Відео

31:38 Genetic contributions into UK from Europe

At, look how you ignored south east Wales!!! The most important part of all Britain.

Now test the Britons with this win the Middle East!!! Go on, I dare you.

YES. OFF COURSE. TYPICAL AMERICAN. YOU JUST WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE, THE BRITISH PEOPLE ARE MAINLY, GERMANIC SAXONS AND VIKINGS AND NOT OTHER. WELL THAT'S NOT TRUE. THEY'RE ARE GENETICALLY, MIXED WITH CELTS AND ROMANS AS, WELL.

May the ghost of Mendel show some silence and humility to all these clueless talking people in the background...

Thank you

Excellent presentation! Thank you!

My ancestors had been long gone from Ireland But base on my research it said that my Surname McGilboy was anglicized from McGiollaBhuidhe is this right? and it is a Gaelic Scottish and Irish from Aodh bhuid Clan if I am not wrong . Please anyone 🥺

I wish I could find out

I was born in Liverpool, and I am 35% Welsh 33% Irish 26% English and 6 % Swedish??? I am more Celtic than English

I'm english from england and my grandad is native Scottish from the macdonald clan and I have roots with somerled and from my mum's side have a Irish family name weird

After 400 years of coexistence do you really think that romans and britons did not become a single ethnic group? Probably a part of britons/romans left the island and a part remained there.

I'm 85% Welsh I have Jones, Richards, Collins, Lloyd, Llewellyn and many more. I have learned that I'm from the famous Lloyds of Dolobran.

I'm a Kavanagh, and I'm going to have to pull you up on the subject of my family name. you seem to be unaware that the surname Kavanagh, is an anglicised form of the Gaelic name O'Caomhanach. When it was anglicised, the O was dropped, but both O'Kavanagh and McKavanagh are still being used today. Hope that clears up any confusion as to the origins of the Kavanagh, Cavanagh, Kavanaugh, Cavanaugh, O' Caomhanach and other variations of my surnames. Diurmud McMurrough Kavanagh was King of Leinster in the 12th century and a prominent Gael.

Both my parents are Jones from North-east Wales, so having some difficulties in tracing FH. Other family surnames are typically Welsh (Evans, Edwards, Parry, Hughes, Phillips, Bellis).

I’m sorry, but, although I’m educated to degree level, the first 25 minutes was all DNA gobbledegook and went over my head. It needed to be a more basic explanation.

I think of all the Americans in the comments I win with over 60% Welsh , my family is culturally English though from Shropshire with English surnames on both sides I'm first generation American.

Great presentation. Made things clearer. Thank you.

This shows close to 40% pre-Roman Briton ancestry from Doggerland, Atlantic Megolithic sources for the English and about 80% for the Welsh. The Cornish, Scottish and Northern Irish are in between the two. If we add Danubian related Neolithic pre-Roman ancestry, the English are at about 70% pre-Roman Briton ancestry and the Welsh about 85% and the Cornish, Scots and Northern Irish in between. The English being Anglo-Saxons that replaced the native Brits is a lie, according to this.

You’d need to make some adjustments to this study to be much more accurate. First one is, you’d need to throw out all the modern samples as people’s genetics change over time and this could skew the results. Second would to be to add ancient Frisians to the list among the ancient Anglo-Saxons. Third would be to get samples of ancient Britons from before the arrival of Ancient Rome and then samples after Ancient Rome but before the ancient Anglo-Saxons arrived. You do that and you’ll have a more true picture of British DNA and will be able to pick out how much DNA is pre-Roman Briton, post-Roman British migration and Anglo-Saxon migration (which also includes Frisian and Jute DNA). This study while very revealing is nowhere near as accurate as the hypothetical one I’ve suggested.

Alasdair Ruadh, the Old Fox, 12th of Glencoe, MacDonald 1630-1691 8th great-grandfather Bryan The Immigrant McDonnell Captain 1645-1707 Son of Alasdair Ruadh, the Old Fox, 12th of Glencoe, MacDonald John McDonald 1679-1762 Son of Bryan The Immigrant McDonnell Captain Isacc David Alexander McDaniel 1742-1797 Son of John McDonald Aaron S. McDaniel Capt Sr 1770-1833 Son of Isacc David Alexander McDaniel Samuel S. McDaniel 1807-1880 Son of Aaron S. McDaniel Capt Sr Thornton Paul MCDANIEL 1862-1949 Son of Samuel S. McDaniel ROY LEE MCDANIEL 1885-1962 Son of Thornton Paul MCDANIEL EARL (NO MIDDLE NAME) "MAC" MCDANIEL 1917-1977 Son of ROY LEE MCDANIEL Charles WAYNE MCDANIEL 1943-2019 Son of EARL (NO MIDDLE NAME) "MAC" MCDANIEL Cindy Rae McDaniel

The slides are unreadable

No Ireland? Irish Gaels had Kingdoms in Britain, and left their DNA all over the British Isles, from Scotland to Wales, to England. Liverpool and Manchester, in the 19th Century, were practically Irish cities, thanks to the Famine. Engels, who lived in Manchester, and had an Irish girlfriend, wrote about it. Much of Yorkshire was conquered by Dublin Vikings, with mixed heritage, and London's Irish population is even in Oliver Twist, which is really set in an Irish slum in Farringdon, Islignton. North East England, on the last DNA survey, was reporting 27 % to 30 % Irish DNA. Odd, to say the least, to leave Irish DNA out of the study.

We don't even need Y DNA, this video takes me back to the 14th century.

The many slides are helpful. Pause and read or snapshot and save to pictures. I do both.

Sorry, Icannadooet! Sound quality dreadful, would so love to have heard it...

It appears since this, the DNA was better specified, so for English DNA it's average 37% Anglo-Saxon, 20% West Germanic, 11% Dane, small % other Scandinavian DNA and 20 "Celtic". It matches my own DNA analysis, which was about 70% Germanic and 30% "Celtic", as almost all my ancestors came from Northern England, and a few from Lowland Scotland.

When we see common genetics between British people and those in Europe we assume that there has been a migration from Europe to Britain. But how much of this could also be due to the reverse. For example, maybe the Danes took British captives to Denmark who contributed to the gene pool there. When one group conquers another there is often a reverse flow. Look at all the Indians, Irish and Africans in Britain today. They never conquered Britain rather the opposite. I wonder how many Britons were taken by the Romans, Anglo Saxons, Danes and Normans to continental Europe to contribute to the gene pool there?

My roots are from Wales my grandma always used to tell me, didn't mean much when she was alive but now that she has passed I'm interested in my surname

The genetic science i fairly complicated. My understanding is that there are similar genetic markers among different Europeans, even territorially fairly distant. Some differences may point to either a bit more German or Slavic heritage, for example. The current commercials, inviting you to determine your ancestry suggest that they can for example tell you that you are 40% German, 40% Italian and 20% something else. I was told that this is impossible to so precisely determine.

“There is no such thing as Welsh DNA” - advising looking at Welsh family names ... okay explains why ‘23nMe’ only identifies English & Irish when my quite detailed Family-Tree going back mid-1600s very clearly in addition to these, has a number of ✅Welsh & ✅Scottish Family Names

Astonishing genetic discovery, I submit to you that every ancient civilization can be identified by their paternal Y chromosome. These sixteen ancient civilizations are as follows: Greek: Thracians L, Greek sea people T, Europeans R, Italy K, Medes Q, Siberia N, China O, Aramean F, Lydian F2, Assyrian G, Elamite H, Hebrew/Arab I & J, North African E3 M81, Egyptian E3 V12, Canaanite E3 M123, Ethiopian E3 V32. These sixteen ancient civilizations correspond to the sixteen grandsons of Noah. Neanderthals are Japhethite descendants and Denisovans are a mix of Japhethites and Cushites. (Not Semitic).

Fantastic! They should do these DNA studies for all countries in Europe, AND, they should also test for traces of African, Jewish, Middle Eastern, Melanesian, and Australian Aborigine DNA that is found in European people.

O'Breasail from Breas the Beautiful whose mother was Eiru and who Ireland was named after.

Skull crushing boring presentation made worse by you trying to cram too much information into this presentation.

Christian people who worshipped YAHUAH, natives of the land, peaceful people, kind, compassionate, full of good ways..Brittan is not lost and not wanted, it has been found. All GLORY TO YAHUAH OUR FATHER who art in Heaven Freedom indeed.

unenthusiastic audience - shame - how rude people are - even if you don't want to listen - others might :)

The brown in the bar chart is a mystery. Whatever is brown is ignored in European history. No surprise there.

But in old times there were celts there

So they are vikings

In norway the vikings went

The frisians were celts

Very interesting but, I'm very surprised that you haven't included Ireland in the British Isles and then totally ignored Ireland's effect on the UK's gene pool!!! Also, some of your historic inferences are very suspect. Other than that, good work.

person, people

Any Gunns here?

good video but terrible sound, as if they are at a railway station.

One of the tribes of Israel.

So it seems if there's a genetic component that prevents or makes less likely for someone to get MS, there would be no representation for that group?

Yeah, but................all of this data was based on people with four grandparents from the same location. And, eh.......what percentage of people is that?? 10%? The rest have grand parents from all over. In other words, if I look at the genome of an average UK person I probably can say no more that "UK origin", or indeed "British Isles origin". Having said, that, this is fascinating.

The speaker gets so bogged down in all sorts of technical details that his conclusions about the percentage of “Anglo-Saxon” DNA in the genes of modern Englishmen is unclear. He rarely discusses his conclusions about this question, and even then only briefly and in passing. This is basically a lecture about the techniques used for the study, not a discussion of its conclusions. Very dull and frustrating for the layman