posted
^ So says the loser who's too stupid to realize he lost his argument when he first started, when was that?... months ago!! LMAO
The same loser who distorts others positions in a bauched attempt to 'win'. For example you spin Mind and Rasols point that Europeans are Asian descent to mean that they descend from modern east Asians like Chinese when in fact they descend from prehistoric Central Asians who are also ancestral to south asians, east asians, etc. These Europeans then recieved admixture from incoming Africans during the Neolithic.
Now to all other intelligent posters:
Step right up. Come one, come all to take your shot at the dumb jackass!
P.S. the degenerate donkey is used to having objects hit its face, especially if its phallic. Posts: 26295 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Again, only one measly post. You must be getting frustrated with being a frustrated loser! lol Come on rasolowitz, start again, this time with increased frustration.
From what had seemed like irreversible oblivion, archaeologists and population geneticists believe they are on the verge of retrieving a record of human history stretching back almost 50,000 years.
The record, built on a synthesis of archaeological and genetic data, would be a bare bones kind of history without individual names or deeds. But it could create a chronicle of events, however sketchy, between the dawn of the human species at least 50,000 years ago and the beginning of recorded history in 3,500 B.C. The events would be the dated migrations of people from one region to another, linked with the archaeological cultures and perhaps with development of the world's major language groups.
The new element in this synthesis is the increasing power of geneticists to look back in time and trace the history of past populations from analysis of the DNA of people alive today.
''It is astonishing how much archaeology is beginning to learn from genetics,'' Dr. Colin Renfrew, a leading archaeologist at the University of Cambridge in England, said at a conference on human origins held last month at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island.
In one of the most detailed genetic reconstructions of population history so far, Dr. Martin Richards of the University of Huddersfield in England and many colleagues have traced the remarkably ancient ancestry of the present-day population of Europe.
Some 6 percent of Europeans are descended from the continent's first founders, who entered Europe from the Near East in the Upper Paleolithic era 45,000 years ago, Dr. Richards calculates. The descendants of these earliest arrivals are still more numerous in certain regions of Europe that may have provided them with refuge from subsequent waves of immigration. One is the mountainous Basque country, where people still speak a language completely different from all other European languages. Another is in the European extreme of Scandinavia. Another 80 percent arrived 30,000 to 20,000 years ago, before the peak of the last glaciation, and 10 percent came in the Neolithic 10,000 years ago, when the ice age ended and agriculture was first introduced to Europe from the Near East.
It used to be thought that the most important human dispersals occurred in the Neolithic, prompted by the population increases made possible by the invention of agriculture. But it now seems that the world filled up early and the first inhabitants were quite resistant to displacement by later arrivals.
Dr. Richards's estimates, reported in the current issue of The American Journal of Human Genetics, are based on analysis of mitochondrial DNA, a genetic element that occurs in both men and women but that is transmitted only through the mother; thus, they reflect only the movement of women.
The movement of men can be followed through analysis of the Y chromosome, but the Y chromosome is harder to work with and data are only just now becoming available. In an article in the current issue of Science, Dr. Peter A. Underhill of Stanford University and colleagues reported the first analysis of the European population in terms of the Y chromosome. Although this agrees with the mitochondrial DNA findings in major outline, suggesting that Europe was populated mostly in the Paleolithic period with additions in the Neolithic, there are some points of difference.
The earliest migration into Europe according to mitochondrial DNA took place from the Near East 45,000 years ago, but Dr. Underhill and his colleagues said they could see no corresponding migration in the Y chromosome data.
They have found a very ancient Y chromosome mutation that occurs in Siberia as well as Europe. They boldly link this mutation with the bearers of the Aurignacian culture who entered Europe 40,000 years ago. The culture appears in Siberia at about the same time, as if these early people had spread both east and west...
Hence aboriginal European lineages derive from prehistoric Asia and NOT modern Chinese, you dumb over-sodomized ass. Posts: 26295 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What did these "prehistoric Asians" look like? Where they black or Chinese looking? Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ What difference does it matter? They were still from Asia which is why Europeans are Asian-derived. In a sense it really doesn't matter since Europe itself is merely an appendage or Asia or rather a subcontinent itself just as India. Which is why the whole 'European continent' notion itself just geopolitical rhetoric just like 'Middle East'.
But I don't expect a dumb degenerate donkey like you to understand.
Posts: 26295 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ come on Mary. I know you can, like a good prey, sense danger in my questions. But don't be afraid maybe you won't disappoint your buddies this time like you always end up doing. Now lets go again, "What did these "prehistoric Asians" look like? Where they black or Chinese looking?"Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
For how many years are you going to continue with your senseless back and forth bickering? Do you guys even have children, family, marriage? Or is bickering on the net your wives?
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Just as I thought. Loser times two. lol
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Depressed Donkey Denies Distorting 
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic