Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

Been here before but this whole 'ranking' of different cultures as 'better' or 'worse', to me is so, er, colonial in attitude. Different cultures are different, and I doubt there are any or ever have been that do not have positive aspects that anyone from any other culture could 'learn' from as well as negative.

Nothing to do with colonial attitude, even though colonialism could have possibly played a role in keeping some countries from advancing. Look at how some cultures treat women, children, gay people etc... I'd say that some cultures are better than other, and just to be clear I do not consider ours to be at the very top.

and would one of those 'environmental' factors that shapes a person identity be perhaps, who controls and shapes and determines the educational curriculum of a people ?

Sure it does, but only up to a certain degree. Cyprus was under foreign rulers for many centuries and we maintained our Greek ethnic identity. Or look at the Kurds in Turkey, who maintained their Kurdish identity even though the educational curriculum is controlled by the Turks, who would not even allow the Kurdish language to be taught to them! The environment that the family and the community creates is far more important than the official education system when it comes to the identity of people.

[GreekIslandGirl]

OK - you can change your general criticism to some other specific criticism now that your first attempt was rubbished by stud. And as for what you're saying above - again, another super-twist because I didn't rubbish "THIS report" as you state (above in red) but the one statement which I quoted to stud regarding 'non-results' - and it was from that article which we now know is in some defunct journal.

Try looking at this post of your GiG (not that actual indisputable evidence ever means anything to you)

cyprus44917-10.html#p842752

You start with a quote, which you mis attribute to STUD but was actually the verbatim text from a report. So which report was your post verbatim quoting and under which you wrote 'What absolute nonsense!' ?

You explicitly quoted from THIS report and immediately under wrote 'Absolute nonsense' and then wittered on about the need to "interpret accordingly" and I then commented on the your ability to "interpret accordingly" to suit your needs generally, just as you had done specifically in regards to THIS report.

Then when STUD makes reference to an entirely different report to THIS report, you came out with your inane comment of " I hope that shuts up erolz "

This is what you do. It is what you have always done. You appear to think such intellectually dishonest behaviour is argument or discussion. It is not, it is just intellectual dishonesty behaviour in place of actual rational argument or discussion.

You don't have to butt into my every post or answer for stud. Nevertheless, you butted in with a general slagging and brought in even the EU (again, since we still have not seen any of your predictions coming into fruition!). So it was a GENERAL criticism of my 'credibility' compared to those you expressed an opinion about that have subsequently turned out to be less than reliable!

Your words:

Given that you 'interpreted' the EU concluding that "Greece is seriously neglecting its obligations" as meaning the EU had concluded that "Greece is NOT seriously neglecting its obligations" then it is hardly surprising that your interpretation of such genetic studies gives you exactly the result you ideology requires.

I personally find the interpretation of those who did such studies vastly more credible than your interpretation - for obvious reason (see above).

Yup, I call that both a general criticism of me and an endorsement of those studies found to be reported in a now 'defunct' journal!

[GreekIslandGirl]

Been here before but this whole 'ranking' of different cultures as 'better' or 'worse', to me is so, er, colonial in attitude.

One of the most stupid things ever written!

Tsukoui .... you have competition!

[erolz66]

You don't have to butt into my every post or answer for stud.

You don't have to call me out by name in posts whilst pretending to be talking to someone else.

Nevertheless, you butted in with a general slagging and brought in even the EU (again, since we still have not seen any of your predictions coming into fruition!). So it was a GENERAL criticism of my 'credibility' compared to those you expressed an opinion about that have subsequently turned out to be less than reliable!

I gave a specific example to highlight a general behaviour of yours. You then took a totally different situation, that did not show this behaviour, to try and show the specific example that did was not valid. Exactly like taking a different report that does not show something, to try and show that a report that did show this something, did not show it. This is what you do. It is how you operate. Nothing new.

[erolz66]

Been here before but this whole 'ranking' of different cultures as 'better' or 'worse', to me is so, er, colonial in attitude.

One of the most stupid things ever written!

Even more stupid than the claim that what I wrote was "One of the most stupid things ever written!"

That a belief in the superiority of a given culture over another has always been used historically as a basis to justify and promote colonialism it hardly a novel insight.

[GreekIslandGirl]

I gave a specific example to highlight a general behaviour of yours. You then took a totally different situation ....

Yes, the EU! And I brought it back to thread-topic! You tried to generally denigrate what I said about this topic (desperately using irrelevancies) and you were found to be wrong in doing that because as stud found and I found - both major sources brought up in this thread are untrustworthy (despite your support of them).

[GreekIslandGirl]

Been here before but this whole 'ranking' of different cultures as 'better' or 'worse', to me is so, er, colonial in attitude.

One of the most stupid things ever written!

Even more stupid than the claim that what I wrote was "One of the most stupid things ever written!"

That a belief in the superiority of a given culture over another has always been used historically as a basis to justify and promote colonialism it hardly a novel insight.

I see a huge modification as you try to now qualify your generally stupid statement.

Because some wrong was done in the past, exploiting a position, it doesn't mean you now throw out the baby with the bathwater.

[erolz66]

I see a huge modification as you try to now qualify your generally stupid statement.

You 'interpret' everything according to your needs. This is what you do. I KNOW what I meant when I wrote what I did and it is in fact you that is now modifying your stupid statement from 'one of the stupidest thing ever written' to 'generally stupid statement'. Still let's not let reality get in the way of your 'interpretation', you never have before, so why start now ?

Because some wrong was done in the past, exploiting a position, it doesn't mean you now throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Not everyone who believes that cultures can be ranked in general terms as 'better or worse' believes that their culture is the best. However everyone who believes in the kind of cultural chauvinism that underpins both your own world view and that of colonialism, believes such. That is the point. Hardly 'one of the stupidest things ever written' I would suggest.

[supporttheunderdog]

There's a difference between science and political rhetoric. You are good at one and I am better at the other.

yeah so good that your interpretation that just happens to also match [url][/url]your ideology requirements is superior to that of the people who actual did the study. In your mind that is.

Oh yeah, so who actually filmed/made that facebook video, because I don't see any "study" giving us the data?

Details here of the provencehttp://creativity-online.com/work/momondo-the-dna-journey/47554
Looks loke sponsorsed by a travel site...i actualy agree it may not be a valid study as the presentation by nationality is a bit iffy. That is why I posted a link to a proper scientific paper, and quoted from it.

OK - well done. Thanks. I hope that shuts up erolz.

But on that note of not taking things at *face value* - your previous paper is weirdly selective and I would have said lacked solid peer review (I don't have time/inclination to do more than skim), but I do notice the journal will no longer be published:

Investigative Genetics will cease to be published by BioMed Central and no longer receives submissions.

One of my main criticisms, from a skim, is that they decided to leave the first wave of Cypriot population expansion from the Greek V-13 sources and concentrated instead on one other which isn't present in such a small population and therefore difficult to draw conclusions. In science it's difficult to make a statement because you haven't found "something" that you decided to look for. In fact such non-results didn't used to lead to publications in my day but judging by the fate of the journal the article appeared in, perhaps that's still the case.

Publishers shut journals for a variety of reasons. That does not of itself invalidate the report or its findings, where your comment that it us wierdly selective is perhaps a reflection of your disspointment that it does not support the theory of mass Mycenaean Greek immigration to Cyprus, but rather suggests Anatolian influences. That tends to support Archeological based theories of Leriou and Jennings, which likewise suggest that the thoery of mass migration of Myceneans to Cyprus, which was one argument used in support of calls for Enosis, is not correct.

Your remarks are other wise an attack on integrity of the academics involved.

[GreekIslandGirl]

[That does not of itself invalidate the report or its findings, where your comment that it us wierdly selective is perhaps a reflection of your disspointment that it does not support the theory of mass Mycenaean Greek immigration to Cyprus, but rather suggests Anatolian influences.

On the contrary, it has strong support for a very early Greek influence which it chooses to leave as taken and not investigate further.

while Greece Balkans supplied the majority of E-V13 and J2a-M67. Haplotype-based expansion times were at historical levels suggestive of recent demography.

Conclusions
Analyses of Cypriot haplogroup data are consistent with two stages of prehistoric settlement. E-V13 and E-M34 are widespread, and PCA suggests sourcing them to the Balkans and Levant/Anatolia, respectively.

(EV-13 is the Greek-associated component that arose around the mesolithic era.)

It also confirms similarity finding from others:

Notably, Cyprus and Crete occupy a central position.

It also distances:

Unlike samples from the present day interior Levant, such as Palestinians, Bedouins, and Jordanians [17, 54], J1-M267 is less common in Cyprus at 6.5 %.

And, significantly:

Although, when using the entire set of Y-chromosome haplogroup frequencies, the composition of Cyprus can be explained by contributions from Anatolia, Balkans, and Levant, the actual Greek contribution stood out for the Cypriot E-V13 (87 %), J2a-M67 (74 %), R1b-M269 (48 %), and G-P15 (17 %) components.

The J2a-M319 lineage, previously observed in Crete and the Levant [18, 85] is also present in Cyprus at 1.1 %.

E-V13 is common in the Balkans and may mark some of the Greek demographic input to Cyprus from the Late Bronze Age through the Iron Age [79]. Network analysis of 46 E-V13 haplotypes (Additional file 10: Figure S5) shows a discrete clustering of 15 samples suggestive of a sub-haplogroup (encircled with an oval). This cluster is characterized by DYS437 = 15 repeats not seen in the Anatolian Greek population, or in the Provence samples [20]. The remaining 31 samples overlap with the Anatolian Greek E-V13 lineages. Given that the highest frequency of I2 is in the Balkans [28], we also propose that I2-M423 (1.9 %) and I2-M436 (1.3 %) lineages reflect Greek influence. Additionally, the presence of G2a-M527 and G2a-U1 is consistent with remnants of Greek heritage [30].

The main criticisms are that it (a) groups Greece and Italy together (which would distance the similarities somewhat) and then only mentions 'Italy' in the figures (which still appear - Fig 3 - in the same quadrant as Cyprus, so close and Turkey/Anatolia as far from each other as could be), and (b) is reporting on not finding something (from a small group) and then going on to draw disproportionate conclusions on Mycenaean Greeks (as a throwaway line at the end) when it doesn't have ANY data nor have they presented ANY data or findings to compare to Mycenaean Greeks. It's like they had to find something new to say and clutched at a straw having already made a number of caveats as to the flexibility and openness to change of their conclusions.