Genetic study of Ashkenazi ancestry proves they're not Khaza

[MikeWB]

Here's another proof that Ashkenazi Jews are not Khazars since Ashkenazis  are not turkic people, like Khazars were. There's a great thread here on TiU in which LAV proves that whole Khazar connection is based on fabrication of historical documents (viewtopic.php?p=12933#p12933) and here's the ultimate proof: genetics. Jews have been fabricating this Khazar connection for a while and it's interesting how it backfired on them. Now we finally have an undeniable proof that all these Jews who were supposedly exposing Jews as Khazars (the likes of Arthur Koestler) were in fact trying to hide the facts and were spreading disinfo.

http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/01/ho ... re_you.php

How Ashkenazi Jewish are you?  permlink
Category: Genetics        
Posted on: January 22, 2009 3:44 PM, by Razib

Carl Zimmer pointed me to a new paper, A genome-wide genetic signature of Jewish ancestry perfectly separates individuals with and without full Jewish ancestry in a large random sample of European Americans. The title is so informative that pasting the abstract is almost unnecessary, but here is the conclusion which gets to the point:
In conclusion, we show that, at least in the context of the studied sample, it is possible to predict full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, although it should be noted that the exact dividing line between a Jewish and non-Jewish cluster will vary across sample sets which in practice would reduce the accuracy of the prediction. While the full historical demographic explanations for this distinction remain to be resolved, it is clear that the genomes of individuals with full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry carry an unambiguous signature of their Jewish heritage, and this seems more likely to be due to their specific Middle Eastern ancestry than to inbreeding.
There have been other papers which show that Ashkenazi Jews form a separate cluster from gentile whites in the United States. This is important again in the context of biomedical studies attempting to ascertain the genetic roots of particular diseases; population substructure (e.g., Jew vs. non-Jew) may result in confounded associations. Also, one of the authors of the paper is David Goldstein, author of the fascinating Jacob's Legacy.

In any case, on to the PC charts where the real action is. Do note that I've resized and added explanatory labels here & there for clarity.



As you can see, there is almost perfect separation between the Jewish and non-Jewish clusters here. PC 1 = first principle component of variation, and PC 2 second principle component of variation. These are the two largest independent dimensions of genetic variance extractable out of the data set. The authors note that there is almost perfect separation along PC 1, and, they note that most of the gentile whites who are closest to the Jews on this PC are of Italian or Eastern Mediterranean origin. This is important later.



As you can see here, the interesting point is that Jewish ancestral quanta is roughly predictive of genetic position. This shouldn't be that surprising once we know that Jews and non-Jews separate so cleanly (e.g., someone who is biracial would be located between their two parent racial clusters on any plot), but it is striking nonetheless in reaffirming the genetic reality of Jewishness. The United States has an easy genealogical history for Jews, as the ancestors of all self-identified American Jews today arrived on the order of 4-6 generations ago. These individuals were likely Jewish relatively far back in their lineages, and admixture is easy to recall because it is of recent vintage.

Finally, let's put Ashkenazi Jews in the worldwide context.




I labeled a few populations for clarity. Orcadians are individuals from the Orkney Islands, just off the northern coast of Scotland. As you can see, American whites occupy an expansive region, in large part due to their diverse origins and admixtures. The Druze have been genetically isolated for over 5 centuries, so it is not particularly surprising they form a distinct cluster. It is likely a function of drift due to bottlenecking, just like Iceland. The separation between the Ashkenazi and the Palestinians might be of interest to some because of political reasons.

As the authors note, the Ashkenazi are almost certainly a compound population. There are full-Jews who "look gentile" and full-Jews who could pass easily in the Middle East as a native. Most Ashkenazi Jews exhibit a mix of features. The genetic likelihood that the Ashkenazi have varied origins should no surprise. The paper notes that Askhenazi heterozygosity is actually somewhat greater than American whites, implying that the source of their distinctiveness has to do with genetic origin, not genetic history (i.e., population bottlenecks). Another population which I suspect resembles the population history of the Ashkenazi are Uyghurs, who fall between Europeans and Han Chinese in their ancestry. But the hybridization even occurred in the past, so the Uyghurs today can be thought of as a separate population with its own suite of genetic combinations, as opposed to a hybrid of two "pure" groups. Similarly, Ashkenazi Jews no doubt emerged from hybridization evens between Middle Eastern and European females, but over the generations they have been relatively endogamous (most gene flow has been out of the community into gentile Europeans through conversion) and so are a genetically coherent population in their own right.

Note that the authors had only a few non-Ashkenazi Jews in their sample, so the assertions above only apply to the Ashkenazi (95-99% of America's Jewish population, but only ~50% of Israel's).

Update: Dienekes emphasizes that the hypothesis that the admixture element which makes Ashkenazi Jews distinctive from other Europeans is Middle Eastern is somewhat speculative. I'm less skeptical than him seeing as how some Y lineages are Middle Eastern, but he offers this interesting point:
With that said, I do suspect that the distinctiveness of the Ashkenazi Jews is in part due to the possession of a Middle Eastern component of unspecified strength. I base this hypothesis on the results reported to me about the EURO-DNA-CALC test. This test distinguishes between NW, SE Europeans and Ashkenazi Jews; a few Arab individuals who have communicated their results to me have reported fairly high AJ components, indicating that part of what distinguishes an AJ from Europeans is related to the Middle Eastern Semitic background of that group.

Original paper: http://genomebiology.com/2009/10/1/R7

[joeblow]

I have a Bachelor of Science in Biochemistry (though I've never worked in a lab) and have taken many pharmacology/molecular biology courses here in Sweden. I have never heard of this Genome Biology journal, it must be brand-spanking new. I shall take a look at the original paper and its referenses, and reply later with my opinions of this particular paper.

We found that the Middle Eastern populations clustered separately from the European and European-American populations, as expected, and the subjects with four Jewish grandparents clustered close to (but separate from) the Adygei and lay between the Middle Eastern and the European and European-American populations (Figure 3). This is an important finding for a number of reasons. Firstly, the Jewish subjects remain in a separate cluster when mixed with both European and Middle Eastern populations, suggesting that the original principal component axis seen in the European-Americans is indeed a Jewish-specific axis, at least in the context of the populations considered here. Secondly, the Jewish cluster lies approximately midway between the European and the Middle Eastern clusters, implying that the Ashkenazi Jews may contain mixed ancestry from these two regions. This is consistent with the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA genetic evidence that has been interpreted by some to suggest a stronger paternal genetic heritage of Jewish populations from the Middle East and stronger maternal genetic heritage from the host populations of the Diaspora [10]. Finally, the proximity of the Jewish cluster to the Adygei is of interest, but the small sample size of the Adygei and sparse availability of Central Asian populations makes interpretation of this proximity difficult.

I call bullshit already, I shall report later.

P.S.

I did a show with Latin before where I discussed how the various roving tribes in Central Asia would frequently enslave each other and "share" DNA, i.e. Germanic people enslaving Turkic people and vice versa.

[LatinAmericanview]

P.S.

I did a show with Latin before where I discussed how the various roving tribes in Central Asia would frequently enslave each other and "share" DNA, i.e. Germanic people enslaving Turkic people and vice versa.

I always found the concept of Jewish slavery really interesting. For example, what did Jewish slavery look like? What labour did the slave Jews perform? What did the Jewish Slave quarters look like? Everyone knows that the Jews have always been some sort of Tax collectors, goldsmiths, bankers, and Lawyers- in other words Administrators within a state. Here is some food for thought...

House of the Green Shield, ancestral home of the Banker Family Rothschild (Red Shield) in the Judengasse. From a photo by Hertel, ca. 1880
Haus "Zum grünen Schild" ,das Stammhaus der Bankiersfamilie Rothschild in der Judengasse, auf einem Foto von Hertel ca 1880

By command of the Emperor Friedrich III in 1462, all of Frankfurts Jews were forced to exchange their quarter just south of the Cathedral with this area near the Wollgraben. The Ghetto was separated from the rest of the city by three gates, and all Jews were forced to live there until 1796 when the area was bombarded by French Revolutionary troops, and half the street burned down. Around 4000 people lived on the oppressive narrow lane (400m long and at some parts only 3m wide). The gates to the Ghetto were first removed in 1808.

In 1886, most the remainder of the lane was cleared except for a section of half timbered houses beginning at the Rothschild House. In 1977, during construction of the City Works Client Center, a few foundations were found. There has since been a call throughout Germany, widely covered by the press, for a "Museum Judengasse" at this original location.

http://www.altfrankfurt.com/Altstadt2/J ... se1869.htm

[sullivan]

There's a great thread here on TiU in which LAV proves that whole Khazar connection is based on fabrication of historical documents (viewtopic.php?p=12933#p12933) and here's the ultimate proof: genetics. Jews have been fabricating this Khazar connection for a while and it's interesting how it backfired on them.

Ok, maybe the Khazar theory is a fabrication, but I'm not convinced that is the end of the story.

Yiddish has key linguistic traits that indicate the Ashkenazi (the primary speakers of the language) are not Middle Eastern - in other words, the language is not Semitic/Afro-Asiatic, despite having Semitic loan words or 'Hebrewisms'.  Rather it appears to have been a direct descendant of a proto-Germanic and is possibly related to Crimean Gothic. Yiddish is not, as many think, merely a derivative of German, but is believed to have actually developed alongside German from the proto language.

In theory, the language of the Khazars would have been an Altaic language. Although Yiddish is not a Turkic language, there are small but not insignificant influences from Altaic languages (Mongol, Turkic, etc) which would lend a modicum of credence to the Khazar theory, although not sufficient to add  any significant weight to the theory.

Interestingly, I recall reading that some researchers have suggested that the language has possible origins in the Dravidian languages spoken in the southern Indian subcontinent.

[MikeWB]

DNA Evidence

Modern DNA studies on the Y chromosome of Jews worldwide have largely disproven the Khazar origin theory for the vast majority of Jews, including the Ashkenazi.

A 1999 study by Hammer et al., published in the Proceedings of the United States National Academy of Sciences compared the Y chromosomes of Ashkenazi, Roman, North African, Kurdish, Near Eastern, Yemenite, and Ethiopian Jews with 16 non-Jewish groups from similar geographic locations. It found that "Despite their long-term residence in different countries and isolation from one another, most Jewish populations were not significantly different from one another at the genetic level... The results support the hypothesis that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population, and suggest that most Jewish communities have remained relatively isolated from neighboring non-Jewish communities during and after the Diaspora."

A 2001 study by Nebel et al. found Eu 19 chromosomes, which are very frequent in Eastern Europeans (54%-60%) at elevated frequency (12.7%) in Ashkenazi Jews. The authors hypothesized that these chromosomes could reflect low-level gene flow from surrounding Eastern European populations, or, alternatively, that both the Ashkenazi Jews with Eu 19, and to a greater extent Eastern European populations in general, might be descendants of Khazars.

A 2005 study by Nebel et al., based on Y chromosome polymorphic markers, showed that Ashkenazi Jews are more closely related to other Jewish and Middle Eastern groups than to their host populations in Europe. However, 11.5% of male Ashkenazim were found to belong to R-M17, the dominant Y chromosome haplogroup in Eastern Europeans, suggesting possible gene flow between the two groups. The authors hypothesized that "R-M17 chromosomes in Ashkenazim may represent vestiges of the mysterious Khazars". They concluded "However, if the R-M17 chromosomes in Ashkenazi Jews do indeed represent the vestiges of the mysterious Khazars then, according to our data, this contribution was limited to either a single founder or a few closely related men, and does not exceed ~ 12% of the present-day Ashkenazim.

Koestler stated that part of his intent in writing the book was to defuse anti-Semitism by undermining the identification of European Jews with the Jews of the Bible, rendering anti-Semitic epithets such as "Christ killer" inapplicable. Arthur Koestler himself was a Hungarian Ashkenazi Jew by ancestry.

Koestler himself was sympathetic to Zionism on secular considerations, and did not see alleged Khazar ancestry as diminishing the claim of Jews to Israel, which he felt was based on the United Nations mandate, and not on Biblical covenants or genetic inheritance. In his view, "The problem of the Khazar infusion a thousand years ago ... is irrelevant to modern Israel". In addition, he was apparently "either unaware of or oblivious to the use anti-Semites had made to the Khazar theory since its introduction at the turn of the century." In the West, Koestler's thesis has also been embraced by some adherents of British Israelism and its offshoots such as the Christian Identity movement.

No modern mainstream scholars support Koestler's hypothesis. As Bernard Lewis wrote:

This theory... is supported by no evidence whatsoever. It has long since been abandoned by all serious scholars in the field, including those in Arab countries, where the Khazar theory is little used except in occasional political polemics.

Koestler's historiography has been attacked as highly questionable by many historians; it has also been pointed out that his discussion of theories about Ashkenazi descent is largely unsupported; to the extent that Koestler referred to place-names and documentary evidence his analysis has been described as a mixture of flawed etymologies and misinterpreted primary sources. Commentators have also noted that Koestler mischaracterized the sources he cited, particularly D.M. Dunlop's History of the Jewish Khazars (1954).

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

I remember seeing a website that listed Kurds and Palestinians as being the closest to Jews genetically.

Blonde hair is not common in the Middle East but is not unusual among European Jews and especially Polish/Russian/Ukrainian Jews. Of course a lot of Jews were simply converts.

As for the Khazars, there is a group of Crimean Jews known as Karaites. These are likely the famed Khazars of old and even today have great riding and fighting abilities on horseback.

Yiddish is still an open question since Linguistically it just sticks out compared with Germanic and Slavic languages in the region with only a few loan words.

[....]

"....A.D.700 the Khazar king was converted to Islam and later to Judaism. A later king, Obadiah, greatly strengthened Judaism, inviting rabbis into his Kingdom and building synagogues. Their Judaism - limited no doubt in any case to a comparitively small group (only the king, his attendants and the Khazars of his kind) - was always superficial and they were liable to relapse into paganism. They became what could best be called Judaized Turks.
Religious toleration was maintained for the Kingdom's 300 years, with clear traces of Christianity being found among them for the whole historical period. The predominating element in the country were the Muslims, and they formed the royal army(3). In the 10th century, "probably in 965, Khazar leaders appealed to a neighbouring Islamic state for help against invasion but were told that the price of assistance was Khazaria's conversion to Islam. According to Muslim historians the kingdom that had embraced Judaism around 740 suddenly abandoned it less than two and a half centuries later. But this did not save them and by the end of the eleventh century the Khazar empire was no more."(1) There are persistent references to the Khazars as Muslims after A.D. 965(3).

To encourage their own people, Jewish writers have tended to exaggerate the importance of the Khazar conversions to Judaism, leaving out unpalatable facts. The smallest group among the Khazars were the Jews, most of them being Muslims and Christians.
The king and his court were Jews for much of their 300 years history and because religious toleration was maintained many persecuted Jews fled there. The fact is that rather than convince themselves by the 10th century that they were Jews descended from Abraham, they found it expedient to convert to Islam.

On the linguistic side, well known Turcologist, A.N.Poliak, regards the Karaite Jews in Poland and the Crimea as the principal present-day representatives of the ancient Khazars, (Karaitism is a minor sect of Judaism quite distinct from mainstream Judaisni) and 'investigations have tended to establish the absence of western influences in Yiddish, though on the other hand affinities with German dialects of the east and south-east have been indicated.'(3)

This is not to say that the occasional occurrence of a fair, light skinned, eastern European Jew doesn't indicate the possibility of some admixture of Khazar blood. However from the thirteenth century there came a great movement across the face of Europe, which was to continue for the next four centuries, to the hospitable lands of Poland and Lithuania.(5)'
'For long generations, therefore, Poland continued to appear in the light of a land of promise for the Jews of northern Europe, and to receive a perpetual accession of new settlers - refugees escaping from massacre, young men seeking opportunity, merchants from as far afield as Italy or the Balkans. In 1500, the number of Jews in the country is estimated to have been only 50,000 souls; a century and a half later, it had risen to half a million. .....
so from the beginning of the sixteenth century the overwhelming mass if Askenazic Jewry, the remants of the communities of medieval england and France and Germanym with others from further afield - became concentrated in Poland abd the surrounding Slavonic territories. It is from them that the majority of the Jews in the world today are descended." (4).

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/ ... azars.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/religion/ ... ebate.html


This is an interesting read on the Scythians and the Khazars.

The Khazars and the Scythians
Vladimir Pomakov
http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/khazar_history.htm

[Anonymous]

here is another DNA sampling

http://64.233.189.132/translate_c?hl=en ... TG2xn9A#43

Abstract
We consider the actual DNA-Genetic data describing the Jews (Klesiv, 2007) on the paternal line. Made the following findings and conclusion.
The methodical conclusion: the available evidence describing Jews enable the general and private DNA genetic reconstruction, and it can be done without the support of well-known versions of their stories.
Genohronologichesky conclusion: the Jews, as a social community to segregate in the 17 century AD.
Genogenealogichesky concluded: closest relatives of Jews from haplotypes Cohen are Turks, Armenians, Kurds (probably the Greeks), the direct relatives of their genetic make up in Turkey, 1.5% of the male population.
Genogeograficheskoe conclusion: social group of Jews were formed, mostly in regions where they lived at the beginning of (the) 19 century.

If I recall the Joe Blow analysis of Yiddish, He found traces of Turkish

Although Sullivan will reply that It's speculation about my theory on the origins of the Jews, I am willing to except that.

!!!!The following is mostly my opinion and is not to believed by anyone except me!!!!

The Ghettos as Latin pointed out are an important key.

As far as I can tell the Jews are not a race, but a caste consisting of many races. Race and Identity seem to be the spawn of 20th and 19th century writings.

I am reminded that term DBS uses often is Xenophobia - or fear of foreigners, which would imply that they were from a foreign country at some point in time.

I believe that they came from Constantinople and were not only tax collectors et al.  but had weaponized religion to stamp out
paganism and promote  the new monotheism throughout the first great empire.

anyway British Israelism or Christian Identity didn't always hate the Jew. In fact they were instrumental in acquiring Palestine for the Jewish homeland. Although located in the wrong place since Jerusalem was located at Constantinople. But for the British The new jewish home located in Palestine was an Ideal location for disrupting and preventing any of the remnants of the Ottoman empire from becoming a super power.

the early BI's and CI's  fully promoted this homeland for the jews thing and that the jews were a race, and it wasn't until Hitler that the first laws were passed declaring that the Jews were a race.

after ww1 there seems to have been a split in BI and CI, with one side still supporting the jewish homeland and the otherside turning and claiming that the jews are not jews. Clearly a dialectic with a convenient prophesy to boot.

This second group of BI's and CI's seem to be responsible for Hitler Coming to power and there seems to be a coup ousting Edward from the throne with a scandal so that ww2 can proceed. But you can see quite clearly that people like Mosley and others were supportive of Adolf and the betrayal and flight of Hess and the offering of Dunkirk.

If you notice the manufactured evidence conveniently discovered at key critical moments at the birth of this Jewish Homeland it seems almost laughable.

I refer of coarse of the discovering of the Letter from the Rabbi to Jose the Khazar and of coarse the Dead Sea Scrolls and now with the tablet of Solomon. timing is everything.

Anyway it's all very interesting, but things seem to be slanted towards agendas that I am not privy to and the evidence to support these agendas and opposing agendas will always surface as to why this is true and why that is true or why this  is not true etc.

I would guess that the events or chess matches of the 20th century were all about power and wealth but mostly about power.

[mgt23]

I had made a post inquiring on this topic

Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
http://www.pnas.org/content/97/12/6769.full

Nearly Half Of Ashkenazi Jews Descended From Four 'Founding Mothers'
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 083446.htm

ScienceDaily (Jan. 17, 2006) — Some 3.5 million or 40 percent of Ashkenazi Jews are descended from just four "founding mothers" who lived in Europe 1,000 years ago. The mothers were part of a small group who founded the Ashkenazi Jewish community, which was established in Europe as a result of migration from the Near East.

@savage i too strangely have been considering whether the ashkenazi came from Byzantium (prior to that khazaria and prior to that mongolia)
been listening to this brief overview
12 Byzantine Rulers The History of The Byzantine Empire
http://www.deathflag.org/index.php?page ... 7a4e0a6d4f

i just get the feeling that the MO of the byzantine royals, attitudes and customs all fit and indeed they did consider themselves the true zion/rome/jeruselem. the gradual decay/infighting of Byzantium could explain the westward push of these bloodlines into europe.
more work needs to be done on this genetic issue but it i feel could be the key to tracing who the top level zionists are. because tptb are all so strictly inbred, if we could get samples from them(no mean feat) get them tested against ancient samples(again no mean feat) of various past leaders of zionism we could have a mechanism for tracing the path of historical carnage they have caused to present day. this could give us some important clues and insight to their families way/scope of thinking. in essence use their bloodlines against them genetically and memetically.

[Anonymous]

@savage i too strangely have been considering whether the ashkenazi came from Byzantium (prior to that khazaria and prior to that mongolia)
been listening to this brief overview

thanks

I submit to you - pure conjecture on my part that Alexander the Great, Ghengis Khan, Solomon all describe a Byzantine King that first created Heaven on earth and became exactly what the egyptian's pharaohs are claimed to have. To be the incarnation of divine ruler  - god on earth who formed the first empire. The romans if you will. and after the 1453 fall of Jerusalem thing get interesting. but it is tough to actually prove any of this because the evidence is scarce, although I am sure there might be some who create evidence and call it ancient.

for example

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=6013

[satya]

Most of these DNA studies have been done by Jews, including this one so who knows if they are fudging the data.  Most "scientific" studies can be skewed for a purpose.

Conclusion:  Future Jewish DNA Studies

 The DNA studies have revealed a high degree of genetic interrelatedness among Ashkenazi groups, particularly among those of Eastern Europe.  This common ancestry can be attributed to a small founding population, coupled with rapid population growth and a high rate of endogamy over the past 500 years.  The studies also indicate a sharing of genetic ancestry between eastern and western Ashkenazim, supporting the view that some portion of Eastern European Jewry was founded by western Ashkenazim.

 DNA research has also revealed significant genetic links between Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish populations, despite their separation for generations.  With the Cohanim study, researchers found a clear genetic connection between the Jewish priests and a shared Israelite ancestor from the past.  Additional genetic results suggest that the Ashkenazim can trace at least part of their ancestry to their Israelite forbearers.

 But Jewish DNA presents a picture that is far more complex than just the Cohanim results.  This picture is also far more diverse than what many genetic studies on Ashkenazi Jews would suggest.  Instead, many of those studies have focused heavily on the Israelite DNA results, often downplaying the significant contribution of European and Khazarian ancestors.  The examination of only a single component of Jewish ancestry has resulted in an incomplete and, to a certain extent, distorted presentation of the Jewish genetic picture.

 Diversity was present from Jewish beginnings, when various Semitic and Mediterranean peoples came together to form the Israelites of long ago.  The genetic picture was clearly enriched during the Diaspora, when Jews spread far and wide across Europe, attracting converts and intermarrying over time with their European hosts.  The most recent DNA evidence indicates that from this blending of Middle Eastern and European ancestors, the diverse DNA ancestry of the Ashkenazi Jews emerged.

 Although the debate over the fate of the Khazars is far from over, DNA research suggests that remnants of these mysterious people continue to exist within the genetic makeup of Ashkenazi Jews.  In fact, the Levite results indicate that the Khazars became fully integrated into the Ashkenazi communities and came to play an important role within the Jewish priesthood.

 The Cohanim results do not disprove the genetic contribution of the Khazars.  Rather, the DNA studies indicate that Jews are not entirely Khazarian, Israelite or European in genetic makeup, but a complex and unique mixture of all these peoples.

 Genetic studies of the future will hopefully clarify many of the remaining mysteries surrounding the origins and formation of the Ashkenazi communities.  For instance, the origins and distribution of the most common mtDNA haplogroup among Ashkenazim – haplogroup K – remains unexplored.  Additionally, tantalizing differences in the genetic makeup of western and eastern Ashkenazi populations remain to be fully investigated by DNA researchers.

 In addition to the Ashkenazim, many other Jewish groups are ripe for study by genetic researchers.  Examination of these groups will no doubt help illuminate their common genetic bonds as well as their differences with other Jewish populations.  Groups such as the Sephardic and Mizrachi Jews await study of their own unique DNA makeup.

In conclusion, much remains to be explored regarding the DNA of various Jewish populations.  Future DNA studies will undoubtedly provide a clearer picture of the various heterogeneous peoples who came together over time to form the Jewish people of today.

http://www.jogg.info/11/coffman.htm

[sullivan]

If I recall the Joe Blow analysis of Yiddish, He found traces of Turkish

There are traces of Turkish, or possibly an Altaic forebear, in the vocabulary. These could be explained away as loan words. In terms of linguistic fundamentals, though, the language is typologically a Germanic language.

Although Sullivan will reply that It's speculation about my theory on the origins of the Jews, I am willing to except that.

Its all speculation, including anything I write, or JoeBlow writes! How can it be otherwise?

[sullivan]

Most of these DNA studies have been done by Jews, including this one so who knows if they are fudging the data.  Most "scientific" studies can be skewed for a purpose.

That has been precisely my response to the DNA evidence. I have no doubt that a significant portion of World Jewry has its genetic origins outside the Middle East, including the Ashkenazi, the Kaifeng and Falasha Jews. Whether or not the Ashkenazi are 'Khazar' has yet to be proven or disproven.

[mgt23]

@sullivan

Most of these DNA studies have been done by Jews, including this one so who knows if they are fudging the data. Most "scientific" studies can be skewed for a purpose.

which is precisely why i wanted a reply in a previous post but got no reply on that article

The new analysis shows that Jewish ancestry reflects a mosaic of genetic sources.  While earlier studies focused on the Middle Eastern component of Jewish DNA, new research has revealed that both Europeans and Central Asians also made significant genetic contributions to Jewish ancestry.  Moreover, while the DNA studies have confirmed the close genetic interrelatedness of many Jewish communities, they have also confirmed what many suspected all along: Jews do not constitute a single group distinct from all others.  Rather, modern Jews exhibit a diversity of genetic profiles, some reflective of their Semitic/Mediterranean ancestry, but others suggesting an origin in European and Central Asian groups.  The blending of European, Semitic, Central Asian and Mediterranean heritage over the centuries has led to today's Jewish populations.

excellent link btw.....i think one should search/ring up geneticists critical of zionist/jewish led research and get their take on things. i don't really care about research being jewish, but whether it has any validity or not/and maybe whether the researcher has has any historical zionist connections in this important field.

[Ognir]

I wonder what was word was used for Zionists prior to Basel 1897, seems probable, it was Jews and that's not correct either :lol:

[sirbadman]

Hmm, I dont really have the time to try and understand this paper abstract but I did receive a distinction in an advanced marketing research unit at a top uni.

You have to look at the methodology with all these types of papers. You also have to consider whether the paper has been peer reviewed. I haven't got the full paper, I could be wrong but i dont think it has been peer reviewed.

A good research paper will acknowledge the potential inaccuracies, this one does a little of that but is rather boastful in its conclusions which raises a red flag right away.

Eg:

Conclusion
We show that, at least in the context of the studied sample, it is possible to predict full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, although it should be noted that the exact dividing line between a Jewish and non-Jewish cluster will vary across sample sets, which, in practice, would reduce the accuracy of the prediction. While the full historical demographic explanations for this distinction remain to be resolved, it is clear that the genomes of individuals with full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry carry an unambiguous signature of their Jewish heritage, and this seems more likely to be due to their specific Middle Eastern ancestry than to inbreeding.

Of course there is  a disclaimer, "in the context of the studied sample", but with any sample group to get a 100% result of anything is a bit unlikely in my view, unless the sample has been tinkered with.

 You can see the important point the Jewish author is trying to raise in the last sentence:"it is clear that the genomes of individuals with full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry carry an unambiguous signature of their Jewish heritage, and this seems more likely to be due to their specific Middle Eastern ancestry than to inbreeding". So we dont want to think inbreeding is the cause, would we?

Looking at the sample group, it's  611, well, you need a minimum of 400 in your sample group to make it relevant to draw any general conclusions about the population at large, but obviously the larger the sample group the better.

With the methodology, which is called "materials and methods" for some reason, there is one problem I can see.

You have this genome or whatever data coming from two separate sources, not sure how much from Duke Uni (might be buried somewhere in the report) and the other from CEPH (http://www.cephb.fr/en/hgdp/diversity.php) which takes this type of stuff from people all over the world. CEPH only has dna/whatever stuff from 1051 individuals from 51 countries in their database, i guess only American data of CEPH was used but i cant tell from the abstract. I dont know the breakdown of how much was Duke Uni and how much was CEPH. You need only American data to run along with the 95% Askhenzai assumptions. Anyway there is a lot of potential to screw with the results i think, but i would need to read the actual paper's methodlogy to ascertain that.

What is clear is they had to play around with the data, this is clear from the abstract, and they acknowledge different ways the two data sets had the data collected:

Analysis on combined Duke and CEPH-HDGP samples

Firstly we attempted to analyze population structure on the mixed Duke/CEPH populations by including all SNPs, having again reduced redundancy as described above. However, because the Duke and CEPH populations were genotyped and quality controlled separately, a PCA that included all SNPs revealed multiple significant axes, reflecting systematic differences in laboratory procedures between the two genotyping sites. In order to focus on axes that reflected population structure and not genotyping procedures, we reduced the dataset to a core set of SNPs that did not show any systematic differences between the sites. To do this, we first reduced the dataset by sorting the reduced-LD dataset by chromosome and location and selecting a subset of SNPs (for example, one in every five along the chromosome) for analysis. We then removed any SNP that did not have genotype data for all individuals...etcetc..

PC1: first principal component axis; PCA: principal components analysis; SNP: single nucleotide polymorphism.

So really, without looking at the full report, and based on just a quick look at the abstract available from a link above, I would advise against anyone taking this report too seriously. If they had a sample group of 1000, with the data collected the same way, and for the important American asheknazi assumption, all known to be sourced from America, and not fiddled around with the data sets so much before applying statisitcal analysis, well the report would be more accurate. But you can draw 100% conclusions from the rejigged data/sample group.

Amen.

[hurensohn]

Ok, if they are not Khazars. What would they be?

[Rockclimber]

Most of these DNA studies have been done by Jews, including this one so who knows if they are fudging the data.  Most "scientific" studies can be skewed for a purpose.

Exactly Satya. I don't trust these studies 1-iota. Not one jot or tittle. It's certainly not impossible to believe that studies have been 'bought and paid for' so to speak.

For one thing, I am a simple but logical man. If you put a palestinian and ashkenazi side by side you will find ZERO resemblance. A sephardi yes, but ashkenazi-no way. A turk, yes and I venture so say that you can see the European/asiatic in them as well. Weak evidence? Perhaps, but I doubt they have any 'jewish' blood in them if any at all.

The khazar theory has been gaining momentum so it would not surprise me that these VERY POWERFUL people you buy their way out of it becoming fact.

[LatinAmericanview]

Ok, if they are not Khazars. What would they be?

The short answer is we live in a feudal system. The top administrators of civilization is a close caste of servants called the Jews. The key words are close caste of servants. There are several different groups at present so not all the top administrators are called Jews. For example, The sultan of the Ottoman Empire employed Armenian Orthodox Christians as his administrators. The Queen of England employs the Jewish Financial Guild housed in the ghetto called the City of London. The best way to determine the relationship between the Kings and servants is note the relationship of man and property.

The difference between Free men and slaves is the right of property ownership. Most of us feel that we can own property but this is merely an illusion. The masses have the privilege to own property but not the inalienable right of property ownership. Therefore if the state deems it necessary to take away your property it can. Hence you are a slave. Free men can not be separated from their property or production of their labour. Free men are usually born in that position or titled for some service to the ruling group.

All Jews are Equal but some Jews are more equal than others. Jewish Freemen are citizens of the state and can own property. Jewish servants are specialized slaves. The rank and file Jews (Clueless). Here is an example: Allen Greenspan is Jewish and a specialized servant for the financial guild. He did such a great job that he was knighted by he Queen and he became a Jewish Freeman.

[MikeWB]

Ok, if they are not Khazars. What would they be?

Jews, as a whole, are a compound race as that study shows. Ashkenazi and Sephardi are clearly different race of Jews. Ashkenazi are clearly a separate race (you can just tell by how they look like) and they're clearly not turkic peoples (Khazars for example). So they're a race of their own just like many other races are a separate race.

I never looked too closely into this Khazarian theory of their origin and took it as a fact after reading articles and listening to radio shows  by people I trust. But what always bothered me about Khazarian theory is that Ashkenazi look nothing like turkic peoples. Take a look at some of the people on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_peoples  Ashkenazi look nothing like them.

After I read that LAV thread in which he pointed out deception, I started digging deeper and found a whole bunch of these genetic studies (the one I posted was the most accessible to a layman like myself) and then it all fit together.

What we're dealing with is just another of their deceptions. Jews always try to blend into their host populations and they take names and dress code and customs (but not religion) of their hosts so they're not discriminated against and so that they can advance and rise to the top of social structures. This Khazar theory is just one of those tools that they used to try to look more European than they are so they can blend in better and so that they can't be called "Christ killers" (as Khostler said himself). Khazar stuff is all lies with very little historical evidence. I do think that some Khazars have converted to Judaism, as some historical evidence suggest and as many other peoples have too, but they don't form the Ashkenazi majority. Ashkenazi are clearly a race of their own.

[joeblow]

Ashkenazi look nothing like turkic peoples

Too bad you never listened to the show I did with Latin or the one I did myself, I described how Ashkenazi look closer to a mix between Armenians and Turks, which any Middle-Easterner can attest to. The curly hair is NOT Semitic, Armenians have the same kind of hair, plus they are also very unattractive (sorry, it is the the truth!). The nose is NOT Semitic, the broken nose type is clearly Central Asian, in my show I described thusly "Imagine you take a black's wide nose and pull the end of it outward from his face".

[MikeWB]

Ashkenazi look nothing like turkic peoples

Too bad you never listened to the show I did with Latin or the one I did myself, I described how Ashkenazi look closer to a mix between Armenians and Turks, which any Middle-Easterner can attest to. The curly hair is NOT Semitic, Armenians have the same kind of hair, plus they are also very unattractive (sorry, it is the the truth!). The nose is NOT Semitic, the broken nose type is clearly Central Asian, in my show I described thusly "Imagine you take a black's wide nose and pull the end of it outward from his face".

Well, Caucasians also share a lot of features and there's a lot of diversity among whites as well. But when I look at some of the typical examples of Turkic peoples, Ashkenazi share very few features and when you look at them as a whole, they just don't fit.

It's quite amazing to me how well these people are hiding their true origins. The amount of deception surrounding their origin is incredible.

I'm sure that when China fully overtakes USA in 15 years time, Ashkenazi will fabricate some other kind of theory that will make them "brothers or cousins" of Chinese so they can blend in there better.  :lol:

[joeblow]

But when I look at some of the typical examples of Turkic peoples, Ashkenazi share very few features and when you look at them as a whole, they just don't fit.

The Turkic peoples, from the beginning were an amalgamation of different tribes of different races with the leadership always being of the more Oriental variety. There are a couple of Turks here at TiU who can back me up, but since they have not chosen to reveal themselves as such, I shall not do it either.

Here is the link to the show I did with Latin viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1159&p=5650&hilit=celtic+khazar#p5650 and later in the same thread:

http://home.swipnet.se/~w-66679/khazaria/khazdoc.html

Along with warfare, diplomacy, taxation and trade there was of course a great lingual and cultural as well as religious and ideological exchange. The Jewish Khazar Kingdom comprised a manyfold variety in combination with "hellenistic" openness in all aspects of human cultural life. A Khazar official could be of Turk, Slav, Greek, Rûs, Arab, Goth, Roman and Magyar ethnical origin. They then just had to be multilingual and capable of communicating with all these "nationalities". General Turkish, "lingua cumana", was surely used among the Turk tribes, as Roman-Greek in the Black sea region and Hebrew among Jewish scholars and rabbis. Every subgroup surely maintained their native tongue, but the demand for a general and common language gradually increased.

[MikeWB]

That second link is the same regurgitation of the Khostler stuff.

[sirbadman]

Ashekenazis dont look like turks?

Hell look at this photo they put up on that wikipedia link:



Looks like Borat's cousin. Im guessing Sasha is an asheknazi.

That genetic study was made to try and conclude the ashekenazis were a race rather than a severely inbred group of people. The jewish, assumably ashekenazi writer did not believe in the latter. How strange.

That said, the Khazar stuff seems to be bull, according to what Savage and Latin have come across in their research. Savage has some good podcasts on the topic.

I really dont care what the ashekenazis are or where they are from, as long as they stop their talmud worshipping BS, and stop controlling all the top companies, central banks, hospitals etc for their own gain.

[MikeWB]

Ashekenazis dont look like turks?

Hell look at this photo they put up on that wikipedia link:



Looks like Borat's cousin. Im guessing Sasha is an asheknazi.

That genetic study was made to try and conclude the ashekenazis were a race rather than a severely inbred group of people. The jewish, assumably ashekenazi writer did not believe in the latter. How strange.

That said, the Khazar stuff seems to be bull, according to what Savage and Latin have come across in their research. Savage has some good podcasts on the topic.

I really dont care what the ashekenazis are or where they are from, as long as they stop their talmud worshipping BS, and stop controlling all the top companies, central banks, hospitals etc for their own gain.

Fine, find me a JEWISH girl that looks like this (from the same page):



You can find 10 other people, who are white, who look closer to Sasha Baron Cohen than the guy you picked. I'm talking on a whole, not picking specific examples that mislead.

The writer of that blog post is clearly a Muslim. Razib Khan is clearly a Pakistani name but he's probably born in US or emigrated at early age.



Selective breeding involves inbreeding so your point about that is extremely weak. Every race started with a form of inbreeding and that's how races separate.

And yeah, I completely agree with LAV and Savage that this whole Khazarian thing is giant disinfo and bullshit.

[Rockclimber]

Well regardless of what anyone believes, all 'Jewish' geneological records were destroyed in 70ad. My point is there is no real way to prove that anyone is a genetic Jew.

So in my estimation, being Jewish is still a religion, not a race.

[MikeWB]

Well regardless of what anyone believes, all 'Jewish' geneological records were destroyed in 70ad. My point is there is no real way to prove that anyone is a genetic Jew.

Well, that's not quite true. You can definitely say whether someone's a jew or not based on a genetic test. All the studies show that and in the paper referenced, they say you can do it with nearly 100% certainty.

So in my estimation, being Jewish is still a religion, not a race.

Jews might be a compound race but the subgroups that make the Jews are clearly different races (Sephardi and Ashkenazi).

Coming back to misleading examples, what about this girl?

[thirdeyewise]

you have to remember, most of the people that put out these findings are probably Jewish.
Just like Henry Kissinger recieved the Nobel Peace Price, i'm i supposed to now assume that the war monger is peaceful, please!

[LatinAmericanview]

you have to remember, most of the people that put out these findings are probably Jewish.
Just like Henry Kissinger recieved the Nobel Peace Price, i'm i supposed to now assume that the war monger is peaceful, please!

This argument is no logical. It is like the Chewbacca Defense.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1974564/c ... a_defense/

<div style="background:#000000;width:400px;height:348px"><embed flashVars="playerVars=showStats=yes|autoPlay=no|videoTitle=Chewbacca%20Defense" src="http://www.metacafe.com/fplayer/1974564/chewbacca_defense.swf" width="400" height="348" wmode="transparent" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" name="Metacafe_1974564" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed><div style="font-size:12px;"><a href="http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1974564/chewbacca_defense/">Chewbacca Defense</a> - <a href="http://www.metacafe.com/">A funny movie is a click away</a></div></div>

You mean like the JEW BEN FREEMAN? Or HOW ABOUT THE jEWISH KNIGHT ART kEOSTHLER? Dna records can be done and are conclusive. Hell they do did on the Maury Povich Show. :lol:

[Rockclimber]

Jewish is a religion. How do you get around the Chinese Jews, african Jews, Syrian Jews etc., there is NO jewish gene per se.

Most Jews today can't even tell you who their 3rd or 4th great grand parents are, let alone going back to prove they're from the blood lineage of Abraham. Good luck proving that one!  :lol: (since the records were destroyed)

I think you guys want to beleive there is a "jew'' gene but I'm not sure of your motives...