>>11681764That and
>>11681658 are plotting two different things
Your graph is plotting variation within caucasian people. Things like WHG, EHG, natufians or even unnamed groups etc. It's why you see groups that look way similar seem way different as if they have nothing in common when in reality that's just magnifying the very minor differences within that are mostly the same groups in different ratios giving rise to populations.
Basically the variation WITHOUT
>>11681658 is so much higher that what's WITHIN(yours) is barely notable as per Fst's for example.
What you posted is real, but simply not enough of a variation to show in any sort of racial clustering as per Fst's.
and let me post the text from the paper
>Figure 2. ADMIXTURE analysis of autosomal SNPs of the Western Balkan region in a global context on the resolution level of 7 assumed ancestral populations (See Table S1 for population data).>7 assumed ancestral populationsYou can assume 1 or 2 or 3 or 17 and all those ancestral populations will be slightly different but still caucasian and very similar as far as race goes.
Hopefully you understand what I'm saying to you. You are essentially posting a form of Lewontin's while trying to disprove arabs are white. Which is hilarious
