GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-09 > 1220960461


From: Alan R <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Age of R1b
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 11:41:01 +0000 (GMT)


David
 
However, its still worth observing that the date given for R1 is too late to link to any pre-Neolithic intrusions.  We also know that the common root of all R1 (whatever the date) is relatively much older than M269 by all normal methods of measurement.   If the Karafet dating had been just for M269 then it might still have been possible within error intervals to link it with the Badegoulian intrusion and the subsequent Magdalenian expansion out the western refugia but its a date for R1 and that is a very different kettle of fish.  So, as far as I can see, the Karafet date for R1 is totally incompatible with a Palaeolithic origin of M269 and those who still wish to maintain such a dating need to refute Karafet as well as the new late dating that has been suggested on this list.  Its possible his date for R1 overall is not too far out but what would his date for M269 be? Surely hugely younger by multiples?  That would surely put it in the
Neolithic.  What would his date be for just the R1b that is several markers downstream from M269 as western European R1b seems to overwhelmingly be? 
 
Its as simple as this, a date for the movement of M269 into western Europe any younger than say 18,000BC is later than the last archaeologically detected pre-Neolithic east/south-east to west movement into western Europe. 
 
Does anyone know what Karafet's methodology and reasoning was?
 
Alan 



----- Original Message ----
From: David Faux <>
To: Alan R <>;
Sent: Tuesday, 9 September, 2008 1:07:01 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Age of R1b


That is a huge IF Alan.  The confidence interval extends many thousands of years into the Paleolithic.  Besides this one date cannot be accepted as the most valid - one of the authors continues to use the ZUF rates and as far as I know has no intention of amending these.  You should know that Zhivotovsky is viewed by many in the pop gen community as having one of these incredibly insightful minds, much as Bandelt is viewed in the same light in relation to mtDNA.
 
David K. Faux.

 
On 9/8/08, Alan R <> wrote:
If Karafet et al date R1 is c. 18500 years ago then this post-dates even the last known pre-Neolithic intrusion into Europe,  The last of these (and the only one that even the optimistic could stretch to link with the Karafet date) was the shadowy Badegoulian which had certainly entered west-central Europe about 20,000BP (probably uncalibrated therefore significantly older than 18,000BC and then France a little later.  It appears to derive from older cold adapted cultures from eastern Europe and is thought to have been an important contributor to the Magdalenian which certainly did later re-expand from the western refugia area.  This is certainly the only one that was within even remote touching/stretching  distance of the Karefet dating.  However the date is a little late and also if the date arrived at is for all R1, then clearly western R1b is going to have to be a lot younger.  So, I dont think there is much comfort for the
pre-Neolithic school in the Karafet dates.   Certainly, the Karafet dating should never be mentioned in the same breath as the Aurignacian or western Gravettian arrival in Europe which clearly pre-date the Karafet dating.  Its a pity Karafet didnt make a statement about the dating of western R1b.  That would have been interesting.

Alan  

This thread: