[Monolith]

Originally Posted by Galaico

Well according to that data Serbians and Herzegovians share 15% and 12% respectively of R1a1 so they're not "Slavic" either, on the other hand Greek Macedonians share 35% of R1a1 and I'm quite sure that it is not of Slavic origin.

How can you be so sure? It's a fact that R1a marker is older then both Slavs and Hellenes, but in Greek Macedonians it could as well be a result of intermixing with Slavs. It is well known that Slavs came all the way to today's Thessaloniki(Solun). Saint Cyrill and Methodius used the Slavic dialect from the Thessaloniki area to spread Christianity among the Slavs from the Balkans' area. That dialect evolved to Old Church Slavonic language, and played a significant role in both Croatian and Serbian.

It is true, that R1a1 is usually more abundant among Slavs, however its origin is much more ancient and it can't be related to any specific meta-ethnicity.

Exactly. No haplogroup can be related to meta-ethnicity.

Compare Serbian and FYROMian percentages they're almost the same, it is quite obvious they have a common origin, probably a mix of Illyrians of Paleo-European extraction, Illyrians (and/or Thracians) of Neolithic stock and ancient Slavonians.

Possible, but that's only a guess. Similar genetic make up doesn't mean that they have common origin.

If their Macedonian origin was so clear, they would be much closer to Greek Macedonians, and well, figures speak by themselves. I'm not denying a possible and small Macedonian influence in FYROMians, but that would be all, just a small influence that could be also be found in other Balkanic people, such as Bulgarians, Serbs, etc.

True, but who says that ancient Macedonians were genetically similar to today's Greek Macedonians? We know almost nothing about them, except the fact they were speaking a Greek dialect. Today's Croats and Serbs speak almost the same language, but are genetically pretty much different.

Originally Posted by Kan Yuvigi Asparukh

I'm interested in other thing. If we compare table one of Bardyllis' post and that one, I see that the people calling themselves Bulgarians Macedonians and Serbians are almost the same genetically. I'm not an anthropologist but that's what I understood from these statistics. Correct me, if I'm wrong

The old post you presented contains obsolete data. At that time Eu's and HG's were used, but those terms were inadequate because they were ill defined.
For example HG2(haplotype group 2), observed in Bulgarians and Serbs in a high frequency, should have been the synonym for today's haplogroup I. But it contained not only haplogroup I, but also the fragments of some related haplogroups.
The mistake with HG2 is even greater when you know that haplogroup I is divided into a dozen of subclades, where almost every subclade has its own subclade.
So, for example, if this HG test was done on Croats, Norwegians and Sardinians, all three group samples would undoubtedly show high frequency of HG2. That would cause a great mess, because those people shared common ancestors approx 15 000-10 000 years ago(through the haplogroup I).
Here you can see what designations are used today, as well as all haplogroups and their subclades.