GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-05 > 1274934995


From: "Lawrence Mayka" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Does Sardinia hold the key to the debate about Neolithicor Paleolithic dispersal of R-M269?
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 23:36:35 -0500
References: <AANLkTinEq_2xAofI_ttFnOgfhjWcPIrOmfH58K4TGdRa@mail.gmail.com> <02af01cafd30$002ee010$008ca030$@org><AANLkTinOtEgLiFCwjh7DgMcDGMT5pMT7atReDxToGtN2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinOtEgLiFCwjh7DgMcDGMT5pMT7atReDxToGtN2@mail.gmail.com>


1) No, ancient DNA results so far do not correspond to those observed in
modern populations. The Lichtenstein results totaled 12 of I2b2, 2 of R1a,
and 1 of R1b. Do you actually claim that this region of Germany is 80%
I2b2, 13% R1a, 7% R1b, with no I1 or I2b1 at all?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtenstein_Cave#Ancient_DNA_Tests

The results from 4600-year-old Eulau remains totaled 5 R1a, with no other
haplogroups. Do you actually claim that this region of Germany is 100% R1a?

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/11/y-chromosomes-and-mtdna-from-eulau.html

2) No, you are not following the scientific method at all. Your logic and
argumentation exactly coincides with those of Young Earthers. You assert,
without any justification whatsoever, that somehow, magically, the physical
process rates observed today do not apply to the past. This is utterly
unscientific. The burden of proof is on you to show why past physical
process rates would differ from those of the present.

3) No, you are not setting testable hypotheses at all. A testable
hypothesis is one that can reasonably be shown to be false. You have
deliberately crafted and conditioned your hypothesis so that no matter how
much evidence accumulates, you can simply deny that it has met your criteria
for refutation.

4) No, the Sardinian data show young R-M269 just as expected. At best,
Morelli et al. merely provide an argument that R-M269 did not spread with
the initial adoption of agriculture, but by another means and at another,
later time.

5) No, your suggestion that Sardinian R-M269 might be all R-L2 would only
confirm that it was brought to Sardinia rather recently, much later than the
original adoption of agriculture.

> From: David Faux [mailto:]
> What Paleolithic or Mesolithic samples are you speaking about Larry.
> Are you alluding to the Bronze Age Litchenstein cave findings which are in
complete concordence with the population structure of that region of Germany
to this day? 
 
> I have no idea what Young Earth Creationism is, but I am a Ph.D. scientist
and do try to follow the customary rules and regulations about observation.
> There is nothing at all wrong about setting out testable hypotheses -
depending on the the underpinnings and rationale.
 
> My point was that the Sardinian data in relation to the Anatolian data
creates a bit of a problem for those who maintain the (new) party line.
> It would be even more damaging should M269 in Sardinia all be R-L2 or some
variant.



This thread: