GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268166041


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Danish "homeland" of Viking Era emigrants to
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:20:41 -0800
References: <1346920655.4215531268139241610.JavaMail.root@sz0002a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net><803753512.4215581268139256132.JavaMail.root@sz0002a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <803753512.4215581268139256132.JavaMail.root@sz0002a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>


Talk about sour grapes Klyosov. Very transparent - especially after my
unrelenting criticism of your "efforts". My hypothesis has been vindicated
by the data, yours hasn't - very simple - sorry that it hasn't worked out
for you.

David K. Faux.

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 4:54 AM, <> wrote:

>
> My response:
>
>
>
> Leaving name-calling aside, I have to partially agree with the main
> point, which is of a "short of fact" thing.
>
>
>
> "Partially", because this "short of fact" thing is not all. In fact, it is
> very difficult to present "facts" in that area of historical conjectures. It
> is always a matter of interpretations of what we look at. And in this regard
> the situation with "Cimbri as R-U152 is even worse. One cannot took as a
> base for interpretation just a percentage of haplotypes. Otherwise the
> native Americans would be classified as R1b1b2 (possibly).
>
>
>
> In order to lay a proper foundation under the Cimbri origin, one has to
> consider - at least - dating of haplotypes in question, that is to consider
> their TMRCAs. It is not necessarily should be the 1-2 centuries BC, but it
> should be in some agreement with the date. Then, it should explain where the
> Cimbri came from, since it is still a mystery. By "explain", the original
> haplotypes of their homeland should be identified, and a connection should
> be clearly shown between the haplotypes in question and the "original"
> haplotypes in wherever the Cimbri came from.
>
>
>
> Indeed, all of it is lacking in DF considerations.
>
>
>
> Therefore, I wish him good luck in reconsidering his conjectures. From what
> I know about the Cimbri, his conjectures are unfounded indeed.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Anatole Klyosov
>
>


This thread: