v. P. Alekseev discussed the racial types of the Altai-Sayan uplands during the Neolithic and Bronze Age. On the basis of geological and palreo climatic evidence, he feels that the initial human settlement of the area could have taken place as far back as the Lower Palreolithic (which in Soviet usage includes the Mousterian). Judging by the Afontova Gora II cranial fragment, the Upper Palreolithic population evidently must be assigned to the Mongoloid race. The Europeoid component begins to penetrate into certain areas during the Neolithic-especially into the southern part of the Krasnoyarsk Territory. Alekseev identifies in this latter area a morphologically Negroid type which would indicate contact with_ southern regions.
Russian Source Materials for the Racial History of Northern Eurasia Author(s): Chester S. ChardSource: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1962), pp. 117-125
Along with many Mongoloid features it displays prognathism and a wide nose. The latter confirm previous evidence from this area suggesting that there was a southern element (Negroid- Australoid) in the Neolithic population here which persisted into the Bronze Age.Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Palaeolithic of the Urals and the Peopling of the North Author(s): O. N. Bader and Richard G. KleinSource: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 3, No. 1 (1965), pp. 77-90
In the Holocene, when the continental glacier disappeared from the north and the immediate consequences of the glaciations were overcome, ancient Mesolithic hunters of the region of the Urals settled in the peri-Arctic territory leaving traces of their stay even in the Bol'shezemel'skaia tundra (Chernov 1948). In the region of the Urals, as apparently in the forested zone of Siberia, the transition to the Mesolithic was accomplished by macrolithic tool users (Golii Kamen1 near Nizhnii Tagil) and only later, as the consequences of glaciation were gradually overcome and the landscape zones were displaced to the north, were the Urals settled on both flanks by people with a well-developed microlithic technique (Bader I960). These people came from the south - from the Ponto-Caspian region. This southern wave probably strengthened the Europoid element in the Urals and possibly brought with it an attenuated Negroid type which later is found west of the Urals in the late Neolithic (Gavrilovka), in the Bronze Age (the Algashinskii burial ground of the Abashevo culture), and even in the Iron Age (the Mari burial grounds).
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
What's interesting is Nakashima et. al 2010. In this study the authors analyzed 14 world prehistoric samples using 20 nonmetric cranial traits. The Iron Age Tagar sample least distant Early Mongol and Arctic Ekven samples. The next least distant samples are a pooled Badarian/Naqada sample and then a Iron Age Lachish/Early Dynasty Kish sample.
I will add that the pooled Badarian/Naqada sample and the pooled Iron Age Lachish/Early Dynasty Kish sample are closer than any other sample set in the series.
Evergreen Posts:
Nonmetric Cranial Variation of Jomon Japan: Implications for the Evolution of Eastern Asian Diversity
NAKASHIMA et. al
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN BIOLOGY 22:782–790 (2010)
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
We already know that the Iron Age Lachish series has some degree of affinity to the Badarian series, as Keita had demonstrated so. This affinity though, pales in comparison to that invoked by mis-classifications of Lachish specimens into the "E" series, the Abydos or even the Kerma series. However, it is important to note, time and again, NO Badarian series has classified into the European series, whereas some Lachish specimens did mis-classify into the European series.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:This southern wave probably strengthened the Europoid element in the Urals and possibly brought with it an attenuated Negroid type which later is found west of the Urals in the late Neolithic (Gavrilovka), in the Bronze Age (the Algashinskii burial ground of the Abashevo culture), and even in the Iron Age (the Mari burial grounds).[/i]
So what to make of this: that the so-called "Europoid" element co-existed with the so-called "Negroid" element in a southern territory?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:This southern wave probably strengthened the Europoid element in the Urals and possibly brought with it an attenuated Negroid type which later is found west of the Urals in the late Neolithic (Gavrilovka), in the Bronze Age (the Algashinskii burial ground of the Abashevo culture), and even in the Iron Age (the Mari burial grounds).[/i]
So what to make of this: that the so-called "Europoid" element co-existed with the so-called "Negroid" element in a southern territory?
Evergreen Writes:
Terms such as "Europoid" and "Negroid" are outdated and pre-genetic. The most parsimonious explaination following basic evolutionary principles is that the diversity found throughout holocene Eurasia represents phenetic divergence from a common African substratum. This model however "rains on the parade" of both the Eurocentric and the Afrocentric.
For the Eurocentric it can no longer be claimed that genetic records indicating Paleolithic back-migrations from Eurasia into Africa brought "Caucasoids" since many of the living Paleolithic Eurasians still resembled Africans.
For the Afrocentric it becomes more difficult to claim recent phylogenetic affinity between Africans and far flung groups such as Olmecs and Sumerians. A more valid model is the African phenetic characteristics found in these regions have been in place since the Paleolithic perod, hence the modern African genetic profile is distinct from the genetic profile in modern Mesoamerica and the Euphrates region. Not all Blacks are African and many whites such as modern Greeks have recent phylogenetic affinity with Africans.
quote:Originally posted by The Evergreen: [QUOTE] Paleoamerican morphology in the context of European and East Asian late Pleistocene variation: Implications for human dispersion into the new world
Hubbe et. al.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
2010
Therefore, these studies broadly support the idea that the morphological diversity seen among modern human groups today is a process of late differentiation that probably took place during the Holocene.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: For the Afrocentric it becomes more difficult to claim recent phylogenetic affinity between Africans and far flung groups such as Olmecs and Sumerians. A more valid model is the African phenetic characteristics found in these regions have been in place since the Paleolithic perod, hence the modern African genetic profile is distinct from the genetic profile in modern Mesoamerica and the Euphrates region. Not all Blacks are African and many whites such as modern Greeks have recent phylogenetic affinity with Africans.
quote:Originally posted by The Evergreen: [QUOTE] Paleoamerican morphology in the context of European and East Asian late Pleistocene variation: Implications for human dispersion into the new world
Hubbe et. al.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
2010
Therefore, these studies broadly support the idea that the morphological diversity seen among modern human groups today is a process of late differentiation that probably took place during the Holocene.
Hubbe finding contradicts your statement about the absence of recent African migrations.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: For the Afrocentric it becomes more difficult to claim recent phylogenetic affinity between Africans and far flung groups such as Olmecs and Sumerians. A more valid model is the African phenetic characteristics found in these regions have been in place since the Paleolithic perod, hence the modern African genetic profile is distinct from the genetic profile in modern Mesoamerica and the Euphrates region. Not all Blacks are African and many whites such as modern Greeks have recent phylogenetic affinity with Africans.
quote:Originally posted by The Evergreen: [QUOTE] Paleoamerican morphology in the context of European and East Asian late Pleistocene variation: Implications for human dispersion into the new world
Hubbe et. al.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
2010
Therefore, these studies broadly support the idea that the morphological diversity seen among modern human groups today is a process of late differentiation that probably took place during the Holocene.
Hubbe finding contradicts your statement about the absence of recent African migrations.
Evergreen Writes:
How so...specifically? Please provide a direct quote from the Hubbe et. al. study that would support your position.
The research of Hubbe et. al. indicates that humans migrated out of Africa (OOA) during the Upper Paleolithic with physical characteristics (phenetic affinity) closely resembling recent tropical Africans. Only during the Holocene did these populations begin to diverege phenetically to resemble recent populations from the Americas, Europe and East Asia. As the evidence from the Olmec, Kish, Mohenjo-Darro, Kurgans, etc. indicate, this process of phenetic divergence was still taking place as late as the Iron Age.
There is no need to attribute phenetic affinities with recent Africans in bronze age Eurasia to migrations from Nubia when these phenetic characteristics are really indigenous to the regions in question.
While the phenetic traits of Africa were still largely retained by OOA Eurasians unique genetic characteristics emerged during the Upper Paleolithic. This is consistent with Eurasian genetic lingeages being present in areas where we see African phenetic traits as late as the Iron Age (i.e. the Olmec or Sumeria).
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QUOTE]The Sumerians said they were Kings of Kish/Kush there was no Kush during the Holocene.
Evergreen Writes:
Of course there were. I think you are confused about the meaning of the term "Holocene". The Holocene means the recent epoch and it dates from approximately 12,000 years ago (a little earlier in the tropics) to the present.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Palaeolithic of the Urals and the Peopling of the North Author(s): O. N. Bader and Richard G. KleinSource: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 3, No. 1 (1965), pp. 77-90
In the Holocene, when the continental glacier disappeared from the north and the immediate consequences of the glaciations were overcome, ancient Mesolithic hunters of the region of the Urals settled in the peri-Arctic territory leaving traces of their stay even in the Bol'shezemel'skaia tundra (Chernov 1948). In the region of the Urals, as apparently in the forested zone of Siberia, the transition to the Mesolithic was accomplished by macrolithic tool users (Golii Kamen1 near Nizhnii Tagil) and only later, as the consequences of glaciation were gradually overcome and the landscape zones were displaced to the north, were the Urals settled on both flanks by people with a well-developed microlithic technique (Bader I960). These people came from the south - from the Ponto-Caspian region. This southern wave probably strengthened the Europoid element in the Urals and possibly brought with it an attenuated Negroid type which later is found west of the Urals in the late Neolithic (Gavrilovka), in the Bronze Age (the Algashinskii burial ground of the Abashevo culture), and even in the Iron Age (the Mari burial grounds).
Evergreen Writes:
Maybe not so crazy after all....
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hypothetically, someone comes to you, and says, perhaps the Neolithic remains of Anatolian first farmers, or even the Natufians, could also very well indicate a population undergoing evolution from the "Negroid" stratum during the transition from the Upper Paleolithic to Neolithic, and to this you say...?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Hypothetically, someone comes to you, and says, perhaps the Neolithic remains of Anatolian first farmers, or even the Natufians, could also very well indicate a population undergoing evolution from the "Negroid" stratum during the transition from the Upper Paleolithic to Neolithic, and to this you say...?
Evergreen Writes:
I'm not sure we have enough data from Anatolia to really understand the phenetic trend. But there is no reason to believe it would be any different in Anatolia than other regions of Eurasia. Hence it is likely that in situ evolution could in part explain some of the phenetic affinities we find in neolithic Anatolia. There is however a clear phylogenetic record around the circum-mediterranean basin indicating an early Holocene migration out of NE Africa. We don't know how quickly the phenetic traits were absorbed by indigenous Eurasians or the degree of geographic penetration of these traits. We do know that within a generation phenetic traits can change diverge.
Craniofacial evidence from the Ohalo > Natufian > PPN cultures indicates an intrusion from the south at the dawn of the Natufian phase and then a drift back to a type similar to the Ohalo culture during the PPN.
============================================== Life on the Color Line: The True Story of a White Boy Who Discovered He Was Black
From Publishers Weekly Williams, dean of the Ohio State University College of Law, tells the affecting and absorbing story of his most unusual youth. Born to a white mother and a black father who passed for white, Williams was raised as white in Virginia until he was 10, when his mother left. His father brought his two sons back home to Muncie, Ind., in 1954 and sank further into drink. The two boys were eventually taken in by Miss Dora, a poor black widow. Williams's many anecdotes are a mixture of pain, struggle and triumph: learning "hustles" from Dad, receiving guidance from a friend's mother, facing racism from teachers and classmates, beginning a clandestine romance with a white girl he eventually married. And while his scarred, grandiloquent father was never reliable, he did instill in young Greg-though not in Greg's brother-sustaining dreams of professional success. Along the way the author decided, despite his appearance, he would proudly claim the black identity that white Muncie wouldn't let him forget. Williams ends his narrative when he reaches college; in the epilogue, he regrets that "there were too many who were unable to break the mold Muncie cast." ==================================================
The Gregory Williams story tells us it hard to look at someone and tell if they are Black or not....
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
Hence it is likely that in situ evolution could in part explain some of the phenetic affinities we find in neolithic Anatolia.
How then, in such a scenario, do you separate the exogenous "Negroid" component from an "evolving Negroid" component?
If we are to go by research from the likes of Brace, then one would have to figure that the "Negroid" component in the "Near East" [as implicated in Natufians] was pronounced enough to be distinguished from trends observed in Neolithic specimens from say, southern Europe [sans the Balkans].
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Hence it is likely that in situ evolution could in part explain some of the phenetic affinities we find in neolithic Anatolia.
How then, in such a scenario, do you separate the exogenous "Negroid" component from an "evolving Negroid" component?
Evergreen Writes: I think it's going to be difficult to assess whether/which remains show phenetic affinity to recent Africans due to holocene migration and which remains show phenetic affinity to recent Africans due to trait retention until we are able to test and compare regionlly microspecific populations across timespan. We should look at Anatolian UP > Mesolithic > Early Neolithic > Late Neolithic to really drill down and understand the phenetic trends and why those trends exist. In that the archaeogenetics of Greece indicate a possible rapid mesolithic migration from Africa around the circum-mediterranean basin and that this migration would have spread through Anatolia (unless it was across the Aegean from the Eastern Mediterranean) then one would have to assume at least part of the African phenetic traits we see in neolithic Anatolia can be explained by holocene era migration.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you not think Neolithic Anatolia would not have been an extension of say, trends in the Levant or southern Europe?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Do you not think Neolithic Anatolia would not have been an extension of say, trends in the Levant or southern Europe?
Evergreen Writes: Yes, I do.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
In that regard, if we are to interpret work from someone like Brace, we are confronted with patterns in southern Europe that suggests that basic "Negroid" stratum, which would have been present in Upper Paleolithic Europe, had largely drifted away and replaced by new trends, as seen in southern Neolithic Europe. Against this backdrop, interpreting an EpiPaleolithic or early Neolithic Levantine specimen as having a "Negroid" component of "equal importance" as the "Eurasian" component, suggests that one of either component is the product of exogenous source. If one is to accept that the "Eurasian" component is extensive of that of other parts of Eurasia, then is that not sufficient to say that these "Negroid" elements are a manifestation of recent migration from elsewhere, outside of the 'Eurasian' confines in question?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: In that regard, if we are to interpret work from someone like Brace, we are confronted with patterns in southern Europe that suggests that basic "Negroid" stratum, which would have been present in Upper Paleolithic Europe, had largely drifted away and replaced by new trends, as seen in southern Neolithic Europe.
Evergreen Writes: Yes, this is true. Unlike the Upper Paleolithic European samples from Hubbe et. al. that cluster near modern Zulu these neolithic samples are more akin to Late Dynastic northern Egyptians. Neither the neolithic European or the Late Dynastic Egyptian have modal affinities with recent Europeans or recent Zulu, though at the individual level some probably did.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Against this backdrop, interpreting an EpiPaleolithic or early Neolithic Levantine specimen as having a "Negroid" component of "equal importance" as the "Eurasian" component, suggests that one of either component is the product of exogenous source.
Evergreen Writes: This is true and the craniofacial and genetic data support a migration from NE Africa to the Levant during the early Holocene. While the Ohalo were Mesorrhine the latter Natufians boadered the platyrrhine range, consistent with migration from a more warm and humid climate. Both fall within the range of variation indigenous to Africa. Recent Europeans tend to be leptorrhine for example.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, but Brace's Neolithic southern European samples clustered amongst themselves rather than with the Nile Valley examples [Bronze age?, but didn't include late Dynastic northern Egyptian samples] they tested. Recalling Brace, Neolithic specimens of Europe more resembled patterns observed in recent southern Europeans than the more northern ones. Do you have any graphic material that suggests neolithic European specimens are almost like the "late Dynastic northern Egyptian" series?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Yeah, but Brace's Neolithic southern European samples clustered amongst themselves rather than with the Nile Valley examples [Bronze age?, but didn't include late Dynastic northern Egyptian samples] they tested. Recalling Brace, Neolithic specimens of Europe more resembled patterns observed in recent southern Europeans than the more northern ones. Do you have any graphic material that suggests neolithic European specimens are almost like the "late Dynastic northern Egyptian" series?
Evergreen Writes: I've got it hit the hay. So we'll have to pick this one up later.
But look at Figure 4 here. Noted how Late Dynastic and North Africa cluster closer to the neolithic European samples than do the recent Continental and NW Europe samples.
posted
Yes, the Late Dynastic [Giza] series by centroid scores clusters with most of the Neolithic European samples, along with the coastal North [western] African samples. I suppose the indirect significance of this would be that both the Late Dynasty [Giza] series and late Holocene Maghrebi crania contain a mix of "tropical African" and "European" cranio-metric patterns. Interesting though, is the position of Neolithic England and Neolithic German samples; in the same figure, they clustered more closely with recent northwest European samples than they did with the rest of Neolithic European samples. And overall, the European samples, both Neolithic and recent samples form a cluster. So, how does that square with the said "heterogeneous" composition of the Maghrebi and Giza series?
Note his Nagadan sample tied closer to the combined Indian sample than the Somali sample, in the same fig.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Yes, the Late Dynastic [Giza] series by centroid scores clusters with most of the Neolithic European samples, along with the coastal North [western] African samples. I suppose the indirect significance of this would be that both the Late Dynasty [Giza] series and late Holocene Maghrebi crania contain a mix of "tropical African" and "European" cranio-metric patterns. Interesting though, is the position of Neolithic England and Neolithic German samples; in the same figure, they clustered more closely with recent northwest European samples than they did with the rest of Neolithic European samples. And overall, the European samples, both Neolithic and recent samples form a cluster. So, how does that square with the said "heterogeneous" composition of the Maghrebi and Giza series?
Evergreen Writes:
In "The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form" figure 1 note that mesolithic France clusters with Natufians and Taforalt/Afaalou while the Portugese mesolithic clusters with the Algerian neolithic.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 January 3; 103(1): 242–247.
The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
Interesting though, is the position of Neolithic England and Neolithic German samples; in the same figure, they clustered more closely with recent northwest European samples than they did with the rest of Neolithic European samples. And overall, the European samples, both Neolithic and recent samples form a cluster. So, how does that square with the said "heterogeneous" composition of the Maghrebi and Giza series?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Any take on the highlighted?...
Originally posted by The Explorer:
Interesting though, is the position of Neolithic England and Neolithic German samples; in the same figure, they clustered more closely with recent northwest European samples than they did with the rest of Neolithic European samples. And overall, the European samples, both Neolithic and recent samples form a cluster. So, how does that square with the said "heterogeneous" composition of the Maghrebi and Giza series?
Evergreen Writes:
Likely a reflection of the fact that non-Africans represent a sub-set of African phenetic diversity.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe what I was driving at was not as obvious as I thought.
I looked at Brace's Fig 4. dendrogram, and what I saw was an interesting super-clustering of Europeans specimens, i.e. both Neolithic and more recent European samples.
Within this super-cluster, one finds the late northern Egyptian Giza series and the northern African series.
While the northern Egyptian Giza series and the northern African series were place in the midst of Neolithic European series, something interesting was also happening: The Neolithic England and German specimens kind of assume their own outliers out of the rest of the Neolithic European series. Instead of closely clustering with other Neolithic European series, these two series assume some degree of distance from them.
My question is therefore this: Given that we know from other sources, that the Maghreb and late dynastic Egyptian "E" series contain a mix of "tropical African" and "European" cranio-metric patterns, then what should the fact that they place into Brace's (1993) super-cluster of European specimens tell us about European specimens? Remember, this super-cluster includes both Neolithic and late or more recent Holocene European specimens?
Should the Neolithic European specimens and the Late Dynastic Egyptian Giza and Maghrebi series not instead form their own super-clusters distinct from the more recent "northwest Europe" and, perhaps "continental Europe", because "northwest Europe" series is less inclined to bimodal contrast like those seen in ether the late Giza series or the Maghreb series? Instead, one would figure that the Maghreb and the late Giza series would assume positions somewhere in between a sub-set of tropical Africans [usually referred to in the ideal "Negroid" descriptive] and northwest Europeans, no?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank to Swenet for pointing me to this thread. So the morphology support the genetics(Lazaridis et al). The Neolithics were Africans. Southern Europeans are more Africans than Northern Europeans. Irregardless modern Europeans are an amalgam of new and old populations.
------------- QUOTE: The research of Hubbe et. al. indicates that humans migrated out of Africa (OOA) during the Upper Paleolithic with physical characteristics (phenetic affinity) closely resembling recent tropical Africans. Only during the Holocene did these populations begin to diverege phenetically to resemble recent populations from the Americas, Europe and East Asia. As the evidence from the Olmec, Kish, Mohenjo-Darro, Kurgans, etc. indicate, this process of phenetic divergence was still taking place as late as the Iron Age. --- Yes, It is clear that there were dramatic morphological changes beginning in the bronze age.
Also---- The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form - C. Loring Brace*†, Noriko Seguchi
Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other. When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of human populations are used to generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other. THE SURPRISE IS THAT THE NEOLITHIC PEOPLES OF EUROPE AND THEIR BRONZE AGE SUCCESSORS ARE NOT CLOSELY RELATED TO THE MODERN INHABITANTS, ALTHOUGH THE PREHISTORIC_MODERN TIES ARE SOMEWHAT MORE APPARENT IN SOUTHERN EUROPE. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. Basques and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it. -----
It is clear , now, Brace was wrong on the “in situ” assumption. The Farmers replace the HG but apparently there was substantial morphological changes “recently”.
Now if we can get past the gay thing we can do some serious damage.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
XyYTHATER, yeah that coming from someone who has stated that Whites are inferior non-humans & have no place on earth we belong. LOL You actually expect any self respecting White person with any amount of pride to believe anything an Anti-White self hater & Anti-White Asian racist has to say XyYTHater?? Boy you Black racist Black supremacists need to make up your dang minds first you say we Whites are from Siberia/or Central Asia, then you turn around and say no that was us too. Silly silly wittle Black racists.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
?? Not sure what you just said there. ANYWAYS!. Brace, Lazaridis, DNATribes, Xyyman, and many others all have concluded the same thing. But it all started with …you know who….my man…..Sergi. He had it pegged from the git go. Europeans are a subset of Africans. There is no “European race” As Brace just pointed out there. Morphological changes takes place at an astonishingly fast rate.
If Cass is reading this. You posted a piece on the female African-American nose. Anyone has the complete paper. I think a clue lies in that paper.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am curious. Do you talk science at your redneck meetings. Do you guys understand all this stuff we are posting? Like dendrograms, Treemix etc.
For a high schooler it can be overwhelming.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ DHhoxie, 8 years ago when I started on this journey I succumbed to dogma mostly. The usual stuff showing pictures to make my point.
I have moved on. I know now Europeans are primarily a sub-set of Africans. I am we'll read now. Sergi was my turning point,
Sage called me out on the flipping in the past with Cleopatra. I like most Afrocentric back then I believe she was black using the flimsy logic. I know now she is black but through a total different line of rational. Something much more logical than blind dogma. I am not AMRTU.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: The Palaeolithic of the Urals and the Peopling of the North Author(s): O. N. Bader and Richard G. KleinSource: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 3, No. 1 (1965), pp. 77-90
In the Holocene, when the continental glacier disappeared from the north and the immediate consequences of the glaciations were overcome, ancient Mesolithic hunters of the region of the Urals settled in the peri-Arctic territory leaving traces of their stay even in the Bol'shezemel'skaia tundra (Chernov 1948). In the region of the Urals, as apparently in the forested zone of Siberia, the transition to the Mesolithic was accomplished by macrolithic tool users (Golii Kamen1 near Nizhnii Tagil) and only later, as the consequences of glaciation were gradually overcome and the landscape zones were displaced to the north, were the Urals settled on both flanks by people with a well-developed microlithic technique (Bader I960). These people came from the south - from the Ponto-Caspian region. This southern wave probably strengthened the Europoid element in the Urals and possibly brought with it an attenuated Negroid type which later is found west of the Urals in the late Neolithic (Gavrilovka), in the Bronze Age (the Algashinskii burial ground of the Abashevo culture), and even in the Iron Age (the Mari burial grounds).
Quote: an attenuated Negroid type...in the Bronze Age (the Algashinskii burial ground of the Abashevo culture)
They've recently found a Bronze Age E1b carrier in Ukraine. For those who don't know, Ukraine is immediately southwest of where this map places the Abashevo culture.
posted
Excellent work young man!!! Connecting the dots and covering all lines of evidence and discipline.
Genetics, geography, anthropology and archaeology!!! Nice!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you mean I3151 from Verteba Cave, associated with Trypillian culture, ~4000-3500 BC, or is there another one?
An amateur went through the data for this sample (which is very low quality) and found one M35 and one M78 equivalent SNPs positive, and 2 L19 and 1 Z830 equivalent SNPs negative besides a few others. Not exactly reliable, but plausible, since E-M78 has been found in ancient Europe previously.
I3498 from Croatia, ~5500 BC, E-L618 (sister to E-V13); there is also an early E-V13 from Cardial Neolithic Spain, though the ID escapes me at the moment. The Trypillian ones are also European Neolithic autosomally according to Mathieson et al.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
Invite some posters from Anthrogenica on here if you can. I like that you have opposing views from others and it has been keeping the discussions on here healthy. All tho... People from that site may see this site in a negative light.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks gramps. We have to. These papers are definitely not going to do African history for us. Not that I consider Ukraine and southern Russia African history. But Semitic people are.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Invite some posters from Anthrogenica on here if you can. I like that you have opposing views from others and it has been keeping the discussions on here healthy. All tho... People from that site may see this site in a negative light.
Sorry man, people think EgyptSearch they think Clyde Winters, xxyman, and Mike111, not the more knowledgeable (if, uh, quirky) posters.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Invite some posters from Anthrogenica on here if you can. I like that you have opposing views from others and it has been keeping the discussions on here healthy. All tho... People from that site may see this site in a negative light.
Sorry man, people think EgyptSearch they think Clyde Winters, xxyman, and Mike111, not the more knowledgeable (if, uh, quirky) posters.
Yeah I totally understand but Mike111 been gone.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
They wont come because of FEAR. Where is that guy who cane for a few days when I was banned....the first time. IWu mimu or something like that. He rejoiced when I was banned. Showed up for a few days ..you guys dogged him and then he disappeared.
They are mostly frauds....maybe not Capra. His objective is different.
His job is to dissuade and steer the conversation from the obvious conclusion. He is technical enough to do damage.
But I am on to you Capra. I got you covered.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic