More shallow stupidity.
Mr. Clogged Arteries writes:
Now you see some signs of other stuff in Sicily or Calabria today, but that seems to be later, from Arab or Byzantine times.
"Stuff." What "stuff?" Lasagna? Olive oil? A horse head in a bed? Oh, the idiot is talking about population genetics. As is typical of HBD, the analysis is shallow. The relative genetic continuity in Italy (Ancient-Modern) - contra the heavy breathing "movement" and Arthur "Pesci" Kemp - is not simply due to "the slaves all died out" or "the slaves were mostly European" but likely a combination of those two: many, not all, of the slaves died out, and the ones who were assimilated were for the most part European, and the others mostly NECs not very genetically distant (as would be Nigerians or Chinamen) from the native population. It's not that there was absolute zero genetic influx, that is absurd, it's that the influx was much smaller than is popularly believed, and was mostly European (with some Levantines mixed in). Likewise, the "stuff" in "Sicily or Calabria" from "Arab or Byzantine times" was also much smaller than is popularly believed, and mostly Near Eastern/North African NECs; the combination of a small influx of peoples not enormously distant from the native population didn't alter things too much (granted the Near Easterners and North Africans may have carried some sub-Saharan alleles). This later influx also (subsequently) included Normans, French, Spaniards, and North Italians, further adjusting the population back in the (overall genetic) direction of its original constitution.