posted
Vicente M. Cabrera , Patricia Marrero, Khaled K. Abu-Amero and Jose M. Larruga. 2018. Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basal lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago. Cabrera et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology (2018) 18:98 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-018-1211-4
The authors said: “ Results: The coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African (L3 ) lineages, both around 71 kya, are not significantly different. The oldest M and N Eurasian clades are found in southeastern Asia instead near of Africa as expected by the southern route hypothesis. The split of the Y-chromosome composite DE haplogroup is very similar to the age of mtDNA L3. An Eurasian origin and back migration to Africa has been proposed for the African Y-chromosome haplogroup E. Inside Africa, frequency distributions of maternal L3 and paternal E lineages are positively correlated. This correlation is not fully explained by geographic or ethnic affinities. This correlation rather seems to be the result of a joint and global replacement of the old autochthonous male and female African lineages by the new Eurasian incomers.“
This paper is unfounded. It lacks validity because there were no anatomically modern humans (AMH) in Eurasia, based on archaeological research until 44kya when the Cro-Magnon people migrated into Iberia. The first Aurignacians in the Levant date back to 36-34kya from Ksar Akil.
The oldest Aurignacian remains come from Iberia/Spain. These sites vary in age from 41kya for the l'Arbreda Cave, and 43kya for Abric Romani, located in Catalonia, Spain.
The dates for the Aurignacian in Europe make it clear this culture spread from west to east. It is important to recognize that Aurignacian culture and Cro-Magnon people appears not to have reached the Levant, until 11ky after it was established in Spain.
These dates for sites where AMH were found in Western Europe make it impossible for claims of U6, M1 and etc., originating prior to 32kya in the Levant and entering Africa via a back migration 40kya. If there were no AMHs in Eurasia before 43,000 years ago how could they be carry L3(M,N) back into Africa. As a result, if the “ coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African (L3 ) lineages, both around 71 kya”, make it clear that this macrohaplogroup had to have originated in Africa where the AMH lived, because Eurasia before 43kya was occupied by Neanderthals.
This paper is unfounded. It lacks validity because there were no anatomically modern humans (AMH) in Eurasia, based on archaeological research until 44kya when the Cro-Magnon people migrated into Iberia. The first Aurignacians in the Levant date back to 36-34kya from Ksar Akil.
.
.
quote:
Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basal lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago.
Conclusions
These results are congruent with a model proposing an out-of-Africa migration into Asia, following a northern route, of early anatomically modern humans carrying pre-L3 mtDNA lineages around 125 kya, subsequent diversification of pre-L3 into the basal lineages of L3, a return to Africa of Eurasian fully modern humans around 70 kya carrying the basal L3 lineages and the subsequent diversification of Eurasian-remaining L3 lineages into the M and N lineages in the outside-of-Africa context, and a second Eurasian global expansion by 60 kya, most probably, out of southeast Asia. Climatic conditions and the presence of Neanderthals and other hominins might have played significant roles in these human movements. Moreover, recent studies based on ancient DNA and whole-genome sequencing are also compatible with this hypothesis....
Skeletal remains unearthed in the Skhul and Qafzeh caves demonstrated that early modern humans were present in the Levant between 125 and 80 kya [10]. The discovery of modern human teeth in southern China dated to 120-80 kya [11], also supports the presence of AMHs in eastern Asia during this period. Several archaeological studies uncovered Middle Stone Age (MSA) lithic assemblages, dated at approximately 125-75 kya, in different regions of the Arabian Peninsula, presenting affinities with northeastern African assemblages of the same period
but lacks early branches of L3 and early M,N diversity. Both M and N were found in ancient Africa.
The real question is why so much effort for a theory that pisses on Occam's razor? Do they really believe their own nonsense or is this social engineering?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Differentiation of the ancestors to people living in these lands today couldn't have taken place in Africa before OOA? I remember hearing something like that about Basal Eurasian.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ase: Differentiation of the ancestors to people living in these lands today couldn't have taken place in Africa before OOA? I remember hearing something like that about Basal Eurasian.
Basal Eurasian is psedo cult model. The effort to make it more than people with early/basal branches to Eurasian lineages requires another shoehorned flawed theory of Levantine Neanderthal admixture.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
This paper is unfounded. It lacks validity because there were no anatomically modern humans (AMH) in Eurasia, based on archaeological research until 44kya when the Cro-Magnon people migrated into Iberia. The first Aurignacians in the Levant date back to 36-34kya from Ksar Akil.
.
.
quote:
Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basal lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago.
Conclusions
These results are congruent with a model proposing an out-of-Africa migration into Asia, following a northern route, of early anatomically modern humans carrying pre-L3 mtDNA lineages around 125 kya, subsequent diversification of pre-L3 into the basal lineages of L3, a return to Africa of Eurasian fully modern humans around 70 kya carrying the basal L3 lineages and the subsequent diversification of Eurasian-remaining L3 lineages into the M and N lineages in the outside-of-Africa context, and a second Eurasian global expansion by 60 kya, most probably, out of southeast Asia. Climatic conditions and the presence of Neanderthals and other hominins might have played significant roles in these human movements. Moreover, recent studies based on ancient DNA and whole-genome sequencing are also compatible with this hypothesis....
Skeletal remains unearthed in the Skhul and Qafzeh caves demonstrated that early modern humans were present in the Levant between 125 and 80 kya [10]. The discovery of modern human teeth in southern China dated to 120-80 kya [11], also supports the presence of AMHs in eastern Asia during this period. Several archaeological studies uncovered Middle Stone Age (MSA) lithic assemblages, dated at approximately 125-75 kya, in different regions of the Arabian Peninsula, presenting affinities with northeastern African assemblages of the same period
Good points. But the earliest archaeological assemblages appear in Africa first. None of them originated in Eurasia.
The people in the Levant were Africans--not Eurasian.
The Qafzeh-Skhul hominids in the Levant dating to 125kya died out and were replaced by Neanderthals. There is no evidence these hominids migrated back into Africa
Trenton W. Holliday, tested the hypothesis that if modern Africans had dispersed into the Levant from Africa, "tropically adapted hominids" would be represented in the archaeological history of the Levant, especially in relation to the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This researcher found that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids (20,000-10,000),were assigned to the Sub-Saharan population, along with the Natufians samples (4000 BP). Holliday also found African fauna in the area. Below are a few quotes from the paper by Holliday they show that the population at this time were Negroid in Southwest Asia.
"In this light, some of the more robust assignments (albeit not 95% of the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids to the sub-Saharan African sample (e.g., Qafzeh 8 at 85%, Skhul 4 at 71%) are remarkable indeed" (p. 62).
"The Qafzeh-Skhul hominids have sometimes been refered to as "Proto-CroMagnons" (e.g., Howell 1957; Vandermeersch 1996) because of their presumed similarity to the famous Aurignacian-associated hominids from Western Europe....Specifically [Brace], he notes that "in both the details of its dental and craniological size and from Qafzeh is an unlikely proto-Cro-Magnon, but it makes a fine model for the ancestors of modern sub-Saharan Africans"(p.63).
"The current study demonstrates African-like affinities in the body shape of the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This finding is consistent with craniofacial evidence (Brace 1996) and with zooarchaeological data indicating the presence of African fauna at Qafzeh (Rabinovich and Tchernov 1995; Tchernov 1988, 1992)" (p.64).\
Reference:
Holiday, T. (2000). Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia, American Anthropologist,102(1) .
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
Even Spencer Wells knows the Levant is an extension of Africa in early AMH terms.
Naming and having the world accept that naming wins the Westeurasians the battle.
Eurasians before OoA, shame (ring ring) shame (cling clang) shame.
Hss timeline Climatology Vegetation
Shame. Shame.
It'll take a lot of time and even more Marley mellow mood green tea before i calm down enough to revist the cot damn 'article'. These Euros and Arabs. SMH. Punching a cinderblock. Steam escaping from 'locks. Ooh dis got me so mad you know i done pret nar blown my top.
Somebody please precision me if the below is inaccurate, thanks. Archaic AMH Africans in Upper Pleistocene Levant are no more after ~80k. Moonsoon full retreat empties the Levant until the ~70k greening and its OoA.
but lacks early branches of L3 and early M,N diversity. Both M and N were found in ancient Africa.
The real question is why so much effort for a theory that pisses on Occam's razor? Do they really believe their own nonsense or is this social engineering?
It is social engineering. So what are the possible motivations? I have my theory. It could be completely off base but here it is... Remember the first seeded psyop story about a "race war" in the Nile Valley....
Scientists are investigating what may be the oldest identified race war 13,000 years after it raged on the fringes of the Sahara.
What is the purpose and the goal? The recolonization and take over of the African Continent.
All of these studies provide or seed the idea that African's specifically SSA's are an archaic sub-humans who are isolated to a small portion of Africa ( south, south Nigeria and Cameroon grassland) for the last 200K years and that group the so-called Bantu's invaded other parts of Africa inhabited by back migrated Eurasian descendants who had been there for 70k years.
As an aside, I remember reading somewhere that Leaky believed Negros where back migrated Asians and "true negros" were not in the fossil record. prior to 70k... I am still trying to find that excerpt.
Motivations for these psyops? Global warming? most of the countries modern Europeans inhabit will be challenged by the coming ecological disaster and this includes China. If you look at the model for the rising seas as the Antarctic melts most of coastal China will be under water.
Look at the moves the current global powers are making. China buying farmland in Africa including, Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya..., The US bases in Africa ARE along the Equatorial belt. The French are also involved in this exact zone
Russian Special ops in the Congo...
Russia builds military ties with Africa The Central African Republic, then the Democratic Republic of Congo: Russia is looking to boost its military cooperation in Africa, with an eye on other interests.
And let's not leave Germany out... their solution to African migrants coming to Europe? This past November a Senior German official proposed the voluntary recolonization of Africa by Europe. Europe would build "special cities" for Africans to come work in.. Yes.. this is getting real.
In conclusion, AMH is African, humans are African and Africa is Noah's ark of humanity. Equatorial Africa has the greatest zone of survivability on the planet. That is why the greatest amount of genetic diversity is found on the continent. The powers that be know this, and just like Russian bots seeded the US with propaganda .... what they call "active measures" to help elect Trump... European scientists are just an arm of European/Russian military covert operations. Yes, that includes anything and everything coming out of the Planck Institute.
Posts: 165 | From: Miami Beach, Florida | Registered: Jun 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ The sad part is it pushing us back to the bronze age of population genetics and some people classified as white will push back.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Collapse of Antarctic ice sheet once caused a 30-foot global flood
The collapse of a major Antarctic ice sheet once caused a “global flood” and scientists now fear it could happen again.
The devastating collapse caused sea levels to rise between 20 and 30 feet compared to today. The catastrophic sea level rise drowned huge areas of now-dry land.
This cataclysmic event, described in Science, took place around 125,000 years ago.
quote:Originally posted by Andromeda2025: Collapse of Antarctic ice sheet once caused a 30-foot global flood
The collapse of a major Antarctic ice sheet once caused a “global flood” and scientists now fear it could happen again.
The devastating collapse caused sea levels to rise between 20 and 30 feet compared to today. The catastrophic sea level rise drowned huge areas of now-dry land.
This cataclysmic event, described in Science, took place around 125,000 years ago.
posted
One of the issues with this is that 70K years ago there was no Eurasian population.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
I don't think the genome was sequenced. These hominids were Homo Erectus or Homo Habilis. I doubt if they will discuss the genome until they can invent an "imaginary' genome for these populations. I may not live to see it, but there is only a matter of time before they admit Neanderthals were Black, and carried the same genes found among Africans today.
Today they lie about who the Neanderthal's were so they can pretend that Caucasians evolved from this population.
Geneticists are lucky people read their papers without a critical eye to determine if the papers are reliable and valid.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde why are you talking about Neanderthals? From the above articles
1) "the scientists added that the shapes of the teeth clearly show that they belong to the modern human lineage as opposed to the Neanderthals"
2) "But this new find suggests that some early humans ranged much of the Earth well before that late date. “This is way earlier than Neanderthals—way, way earlier,” Petraglia told me."
3) " Dmanisi in Georgia suggests the earliest Homo species – Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis and so forth – actually belonged to the same species."
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde why are you talking about Neanderthals? From the above articles
1) "the scientists added that the shapes of the teeth clearly show that they belong to the modern human lineage as opposed to the Neanderthals"
2) "But this new find suggests that some early humans ranged much of the Earth well before that late date. “This is way earlier than Neanderthals—way, way earlier,” Petraglia told me."
3) " Dmanisi in Georgia suggests the earliest Homo species – Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis and so forth – actually belonged to the same species."
These geneticists are making stuff up to try and make it appear AMH also arose in Eurasia.The Chinese skeleton has been identified as Homo Erectus since the 1930's. Now it is said to be AMH.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
but lacks early branches of L3 and early M,N diversity. Both M and N were found in ancient Africa.
The real question is why so much effort for a theory that pisses on Occam's razor? Do they really believe their own nonsense or is this social engineering?
It is social engineering. So what are the possible motivations? I have my theory. It could be completely off base but here it is... Remember the first seeded psyop story about a "race war" in the Nile Valley....
Scientists are investigating what may be the oldest identified race war 13,000 years after it raged on the fringes of the Sahara.
What is the purpose and the goal? The recolonization and take over of the African Continent.
All of these studies provide or seed the idea that African's specifically SSA's are an archaic sub-humans who are isolated to a small portion of Africa ( south, south Nigeria and Cameroon grassland) for the last 200K years and that group the so-called Bantu's invaded other parts of Africa inhabited by back migrated Eurasian descendants who had been there for 70k years.
As an aside, I remember reading somewhere that Leaky believed Negros where back migrated Asians and "true negros" were not in the fossil record. prior to 70k... I am still trying to find that excerpt.
Motivations for these psyops? Global warming? most of the countries modern Europeans inhabit will be challenged by the coming ecological disaster and this includes China. If you look at the model for the rising seas as the Antarctic melts most of coastal China will be under water.
Look at the moves the current global powers are making. China buying farmland in Africa including, Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya..., The US bases in Africa ARE along the Equatorial belt. The French are also involved in this exact zone
Russian Special ops in the Congo...
Russia builds military ties with Africa The Central African Republic, then the Democratic Republic of Congo: Russia is looking to boost its military cooperation in Africa, with an eye on other interests.
And let's not leave Germany out... their solution to African migrants coming to Europe? This past November a Senior German official proposed the voluntary recolonization of Africa by Europe. Europe would build "special cities" for Africans to come work in.. Yes.. this is getting real.
In conclusion, AMH is African, humans are African and Africa is Noah's ark of humanity. Equatorial Africa has the greatest zone of survivability on the planet. That is why the greatest amount of genetic diversity is found on the continent. The powers that be know this, and just like Russian bots seeded the US with propaganda .... what they call "active measures" to help elect Trump... European scientists are just an arm of European/Russian military covert operations. Yes, that includes anything and everything coming out of the Planck Institute.
All the global warming alarmism aside, Africa was and still remains the richest continent in terms of natural resources which is why colonialism has never really ceased in the continent but has transformed or rather disguised itself as Neo-Colonialism a.k.a. Globalism via corporate emissaries of certain nations. A some Africans like to put it, "colonizers exited through the front door but came right back in through the back door" and through the invites of corrupt government officials I might add.
As for these more than suspicious articles from that debacle by the Independent about a Mesolithic "race war", to Cheddar Man having black skin, to now Abusir Mummies being "Early European Farmers", it's as I said before from various contacts I've had that there are those writing articles or publications on anthropological findings that are coming from a certain ideology! Alt-Right?? More like 4th Reich!! And I hear it's going to get worse before it gets any better!
Debating the experts themselves or their findings is difficult enough but the only solution is to keep at it as even attempting to debate these 4th Reich journalists and publishers with their op-ed piece propaganda is useless folly. It's like what the old priest in the Exorcist movie warned the younger priest "do not engage the demon" for the demon will only confound and confuse mixing lies with truths or to that effect. The data is there for everyone to critique and that is what people need to do. The 4th Reich mouthpieces like all propagandists will try to put out their interpretations or spin on the data and when you attack them, they will only distract you!
In the end all these 4th Reichers are doing is rehashing old debunk theories in newer molecular genetic spun forms i.e. Eurafrican brown Hamitic race types back-migrating to Africa to create civilizations from the Nile Valley to Ghana to Great Zimbabwe.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't attribute the Cheddar Man findings to the alt-right/4th Reich crowd. I know you're skeptical that he would have been as dark-skinned as Africans, but if he was, that's not good news for the position that the aboriginal people of northern Africa would have evolved significantly lighter skin. Think about it, if there were people still retaining dark skin in the middle latitudes during the Mesolithic, that would suggest against lighter skin evolving further south in the Sahara.
Right now, the only way the 4th Reichers can plausibly force light skin into prehistoric North Africa is if they claim it was brought there by PPNB- or EEF-type people within the last 10,000 years. Any Eurasian back-migrations prior to that period (e.g. the one that supposedly brought U6 into North Africa) would have involved WHG-like people no paler than Cheddar Man. That's not exactly what the 4th Reichers want.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: \ I wouldn't attribute the Cheddar Man findings to the alt-right/4th Reich crowd. I know you're skeptical that he would have been as dark-skinned as Africans, but if he was, that's not good news for the position that the aboriginal people of northern Africa would have evolved significantly lighter skin. Think about it, if there were people still retaining dark skin in the middle latitudes during the Mesolithic, that would suggest against lighter skin evolving further south in the Sahara.
Right now, the only way the 4th Reichers can plausibly force light skin into prehistoric North Africa is if they claim it was brought there by PPNB- or EEF-type people within the last 10,000 years. Any Eurasian back-migrations prior to that period (e.g. the one that supposedly brought U6 into North Africa) would have involved WHG-like people no paler than Cheddar Man. That's not exactly what the 4th Reichers want.
They can spin it either way. Their M.O is I'm white and I said so. They currently have no consistency in their propaganda. David Duke is one some multi regionalism in Africa while others still argue against OoA. Taforalt destroys that line but they don't care.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: I wouldn't attribute the Cheddar Man findings to the alt-right/4th Reich crowd. I know you're skeptical that he would have been as dark-skinned as Africans, but if he was, that's not good news for the position that the aboriginal people of northern Africa would have evolved significantly lighter skin. Think about it, if there were people still retaining dark skin in the middle latitudes during the Mesolithic, that would suggest against lighter skin evolving further south in the Sahara.
Right now, the only way the 4th Reichers can plausibly force light skin into prehistoric North Africa is if they claim it was brought there by PPNB- or EEF-type people within the last 10,000 years. Any Eurasian back-migrations prior to that period (e.g. the one that supposedly brought U6 into North Africa) would have involved WHG-like people no paler than Cheddar Man. That's not exactly what the 4th Reichers want.
I take it you missed my point that the Euronuts no longer care about skin color. That Cheddar Man had black skin is only fuel for their resurrected fantasy of black-skinned Caucasoids which is exactly what the so-called Eurafrican and Hamitic race types of Africa were and still are called. Hell, they even have their own blog-- Hamitic Union. According to them not only Egyptians but Nubians, Horn Africans and even some West Africans like the Fulani are black-skinned Cacasoids who are closer related to Germans than they are to their black neighbors with different features.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course we all know that African populations and African features were the dominant features for most of human history everywhere on earth. And obviously this means that 70,000 years ago calling any population "Eurasian" is simply a case of meaningless semantics. By all rights they should be called "Africans".
There has been overlap in African features from Africa into Eurasia since forever, but Europeans and their made up concepts like EEF and Basal EUrasian are designed to obfuscate vs educate.
It isn't an irony that many of the present wars are in places where plenty of populations with historic overlapping features are found today: Syria, Yemen, Libya etc.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic