So what is the genetic component that makes Slavs so much different from Nordics/Germanics?
>>16546773Wrong map
>>16546778Why?
>>16546773There isn’t much. Slavs all come from the same small group of tribes that expanded across Eastern Europe. So, they’re from a specific subset of the indo-Europeans. Then Slavs differentiate from the each other based on groups they mixed with. So south Slavs mixed with whoever was in the Balkans to be half Slav half Balkan (or something to that effect). West Slavs, particularly the Czechs and Slovaks, mixed with Germans more. East Slavs mixed with Uralics/Mordvins (whatever that group was in NE Europe) and steppe people. The most “Slav” of the Slavs are probably Poles and Belarusians.
>>16546790>>16546790it is wrong geographically, it is very simple and the main thing;yamnaya is no longer considered PIE.The ancestor of Urheimat is CLV which is divided into Anatolian and "PIE" (Yamnaya).We can say that Sredni Stog is PIE too.or in this case, "PIA".
>>16546794YesThe eastern slavs are mixed with uraloid and other mongolian peoples...Maybe similar to saami
>>16546799Hum ok.
>>16546807They’re not saami or Mongolian. The amount of that admixture is probably heavily overblown, but exists to some extent. Other than NW Russia, Finns have more East Asian admixture.
>>16546817I didn't say they were.said that there is such a mixture.as you said, the eastern Slavs mixed with other people, and such people were similar to Uraloids and things like Saami.In fact, people similar to the Saami have been around Eastern Europe and its far north since the Iron Age.but it's clearly not 50/50%
>>16546799So;CIE? Or CIAE?
>>16546834I didn't use that terminology.what the fuck is CIE???????
>>16546846It's obvious stupid;CIE=CLV Indo European, the real Urheimat.and if we want to be more restricted, we will use CIAE.CIAE=CLV Indo Anatolia European
>>16546858OK???I don't know what to say about this staggering level of "complexity" lol
>>16546799Maykop had nothing to do with yamnaya
>>16546873When did I say I had something in common? that was very strange.clearly they have nothing to do with it, maykop itself is in a different cluster than the yamnaya and the CLV parents.
>>16546878forgiveness.I think I misinterpreted your comment, for some reason it reminded me of the 2018 patients with the muh armenia hypothesis, where they used maykop as a kind of "PIE", which is clearly a no-brainer
>>16546773balto slavic drift, genetically eastern europeans are the same as northern, they have genetic drift however, and some east asian ancestry, in finns and russians.
>>16546891oh ok.yes, I remember those putrefactions... anyway, it's impossible for all possible reasons, the Yamnaya itself is part of a different cluster than the Maykop and they both had different languages, cultures and even religion. The Maykops themselves were much more culturally evolved than the Yamnaya, especially from an artifactual point of view.related photo are maykop bois.I presume that such cultural superiority is due to its greater proximity to agricultural peoples, there may be a certain cultural continuity between this specific type of ox and the cultures of Iraq and Turkmenistan, representing solar gods with origins in Neolithic cultures.
