Going to run through all of the common Christian Identity copes in this thread and debunk all of them because CI niggers are fucking retarded. CI is low IQ bullshit and its adherents blatantly misrepresent genetic studies that quite literally prove the claims they back with these studies wrong. Feel free to repost, as more need to know about this, and feel free to contribute any other anti-CI arguments, memes, etc that you`ve got. I`ll probably re-do this thread tomorrow and include stuff on the origins of Jews (spoiler: Jews are descended from Israelites and Khazar theory is fake).
First, we will start with the alleged race of the Israelites and the origin of modern Jews per CI Niggers and some of the "evidence" they cite in favor of their arguments, then we will compare how these claims relate to what genetic studies tell us is actually true about the race of Israelites and modern Jews.
PT 1. Anyone who has been here for a while has seen that stupid, poorly put together infographic with the out of context map that allegedly shows that Levantines wuz white and cherrypicked quote about how before the Arab migrations, Levantines were genetically closer to Europeans than to Arabs, and how this means that Israelites wuz white n shieeeet. I`m here to tell you that this is complete fucking bullshit and that CI Kikes are lying to you. The figure and quote in question comes from "Genome-Wide Diversity in the Levant Reveals Recent Structuring by Culture" by Haber et al. (2013) ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3585000/ . Lets take a look at what this paper sets out to find and what it actually says:
>The genetic diversity based on uniparental markers (i.e. Y-chromosome and mtDNA) of the Levantine populations shows a strong correlation with geography [1] and religion [2]–[4]. It has been suggested that the Islamic expansion from the Arabian Peninsula beginning in the 7th century CE introduced lineages typical of this Peninsula into those who subsequently became Lebanese Muslims, whereas the Crusader activity in the 11th–13th centuries CE introduced western European lineages into Lebanese Christians [5]. This recent differential penetration of exogenous Y-chromosome lineages into the Lebanese has probably been maintained by limited admixture between the religious groups, resulting in population stratifications in the present-day populations. However, it is not yet known if those structures are genome-wide and if they extend beyond Lebanese borders.
This is the background information given by the researchers to contextualize the study. All it says is that based on Y and mt DNA haplogroups (genetic markers given to one by their father and mother, respectively, that reflect one`s specific lineage. They are only loosely correlated to race, and cannot be broken down into percentages based on ethnicity, unlike autosomal DNA, the stuff that 23andMeme, Ancestry.com, etc. break down into percentages of different ethnic groups), genetic differentiation in Levantines seems to be along religious and geographical lines.
Jace Scott
> Genome-wide surveys in the Levant are limited and most of our knowledge comes from studies assessing the relationship of Diaspora Jewish groups to a Levantine/Middle Eastern origin [6], [7]. These studies show that the Jews form a distinctive cluster in the Middle East, and it is not known whether the factors driving this structure would also involve other groups in the Levant. For example, would the Druze from Mount Lebanon have the same genome-wide diversity as the Druze from Mount Carmel, and would the predominantly Muslim populations in the Levant from Syria, Palestine, and Jordan have more genetic similarities to the populations of the Arabian Peninsula (Saudis, Yemenis) than would other non Muslims Levantines have?
Here, we get a little more contextual information, followed by examples of the sorts of questions that the researchers are seeking to answer in conducting their study. Take note of the fact that they CLEARLY STATE THAT DIASPORA JEWS (Ashkenazim, Sephardim, etc) ARE OF MIDDLE EASTERN/LEVANTINE ORIGIN, contrary to the “muh muhfuggin Khazars!” bullshit, as this will be important later on. Also note that it says that Jews form a cluster in with middle easterners, not Europeans, Caucasians/Iranians/Anatolians (who form a cluster of their own and are not quite “Middle Eastern” likes Levantines, Arabs, and Nafris), or any kind of mongoloid Asians (East Asians, North Asians, Central Asians).
Christopher Cox
> A recent study by Moorjani et al. [8], estimated that Jewish admixture with African genes ended much earlier (∼75 generations ago) than other Levantines (Muslims) (∼32 generations ago). However, it is not known if this different admixture history is the result of out-migration from the region and the discontinued gene flow from neighboring populations or if it is a result of cultural isolation in a predominantly Christian (∼100–650 CE) and later Muslim (∼650 CE-present) environment. Would today's Christians from the Levant also show older dates for cessation of African admixture than other Levantines, reflecting cultural/genetic isolation from their surrounding neighbors? By exploring the genetic isolation of populations like the Christians and Druze, it would then be possible to assess the pre-Islamic genetic structure of the Levantines and accurately construct the genetic relationships with neighboring populations.
Last bit of context in the Intro section. Notice something else – the author states that Jews` distinctiveness amongst other Middle Easterner populations appears to be a result of them having less recent nigger admixture than other Middle Easterners, and that the same may be true of other insular groups in the Levant, such as Lebanese Christians, who did not mix as much with Muslims? I don`t want to get ahead of myself, but it`s almost as if part of the reason that certain Levantine populations would be closer to Europeans than to other Middle Easterners is because they have less nigger admixture than Arabs and Arab-adjacent populations in the Levant such as Syrians, who themselves mixed with non-Levantine Arab muslims and consequently got secondhand mudblood from Africa…
Cooper Clark
> A multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot based on the identity-by-state (IBS) matrix shows strong stratification in Lebanon by religion, with separate clusters for Christians, Muslims, and Druze, irrespective of their geographic origin (Figure 1). The results suggest endogamous practices among the religious groups of Lebanon within a small geographical area not exceeding 10,452 km2
So, we are now in to the results section of the study, and what does it say? As hinted at above, the researchers found that different Lebanese groups seem to have segregated themselves based on religion and practiced endogamy (in-group mating). See anything that is even remotely suggesting that either pre-Islamic Levantines were white Europeans or that the descendants of the Levantines who did not mix with Arab muslims (and thus would be very genetically similar to pre-Islamic Levantines) are basically white? No? Me neither. It`s almost as if the afoarementioned infograph is deliberately misleading you… wait, no, that`s not possible, it`s probably just my evil pagan atheist satanist khazar fake jew brain (I`m 100% European, a mix of English and Lithuanian, btw) not being able to understand real science or something.
Ryan Murphy
>In order to assess the population structure of Levantine populations more generally, an MDS (Figure 2) and a normalized principle component analysis (PCA) (Figure S2) plots with 48 additional Old World populations (Table S1) were built. Only 25 randomly selected samples from each Lebanese group were used in order to avoid population size biases (Figure S3). The plots reveal a Levantine structure not reported previously: Lebanese Christians and all Druze cluster together, and Lebanese Muslims are extended towards Syrians, Palestinians, and Jordanians, which are close to Saudis and Bedouins. Ashkenazi Jews are drawn towards the Caucasus and Eastern Europe, reflecting historical admixture events with Europeans, while Sephardi Jews cluster tightly with the Levantine groups. These results are consistent with previous studies reporting higher European genome-wide admixture in Ashkenazi Jews compared with other Jews [11] and higher Y-chromosomal gene flow to Lebanese Muslims from the Arabian Peninsula compared with other Lebanese [5].
Jayden Nelson
Ok, so now we have a comparison of the Y DNA haplogroups of various Levantine populations (and some non-Levantine Middle Easterners), and what do we find? Lebanese Christians and Druze form a distinct cluster, while Lebanese Muslims are a bit more similar to other Middle Easterners, and Ashkenazi Jews seem to have a stronger affinity to European and West Asian (Caucasian, think Armenian, Chechen, Georgian, etc) populations than do other Levantines. Before we get into the implications of this, do keep 1 thing in mind - all of these Levantine and Middle Eastern groups are EXTREMELY similar, genetically speaking (barring Ashkenazi Jews, who actually do have a significant amount of European DNA from admixture with Europeans and thus are not like these pure shitskins), and thus when we speak of differences amongst any of these groups sans the Jews, we are talking about very small genetic differences, akin to the differences between a Frenchman and a German or an Englishman and an Irishman. Now, to break this finding down, consider the following – isn`t it weird that the researchers specifically note that the Ashkenazi Jews have a higher frequency of European Y-DNA haplogroups than do other Levantines, yet don`t make such a claim about un-mutted Lebanese Christians (who again, would be very genetically similar to, if not identical to, pre-Islamic Levantines)? Surely if these pre-Islamic Levantines and their relatively pure descendants were European or had DNA that was very similar to that of Europeans, the researcher would have noted this, no?
Alexander Young
> ChromoPainter computes a similarity measure which is the number of haplotype “chunks” used to reconstruct the recipient individual from each donor individual. We then used fineSTRUCTURE [16] which employ model-based Bayesian clustering to construct a tree that infer population relationships and similarities using ChromoPainter's coancestry matrix. The population tree (Figure 3A) splits Levantine populations in two branches: one leading to Europeans and Central Asians that includes Lebanese, Armenians, Cypriots, Druze and Jews, as well as Turks, Iranians and Caucasian populations; and a second branch composed of Palestinians, Jordanians, Syrians, as well as North Africans, Ethiopians, Saudis, and Bedouins. The tree shows a correlation between religion and the population structures in the Levant: all Jews (Sephardi and Ashkenazi) cluster in one branch; Druze from Mount Lebanon and Druze from Mount Carmel are depicted on a private branch; and Lebanese Christians form a private branch with the Christian populations of Armenia and Cyprus placing the Lebanese Muslims as an outer group. The predominantly Muslim populations of Syrians, Palestinians and Jordanians cluster on branches with other Muslim populations as distant as Morocco and Yemen.
So, after taking their data, the authors used software to construct a phylogenetic tree that roughly shows the relationships between sampled populations, and what did they find? 2 things – that there are two main “branches” on the Levantine phylogenetic “tree”, one that is more similar to Europeans AND Central Asians and includes the Lebanese, Jews, Turks, Iranians, Caucasians, Druze, etc, and one that is more similar to Arabs and North Africans, containing Syrians, Jordanians, North Africans, Ethiopians, etc; and that there are small “private branches” for Jews, Lebanese Christians, and Druze.
Christian Perez
Take note of the fact that despite these differences, all these groups are… wait for it… PART OF THE SAME TREE. Notice how it does not say “Some Levantines are European” or “Clearly this means that Levantines used to be European”.
Dominic Mitchell
> ChromoPainter's coancestry matrix (Figure 3B, Figure S4) shows the haplotype chunks donated from the world populations to the Levantines and shows that Jordanians, Palestinians, and Syrians receive more chunks from sub-Saharan Africans and from Middle Easterners compared with other Levantines. We explored the sub-Saharan/Middle Eastern gene flow to the Levantines further by employing a previously developed method (ROLLOFF) [8] that estimates the time since admixture with sub-Saharan African genes using the rate of exponential decline of admixture LD. Previous simulations [8] showed that bias from ROLLOFF estimates is removed with increased sample size, so we used the entire Lebanese religious subgroups after carrying out a rigorous outlier removal based on PCA [17] and keeping the main core clusters (336 Christians, 85 Druze, 747 Muslims) (Text S1). We found that Christians have the oldest admixture dates (2,375-2,025 years ago, y.a) with bounds coinciding with the decline of Phoenicia and the control of the region by the Hellenistic rulers. The time since the observed Druze admixture (1,275-1,025 y.a) closely precedes the development of the Druze faith and their divergence from other Muslims. The Muslims appear to have maintained contact with populations carrying sub-Saharan genes until 675-625 y.a, which overlaps with the rise of the Ottoman Empire and formation of a semi-autonomous state in Lebanon. Historical events coinciding with our observed admixture dates are some of the examples of population processes and demographic events that were occurring during this period in the Levant. These historical events, in addition to cultural adoptions and transitions, may have contributed to the differences among the religious groups through facilitating or restricting contact with other Middle Easterners carrying the sub-Saharan genes.
Aiden Young
Here, the authors discuss their 2 main findings - that the branch of Levantines that is more similar to other sand niggers has nigger admixture, probably as a result of getting mudblood from the Arabs who brought Islam, and that the Lebanese Christians, who have their own “private branch” that, as noted above, moves towards Europeans, are basically Phoenicians whose most recent admixture (from some unspecified population) would have come from the Hellenistic period. The latter finding is more important for our purposes because it not only supports the claim that the Christian Lebanese are basically pure descendants of the ancient Levantines who were “more similar to Europeans than to Arabs”, but also because we will later get into studies that discuss who these Levantines were and what their DNA was like (Hint: It wasn`t anything like European DNA).
Levi Foster
> ADMIXTURE identifies at K=10 an ancestral component (light green) with a geographically restricted distribution representing ∼50% of the individual component in Ethiopians, Yemenis, Saudis, and Bedouins, decreasing towards the Levant, with higher frequency (∼25%) in Syrians, Jordanians, and Palestinians, compared with other Levantines (4%–20%). The geographical distribution pattern of this component (Figure 4A, 4B) correlates with the pattern of the Islamic expansion, but its presence in Lebanese Christians, Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jews, Cypriots and Armenians might suggest that its spread to the Levant could also represent an earlier event. Besides this component, the most frequent ancestral component (shown in dark blue) in the Levantines (42–68%) is also present, at lower frequencies, in Europe and Central Asia (Figure 4A, 4C). We found that this Levantine component is closer to the European component (dark green) (FST=0.035) than to the Arabian Peninsula/East Africa component (light green) (FST=0.046). Our estimates show that the Levantine and the Arabian Peninsula/East African components diverged ∼23,700-15,500 y.a., while the Levantine and European components diverged ∼15,900-9,100 y.a.
Luke Gonzalez
Ok, so now we are finally at the point in the study where those out of context genetic maps of the Old World + Africa that are on the shitty CI nigger infographic are discussed, and all the authors end up saying is that there is a common ancestral component in Ethiopians, Arabs, and Levantines from a population that all of these populations are partially descended from (common ancestors), and that there is also a common component found in Levantines that can also sometimes be found in both Europeans and Central Asians. Moreover, the common ancestors of East African niggers, Arabs, and Levantine dune coons diverged into these populations sometime between 23k and 15.5k years ago, while the common ancestors of Levantines, Europeans, and some central Asian populations diverged between 15.9k and 9.1k years ago. What does this mean? Nothing of any import, really, as it certainly doesn`t bolster the “we wuz kikes n shit” argument because anyone with even a cursory knowledge of archaeogenetics knows that Europeans are descended in part from EEFs (a group that has deep roots in Anatolia and who migrated to Europe and brought farming in the neolithic), who can be inferred as being the source of this common ancestral component, as they migrated to both Europe and the Middle East/Levant and made a genetic impact there around 11-9k years ago. Keep in mind that modern Europeans (white people) were not a thing until the Chalcolithic, as we are a mixture of WHGs (Cro-magnons, “cave men”, Europe`s original inhabitants), EEFs, and Indo-Europeans who coalesced in Europe around 3k BC. While you could argue that any of these groups are “proto-whites” or “pre-modern whites”, it wouldn`t matter much in the context of this post because the core CI nigger claim we are addressing is whether or not the Israelites were white, and Israelites having admixture from one proto-white group as well as from a bunch of non-white groups makes them about as white as an average Pakistani
Levi Perry
> The estimated time of divergence between the Levantine component and other Middle Easterners overlaps with evidence from archeological findings of a major cultural development in the Levant during the early Epipaleolithic period (23,000-14,500 y.a) [21]. The period of climatic warming after the Last Glacial Maximum (∼26,000-19,900 y.a) in the Levant was characterized by the spread of the microlithic technologies and the appearance of highly mobile populations between the Sinai Peninsula and southern Turkey. This Early Epipaleolithic phase formed a cultural continuity with the last Epipaleolithic phase, immediately preceding the appearance of the Natufian culture and the development of sedentism [22]. Our time estimate of divergence between the Levantine and European components (∼15,900-9,100 y.a) overlaps with the transition to agriculture in the Levant ∼11,000 y.a but is also slightly earlier than the proposed expansion to Europe starting at ∼9,000 y.a. [23]–[25]. In agreement with this, a recent study of complete mtDNA sequences also proposed earlier expansion dates (19,000-12,000 y.a) of certain female lineages from the Near East to Europe [26]. These results suggest that population migration to Europe from the Near East could have started after the LGM warming and continued until the Neolithic.
Finally, the last bit of the Discussion section. Aside from explaining the relationship between Levantines, Arabs, and Ethiopians, this section affirms what was written above regarding any common ancestry between Europeans and Dune Coon Levantines, as it states that the divergence between Levantines` and Europeans` common ancestors would`ve occurred right around the time EEFs would have gone to Europe, and that other studies support this finding.
Nathan Butler
> In this study, we show a multilayered history of the Levantines with multiple components that might be traced to different historical population events. We propose that the Levant and Middle Eastern modal components diverged after the LGM during the early Epipaleolithic period, which was characterized by behavioral variability and innovations accompanied by major life-style and technological changes in the Levant [21], [27], [28]. We also show that the Levantines and Europeans diverged between the last glacial warming and the start of the Neolithic age.
Lastly, the authors` conclusion, which simply summarizes the study itself. Oddly absent is anything about Levantines being Evropan or Aryan, although what is present is the statement that Levantines and Europeans would`ve diverged genetically between the end of the Ice Age and the Neolithic, which is before Israelites would have even emerged as a Levantine people group in what is now Israel. Isn`t it really weird how NOTHING in this study ever says that Europeans and Levantines were the same, yet Christian Identity niggers cite it as “proof” that Israelites were white, despite the fact that it literally shows the opposite? It`s almost as if you shouldn`t listen to people who cherrypick from random sources that they don`t understand…
Luke Carter
Pt. 2 Now that we`ve dealt with the infamously retarded CI infographic, which could not have been made by anyone with anything higher than an 8th grade education, let`s address the other study that these people love to cite (without understanding it/having read it) – the “but what about muh muhfuggin blue eyes in Israel 6,500 years ago” study. This one will require far less effort to explain, as the paper`s contents conveniently include a figure that literally shows that these blue eyed people in Israel were genetically the same as modern Levantines, who do not cluster with Europeans on a PCA and thus are not genetically white/European, and thus were not white. Here`s the study: “Ancient DNA from Chalcolithic Israel reveals the role of population mixture in cultural transformation” Harney et al. (2018) ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6102297/ First, let`s see what the authors of the study say about the people whose bodies were sampled/whose DNA was examined in this study, these blue-eyed, allegedly European people:
Anthony Butler
> This procedure produced genome-wide data from 22 ancient individuals from Peqi’in Cave (4500–3900 calBCE), with the individuals having a median of 358,313 of the targeted SNPs covered at least once (range: 25,171–1,002,682). The dataset is of exceptional quality given the typically poor preservation of DNA in the warm Near East, with a higher proportion of samples yielding appreciable coverage of ancient DNA than has previously been obtained from the region, likely reflecting the optimal sampling techniques we used and the favorable preservation conditions at the cave. We analyzed this dataset in conjunction with previously published datasets of ancient Near Eastern populations24,26 to shed light on the history of the individuals buried in the Peqi’in cave site, and on the population dynamics of the Levant during the Late Chalcolithic period. So, this study looks at the DNA from 22 bodies found in Peqi`in Cave in Northern Israel. These people lived in the Neolithic/Chalcolithic (4,500-3,900 BC), which, as shown above, was after Europeans` EEF ancestors and Levantines had split up, and thus it can be inferred from this fact alone that they were probably not genetically white/European, although this alone is not sufficient to make this claim. What`s interesting about these bodies is that they were found in Galilee, and thus were presumably “Galilean”, just as Christ was. The authors then took their DNA and compared it to other ancient Levantine populations` DNA.
Parker Peterson
> Previous genome-wide ancient DNA studies from the Near East have revealed that at the time when agriculture developed, populations from Anatolia, Iran, and the Levant were approximately as genetically differentiated from each other as present-day Europeans and East Asians are today24,25. By the Bronze Age, however, expansion of different Near Eastern agriculturalist populations—Anatolian, Iranian, and Levantine—in all directions and admixture with each other substantially homogenized populations across the region, thereby contributing to the relatively low genetic differentiation that prevails today24. Lazaridis et al.24 showed that the Levant Bronze Age population from the site of 'Ain Ghazal, Jordan (2490–2300 BCE) could be fit statistically as a mixture of around 56% ancestry from a group related to Levantine Pre-Pottery Neolithic agriculturalists (represented by ancient DNA from Motza, Israel and 'Ain Ghazal, Jordan; 8300–6700 BCE) and 44% related to populations of the Iranian Chalcolithic (Seh Gabi, Iran; 4680–3662 calBCE). Haber et al.26 suggested that the Canaanite Levant Bronze Age population from the site of Sidon, Lebanon (~1700 BCE) could be modeled as a mixture of the same two groups albeit in different proportions (48% Levant Neolithic-related and 52% Iran Chalcolithic-related). However, the Neolithic and Bronze Age sites analyzed so far in the Levant are separated in time by more than three thousand years, making the study of samples that fill in this gap, such as those from Peqi’in, of critical importance.
Isaac Jenkins
Interestingly, this portion of the study explains that around the early neolithic, the peoples who would mix and become modern Levantines were very genetically distant, yet by the Bronze age, had mixed and homogenized, giving rise to the modern semitic inhabitants of the Levant. The authors note that based on previous findings, every Bronze Age Levantine population seemed to be a mixture of Iranian agriculturalists and Levantine agriculturalists, neither of which were white. As established in the previous study we examined, there would not be another major admixture event in the region until the Islamic expansion of the 7th century AD, and so it can also be inferred from this fact alone that the Israelites were almost certainly normal Levantine sandniggers, as their ethnogenesis occurred in the Bronze Age, and thus they would probably be a mixture of Anatolian, Iranian, and native Levantine agriculturalists (none of whom were white), although I don`t want there to be an iota of doubt about the fact that Israelites were dune coons by the end of this part of the post, and thus I will not treat this as sufficient for claiming that they were (even if it is sufficient to make this claim).
Evan Martin
> To obtain a qualitative picture of how these individuals relate to previously published ancient DNA and to present-day people, we began by carrying out principal component analysis (PCA)33. In a plot of the first and second principal components (Fig. 3a), the samples from Peqi’in Cave form a tight cluster, supporting the grouping of these individuals into a single analysis population (while we use the broad name “Levant_ChL” to refer to these samples, we recognize that they are currently the only ancient DNA available from the Levant in this time period and future work will plausibly reveal genetic substructure in Chalcolithic samples over the broad region). The Levant_ChL cluster overlaps in the PCA with a cluster containing Neolithic Levantine samples (Levant_N), although it is slightly shifted upward on the plot toward a cluster corresponding to samples from the Levant Bronze Age, including samples from 'Ain Ghazal, Jordan (Levant_BA_South) and Sidon, Lebanon (Levant_BA_North). The placement of the Levant_ChL cluster is consistent with a previously observed pattern whereby chronologically later Levantine populations are shifted towards the Iran Chalcolithic (Iran_ChL) population compared to earlier Levantine populations, Levant_N (Pre-Pottery and Pottery Neolithic agriculturalists from present-day Israel and Jordan) and Natufians (Epipaleolithic hunter-gatherers from present-day Israel)24. Now we are on to the Results section of the paper, and what did the authors find? These Galileans overlapped with older Levantine populations from the neolithic, and did not differ too strongly from Bronze Age Levantines, as the only real difference was some slight admixture from neolithic Iranian-like populations.
Dylan Baker
> ADMIXTURE model-based clustering analyses34 produced results consistent with PCA in suggesting that individuals from the Levant_ChL population had a greater affinity on average to Iranian agriculturalist-related populations than was the case for earlier Levantine individuals. Figure 3b shows the ADMIXTURE results for the ancient individuals assuming K=11 clusters (we selected this number because it maximizes ancestry components that are correlated to ancient populations from the Levant, from Iran, and European hunter-gatherers)24. Like all Levantine populations, the primary ancestry component assigned to the Levant_ChL population, shown in blue, is maximized in earlier Levant_N and Natufian individuals. ADMIXTURE also assigns a component of ancestry in Levant_ChL, shown in green, to a population that is generally absent in the earlier Levant_N and Natufian populations, but is present in later Levant_BA_South and Levant_BA_North samples. This green component is also inferred in small proportions in several samples assigned to the Levant_N This portion of the paper is essentially a reaffirmation of what was stated above, coupled with an explanation of the chart (figure 3 in the paper), which is attached to this post. Figure 3 is key in understanding why CI niggers are lying crypto-kikes, because it DEFINITIVELY shows that NO Levantine population from the neolithic until the present WAS EVER EUROPEAN. Notice the complete lack of overlap on the PCA between the 2 European clusters (yellow and blue, which shows all of the neolithic EEF, pre-Aryan populations of Anatolia and Europe, and the yellow and pink, which shows the Indo-European and Indo-European-EEF admixed populations who would become modern Europeans) and ANY of the Levantine samples. If these blue eyed, allegedly white people from Israel were truly white Europeans, or even related to white Europeans, then they (Levant_ChL) would cluster with Europeans, not other Levantine populations.
This pretty much ends any debate on the topic on the spot, but I want to address some other things covered in the paper as well. > We find that the individuals buried in Peqi’in Cave represent a relatively genetically homogenous population. This homogeneity is evident not only in the genome-wide analyses but also in the fact that most of the male individuals (nine out of ten) belong to the Y-chromosome haplogroup T (see Supplementary Table 1), a lineage thought to have diversified in the Near East46. This finding contrasts with both earlier (Neolithic and Epipaleolithic) Levantine populations, which were dominated by haplogroup E24, and later Bronze Age individuals, all of whom belonged to haplogroup J24,26. Our finding that the Levant_ChL population can be well-modeled as a three-way admixture between Levant_N (57%), Anatolia_N (26%), and Iran_ChL (17%), while the Levant_BA_South can be modeled as a mixture of Levant_N (58%) and Iran_ChL (42%), but has little if any additional Anatolia_N-related ancestry, can only be explained by multiple episodes of population movement.
Jaxon Taylor
This is noteworthy because the authors found two important things. The first is that all of the Y-DNA lineages found in these blue-eyed people are indigenous to… you guessed it, the Middle East/Levant, specifically haplogroups T, E, and J, all of which are common in modern Jews and in the Middle East/North Africa. Europeans and related populations are characterized by various subclades of haplogroups R1b and R1a, with some European populations having I1 or I2 from ancient hunter gatherer populations who were assimilated by the Indo-Europeans, and a small number of European populations having E, J2, or G as a result of admixture from Middle Easterners who came at various stages of European history (Imperial Rome, Islamic conquests, and Ottoman expansion). The second is that the blue eyed individuals in question were a mixture of Neolithic Levantines with some Anatolia_N (basically EEF or a very closely related population) and Iran_ChL admixture. Absent from this finding is any mention of any sort of Indo-European/”Aryan” ancestry, typically called “Steppe_EBA”, “SteppeMLBA”, “Europe_LBA” in the literature (there are other populations that fit this description that are used in the literature, these are just some noteworthy ones).
Oliver Reyes
> We highlight three findings of interest. First, an allele (G) at rs12913832 near the OCA2 gene, with a proven association to blue eye color in individuals of European descent40, has an estimated alternative allele frequency of 49% in the Levant_ChL population, suggesting that the blue-eyed phenotype was common in the Levant_ChL. So, what is this saying? Basically, these Galileans UNDOUBTEDLY had blue eyes at a pretty high frequency, this is not disputed. What is uncertain is the source of the alleles that gave them this feature. As the study says, the allele in question has been proven to be associated with the same allele Europeans have for blue eyes. Does this mean that these people were white Europeans or got this gene from mixing with white Europeans? Simply put, no. A likely explanation is that they got this allele as a result of admixture with Anatolians, who did live near the black sea where the allele originated, although neolithic Anatolians likely did not have this feature at such a high frequency, and did not have any ancestry from any of the populations in the European parts of the Black Sea. Alternatively, they got it from neolithic Iranians, who themselves had CHG (Caucasian hunter gatherers) ancestry, and CHGs did mix with the peoples of southern Ukraine/Russia, EHGs, near the coast of the black sea. EHGs were in turn heavily descended from WHGs, a European population with a frequency of blue eyes that was nearly 100%, and thus they could have gotten the gene through very indirect transmission from European hunter gatherer populations and preserved it through endogamy. As the study notes, despite this high frequency of blue eyes, these blue eyed Galileans did not have any European autosomal DNA, which is why they did not cluster with any European populations whatsoever, nor did they have European Y-DNA lineages.
Dylan Thompson
If Europeans had been the source of the blue eyes, we would see typically European Y-DNA lineages amongst these Galileans, such as R1b, I1, I2, G2, etc, but we do not. Instead, we see lineages such as J, E, and T, and J in particular was very common amongst both neolithic Anatolians and Iranians, which only strengthens the theory that either of these populations are responsible for blue eyes amongst the Peqi`in people. Thus, we can conclude that groups related to Levant_ChL contributed little ancestry to Levant_BA_South. Lastly, here`s a little “fuck you” to CI niggers who think that Chalcolithic Levantines having blue eyes means that Jesus had blue eyes 3000 years later, as it states that they probably didn`t contribute much genetically, if anything, to the later inhabitants of the region.
So, there you have it, anons, CI is low IQ bullshit and its adherents blatantly misrepresent genetic studies that quite literally prove the claims they back with these studies wrong. Feel free to repost, as more need to know about this, and feel free to contribute any other anti-CI arguments, memes, etc that you`ve got. I`ll probably re-do this thread tomorrow and include stuff on the origins of Jews (spoiler: Jews are descended from Israelites and Khazar theory is fake).
