We're just stumbling upon a study by brilliant geneticist Eran Elhaik, that calls into doubt a major tool used by many to achieve the outcomes they wish.
Simply put, we read Elhaik's paper, and it absolutely rocked our worlds. I mean, it rocked our worlds in two ways:
First, we feel vindicated when we have previously pointed out that other papers seem to defy logic; or seem to be conclusions in search of evidence.
But second, it rocks our world, because a paper like this has upended, or should upend, the entire field of population genomics!
The paper is entitled "Principal Component Analyses (PCA)-based findings in population genetic studies are highly biased and must be reevaluated" and you can access a free copy by clicking this link.
The study can be summed up as follows:
-PCA data is subject to manipulation that leads to false claims that various genetic ties (racial, ancient, etc.) are what any given researcher wants the data to show.
-Major studies using PCA do not follow scientific rigor of testing a hypothesis and then trying to refute it. Instead, they appear to conceive a hypothesis and manipulate the PCA data to confirm it.
Elhaik found that PCA statistics could be made to lie close to virtually any reference population just by changing the numbers and types of the reference samples, generating practically endless historical versions, all mathematically “correct,” but with only one truly biologically correct.
His paper calls into question major paradigms of the world of population genetics, racial genetics, ancient DNA, and popular science -- the type you see on all the online message boards.
Applying rigorous socratic logic to Elhaik's paper, we believe his points have merit. ~216,000 studies have thus been called into question.
Bottom line: if reading a study using PCA, watch for common biases, and you are well within sound scientific practice to question the result.
