#BLACKED

>In Europe, haplogroup L is found at low frequencies, typically less than 1% with the exception of Iberia (Spain and Portugal) where frequencies as high as 18.2% have been reported
> the designation "haplogroup L" is typically used to designate the family of mtDNA clades that are most frequently found in Sub-Saharan Africa
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro-haplogroup_L_(mtDNA)#Europe

Other urls found in this thread:

medicaldaily.com/dna-ancestry-tests-are-meaningless-your-historical-genealogy-search-244586
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>South America Argentina 246 Corach et al. (2009) 2.03%

ARGENTINA IS WHIITEEEE

It could be Jewish blood

West Aasia Yemen (Jews) 119 Behar et al. (2008) 16.81%
West Asia Bedouins (Israel) 58 Behar et al. (2008) 15.50%
West Asia Palestinians (Israel) 117 Achilli et al. (2007) 13.68%

>frequencies as high as 18.2% have been reported
literally only 1 comarca of 33 people

Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to daughter you fucking retard, and they aren't the same regardless. There are dozens of sub-variants of MACRO-haplogrup L that are TENS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS APART.

>mtDNA
But that means it was the nigger women that got bleached, not Spaniards getting blacked. Mitochondria only transfer from mother to child.

>wikipedia, controlled by who we all know lel

They dont tell you ofcourse that L mtdna it is not autosomal(admixture) and L markers have been found even in Norway, Russia and England. And no one knows their origin, probably it us much ancient

And in autosomal England, Norway, Spain and Portugal usually don't score any relevant ssafrican

They are much lower in the rest of Europe though(Greece 0.1%, Denmark 0.5%, France 0.9%), and Iberians do score some sub-saharan in autosomal tests as well.
Pic related is Eurogenes k8, the gradient is very similar to that of mtDNA L.

That is not deep ancestry ignorant, that map can't separate north african caucasian alleles from sub-saharan ones.. because it is not deep -

If you wanna see deep with diferentiation you have to check k36 or k15 eurogenes.
that have much more samples that can separate real ancestry.
and of course in 23 and me no european scores those values

>muh deeep!!
deep doesn't make something go away, it just means it is better mediated through a different population

the fact that at lower K it is assigned to non caucasian clusters and it is correlated with increased non caucasian lineages pretty much destroys your argument

>pretty much destroys your argument

No, it only reinforces the argument, if some run has not a big number of samples it can´t separate what is real, from what is buzz, this is basic logic. if northafrican diferentiation is not there, some europeans will score it When it is there, for example in k36 from eurogenes, they don´t score it.

>if some run has not a big number of samples
that's your claim for which you didn't provide any evidence

you still have to explain to me how it is caucasian despite it being assogned to non caucasian clusters at lower K, you just keep avoiding the point like the plague
and also why is mtDNA L so much more frequent in Iberia
nobody is saying it was literal negroes who would've brought said lineages and mixture in Iberia, but north Africans certainly could, since they are a mixed race of both caucasian and negroid origins

anybody who knows even a little about the subjects knows increasing K doesn't make things more informative, if you put K high enough what you get is that everyone is a 100% purely from a cluster

>that's your claim for which you didn't provide any evidence

It's a fact, that's exactly why, they started to add more ppopulations,to increase accuracy. You can´t analyse something in 2d ray and expect accuracy. And that is only half part of the story. Because those projects essencially focus on european diversity, not in asian or amerindian or african.
In those calculators you are looking at ancient (Mesolithic and Neolithic) ancestry.

When you see k36 for italians, spaniards and portuguese, they score what we all know. spaniards and portuguese atlantic, med and north west europe by far, that small input of baltic, etc.. north afrca and near east(in line with Ydna - 4% 5% 6%) and ssa it is basically nothing.

>It's a fact, that's exactly why, they started to add more ppopulations,to increase accuracy.
you have no clue what you are talking about do you?
the dataset is the same, K is just the number of clusters the ADMIXTURE algorithm is allowed to assign SNPs to since it's a supervised clustering algorithm

the fact that when you give to it few clusters to play with it assigns some SNPs to the African related cluster(i.e at K=4) is certainly of some significance, otherwise you cannot in principle even distinguish between what is caucasian(west Eurasian) or not, as by increasing K you would just get a cluster for each subpopulation

>In those calculators you are looking at ancient (Mesolithic and Neolithic) ancestry
in period of time, sure, but not in an ethnic sense
among now nearly 500 mesolithic and neolithic samples from all over Europe and the Levant you cannot find a single one of them with mtDNA L or significant african input(with the exception of Swedish Funnelbeakers who, you've guessed it, are a late neolithic culture linked to the Iberian megalithic cultures)

Glad I'm not wh*te
you weakling pigskins will soon be extinct inshallah and there is nothing you cuckboys can do to stop this

Nobody except some butthurt nordicists say it is much or recent stuff, but I don't like people in denial about it either who just cannot sleep if they don't convince themselves they are 100% pure something.
South Europe has some north African(caucasian+negroid) and west asian input, north/east Europe has some Siberian/east Asian input, it is to be expected when you live near the boundaries of a certain geographical region.

/thread

>the fact that when you give to it few clusters to play with it assigns some SNPs to the African related cluster(i.e at K=4) is certainly of some significance,

I've explained you before, because it lacks differentiation of alleles, the focus was primarly europe. North-africans and even sub-saharans have some old pre-historic west eurasian alleles, it is shared from ancient times.
´Just wait to see when basal Eurasians get sampled, you will have even greatter differentiation

>in period of time, sure, but not in an ethnic sense

For that you have basically 23 and me, that traces your heritage, spaniards and portuguese all score more than 99% european, thats pretty clear about their ethnic origins. About 5000 years ago or 10.000 the studies are being done.

why doesn't anyone understand haplogroups?

If you are a non european immigrant in portugal you are not. portuguese people are white like spaniards, so, accept more refugges lmao

>North-africans and even sub-saharans have some old pre-historic west eurasian alleles, it is shared from ancient times.
>´Just wait to see when basal Eurasians get sampled, you will have even greatter differentiation
I agree that could in fact be, at least in principle, an alternative explanation. But the fact remains that said admixture is also correlated with increased sub-saharan maternal lineages.
The most basal Eurasian populations sampled thus far, Natufians and mesolithic Iranians, show no sign of sub-saharan input and have 100% west eurasian lineages.

>For that you have basically 23 and me, that traces your heritage, spaniards and portuguese all score more than 99% european, thats pretty clear about their ethnic origins. About 5000 years ago or 10.000 the studies are being done.
see, you don't understand my point, you are just parroting whatever you told yourself to sleep better
23&me uses a very high K to determine ancestry, so of course at some point you are going to get an Iberian cluster
but that doesn't say anything about what fundamentally makes up this Iberian cluster
it's the same with ashkenazim, they also get their own cluster, does that mean ashkenazim are not a mixed population?
stop the pathetic denial

>show no sign of sub-saharan input and have 100% west eurasian lineages

Some ancient populations in europe had sub-saharan markers, from a very old ancestry, like the Bronze Age from Rathlin Island, Co. Antrim, Ireland, just go check by yourself.

All that bullcrap myths aboutt mass atlantic slave trade it is ridiculous at least for europe.

> that doesn't say anything about what fundamentally makes up this Iberian cluster

The iberian cluster there in basically basque.

>it's the same with ashkenazim, they also get their own cluster, does that mean ashkenazim are not a mixed population?
stop the pathetic denial

Are you crazy?
in deep ancestry all europe scores something ouside of europe, all without any exception. is Europe all mixed? of course not, you have references, 23nd me could be one of them.
Deep pre-historic ancestry it is being done, but take that always with a bit of salt.
when we look at spaniards or portuguese their genetic connections are with other europeans.

Usually only some third worlders (you?) are obsessed with north-african or ssa that are small to near zero.
If you wanna see who they are,check their similarity by dna. Of course you will never see there, proximity with north-africans or with ssa.

you are in full blown denial, it's really sad
believe what you want, luckily reality won't change

of course it won´t change, you came here claiming that iberians were mixed, you get your ass kicked, and now all europe is mixed?
your reality wont change for sure, their is pretty european, just look at the similarity map again.

kek thank you user

>you get your ass kicked
thanks for the great laugh
you got utterly BTFO on every claim you made, completely avoided answering my questions and just repeated your damage control

the admixture, the african lineages are still there

So we are not white? Thanks Slowpoke.

1,000,000 keks. Just for the title and the related pic. Made me LOL.

Well done. Not everybody is talented enough to pull it off. But YOU sir, hit the sweet spot.

ty

>Portugal
>white
>Spaniards
>white

we are Moors of AFRICAN descent
remember Haplogroup L

All your points falled into the ground,
from the first map that you have posted, to your claims that no ancient pop scored ssa.
And yes, we are on the same spot we were before, iberians keep scoring > 99 european in the most knowed autosomal test and in some more deep ancient yes the north-african pre-history lines 6% are there,nothing new, west asian it is also in all europe, more caucasoid, like other lineages, ssa it is basically clop values.....

I think no. Enjoy diversity.

>All your points falled into the ground,
yeah sure, such as my pointing out your increassed frequency of mtDNA L in correlation with your increased SSA in admixture tests, point which you avoided to address like the plague

>your claims that no ancient pop scored ssa
show me some, go on
also show me a single ancient sample with mtDNA L, I'll wait

>keeps repeating the nonsensical shit like a negro
your SSA is showing, can't expect much from portuguese """intellectuals""" I guess

I mean, show me some that aren't directly linked to Iberia like the Swede Funnelbeakers
your african mixture is not historical

>mt DNA
>Maternal lineage
BLEACHED,is what you meant to say i tak eit?

Show your true flag if you're gonna pretend to be white you disgusting fucking niggers

Hi.

Btw the joke was about mtdna haplogroup being a maternal line.
The doggo is italian too, cane pastore italiano.

You won 1 (one) internet each.

>mfw not white

>mfw don't have to take in forced diversity

>mfw i'll willingly convert to islam in the future to get my nordic cumskin slave

isn't mtDNA matrileneal?

We've another winner, you're the fourth in this thread to get it over sixteen (16) unique posters.
Congratulations.

>The doggo is italian too
wut?

OP picture dogo.

You still black your genetics even if it comes from the mother's side. A drop of shit in a glass of water makes the whole water shit water.

medicaldaily.com/dna-ancestry-tests-are-meaningless-your-historical-genealogy-search-244586