Talk:Genetic studies on Sami

message: Article says 'haplogroup N' is a Y-chromosome, but it's mitochondric DNA.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.123.135.255 (talk) 02:02, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo

message: "Their physical appearance reflects this, varying from very European-looking with blond hair and blue eyes like Finns or Scandinavians, to almost indistinguishable from East Asians, indigenous Siberians, or Inuit."
There are very few Saami who look simillar to Inuits, the idea that the majority of Saami look more Asiatic than other Northern Europeans is a myth, the majority are mostly indistinguishable from other Northern European populations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taddeiv (talk • contribs) 20:37, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Sami physical appearance

message: Thank you Peer Gynt for your editing of the above two sections.  I have been 'looking' at this artical but forgot to 'watch' it.  You did some good editing here - take care... Dinkytown (talk) 19:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thank you for the above sections

message: I read all about the numerous ethnological theories on the origin of Sami being of Siberian and east Asian ancestors, due to many Sami have light brown or dark hair, the shorter height and huskier body structure and some have slanted eyes. But from the ongoing contact with Scandinavians in Northern Europe, there are mostly high numbers of persons with blond hair, blue eyes and evident "Nordic" appearance. The Sami may lived in northernmost Europe for over 5,000 years or have migrated across the Arctic ocean in boats strong enough to past through summer ice and may inherited genes from other Arctic peoples of Siberia and possibly North America (the Inuit), therefore the Sami may be of mixed racial "Caucasoid" and "Mongoloid" origins. The Sami language is much alike Finnish but was linked to that of other Uralic/Altaic and Turkic languages such as Hungarian and Turkish to indicate the Sami may came from Central Asia and present-day European Russia, thus the Sami are indigenous to Europe before the arrival of Indo-European speaking peoples. + 71.102.5.6 (talk) 04:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Mongoloid" origins has been largely discredited for several years now.  Genetic research showed that Sami are an isolated branch of every other group around them, but closer to 'Nordic' groups than anyone else.  Sami are not Asian, but closer to European.  Paleolithic/Stone Age boats would not be strong enough to take on the Arctic Ocean, especially since there would have been more ice back then (5000+ year ago), and even then there would be the need for a large genetic infusion to show any noticable results from such a crossing.  Archealogical finds show that the Sami were in northern Scandinavia before any other present group.  Language simularities may be a recent adaptation.  There are many threories out there - many contradic each other.  No smoking gun yet.  Dinkytown (talk) 06:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ethnological theories" 

message: Their physical appearance reflects this, varying from very European-looking with blond hair and blue eyes like Finns or Scandinavians, to almost indistinguishable from East Asians, indigenous Siberians, or Inuit??????    no,  there are none sami looking like east asian or inuit?  we need to open the artikel again so we can get correct information with links.
Please open the artikel again.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.196.3.211 (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is! I could provide pictures, but I don't want to violate someones privacy. 129.242.61.221 (talk) 02:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Kildin Sami orthography which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 15:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: In section Y-DNA, I have changed the split from other baltic-fennic languages to 3300, since the given source () sets the split to cirka 1300 BC. The source in turn refers to a paper from a conference in May 2010, but Blažek published Fenno-Saamic - the Test of Glottochronology in 2010 aswell. Perhaps a better source?
// 158.174.23.187 (talk) 10:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linguistic evidence 

message: The last sentence under the section Y-DNA links to an external webpage called www.saamidna.com, containing a summary of some very political and conspiratorial loaded language. I'm not in the position to evaluate the science presented, but I question paragraphs such as this:
Is it just me that find this link odd?
--84.209.48.85 (talk) 01:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political conspiratorial language