It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are you of European, British, or an American? .. then likely you are both Semitic and a "Hebrew"

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: redhorse
a reply to: nOraKat

At first I thought that this might give me some insight into my own weird DNA but you're going back too far unfortunately. I'm running around 17% West Asian, 5% Ashkenazi Jewish, 3% East Asian, 2% South East Asian, 4% Oceanian, about 2% Melenesian and Austronesian, and 2% African on my autosomal DNA. My mitochondrial (mother-line) deep ancestry is quintessentially African (L2a1).

These are my averages running two DNA tests through GedMatch's Eurocentric tests for recent ancestry. Maybe 7 generations back and it is really unusual to have that much black, brown and yellow all mixed up on someone who is a white American. What you're talking about is a lot older and as such I don't think it applies to autosomal DNA but it's still really interesting. I think that you may very well be right about origins and some deeper ancestry but it's not going to show up in typical autosomal tests. I could run my DNA through the ancient DNA comparison tests and see what it picks up but even then, because my recent ancestry is strange it won't give you your average American I don't think. Certainly not your average European.

My sister (half sister, we don't have the same father) doesn't have most of the weird stuff though and I could run her DNA through the ancient ancestry comparisons as an example (with her permission of course). Our mother has some welsh by the family lore. Not much of a sample size but it's interesting to look at the DNA from the perspective that you've brought up here. My sister and I share the Jewish heritage as well as the L2a1 from our mother, but nothing African shows up in her autosomal DNA, which could be due to recombination but it's hard to say.



See this is the only real way to establish anything solid. All the rumors, family tales, even ancient books, none of it is reliable.

When you say 17% western Asian, this could quite easily be Finnish (are you in the north midwest? Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota). Also check out pictures of Khanty and Tajik children. Often they have light eyes and hair. They are where the ancient Finns descended from. Very unique looking peoples, but when mixed with 3/4 other Europeans, you would never really notice other than maybe slightly almond shaped eyes.




posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: redhorse
a reply to: nOraKat

At first I thought that this might give me some insight into my own weird DNA but you're going back too far unfortunately. I'm running around 17% West Asian, 5% Ashkenazi Jewish, 3% East Asian, 2% South East Asian, 4% Oceanian, about 2% Melenesian and Austronesian, and 2% African on my autosomal DNA. My mitochondrial (mother-line) deep ancestry is quintessentially African (L2a1).

These are my averages running two DNA tests through GedMatch's Eurocentric tests for recent ancestry. Maybe 7 generations back and it is really unusual to have that much black, brown and yellow all mixed up on someone who is a white American. What you're talking about is a lot older and as such I don't think it applies to autosomal DNA but it's still really interesting. I think that you may very well be right about origins and some deeper ancestry but it's not going to show up in typical autosomal tests. I could run my DNA through the ancient DNA comparison tests and see what it picks up but even then, because my recent ancestry is strange it won't give you your average American I don't think. Certainly not your average European.

My sister (half sister, we don't have the same father) doesn't have most of the weird stuff though and I could run her DNA through the ancient ancestry comparisons as an example (with her permission of course). Our mother has some welsh by the family lore. Not much of a sample size but it's interesting to look at the DNA from the perspective that you've brought up here. My sister and I share the Jewish heritage as well as the L2a1 from our mother, but nothing African shows up in her autosomal DNA, which could be due to recombination but it's hard to say.



See this is the only real way to establish anything solid. All the rumors, family tales, even ancient books, none of it is reliable.

When you say 17% western Asian, this could quite easily be Finnish (are you in the north midwest? Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota). Also check out pictures of Khanty and Tajik children. Often they have light eyes and hair. They are where the ancient Finns descended from. Very unique looking peoples, but when mixed with 3/4 other Europeans, you would never really notice other than maybe slightly almond shaped eyes.


Finnish does come up in the tests that really dissect my European DNA but the West Asian stays the same, so I don't know. Those tests often pop up trace amounts of "Samoyedic and/or Nenet" as well which is probably related to the Finnish I suppose. I'm a third generation or better Montanan (born in) on my mother's side so... close to the Midwest.

I'm not sure how Finnish could be mistaken for West Asian at all though, that's a new one for me. Maybe you can explain it though. I would think East Asian may pop up there. The populations where that west Asian fits best for me (by Oracle on gedmatch) is Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and to a lesser extent Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Different tests categorize these things differently, based upon the geographic foot print that they have decided on and what specific populations they have to test people against within that, but West Asian generally refers to what most Americans would call the middle east. One tests "West Asian" is another's "Persian" and another's "Eastern Mediterranean". The East Asian comes up as Chinese or Japanese but no Korean depending on the test (which I find weird) but... people move around which is the point of this thread.

It does seem to me that most of them are pretty good at differentiating, sometimes down to academic minutia, and there is a big difference between West Asian and Eurasian (which is what I thought was the genesis of those morphological traits you spoke of in the Finnish). I could be off base though. This is a journey for me and I am learning all the time.
edit on 25-9-2015 by redhorse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: redhorse

You use gedmatch? Im mixed Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian...and so on in this order.. in this and ( it varies depending what gedmatch project you choose ) i have 3 % West Asian ( it is not huge amount compared what you got ) So i believe your % is not from finnish ancestry. What is intresting i also have almost 2% American Indian ( i blame viking roots on that one ) .. if West Asian you have would be finnish roots you should have less of that and i should have much more. I had none of the Samoyedic and/or Nenet or east Asian.
edit on 25-9-2015 by dollukka because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: redhorse

Check out google images for Udmurt, Tatar, Karelian, Uzbek, and Tajik people. It's really interesting. There's remote regions of western China also that have lots of kids with light hair and blue/green eyes. Some Northern afghan people too. I guess I was thinking Urals region when you said western Asia, which is very distinct from Persia and Arabia.

Also it's really amazing how many ancient populations comprise what is modern day Russian territory.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: 8675309jenny

Karelian was part of Finland before we lost it in WW2 to Russia, most of finnish people from Karelia were evacuated to Finland some were left behind. Karelia was inhabited after war by Russian people with Russian origin.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: nOraKat
I'm not talking about being Jewish. What I'm talking about is not so
much the population of ancient Mesopotamia but the present
population of Great Britain. I don't believe the Germanic
tribes that migrated to Great Britain were Semitic. Man had
dispersed quite a bit by the time of Mesopotamian culture.
The Australian aborigines came there from Africa 70,000
years ago. Indigenous people were everywhere. Not just a
mixed group but Non-Semitic. Even King Tut had European DNA.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: dollukka
a reply to: redhorse

You use gedmatch? Im mixed Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian...and so on in this order.. in this and ( it varies depending what gedmatch project you choose ) i have 3 % West Asian ( it is not huge amount compared what you got ) So i believe your % is not from finnish ancestry. What is intresting i also have almost 2% American Indian ( i blame viking roots on that one ) .. if West Asian you have would be finnish roots you should have less of that and i should have much more. I had none of the Samoyedic and/or Nenet or east Asian.


My Finnish is not that much, I think it averages around 5%. I was surprised to see it. The Samoyedic that comes up is usually less than 1% but it turns up consistently so I count it. On average MOST of me (around 25-ish%) is Austrian, then (mostly northern) Italian, so I figure I had some recent ancestors that got most of their DNA in the Alps straddling the border. Then comes Russian (Don Cossack no kidding), then Iberian, then Scottish, Irish, French, then finally... Finnish and Swedish and (probably) Norwegian and little bit of British Isles (Cornish) for my strictly European ancestry. This makes up about 60 to 65% and the rest is this weird mix of West Asian, East Asian, Oceanian, SE Asian, African (pygmy and Khoisan), Ashkenazi Jewish and Melanesian/Austronesian, but again, some of these are represented in really small amounts, 2 or 3% or less but consistent, save the west Asian which is a significant enough amount to point to more recent ancestry.

I have ancestral lines that have been in the U.S. for a loooong time (colonial times for my direct mother line) but for all of that I am the anti-native American. It just doesn't come up at. all. I have a "cousin" from 23andme who said that she is full Yupik Eskimo so we're both a little baffled. I expected to find that on GedMatch and I just didn't. Other than that, I am a thoroughly mixed up mutt, from just about everywhere. As I said my paternal line is unknown so I have no family lore for half of me.

I look like a typical white lady. Blonde hair, brown eyes, fair skin. High cheek bones and a strong jaw, these two facial features really stand out in my family but that could be from anything really. I'm a bit jealous of your native American though. If I had that I think I'd have every continent represented. People move around and things sure get lost don't they? It's a thing.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: redhorse

People moved around a lot more than we thought, there were a study of finnish genes

The study also found that the Finnish genetic pool does not resemble that of the closest linguistic group, the Hungarians, but shares more commonalities with the Dutch. The results of the study show that Finns may be more closely related to the Dutch and to Russians from eastern Moscow, than to Hungarians, whose language can be most closely linked to Finnish. The researchers have therefore concluded that Finnish genetic ancestry follows geographical rather than linguistic patterns.

Study
Pretty much tells that lingustic way to proof how people moved around could be misleading, and much of what we belived to be is actually wrong.

What comes to arhaic gedmatches :

No matches with Denisova, Altai, Eskimo, Malta(Siberia)

Archaic matches with 3cM
LBK Stuttgart
Loschbour, Luxemburg
Rise98 Sweden
and Kennewick Man

With 4 cM Loschbour, Luxemburg and Kennewick man ( crazy! )

with 2 cM there is much much more to add.. too long list

I wonder where i should look to find neantherthal % if any..
edit on 25-9-2015 by dollukka because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: dollukka

I agree that linguistics alone can be misleading. If used in conjunction with archeological and or DNA evidence it can be a way to clinch population movements or just indicate contact. Deciphering all of that however... That's difficult. I am usually willing to take a hypothesis on board as a possibility if for no other reason than I have been so very surprised by my own DNA. You just don't know what is back there. I think that may work in a broader population wide way as well in some cases. Culturally we can try to cover up heritage, like the Spanish did with the Moors for example and it becomes lost.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: dollukka
a reply to: redhorse

You use gedmatch? Im mixed Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian...and so on in this order.. in this and ( it varies depending what gedmatch project you choose ) i have 3 % West Asian ( it is not huge amount compared what you got ) So i believe your % is not from finnish ancestry. What is intresting i also have almost 2% American Indian ( i blame viking roots on that one ) .. if West Asian you have would be finnish roots you should have less of that and i should have much more. I had none of the Samoyedic and/or Nenet or east Asian.


My Finnish is not that much, I think it averages around 5%. I was surprised to see it. The Samoyedic that comes up is usually less than 1% but it turns up consistently so I count it. On average MOST of me (around 25-ish%) is Austrian, then (mostly northern) Italian, so I figure I had some recent ancestors that got most of their DNA in the Alps straddling the border. Then comes Russian (Don Cossack no kidding), then Iberian, then Scottish, Irish, French, then finally... Finnish and Swedish and (probably) Norwegian and little bit of British Isles (Cornish) for my strictly European ancestry. This makes up about 60 to 65% and the rest is this weird mix of West Asian, East Asian, Oceanian, SE Asian, African (pygmy and Khoisan), Ashkenazi Jewish and Melanesian/Austronesian, but again, some of these are represented in really small amounts, 2 or 3% or less but consistent, save the west Asian which is a significant enough amount to point to more recent ancestry.

I have ancestral lines that have been in the U.S. for a loooong time (colonial times for my direct mother line) but for all of that I am the anti-native American. It just doesn't come up at. all. I have a "cousin" from 23andme who said that she is full Yupik Eskimo so we're both a little baffled. I expected to find that on GedMatch and I just didn't. Other than that, I am a thoroughly mixed up mutt, from just about everywhere. As I said my paternal line is unknown so I have no family lore for half of me.

I look like a typical white lady. Blonde hair, brown eyes, fair skin. High cheek bones and a strong jaw, these two facial features really stand out in my family but that could be from anything really. I'm a bit jealous of your native American though. If I had that I think I'd have every continent represented. People move around and things sure get lost don't they? It's a thing.


Does 23andme really go into that much detail regarding nationality?? Also do they give you a full detailed report that you can connect to haplogroups and look for genetic markers for disease risk ?


As far as the native American thing, when I first got into genealogy/ancestry research I came across some article that said many many Americans have been told they have some native ancestry, but it's usually just an old story and is seldom true. My own mother looked I would guess at least 1/8th native American, but when doing the the research I could not find any non-European ancestors of hers all the way back to 1750...

Unless the O'Malley's were natives of course...



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 04:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

I am not saying overall, but I suspect it is a significant part of the genetic makeup (in the UK, and other countries especially Portugal, Spain and Italy, also Germany and other parts of Europe).

One route you mentioned - which is, as early as 2300 BC, the Phoenicians were mining tin in Cornwall.

If there was already a population there, then you imagine something like sailors mixing with the people there, but maybe it was more significant than that since they were mining tin there for thousands of years, with possibly, large permanent settlements.

More significant than this route is : That the Phoenician headquarters moved from Canaan and Crete to places like Carthage, and Venice. These are not just some sailors going to mine tin. These are major civilizations in themselves, that developed from Phoenician colonies over vast lengths of time. It must have had a great impact on the populations wherever a great Phoenician civilization developed.

I think the most significant route that may have effected the genetic makeup of the UK, Germany and Europe is from the Roman civilization (that I believe is significantly Phoenician), taking the route of development from: Phoenician/Minoan -> Venetian/Etruscan -> Roman Empire, which covered most of Britannia, and present day Germany, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc.
edit on 26-9-2015 by nOraKat because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: nOraKat
You and I have such a different view of human history.

Mesopotamia is a cradle of civilization (not the only
one.) While I see this as meaning a cradle of culture;
you appear to see it as more of a birthplace of humanity
as if the human race was only a few thousand years old.

The Chinese and other civilizations are also very ancient.
Just because they aren't included in our ancient (written)
history does not mean they didn't exist. The fact that they
do exist speaks to the extent of human dispersion upon
the earth in prehistoric times.

I believe there were many civilizations earlier than Mesopotamia
all over the world. We don't have many records because they
were not continuously inhabited to modern times and many were
near coastlines and are now buried under the ocean and the
Mediterranean Sea. Or else they do exist but we can't prove
their history as is the case of ancient South American cultures.

I will repeat my first assertion that the only way your assertion
can be tested is genetically, not with histories or theories.


edit on 26-9-2015 by toms54 because: spelling



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: 8675309jenny

No 23andme absolutely does not go into that much detail on heritage. It is very generalized. But if you upload your dna onto gedmatch you can get a lot more detail. You have to look at the populations that they compare you to in Oracle to start and not every test has that available, but a lot do. There are a lot of tools on that site. It is amazing and a godsend.

23andme does give you a Neanderthal percentage (which is fun) and of course connects you in their data base to other genetic relatives. Which, if you are looking to fill some holes in family lore is incredibly useful, and sometimes just really interesting.

23andme doesn't give you what I would call a "full report" on haplogroups. It tells you what your x is and x and y (if you are male) and it does have a feature to list relatives by haplogroup. Family tree dna (which I believe is associated with national geographic but don't quote me) will map out your maternal and paternal haplogroups but you will pay for each one (separate test) and it is spendy. If you are male and want to look at both haplogroups you would be spending better than $450.00.

None of these services will spell out disease risk. You are on your own to figure that out. The information is available but you would need at least some knowledge of what mutations for disease are where. The FDA cracked down on 23andme for giving out "medical information" and that is unfortunately no longer part of their service, but... they used to do it.

I know how long some of my direct lines have been in the U.S. and where some of those have come from because I have done a lot of research on that, but both 23andme and ancestry definitely helped with that with the DNA and their genetic relatives data bases. If I hadn't done that I would still be laboring under an incorrect assumption about my paternity. I have been able to figure out a great grandfather (probably 3rd) on my paternal side thanks to ancestry and gedmatch and now it is only a matter of time before I find out who my biological father is. I only bring this up to point out just how much these services can tell you if you are willing to do some work. It is remarkable.

I have had both 23andme and Ancestry.com read my genetic profile. I found Ancestry a little more accurate but not that much. The real meat has been on gedmatch.

A word of caution though, taking any of these population/heritage assignments too literally can be problematic. For example on gedmatch my sister has some "West Asian", about half as much as me, but when we go into oracle all of her comparative populations are decidedly European, the closest to West Asia that she gets is Hungary. I will come up with populations that are what most people would consider the middle east though. We have a similar amount that is categorized as west Asian but for whatever reason, the details seem to be different. Some tests will categorize her as West Asian and me as West Asian and Eastern Mediterranean (splitting that percentage down the middle), but again her closest populations are eastern European and mine are Turkey, Iran, etc... I don't know if recombination can account for this difference or if I am getting something additionally from that region from my father. It's a puzzle.

I would highly recommend doing at least 23andme if you are interested in DNA at all. It is loads of fun. It really is.
edit on 26-9-2015 by redhorse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 10:13 AM
link   
FamilytreeDNA gives haplogroups, matches and chromosome browser where you can find how much you have common with geneological matches and in which chromosomes. You can download your DNA and use it elsewhere if you like. I find that familytreeDNA has more focus on genes making deeper research than 23andme. When you buy you know what you buy in FTDNA and they tell you exactly what their kit includes when you shop, from 23andme you don´t see what you get

I did full mtfullsequence and family finder and my father did complete genome and family finder.
If you don´t want your data to be used by third party researchers ( like Pharma´s and medical research ) you pick FamilytreeDNA

The terms of use at 23andMe allow it to sell the data of anyone who has consented to participate in research15 and, in fact, it has just entered into two agreements with major pharmaceutical companies to do just that.16 And it can share your data combined with that of all other 23andMe users even if you didn’t consent to research. Those who agree to participate in AncestryDNA’s research project agree to allow their genealogical, genetic, and health information to be used and shared with third-party researchers17 — which can include private companies like the pharmaceutical industry.

Link

tests are not cheap.. 23andme propably cheapest. It is good to know what you sign for and what you get out of your bucks.
edit on 26-9-2015 by dollukka because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join