Thanks for posting the videos - they are definitely educational.
I like Stringer's embracing of Heidelbergensis - my thought for many, many years (perhaps it's a difference between the European view vs. what used to be a more widespread US thought on the topic).
Unfortunately, both didn't go any further on the green Sahara, and didn't mention the adjacent green Arabia and associated stone tool sets, nor the importance of a possible back-migration into Africa. Stringer was a bit off there with some of the dates - also confusing mtDNA last-common-ancestor dates with the average autosomal one.
Did I understand Hammer correctly that up to 15% of the African genome could be archaic? Sunday, May 20, 2012 10:32:00 am
Jim H. said...
Stringer covers that material but with only monochrome illustrations in his excellent 2011 book (Amazon UK) http://tinyurl.com/cmhlng7 Different title in US -- http://tinyurl.com/79u5a6j Sunday, May 20, 2012 2:12:00 pm
George said...
Michael Hammer talked about the New High Priests in his field.
I am a just a lay person (worshiper) and was wondering if Dienekes, Razib Khan and others could comment on this and provide their own lineup of 5 or so "Priestly" persons.
I actually have some skin in this game as my new son inlaw is about to graduate with a Bachelors in Anthropology .... and then I guess he needs a Masters and PHd until he can start bringing home some bucks.
Also, what's others take on Hammer's comments on the Jolly Babboon Analogy? Sunday, May 20, 2012 8:35:00 pm
Onur said... This comment has been removed by the author. Sunday, May 20, 2012 11:57:00 pm Onur said...
Interesting findings about relatively high level of archaic admixture in Negroids, in line with the degree of their genetic distance to non-Negroids. Pygmies seem to show expecially high levels of archaic admixture. I think this is the reason behind their genetic divergence from the rest of the extant modern humans. I am sure the San would show similarly high levels of archaic admixture if they were examined.
As Stringer pointed out, it would be interesting to test the hypothesis that the differences between the phenotypes of the extant human races are mainly due to different types and levels of archaic admixture. Here is my guesstimate of the ordering of the extant human races based on the level of archaic admixture from the lowest to the highest: Caucasoids - Mongoloids (including Amerindians) - Australoids - Negroids (hunter-gatherer Negroids having the highest level of archaic admixture). Monday, May 21, 2012 11:45:00 am Unknown said...
"Interesting findings about relatively high level of archaic admixture in Negroids"
Hammer only mentions the Biaka Pygmies in this context not other Africans. The estimate, which is still unconfirmed, for this group, was approximately 7.5-10%(described in the video as three to four times the archaic in Europeans). Hall and Hammer's estimates have been off in the past. They estimated at least 5% Neanderthal in Europeans when the average is in fact about 2.5%. Thursday, May 24, 2012 6:43:00 pm
Dienekes said...
It is clear -I've written about this as well- that the evidence for archaic admixture depends on the recency of the admixture event, because otherwise recombination removes the evidence for it (the archaic "chunks" of DNA become so small that the statistical case for them being archaic weakens).
Another great point made by Hammer is that the 2.5% is not actual admixture, but an _excess_ of admixture in Eurasians relative to Africans. He also makes another of my points, namely that the D-statistic based admixture estimates can be explained by either Neandertal admixture or African structure, and he's unsure which of the two processes explains most of it. Thursday, May 24, 2012 6:54:00 pm
Onur said...
Hammer only mentions the Biaka Pygmies in this context not other Africans.
Incorrect. In the 42nd minute of the video Mike Hammer presents the results of a soon-to-be-published study by Jeffrey (Jeff) Wall according to which archaic admixture in Negroids in general (not just Pygmies) is a few times higher than in non-Negroids. Biaka Pygmies have the highest archaic admixture level according to Wall's study. Unfortunately the San are not included in that study. Thursday, May 24, 2012 7:18:00 pm
Unknown said...
"Incorrect. In the 42nd minute of the video Mike Hammer presents the results of a soon-to-be-published study by Jeffrey (Jeff) Wall according to which archaic admixture in Negroids in general (not just Pygmies) is a few times higher than in non-Negroids. Biaka Pygmies have the highest archaic admixture level according to Wall's study. "
He mentions Africans without specifying which ones, and then describes the admixture in the Biaka as a few times higher. It is not clear whether he means Africans in general, certain African groups, or one. I do not believe he mentions "Negroids". As far as I know Subsaharans do not form a single cluster genetically. The divergences between Khoisans plus Hadza/Sandawe, Pygmies and most non foraging groups appear deep. West Africans and the "purer" Nilo-Saharan speakers of South Sudan(according tovTischkoff) seem to have diverged near the holocene. Thursday, May 24, 2012 11:55:00 pm
Onur said...
He mentions Africans without specifying which ones, and then describes the admixture in the Biaka as a few times higher. It is not clear whether he means Africans in general, certain African groups, or one. I do not believe he mentions "Negroids". As far as I know Subsaharans do not form a single cluster genetically. The divergences between Khoisans plus Hadza/Sandawe, Pygmies and most non foraging groups appear deep. West Africans and the "purer" Nilo-Saharan speakers of South Sudan(according tovTischkoff) seem to have diverged near the holocene.
He compares the archaic admixture levels in Negroids and non-Negroids according to the results of Wall's study and explicitly states that Negroids (he uses the word "Africans" to designate them) are much more archaic admixed than non-Negroids (he uses the word "non-Africans" to designate them) according to Wall's study and the chart he shows confirms that. He explicitly mentions Biaka Pygmies because they are the most archaic admixed of the studied Negroid populations, but from the chart it is clear that in addition to Pygmies two other Negroid populations were examined in that study (I know those two Negroid populations from earlier genetic studies). The three Negroid populations are from different parts of Sub-Saharan Africa and have very different traditional subsistence types and population histories, so they can represent Negroids in general when making a Negroid/non-Negroid comparison. Friday, May 25, 2012 3:02:00 am
Clearly many of the sites patrons are interested in what anthropologists studying Africans has to say about the levels of "archaic" admixture in "Negroids". Just as any person (with sense) would have thought.
Notice the tactful answer of the unknown responder near the bottom to use of the word "Negroids" by responders on this post.
And i'm not sure why you think Dienekes is a proponent of Coon's theories - he isn't.
which "sub-race" is older Mediterraneans or Nordics?
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
Arthur Kemp, a South African Nordicist/White Supremacist has recently responded to the criticism of his tract “March of the Titans: the History of the White Race” by this author with a slanderous mix of lies and misinformation. Of course, nothing less could be expected from the self-proclaimed historian of the White Race.
Kemp has spent a significant amount of time preparing his “refutation.” He has his reasons for it, because he cannot afford critique of his money-making enterprise of historical revisionism. I will eventually address all his “points” in this space. In the interim, I advise the reader to look at the extensive evidence gathered in Racial Type of the Ancient Hellenes.
This site does not engage in debate with Kemp. Anyone who has followed my writings over a long period of time knows that I do not harbor any bad feelings for any ethnic group, only at those who wish to misrepresent the history of my country to prove the superiority of their particular racial or ethnic group. I am honored that Afrocentrics and Nordicists like Kemp wish to associate with Greece, to live with “borrowed glory,” but unfortunately for them, they will not be allowed to do so.
posted
An essentially nonsensical term "archaic admixture".
"Homo Sapiens"--in the sense of the only surviving member of the species hominidae and has developed language and reflexive consciousness--attained its anatomical modernity and behavioural modernity in Africa. Kline has argued that human behavioural modernity extra-Africa but he has been refuted.
So what then is "archaic admixture"? The truth is that once humans reached the stage of language capability with its capacity for reflexive ratiocination then no trait could then be archaic. All human traits from that point onwards would just be adaptive or non-adaptive . If the trait is non-adaptive than it would be pushed towards adaptivity by any number of ways--contingent or non-contingent.
An example of non-contingent adaptivity is that of pigmentation. Melanin protects the human epidermis from UV damage so humans who live in places of the greatest UV incidence tend to be more melanin pigmented than elsewhere. The reverse occurs where UV rays are less threatening to the epidermis.
An example of contingent adaptivity would be traits derived from contingent genetic drift, contingent bottlenecking, contingent assorted mating and its peculiarities, etc.
Therefore, differentially arrived at traits cannot be described as archaic or non-archaic.
That's why the term "archaic admixture" is nonsensical.
lamin Member # 5777
posted
Now that it has been shown that Neanderthal DNA confers no "racial superiority" given that such DNA is confined not only to Europe but as far afield as New Guinea and parts of East Africa, there is now a scramble to reduce its incidence.
There is now the countermove to make the claim that African DNA now shows incidences of "archaic admixture". Just the same old wine in new plastic bottles.
Doug M Member # 7650
posted
Yes the white archaic negroes can't stand the truth. LOL!
But all joking aside, the only thing that this proves is that humans are social creatures and that the creation of racial socialization processes among Europeans has propelled them to where they are today. There is no two ways about it and this is PRIMARILY why they cling to it. The rest is mere window dressing as anyone with eyes can see the results in front of their face. Everyone wants to be part of something bigger than themselves in order to find meaning and purpose and much of the propaganda of the last 500 years has done just that for the people of Europe. America, out of all the colonial European satellites has not only built on this process for Europeans through the ideology of freedom and democracy, but also captured the imagination of most of the world. Where everyone wants to shoot for the "ideal vision" of a great society even if in reality it doesn't exist or is an illusion built on pain and suffering.
The counterpoint to that is that Africans now need to come up with their own socialization processes to propel them forwards, with the good thing being that at least Africans don't have to lie and steal to provide the framework for this process. That is the most important part.
And i'm not sure why you think Dienekes is a proponent of Coon's theories - he isn't.
Dienekes is no better than the Afronuts and he is somehow connected to these dna sites like 23andme and has had impact on the genetic blogosphere out there. People will find out some of this much to their chagrin later.
FYI - Afronuts are not "Proponents of Afrocentric theories. I don't like to confuse the two.
Dienekes and Kemp are both on the same level and both Euronutty nationalists no more relevant to the academic world than Coon was when he died.
The "mediterranean race" nationalism Dienekes leans toward is inspired by Coonology. There is no such thing. The fact that Dienekes even uses the word "race" means he may know a lot about science and statistics, but has little understanding of genetics.
dana marniche Member # 13149
posted
Dr. Fabrizio De Donno defines Mediterraneanism as the belief:
"The Eurafrican [Afro-Mediterranean] had created all the major civilizations of the Mediterranean and Europe, from the Egyptian to Graceo-Roman, and from that of the Renaissance to the contemporary."
(Another way of saying the Romans were white hamites that blackened in Africa.)
Whoever this guy is is more ridiculous than Coon. Another attempt by Italian scholars like Sergi to link themselves to the Abyssinians ( "Hamites") i.e. true proto-mediterranean populations.
posted
Onur sez: As Stringer pointed out, it would be interesting to test the hypothesis that the differences between the phenotypes of the extant human races are mainly due to different types and levels of archaic admixture. Here is my guesstimate of the ordering of the extant human races based on the level of archaic admixture from the lowest to the highest: Caucasoids - Mongoloids (including Amerindians) - Australoids - Negroids (hunter-gatherer Negroids having the highest level of archaic admixture).
^^The dull "Onur" forgot to mention that phenotype is also determined heavily by environmental adaptation. Onur's "guestimate" is pure bullshiitt. ANd as far as "archair" admixture, Europeans have per some studies do quite well in that as held b Green et al2010 on Neanderthals. Nose shape for example is heavily determined by climate and Africa has all tyes of nose shapes without needing any "wandering Caucasoids" to explain why...
---------------------------
Onur said... He mentions Africans without specifying which ones, and then describes the admixture in the Biaka as a few times higher. It is not clear whether he means Africans in general, certain African groups, or one. I do not believe he mentions "Negroids". As far as I know Subsaharans do not form a single cluster genetically. The divergences between Khoisans plus Hadza/Sandawe, Pygmies and most non foraging groups appear deep. West Africans and the "purer" Nilo-Saharan speakers of South Sudan(according tovTischkoff) seem to have diverged near the holocene.
Notice how the dullar "Onur" backtracks- Stringer is not saying anything close to what "Onur" is insinuating. And notice the dullard's sweeping assertions about Khosian "divergences" and "purer" Nilo-Saharan- multiple layers of bullshiit without anything credible to back them up.
Dana sez Clearly many of the sites patrons are interested in what anthropologists studying Africans has to say about the levels of "archaic" admixture in "Negroids". [Smile] Just as any person (with sense) would have thought.
^^lol. Their "archaic" angle is a diversionary one, meant to downplay or obscure the fact that their vaunted ancient Europeans were more like tropical Africans that the moderns of today. Hollering bout "archaic" is intended to insinuate a taint of "primitivism" over the unpalatable data, but they still fail in hiding it.
Dana sez: The "mediterranean race" nationalism Dienekes leans toward is inspired by Coonology.
^And Coon found certain "negroid tendencies" in the "Mediterraneans"... Interesting as Keita notes..
Dinekenes sez I am honored that Afrocentrics and Nordicists like Kemp wish to associate with Greece, to live with “borrowed glory,”
^^LMAO.. what "borrowed glory" and what "association"? Sheeeyit... If anything, numerous historical sources show that the Greeks very much liked to get the aura of "borrowed glory" from the Egyptians as people from Bernal to Lefkowitz show. As for other "Mediterraneans" the ROmans also engaged in extensive "borrowed glory" and with the Greeks, pioneered "Egyptomania" as credible researches show time and time again. White people have long been appropriating "borrowed glory" from Egypt right down to the present day.
jacket blurb “Consuming Ancient Egypt examines the influence of Ancient Egypt on the everyday lives of people, of all ages, throughout the world. It looks at the Egypt which the tourist sees, Egypt in film and Egypt as the inspiration for opera. It asks why so many books are published each year on Egyptological subjects at all levels, from the austerely academic to the riotous celebrations of Egypt as a land of mystery, enchantment and fantasy.
It then considers the ways in which Ancient Egypt interacts with the living world, in architecture, museum-going, the acquisition of souvenirs and reproductions, design, and the perpetual appeal of the mummy. The significance of Egypt as an adjunct to (and frequently the subject of) marketing in the consumer society is examined. It reveals much about Egypt's immemorial appeal and the psychology of those who succumb to its magnetism.”.
From: -- Consuming Ancient Egypt, 2003, By Sally MacDonald, and Michael Rice.
Another book notes: quote "Roman emperors built Egyptian gardens in their palaces. Cults based on Egyptian gods and godesses spread throughout the empire. The goddess Isis, for example, was worshipped from England to Afghanistan. Later medieval popes constructed obelisks that mimicked those of the pharaohs. Medieval doctors ground up mummies and fed them to patients in the mistaken belief that these well preserved bodies had supernational healing powers.
In the 19th century, Egyptian influence became fashionable in design and the arts. Jewelry, furniture, and an assortment of decorative objects and accents pieces were adorned with designs and images that conjured thoughts of life along the Nile. Egyptian themed (and or at least tinged) operas, plays and novels were a hit with the general public.
It seemed that the more that was revealed about ancient Egypt, the more appetite for faux relics and representations grew in America and throughout Europe. The discovery of King Tutankhamen's tomb in the early 20th century sparked yet another round of Egyptomania."
From: --Ancient Egypt: From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. By Educational Britannica Educational 2010
-----------------------------------------
The white obsession with Egypt extended to consuming the dead flesh of Egyptian mummies as one article notes:
"At the same time that Europeans were condemning various native peoples as cannibals, however, they were practicing a form of cannibalism themselves. Use of medicines made from blood and other human body parts was widespread in Europe through the 17th century. Europeans of the period consumed fresh blood as a cure for epilepsy and substances from various body parts to treat a variety of diseases, including arthritis, reproductive difficulties, sciatica, warts and skin blemishes. A primary source for this material was the bodies of executed criminals. Pieces of mummified human flesh imported from Egypt were considered a general panacea and were widely prescribed by the physicians of the day..[as author Beth Conklin reports]"
--Brief history of cannibal controversies David F. Salisbury. August 15, 2001
^^So much for Dinekenes and his self-flattering "borrowed glory"...
Dinkenes claimed Kemp lied about him: Lie #4: Kemp asserts that I “insult Northern Europeans by calling them unintelligent, but above all bellicose and cruel and the original White Egyptians are dismissed as lovers of money, conniving and untrustworthy.”
^^lol, but the so-called "original white Egyptians" are an even bigger piece of bullshiit.
Dink sez: Kemp claims that I “insults Greeks, calling them “not mainstream Europe”... I am proud not to consider Greeks as “mainstream Europe.” We Greeks don’t want to be "mainstream,” we are happy being Greeks - nothing more, and nothing else.
^^WHat Dink conveniently forgets is that some Greeks are also not "mainstream" due to admixture with African DNA.
QUOTE: Recent Greeks are primarily an Indo-EUropean population, heavily influenced by recent so-called "Indo-European" migrations but certain Greeks in some early eras (Angel 1972), and at certain times (Arnaiz-Villenna 2001), show some gene flow and/or genetic markers with Africans, from Benin Sickle Cell syndrome (Ricaut et al 2008), to certain cystic fibrosis mutations (Dork, et al 1998), to cetain Y-chromosome markers- Europeans contain the E3b subhaplogroup, which was derived from haplogroup E in sub-Saharan Africa (Frukadis 2008)
^Curious how Dinknes neglects to mention the above.... -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Troll Patrol sez: Let me introduce you'll to Arthur Kemp.
^^Lets not man.... lol But we will be happy to demolish his bullshiitt anytime! --------------------------------------------------------------------
mena7 Member # 20555
posted
The European of the 17 cent CE were cannibals because they ate Egyptian mummy skin and They used the body parts of executed criminals to make medecine.
Cro Magnon, Grimaldi, Auragnician, Negroid etc are fancy names for the original inhabitant of the world the Khoisan and the Twa people.Why dont western scholars used those black people real name.