Cyprus-Forum.com

[supporttheunderdog]

There's a difference between science and political rhetoric. You are good at one and I am better at the other.

yeah so good that your interpretation that just happens to also match [url][/url]your ideology requirements is superior to that of the people who actual did the study. In your mind that is.

Oh yeah, so who actually filmed/made that facebook video, because I don't see any "study" giving us the data?

Details here of the provencehttp://creativity-online.com/work/momondo-the-dna-journey/47554
Looks loke sponsorsed by a travel site...i actualy agree it may not be a valid study as the presentation by nationality is a bit iffy. That is why I posted a link to a proper scientific paper, and quoted from it.

[GreekIslandGirl]

There's a difference between science and political rhetoric. You are good at one and I am better at the other.

yeah so good that your interpretation that just happens to also match [url][/url]your ideology requirements is superior to that of the people who actual did the study. In your mind that is.

Oh yeah, so who actually filmed/made that facebook video, because I don't see any "study" giving us the data?

Details here of the provencehttp://creativity-online.com/work/momondo-the-dna-journey/47554
Looks loke sponsorsed by a travel site...i actualy agree it may not be a valid study as the presentation by nationality is a bit iffy. That is why I posted a link to a proper scientific paper, and quoted from it.

OK - well done. Thanks. I hope that shuts up erolz.

But on that note of not taking things at *face value* - your previous paper is weirdly selective and I would have said lacked solid peer review (I don't have time/inclination to do more than skim), but I do notice the journal will no longer be published:

Investigative Genetics will cease to be published by BioMed Central and no longer receives submissions.

One of my main criticisms, from a skim, is that they decided to leave the first wave of Cypriot population expansion from the Greek V-13 sources and concentrated instead on one other which isn't present in such a small population and therefore difficult to draw conclusions. In science it's difficult to make a statement because you haven't found "something" that you decided to look for. In fact such non-results didn't used to lead to publications in my day but judging by the fate of the journal the article appeared in, perhaps that's still the case.

[supporttheunderdog]

This tells like it is about Cypriots, at least through Y-DnA
http://investigativegenetics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13323-016-0032-8
Conclusions
Analyses of Cypriot haplogroup data are consistent with two stages of prehistoric settlement. E-V13 and E-M34 are widespread, and PCA suggests sourcing them to the Balkans and Levant/Anatolia, respectively. The persistent pre-Greek component is represented by elements of G2-U5(xL30) haplogroups: U5*, PF3147, and L293. J2b-M205 may contribute also to the pre-Greek strata. The majority of R1b-Z2105 lineages occur in both the westernmost and easternmost districts. Distinctively, sub-haplogroup R1b- M589 occurs only in the east. The absence of R1b- M589 lineages in Crete and the Balkans and the presence in Asia Minor are compatible with Late Bronze Age influences from Anatolia rather than from Mycenaean Greeks.
See Also
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml
This give clues about MtDnA
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_mtdna_haplogroups_frequency.shtml

Oh and btw we also have 50% banana remnants in our DNA - using "g"IG logic, that is...

It's not my logic but my attempt to ridicule those who think they are "5% German" whatever that means. Oh, but don't forget our dinosaur cousins ... except one of my closest is Marie Antoinette, apparently. Did dinosaurs eat cake/brioche?

So I see you now agree with me about Dinosaurs being our cousins....http://www.cyprus-forum.com/cyprus39665-30.html

I see only that your confusion continues.

Not at at all. I rather thought it was you who were confused with comments like

We are the dinosaurs that didn't die out. You have not managed to prove you are not related to dinosaurs (years do not matter).

When plainly we are not dinosaurs, and when at that point I had already pointed out that we were related to dinosaurs through a common ancestor probably about 300 mya to 340 mya, and where you had dismissed my use of the word "Cousins" to describe the proximate nature of the relationship.

As usual you were contructing straw man arguments plainly ignoring what I had said...but that is what you do here, that is what you always have dine here

And if you had opened the link and read the article you would have known the words were not mine and where the lack of quotation marks does not make them mine...but then I sometimes question your ability to read. You might look at the letters and word on the page, but understand them........?? Judging by what you write, that to me is questionable, but too was topic where your distorted Hellenic World view was under challenge.

[erolz66]

OK - well done. Thanks. I hope that shuts up erolz.

Not really because my comments about you ability to interpret anything, politics , science or anything else, in a way that suits your ideological needs was specifically in relation to your deceleration that THIS report http://investigativegenetics.biomedcent ... 016-0032-8 was 'absolute nonsense' and how you must 'interpret accordingly'.

Still taking a reference to an entirely DIFFERENT report to the one being discussed to suit your needs is nothing new for you GiG, is it ?

[GreekIslandGirl]

OK - well done. Thanks. I hope that shuts up erolz.

Not really because my comments about you ability to interpret anything, politics , science or anything else, in a way that suits your ideological needs was specifically in relation to your deceleration that THIS report http://investigativegenetics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13323-016-0032-8 was 'absolute nonsense' and how you must 'interpret accordingly'.

Still taking a reference to an entirely DIFFERENT report to the one being discussed to suit your needs is nothing new for you GiG, is it ?

OK - you can change your general criticism to some other specific criticism now that your first attempt was rubbished by stud. And as for what you're saying above - again, another super-twist because I didn't rubbish "THIS report" as you state (above in red) but the one statement which I quoted to stud regarding 'non-results' - and it was from that article which we now know is in some defunct journal.

[erolz66]

OK - you can change your general criticism to some other specific criticism now that your first attempt was rubbished by stud. And as for what you're saying above - again, another super-twist because I didn't rubbish "THIS report" as you state (above in red) but the one statement which I quoted to stud regarding 'non-results' - and it was from that article which we now know is in some defunct journal.

Try looking at this post of your GiG (not that actual indisputable evidence ever means anything to you)

cyprus44917-10.html#p842752

You start with a quote, which you mis attribute to STUD but was actually the verbatim text from a report. So which report was your post verbatim quoting and under which you wrote 'What absolute nonsense!' ?

You explicitly quoted from THIS report and immediately under wrote 'Absolute nonsense' and then wittered on about the need to "interpret accordingly" and I then commented on the your ability to "interpret accordingly" to suit your needs generally, just as you had done specifically in regards to THIS report.

Then when STUD makes reference to an entirely different report to THIS report, you came out with your inane comment of " I hope that shuts up erolz "

This is what you do. It is what you have always done. You appear to think such intellectually dishonest behaviour is argument or discussion. It is not, it is just intellectual dishonesty behaviour in place of actual rational argument or discussion.

[supporttheunderdog]

Was it a general criticism as you suggest, since it was in reply to a specific criticism you made of a specific article....and by implication is soecific to that....?

[Sotos]

so how much terggish dna do you have my little tourgociraboullouimmmmmmu

Not even the Turks themselves have much Turkic DNA in them. Here is an interesting thread in another forum:

Hi everyone I'm new and I'm Turk with origins from Ankara and I was raised in Spain now live in in the U.K as a student.

I want to ask you guys, why is it that DNA results shows many Turks have 10-25% Mongoloid admixture but yet greeks, Armenians or Kurds samples are 0%? that this mean really our ancestors were Mongoloid and if it was will this change the way you look at Turks? I did a DNA test and I came out having 22% Mongoloid ( Siberian 14.7% + 7.3% East Asian ). I really don't understand what's the meaning of this but at first the results surprised me so much that I even doubt if I was a pure Turk and my family told me they are just Turks. So I did a lot genetic research of Turks on the forum and found I'm not the only one with such odd results. Here is what I found while searching for more data.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28 ... somal-DNA-)

[Sotos]

Hellenism was never about DNA, you silly sod.

Exactly. And neither is DNA what determines membership in any nation. We are a nation, not a tiny tribe which is isolated from the rest of the world. What makes some nations better than other is not the DNA of their people, but their culture. DNA analysis could be useful in treating diseases but it tells you nothing about your identity, because an identity is something that a person acquires through his environment and through his choices, not something that is passed with DNA.

[erolz66]

What makes some nations better than other is not the DNA of their people, but their culture.

Been here before but this whole 'ranking' of different cultures as 'better' or 'worse', to me is so, er, colonial in attitude. Different cultures are different, and I doubt there are any or ever have been that do not have positive aspects that anyone from any other culture could 'learn' from as well as negative.

because an identity is something that a person acquires through his environment and through his choices, not something that is passed with DNA.

and would one of those 'environmental' factors that shapes a person identity be perhaps, who controls and shapes and determines the educational curriculum of a people ?