Trying to be racially conscious

My understanding of the correlation between Y-DNA (passed male to male) genetics and geographic location is that even when there is a later migration to or from an area, the major population of males is analysed genetically and an average is obtained.

Also definitely not all encompassing, more a representative of common genetic data across a region

I don't get what you're refering to.
explain pls?

>Some German dude said something about the only relevant countries would have navies after some other German dude said there was two ways to get gold: trade for it or take it by force. Both were not R1b but ruled over R1b countries. Land locked countries are geofucked countries.

Sailing sounds like a more than plausible explanation as to how this group dominated after massacring the previous inhabitants

I think restated the general naval based theory better

Major genetic differences extrapolated over time would explain a lot about problematic regions of balkans and armenia area

OK thanks.
But still China had invented ship with rudders and gunpowder long before us... and they have the Yellow Sea (maybe not as calm as the mediterranean, but still).

So is is possible all this J1 males just imported or bred woth women who were from all over giving them this extremely mixed population in regards to appearance but share a common male ancestry?

I think you hit the nail on the head - this map is solely male ancestry and if a diverse group of communities was conquered (males killed and women raped) only the resultant male bloodlines would be shown in the map.

I agree that it doesn't take into account that Southeast Asian paradigm of human conflict, but it does a pretty good job of explaining the European paradigm. Probably the most organized warring tribes populated the best land early on, and most people who know real estate know the best land is close to the sea.

r1b masterrace

Really interesting thank you. Not sure if you care, the reason I ask is im from a Palestinian Tribe and we autistically document our tribes history and lineage. However the family tree we have compiled over centuries only includes males.

Now this is where it gets interesting, my tribe shares a common male ancestor with 4 other tribes as well all trace ourselves from his 5 sons.

So while we know we are related. Some tribes have very distinct features such as freckles and red hair, others have colored eyes and some look more Indian then related to us.

This makes me wonder if the reason why his sons considered themselves distinct was because they had diffrent mothers, pride, etc.

ok nigger

Red pill me on Genghis Khan and why his DNA was world Hegemony for 2 centuries
discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/1-in-200-men-direct-descendants-of-genghis-khan

ok

That is interesting. Pro-polygamist attitudes seem to play a role in the dominance of a paternal bloodline. The idea of multiple mothers resulting in a sense of distinctness despite a common Y-Chromosome is something I'm unfamiliar with coming from a totally American/European family that doesn't document that stuff as much.

>think you hit the nail on the head - this map is solely male ancestry
Males are the only drivers of society.

Interesting that two Canadian posters made the same point. Assuming you are both of Asian descent, and asserting mongoloid dominance in the modern era, I'm not entirely certain that quantity of population is more significant that quality of population in the grand scheme of global hegemony - remember that Western Europe was where Ghengis was halted (either voluntarily or by resistance). In the information age of nuclear weaponry and technological dominance population size matters less and less with each passing age and in many cases it is a detriment to an advanced society (China for example).

Agreed. Unless your mother happens to be Jewish.

haplogroups do not matter.

R1b as Aryans destined to dominate the world actually makes sense purely genetically

gay

Found the E paternal haplogroup nigger. Your grandpappy was a nigger bro

Այո

Technically the oldest son should have taken the role of Patriarch and continued the one tribes lineage, many are unsure why they did not especially because other tribes lived there they could have viewed as "other".

The only excat story I know is my Tribes patriarch became so when he was around 12-14 years old. His grand uncle's(grandfathers brothers) attempted to take his lands as well as his Uncle's who had left to Petra.

His mother demanded that he go fetch his Uncle. He went with the rest of his tribe and violently forced his uncle to come back to the lands so they could both claim their birthright. When they claimed it, the boys uncle was pissed about his nephew's violent/disrespectful attitude and claimed his tribe as separate.

>spic el goblino larping as a Mediterranean

Bullshit, dude. No country along that massive African coastline has ever been relevant. Meanwhile countries with limited or no sea acess are still relevant to this day, such as Germany and Austria.

>he doesnt know about Carthage

>Germany
>limited sea access
>Austria
>relevant
Imagine being this retarded.

>Meanwhile countries with limited or no sea acess are still relevant to this day, such as Germany and Austria

Prussian states are definitely an exception, maybe desert (ie no wood to build ships) prevents sailing? Also Carthage had Hannibal, who assfucked Rome undeniably. (Carthage was geographically there but almost definitely not genetically similar to modern day africans, like Egyptians)

Austria is mainly only relevant is it falls under German (ancestrally Prussian) influence.

And what is the connection with I1 and I2?

T. I1

Both based

R1a and R1b are essentially the same community split in half - one goes east one goes west. I1 and I2 would be the same deal, but going north and south thousands of years ago