|
|
Post by Melnorme on Aug 28, 2004 6:50:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Aug 28, 2004 7:56:28 GMT -5
hum... I wonder Why the iberian have more south asian blood than for instance greeks, greeks are closer to them... I find that very, very strange...  Iberian are more nordic than med? hum... I guess they are using genes for those tests, that born in Iberia! Another interesting stuff: Nordics are more ARABIC than even the Iberians... very interesting! |
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on Aug 28, 2004 8:38:24 GMT -5
"You may not want to purchase this test if:
...
3) It bothers you that we do not exactly understand the precise genetic origins of NOR, MED, MIDDEAS or SA identity."
Exactly! If they don´t know what NOR, MED., MIDDEAS and SA really mean or where they came from, what is the point of the test?
|
|
|
|
Post by Springa on Aug 28, 2004 9:19:23 GMT -5
Maybe that's because, being an older population, Iberians didn't specialize as much as other Europeans, and kept some ancient genes that prevailed in south asians. hum... I wonder Why the iberian have more south asian blood than for instance greeks, greeks are closer to them... I find that very, very strange... Iberian are more nordic than med? hum... I guess they are using genes for those tests, that born in Iberia! Another interesting stuff: Nordics are more ARABIC than even the Iberians... very interesting! |
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Aug 28, 2004 9:37:01 GMT -5
I really don't know what older means... with less mutations? obviously all human races mutates at the same pace... with the same level of nuclear radiation! ;D Might be because the enviroment was more apropriate to those genes? Maybe it's all the gipsys nomads that arrived here after the middle ages! |
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Aug 28, 2004 9:44:12 GMT -5
I really don't know what older means... with less mutations? Not less mutations. Different mutations, that arrived in Europe earlier than the 'new mutations'. |
|
|
|
Post by Polako on Aug 28, 2004 10:42:05 GMT -5
Well, actually, if you score 100% in this test for NOR, then you're not necessarily Nordic, but North Western European. The NOR type singled out here clearly corresponds to the Northern Paleo-Europid genetic and anthropological region - from Ireland to WESTERN Scandinavia. This does NOT include eastern Scandinavia (Sweden), which has many elements also seen in eastern Europe. Check this out... forum.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=15908 |
|
|
|
Post by xxx on Aug 28, 2004 13:58:52 GMT -5
This reminds me of someone who said on the old phora that she was going to take the test soon, as she was being laughed at her claims of being even predominantly European after she showed the pictures of her [mongoloid] family. That was a few months ago, but now I find the same claims by the same person almost 8 months ago on skadi!! forum.skadi.net/showpost.php?p=65977&postcount=14Yup, that was LadyGook. I wonder if this new test will be valid for her, as it is invalid for individuals with less than 50% of European.  |
|
|
|
Post by xxx on Aug 29, 2004 5:16:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Aug 31, 2004 12:14:01 GMT -5
|
|
Praetor
Full Member
Graecus in Fennia
Posts: 246
|
Post by Praetor on Sept 2, 2004 6:37:39 GMT -5
I think this test oversimplifies lots of things. Wouldn't be my choice If I 'd go for such a test.
The Greek sample is consisted of 8 individuals for crying out loud,this is practically 0% of the total population...If we check their lines all but one of them show all four group colours(with one lacking the Asian),that is totally uncanny.
What about that TABLE4GROUP Test. Why should be Western Scandinavians clustered solely with the British Isles while Danes with Russians among others? And why should one pack Italians with Spaniards and not with Greeks?
I would like to see a DNA test of 11,000 unmixed Greeks only from Greece(11 millions of population),with samples resembling the population distribution of us in a 1/1000 scale. Tough but that would be the Real McCoy.In a sample that Aegean islanders are overepresented the Med element becomes dominant while when Epirotans and/or Western Macedonians prevail we get crazy Nordic/Dinaric stats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Sept 3, 2004 5:20:26 GMT -5
In the future we'll see some large-scale genetic censi of world populations. I think right now researchers are figuring out which markers distinguish between populations and work towards identifying gene loci that code for various traits, so most studies are quite limited in scope. In the next ten years we'll probably have a near-perfect mitochondrial and Y-chromosomal phylogeny, going all the way to the last two thousand years, and will be able to test thousands of SNPs per individual at a very low cost. At that stage the exploratory phase will be over and serious large-scale efforts will take place.
The real key development though will be archaeogenetics. Right now, scientists pretty much know how to do ancient mtDNA which is short and preserved in numerous copies, but I'm sure that they'll manage to squeeze much more information from ancient bones. This will make it possible to trace the movement of genes in space and time and refine the picture gathered from the study of modern populations, which is in many cases educated guesswork.
|
|
