Will the work of Dr. Eran Elhaik change anything?

[Ventura77]

As promised earlier, and after careful reading of proposed material, I intend to show a range of discrepancies and assumptions and biases in Elhaik's studies.

Because of the vast level of data gathered in relation and reference to this study, I'll post ig in separate parts, trying to summarize and simplify the points to a level of conversation, leaving conclusions to the end post.



Introduction


I must mention that as far as both German and Khazarian hypothesis' they have a varying level of discrepancies with the traditional Jewish historiography, with the Khazarian being the most biased case, due to lack of information and it's nature. Virtually all are coming from 3 exclusively Jewish sources. But even when using them to back up the hypothesis they virtually ignore all the history of Jewish migration, while choosing only those that back up their proposed model, assigning new values and inventing new histories for longstanding Jewish communities in the Turkey and Persia regions.

However none of those hypothesis actually claim what most of the anti-Zionists erroneously use them for – to deny Jews rights in Israel/Palestine. Neither does the German hypothesis confirms German ancestry as main source of AJ's, nor does the Khazarian hypothesis separates Jews from Israelites or ME/Levant in general. Neither of them conclude of exclusively single predominant surrogate group that magically exchanged the ancient Jews, while the original ones faded away with no wide documented references outside of modern-day political discourse.



While reading Dr Elhaik's studies, analyzing his conclusions in relation to other new studies on the subject by different geneticists I've paid attention to 7 problematic areas that must be addressed:

1. Self contradictory methods and results.
   
   
2. Static models of proposed surrogate populations based on modern-day demographics, in relation to ancient peoples with no substantial reference to real data on those peoples.
   
   
3. Questionable references to historic data, from a handful of modern politicized works.
   
   Virtual ignorance towards major events in Jewish history of Persia, Kushta, and Europe.
   
   
4. Nature and volume of data in comparison
   
   
5. Weak and controversial linguistic bias about Yiddish at the basis of the study (Wexler, Sand)
   
   
6. Druze genetics
   
   
7. All that is “believed” and widely“assumed” - that lay at the basis of this study.

Apparently you are confused about the criteria separating hasbara and legitimate refutations...none of the above refutes Elhaik's research.

 

[Ventura77]

...the nickname my father gave me when I was two and couldn't pronounce my own given name.

The irony that Daddy's choice for you was quite possibly, your true ancestral homeland, yes?

This seems like an add for yet another "roots" thing. Since apes share DNA of 99% as humans, how can you tell what area we originated from? I know genetics have advanced, but this analyzing DNA origins seems a little suspicious.

He explains it scientifically in the papers I presented and in layman's terms in the videos I posted in the OP.

Nothing that has been posted has refuted:

Remarkably, the mean coordinates of Eastern European Jews are 560 km from Khazaria’s southern border (42.77° N, 42.56° E) near Samandar—the capital city of Khazaria from 720 to 750 CE...

When compared with non-Jewish populations, all Jewish communities were significantly (P < 0.01, bootstrap t test) distant from Middle Eastern populations and, with the exception of Central European Jews, significantly closer to Caucasus populations...

...therefore supports the Khazarian hypothesis and should not be confused with a Semitic origin, which can be easily distinguished from the non-Semitic origin...

In other words, it might not be easy for us, but for those educated in these fields, it is quite easy.

Actually the majority of those who are educated in this field reject the Khazarian hypothesis. That's why You'll see Elhaik quoting his OWN studies so much. His results, he claims are generally supported only by 2 small studies - one of which is his, and the second is from Behar's study titled :
"No evidence from Genome wide data of a Khazar origin for the AJs".

This is manifestly incorrect: Jews themselves acknowledge their Khazarian ancestry...

 

[rylah]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."
https://watermark.silverchair.com/e...pmjb5RXnfxJGS6xgFLNcPZ-h-4TS5QyGar55XM1LZwhXw




a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on this basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

 

[Ventura77]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

 

[rylah]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

 

[Ventura77]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

 

[Ventura77]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Additionally what also appears to elude you is that even if it were the case that the Jews of the 21st century could prove a DNA connection to the ancients there is no precedent for an absentee land-claim spanning 13 centuries...you people are quite delusional...

 

[rylah]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

 

[Ventura77]

1. 
   Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

In which case I can only conclude that you have an agenda which denies the validity of Elhaik's research...again what you and others fail to note is that even if a genetic connection could be proven it would not entitle Ashkenazi Jews to one square foot of Historic PALESTINE...

 

[rylah]

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."



a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
(Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to Primeval Villages in the Ancient Iranian Lands of Ashkenaz | Genome Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic) - is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on the basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

In which case I can only conclude that you have an agenda which denies the validity of Elhaik's research...again what you and others fail to note is that even if a genetic connection could be proven it would not entitle Ashkenazi Jews to one square foot of Historic PALESTINE...

Elhaik denied the validity of his work by himself - through all the biases and dependencies. He contradicted himself in each of the studies in the OP. I've shown this to be true by responses of other scientist to his methods.
Again the majority of geneticists reject the hypothesis.

But if You want to simply believe and hold to it - be my guest just don't pretend to be discussing science.
The OP correctly recognized the emotional attachment to such beliefs in light of the political/religious conflict.
Just notice that words such as "believed" and "assumed" are all used in building Elhaik's models.

So far You discredited nothing of what I've written.

 

[Ventura77]

THE GENOME PROJECT SPELLED DOOM FOR THE FOUNDING MYTHS OF ISRAEL
NOW ONTO SOME OF THE SCIENCE HIGHLIGHTS.
Dr. Elhaik’s research shows that the dominant element in the genetic makeup of European Jews is Khazar. For Central European Jews it is 38%, while for East Europeans it is 30%.

TO THAT YOU CAN ADD HIS FINDINGS THAT IN BOTH GROUPS THEIR GENOME IS MOSTLY WESTERN EUROPEAN. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.
The Roman empire is the dominant lineage there, those that settled on the frontier, like retired soldiers, and the locals with whom they produced families.

There were some Jewish merchants there as Elhaik did find some Middle Eastern roots which he suspects are Mesopotamian and a bit of biblical Israel.

BUT HERE COMES THE SLAM DUNK…
THE ISRAEL CONNECTION IS SUCH A TINY PART OF THEIR OVERALL GENOME THAT IT CANCELS OUT THEIR DNA TITLE CLAIM TO THE LAND. THE GOOD DOCTOR WOULD NOT WANDER INTO THIS SWAMP BUT I WILL, BY CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
What Dr. Elhaik has discovered folks is a ‘reverse holocaust’, the inventing of huge numbers of pseudo-Jews who have no more a blood claim to the land of Palestine than I do, even if I converted.

What I have just stated in no way challenges a religious or cultural affiliation. But as we all know, most Jews are not religious, including in Israel where way more than most are not. Subtracting that, then all you have is the tribe, the DNA, which unites them to a shared history of persecution. But that folks, is now all gone. Poof…gone.

WHO AMONG USE DOES NOT HAVE SOME GENETIC MAKE UP OF A PEOPLE WHO HAD SUFFERED IN ANCIENT TIMES, EVEN NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLES, FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT ONES? WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PRETEND-A-JEWS TO SEND ALL OF OUR GENE POOL TO THE BACK OF THE HISTORICAL SUFFERING BUS AS CLUB MED ANCESTORS WHO ENJOYED THE ‘ALL INCLUSIVE’ TREATMENT. I FIND THAT JUST A BIT TOO CONVENIENT.



Science: New Genome Study Destroys Zionist Claims to Palestine...

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

In which case I can only conclude that you have an agenda which denies the validity of Elhaik's research...again what you and others fail to note is that even if a genetic connection could be proven it would not entitle Ashkenazi Jews to one square foot of Historic PALESTINE...

Elhaik denied the validity of his work by himself - through all the biases and dependencies. He contradicted himself in each of the studies in the OP. I've shown this to be true by responses of other scientist to his methods.
Again the majority of geneticists reject the hypothesis.

But if You want to simply believe and hold to it - be my guest just don't pretend to be discussing science.
The OP correctly recognized the emotional attachment to such beliefs in light of the political/religious conflict.
Just notice that words such as "believed" and "assumed" are all used in building Elhaik's models.

So far You discredited nothing of what I've written.

You have no idea of the sophistry you spout...post the proof that Elhaik denies his own research...you are a propagandist plain and simple...

 

[rylah]

No Elhaik study doesn't say any of that, however this is how people who wish to deny Jews rights usually use it.

But did You contradict any of what I wrote?

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

In which case I can only conclude that you have an agenda which denies the validity of Elhaik's research...again what you and others fail to note is that even if a genetic connection could be proven it would not entitle Ashkenazi Jews to one square foot of Historic PALESTINE...

Elhaik denied the validity of his work by himself - through all the biases and dependencies. He contradicted himself in each of the studies in the OP. I've shown this to be true by responses of other scientist to his methods.
Again the majority of geneticists reject the hypothesis.

But if You want to simply believe and hold to it - be my guest just don't pretend to be discussing science.
The OP correctly recognized the emotional attachment to such beliefs in light of the political/religious conflict.
Just notice that words such as "believed" and "assumed" are all used in building Elhaik's models.

So far You discredited nothing of what I've written.

You have no idea of the sophistry you spout...post the proof that Elhaik denies his own research...you are a propagandist plain and simple...

Maybe a better word would be -"discredited".
Show me where I was incorrect:

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."
https://watermark.silverchair.com/e...pmjb5RXnfxJGS6xgFLNcPZ-h-4TS5QyGar55XM1LZwhXw




a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on this basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

 

[rylah]

Maybe somewhere here?

1. Self contradictory methods and results.

GPS findings raise two concerns:

1. that the Turkish “Ashkenaz” region may be the centric location of other regions rather than the place where the Ashkenazic Jewish admixture signature was formed;
   
   
2. in the absence of “Ashkenazic” Turks it is impossible to compare the genetic similarity between the two populations to validate the common origins implied by the GPS results.
   
   
   
   To surmount these problems we derived the admixture signatures of “native” populations corresponding to the geographic coordinates of interest from the global distributions of admixture components (fig. 2B) and compared their genetic distances with AJs.
   
   This approach has several advantages.
   
   a. First, it allows studying “native” populations that were not sampled (!!??)

1. 
   b. Second, it allows identifying putative progenitors by comparing genetic distances between different populations.
   
   c. Third, it minimizes the effect of outliers in modern-day populations.
   
   
   
   d. Finally, it circumvents, to a certain degree, the problem of comparing AJs with modern-day populations that may have experienced various levels of gene exchange or genetic drift past their mixture with AJs. “
   
   
   
   (Elhaik 2016 - https://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwij6pSHucvXAhUQK1AKHfz1Cw8QFggrMAA&url=https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/8/4/1132/2574015/Localizing-Ashkenazic-Jews-to-Primeval-Villages-in&usg=AOvVaw1bIJPcgT9LYq8kNhsIajVW)

He actually explains what he DID NOT DO.

How can one isolate Spaniards, Caucasians, Persians and Greco-Romans from Jews, while at the same time studying their admixture with people in those regions?

Creation of synthetic models based on modern day demographics, or fixated on one of populations that for sure admixed with the Judeans and others throughout history, and migrated, while at the same time pointing at a problem comparing people in movement - destroys the model and method by itself. Any study about the history of the place shows Jewish presence in Caucasus region and Kushta prior and after the fall of the Turkic kingdom.



Therefore, GPS doesn't find any real progenitor of a population if one has zero real data outside of invented models or exclusively late information about the population at the time of the progenitors.
What one gets are merely models based on other models of imagined demographic situation for a short period of time. What GPS does is average out a probable point on map, based on those same static models – ignoring previous or further population shifts.

It's crucial to emphasize again that GPS model was calibrated using modern political boundaries - not archeology or anthropology, ancient people in movement were treated as static populations .

 

[rylah]

Clearly you don't understand the data you seek to discredit insomuch as nothing you've undertaken in this objective succeeds...Jews themselves concede their shared Eastern European Khazar ancestry...

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

In which case I can only conclude that you have an agenda which denies the validity of Elhaik's research...again what you and others fail to note is that even if a genetic connection could be proven it would not entitle Ashkenazi Jews to one square foot of Historic PALESTINE...

Elhaik denied the validity of his work by himself - through all the biases and dependencies. He contradicted himself in each of the studies in the OP. I've shown this to be true by responses of other scientist to his methods.
Again the majority of geneticists reject the hypothesis.

But if You want to simply believe and hold to it - be my guest just don't pretend to be discussing science.
The OP correctly recognized the emotional attachment to such beliefs in light of the political/religious conflict.
Just notice that words such as "believed" and "assumed" are all used in building Elhaik's models.

So far You discredited nothing of what I've written.

You have no idea of the sophistry you spout...post the proof that Elhaik denies his own research...you are a propagandist plain and simple...

Maybe a better word would be -"discredited".
Show me where I was incorrect:

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."
https://watermark.silverchair.com/e...pmjb5RXnfxJGS6xgFLNcPZ-h-4TS5QyGar55XM1LZwhXw




a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on this basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 3)
https://watermark.silverchair.com/e...MCU6VAHUsa2c5s41SGhrUNBX6Fm1GfxtR5Qyhaq_SBwsx
Elhaik writes: "These events were localized to the extent that no single Ashkenazic non-Jewish population presently exists. However, the few Greek, Italian, Bulgarians, and Iranian individuals clustered with or adjacent to AJs imply that individuals descent from the potential progenitors of AJs still exhibit similar genetic makeup to AJs and may even be at risk for the genetic disorders prevalent in this population (Ostrer 2001). Confirming this hypothesis will shed new light on the origin of mutations associated with genetic disorders, like Cystic fibrosis (OMIM #219700) and a-thalassaemia (OMIM #141800) and promote genetic screening for all at risk individuals. Identifying the founding populations and their relative contribution to the AJ genome necessitate using biogeographical tools that can discern multiple origins, but such an analysis is beyond the scope of this article."




Comment: how about when studying disease look at specific genes rather than geography and political borders?

 

[Ventura77]

Again I don't see any substantial proof of that.
Elhaik study doesn't prove any of that - on the contrary.

Show me exactly where I was wrong, or where professional geneticists that discredited his studies went wrong.

Pitfalls of the Geographic Population Structure (GPS) Approach Applied to Human Genetic History: A Case Study of Ashkenazi Jews

In which case I can only conclude that you have an agenda which denies the validity of Elhaik's research...again what you and others fail to note is that even if a genetic connection could be proven it would not entitle Ashkenazi Jews to one square foot of Historic PALESTINE...

Elhaik denied the validity of his work by himself - through all the biases and dependencies. He contradicted himself in each of the studies in the OP. I've shown this to be true by responses of other scientist to his methods.
Again the majority of geneticists reject the hypothesis.

But if You want to simply believe and hold to it - be my guest just don't pretend to be discussing science.
The OP correctly recognized the emotional attachment to such beliefs in light of the political/religious conflict.
Just notice that words such as "believed" and "assumed" are all used in building Elhaik's models.

So far You discredited nothing of what I've written.

You have no idea of the sophistry you spout...post the proof that Elhaik denies his own research...you are a propagandist plain and simple...

Maybe a better word would be -"discredited".
Show me where I was incorrect:

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 2)

"The AJs predicted in our earlier analysis (fig. 4) largely overlapped with “native” “Ashkenazic” Turk and a few Khazarian and Iranian individuals mapped to northeastern Turkey. A comparison of d between the AJs and “native” populations (fig. 5E) confirmed that Yiddish speakers are significantly (Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, P < 0.01) closer to each other (~ d= 1.1%), followed by “native” Khazars (~ d= 4.6%), “Ashkenazic” Turks (~ d= 7.7%), Iranians (~ d= 11.9%), Israelites (~ d= 13.6%), Germans (~ d= 18.3%), and Ukrainians (~ d= 18.5%)."
https://watermark.silverchair.com/e...pmjb5RXnfxJGS6xgFLNcPZ-h-4TS5QyGar55XM1LZwhXw




a. Elhaik claim that :”“ It is also unclear whether AJ subgroups share common origins“
is contradicted by the closest tie he reported between Yiddish speakers – the language of AJ's.



b. On the other hand, if we used Elhaik's method for creating a static population model of ancient people ( like he did for Khazars and Israelites) based on modern-day political boundaries – we should have gotten the closest proximity of AJs to modern Ukrainians – as Ukraine is at the heart of where Khazaria used to be.

Then judging on this basis, by showing the greatest distance between AJ's and Ukrainians he destroys his own method of proving the Khazarian hypothesis. It's self contradictory.

1. Self contradictory methods and results. (example 3)
https://watermark.silverchair.com/e...MCU6VAHUsa2c5s41SGhrUNBX6Fm1GfxtR5Qyhaq_SBwsx
Elhaik writes: "These events were localized to the extent that no single Ashkenazic non-Jewish population presently exists. However, the few Greek, Italian, Bulgarians, and Iranian individuals clustered with or adjacent to AJs imply that individuals descent from the potential progenitors of AJs still exhibit similar genetic makeup to AJs and may even be at risk for the genetic disorders prevalent in this population (Ostrer 2001). Confirming this hypothesis will shed new light on the origin of mutations associated with genetic disorders, like Cystic fibrosis (OMIM #219700) and a-thalassaemia (OMIM #141800) and promote genetic screening for all at risk individuals. Identifying the founding populations and their relative contribution to the AJ genome necessitate using biogeographical tools that can discern multiple origins, but such an analysis is beyond the scope of this article."




Comment: how about when studying disease look at specific genes rather than geography and political borders?

Please give me a break with the fake refutations and the Hasbara-replies!!

 

[Shusha]

I appreciate all your efforts and hard work, rylah

But I don't think we are going to make any headway here.

 

[abi]

I appreciate all your efforts and hard work, rylah

But I don't think we are going to make any headway here.

Are you kidding me? You and he disagree completely. Remember how you were so certain of his conclusion? Read your posts back on this thread and check back if you would.

 

[Shusha]

I appreciate all your efforts and hard work, rylah

But I don't think we are going to make any headway here.

Are you kidding me? You and he disagree completely. Remember how you were so certain of his conclusion? Read your posts back on this thread and check back if you would.

Wait, what?! You think rylah and I disagree?