<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Genetic Map of Greece	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://vividmaps.com/genetic-map-of-greece/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://vividmaps.com/genetic-map-of-greece/</link>
	<description>Maps that explain the World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2026 00:51:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Guest		</title>
		<link>https://vividmaps.com/genetic-map-of-greece/#comment-42991</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Guest]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2026 00:51:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://vividmaps.com/?p=40339#comment-42991</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This whole post doesn&#039;t even have anything to do with the original paper lol the majority of what I just read is lies including that awful map and qpadm model. Anyone who&#039;s actually interested should just read the paper. If you don&#039;t have time:
TLDR: Slavic admix 0-40% among Greeks depending on region and is the only part that the map got right though the article is still wrong,
Ottoman Turkish ancestry is not present, it&#039;s not even relevant to the paper which is primarily about the Roman-Medieval period. This should also be common sense, interfaith marriage was not allowed (except Mohammedan men and Christian women where the child would be raised to follow Islam). If there was Turkish admix we&#039;d see Turkic admix and East Asian components in Greeks but we don&#039;t.
The numbers for IA/BA Aegean ancestry and Anatolian ancestry are nowhere in the paper and are entirely made up.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This whole post doesn&#8217;t even have anything to do with the original paper lol the majority of what I just read is lies including that awful map and qpadm model. Anyone who&#8217;s actually interested should just read the paper. If you don&#8217;t have time:<br />
TLDR: Slavic admix 0-40% among Greeks depending on region and is the only part that the map got right though the article is still wrong,<br />
Ottoman Turkish ancestry is not present, it&#8217;s not even relevant to the paper which is primarily about the Roman-Medieval period. This should also be common sense, interfaith marriage was not allowed (except Mohammedan men and Christian women where the child would be raised to follow Islam). If there was Turkish admix we&#8217;d see Turkic admix and East Asian components in Greeks but we don&#8217;t.<br />
The numbers for IA/BA Aegean ancestry and Anatolian ancestry are nowhere in the paper and are entirely made up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
