Who am I?

 I have never told here my blog who I am.  First, I have a genealogy research based on church and admisistrative documents reaching all my ancestrors to the end of the 17th century and certain Finnish male lineages to the beginning of the 16th century.  99% of my earliest lineages carry Finnish names and were settlers from Tavastia to the seaside of the Bothnian Bay. They supposedly moved from tavastia 500-700 ybp.   During the heyday of the Swedish realm, in the 17th century I have some foreign lineages from Baltic countries, Germany and Scotland covering around 3% of my ancestry.  From the end of the 18th century my ancestry is again fully Finnish by name, as well as proven by church registers.  All this is essential to know before estimating my genetic ancestry.  During years I have tested myself on online genetic tests, not only one or two, but maybe tens and I have a good general view about methods and about results I get averagely. Nowadays tests and the research behind them have improved, mostly the improvement is due to the growing amount of reference samples.  In a few years the reference sample size is multiplied.  However used methods can mislead.  Basically methods can be divided into two categories: tests trying to find a prevalent ancestry using genetic fingerprints characteristic for each populations.  This method is useful in a worldwide genealogical research, giving a good estimate where your ancestor comes from.  Another way to estimate someone's ancestry is an orthodox admixture method using reference groups.  The biggest problem in this method is how to select reference groups.  Missed or wrong reference groups give false admixtures, because you can practically choose any two or more points on the genetic geography to determine one's  admixtures.  So be cautious!  Nevetheless, real (orthodox) admixture test with wide genome sample can reveal real things with better certainty than the method searching only prevalent ancestry, simply because you typically don't know the used method and how your prevalent ancestry is found and if there are minor admixtures.  Both methods can be misleading, but in the case of real admixture you can evaluate things being wrong and right, in the case of prevalent ancestry method you have not data and tools to judge the result.

My first result show that I am Finnish and this data could be published without further information.  In this case it tells that my admixture looks MOSTLY like an average Finnish admixture, but some tests could find my Finnish origin by certain genetic fingerprints, which is totally a different case.  Showing typical Finnish admixture doesn't tell that the Finns ARE a mixed population, only that it can be in some time frame.  

Following results show that I am according these tests, as well the Finns averagely, mixed, but there is a probability that the Finnish reference (possible also others references) is poorly selected.  Changing relative position on the genetic geography I could be fully Finnish and the chosen Finnish reference mildly mixed in some other way.