The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


this is a must

Feel free to talk about anything that you want.

Re: this is a must

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:00 pm

Stud - you're getting mixed up with migratory markers and autosomal DNA ..... again! Idiot!
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8945
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: this is a must

Postby supporttheunderdog » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:09 pm

GreekIslandGirl wrote:
Get Real! wrote:Oracle, even though I’ve known you for 10 odd years I’ve kept a horrible “secret” from you because I didn’t want to hurt your feelings but the truth is you’re the biggest BASTARD in Europe. :cry:

Your DNA is a cocktail of Albanian + Turk + Bulgarian + Gypsy + Slav.

In other words girl, you are a BALKAN.

*That* is your true ethnicity, *that* is your origin, *that* is your makeup and you need to acknowledge and accept that. Now deal with it!


If I am "Balkan" then so are 85% of Cypriots! :D However, it's zero percent Turk/Albanian/Gypsy/Slav here!

- The difference between me and you GR! is that I deal in facts and you deal in confabulations!


Incorrect as the majority of Cypriots can probably trace their ancestory on this Island through both Maternal and Paternal (Y) DNA to non-Greek peoples who were here for 3000 years before anything identifiably Greek existed, let alone came to Cyprus. And no I am not getting confused. You are the one spreading (or trying to spread ) confusion as the whole report is about migratory markers -Y DnA - and the genetic orgin of Male Cypriots as found from their YDnA.
Last edited by supporttheunderdog on Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
supporttheunderdog
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8155
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:03 pm
Location: limassol

Re: this is a must

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:10 pm

supporttheunderdog wrote:You are the idiot as the contributions do not add up to 100%, but more, and that shows the fallacy of your argument.



It's not my fallacy as I didn't make the numbers up. They are in your article.

supportthesickdog wrote:As it plainly says E-V13 is only 7.3% of the whole


:lol:
Although, when using the entire set of Y-chromosome haplogroup frequencies, the composition of Cyprus can be explained by contributions from Anatolia, Balkans, and Levant, the actual Greek contribution stood out for the Cypriot E-V13 (87 %), J2a-M67 (74 %), R1b-M269 (48 %), and G-P15 (17 %) components. Lastly, Levant contributed up to 30 % of the Cypriot R1b-M269 and to a lesser extent regarding the Cypriot J lineages (3–8 %).


supportthesickdog wrote:I would incidentally point out that Professor Deltas has stated elsewhere that there is little to genetically distinguish Pre 1974 Turkish Speaking Cypriots from Greek Speaking Cypriots, that this was likely through conversion to Islam and adoption of Turkish language (for tax reasons?) of Greek Speaking Cypriots and if so to me that too makes them Cypriot natives, not Ottoman remnants to be evicted.


I don't care what people without data say. The sad fact is, among other studies, The Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus is only able to distinguish between GCs and TCs precisely BECAUSE they have genetic differences.

Now get lost imperialist colonialist fascist who is here to tell us what we are and are not!
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8945
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: this is a must

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:14 pm

supporttheunderdog wrote:Incorrect as the majority of Cypriots can probably trace their ancestory on this Island through both Maternal and Paternal (Y) DNA to non-Greek peoples who were here for 3000 years before anything identifiably Greek existed, let alone came to Cyprus.


Just bypass the need to analyse and make up whatever you want, dear! And half the population does NOT have Y chromosomes, idiot!

Who are 'non-Greek' peoples when you are analyzing migratory markers, idiot? You have a a marker that switches on to say when "identifiably Greek existed"?

utter fool
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8945
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: this is a must

Postby supporttheunderdog » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:33 pm

GreekIslandGirl wrote:
supporttheunderdog wrote:You are the idiot as the contributions do not add up to 100%, but more, and that shows the fallacy of your argument.



It's not my fallacy as I didn't make the numbers up. They are in your article.


superstud wrote:As it plainly says E-V13 is only 7.3% of the whole


:lol:
Although, when using the entire set of Y-chromosome haplogroup frequencies, the composition of Cyprus can be explained by contributions from Anatolia, Balkans, and Levant, the actual Greek contribution stood out for the Cypriot E-V13 (87 %), J2a-M67 (74 %), R1b-M269 (48 %), and G-P15 (17 %) components. Lastly, Levant contributed up to 30 % of the Cypriot R1b-M269 and to a lesser extent regarding the Cypriot J lineages (3–8 %).




superstud wrote:I would incidentally point out that Professor Deltas has stated elsewhere that there is little to genetically distinguish Pre 1974 Turkish Speaking Cypriots from Greek Speaking Cypriots, that this was likely through conversion to Islam and adoption of Turkish language (for tax reasons?) of Greek Speaking Cypriots and if so to me that too makes them Cypriot natives, not Ottoman remnants to be evicted.




I don't care what people without data say. The sad fact is, among other studies, The Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus is only able to distinguish between GCs and TCs precisely BECAUSE they have genetic differences.

Now get lost imperialist colonialist fascist who is here to tell us what we are and are not!


I stand by what i say. You are using your usual tricks of lies and distortions. I do not in fact argue with the figures per se. What i argue with is your deceitful use of them.
The last sentence looks only at four particular haplogroups and the Greek contribution to them and them only.,What you must look at is the percentage that each of them bears to the whole, where as us made plain, eg E-V13 is only 7.3%. And Tge rest I think are smaller.

The fact remains, 60% Anatolia, 24% Levant, 13% Balkans, Greece not listed except as combined with Balkans, and quite how 7.3% of the whole can become 87.5% except by wilful,and persistent distortion, which is all you are good at is something I think you must clarify

The remains are identified not by genetic differences between GSC And TSC but rather by genetic similarities to living relatives, which us how the remains can in many cases be identified as specific individuals and handed to the families for burial.
User avatar
supporttheunderdog
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8155
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:03 pm
Location: limassol

Re: this is a must

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:36 pm

supporttheunderdog wrote: I do not in fact argue with the figures per se.

:lol:

Oh, but it is precisely the figures you have been arguing about!

But now you finally accept they are straight out of your article. :roll:

supporttheunderdog wrote:What i argue with is your deceitful use of them.



I haven't used them for anything. You're the one misusing them to tell us what we are and are not related to whilst all the while not having a clue what migratory markers actually mean!

supporttheunderdog wrote:The fact remains ....


And by the way ........ there are no "facts" in that article as you will find out if you read the caveats and exclusions the authors mention. :wink:
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8945
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: this is a must

Postby supporttheunderdog » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:50 pm

GreekIslandGirl wrote:
supporttheunderdog wrote:Incorrect as the majority of Cypriots can probably trace their ancestory on this Island through both Maternal and Paternal (Y) DNA to non-Greek peoples who were here for 3000 years before anything identifiably Greek existed, let alone came to Cyprus.


Just bypass the need to analyse and make up whatever you want, dear! And half the population does NOT have Y chromosomes, idiot!

Who are 'non-Greek' peoples when you are analyzing migratory markers, idiot? You have a a marker that switches on to say when "identifiably Greek existed"?

utter fool


I know that, but note i put the y after paternal, and where the majority of the male population with yDNA plainly is not decended directlly from Greeks, and where another Study I quouted on the Maternal DnA suggests a majority Anatolian or Levantine Origin of the female population it follows that the majority of the population whether male or female will likely have their ancestry on both parents side from Anatolian or Levantine Origin.

Greek language and culture btw seemingly did not exist until possibly 2000 bc with neolithic movements into Greece of Indo European peoples. See the Kurgan hypothesis.
User avatar
supporttheunderdog
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8155
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:03 pm
Location: limassol

Re: this is a must

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:53 pm

supporttheunderdog wrote:[
The remains are identified not by genetic differences between GSC And TSC but rather by genetic similarities to living relatives, which us how the remains can in many cases be identified as specific individuals and handed to the families for burial.


Oh, yeah?

For example:

Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015 Jan;14:e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.09.004. Epub 2014 Sep 16.
Population genetic data for 15 autosomal STR markers in Turkish Cypriots from Cyprus.
Gurkan C1, Demirdov DK2, Yamaci RF3, Sevay H4.

Abstract
Fifteen autosomal short tandem repeat (STR) markers [D8S1179, D21S11, D7S820, CSF1PO, D3S1358, THO1, D13S317, D16S539, D2S1338, D19S433, vWA, TPOX, D18S51, D5S818 and FGA] were analyzed in 501 unrelated, randomly selected Turkish Cypriot individuals from the island of Cyprus. While no locus duplications or null alleles were detected in these samples, eight allelic variants were observed in total, 75% of which were intermediate allelic variants that were absent in the system allelic ladder. Allelic frequencies and statistical parameters of forensic interest were calculated at each locus. For the 15 STR loci tested, combined matching probability (pM) was 2.15717 × 10(-18) and combined power of exclusion (PE) was 0.9999995213. No deviations from the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium were observed, except for the vWA locus, which became insignificant after the Bonferroni correction for multiple testing. Locus-by-locus comparisons of the Turkish Cypriot allelic frequencies with those published for the neighboring and/or historically related populations with similar loci coverage (Turkish, Greek, Greek Cypriot, Italian and Lebanese) revealed some statistically significant differences at one to five loci. In general, an increase in the number of such significant differences between the Turkish Cypriot data and those for other populations correlated closely with an increase in the geographic distance and/or a decrease in the amount of historical contact. The Turkish Cypriot autosomal STR population study will find immediate use in the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus Project on the "Exhumation, Identification and Return of Remains of Missing Persons" and it will also be available for criminal, parentage and other missing person investigations.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8945
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: this is a must

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:57 pm

And ...

Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2014 May;10:e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.01.003. Epub 2014 Jan 18.
Population genetics of 17 Y-STR markers in Turkish Cypriots from Cyprus.
Teralı K1, Zorlu T2, Bulbul O2, Gurkan C3.

Abstract
We analyzed seventeen Y-chromosomal short tandem repeats (STRs) [DYS456, DYS389I, DYS390, DYS389II, DYS458, DYS19, DYS385a/b, DYS393, DYS391, DYS439, DYS635, DYS392, Y-GATA-H4, DYS437, DYS438, and DYS448] in 253 unrelated, male individuals from the Turkish Cypriot population of the Eastern Mediterranean island of Cyprus. While 206 out of the 253 haplotypes present in the dataset were unique, there are also 22 haplotypes that were observed in two individuals each, and 1 haplotype that was observed in three individuals. While no locus duplications or null alleles were observed in our dataset, we have detected 43 allelic variants in total, the majority of which (25 out of 253 haplotypes or 9.88%) comprised of .2 intermediate variants at the DYS458 locus (alleles 16.2, 17.2, 18.2, 19.2, and 20.2). For the 229 different haplotypes observed in the Turkish Cypriot dataset, the calculated discrimination capacity (DC) was 0.9051 and the haplotype diversity (HD) was 0.9992. The calculated average gene diversity (GD) values ranged from 0.3828 to 0.9631 for the DYS392 and DYS385a/b loci, respectively. Pairwise genetic distance comparisons of the Turkish Cypriot Y-STR dataset with those from the neighbouring (Turkey, Greece, Israel/Palestinian Authority area, Egypt and Italy) and relatively distant (Lithuania, Taiwan and Australia) countries through the use of analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) and multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) analyses confirmed that our data do not deviate significantly from the typical core haplotypes of the Eastern Mediterranean region. The Turkish Cypriot Y-STR haplotype dataset will find an immediate use in the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus Project on the "Exhumation, Identification and Return of Remains of Missing Persons" and it is also expected to contribute to the establishment of forensic genetic services ...
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8945
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: this is a must

Postby supporttheunderdog » Tue Jun 14, 2016 12:04 am

GreekIslandGirl wrote:
supporttheunderdog wrote: I do not in fact argue with the figures per se.

:lol:

Oh, but it is precisely the figures you have been arguing about!

But now you finally accept they are straight out of your article. :roll:


This is a misinterpretation of my position on those number and yiu know it, you liar.



supporttheunderdog wrote:What i argue with is your deceitful use of them.


I haven't used them for anything. You're the one misusing them to tell us what we are and are not related to whilst all the while not having a clue what migratory markers actually mean!


So if you are not using them for anything why are you quoting them ad Nauseum? What point are you trying but fsiling to make.

I note incidentaly that you do not deal with my interpretation of how they fit in with the whole paragraph...

I note also you have not dealt with the opening sentence that 60% of Dna is of Anatolian Origin, 24% Levant, and 13% Balkans, which is a combination of Greece plus Danube, ad per table 2.

Explain what that means?

Why have the writers been so coy about highlihghting the actual Greek contribution? Which is under 20% of the whole according to the report.
supporttheunderdog wrote:The fact remains ....


And by the way ........ there are no "facts" in that article as you will find out if you read the caveats and exclusions the authors mention. :wink:[/quote]
User avatar
supporttheunderdog
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8155
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:03 pm
Location: limassol

PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests