https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry is pretty bad. It makes the scientific literature seem much more one-sided than it is.
Ashkenazi Jews have genetic contributions from all over the place. There's a political push to say they're originally native to the Levant because of..... well actually I don't know why they're pushing that line it's a total mystery.
Wikipedia says "While the consensus in genetic research is that the world's Jewish populations (including the Ashkenazim) share substantial genetic ancestry derived from a common Ancient Middle Eastern founder population, and that Ashkenazi Jews have no genetic ancestry attributable to Khazars" and cites Behar et al. (2013). "No Evidence from Genome-Wide Data of a Khazar Origin for the Ashkenazi Jews" to support that claim. But you can't cite one 2013 study and call that citation evidence of "consensus". And the papers citing Behar et al. take a variety of positions on it. It's a lie to call it a consensus.
I'd be curious to read a more unbiased take on this, but I have no idea where to look.
Edit: the consensus thing is common lie that Wikipedia editors like to push. Even official policy guides require the consensus to be cited, meaning that a reliable source should say it's consensus, but right wing editors love to flout this and just show that 4 authors means consensus.
the Khazar hypothesis being bunk is not a zionist plot, all of these studies find european ancestry in addition to middle eastern if they don't get caucausian. some genetic marker a person has being 'from' one region or another does not justify setting up an apartheid genocide regime there.
people do have a habit of declaring a 'consensus' due to a subjective valuation of the quality of the disputing voices, not how loud they are, though. and in this case, we have geneticists citing Koestler into the 2010s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry is pretty bad. It makes the scientific literature seem much more one-sided than it is.
Ashkenazi Jews have genetic contributions from all over the place. There's a political push to say they're originally native to the Levant because of..... well actually I don't know why they're pushing that line it's a total mystery.
Wikipedia says "While the consensus in genetic research is that the world's Jewish populations (including the Ashkenazim) share substantial genetic ancestry derived from a common Ancient Middle Eastern founder population, and that Ashkenazi Jews have no genetic ancestry attributable to Khazars" and cites Behar et al. (2013). "No Evidence from Genome-Wide Data of a Khazar Origin for the Ashkenazi Jews" to support that claim. But you can't cite one 2013 study and call that citation evidence of "consensus". And the papers citing Behar et al. take a variety of positions on it. It's a lie to call it a consensus.
I'd be curious to read a more unbiased take on this, but I have no idea where to look.
Edit: the consensus thing is common lie that Wikipedia editors like to push. Even official policy guides require the consensus to be cited, meaning that a reliable source should say it's consensus, but right wing editors love to flout this and just show that 4 authors means consensus.
the Khazar hypothesis being bunk is not a zionist plot, all of these studies find european ancestry in addition to middle eastern if they don't get caucausian. some genetic marker a person has being 'from' one region or another does not justify setting up an apartheid genocide regime there.
people do have a habit of declaring a 'consensus' due to a subjective valuation of the quality of the disputing voices, not how loud they are, though. and in this case, we have geneticists citing Koestler into the 2010s