Posted: Dec 05, 2022 2:17 pm
by Spearthrower
Wortfish wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:The paper you're citing does not support confident conclusions.

Despite this being underlined for you so you can't miss it, you still insist that you are correct.


... all the evidence points in one direction. I have looked at the data, and it unmistakably shows that the Jews of Erfurt were mostly Italian in origin with a substantial Eurasian contribution. Some Near Eastern ancestry is probably there, but it is unclear from where exactly.



https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7422013782

We caution that the specific identity of the source populations that we inferred, as well as the admixture proportions, should not be considered precise. This is due to the multiple Southern European populations that fit the EAJ data, as well as our reliance on modern populations as a proxy of the true ancestral sources. The levels of Middle Eastern ancestry in Italy were historically variable (Aneli et al., 2021; Antonio et al., 2019; De Angelis et al., 2021; Posth et al., 2021; Raveane et al., 2019), and Middle Eastern populations have also experienced demographic changes in the past two millennia, particularly African admixture (Moorjani et al., 2011) (Data S1, section 16). Under the extensive set of models we studied, the ME ancestry in EAJ is estimated in the range 19%–43% and the Mediterranean European ancestry in the range 37%–65%. However, the true ancestry proportions could be higher or lower than implied by these ranges (Data S1, section 16). Our results therefore should only be interpreted to suggest that AJ ancestral sources have links to populations living in Mediterranean Europe and the Middle East today.


This is exactly why people are always asked to cite papers, and why Creationists usually go far out of their way to avoid it.