kurds and afghans do NOT look alike . compare and contrast

[ImHere]

That is not much different fromt what I wrote. Once again I used the type D as example. 5% was just an example. it could be 3% for all I care. But the fact of the matter is even if 1 in 20 Kurds has this look this automatically means Pashtuns who resemble that 1 guy can pass as Kurds. Even if as very atypical. Otherwise you would claim that Kurds who look like that but are 100% genetic Kurdish are not real Kurds. And this would be a delusional, paradox and very contradictionary statement.



I have seen Kurds from Ilam, Lorestan all the way into Dersim who resemble the examples 3,4,5, 7. Very atypical for Kurds but they do exist even if only 1 in 100. This would be a type for example which is relevant among Pashtuns (like 15%) but only found in the 1% scale among Kurds. Don't let yourself be confused by the skin color which is clearly sun burned but the facial features. Ironically some of these examples look more pseudo Arabian than South Asian. The exception being Nr.1

Also as I pointed out. These people are very rural the comparison is not fair and this is quite frankly how especially Turks try to portray Kurds by comparing their people in shiny western clothes with people from the farm.


You seem to have a little hard time understanding what I mean with the concept of "passing" and "looking around average or typical". Maybe I am not good in explaining it. If you put a Kurdish and a Pashtun group next by each others you will easily tell apart the two. You will also be able to tell which individual is more likely to be Kurd or Pashtun. This is a no brainer. But this does not disprove the concept of passing. Because passing only works on a individual to individual basis. What you are describing is the concept of typical/average look. Even if a type, let's call it "G" exist only 1% ofKurds while at the same time in 20% of the Pashtun population. This still would make these Pashtuns pass as a Kurd. But you could not claim the 20% of Pashtuns of type G look Kurdish. Because this G type is not typical Kurdish to begin with. Passing =/= looking like



It's not just some. It's a whole lot of more than that. I am not sure if it is 60, 70 or 90%. The 90% was just an extreme example. it's probably more around ~67% (2/3). But from my own two eyes it is more than just "some". Passing =/= Looking typical or average.
If we are going to make comparisons we should make fair comparisons. Any of the countries Kurds live in are richer and allot more "westernized" in the way they act and dress.

Pashtun people in the diaspora is how I know they look from face to face.

Tajiks have even more often features that can pass as Kurdish

I am not saying they look like us Kurds (passing =/= looking like) but you guys here almost sound like we are talking about a completely different species of humans.







Instead of feeling attacked we should feel proud of it. Them trying to link themselfs to us is a sign of affection. And it is also because they dislike most of their neighbours which we Kurds should understand 100%. When they say, they are "Northern West Asians" they don't do this to hurt your or anyone elses feelings, they do this to distance themselfs from Pakistanis who are literally one of the major reasons why Afghanistan is so f.ed up right now. They don't claim closeness to us by making shit up like saying we are South Asians, if there are some of them claiming things like this, then your response is a understandable response to these individuals. But from my experience they claim closeness to us by saying they are an extension of Northern West Asians which is not a wrong statement to begin with. Most of the ancestry from West-Central Asia did basically originate in Northern West Asia. It is that 15-25% AASI which isn't, but still 75-85% of their ancestry is from Northern West Asia/Steppes which makes them some sort of extension of us.

I do not consider them as Northern West Asians, but as an extension of us (West-Central Asians). Somehow a thing of their own

Many of us get less "AASI"/south eurasian than that. I myself at max get 10%(9,75% to my calculations) and down to perhaps 8%(7,80% to my calculations)

Also, regardless i think youre from TA. The calculation you made with the phenotype thing, i only remember seeing it on TA once.
Who are you on TA though? If im not wrong?

 

[Kurdquistador]

i think he means the G25 modellings not gedmatch

but on gedmatch afghans often get more than you

 

[ImHere]

i think he means the G25 modellings not gedmatch

but on gedmatch afghans often get more than you

Afghans get rather as much as me, and a lot of them lower than me(from little to signficant)
Also, i WAS talking about g25

 

[Kurdquistador]

i was just posting models bro

no way are afghans only 8-10 .

also i just ran an afghan kit through harappaworld and he gets 18% s.indian for example

please lets be serious here

 

[ImHere]

i was just posting models bro

no way are afghans only 8-10 .

also i just ran an afghan kit through harappaworld and he gets 18% s.indian for example

please lets be serious here

I am serious here.

Youre using these garbage g25 modellings with those simulated g25 coordinates. And your fits showing afghans getting something like 17% AASI are around 3-3,5+. The ones with better fits, like 2, shows these eastern afghans at 12% AASI. Youre the one whos not serious here.

I however prefer not to use those simulated coordinates, or your crappy models which inflates the south eurasian.

I judge this by using actual samples like shahr e sokteh BA3(IVC) with better fits. And i got no more than 20% of it(19,5% to be exact). If those IVC folks were half south eurasians, i would be around 9,75% south eurasian. But if i put my trust on some study that apparently put BA3 at 60% west eurasian, i would get around no more than 7,8%

Also, the south indian is signficantly west eurasian

 

[Kurdquistador]

how are my modells crappy ?

shahr e sokteh or IVC has already AASI in it thats why it shows your aasi score less

the s.indian component on HW is not significantly west eurasian

 

[ImHere]

how are my modells crappy ?

shahr e sokteh or IVC has already AASI in it thats why it shows your aasi score less

the s.indian component on HW is not significantly west eurasian

I AM literally counting the south eurasian in IVC + the south eurasian in the BMAC model i use(and i figured out the south eurasian in BMAC sample itself by modelling it with IVC + no south eurasian admixed samples)

Your models are garbage, because theyre barely get 2 at fit most of the time. And a fit of 3 can be off from what your admixture really is like. I even get certain people at distance of 3 who are signficantly different from me

Also, your own models proves you wrong:

Target: Tarkalani
Distance: 2.0943% / 0.02094330
47.6 Iran_Neo
22.6 Eastern_European_Hunter_Gatherer
12.2 AASI
12.2 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
3.6 Nivkh
1.8 Caucasus_Hunter_Gatherer



Target: Tarkalani
Distance: 3.0431% / 0.03043143
39.8 Iran_Neo
20.6 Eastern_European_Hunter_Gatherer
17.0 AASI
11.4 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
10.6 Caucasus_Hunter_Gatherer
0.6 Nivkh


The one with the better fit made the pashtun average get only 12% south eurasian. And thats with a simulated/not real sample.
I dont even know why youre trying to argue about pashtuns getting above 15% south eruasian, when the one with the better fit tells otherwise. It however also gets 8% iran N more.
Oh wait, let me guess, are you now gonna tell me the 8% iran N is hiding all of that 5% AASI? What does that make your own Iran N? Mulatto too?
I dont really take modellings with those simulated samples much serious anyways.


Just because you want afghans like me to be less west eurasian than we are, sorry if that isnt the case
I will say its likely i get 10% south eurasian, but i doubt i get more than that based on my modellings

 

[Kurdquistador]

i am not trying to make you anything mate . you can be 100% west eurasian for all i care

i used different aasi . the one with aasi based on south indian tribals gives more aasi while the nw-aasi gives 12%

my models are not crappy at all . many people model people the same way as i do . i am using all relevant populations . therefore a fit of even 4 would be ok . look at what i get for example :


Target: skidrow_scaled
Distance: 4.1007% / 0.04100675
39.0 Barcin_N
34.6 Ganj_Dareh_N
11.0 Caucasus_Hunter_Gatherer
7.4 Levant_Natufian
5.8 Eastern_European_Hunter_Gatherer
1.6 Eskimo
0.6 Nivkh

or

Target: s_scaled
Distance: 3.5545% / 0.03554468
46.4 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
36.2 Iran_Neo
8.0 Eastern_European_Hunter_Gatherer
6.6 Caucasus_Hunter_Gatherer
1.8 Eskimo
1.0 Nivkh


etc

the distance to each pop alone is very big like 15+ . therefore a fit of 3-4 is good enough . the lowest fit with a neolithic model i have achieved was 2.9 or so lol


--

how do you measure the south eurasian in shahr e sokteh etc. ?

 

[ImHere]

i am not trying to make you anything mate . you can be 100% west eurasian for all i care

i used different aasi . the one with aasi based on south indian tribals gives more aasi while the nw-aasi gives 12%

my models are not crappy at all . many people model people the same way as i do . i am using all relevant populations . therefore a fit of even 4 would be ok . look at what i get for example :


Target: skidrow_scaled
Distance: 4.1007% / 0.04100675
39.0 Barcin_N
34.6 Ganj_Dareh_N
11.0 Caucasus_Hunter_Gatherer
7.4 Levant_Natufian
5.8 Eastern_European_Hunter_Gatherer
1.6 Eskimo
0.6 Nivkh

or

Target: s_scaled
Distance: 3.5545% / 0.03554468
46.4 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
36.2 Iran_Neo
8.0 Eastern_European_Hunter_Gatherer
6.6 Caucasus_Hunter_Gatherer
1.8 Eskimo
1.0 Nivkh


etc

the distance to each pop alone is very big like 15+ . therefore a fit of 3-4 is good enough . the lowest fit with a neolithic model i have achieved was 2.9 or so lol


--

how do you measure the south eurasian in shahr e sokteh etc. ?

I just make an assumption of it being 50% south eurasian, even though there was a study that it was only 40%.

I count in all the IVC admix from the BMAC samples i use(gonur BA1 average, which is around 7% shahr e sokteh BA3). That put together gives me 19,5% IVC. And if it all really is 50% south eurasian instead of 40%, i get 9,75% south eurasian.


Fit of 3,5 is not good. 4 is even worse. You can literally get iranians with 8% to perhaps even 10% IVC/SIS-BA3, and still get them at distance of 4. Specially with kurds who are more barcin N shifted

 

[Kurdquistador]

I just make an assumption of it being 50% south eurasian, even though there was a study that it was only 40%.

I count in all the IVC admix from the BMAC samples i use(gonur BA1 average, which is around 7% shahr e sokteh BA3). That put together gives me 19,5% IVC. And if it all really is 50% south eurasian instead of 40%, i get 9,75% south eurasian.


Fit of 3,5 is not good. 4 is even worse. You can literally get iranians with 8% to perhaps even 10% IVC/SIS-BA3, and still get them at distance of 4. Specially with kurds who are more barcin N shifted

well assumptions are not exactly what we should aim for

but just for curiousity . please post such a model using an afghan average pop . i am curious to see


mate you have to be aware that you can not really compare the fit of a modelling of 3-4 with the population list where you get specific modern populations at a distance of 3-4

as i said when you use all relevant ancient populations there is "not much more you can do" . if you know what i mean . i mean i use ANF , CHG , EHG , Iran N , WHG , AASI , east eurasian , Natufian or Levant N . these are all the relevant populations you need

 

[ImHere]

well assumptions are not exactly what we should aim for

but just for curiousity . please post such a model using an afghan average pop . i am curious to see


mate you have to be aware that you can not really compare the fit of a modelling of 3-4 with the population list where you get specific modern populations at a distance of 3-4

as i said when you use all relevant ancient populations there is "not much more you can do" . if you know what i mean . i mean i use ANF , CHG , EHG , Iran N , WHG , AASI , east eurasian , Natufian or Levant N . these are all the relevant populations you need

If i dont go by assumptions, i would actually get 8% south eurasian then(had an actual study pointing out BA3 being 40% south euraisan)


And yes i can. What you think your fit is for???? If you got yourself modelled with 50% assyrian and 50% paliestinian and got a fit of 4, you will also get someone being a mix of those 2 at same distance. You can literally check yourself if you have genoplot.


Also, unlike "AASI", all of these other samples are ACTUAL samples, not simulated fakes. Using more recent samples, specially ones with large amount of south eurasian which is an actual sample, is better

 

[Kurdquistador]

i dont understand what you mean with the assyrian and palestinian thing . but i said already what needed to be said . i use all relevant populations for my models and many people use the same models

"simulated fakes" . uhm wait a minute . the "calculation" of south eurasian withing the BA3 etc. is also "fake" since it is assumption

if you want we can use paniya instead of aasi ok let us model afghans that way if you want .

and as i said i am curious to see your models . please post them


and by the way here 2 results of 3 afghan kits i have :

Spoiler

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baloch 38.14
2 Caucasian 21.39
3 S-Indian 19.15
4 NE-Euro 11.76
5 SW-Asian 2.63
6 Beringian 1.83
7 Siberian 1.78
8 American 1.73
9 Mediterranean 1.04
10 Papuan 0.18
11 Pygmy 0.15
12 W-African 0.13
13 San 0.07

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 pashtun (harappa) 4.87
2 kalash (hgdp) 6.64
3 pathan (hgdp) 7.33
4 sindhi (harappa) 10.36
5 punjabi-khatri (harappa) 10.87
6 bhatia (harappa) 12.03
7 kashmiri (harappa) 12.37
8 burusho (hgdp) 12.49
9 punjabi-jatt-sikh (harappa) 13.07
10 punjabi-jatt-muslim (harappa) 13.92
11 haryana-jatt (harappa) 14.14
12 kashmiri-pandit (reich) 14.93
13 tajik (yunusbayev) 15.43
14 gujarati-muslim (harappa) 15.92
15 punjabi (harappa) 16.01
16 punjabi-arain (xing) 16.38
17 sindhi (hgdp) 16.51
18 punjabi-brahmin (harappa) 16.77
19 singapore-indian-c (sgvp) 17.46
20 kashmiri-pahari (harappa) 17.84

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 82.5% pathan (hgdp) + 17.5% kumyk (yunusbayev) @ 2.08
2 85.1% pathan (hgdp) + 14.9% adygei (hgdp) @ 2.1
3 84.9% pathan (hgdp) + 15.1% balkar (yunusbayev) @ 2.13
4 83.5% pathan (hgdp) + 16.5% chechen (yunusbayev) @ 2.15
5 85.1% pathan (hgdp) + 14.9% north-ossetian (yunusbayev) @ 2.15
6 85.1% kalash (hgdp) + 14.9% turk-aydin (hodoglugil) @ 2.16
7 75.3% sindhi (harappa) + 24.7% lezgin (behar) @ 2.33
8 81.6% pathan (hgdp) + 18.4% lezgin (behar) @ 2.34
9 86.4% pathan (hgdp) + 13.6% georgian (harappa) @ 2.35
10 82.3% pathan (hgdp) + 17.7% azeri (harappa) @ 2.38
11 80.7% pathan (hgdp) + 19.3% stalskoe (xing) @ 2.41
12 63.9% sindhi (hgdp) + 36.1% stalskoe (xing) @ 2.41
13 85.1% kalash (hgdp) + 14.9% turk-istanbul (hodoglugil) @ 2.41
14 88.3% kalash (hgdp) + 11.7% cypriot (behar) @ 2.43
15 87.6% kalash (hgdp) + 12.4% ashkenazi (harappa) @ 2.45
16 85.5% kalash (hgdp) + 14.5% turk-kayseri (hodoglugil) @ 2.46
17 87.5% kalash (hgdp) + 12.5% ashkenazy-jew (behar) @ 2.46
18 87.3% kalash (hgdp) + 12.7% lebanese (behar) @ 2.48
19 86% pathan (hgdp) + 14% armenian (behar) @ 2.48
20 87% kalash (hgdp) + 13% syrian (behar) @ 2.49

Spoiler

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baloch 34.2
2 Caucasian 20.37
3 S-Indian 18.48
4 NE-Euro 13.81
5 NE-Asian 2.6
6 SW-Asian 2.58
7 Mediterranean 2.41
8 Siberian 2.23
9 American 1.69
10 Papuan 1.18
11 Beringian 0.45

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 pashtun (harappa) 4.19
2 pathan (hgdp) 9.71
3 kalash (hgdp) 10.48
4 sindhi (harappa) 12.32
5 punjabi-khatri (harappa) 12.4
6 tajik (yunusbayev) 12.43
7 burusho (hgdp) 12.67
8 kashmiri (harappa) 13
9 haryana-jatt (harappa) 13.5
10 punjabi-jatt-sikh (harappa) 13.96
11 bhatia (harappa) 14.39
12 punjabi-jatt-muslim (harappa) 15.16
13 kashmiri-pandit (reich) 16.19
14 gujarati-muslim (harappa) 16.83
15 punjabi (harappa) 17.11
16 up-muslim (harappa) 17.98
17 punjabi-brahmin (harappa) 17.98
18 punjabi-arain (xing) 18.38
19 singapore-indian-c (sgvp) 18.56
20 turkmen (yunusbayev) 18.72

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 69.6% punjabi-jatt-sikh (harappa) + 30.4% kumyk (yunusbayev) @ 2.45
2 76.7% pathan (hgdp) + 23.3% nogai (yunusbayev) @ 2.76
3 66.5% punjabi-jatt-sikh (harappa) + 33.5% stalskoe (xing) @ 2.95
4 78% pathan (hgdp) + 22% turk-aydin (hodoglugil) @ 2.96
5 66.4% haryana-jatt (harappa) + 33.6% iranian (harappa) @ 3.15
6 69.5% sindhi (harappa) + 30.5% stalskoe (xing) @ 3.24
7 94.8% pashtun (harappa) + 5.2% hungarian (behar) @ 3.24
8 95.3% pashtun (harappa) + 4.7% utahn-white (hapmap) @ 3.25
9 50.1% punjabi-khatri (harappa) + 49.9% tajik (yunusbayev) @ 3.25
10 94.9% pashtun (harappa) + 5.1% slovenian (xing) @ 3.25
11 95.3% pashtun (harappa) + 4.7% utahn-white (1000genomes) @ 3.25
12 95.2% pashtun (harappa) + 4.8% ukranian (yunusbayev) @ 3.26
13 95.4% pashtun (harappa) + 4.6% british (1000genomes) @ 3.26
14 95.3% pashtun (harappa) + 4.7% n-european (xing) @ 3.26
15 95.6% pashtun (harappa) + 4.4% belorussian (behar) @ 3.26
16 95.5% pashtun (harappa) + 4.5% orcadian (hgdp) @ 3.27
17 96.1% pashtun (harappa) + 3.9% lithuanian (behar) @ 3.3
18 95.7% pashtun (harappa) + 4.3% russian (behar) @ 3.3
19 95.3% pashtun (harappa) + 4.7% french (hgdp) @ 3.34
20 70% bhatia (harappa) + 30% turk-aydin (hodoglugil) @ 3.34

 

[ImHere]

This is what i meant by the palestinian/assyrian part.
But i just use laz as example


Using genoplot, here i model a kurd with a georgian and palestinian. THis is the results:



If we go by what i said, i said that his fit and results wont only show how bad/good the fit is, it also does show the distance of someone that get the same results as the modelling results.

TO show im right, using genoplot i tried to make a ghost sample, getting the same amount of laz and palestinian as the fit showed. I will call the sample "west asian arab". I expect the kurdish average to get the mix at distance of 5,25 as well, using the exact same samples:







Now i will try to see how close the very same kurdi average is to the mix:






THis DOES show the fit doesnt only show your modelling results, it als shows how close you would be to someone who get the identical results to your modelling results, no matter how good/terrible it is

 

[Kurdquistador]

if we go by this then we can leave the modelling all aside to begin with . what a nonsense

as i said 100 times already . i am using all relevant populations for a model

and still waiting for your models

 

[ImHere]

I will also say calculation of South eurasian in BA3 is fake, because the onge used isnt for sure entirely south eurasian, and can be part west eurasian + other eurasian too.

But fine, if we're gonna use the AASI samples + trust that study, these are my results then:




And i used both the AASI averages. Keep in mind i get 14,64% SI, while you try to prove that pashtuns cant even get below 15% AASI with those gedmatch samples you posted.

Then i have to count in the south eurasian from Gonur BA1, which gets modelld as 7% BA3:




Keep in mind 2085 gonur doesnt get modelled with any of the IVC samples, and gets only 3,6% SI, which is barely almost none on g25.

And we then use the data from that study regarding BA3, then i can do the calculation with the south eurasian in gonur BA1:

7% of 60% gonur BA1= 4,2% IVC BA3
40% of 4,2 IVC BA3= 1,68%

Putting that together with the remaining AASI gives me 8,18% AASI supposedly.


Now with the pakistan pashtun averages:





You do the math.

But then again, i dont care much about these modellings, since theyre using those simulated coordinates. I care more about them when actual samples are used

 

[ImHere]

if we go by this then we can leave the modelling all aside to begin with . what a nonsense

as i said 100 times already . i am using all relevant populations for a model

and still waiting for your models

I didnt say we never should model again. Just saying the fit also tell how close you would be to someone from the outcome of the model results

 

[Kurdquistador]

this is confusing . hard to follow

why did you model gonur with another gonur + iran n etc ?

and you actually proved that pashtuns have 13% aasi . so my modelling was correct

 

[ImHere]

this is confusing . hard to follow

why did you model gonur with another gonur + iran n etc ?

and you actually proved that pashtuns have 13% aasi . so my modelling was correct

Because gonur BA1 is too drifted and has its own cluster. Cant use non-BMAC samples at this point(hard to model with a good fit without BMAC). But i used a gonur sample that didnt seem to have any IVC admix + ganj dareh, since Gonur BA1 is very Iran admix, but many BMAC samples shows some signs of IVC, since indus valley had contat with BMAC.
The point of modelling gonur BA1 average was to show how much IVC it got

I also proved that pashtuns can get down to 8% AASI(though i dont take modellings with those AASI samples too serious), which you said were impossible. I never denied we cant get up to 14-15% south eurasian

 

[Kurdquistador]

well i remember seeing a few afghan results on the eurasia k9 ASI calc scoring arond 7-8% ASI

 

[ImHere]

Oh, i forgot to tell, the AASI in the tarkalani + uthmankhel were AASI south. AASI NW(which was used with my model) isnt inflating the amount in the afghans, since NW AASI is meant of nw south asians + afghans. AASI S contains this extra east eurasian and is meant for south indians





But again, i honestly dont care too much about the modellings with the simulated AASI samples