA to trace a cline, and then trying to pin a date on it.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 16, 2012, 07:50:06 AM
I would think that even in a paper called "The Genetic History of Europeans" that the term SNP would be used.

Yes they use it.

"Third, studies differ in the type of molecular data considered [classical allele frequencies, DNA sequences, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), short tandem repeats (STRs)] and the kind of inference approaches used."


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 16, 2012, 07:56:48 AM
I may be way off base, but I get the feeling these guys left out R1b and R1a purposely. I think they are leaning toward an older age of R1b; one that would put it in the Neolithic expansion.

That's just your personal paranoia. You need to read these studies before accusing the authors of scientific fraud.

The number of SNPs identified in ancient remains amounts to a handful over a period covering thousands of years. Even with modern statistical methods, it is impossible to make any inferences as to what was not in europe. The only sound data is if, for example, G2 was found in a grave dated at some point in time. It is not possible to predict the presence of anything not yet found.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: razyn on August 16, 2012, 08:13:30 AM
they criticised the whole approach of using modern DNA to trace a cline, and then trying to pin a date on it.

As well they might, they are looking for harder science than we are doing here.  But a big part of that is lack of precision in a couple of our variables, the mutation rate and the length of a generation.  It doesn't mean that SNPs don't have clines; but every one of them could use a little calibration (notably by digging up some dead guys in dated contexts who have the SNP), and we don't know how many SNPs in a given lineage exist that we haven't yet found.  But we're working on it, and we're getting closer.

And btw I posted about an example of that, not long ago -- to an overwhelming chorus of nobody responding:

http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=10645.msg132339#msg132339


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 16, 2012, 08:16:36 AM
Quote
That's just your personal paranoia. You need to read these studies before accusing the authors of scientific fraud.
Nobody's accusing the authors of "scientific fraud". What we're saying is their paper was lacking, as it didn't properly take into account post-Neolithic migrations into Europe. It's hard to blame them for it though, as the only (as far as I know) author that's published in the scientific literature about the origins of e.g R1b is Anatole Klyosov, who only recently published his Arabins paper.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mike Walsh on August 16, 2012, 08:22:26 AM
... It's hard to blame them for it though, as the only (as far as I know) author that's published in the scientific literature about the origins of e.g R1b is Anatole Klyosov, who only recently published his Arabins paper.
You might want to google "R1b" in tandem with "Myres", "Wells", "Barlaresque" and "Busby", to find a few other studies.
I've got links to them here:  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b-YDNA/links/


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 16, 2012, 08:36:40 AM
Nobody's accusing the authors of "scientific fraud".

Scientific fraud is exactly what is alleged in this statement:

"I get the feeling these guys left out R1b and R1a purposely. I think they are leaning toward an older age of R1b; one that would put it in the Neolithic expansion."

If you deliberately leave something out because you wish for a pre determined outcome, that is scientific fraud. There is no question about it.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 16, 2012, 08:43:18 AM
Nobody's accusing the authors of "scientific fraud".

Scientific fraud is exactly what is alleged in this statement:

"I get the feeling these guys left out R1b and R1a purposely. I think they are leaning toward an older age of R1b; one that would put it in the Neolithic expansion."

If you deliberately leave something out because you wish for a pre determined outcome, that is scientific fraud. There is no question about it.

Lol, you're a funny, funny man Authurn! You left off my opening line, "I may be way of base....". You're also overlooking the line "I get the feeling..."

Leaving out something purposely isn't fraud. You may want to address it later and are currently seting the groundwork.

Do you exercise or nap?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 16, 2012, 08:45:04 AM
... It's hard to blame them for it though, as the only (as far as I know) author that's published in the scientific literature about the origins of e.g R1b is Anatole Klyosov, who only recently published his Arabins paper.
You might want to google "R1b" in tandem with "Myres", "Wells", "Barlaresque" and "Busby", to find a few other studies.
I've got links to them here:  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b-YDNA/links/
Sorry, I meant that Klyosov was the only author to posit a Bronze age origin of R1b in Central-Western Europe.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: authun on August 16, 2012, 09:05:06 AM
Message Deleted.  Terry


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 16, 2012, 09:26:57 AM
Oh dear me! Someone is angry! Cocktail?


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 16, 2012, 09:48:38 AM
@ authun

Dr. Roy King is a member of the English Molgen forum that was set up to replace DNA forums. However the latest offering as a replacement sacrificed speed for solid preparation and got its moderation in place before opening, which is a big plus. They seem unlikely to let in known troublemakers. They are looking for high standards of contribution, and so seem most likely to attract academics. Could suit you.

Mark Thomas has been helpful to me too. I had a copy of another work of his re migration that is still in press.  It certainly is helpful of him to supply a copy online of this landmark review paper.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: eochaidh on August 16, 2012, 10:58:22 AM
Okay, so the authors of the paper left out R1b and R1a because:

A) They are unaware of R1b and R1a

B) They don't think that R1b and R1a have any relevence to the genetic history of Europe.

C) They left R1b and R1a out purposely for undisclosed reasons.

D) (Insert your own idea here)

EDIT: Also, please note that I offered my opinion with the caveat "I may be way off base" and "I think". I also didn't call names.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 16, 2012, 11:13:24 AM
@ eochaidh

If you read the paper you will see that the authors do not mention Y-DNA haplogroups I, J, E, or indeed any other found in Europe except G2a, because that is the only one for which we have enough ancient DNA to be significant. And what is most significant about it is that this is not the most common Y-DNA haplogroup in modern Europe. OK we don't really have enough ancient Y-DNA yet to be drawing really solid conclusions. We don't have any published yet from hunter-gatherers. But they stick their necks out and say (about all this G2a in Neolithic Europeans) that "this result suggests that the spacial structure of European genetic variation was not fixed in the Neolithic but continued to be reshaped by subsequent demographic processes." Translation into Miles-speak: R1b and R1a must have arrived/spread widely later. Probably. We think.

No they don't spell out in so many words that the common Y-DNA haplogroups in Europe today are R1b and R1a. But anyone as well-versed in these matters as yourself does not need to be told that surely. They know that. You know that. All of us here know that. Personally I do spell matters out for the complete newcomer. But then I'm addressing the general reader. In a book.



Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: rms2 on August 16, 2012, 11:33:32 AM
I enjoyed the paper. It is an excellent summary of the state of things at this point and is well written, with a helpful glossary of terms at the beginning. The approach was even handed and as objective as humanly possible.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 19, 2012, 04:49:50 AM
While we're on the subject of Sykes, what about his book "the seven daughters of Eve"? I've heard that his work hasn't been supported by ancient DNA, as the lineages he says are Paleolithic in Europe are non-existent or rarer than they are now so far.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 19, 2012, 08:28:32 AM
Seven Daughters of Eve has been completely overturned. But Sykes does have the excuse that it was created out of very, very limited data at that time on a very, very limited range of haplogroups. Very little was known about mtDNA in the Near East or indeed anywhere else very much. So things that seem obvious to us now were not obvious to Sykes. For example it is pretty clear now that U5 was born in Europe, but not U. From U in the Near East, some people went south in to North Africa, where U6 arose, while others moved into Europe, where U5 arose. So scrap Ursula's birth on Mount Parnasus. And so on. The only one of the origin locations he pictures for his seven daughters that is still holding up is Jasmine in the Near East, but his date is wrong. The latest estimate for J is long before farming.

By the time Seven Daughters was published in 2001, things were getting a bit clearer. Indeed Sykes had been one of the co-authors on Richards et al 2000, Tracing European Founder Lineages in the Near Eastern mtDNA Pool. The text for Seven Daughters was probably written well before publication.

  


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 19, 2012, 09:37:06 AM
Thanks for the reply. Although the origins and spread of mtDNA is harder to track as their distribution is more homogeneous, what are your current beliefs on the possible origins of the major haplogroups in Europe?

A broad outline appears to be that H = Neolithic farmer and U = Paleolithic hunter gatherer, but it appears both clades were present albeit at lower frequencies in both populations. There are also mtDNA hgs which appear to correlate with the spread of Indo-European.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 19, 2012, 01:43:42 PM
You can see for yourself in Ancient Western Eurasian DNA (http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/ancientdna.shtml) that the only mtDNA haplogroups that have been assigned with certainty to Europeans before the spread of farming into Europe are U and subclades of U. Some other subclades appear in groups who were still hunter-gatherers, but long after farming had arrived, and  living cheek by jowl with farmers. So we can guess that these other haplogroups came from farming people. (It is possible that there was some HV and/or R0, but testing was too limited in these cases to be sure.) 

So things are a whole lot simpler and more clear-cut than most of us expected. Even those of us who were extremely sceptical of the Sykes vision were bowled over by the first ancient DNA studies to give these clear results.

By the end of the Neolithic all the mtDNA haplogroups common in Europe today had arrived in Europe, but they were not necessarily spread around in the same proportions and places as they are now. By the end of the Bronze Age the picture is a lot closer to that of modern Europeans.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 19, 2012, 03:48:44 PM
A recent study on mtDNA gives a TRMCA date for H of just
 over 12,000 years, which correlates surprisingly well with the period just before the beggining of agriculture. It could be theorized that the H woman/women was among the first peoples to practise farming, thus giving her a population boost versus non-agricultural mtDNAs.

However, Dienekes has noted that the mutation rate assumed a Human-Chimp divergence rate of 7 million years. A new paper has put this at atleast 7-8 million years and as much as 13 million. Even if we (less than) double it though H is likely less than 20,000 years old.

Here's the TRMCAS from A “Copernican” Reassessment of the Human
Mitochondrial DNA Tree from its Root
supplemental table 5

The second number is the standard deviation

Quote
H 12846.0 773.4
H1 9888.6 880.6
H2 11905.3 1364.4
H3 8919.0 1062.6
H4 10617.3 1471.3
H5 9877.6 1401.7
H6 10945.6 1873.7
H7 8890.8 1685.1
H8 8341.0 3187.8
http://download.cell.com/AJHG/mmcs/journals/0002-9297/PIIS0002929712001462.mmc1.pdf


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Jean M on August 19, 2012, 04:01:14 PM
Yes I know. I keep an eye on the papers that Dienekes helpfully draws our attention to.

But the date of a mutation is not the same as the date that said mutation arrives in any particular place (other than the one it was born in). mtDNA H could have been born in the Near East at any date you please, but it will not immediately fly to every point on the globe.

So estimates for particular haplogroups are just one factor to bear in mind. We also need to think about evidence for migration, and most especially ancient DNA, which is solid proof of arrival. Even then lineages can die out, so that people today of a particular haplogroop could be descended from a later arrival than the one we see in aDNA. All very complex. But interesting.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Heber on August 19, 2012, 04:16:21 PM
My mtDNA haplogroup is H1C1. If I plot it's defining mutations back to H, based on aDNA found,  I find an interesting overlap with the defining mutations of my Y DF21 back to M269. Which raises the interesting question, did they migrate together or more probably were they random meetings. Where and when did they overlap. Has anybody looked at the overlap between mtDNA And Y SNPs and in particular H and R1b.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534763591605/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Mkk on August 20, 2012, 06:24:41 AM
My mtDNA haplogroup is H1C1. If I plot it's defining mutations back to H, based on aDNA found,  I find an interesting overlap with the defining mutations of my Y DF21 back to M269. Which raises the interesting question, did they migrate together or more probably were they random meetings. Where and when did they overlap. Has anybody looked at the overlap between mtDNA And Y SNPs and in particular H and R1b.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534763591605/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/
Maybe l23-related? We know H expanded out of the middle east, as did R1b.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: Trusty on December 30, 2015, 09:56:29 AM
Yes I know. I keep an eye on the papers that Dienekes helpfully draws our attention to.

But the date of a mutation is not the same as the date that said mutation arrives in any particular place (other than the one it was born in). mtDNA H could have been born in the Near East at any date you please, but it will not immediately fly to every point on the globe.

So estimates for particular haplogroups are just one factor to bear in mind. We also need to think about evidence for migration, and most of this PhenQ review (https://skinnyexpress.com/phenq-review) especially ancient DNA, which is solid proof of arrival. Even then lineages can die out, so that people today of a particular haplogroop could be descended from a later arrival than the one we see in aDNA. All very complex. But interesting.

The very fact that Sykes book was written for the BNP shows that he has an agenda. I don't trust anything by someone who has a bias.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: PansyPuckett on June 14, 2017, 03:26:35 PM
Yes I know. I keep an eye on the papers that Dienekes helpfully draws our attention to.

But the date of a mutation is not the same as the date that said mutation arrives in any particular place (other than the one it was born in). mtDNA H could have been born in the Near East at any date you please, but it will not immediately fly to every point on the globe.

So estimates for particular haplogroups are just one factor to bear in mind. We also need to think about evidence for migration,phenqwiki.com (http://phenqwiki.com/)and most especially ancient DNA, which is solid proof of arrival. Even then lineages can die out, so that people today of a particular haplogroop could be descended from a later arrival than the one we see in aDNA. All very complex. But interesting.
I don't trust anything by someone who has a bias.The very fact that Sykes book was written for the BNP shows that he has an agenda.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: lucileburt on August 19, 2017, 09:55:58 AM
Yes I know. I keep an eye on the papers that Dienekes helpfully draws our attention to.

But the date of a mutation is not the same as the date that said mutation arrives in any particular place (other than the one it was born in).aboutmens.com (http://aboutmens.com/) mtDNA H could have been born in the Near East at any date you please, but it will not immediately fly to every point on the globe.

So estimates for particular haplogroups are just one factor to bear in mind. We also need to think about evidence for migration, and most especially ancient DNA, which is solid proof of arrival. Even then lineages can die out, so that people today of a particular haplogroop could be descended from a later arrival than the one we see in aDNA. All very complex. But interesting.
that Sykes book was written for the BNP shows that he has an agenda.


Title: Re: Worth of Oppenheimer, Sykes et. al? / Origins of British people
Post by: ian231 on November 02, 2017, 07:25:08 AM
My mtDNA haplogroup is H1C1. If I plot it's defining mutations back to H, based on aDNA found,  I find an interesting overlap with the defining mutations of my Y DF21 back to M269. Which raises the interesting question, did they migrate together or more probably were they random meetings. Where and when did they overlap. Has anybody looked at the overlap between mtDNA And Y SNPs and in particular H and R1b.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534763591605/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/

While we're on the subject of Sykes, what about his book "the seven daughters of Eve"? I've heard that his work hasn't been supported by ancient DNA (http://healthworldjournal.com/phen375-a-factual-and-truthful-review-by-hwj/), as the lineages he says are Paleolithic in Europe are non-existent or rarer than they are now so far.