Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Plunder_n_Frightenin t1_iz5cx9e wrote

Reply to comment by Chetkica in Asians were the First People in Europe According to Recent Genetic Studies. by KottjornGoad

If you read the article their were inferences to similarities to current East Asian genetics

4

Chetkica t1_iz5dogk wrote

they probably meant east eurasian. But that article is nonsense then, as the first groups of prople to reach europe were before the east-west eurasian divergence date

1

ksatriamelayu t1_j1mdhi6 wrote

If you read the article, they are saying that it was (modern) East Eurasians that reached Europe (Bulgaria) first, before getting wiped out and replaced by (modern) West Eurasians, which seems, well, a bit weird but that's the finding. I really would've thought East Eurasians to move from India Northeast through the jungles and beach route, not through Bulgaria/Caucasus -> Central Asia and Siberia... Then again, there would be a lot of branches, and not all thrived.

1

Chetkica t1_j1o9jia wrote

Bulgaria was named after the bulgars, an oghur Turkic people. But certainly thats not what they were referring to, as thats very recent history.

But just the title is wrong, as asian just designates people from a continent today.

Siberia is known to be the origin point of the most clusters of east asians proper (northern). China, Japan, Korea, all of those are rather southern populations, or really a mix of southern and northern elements, much closer to southeast asians than to northern asians. True northern east eurasians are groups like the Ket, Evenki, Nenet, Eskimo-Aleuts. Tungusic, Ket people are from the same language family as the Na Dene native americans such as the Athabaskans like Navajo, the Dene-Yeniseian family.

1