And other news.
This is really moronic:
We have characterized the Y chromosome carried by President Thomas Jefferson, the general rarity of which supported the idea that he, or a patrilineal relative, fathered the last son of his slave Sally Hemings. It belongs to haplogroup K2, a lineage representing only ∼1% of chromosomes worldwide, and most common in East Africa and the Middle East. Phylogenetic network analysis of its Y‐STR (short tandem repeat) haplotype shows that it is most closely related to an Egyptian K2 haplotype, but the presence of scattered and diverse European haplotypes within the network is nonetheless consistent with Jefferson’s patrilineage belonging to an ancient and rare indigenous European type. This is supported by the observation that two of 85 unrelated British men sharing the surname Jefferson also share the President’s Y‐STR haplotype within haplogroup K2. Our findings represent a cautionary tale in showing the difficulty of assigning individual ancestry based on a Y‐chromosome haplotype, particularly for rare lineages where population data are scarce. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2007. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Any “movement” fetishist couldn’t do “better.” Jefferson’s NRY is “most common in East Africa and the Middle East. Phylogenetic network analysis of its Y‐STR (short tandem repeat) haplotype shows that it is most closely related to an Egyptian K2 haplotype” but it is also at the same time “an ancient and rare indigenous European type” because “two of 85 unrelated British men sharing the surname Jefferson also share the President’s Y‐STR haplotype within haplogroup K2.” Err, why isn’t that simply low level admixture? If this was in Southern (or Eastern) Europe you damn well know the presence of K2 would be ascribed to admixture and not, mysteriously, to “an ancient and rare indigenous European type” that just so happens to “most closely related to an Egyptian K2 haplotype.” Occam’s Butterknife!
The only thing here of worth is the obvious – ” a cautionary tale in showing the difficulty of assigning individual ancestry based on a Y‐chromosome haplotype, particularly for rare lineages where population data are scarce.”
Notice that Jobling changes his tune a bit here:
The fact that K2 is common in the Middle East, however, raises the possibility that Jefferson had a Jewish ancestor, Dr. Jobling said. Jewish Y chromosomes resemble those of Middle Eastern peoples, and the Jewish Diaspora is one way Middle Eastern chromosomes entered Europe.
Population genetics is, by far, the most politicized branch of science there is. Most such papers, in my opinion, some sort of discernible bias (in some cases, likely covert and subconscious, but in other cases, very overt and intentional).
In any case, what’s good for the Nordish goose is good for the Swarthoid gander. From now on, any genetic indications of non-European admixture in any European individuals or populations should simply be ascribed to “an ancient and rare indigenous European type.” QED.
Duchesne is drinking the HBD-Nordicism Kool-Aid. Does Duchesne really believe this:
A fair criticism, which I am sure MacDonald would welcome, is that much research is still required in support of the thesis…
Does he really believe that HBDers welcome criticism, or want research on their theses?
We can ask how real is that fundamental thesis? The Y axis here calls that into question.
Even if the overall thesis has some validity, is it really genetic? Are the traits stable in particular ethnies, generation after generation in a novel environment such as America?
Why are the Irish – who in their basic ancestral components are not very significantly different than other Northwestern European peoples – “Outer Hajnal” while their neighbors in Northwest Europe, of similar WHG-Steppe-Farmer proportions, are “Inner Hajnal?”
Is asking these questions akin to blasphemy?
Are there any alternative explanations?
Any, anyway, if these guys really believe this thesis, then shouldn’t we have some of those “moderately collectivist” swarthoids managing European interests? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t argue that Northern Europeans are uniquely evolved to hyper-individualism that is harming White interests and then, at the same time, support an affirmative action program that has only those people as leaders of pro-White activism.