GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-11 > 1228095098


From: "Dienekes Pontikos" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TRMCA for R1b1
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 03:31:38 +0200
References: <5cf61dfb0811301648p69cd0727obb1f32ca9d5dfc11@mail.gmail.com><f3f05ce80811301655t4ea32fc7pfc87d3b1b1c1979b@mail.gmail.com><2BFB4890-8234-4225-B37F-CA7858F27904@vizachero.com>
In-Reply-To: <2BFB4890-8234-4225-B37F-CA7858F27904@vizachero.com>


On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 3:18 AM, Vincent Vizachero <> wrote:
> Come on, this is absurd.
>
> The point that should be addressed is whether the argument - Semino's
> argument - that R1 WAS in Europe before or during the LGM is flawed.
>

As I already mentioned, I said that they overstretched their evidence
to arrive at that conclusion. That, of course, does not imply that
they were wrong, only that the case they presented wasn't strong
enough.

> The best estimate we have for the TMRCA of R1 is 18.5 kya, and the
> date is just as likely to be more recent as to be more ancient. To
> put this guy in Europe we would need some evidence that descendant
> nodes (R1, R1a, R1a1, R1b, R1b1, R1b1b1, R1b1b2, R1b1b3, etc) are more
> ancient in Europe than elsewhere. In most, if not all, of these cases
> the evidence points in the exact opposite direction: towards central
> or western Asia.
>

I don't see evidence for your last sentence. At least for R1a the
evidence points to Europe as the place of origin; The case for R1b is
less clear.



--
Dienekes' Anthropology Blog: http://dienekes.blogspot.com

Anthropological Research Page: http://dienekes.50webs.com/arp

This thread: