Swiss institute IGENEA : "Macedonians, NOT slav Macedonians - the "Black Athenians" "frustrated". He, he, he...
Krater Makedonski
The research findings of the Swiss institute IGENEA has FRUSTRATED the
"Black Athenians". The institute which deals with genetic research of the
European peoples and one of the leading institutions in the area of DNA
analysis, has confirmed that the contemporary Macedonians are direct
descendants of the ancient Macedonians.
To a question": "What are the roots of the Slavomacedonians", by a female
from "Black Athena", its official forum answers: "Before else, they are
Macedonians and NOT Slavomacedonians, as you call them for political
reasons. The largest portion of the Macedonians are direct descendants of
the ancient Macedonians and much smaller part have slav origins. The
institute backs up its answers with its research evidence.
For the "Black Athenian" frustration to be even greater (if that is possible
:-)), IGENEA "uncovers" that only 32% of them have "hellenic", macedonian
and arabic origins. 31% have celtic origins, 12% germanic and slavic roots
and 11% illyrian roots.
In respect of the "Albanians", double the percentage (40%) of "Bosnians"
have illyrian origins, according to the DNA research by IGENEA.
The forum of this institute has been flooded with questions by "Black
Athenians", who, "interestingly" are mostly interested in the origins of the
Macedonians, not their own. He, he, he....
IGENEA, besides its DNA studies uses anthropological, archaeological and
historical evidence, as well, for its findings.
Well, after all this is NOT SURPRISING ...unless you are from "Black Athena,
or "Bulgaromania" :-)
Panayiotis
"And Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece."
(Strabo VII, Frg. 9 [Loeb, H.L. Jones])
======================================
"Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ddfc0a$0$18426$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
[Snipped]
> In respect of the "Albanians", double the percentage (40%) of "Bosnians"
> have illyrian origins, according to the DNA research by IGENEA.
>
Krater,
You are very cautious, generous and diplomatic concerning the figures for
the Albanians. Let me provide the exact paragraph from MINA as reproduced
from VECER:
http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/3717/46/
"iGENEA also negated the Illyrians roots of the Albanians. In stark contrast
to Albanian beliefs, IGENEA says the Albanians have the least Illyrian
roots. Only 20 percent of the Albanians have Illyrian roots, while 40
percent of today’s Bosnians have Illyrian roots".
Sounds as if you are trying to prove that every one in the Balkans is
"unpure", except you and your compatriots (minus the official 25% Albanian
population of FYROM).
> The forum of this institute has been flooded with questions by "Black
> Athenians", who, "interestingly" are mostly interested in the origins of
> the Macedonians, not their own. He, he, he....
>
Doesn't this remind you of your own tactics. You are mainly concerned in
proving that we are not what we are, but you avoid to provide any
information about yourselves.
Panayiotis
Istor the Macedonian
> The "Black Athenians" "disappointed" :-)
>
> The research findings of the Swiss institute IGENEA has FRUSTRATED the
> "Black Athenians". The institute which deals with genetic research of the
> European peoples and one of the leading institutions in the area of DNA
> analysis, has confirmed that the contemporary Macedonians are direct
> descendants of the ancient Macedonians.
Then ancient Macedonians are ashamed of you, Zhivko.
Anyway, blood and dna are not related to ethnicity, at leasti within a
race. If you allow us controlling SlavoSkopian education system as
Tito did we will call you Macedonians and prove to you that
irrelevancy. Alexander had no DNA test to recognize Macedonian
soldiers.
How about that?
Remember, as long as you deny this offer you confess our truth: blood
is not ethnicity.
akritas
The genetics, with its appearance of scientific objectivity, holds
obvious--albeit illusory--appeal. As Appelbaums remarked for nations
with strong claims to territorial sovereignty, genetic data will be
irrelevant; for nations with weak claims, such data will always be
inadequate. Advocates who look to genetics for a decisive victory are
certain to be disappointed.
Nationality is a matter of culture and education and not genetic
(mixtures) issue.
Who is the person that put blood standards as about the nationality
(race)?
The racist and the "white arryan"supremacist that think the colour of
the skin and eye or the blood markers are the definition of the race.
gogu
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure
in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi
puttane! F.d.A
Coins, travels and more:
http://s208.photobucket.com/albums/bb120/golanule/
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html
? "Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> ?????? ??? ??????
news:48ddfc0a$0$18426$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Krater Makedonski
"Panayiotis" <panayi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gbl30v$it5$1...@volcano1.grnet.gr...
> ======================================
> "And Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece."
> (Strabo VII, Frg. 9 [Loeb, H.L. Jones])
> ======================================
> "Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:48ddfc0a$0$18426$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>
> [Snipped]
>
>> In respect of the "Albanians", double the percentage (40%) of "Bosnians"
>> have illyrian origins, according to the DNA research by IGENEA.
>>
> Krater,
> You are very cautious, generous and diplomatic concerning the figures for
> the Albanians. Let me provide the exact paragraph from MINA as reproduced
I only tried to shorten the report, otherwise the figures are as per your
sample (half of 40% for the Bosnians is 20% for the Albanians). My report,
btw, was nos sourced from "Vecer", but from "Sitel".
> from VECER:
> http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/3717/46/
> "iGENEA also negated the Illyrians roots of the Albanians. In stark
> contrast to Albanian beliefs, IGENEA says the Albanians have the least
> Illyrian roots. Only 20 percent of the Albanians have Illyrian roots,
> while 40 percent of today's Bosnia the figuresns have Illyrian roots".
>
> Sounds as if you are trying to prove that every one in the Balkans is
> "unpure", except you and your compatriots (minus the official 25% Albanian
> population of FYROM).
You are attempting to "shoot the messenger" here. :-( It is the Swiss
institute who are doing the "proving". I only reported. Take the report as
you please. :-)
>
>> The forum of this institute has been flooded with questions by "Black
>> Athenians", who, "interestingly" are mostly interested in the origins of
>> the Macedonians, not their own. He, he, he....
>>
>
> Doesn't this remind you of your own tactics. You are mainly concerned in
> proving that we are not what we are, but you avoid to provide any
> information about yourselves.
Not at all. I, for instance point out the obvious in respect of the
"sub-Saharans" from "Black Athena" :-) because it is they, in the first
instance, who deny the NATIVE Macedonians connection to their ancient
Macedonian ancestors and ABSURDLY claim that right for themselves.
I actually refrained from commenting on the DNA results, although the ones
from "Black Athena" seem quite "interesting" :-). The racial
demographics/demarcations in "Black Athena" are much starker than in its
neighbours. So it would be "interesting" if more can be discovered about the
geograpical origins of the "Black Athena" samples.
>
> Panayiotis
Spirit of Truth
"Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ddfc0a$0$18426$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> The research findings of the Swiss institute IGENEA has FRUSTRATED the
> "Black Athenians". The institute which deals with genetic research of the
> European peoples and one of the leading institutions in the area of DNA
> analysis, has confirmed that the contemporary Macedonians are direct
> descendants of the ancient Macedonians.
> To a question": "What are the roots of the Slavomacedonians", by a female
> from "Black Athena", its official forum answers: "Before else, they are
> Macedonians and NOT Slavomacedonians, as you call them for political
> reasons. The largest portion of the Macedonians are direct descendants of
> the ancient Macedonians and much smaller part have slav origins. The
> institute backs up its answers with its research evidence.
THOSE are your stupidest statements yet!
Fyrom IS NOT the land of the ancient Macedonian Greeks.
The real Macedonia:
http://www.macedonia.com/english/history/regions1.html
http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/Maps/mapSeq_Map01.html
http://crystalinks.com/mapgreeceancient.gif
Spirit of Truth
Spirit of Truth
> You are attempting to "shoot the messenger" here. :-( It is the Swiss
> institute who are doing the "proving". I only reported. Take the report as
> you please. :-)
If they really stated anything you posted then they the least educated
people in Europe after the Fyromian propagandists.
Spirit of Truth
> Athenians" "disappointed" :-)
Greeks are always disappointed in stupidity, Bulgar.
For instance one of the stupid things in the link you posted says
"that 31 percent of Greek citizens have Celtic roots".
I guess whoever is responsiblbrle for the silly statements in the text
you linked has no earthly idea of the history of the Celts or Greece.
The Greeks defeated and evicted the Celts.
Spirit of Truth
Panayiotis
"And Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece."
(Strabo VII, Frg. 9 [Loeb, H.L. Jones])
======================================
"Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
You amuse me. First time I read that a Peloponnesian claims that he is
"connected" to the ancient Macedonians!!!
Keep up the good work!
As far as I am concerned, keep talking about "Black Athena" and "Black
Athenians". I don't give a hoot. It only proves that you are a racist.
Next time write something about your Skopian brothers. You should be proud
of your Slav origin.
Panayiotis
stephan.nikolov
"turko-tatar" character of FYRoM is greater than that of Bulgaria proper;
Greece and Albania show more Slavic
blood than Bulgaria
Bulgaria:
49%Thraker
11%macedonian
15%slavs
15%hellenen
5% pheonician
Macedonia:
30%macedonian
10% illyrian
15% hellenen
5%phoenician
20% germanic
5% hunnen
15% slavs
Greece:
10% Germanic
10%illyrians
20% slavs
20% phoenician
5% macedonian (in north more than 18%)
35% Hellenen
--
SN
_______________________________________
Nec vitia nostra nec remedia pati possumus ......
_______________________________________
"Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ddfc0a$0$18426$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Krater Makedonski
In that case, welcome to to Milky Way and planet Earth. :-)
>
> Keep up the good work!
>
> As far as I am concerned, keep talking about "Black Athena" and "Black
> Athenians". I don't give a hoot. It only proves that you are a racist.
Sticks and stones.... :-)
> Next time write something about your Skopian brothers. You should be proud
> of your Slav origin.
Whatever makes you happy. Again I welcome you to planet Earth. :-)
Krater Makedonski
artificial (in name only) turko-Tatars. :-) Nevertheless, Bulgaromania's
:-) results are "interesting", to say the least ("49% Thraker").
"stephan.nikolov" <baba_...@pri.abv.bg> wrote in message
news:gbpr4s$f4s$1...@aioe.org...
Nashton
> The "Black Athenians" "disappointed" :-)
Poor Krater. So tangled up in your bigotry and racism.
Could you post a link to the article, so that we can review its
methodology and conclusions?
You are obviously not the sharpest knife in the shed and it's pretty
obvious that you believe anything you read about the origins of Skopjans
that suits your political agenda. For many others, far more intelligent
than you, we would rather rely on proof.
>
Nashton
More dipwadery from Kraterofski, the self-professed Macedonin.
I researched this article everywhere I could on known medical research
databases. Do you happen to know where it was published and
peer-reviewed? Was it ever published and peer-reviewed?
And Krater, did you read about the genetic differences between Serbs and
FYROMians from the same source you cited?
Macedonia
I2A – 39%, E1B1B – 26%, RIA - 20%, J2 – 15%, RIB – 10%
Serbia
I2A – 28%, E1B1B – 20%,, RIA – 19%, J2 – 9%, RIB – 14%
Almost identical, poor dipwad.
Poor Krater, it seems that every time you attempt to post anything
related to the veracity of the claim that you're Macedonian anything,
you fall flat on your Slav face and the evidence ends up proving the
exact opposite of your claims.
My condolences.
N Kostoff
--
Н К
Всичко е лъжа, дори и истината.....
stephan.nikolov
Но пък тоя отговор сега ще позадръсти техните )))
--
SN
_______________________________________
Nec vitia nostra nec remedia pati possumus ......
_______________________________________
"N Kostoff" <no...@nowhere.bg> wrote in message
news:gbqfkj$7v8$1...@aioe.org...
Krater Makedonski
> ======================================
> "And Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece."
> (Strabo VII, Frg. 9 [Loeb, H.L. Jones])
> ======================================
>>> ======================================
>>> "And Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece."
>>> (Strabo VII, Frg. 9 [Loeb, H.L. Jones])
>>> ======================================
>>>>> And you wouldn't believe me when I was telling you that you
>>>>> (bugaromani) are artificial (in name only) turko-Tatars. :-)
>>>>
>>>> turko-tatars than us :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Nevertheless, Bulgaromania's :-) results are "interesting", to say the
>>>>> least ("49% Thraker").
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure how representative and valid is such a study, moreover, I
>>>> got these results from the forum.
>>>> Yet, there has been extensive research on the issue as regards
>>>> Bulgaria and the artivle on the Bulgarians
>>>> in the wikipedia has been written by someone relying heavily on this
>>>> research.
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarians
>>>>
>>>> The ethnic contribution of the indigenous Thracian and Daco-Getic
>>>> population, who had lived on the territory of modern Bulgaria and
>>>> established here the Odrysian kingdom has been long debated among the
>>>> scientists during the 20th century. Some recent genetic studies reveal
>>>> that these peoples have indeed made a significant contribution to the
>>>> genes of the modern Bulgarian population, which is however comparable,
>>>> or even less than, to the contribution to other Balkan (Albanians,
>>>> Greeks, Romanians) and Italian groups.[49]
>>>>
>>>> For what is worth, there is also a reference to the mixed character of
>>>> the Bulgars when they moved to the Balkans (something I have been
>>>> referring to in an earlier discussion):
>>>>
>>>> "The Bulgars were a seminomadic people, probably of Turkic descent
>>>> originally from Central Asia, who during the 2nd century migrated from
>>>> the Northern portions of Central Asia into the North Caucasian
>>>> steppe.[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68]
>>>> It has to be mentioned that some Bulgarian scientists allow Iranian
>>>> descent from the Bulgars.[69][70] Between 377 and 453 they took part in
>>>> the Hunnic raids on Central and Western Europe. Anthropological data
>>>> collected from early Bulgar necropolises from Dobrudja, Crimea and the
>>>> Ukrainian steppe shows that Bulgars were a high-statured Caucasoid
>>>> people with a small Mongoloid admixture, and practiced artificial
>>>> cranial deformation of the round type.[71][72][73][74][75][76] "
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some years ago there was a thread in soc.culture bulgaria on the issue.
>>>> I need to say that I have also participated in such a project.
>>>>
>>>> While the genetic side of the "Thracian" impact on modern Bulgarian
>>>> ethnogenesis has been studied only for the last twenty years its
>>>> histotical and cultural aspects have been
>>>> one of the major subects of historical investigation. In fact this was
>>>> something I was specializing within my undergraduate study when I
>>>> started dealing with history.
>>>> There is clear evidence of surviving Romanized and Hellenized
>>>> "Thrachian" population in the Balkans.
>>>> Still, the 0% of Turkic, Turkic-Iranian and especially Iranian
>>>> population is puzzling since we have clear evidence for a
>>>> over-millenium interaction between the eastern Balkans and
>>>> the Iranian population of Eurasian steppes.
>>>>
>>>> Another puzzling find of IGENEA is the "Albanian section":
>>>>
>>>> Albania:
>>>> 30% Illyrians
>>>> 15% Phoenician
>>>> 14% Hellenen
>>>> 18%Thraker
>>>> 2% Vikings
>>>> 20% slavs
>>>>
>>>> Out of a sudden we have 18% "Thracian" element crossing over the
>>>> "Macedonian" and not a single % of "Macedonian". One might wonder is
>>>> the "Thracians" in question had been using aircrafts in order to
>>>> preserve "Macedonian" gene pole clean of thier influence......
>>>>
>>>>
>>> stephan.nikolov,
>>> This is a good point! A good question!
>>> Don't expect a clear reply from Krater/Zhivko!
>>
>> When you two can provide a "clear" answer, let me know. :-)
>>
>> What is also "interesting", though, according to the IGENEA DNA results
>> both "Black Athena" and Albania are more "slavic" (20%) than Macedonia
>> (15%), and "Bulgaromania" :-) has no turkish in its DNA makeup despite
>> the fact that there is a turkish minority numbering over a million.
>>
> Krater,
> So, you admit that the IGENEA study is unreliable.
Is this a statement, or are you asking me? If you are asking me, as I
suspect you do, then where did you get that idea from? I am not as (b)rash
as you are, thus would not call it unreliable, since I don't have the
evidence to back up that kind of qualification/conclusion. Any study that is
based on a "sample" from a collective body depends on the
accuracy-of-representation of that sample. And, as I said in my previous
posts, the (not so) "iteresting" (for us, the Macedonians)/"frustrating"
(for you, the "sub-Saharans":-)) result from this study, is, that "Black
Athena" :-) is more "slavic" than those countries which you FALSELY accuse
of being "slavic".
PS Hopefully my answer is "clear" enough for you? :-)
>
> Panayiotis
>
>
stephan.nikolov
> Is this a statement, or are you asking me? If you are asking me, as I
> suspect you do, then where did you get that idea from? I am not as (b)rash
> as you are, thus would not call it unreliable, since I don't have the
> evidence to back up that kind of qualification/conclusion. Any study that
> is based on a "sample" from a collective body depends on the
> accuracy-of-representation of that sample. And, as I said in my previous
> posts, the (not so) "iteresting" (for us, the Macedonians)/"frustrating"
> (for you, the "sub-Saharans":-)) result from this study, is, that "Black
> Athena" :-) is more "slavic" than those countries which you FALSELY accuse
> of being "slavic".
>
> PS Hopefully my answer is "clear" enough for you? :-)
Do you have any idea how many people constitute that "sample"?
For as you can read , the results mention not Zhivko, Anastassios, Stephan
and Mother Theresa but rather speak of _countries_.
So, the institution in question should have a fair amount of both ancient
and modern samples in order to claim some validity of its research and the
results published
Nashton
Remember, this is not published, peer-reviewed material. It's Krater and
his strawmen all lined up like ducks in a row, ready to be toppled.
Nothing Krater says or has ever said has even a shred of credibility.
Krater Makedonski
> "Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:48e32e2b$0$4451$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>> Is this a statement, or are you asking me? If you are asking me, as I
>> suspect you do, then where did you get that idea from? I am not as
>> (b)rash as you are, thus would not call it unreliable, since I don't have
>> the evidence to back up that kind of qualification/conclusion. Any study
>> that is based on a "sample" from a collective body depends on the
>> accuracy-of-representation of that sample. And, as I said in my previous
>> posts, the (not so) "iteresting" (for us, the Macedonians)/"frustrating"
>> (for you, the "sub-Saharans":-)) result from this study, is, that "Black
>> Athena" :-) is more "slavic" than those countries which you FALSELY
>> accuse of being "slavic".
>>
>> PS Hopefully my answer is "clear" enough for you? :-)
>
> Do you have any idea how many people constitute that "sample"?
Do you? :-)
> For as you can read , the results mention not Zhivko, Anastassios, Stephan
> and Mother Theresa but rather speak of _countries_.
So what?
> So, the institution in question should have a fair amount of both ancient
> and modern samples in order to claim some validity of its research and the
> results published
It may very well do so. :-) Neither I nor anyone else is in a position to
prejudge without knowing more about the study. But this does in no way mean
that the study can be deemed as flawed just because the results do not
parallel someone's preconceptions (and predispositions) :-)
>
stephan.nikolov
Well, since neither the exit data nor the results suggest the application of
sufficient
material I consider this claim unsubstantiated....
Nashton
You're amusing, Krater. Science does not work by presuming that a
hypothesis is true or false. Science functions by proof and the research
is then submitted to peer review and then is published in a relevant
journal.
This particular study that you mentioned is not published, hasn't been
peer-reviewed and its methodology is unknown, hence Stephane post.
Therefore it's worthless. Not surprising, given the strawmen that you
continually construct and we continually destroy. Aren't you getting
tired of this?
Panayiotis
"And Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece."
(Strabo VII, Frg. 9 [Loeb, H.L. Jones])
======================================
"Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
Krater,
My statement reads as follows: "So, you admit that the IGENEA study is
unreliable".
Do you see any question mark? So, you are wrong. It is not a question, I am
not asking you.
If a scientist, or a group of scientists, discover or work on a project and
come to a conclusion, they are obliged to publish their findings in the
pertinent periodical of their union.
Statements of the type "It is clear from the extant Alexander historians
that the lost sources. . .", are unacceptable. How can one judge the
validity of these statements.
So, please, in the future do cite your sources, and if possible the web page
where you found it. Maybe you are wrong in your assessment.
Panayiotis
Krater Makedonski
the on study/results on your own (political) predispositions. Neither you or
I, or anyone else have any basis to make a concrete denouncement on the
study, unless... :-)
Spirit of Truth
Stop being silly:
Although most of the societies were for cultural and propaganda purposes
and did not participate in outrages, some did. The best known of the
extremist organizations were **both Bulgarian**. The Internal Macedonian
Revolutionary Organization, or IMRO, appeared in 1893. Its purpose was to
overthrow Ottoman rule and establish an autonomous Macedonian state; hence
its motto was Macedonia for the Macedonians. Its sympathies were
**nevertheless Bulgarian**. Its rival was the Macedonian Supreme Committee,
known both as the Supremists and the External Organization. It was located
in Sofia and its membership came chiefly from refugees from Macedonia. It
enjoyed the support, although not openly, of the Bulgarian government.
Itsgoal was the annexation of the area to Bulgaria." pp.211
Barbara Jelavich, "The Establishment of the Balkan National States,
1804-1920", Seattle, 1977
Spirit of Truth
(using June's e-mail to communicate to you)!
Spirit of Truth
Quit calling Fyrom, "Macedonia"
Spirit of Truth
Spirit of Truth
Which OF COURSE they do not have.
Don't even bother with such foolishness.
Spirit of Truth
Krater Makedonski
on the study/results is founded on your own (political) predispositions.
Neither you nor
I, nor anyone else has any basis to make a concrete denouncement on the
study, unless... :-)
Spirit of Truth
Didn't I tell you to stop posting stupidities?
Here, folks:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/search/label/Greeks
Spirit of Truth