"the difference from a astaru haplotype perspective" Topic

‌ http://gdb.voanews.com/C387E8BB-FABC-4FA9-898E-C974E2F28ADF_cx0_cy7_cw0_mw1024_s_n.jpghttp://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/viking-charge-stotfold-uk-may-reenactors-line-up-making-demonstration-public-milll-show-may-31722825.jpghttp://www.southernswords.co.uk/ekmps/shops/southernswords/images/viking-woollen-tunic-2831-p.jpghttp://acidcow.com/pics/20140514/incredibly_realistic_hominid_reconstructions_15.jpg‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌‌‌‌ [

can you spot the errors in each comparison? the vikings kept the most pure of the neanderthal "god" haplotype in there genes, the reconstructions are too primative and the modern actors are too homospiens, only the christians could balance out the genes of vikings to the modern scandinavians

I think you mean "Asatru".

only the christians could balance out the genes of vikings to the modern scandinavians

Not sure what you mean here. Presumably the Chrustians would simply be Vikings who had converted. Their genes would still be the same?

I find myself confused here too. As MajorB writes, the Christians would simply be Vikings who had converted. I don't see how that affects their genetic make-up. Perhaps you could give a bit more explanation, please.

can you spot the errors in each comparison?

Which comparisons?

This is based upon a misapprehension that physiognomy alone defines race or in this case a species of human. The differences between us and Neanderthals are much greater than facial, being in bone size and density, musculature etc. I understand that the Neanderthals could not throw a spear or rock as we throw it and there may have been substantial difference in the function of internal organs such as the gut and liver.

Since the Thracians were the ancient ancestors of the Scandinavians you would have to prove there is some correlation there first. I don't remember reading any descriptions of the Thracians as having Neanderthal characteristics.

The Viking conversion to Christianity didn't happen until 1000 ad, so I don't think the Christians had too much to do with breeding out the Neanderthal.

Plus the word "Asatru" is a neologism and was never used by worshipers of Odin, Thor, Frey, Tyr, Frigga … etc.

And yet no one wants to play the priests and slaves anyway.
When I see Nordic 'Viking' reenactment it just sooo Blond with a lot of thrash metal adherents :). Yet they did inter breed with their captives I am led to believe.
Just like playing cowboys and Indians as kids everyone wanted to be the cowboys :)

I feel we are a long way from getting Adam and Eve answers to where we came from, but it is an interesting debate.
Cheers

And the genetic component of a modern human is still only 3-4% max neanderthal dna.

That there is a full percentage points overlap with Neanderthals means we interbred. So what.

"Vikings" are just Germanics further north. Are you suggesting that German "Aryans" are really more like Neanderthals? Are you trying to start WW3 or what? ;)

I don't see your "comparisons", I only see obvious Nordic/European types sharing page space with hypothetical reconstructions of Neanderthals. I'm unsure what points you are making….

I'm unsure what points you are making….

That is one way of putting it but I don't really think anyone is in doubt what the OP is actually on about in a general way.

No, I don't see what the OP is "on about" at all. "…the christians could balance out the genes of vikings to the modern Scandinavians". What's up with that assertion? As others have observed, Christianity is too recent, and it was the Scandinavians who converted, not got "bred out", as it were by some incursion of a different haplotype. I am very "ignurnt" in this area….

???smells like sock puppet in here???

One of them resembles me…in an unflattering light. Some of the others are more masculine than I. Obvious errors indeed.

I thought genetic studies showed that the mix population was strongest in the south where you see more elongate faces.

"Since the Thracians were the ancient ancestors of the Scandinavians"

That's interesting where can I read this also as GWA that also mean's ancient Germans as well.

"Since the Thracians were the ancient ancestors of the Scandinavians"

That's interesting where can I read this

I'm not aware of any actual evidence for Viking Age Scandinavians being descended from Thracians, but that does not mean it does not exist. This period is rather earlier than I am accustomed to study. However, that aside, Snorri Sturluson wrote that Asgard was Troy (Gylfaginning in Snorri's Edda). Snorri also wrote that Odin came from east of the River Don (Ynglinga saga in Heimskringla, Chapters 1-2). Perhaps this is what is meant, with the Trojans being descended from the Thracians, although the ancestors of the Vikings appear to have arrived c. 2300BC or thereabouts, which pre-dates the sack of Troy VII, so they are not the descendants of Aeneas or any other Trojans that got away. The archaeological evidence indicates that the last great wave of settlement in Scandinavia came from the east and from central Europe. This has been suggested as coming from Scythia which accords with the tales related by many late Roman and early medieval chroniclers. For the historical pattern of settlement I would recommend The Cambridge History of Scandinavia: Volume 1 Prehistory to 1520, ed. by Knut Helle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). It's the most recent and comprehensive history of Scandinavia in English that I can immediately recall. If you look into this further I would be interested in reading what you come up with.