|
|
Post by alfonsoviii on Dec 23, 2020 22:33:06 GMT
Hello everyone. I just found out that my paternal haplogroup is R1b-A8053 => A8051 => FGC37100. It seems that it is a very minority haplogroup and I hardly find information about it. In FamilyTree there are only a few people belonging to A8053, of which 28 are FGC37100. Within FGC37100, there are 10 people from Scotland, 6 from Ireland, 3 from USA, 1 from UK, 1 from Portugal and 6 without assigned nationality.
Also, in the Y-DNA classic chart I have been able to check several old members of FGC37100. All of them from Scotland, except for an American with a German surname (Pfeiffer) and an Irishman, but the latter seems to have been an Ulster Scot.
Looking at the surnames of these people I have verified that they are Scottish surnames of Norman, Anglo or Scandinavian origin, in any case they are not surnames of Gaelic or British origin. I have also been able to verify that this haplogroup exists in England, as well as in Germany. In addition, it seems that in the archaeological site of the battle of Tollense A8051 has been found in some remains. This leads me to speculate a possible Germanic-Nordic origin, at least associated with Nordic Bronze if we take into account the A8051 from Tollense. This added to the presence of this haplogroup in families of possible Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon and / or Norman descent in the British Isles.
What do you think? Can anyone give me some more information on this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 24, 2020 0:44:45 GMT
I would recommend to do another test with 23anme. Personally that one gave me a lot of info so it can possible help you too. Also, I know of other R1 people even on this forum but not many details unfortunately. Has your family shed any light about origins? Also it says you're posting via mobile. If you'd like more access to the forum then scroll down to the bottom of the page and click desktop at the right.  |
|
lorac
Full Member
Posts: 214 
Likes: 141
|
Post by lorac on Dec 24, 2020 11:37:42 GMT
R1b A8053 Anthro site Project: R1b-L51 less P312 and U106: S1194, A8053, CTS4528/DF100, S14328, A8039 (anthro.com) Are you Alonso V111 by chance? Yes, I believe they are related to the Germanic groups. Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA) - Eupedia Lots of very up to date information re the movement of the R1b haplogroup with distribution maps etc.. Makes for particularly good reading. Though you do seem to have a lot of information already. Haplogroup R* originated in North Asia just before the Last Glacial Maximum (26,500-19,000 years ago). This haplogroup has been identified in the remains of a 24,000 year-old boy from the Altai region, in south-central Siberia (Raghavan et al. 2013). This individual belonged to a tribe of mammoth hunters that may have roamed across Siberia and parts of Europe during the Paleolithic. Autosomally this Paleolithic population appears to have contributed mostly to the ancestry of modern Europeans and South Asians, the two regions where haplogroup R also happens to be the most common nowadays (R1b in Western Europe, R1a in Eastern Europe, Central and South Asia, and R2 in South Asia). mcewanjc.org/scotsr1b.htmYou might gleam something from this site too. I am (my male family member) T and follow your route quite closely, they are still trying to understand where the route from Africa/Asia is exactly due to many waves of conquered peoples in Europe in the bronze age etc. Good hunting but I think as most of the data is 'out there' more testing from others + ancient burial sites DNA bone testing data will be the only way forward from this stage. |
|
|
|
Post by alfonsoviii on Dec 24, 2020 12:26:15 GMT
Are you Alonso V111 by chance? Yes, I believe they are related to the Germanic groups. Yes, I'm AlfonsoVIII. I suspect A8053 and subclades are related to Germanic peoples. |
|
lorac
Full Member
Posts: 214
Likes: 141
|
Post by lorac on Dec 24, 2020 13:53:41 GMT
Are you Alonso V111 by chance? Yes, I believe they are related to the Germanic groups. Yes, I'm AlfonsoVIII. I suspect A8053 and subclades are related to Germanic peoples. oopps didn't spot your avatar name on here when I posted....I saw your thread on Anthro and recognised the wording similarity. Hope the other sites will help. |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Dec 24, 2020 19:31:11 GMT
you are being beguiled by the baffle-with-bullshitters
what total garbage!
|
|
|
|
Post by alfonsoviii on Dec 24, 2020 22:53:15 GMT
you are being beguiled by the baffle-with-bullshitters what total garbage! OK, light me |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 25, 2020 0:37:40 GMT
you are being beguiled by the baffle-with-bullshitters what total garbage! What do you mean? Or what part do you disagree with? |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Dec 27, 2020 21:10:12 GMT
you are being beguiled by the baffle-with-bullshitters what total garbage! What do you mean? Or what part do you disagree with? Genetics has as a foundational premise that there is no soul. Show me where the soul is connected to the body in their 'theory'.
If you accept their jargonized racial classifications, you have effectively endorsed atheism, and genocide.
Because the next step after this is eugenics. They will next show you how certain of their 'categories' are less fit for survival than others.
wake-up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 27, 2020 22:11:40 GMT
What do you mean? Or what part do you disagree with? Genetics has as a foundational premise that there is no soul. Show me where the soul is connected to the body in their 'theory'. If you accept their jargonized racial classifications, you have effectively endorsed atheism, and genocide. Because the next step after this is eugenics. They will next show you how certain of their 'categories' are less fit for survival than others. wake-up.
There is a soul. I never heard genetics say that there isn't one but people spread junk all the time. Souls aren't connected to the body they're in the body just until the body dies before leaving elsewhere. But this stuff is about where you're born not about souls. Totally different discussion! |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jan 13, 2021 12:53:29 GMT
Genetics has as a foundational premise that there is no soul. Show me where the soul is connected to the body in their 'theory'. If you accept their jargonized racial classifications, you have effectively endorsed atheism, and genocide. Because the next step after this is eugenics. They will next show you how certain of their 'categories' are less fit for survival than others. wake-up.
There is a soul. I never heard genetics say that there isn't one but people spread junk all the time. Souls aren't connected to the body they're in the body just until the body dies before leaving elsewhere. But this stuff is about where you're born not about souls. Totally different discussion! The discussion is about the essence of who you are. The entirety of biology denounces the soul and God. The foundational premises of that paradigm is that our only existence is biological. You misunderstand what I say by 'connected'. If the soul is in the body, that is the 'connection'. It still needs to rule the body somehow. But the biology cult says that you are dictated to by your genes. Their entire structure is riddled with fallacies, most especially this current fashion of sophistic names for races. A-8051 and other such sophistry are just a matter of shifting goalposts from race to this current jargon. It is entirely relevant because all science for real is underpinned by the ethic of not lying or perpetuating nonsense theory. |
|
lorac
Full Member
Posts: 214
Likes: 141
|
Post by lorac on Jan 13, 2021 15:33:35 GMT
Jonbain, why do you say your Ancestry is Scots, Irish Icenian etc if you believe the biology (the study of life/living matter etc) cult is riddled with fallacies and the current fashion of sophisticated names for race?
|
|
