March 25, 2018

A bit of satire

Disclaimer: this is a fictional work, any coincidence with reality is, well, coincidence... or something...

I told you years ago it would be like this. Having a nervous breakdown are we? Mwahahaha!

Plenty of us in the Nordic Horde Party have also looked at this. It is settled.

Iberia, the French samples we have, plus the British Neolithic samples tell us what the rest of France was like...

So now France is part of Britain? I see, I see who's "losing it".

Game over!

The megalithism stuff too. Forget it. Admit you didn't interpret stuff right.

It is about you because...

... because I'm stating the inconvenient truth, the obvious contradictions and limitations of the Pan-Indoeuropeanist ideology?

Do you only see the pictures or read the papers?

(Laughing) I read cartoons only. Preferably manga with no text, all cries and extremely slow action designed to dumb down the newer generations.

But by all means, please keep the comedy rolling on.


Uh, alright. You want comedy, don't you? 

Just be at peace with the fact your predictions based on modern DNA were wrong. And we the Nordic Horde Party has THE TRUTH. You can't fight against The Nordic Horde, just as Elcano could never even dream to circumnavigate the World on a rotten carrack.

J.S. Elcano, first person to sail around Earth
(Elcano shows up from the Netherworld)

I did though!

Thanks buddy for clarifying that. 

(Elcano vanishes in a puff of smoke)

Just, deal with the facts: with our alternative facts!

Everyone in Europe has Steppe ancestry. Basques too, Sardinians too, everyone belongs to the Nordic Horde, hierarchically organized by greater purity of Nordic Horde ancestry!

... conveniently deformed by forced pseudoanalyses so the Brits and Germans retain top-dog position in your Nordicist revised hierarchy rather than being semi-Basque? I see...

...  they also influenced the Basque despite the fact Basque speak a non-Indo European language. 20-30% contribution.

Uh, here it says zero contribution. And here too, and here, and here, and here...

Nein, nein, nein, Impossible!

Is R1b Z2103 in Yamnaya not good enough for you?

No. It's a very high distinct branch within M269 and has no direct relation with either S116 nor U106, nor their direct precursors, M412, etc.

Deny, deny, deny. Eventually you'll accept the truth.

You're completely insane, but at the very least try and get the facts right. Our facts, our alternative facts!

Ancient DNA will never prove you right. You will have to deal with this sooner or later. And if it does: we'll claim it is 'dubious', 'contaminated', whatever we need to impose our doctrine, because remember that a lie repeated one thousand times becomes truth, mwahahaha!

Truth defends itself.

There's a new paper coming... I have connections, I know the future, mwahahaha! I'll enjoy seeing you try and squirm your way out of what you just said after you see the results.

I heard that before and most of the time it was nothing like you imagined.

There's no getting away from it.

OK, abracadabra, whatever, agur.


  1. Long time reader, first time commenter.
    This post sounds a lot more insane and less funny than you probably intended, your also seriously godwinning here.
    I'd delete this one if I were you, as you're ultimately discrediting yourself .

    1. What if told you that 90% of the text is original from comments in this blog? From recent ones...

    2. I'm not seeking any "credit": I'm just speaking my mind. That's the purpose of a blog, right?

      But in this case it's way too coincidental with reality, so I'm just taking this from here, that from there, adding the kind of images that such comments (and their context) suggest me, and adding a mwahahaha and some other extra bit in order to get dramatic effect. 80-90% of text is real, and my part is the red part.


    hello maju i compared it with a series of articles written on the internet with a consistent and different perspective on the origins of the Turkic people

    I think this theory explains the seima turbino phenomenon

    i wonder can you write an article about the origin of the Turkic people by interpreting this and other information about it.

    because I do not agree with the altaic language theory and other common views about the Turkic people and you are a master in destroying common ideas

    1. I'm not linguist but I understand that micro-Altaic (Turkic-Tungusic-Mongolic) is pretty much the consensus today, while macro-Altaic instead is mostly discarded (but could still imply obscure and hardly demonstrable relations).

      Anyhow, I believe you're a bit off-topic. You may have wanted to comment in a more specific thread maybe?

  3. A worthy experiment, but, maybe prose analysis is more your thing than Socratic dialog when it comes to conveying a message well. And, the problem with a dialog from the comments is that some of the comments you have to be an interlocutor with are themselves pretty bad.

    1. Sure, I'm better at prose, no doubt. But there's no reason not to stray out of the usual when you feel like it. I woke up with the idea of the Hitler in the Bunker video meme and, like that is a bit more complicated, at least for me and also I did not even watch the movie to begin with, I went with a simplified version on the same basic idea.

      In any case it's how I perceive these "discussions" which are not discussions but attempts to impose one side's ideas with more authoritarianism, sometimes very rude, than reason. Because they are never willing to see your side: they already have embraced a faith, an ideology, and won't move from it, all they seem to be able to think is "how can we defeat the opposition", much as creationists and such, not about scientific debate, which, as we know can remain unsolved for very long periods... and that just normal.

      But here we deal with identity politics and that tends to contaminate things quite a bit. Also right-wingers are very very interested in identity issues, some may be more honest intellectually but there is dishonesty too, because for them what matters is to confirm their petty "superiority" ideas, instead of understanding the complexity of our origins.

      And, well, I'm not in the mood of being insulted, trashed and patronized every other day just because my criticism and inquisitiveness is inconvenient for them. If they want to debate and agree to disagree and acknowledge that there are many dark spots and poor/biased interpretations, fair enough. If they just want to beat once again their dead horse just because they don't reach further, I can't do much about it, although I prefer they'd do in their ideological spaces. But, if they come to my home, I do demand respect, non-authoritarianism and at the very least request open-mindedness.

  4. Actually, this topic is very appropriate for my posting.

    Altaic language theory is not accepted by most linguists anymore, but traditionally, Turkish, Mongolian, and Tungus languages are widely spread as altaic language families, since they do not evaluate the other theories.

    the dominant view of history and archeology on the internet as it is constantly compared to you is shaped according to the "AR1(a,b)YAN" community.

    this sect believes that the whole world is created by Indo-Europeans and according to them, the other people as the savages they learned everything by them

    there were even fanatics who even wrote that all the basque people came from women who fucked by R1b rich aryans.

    but your writes down their theories and your writes interesting and accurate

    I hope you have looked at the articles I shared and at the appropriate time you write something about it on your blog.

    1. I'm not looking at linguistic conundrums of languages I cannot speak. I have my hands full.

    2. Well,İ guess you didn't read the articles.Because there read more of than linguistic.There trying a urheimat and migration history for bulgaro-turkic people from paleolinguistic and archeology.Yes you maybe can't able to talk about linguistic but you interest archeology, and paleolinguistic is a some kind archeology which is maybe useful for you.
      İ am sory if I disturbed you.You must be working on other things.I have not hurry,you write somethings about the Proto Bulgaro- turkic when you are interested.
      Gau ona.

  5. Many of those quotes come from. I don't associate myself at all with the far right or Nordicism. I just like to learn about prehistory. One piece of European prehistory is the significant role of Chalcolithic Steppe peoples who spoke proto-Indo European language. Both R1a M417 & R1b M269 do derive from them.

    Somehow, Maju, thinks this is racist. I don't know why. I doubt he can give any credible reason.

    My grandfather was from Puerto Rico. I have both African & Amerindian ancestry, how could I justify being a Nordicists? Would I have to hate 25% of my own DNA? My ancestors didn't care about the genetic makeup of the people they had sex with.

    Anyways, this type of reaction is expected. David Reich the leader of the ancient DNA genetics revolution has had to deal with this kind of reaction.

    Some of his German team members didn't like what ancient DNA results from Corded Ware revealed. They didn't like the fact, Corded Ware people represented an ethnic group not just a culture who spread across Europe & likely introduced Indo European languages.

    They complained David Reich's "opinion" (factual opinon) on Corded Ware's ancestral origins somehow aligned with a Nazi view of prehistory. The funny thing is David Reich is Jewish. Definitely not a Nordicists.

    Going back, deep in prehistory, the only people who can at the slightest claim a 'noble' ancestry are Mesopotamians and Egyptians. I don't think there's anything especially noble or impressive about Steppe migrations. All I know is it happened.

    1. Reich is also apparently suggesting a South Caucasus origin of PIE, instead of something associated with EHG I Russia

    2. @Samuel: sorry, seems I approved your post and I didn't even read it.

      You say: "Both R1a M417 & R1b M269 do derive from them. (...) Somehow, Maju, thinks this is racist".

      Did Jonathan Swift in his "A Modest Proposal" actually mean that what he wrote? Nope he was bringing things a bit too far for the sake of satire. Still, much of the wording in this entry is from real quotes of recent comments by you and others who align with your views, and my incomodity is not so much on your stand (agree to disagree) but on how you express it in authoritarian and fanatic terms.

      "Both R1a M417 & R1b M269 do derive from them. (...) Somehow, Maju, thinks this is racist".

      First of all I respectfully disagree with your claim. I do not see any strong evidence for either haplogroup being associated the way you claim to the Kurgan expansion. This may be a bit blurrier in the case of R1a, but it's strikingly not supported by facts in the case of R1b in any way whatsoever.

      There may be a racist or ethnocentric-cum-racialist (roughly the same) element indeed, not in the beliefs themselves as much as in how they are presented: first of all in the claim that you guys have "the truth", when most of the time your argumentation is in the lines of "surrender, all resistance is futile", to put it mildly, and never acknowledging the facts and arguments the other side presents: modern Y-DNA's phylogeny on the map, ancient mtDNA, huge spatio-temporal gaps in the data, even every day stronger indications on the side of ancient DNA, which I deem pretty much conclusive against your simplistic pseudo-reasonings, as we have discussed before. To all that you react with dismissive and authoritarian demeanor, not even paying attention: just denying that it even matters at all, just like a flat-earther would do with the curvature of the horizon, which they either do not understand or they pretend is not even there with great hypocrisy.

      I was arguing in favor of the Kurgan model when the Anatolian model was still fashionable in way too many circles. Thus I'm perfectly fine with the Kurgan model being vindicated by archaeogenetics but what I can't accept is that it is twisted and expanded beyond reason: pretending to see in it stuff that is definitely not there like the Y-DNA haplogroups of the only pòpulation that has, almost miraculously, surely thanks to repeated resistance and rebellion, withstood the Indoeuropean invasion (other than Uralics in the Far North). You guys claim that Basque patrilineal ancestry is 90% Indoeuropean, more than any actually existing Indoeuropean people. That makes no sense whatsoever! And so many other things neither do.

      But you don't have the decendy to step back and consider the arguments of the opposite camp, you just prefer to hammer it in trollish authoritarian ways. And that is what I tried to reflect in this satire.

  6. @André
    That's a bit surprising to me, do you know if David Reich has additional samples from the Transcaucasus-Iran area? Rumors are the Harvard lab has thousands of unpublished ancient samples, so I wonder if those are taken into account in this.

    1. I don't know. He cannot discuss unpublished samples, but then again he can use their information when making his models - why would he have more information than anyone else and discard such information when theorising?

      Then again he frased it in a very conservative and careful way "(although the evidence here is circumstantial as no ancient DNA from the Hittites themselves has yet been published)". Notice he used the word *published*, so maybe he's seen something we haven't?
      It does seem suspicious to me that instead of backing the more consensual (in my opinion) EHG-origin in Russia for PIE he decides to write on his book that "to me that the most likely location of the population that first spoke an Indo-European language was south of the Caucasus Mountains, perhaps in present-day Iran or Armenia" if he had no more info.

      It definitely caught me off guard as I was not expecting it, so I guess we'll be seeing some interesting things in the future?

    2. Interesting. I think the consensus existed mostly among amateurs on the internet, and you know there's an undeniable political or perhaps ethnocentric slant. Hopefully we'll soon have more samples from the Near East.

      If Maju is right and the R1b-Z2103 on the steppe is rather terminal maybe that could be indiciative of the trail of PIE, with Anatolian branching off before reaching the northern Caucasus. I've looked it up on Yfull and at a cursory glance the epicentre of basal diversity under Z2103 appears to be Armenia. The basal branches that exist in Russia seem to be exclusively from the North Caucasus replubics, especially Daghestan. It will definitely be interesting to see what comes of it, thanks for the response!

    3. Andre. So kudos to me, that have been horning the Shulaveri Shomu as the homeland of PIE for 3 years.

  7. Dealing with the ethnofanatics is an eternal struggle. I wish they'd find self esteem elsewhere.

    A latest example. While it's still on the table just how "dark" these WHGs might have been, it's very telling that I never saw similar apologetics for the hundreds of other fact-lite conclusions in western popsci articles. I wonder why?

  8. ...and what a curiosity it will be if, after sampling and publishing everything before and after them, east west north and south of them.... Now i am right and Shulaveri are "it".
    First Krause and now Reich are saying something akin of....

  9. Just to post an update on this, the new Central Asian paper found 8,000-year-old R1b-Z2103 in Western Iran. Maju was completely right about everything, including the 'clockology' :-)

    I think some people owe him an apology.

  10. Basques came from France so R1b evolved there. Some Italians claim R1b evolved there. I've chatted with a Turk who claims R1b and R1a are Turkic (along with Yamna, Andronovo, etc in spite of all evidence they're not) So the pictures of the Megalomaniacal master race guy really seems to fit in with some of you.

    MZ carbon date Haji Faruzz then talk.

  11. Writes: Please, be reasonably respectful when making comments. I do not tolerate in particular sexism, racism nor homophobia. Personal attacks, manipulation and trolling are also very much unwelcome here.The author reserves the right to delete any abusive comment.

    Then makes a post Implying people with a mainstream view are the same as Hitler

    1. That way I can ban anyone on a whim, mwahahaha! ;-)

      No, I did not mean to imply that "people with mainstream views are Hitler", I just meant to make a Hitler-meme type of satire not so much of some views (which I do not consider "mainstream" at all, but ideological, unfounded and terribly biased) but of certain attitudes. I probably offended someone but it was my intention only to put them before a slightly distorted mirror so they could learn something about themselves and their aggressiveness, authoritarianism and dogmatism. You can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs...

      Of course there was a time when Hitler and others like him were pretty much mainstream, and of course Hitler arose from mainstream ideas of his time, some of which were precisely abandoned because of the outrage he and his followers caused. And some of the debates that existed then and that have been sidelined because of Hitler and his massacres are to some extent coming back. Even Reich admitted that one of his collaborators dropped out because of concerns of resurrecting the ideas behind Nazism with the kind of findings they had and that we now take for granted:

      But in any case I did not mean to offend anyone anymore than the strictly necessary so they realized the ugliness of their manners and the limitations (to put it mildly) of their arguments. It could be expressed in other terms I guess: the Inquisition vs. Galileo or whatever, but I do feel that they err on the side of the dogmatic wolf pack and you can maybe recognize their words, their manners and their weak argumentation in the "Hitler" part. But I don't think they are Hitler, even if some of them might wish so.

  12. Lazaridis et al. (2016) proposes a different people, likely from Iran, as the source for the Middle Eastern ancestry of the Yamna people, finding that "a population related to the people of the Iran Chalcolithic contributed ~43% of the ancestry of early Bronze Age populations of the steppe."[5] That study asserts that these Iranian Chalcolithic people were a mixture of "the Neolithic people of western Iran, the Levant, and Caucasus Hunter Gatherers."[5][note 1] However, a different analysis, carried out by Gallego-Llorente et al. (2016), concludes that Iranian populations are not a likelier source of the 'southern' component in the Yamnaya than Caucasus hunter-gatherers.[21]

    1. That's a slightly interesting bit, thank you. In any case, the "Caucasus" element is what most clearly differentiate Indoeuropeans from Vasconics in Europe. Some confusion may happen because of the Vinca-Pelasgian-Tyrrhenian waves in SE Europe if we only use that component but in any case it appears as clearly the signature of post-Vasconic waves.


Please, be reasonably respectful when making comments. I do not tolerate in particular sexism, racism nor homophobia. Personal attacks, manipulation and trolling are also very much unwelcome here.The author reserves the right to delete any abusive comment.

Preliminary comment moderation is... ON (your comment may take some time, maybe days or weeks to appear).