This is cope, you can only have 1 haplo group. You can't be a descendants of two men.

The Mexicans either need to embrace being the descendants of Spainards and indigenous women who took BWC from the back while playing with the balls.

Or they can ignore that and just claim full indigenous ancestry despite history.

But these who "we are the heirs of both the Spainards and the Aztecs" is cringe and gay. Aztecs weren't matrilineal. You can't claim two patrilineal civilizations.

what percentage of Mexican Y-DNA is still indigenous?

>>17774361 (OP)
Retarded nigger it doesnt work like that
If your dad is nigerian and your mom is polish
You are both nigerian and polish
There is paternal lines and maternal lines
Also there is something called ADNA retard and this is the most important and according to this logic, euros are the rapebabies of swarthy finno-churkas from the steppe
>>17774383
I goes from 40 % to 60 % dépendance on the individuals

>>17774391
>>17774383
My bad you said YDNA so its like 5 %

>>17774457
You knew wtf he said, you just wanted to push your propaganda

except native americans came from siberia, defned by euraisan haplogroups q and r which was inherent to the population long before invaders arrived

>>17774467
Siberia isn't Spain. Siberia isn't even in Europe. Fuck off De-Railer!

>>17774467
Every R in the Americas is from European colonists.

>>17774361 (OP)
>You can't be a descendants of two men.
two things. first:
>a descendants
is ungrammatical as fuck.
second, most of us had two distinct grandfathers. so 'You can't be a descendants of two men.' is not the reason why you have a single haplogroup. the reason is that you have a single paternal line of descent.

>>17774361 (OP)
Haplogroup does not determine ethnicity, retard. Autosomal DNA is more important anyway. And the National identity of Mexico (and all Latin American countries) is made up and subject to change anyway.
>>17774383
It varies but I'd say from sixty to forty percent. Sampling is pretty spotty and I don't think an accurate picture has been developed or will be developed for some time.
>>17774457
Excuse me what? There's four times more ethnically Indigenous people in Mexico.

>>17774361 (OP)
>You can't be a descendants of two men.
Everyone is a descendant of a lot more than just two men.

>>17774361 (OP)
You're descended from hundreds of men anon...

>>17774498
And to be honest with you I think this particular study is quite skewed towards the more mixed north.

>>17774489
>>17774482
no

R was present in the americas prior because its inherent to the native population prior to migration

Even the "most native" peoples in Americas, have Spaniards Ancestry
Check-out the peruvians

>>17774498
Someone make a model.. this doesn't look like accurate to me

>>17774535
>23% spanish
Kek i though the eastern americas were "pure"
Spanish guys won

>>17774535
Believe it or not any given nationality is going to have mixed individuals in it.There's a shitton of proud sons of Inti wandering around Peru and Bolivia.

>>17774541
if you tried to sound mocking or intelligent, you failed miserably.
I am saying that the argument that Bolivians, Peruvians and the like are "pure Indians" is a fallacy. and you can test the averages in the G25 to see. there is adjacent Spanish ancestry.
>>17774540
No

>>17774536
Ok

>>17774361 (OP)
The """spanish"""" conquistadors were literally all jewish

Latinxcrements are a loathsome mongrels of chosenites and injus

>>17774465
No i just read dna
Not ydna retarded tranny faggot

>>17774361 (OP)
>you can't bc it's not heckin' scientific also racial cuckoldry
do jannies actually consider this humanities

>>17774489
Wrong. These haplogroups maps are probably mixed historical and present. North America today is 90% IE so there shouldn't be so much Q like shown on the charts.
>>17774536
>The Mestizo's mind is blown whenever he actually looks at the per capita stats
Pottery

>>17774603
>Per capita
Nigger those aren't per capita stats. I'm pretty sure the sampling wasn't even proportional. Monterey is way overepresented (make up a third of the samples) and there's only two southern states. Three if you count Puebla.
Also the Graph somehow manages to mislabel Chiapas as Oaxaca.

>>17774498
>>17774603

>>17774808
Name of study?