10-24-2023, 04:23 PM
(10-24-2023, 03:47 PM)DNA archi Wrote:(10-24-2023, 02:13 PM)ph2ter Wrote: As Davidski also said on his blog, IBD method is not suitable for identification of populations.
It is only good for family genealogy.
Their method depends on the choice of reference samples which probably are of mixed origin.
If you input garbage into something, you will also as a result get the garbage.
In this case, Davidsky is completely mistaken. IBD just shows the origin of one population from another by the closest kinship, that is, what kind of people were the closest relatives. Other methods cannot distinguish relatives at a distance of <300-500 years or less, they can only show the total genetic kinship farther >300-500 years.
IBD is simply a more accurate method for establishing the nearest direct kinship of populations, unlike ordinary methods that cannot distinguish between close relatives, distant relatives, an ethnophone, and just garbage and garbage data, which are full at Davidsky.
Davidsky is simply very angry, and he cannot be trusted in this matter, he is biased, because his propaganda that Fatyanovo was a direct ancestor of Sintashta, as the fact that the Yamnaya the direct ancestors of the Bell Beakers were destroyed by the IBD method, and much more. Therefore, he is very angry and is completely not fair. He just does not want to be wrong as always.
I do not know what the Flegontov with the Slavs do there, maybe some kind of nonsense. But I did not hear that the Slavic burials were found, and to look for the Slavs in obviously non-Slavic burials is a completely false path in my opinion.
Hmm. Who do you think was the ancestor of Sintashta than?