Ashkenazi Jews from 350 people, maybe Khazars?

Genetic studies disprove a Khazar connection, so your psuedo theories are rubbish.

 

the only study that they cite which claims to show a Khazar genetic connection, compares the DNA of Ashkenazi Jews to the DNA of Jews from the Caucasus region,

such idiocy.

 

The Khazars are one of the most mysterious populations of the Old World whose abrupt disappearance from the history pages has tantalized scientists for years. Who were these Eurasian warriors? Were they Giants, Amazons, Turks, or Mongols? Were they all Jews or just their rulers? What happened to them and where are they now? Were they enslaved by their conquerors or were they absorbed into a different population?

To answer these questions we launched the Khazar DNA Project.

continued

https://khazardnaproject.wordpress.com/

 

its absurd and idiotic to suggest that because Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews share genetic markers with Caucasus Jews, that means that Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews are descended from the Khazars!!!

the fact is, pretty much ALL Jews, share genetic markers. Jews in France, Germany, Russia, India, Morocco, Spain, Algeria, Holland, Italy, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, etc etc.

 

Right.

Here's what you won't quote from the above:

"Because the Khazars were Jews, WE SPECULATE that Jewish populations, mostly around ancient Khazaria, WILL exhibit large fraction of this signature, compared to other populations, but we will search non-Jewish populations as well. The POSSIBILITY to reveal the genetic background of these mysterious people through genetic data is one of the most exciting ventures now available with Next Generation Sequencing data."


Go on please read they words WE SPECULATE, WILL, POSSIBILITY.

Yep that sure establishes scientific fact and date to contradict the genetic studies to date that have already shown the above thesis is a crock of manure.

You really want to keep flogging this pathetic attempt to discredit Jews as being Jews to prop some fantasy argument that Zionism is not valid because Jews are Khazars not Jews? Really?

At this point this is what you will flog, selectively ignoring the genetic studies that are public record and repeating this falsehood?

There was a time you tried at least to write with a semblance of reason. Now?

Its interesting after Dr. Eran Elhaik the population geneticist was directly criticized in posts I provided by mainstream scientists stating his theories were rubbish, you simply come back
pretending you didn't see the previous repudiations, and presenting his speculation as if its somehow valid?

Really, o.k. you continue and so will I.

 

As Margot continues to hype the Jews are Khazars and not Jews falsehood and try
pass off Erlan Elhairk as having scientific data to prove his claim I will continue to respond
showing why the above is nonsense:

source: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.jewish/qxTtmNfzLio

"The Khazarian Hypothesis and the Nature of Yiddish
Asya Pereltsvaig
February 25, 2013

The Khazarian hypothesis, namely that Ashkenazi Jewry derives from the
Khazars, has recently been revived by Eran Elhaik, a geneticist at
John Hopkins University. His article “The Missing Link of Jewish
European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian
Hypotheses” appeared in December 2012 in Genome Biology and Evolution
and was widely publicized before the actual publication. The two
hypotheses compared in this article depict Eastern European Jews as a
group that either “emerged from a small group of German Jews who
migrated eastward and expanded rapidly” (Rhineland hypothesis) or
“descended from the Khazars, an amalgam of Turkic clans” (Khazarian
hypothesis). According to the abstract, Elhaik “applied a wide range
of population genetic analyses” and found evidence to support the
Khazarian hypothesis.

The Khazarian hypothesis is most strongly associated with the noted
Hungarian-Jewish polymath Arthur Koestler, who advanced the hypothesis
in The Thirteenth Tribe, published in 1976. The Khazars were a nomadic
tribal confederacy that established a strong, trade-based state
centered in the lower Volga River during the early Middle Ages. Their
elite stratum definitely converted to Judaism, although it is unknown
how deeply the religion penetrated into the rest of their diverse
society. Although Koestler’s arguments were intriguing, solid evidence
in support has been lacking, and most recent genetic studies have
indicated that the Khazarian contribution to European Jewry was
minimal at best. Until the publication of Elhaik’s work, the Khazarian
thesis was all but defunct.

Razib Khan wrote an eminently sensible critique of the genetic,
historical, and geographical errors in Elhaik’s article, focusing on
his unsubstantiated use of Armenians as a genetic proxy for the
Khazars. The genetic affinity between Jews—and not only those of
Eastern European ancestry, but other Jewish groups as well—and
Armenians has been noted at least as far back as 2000, when Nebel et
al. found a connection between Jewish groups worldwide and other
peoples living in the north of the Fertile Crescent, such as Kurds,
Turks, and Armenians. Elhaik’s use of Armenians as the proxy for
Khazarian DNA which reveals a profound lack of understanding of
historical geography. Razib Khan writes:

“If you look at the modern state of Armenia this is eminently
reasonable. But for most of its history Armenia was a marginal
Caucasian nation, with its center of gravity further south, straddling
Anatolia and western Iran, and looming over the plains of Mesopotamia.
The Caucasian nature of modern Armenia is to a great extent a function
of the extermination of Armenians from much of eastern Anatolia in the
early 20th century.”


Now of course the Jews are Khazars theory is used to argue Zionism is not valid and Israel is not valid as a Jewish state, because
Jews aren't Jews.

It is without a doubt one of the most half-asped attempts at inventing an anti-Zionist argument there are but it attacks all
Jews. It insults all Jews and it depends on ignorance.

There are over 38,000 threads on the internet at any given time spewing this crap. Its like a chain letter.

Its blatantly false and yet the name of the game is to place it on political forum web sites to incite resentment at Jews
not just for creating the state of Israel, but for claiming to be Jewish.

cont. next post

 

source: Eran Elhaik Is Still Wrong

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.jewish/qxTtmNfzLio

The volume of inaccuracies and false assumptions Eran Elhaik made speak for themselves.

Here are criticisms of his false understanding of history:


"Thus, if one wants to be historically accurate, one should treat
Armenians as a northern Fertile Crescent group, not a Caucasian one.
But equally important, the Khazars were not exactly a Caucasian nation
either: their capital was in the Volga delta, and most of their empire
was in the steppe zone, as the map posted on the left shows. As Khan
writes, and I second, the real “smoking gun” would be genetic links
with East Asian populations: as the Khazars were Turkic, “they would
have had substantial proportions of East Asian ancestry”, but no East
Asian traces in the Jewish gene pool have been reported by Elhaik or
anyone else, as far as I know. "

He also has no understanding of geography:

"Elhaik commits many other errors of historical geography. In the
abstract alone, he claims that the Khazars “converted to Judaism… in
the 8th century”, whereas it was mostly their aristocracy that
converted. He takes the conjecture that “following the collapse of
their empire, the Judeo-Khazars fled to Eastern Europe” as a proven
fact. He talks of “Caucasus, European, and Semitic ancestries” as if
these were commensurate categories, and not a mountain range, a sub-
continent, and a language family. He also proposes to explain major
difference among populations of the Caucasus by the early presence of
Judeans in the Southern and Central Caucasus, while in actuality a
huge array of genetic diversity exists in the Caucasus regardless of
Jewish population. "


cont. next post

- - - Updated - - -

source: Eran Elhaik Is Still Wrong

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.jewish/qxTtmNfzLio

The volume of inaccuracies and false assumptions Eran Elhaik made speak for themselves.

Here are criticisms of his false understanding of history:


"Thus, if one wants to be historically accurate, one should treat
Armenians as a northern Fertile Crescent group, not a Caucasian one.
But equally important, the Khazars were not exactly a Caucasian nation
either: their capital was in the Volga delta, and most of their empire
was in the steppe zone, as the map posted on the left shows. As Khan
writes, and I second, the real “smoking gun” would be genetic links
with East Asian populations: as the Khazars were Turkic, “they would
have had substantial proportions of East Asian ancestry”, but no East
Asian traces in the Jewish gene pool have been reported by Elhaik or
anyone else, as far as I know. "

He also has no understanding of geography:

"Elhaik commits many other errors of historical geography. In the
abstract alone, he claims that the Khazars “converted to Judaism… in
the 8th century”, whereas it was mostly their aristocracy that
converted. He takes the conjecture that “following the collapse of
their empire, the Judeo-Khazars fled to Eastern Europe” as a proven
fact. He talks of “Caucasus, European, and Semitic ancestries” as if
these were commensurate categories, and not a mountain range, a sub-
continent, and a language family. He also proposes to explain major
difference among populations of the Caucasus by the early presence of
Judeans in the Southern and Central Caucasus, while in actuality a
huge array of genetic diversity exists in the Caucasus regardless of
Jewish population. "


cont. next post

- - - Updated - - -

source: Eran Elhaik Is Still Wrong

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.jewish/qxTtmNfzLio

The volume of inaccuracies and false assumptions Eran Elhaik made speak for themselves.

Here are criticisms of his false understanding of history:


"Thus, if one wants to be historically accurate, one should treat
Armenians as a northern Fertile Crescent group, not a Caucasian one.
But equally important, the Khazars were not exactly a Caucasian nation
either: their capital was in the Volga delta, and most of their empire
was in the steppe zone, as the map posted on the left shows. As Khan
writes, and I second, the real “smoking gun” would be genetic links
with East Asian populations: as the Khazars were Turkic, “they would
have had substantial proportions of East Asian ancestry”, but no East
Asian traces in the Jewish gene pool have been reported by Elhaik or
anyone else, as far as I know. "

He also has no understanding of geography:

"Elhaik commits many other errors of historical geography. In the
abstract alone, he claims that the Khazars “converted to Judaism… in
the 8th century”, whereas it was mostly their aristocracy that
converted. He takes the conjecture that “following the collapse of
their empire, the Judeo-Khazars fled to Eastern Europe” as a proven
fact. He talks of “Caucasus, European, and Semitic ancestries” as if
these were commensurate categories, and not a mountain range, a sub-
continent, and a language family. He also proposes to explain major
difference among populations of the Caucasus by the early presence of
Judeans in the Southern and Central Caucasus, while in actuality a
huge array of genetic diversity exists in the Caucasus regardless of
Jewish population. "


cont. next post

 

Using Eran Elhaik to spread the false myth Jews are Khazars is nonsense as I am trying to show, but the issue is complex and the falsehoods and stupidities
of Elhaik so immense it takes more than one sentence to dismiss them-but it is important to do so because people who have the audacity to rely on this
person and try pass him off as credible need to be challenged and exposed for doing so. There's a reason this individual is a favourite on neo Nazi and Muslim extremist
hate sites.

source: Eran Elhaik Is Still Wrong

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...sh/qxTtmNfzLio


The criticism below comes from the above article.

In addition to the already mentioned criticism I have indicated the above article also points out that ElHaik made false assumptions as to the origins of Yiddish
to back his idiotic theory of Jews being Khazars-his idiotic false assumptions and ignorance were exposed but like any idiot, if you repeat his words enough
times, its hoped they stick.

"... problems with Elhaik’s paper are not limited to those of
historical geography. In the discussion section, he ties his flawed
findings to even worse linguistic theories, specifically to the idea
that Yiddish, the language of Central and Eastern European Jews,
“began as a Slavic language that was re-lexified to High German at an
early date”. The preponderance of Germanic words in Yiddish is clear
from the page from the Shemot Devarim, a Yiddish-Hebrew-Latin-German
dictionary and thesaurus, published by Elia Levita in 1542 and
reproduced on the left.

The theory that Yiddish is a Slavic language
was originally proposed by Paul Wexler in his 1993 book The Ashkenazic
Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jewish Identity, a sequel
of sorts to his 1990 book in which he argues that Modern Hebrew too is
a Slavic language, re-lexified to Biblical Hebrew. Considering
Wexler’s book on Hebrew would take us too far afield, but what about
this idea that Yiddish is really a Slavic language?

First, it seems odd that a Turkic people who moved to Europe via
Romania and Hungary would somehow acquire a Slavic language on the
way. No traces of Turkic, Romance, or Uralic linguistic influences
have ever been identified in Yiddish. Second, no clear cases have been
described in which a language changes most or all of its vocabulary
drawing on that of another language. If such a transformation were to
happen, the old form of the language and the new one would be mutually
incomprehensible, so it is hardly likely that either its speakers or
linguists would use the same label for it, as if it were the same
language.

Many instances of language shift have been attested, but
they are always described as a shift from one language to another, not
a switch from one form of a language to a mutually incomprehensible
one.

But most crucially, Yiddish is not only non-Slavic in its vocabulary,
but also in its grammar. This is particularly obvious if we compare
Yiddish to Sorbian: the former is a Germanic language with some Slavic
influences, whereas the latter is a Slavic language with Germanic
influences.

Let’s consider Sorbian first, which makes a fitting
comparison for Yiddish because both modern Sorbian varieties—Upper and
Lower Sorbian—are surrounded by German-speaking territory. Neither
Sorbian-speaking group has an autonomous region of its own:

“Upper Sorbs live mostly in southern Lusatia in Saxony and Lower
Sorbs in the Niederlausitz region; they have long been an ethnic
minority in Germany. Sorbian monolingualism ceased before World War
II; nearly all Upper Sorbian speakers are fully bilingual in German
and use primarily German; Lower Sorbian is serious endangered. Both
languages show significant impact of contact with German, change which
has been almost entirely unidirectional.” (Lenore A. Grenoble,
“Contact and the Development of the Slavic Languages”, p. 58

One example of German grammatical influence on Sorbian is the merger
of the two uses of the instrumental case. Grenoble describes “the pan-
Slavic pattern” as making “a distinction between the instrumental or
absolute use of the instrumental case, which does not occur with a
preposition, and the instrumental of accompaniment, which is used with
the preposition ‘with’” (ibid). For example, compare the Russian Ja
rabotaju golovoj (literally, ‘I work head.INSTR&#8217 with Ja rabotaju s
Martinom (literally, ‘I work with Martin.INSTR&#8217. In Upper Sorbian,
however, “these two usages are collapsed and are found only with the
preposition z ‘with’” (ibid). Compare the Upper Sorbian Ja dźělam z
ruku ‘I work with my hand’ (instrument) and Ja rěčг z prěćelom ‘I
speak with my friend’ (accompaniment).

But while this example illustrates German grammatical influence on
Sorbian, it also underscores the underlying Slavic grammar of the
language: like most other Slavic tongues, Sorbian maintains a rich
system of seven cases (including the vocative) and marks them on the
nouns themselves. In comparison, Yiddish has only four cases and marks
them on the determiners such as the article ‘the’.

Furthermore, Sorbian adjectives decline according to the same seven cases as nouns;
when an adjective is used to modify a noun, they must agree in case.

Yiddish, in contrast, do not mark cases on adjectives; instead, there
are different forms are used for adjectives in attributive (i.e.
modifying) and predicative positions. For example, the form of the
adjective ‘good’ in Yiddish is different in ‘The good man left’ and
‘The man is good’—much like in German or Norwegian, and as it used to
be in Ye Olde English period. Sorbian is also noted for its retention
of the dual number, a special form used in reference to two objects,
as opposed to one (singular) or three or more (plural). Common Slavic
had a dual number and most modern Slavic languages retain some
vestiges of it. In modern Russian, for instance, the former dual is
reflected in the forms of some modern plurals in which the stem-final
velars k and x palatalized into č and š (e.g. Russian oči ‘eyes’ and
uši ‘ears&#8217. The older dual is also to blame for the fact that a
different form of a noun is used with ‘two’ (extended also to numerals
‘three’ and ‘four&#8217, as opposed to ‘five’ and up: for example, one
says dva mal’čika (literally ‘two boy’ in the genitive singular), but
pjat’ mal’čikov (literally ‘five boys’ in the genitive plural). In
modern Sorbian, two hands is ruce, but three or more hands is ruki.
Yiddish, in contrast, has no dual, and neither do other Germanic
languages.

When it comes to syntax, Sorbian and Yiddish differ as to the order of
major sentence constituents: Yiddish exhibits the Verb-Second
phenomenon: the finite verb—auxiliary if one is present, and the
lexical verb otherwise—must appear in the second position in a main
clause. For example, in the sentence Oyfn veg vet dos yingl zen a kats
(literally ‘On the way will the boy see a cat&#8217, the auxiliary vet
‘will’ appears right after the prepositional phrase oyfn veg ‘on the
way’ rather than after the subject dos yingl ‘the boy’, unlike in the
corresponding English sentence On the way, the boy will see a cat,
where both ‘on the way’ and the subject must precede the verb. In
fact, English is the only Germanic language that lacks the Verb-Second
(except in some marginal sentence types). "

cont. next post

 

Coming on this forum and propogating that Kews are Khazars is in my opinion nasty anti-Semitism at its worst. Its done to attack all Jews as being frauds and then in the context of saying this makes their having a Jewish state invalid. It shows vividly how Israel's existence and attacking all Jews for existing as Jews is intertwined by anti-semites.


I again repeat yet another summary of the scientific evidence that has repudiated the myth that Jews are Khazars:

Ultimately, Ashkenazi Jews have been found to have a strong DNA connection to Israelites and the Middle East,[4] sharing many common genes with other Jews from approximately 3000 years ago,[5] which “does not support this [Khazar conversion] idea.”[6]

Abraham Eliyahu Harkavi had suggested as early as 1869 that there might be a link between the Khazars and European Jews. The theory, however, that Khazar converts formed a major proportion of Ashkenazi Jews was first proposed to a Western public by Ernest Renan in 1883.

The idea was taken up by a number of Jewish historians, including Sigmund Freud, and authors like H. G. Wells (1921). But the Khazar-Ashkenazi hypothesis came to the attention of a much wider public with the publication of The Thirteenth Tribe, by agent of the CIA Arthur Koestler in 1976. But Koestler's work was mainly a hsitory of the Khazars, and merely provides a suggestion that European Jews may be descended from them, without providing any proof.

The last 15 years has seen a large number of genetic studies on Jewish populations worldwide, which conclude: “The consensus research holds that most Ashkenazi Jews, as well as many Jews tracing their lineage to Italy, North Africa, Iraq, Iran, Kurdish regions and Yemen, share common paternal haplotypes also found among many Arabs from Palestine, Lebanon and Syria.”[7]

Nadine Epstein, an editor and executive publisher of Moment magazine said “When I read Arthur Koestler’s The Thirteenth Tribe, I bought his theory that Ashkenazim were descended from the Khazars… But in 1997, Karl Skorecki in Haifa, Michael Hammer in Tucson and several London researchers surprised everyone by finding evidence of the Jewish priestly line of males, the Kohanim. Half of Ashkenazic men and slightly more than half of Sephardic men who claimed to be Kohanim were found to have a distinctive set of genetic markers on their Y chromosome, making it highly possible that they are descendants of a single male or group of related males who lived between 1180 and 650 B.C.E., about the time of Moses and Aaron.[8]

In 2000, the analysis of a report by Nicholas Wade, titled Y Chromosome Bears Witness to Story of the Jewish Diaspora, “provided genetic witness that these [Jewish] communities have, to a remarkable extent, retained their biological identity separate from their host populations, evidence of relatively little intermarriage or conversion into Judaism over the centuries… The results accord with Jewish history and tradition and refute theories like those holding that Jewish communities consist mostly of converts from other faiths, or that they are descended from the Khazars, a medieval Turkish tribe that adopted Judaism.” [9]

A 2001 study found that Jews were closer to groups in the north of the Fertile Crescent, such as Kurds, Assyrians, Turks, and Armenians, than to their Arab neighbors, whose “chromosomes might have been introduced through migrations from the Arabian Peninsula during the last two millennia.”[10]

In 2010, Atzmon et al. presented research refuting the possibility of large-scale genetic contributions of Central and Eastern European and Slavic populations to the formation of Ashkenazi Jewry. Ashkenazi Jews, part of European/Syrian Jewish populations, shared a proximity to each other and to French, Northern Italian, and Sardinian populations which was found to be incompatible with any theory maintaining that the Askhenazi were direct lineal descendants of Khazars or Slavs. They did allow that some Slavic or Khazarian admixture might have taken place during the second millennium, and noted that the 7.5% prevalence of the R1a1 haplogroup., common among Ukrainians, Russians and Sorbs, as well as among Central Asian populations, among Ashkenazi Jews has led to interpretations for a possible Slavic or Khazar admixture, although this admixture may have resulted only from mixing with Ukrainians, Poles, or Russians, rather than with the Khazars.[11]

Using four Jewish groups, one being Ashkenazi, a Kopelman et al study found no direct evidence to the Khazar theory[12] while another study concluded that its findings “debunk one of the most questionable, but still tenacious, hypotheses: that most Ashkenazi Jews can trace their roots to the mysterious Khazar Kingdom that flourished during the ninth century in the region between the Byzantine Empire and the Persian Empire.”[13]

Some scientists believe that even if the theory were to be true, “only a small minority of the Khazars may have adopted Judaism.”[14] and that “the questions of whether there was a Khazar contribution to the Ashkenazi Jews’ lineage, or exactly what percentage of mitochondrial variants emanate from Europe, cannot be answered with certainty using present genetic and geographical data.”[15]

In 2013, the results of the largest genetic study on Jews released by the Wayne State University found that Ashkenazi, North African, and Sephardi Jews shared substantial genetic ancestry, that they derive from Middle Eastern and European populations and found no detectable Khazar genetic origins.[16] Another 2013 study of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA, found no significant evidence of Khazar contribution to the Ashkenazi Jewish DNA, as would be predicted by the Khazar hypothesis.[17]


sources for the above:

1] Johnson. A History of the Jews, p. 171


[2] Entine, Jon. "Israeli Researcher Challenges Jewish DNA links to Israel, Calls Those Who Disagree 'Nazi Sympathizers'", Forbes, May 16, 2013


[3] Melissa Hogenboom, 'European link to Jewish maternal ancestry BBC News, 9 October 2013; "No indication of Khazar genetic ancestry among Ashkenazi Jews". ASHG. Retrieved 5 November 2013.


[4] Middle East origins: Jared Diamond (1993). "Who are the Jews?". Retrieved November 8, 2010. Natural History 102:11 (November 1993): 12-19; "Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes". Retrieved 11 October 2012; Shriver, Tony N. Frudakis ; with a chapter 1 introduction by Mark D. (200. Molecular photofitting : predicting ancestry and phenotype using DNA. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press. ISBN 9780120884926. sharing many common genes with other Jews from 3,000 years ago.


[5] Wade, Nicholas (June 9, 2010). "Studies Show Jews’ Genetic Similarity". New York Times. Retrieved 8 November 2013; "Who Are the Jews? Genetic Studies Spark Identity Debate". Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Retrieved 9 November 2013.


[6] "Jews worldwide share genetic ties". Nature (journal). 3 June 2010. Retrieved 9 November 2013.


[7]http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/08/ashkenazi-jewish-women-descended-mostly-from-italian-converts-new-study-asserts/


[8] "Jewish Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries". Retrieved 9 November 2013.


[9] "Jewish Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries". Retrieved 9 November 2013.


[10] Almut Nebel, Dvora Filon, Bernd Brinkmann, Partha P. Majumder, Marina Faerman, Ariella Oppenheim. "The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East", (The American Journal of Human Genetics (2001), Volume 69, number 5. pp. 1095–112).


[11] G.Atzmon, L.Hao, I.Pe'er, C.Velez, A.Pearlman, P.F.Palamara, B.Morrow, E.Friedman, C.Oddoux, E.Burns and H.Ostrer. Abraham's Children in the Genome Era: Major Jewish Diaspora Populations Comprise Distinct Genetic Clusters with Shared Midde Eastern Ancestry. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 03 June 2010.


[12] Kopelman NM, Stone L, Wang C, et al. (2009). "Genomic microsatellites identify shared Jewish ancestry intermediate between Middle Eastern and European populations". BMC Genetics 10: 80. doi:10.1186/1471-2156-10-80. PMC 2797531. PMID 19995433.


[13] "New Study Finds Most Ashkenazi Jews Genetically Linked to Europe". Jewishvoiceny.com. 2013-10-16. Retrieved 2013-10-31.


[14] "Genomic microsatellites identify shared Jewish ancestry intermediate between Middle Eastern and European populations". Retrieved 9 November 2013.


[15] "Jewish Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries". Retrieved 9 November 2013.


[16] http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1040&context=humbiol_preprints


[17] "A substantial prehistoric European ancestry amongst Ashkenazi maternal lineages". Nature Communications. Retrieved 8 November 2013.


The above can be found in its entirety from the article, " Myth of the Khazar Ancestry of the Jews ", by David Livingstone

http://www.conspiracyschool.com/blog/myth-khazar-ancestry-jews

- - - Updated - - -

Yes but the name of the game is to keep repeating the rubbish over and over. On internet forums, sheer volume or reputation of a falsehood
gives it a new life and can incite new anti semitic tirades and beliefs.

 

I have no idea.. that's why I posted the links.. Jews also share genetic markers with Arabs.. I have a dear friend from Morocco.. She is Sephardic .. We play dominos with Ashkenazi Jews whose grandparents were from Russia and the Ukraine. They teach us Yiddish words. The girls I attended boarding school with in South Carolina were old line Sephardic Jews.. beautiful girls with very white skin and dark eyes.

The same mix is in my book club.. and they are an impressive bunch.. particularly when it comes to service organizations.

 

comparing the genetics of one group of Jews to the genetics of another group of Jews, to prove they come from non-Jews, is comical.

 

Wrong.

J1 aka J-M267 is common in parts of North and eastern Africa. Most black Africans do not have it, but some do. Including the Lemba in South Africa who claim to be Jews. Ethiopians also have it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J-M267#North_Africa_and_Horn_of_Africa

 

Incorrect. See Arthur Koestler's The Thirteenth Tribe. This work shows how it was the people of Khazaria who converted to Judaism around the 8th century.

 

This is just facts.

Not sure why ppl deny it, can anybody explain why jewish ppl are so opposed to their khazar heritage?

 

Genetic research shows Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Israelite men who took wives in Italy and neighboring parts of the Roman Empire.

 

right...lol

 

You can laugh at scientific facts all you like.

It has a lot more evidence behind it than the silly Bible fantasy comic book.

 

What facts?

 

Very thorough and comprehensive genetic research of Ashkenazi Jews.

It shows that they are descended from Israelites and people in around Italy, during the Roman times.

But you can disregard and laugh at the research all you like. I'm sure the fantasy comic book known as the Bible has more scientific evidence.

LOLOLOL!!!!!

 

So, no facts then

 

Black americans are the real Jews, praise Yah the almighty.

 

LOL!!!!

Fake news, racist propaganda and disinformation.

Jews can be of any race, and it is absolutely racist to say that a non black person cannot be a Jew.

 

You're entitled to your opinion. It's not racist to say black americans are the real Jews. It would be racist if isaid blacks are the real Jews but idont believe that.

 

It is racist to say that white people and other non black people cannot be Jews. It is racist to say that Ashkenazi Jews are in fact fake Jews because of their skin color.

Especially considering the inside of their hands and the bottom of the feet of black people is light skinned, not black. Which suggests that their ancient non-human ancestors did not have black skin.

 

Never said that. Whites can convert to Judaism as they have done and be considered Jewish