QuoteReplyTopic: How would albanian sound to a non-ethnic? Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 05:45
Originally posted by Anton
That is another paper and I read it as well. It was just unrelated to the question. It seems that you didn't read them.
On the contrary, the author in both journals used the same data. Hence the refutation from Luca Cavalli-Sforza and his team about Arnaiz-Villena unscientific methodology applies to both journals.
About Macedonians it was checked by different markers
1. HLA-DRB1, DRB3/4/5 and DQB1 polymorphism (Tissue Antigens. 2000 Jan;55(1):53-6.) by Hristova-Dimceva A, Verduijn W, Schipper RF, Schreuder GM. 2. HLA-A,-B,-DRB1 in Tissue Antigens Volume 60 Page 496 - December 2002 by M. Ivanova1, E. Rozemuller2, N. Tyufekchiev3, A. Michailova1, M. Tilanus2, E. Naumova1
3. Which is more precise by Alu insertion polymorphism by
As for the list of authors, in our field major contributers are first and last author. Last author determines the research and the first does most part of experiments. I am rather sure in Human Genetics situation is the same.
Explanation of molecular biology results by polytical reasons reveals that explaining person is not familiar with the topic. It is rather easy to repeate those experiments. Up to now I didn't find any publication showing different result.
And finally, this:
It is difficult to believe that knowledge of genes may help to explain the present conflict. Although population genetics can address issues of relatedness of populations, mating patterns, migrations and so on, obviously it cannot provide evidence about reasons for conflicts between people.
was not the major aim of the paper you speak about. More precisely accents were on relatedness of the populations but not conflict between them.
Response of Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. would be also usefull:
Sir:
Neil Risch et al. in Correspondence1 state that our paper2 on the genetic relatedness of Palestinians and Jews lacked scientific merit because its conclusions are based on data reported for a single-locus genetic marker (HLA-DRB1). Although the use of single-locus markers can lead to misleading results, single-locus studies, whether using HLA or other markers, are common in this field and are regularly published in the specialist literature.
In papers reporting data on a single locus, it is important not to take anomalous results at face value but to interpret them in the light of other types of data, such as historical, anthropological and linguistic data, as well as testing them using other genetic markers (see, for example, ref. 3). As we stated in ref. 2, we are currently investigating the populations reported in our paper using other markers.
To end the story with Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. there are plenty of details pointing to the direction of characterising his work as strongly unscientific. The samples used in his research were taken from Clayton et al. 1997. This means that 3 years or more passed before the DNA samples were used by Arnaiz-Villena. Samples could have easily been mixed, labels could have been lost, and DNA sample quality drastically reduced depending on storage and shipping of the samples from Clayton et al. to Arnaiz-Villena et al. The study by Arnaiz-Villena et al. represents work that is not only biased due to the fact that collaborators of the work were located in Skopje but also due to the fact that all the DNA samples were analyzed at a facility in Skopje.
Analysis of the data at a neutral facility with a double-blind study would have been more appropriate in this case.
In The History and Geography of Human Genes (Princeton, 1994), Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza grouped Greeks with other European and Mediterranean populations based on 120 loci (view MDS plot). Then, Ayub et al. 2003 did the same thing using 182 loci (view dendrogram).
The disputed data continues to be cited all over the Internet, mostly by White Supremacists, Afrocentrists and Macedoniannationalists who have political motivations to relate modern or ancient Greeks to black Africans. However, it's no longer referenced by population geneticists in contemporary research, mainly due to the criticism of Cavalli-Sforza et al.
It seems though Antonio Arnaiz-Villena's work is not only a bright "example of misguided interpretation" in recent published books about genetics but he is a bright example of avoidance for geneticists as a whole.
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
On the contrary, the author in both journals used the same data. Hence the refutation from Luca Cavalli-Sforza and his team about Arnaiz-Villena unscientific methodology applies to both journals.
Data was different. It was similar approach but data itself was different.
To end the story with Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al. there are plenty of details pointing to the direction of characterising his work as strongly unscientific. The samples used in his research were taken from Clayton et al. 1997. This means that 3 years or more passed before the DNA samples were used by Arnaiz-Villena. Samples could have easily been mixed, labels could have been lost, and DNA sample quality drastically reduced depending on storage and shipping of the samples from Clayton et al. to Arnaiz-Villena et al.
It is unlikely. Unless somebody did it mannualy. They are usually frosen in -80 freege and nothing happens to them for ages. DNA samples are rather stable. So, one need to prove before make such a claim.
The study by Arnaiz-Villena et al. represents work that is not only biased due to the fact that collaborators of the work were located in Skopje but also due to the fact that all the DNA samples were analyzed at a facility in Skopje.
If it were falsificate some greek laboratories would try to prove that for sure.
Analysis of the data at a neutral facility with a double-blind study would have been more appropriate in this case.
Again: you have no experience to speak about it. Ask for samples and do some tests before saying that it is falsificate. Following your logic every data obtained by Greek archeologists about greece, macedonia, thrace and illiricum should be ommited as falsificate because of nationalistic ideas they support You have branch of data and you must operate with them untill somebody find something else.
In The History and Geography of Human Genes (Princeton, 1994), Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza grouped Greeks with other European and Mediterranean populations based on 120 loci (view MDS plot). Then, Ayub et al. 2003 did the same thing using 182 loci (view dendrogram).
Those two papers do not really contradicts to each other. Greeks are of course Mediterranean people. The major information might come from differences between nations.
The disputed data continues to be cited all over the Internet, mostly by White Supremacists, Afrocentrists and Macedoniannationalists who have political motivations to relate modern or ancient Greeks to black Africans. However, it's no longer referenced by population geneticists in contemporary research, mainly due to the criticism of Cavalli-Sforza et al.
It seems though Antonio Arnaiz-Villena's work is not only a bright "example of misguided interpretation" in recent published books about genetics but he is a bright example of avoidance for geneticists as a whole.
He continues to publish his works in peer reviewed jopurnals and his works are cited by others. This is not what I call avoidance.
A typical trick of greek friends in this forum is to make argument nationalistic and by that disprove it. I started to believe that some of them are not really interested in their history, but instead to pursuade the whole world in some fairy tales that nobody actually believe.
Again this story has nathing to du with the initial question were Macedonians mixed with Balkan populoation or not. It is regarding another research. And again, some passage from the text you kindly provided:
This incident, believed to be the first time a paper published in a peer reviewed biomedical journal has been retracted asa result of political comments, began when Dr Arnaiz-Villena wasinvited to be a guest editor of the September issue of Human Immunologytheofficial journal of the American Society for Histocompatibilityand Immunogenetics.
The disputed data continues to be cited all over the Internet, mostly by White Supremacists, Afrocentrists and Macedoniannationalists who have political motivations to relate modern or ancient Greeks to black Africans. However, it's no longer referenced by population geneticists in contemporary research, mainly due to the criticism of Cavalli-Sforza et al.
It seems though Antonio Arnaiz-Villena's work is not only a bright "example of misguided interpretation" in recent published books about genetics but he is a bright example of avoidance for geneticists as a whole.
I was expecting some answer..its like immigrants from poor countries to richer countries with higher technical development level,with "lingua franca" (as english) ,with their own strong government and religion ,would assimilate natives.
Hard to believe. I think u need more researches by scientists with surnames ending with -ov or -ski to prove the opposite!
Also ,can u explain me the existence of Greek speaking,orthodox christian population in Macedonia ?
Data was different. It was similar approach but data itself was different.
To quote from the link i gave above:
" Later that year, the same data was used in another study by the same author published in a different journal."
To be certain about this, i will send a mail to a geneticist i know from Spain to verify the above or not.
It is unlikely. Unless somebody did it mannualy. They are usually frosen in -80 freege and nothing happens to them for ages. DNA samples are rather stable. So, one need to prove before make such a claim.
Exactly thats the reason in order to avoid suspicions why its appopriate these studies to take place in neutral facilities.
Again: you have no experience to speak about it. Ask for samples and do some tests before saying that it is falsificate. Following your logic every data obtained by Greek archeologists about greece, macedonia, thrace and illiricum should be ommited as falsificate because of nationalistic ideas they support You have branch of data and you must operate with them untill somebody find something else.
I like the fact you rush to write "you have no experience to speak about it" and then you jump to make false parallels to a field, "you have no experience to speak about it". A great bulk of archaeological findings in Greece are not even discovered by greek archaeologists for starters but even those findings who are discovered indeed, are having a specific process before published, that demand participation of foreign specialists and in contrast with genetics, archaeological inscriptions cant be altered since in a such attempt, it will be more than clear to anyone who will examine it afterwards.
Those two papers do not really contradicts to each other. Greeks are of course Mediterranean people. The major information might come from differences between nations.
How is that so? Not only them, but even yourself contradictArnaiz-Villena's research. Note that the author speaks about sub-Saharan Origin of Greeks, not even about sub-Saharan genetic presence. Let aside the rest of "anomalous" conclusions he has reached (Japanese Nearly identical to West and South Africans, etc)
He continues to publish his works in peer reviewed jopurnals and his works are cited by others. This is not what I call avoidance.
A typical trick of greek friends in this forum is to make argument nationalistic and by that disprove it. I started to believe that some of them are not really interested in their history, but instead to pursuade the whole world in some fairy tales that nobody actually believe.
While from the other hand, a typical trick of some Bulgarian friends in this forum is to present Controversial geneticists, with refuted unscientific approaches and researches as the top geneticists say themselves, used in internet as i read mostly by the cream of white suprematists, afrocentists and some balkan nationalists and present them as something that we should take seriously.
Therefore your last sentence could be easily your own self-criticism.
Again this story has nathing to du with the initial question were Macedonians mixed with Balkan populoation or not. It is regarding another research. And again, some passage from the text you kindly provided:
As it has to do with the approach this controversial person has for doing his 'work', it has lots to do. Anyone can read about transfers without permission tothe university for research purposes, he is bound to falsificate statistical data to justify purchases, let aside all the rest, that make him completely untrustworthy.
In order to sum up. This person's research you present here, although you contradict even yourself his conclusions, cant be taken as valid for all the reasons discussed until now. If you want to make a point at least find one credible source, not one that has almost all the scientific community jumping on him either for his false approaches, or his politically oriented remarks inside his researches and ofcourse most importantly his wrong or "anomalous" as more credible geneticists say, conclusions.
Edited by Perseas - 28-Oct-2006 at 08:41
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
1. As I said before people trust him by continuing citing his articles.
2. Question about Macedonians were supported by others. See my previous post and work in : Ann Hum Genet. 2004 Mar;68(Pt 2):120-7.
Exactly how you like -- no Bulgarian and Macedonian names. Even no Greeks.
3. Those papers do not contradict each other since it is hardly to believe that any nation has only one origin. Cavali-Sforza and his colleagues just supported obvious idea that Greeks as any others around Mediterranean See are authochtonic population.
4. As for the same or different research -- they were published in different papers. Ask your friends from Spain what happens when one tries to publish exactly the same research. They published many papers, not only regarding Greeks and Palestinians, but regarding some American tribes and for example Chuvashes.
5. Many people don't like that kind of research for nationalistic reasons -- every Balkanic tendency to prove that their nation was first here. Works of Alvariz-Villena and some others shows that there was no first nation which makes you unhappy.
"People like me" as well as AE Code of Conduct have little tollerance on people constantly labelling their interlocutors as "Nationalists" in AE, as they seem to think it makes their argument more valid. On the contrary, it is counter-productive, annoying and as i already demonstrated in the first time you used above, it is also incorrect to use, as it can work both ways, yet you insist to carry on. Think twice the very next time you will label someone as "nationalist". As much as you repeat over the same things, it doesnt make them any more valid and it doesnt change the fact either that Arnaiz-Villena's conclusions have been contradicted not only by Luca Cavali-Sforza but many people would argue also by common sense.
Edited by Perseas - 29-Oct-2006 at 03:31
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
I was expecting some answer..its like immigrants from poor countries to richer countries with higher technical development level,with "lingua franca" (as english) ,with their own strong government and religion ,would assimilate natives.
It happens in the UK for example.
Hard to believe. I think u need more researches by scientists with surnames ending with -ov or -ski to prove the opposite!
Did you read my post? There were a work from Germany without -ov and -ski showing he same.
Also ,can u explain me the existence of Greek speaking,orthodox christian population in Macedonia ?
What surprises you with that? You asked whether one could believe that there were mix of Slavs with inhabitants of Byzantine Empire and the answer was "yes" because of genetical research. Who said it was complete assimilation of one nation by another?
I feel really sorry for interrupting you guys, it looks like you are having so much fun.
Perseas, when you remind the others about the code of conduct, do you remember it yourself. Dont you realize that you are posting genetic researches in the linguistic forum, and this is completely irrelevant to the topic???
Guys, with all my benevolence, why dont you move on another thread?
I hope it wont make you feel bad, but I want to be part of the community of those who break the rules, and I am posting something irrelevant too (of course Perseas as a responsible moderator will delete everything at the end, as he should).
In my opinion talking about national genes, and ethnogenetics is completely weird. There have never existed nations, or even smaller communities completely homogeneous.
The real heritage is the cultural one. And of course that the modern greeks inherite very important elements of the ancient greek culture. The same thing cannot be said of the modern macedonians. It is true that the ancient macedonians didnt dissapear but they mixed with the newcomers, but their culture didnt make it. The culture of the modern macedonians is, in my opinion, south-slavic and bulgaric. But, I repeat, this should be discussed somewhere else.
I hope you will start discussing again about the albanian language and its sound.
As far as I know there aren't any writings in dacian but Ovidius, a roman poet, did write poems in dacian according to his own testimony. I wonder if there are similar mentions of writings in illirian that are lost now but that might be found in some future archeological diggings?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Share Topic
Printable Version
Google
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
reddit
Facebook
MySpace
Newsvine
Furl
Topic Options
You have branch of data and you must operate with them untill somebody find something else. 
the official journal of the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics. 
