Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-11 > 1289780127

Subject: Re: [DNA] First Neolitic Y-DNA published
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:15:27 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <>

From: Dienekes Pontikos < >

> > wrote:
> Can you elaborate, please? Do you have crania of Upper Paleolitic R1b1? R1a1? Does anyone have? I can only refer you to my article "DNA Genealogy, craniometry, and the origin of Caucasioids", 2010, Januaty, pp. 1256-1309 (ibid).

>You claimed that Caucasoids originated in the Altai based on your
dating of some Y-chromosome lineages to about 20,000-years ago.
That is clearly not consistent with their presence in Upper
Paleolithic Europe (e.g., Mladec is 31,000-years old, and clearly
Caucasoid in morphology).

>Also, it is incorrect to equate Caucasoids with either R1b1 or R1a1.
While we can be fairly certain that R1b1 originated among Caucasoids,
it is incorrect that the place of origin of R1b1 has anything to do
with where Caucasoids originated, as most Caucasoids do not in fact
belong to this lineage.

Dear Dienekes,

Dear Dienekes,

May I notice that the discussion deviates from to be constructive? Please pay attention that I asked you a simple question (see above)- "Do you have crania of Upper Paleolitic R1b1? R1a1? Does anyone have?" 

Instead of honestly say - "no, I do not, and nobody does", you ventured into quite a different subject. This, indeed, does not serve a purpose of the discussion.     

Then, you have distorted my words (or maybe it was a poor choice of my words). I have never claimed in my studies that Caucasoids originated in South Siberia. R1a and R1b did, either there or in adjucent areas. Now you have my paper on origin of Europeoids and crania analysis, and you can see that I suggested that Europeoids have originated in the Eastern European Plain, and went apart, to the West and to the East. This explains why some very similar paleolithic tools dated around 40,000 ybp, were found both in Europe and in South Siberia. Anyway, it is my hypothesis on the origin of Europeoids, and anyone has a right to challenge it, however, with DATA, not just verbally and groundlessly.       

Now you see that your sentence "the place of origin of R1b1 has anything to do
with where Caucasoids originated, as most Caucasoids do not in fact
belong to this lineage" is irrelevant here. Jut please be a little patient. There are a lot of unanswered questions, and a low of hypothesis and ideas. You just cannot fight with them all. Simply put forward yours. Simple, isn't it? Please notice that you take a line of denying whatever is said. This is not a constructive way. Constructive is to suggest a new and justified concept, based on DATA. Please, go ahead. So far, I have not seen your data, just words.  

>R1b1 has hardly a presence in South Asia or East Asia or indeed in
many populations of Central Asia and Siberia.

It is incorrect. Then, "presence" is important, but "age" is no less important. Do you consider "age"? CAN you consider "age" (TMRCA)? CAN you really analyze "age" of those populations? Well, if not, then what are we talking about?   

>So, what kind of plausible model can have it originate in the far eastern end of its present distribution, cover thousands of miles westward, but not diffuse even a little bit eastward or southward.

Again and again, it is incorrect. Have you analyzed the recent paper by Zhong at all with hundreds of Asian haplotypes? Then, may I remind you on population bottlenecks?   

>Especially since at the time when West Eurasian R1b1 coalesces, there is no evidence of
such a dramatic east-to-west movement of people, but rather the
opposite, the spread of Caucasoids from eastern Europe to Siberia.

Yes, they were too. However, you are seemingly confusing migrations of R1a1 to the East around 4,000 ybp and migrations of R1a and R1b to the WEST some 15-10 thousand years ago.   


Anatole Klyosov

This thread: