DNA testing

[hateeveryoneequily]

does anyone know about dna testing to find out racial admixtures? say if your irish or swedish as opposed to just the indo-european group. the tests i have seen are not very specific. are there test that are more detailed?
thanks





2056

[JohnJoyTree]

There are no commercially available tests that claim to make this distinction.

[Anglo_Francais_Deutsch]

Hi Everyone.

I have a question about using the many DNA tests to check for Racial Purity. I will imagine that this question has appeared many times on SF, but I am new to this site, so please bear with me.

I was considering ordering one of these tests for the sake of interest, however, from what I have read on the Web sites for companies providing DNA tests as a way of ascertaining ancestry, it seems that no one, no matter what race they belong to, will test 100% pure anything. i.e. a typical "pure" Englishman, for example, will test 99.6% White, and 0.4% something else. Apparently Scandanvians, as well as Eastern Europeans, seem to show very low levels of Asian gene markers, according to one Web site. Any thoughts on this?

Personally, I would take the word of Stormfront people over the word of any money-making corporation, so I am interested in knowing if anyone puts any validity into what these companies say. Anyone ever tried one of these DNA tests?

Kind Regards

32

[Cyrus1964]

Originally Posted by Anglo_Francais_Deutsch

Hi Everyone.
Apparently Scandanvians, as well as Eastern Europeans, seem to show very low levels of Asian gene markers, according to one Web site. Any thoughts on this?
32

It has all got to do with another time, and another place. Think of it like the skin of an onion. You peel away layer by layer until you finally reach the bulbous core ... the heart of the matter. Archaeologists strip away horizons of soil as they work their way back through the stratigraphic record. The further they go, the further back in time they reach.

Layer 1: Tartan-wearing white folk formerly lived in Asia several thousand years ago, but were largely driven from the region beginning in the first three centuries before Christ. In the Tien Shan region of China there is some evidence that the Europoids eventually started interbreeding with the Asiatics, though they had scrupulously maintained their genetic purity prior until this point.

Layer 2: Then you have the medieval Mongol invasion of Eastern Europe.

Translation: Asiatic genetic markers most likely percolated into the Scandinavian and Eastern European gene pool during either of these historical periods.

Now go and ask a post modernist/leftist college graduate. You will be amazed how they become unglued as they are cruelly exposed to such scientific data. Then watch them squirm as they fail to digress into their fall-back position ... political correctness. You see their professors didn't advise them how to handle any and all circumstances. At that moment they realize they are on their own ... just them and their logic. Only then do they realise ... my professors have been hiding something from me, or worse still lying (eg; I thought Aryan Europoids were pure fiction, or the fabrications of Nazi theorists).

[JohnJoyTree]

WIthout trying to knock what Cyrus has said, I think it is important to understand that 1) these tests are still new, and 2) we don't know if there has **ever** been a group of people **anywhere** that would have tested 100% on those markers.

It's quite possible that they have been present in low amounts in white populations since before we evolved the characteristics that make us white.

[Cyrus1964]

Originally Posted by JohnJoyTree

WIthout trying to knock what Cyrus has said, I think it is important to understand that 1) these tests are still new, and 2) we don't know if there has **ever** been a group of people **anywhere** that would have tested 100% on those markers.

It's quite possible that they have been present in low amounts in white populations since before we evolved the characteristics that make us white.

To a degree what you say is correct. However genetics is to some extent a chemical transaction. Certain chromosomal characteristics, peculiar to certain geographical regions, can combine with dissimilar strains through the act of mating.

I would like to cite the case of a certain east African tribe (their name escapes me) that is lauded as some kind of ancestral genetic super-donor, having a number of traits found in far off Asia and China. Geneticists never bothered to touch base with archaeologists before reaching this astonishing conclusion. As it turns out Chinese sailed to this very region at various points throughout the Middle Ages, and left physical traces behind for good measure. No doubt some of them stayed behind and integrated with the local negro populace. There African and Asiatic genetic trends intermingled.
Likewise some Australian aboriginals are known to have genetic structures commonly associated with Korea and Mongolia. Here, once again, geneticists fondly harken back to the ancestral Lucys etc. What they never took into account was a massive medieval Mongol invasion fleet that attacked Indonesia, but was shipwrecked by atrocious weather conditions. How many vessels sailed a short distance to the south, to Northern Australia, and there interbred with the natives? In Western Australia certain tribesmen have a weird blood disorder peculiar to Holland and the Dutch colonists dwelling in South Africa. So did aboriginies (isolated from Asia since the last Ice Age) get the blood disease from Lucy also? Nooooooooooooooooooooooo! On the basis of archaeological remains and rock engravings in W.A. it can be demonstrated that it entered Australia's arid interior with shipwrecked Dutch sailors.

Archaeology, linguistics and historical sources can all be effective tools for determining whether or not a physical and cultural interaction took place between potentially alien gene pools.

Yes JohnJoyTree there is still a long way to go in some respects. Only when archaeologists chemically test human remains on some scale and, where permited, undertake DNA testing of excavated remains where the level of preservation allows for it, can we fine tune our understanding of what came from "Lucy" and what did not.

Remember Lucy, as the common ancestor of all humanity, is still only a theory.

[st45215]

I would say the genetic tests are not going to accurately tell you your ancestory anyway. For one I don't even think it makes a distinction between whites and jews if I am correct.

But %99 of genes are the same between races. There's no way to tell what race it came from. I suppose this test is just testing for the presence of certain genes found only in particular racial group or associated with that group. Which there could be personal mutations that you or your family has, its possible you have a background of a certain race but didn't inherit the particular gene its testing for therefore it could tell you that your pure or likewise other things.

Also even if for example you have a mixed background, say you are 1/4 asian 1/4 jew 1/4 white 1/4 negro. Especially if the mixings occured further back in generations (that is a 'pure' ancestor existed many generations back instead of recently that is if both parents are likewise 1/4 1/4 etc. instead of 1/2 1/2) you would probably inherit a disproportanate number of genes from a particular ancestor "taking after" a particular one. your genes may be %50 asian even though by heritage you are onlyl %25 asian.

It seems to me that it would be impossible to be completely accurate even if we were experts at genetics, but we only recently decoded the human genome, much less understand all the different genes relating to race.

One thing does seem true from what I've learned is there are also not a lot of distinction between races. That is the further south you go people gradually become darker and gradually take on certain traits rather than a straight line of difference same thing with east/west though general barriers have kept certain populations semi-isolated.

However is it accurate for the most part, I hear it is.

[Red Baron]

EURO-DNA 1.0 reports your European ancestry admixture much like ABD 2.5 does, but looks deeper within European lineages for individuals who are predominantly European:

1) Northern European subgroup (NOR),

2) Southeastern European (Mediterranean) subgroup (MED),

3) Middle Eastern subgroup (MIDEAS) and

4) South Asian (SA) subgroup.

These groups were defined empirically – that is to say, research at DNAprint with DNAPrint genetic markers reveals that the assumption of a 4-group sub-structure model within Europeans “fits” the best (though admixture within parental samples clustered as a function of geopolitical identity, and made geographic sense whatever the model).

https://www.ancestrybydna.com/abd30.asp

[nemo70]

McCulloch and Coon were wrong

https://www.ancestrybydna.com/abd30.asp#e002

[Strathclyde]

I thought this was _really_ interesting and I look forward to further advances in this area.