_______________________________________________________________________________^^^SOUTHERN _______________________________________________________________________________HALF OF INDIA
Look at the Southern half of India. It is below the latitude of Egypt It is on the same latitude as Sudan Niger, N. Nigeria, Senegal etc,
So do some South Indians have tropical limb ratios? Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ And so what if they did? Are you going to connect the bodies of ancient Egyptians with those of India?? We already noted your bad and I dare say awful failed attempt at trying to connect their faces to India!
Lyinass produced:
LMAOGTOHPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those that live in the tropic zone unaffected by migrants from the North do have Tropical limbs. They also typically have dark skin. This is not only true for India but POSSIBLY Aboriginal populations in the Arabian peninsula and definitely populations in the South Pacific as well.
These Indians though, regardless of their body type had nothing to do with the peopling of the Nile Valley or Sahara. So what is your point in bringing them up?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Those that live in the tropic zone unaffected by migrants from the North do have Tropical limbs. They also typically have dark skin. This is not only true for India but POSSIBLY Aboriginal populations in the Arabian peninsula and definitely populations in the South Pacific as well.
These Indians though, regardless of their body type had nothing to do with the peopling of the Nile Valley or Sahara. So what is your point in bringing them up?
I was wondering about it since I have never heard anybody but Africans be described as having tropical limb ratios, Indians just one example nad them being longer in te region than South Americans have been in their lower latitude region (Amerimdians who descend from Siberians)
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ How can you not know this when you are using the term "Tropical Limb Proportions?" They used to be called "Negroid Limb Proportions" to reference Africans. The term was swapped out in favor of "Tropical" cause it covers all groups in a certain area....Not just Africans.
You should be familiar with the history behind the terms you are using.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Modern "Eurasian Adam" and "Eurasian Eve" evolved in Africa modern DNA analysis shows
"The vast majority, perhaps all, men with EUropean and Asian genetic backgrounds can trace their Y-chromosome lineage back to a particulaR male (named M168, after the marker that defines these chromosomes). M168 thus can be considered the Eurasian Adam. ALthough the Y-chromosome Adam and mitrochondrial Eve did not meet, it is quite possible that the Eurasian "Adam" M168 could have met his equivalent, the EUrasian Eve (known as L3). The estimates of their dates overlap (around fifth thousand years ago) and they both probably lived in northeast Africa. Africa? Yes, Africa. Although nearly all Eurasian mtDNA and Y chromosomes currently existing can be traced back to L3 and M168 respectively, M168 and L3 also had African descendants." --Norman Johnson (2007) Darwinian Detectives: Revealing the Natural History of Genes and Genomes. p. 100. [Norman A. Johnson, an evolutionary geneticist, is the author of numerous research publications, mainly in the genetics and evolution of reproductive isolation between nascent species. Johnson has taught at the University of Chicago, University of Texas at Arlington, and the University of Massachusetts].
---------------------
Many Cro-magnons had tropical limb proportions
1-- Detailed modern cranial studies show Cro-magnon crania clustering AWAY from today’s Europeans. Brace 2005 testedthe “Cro-magnid” claim and found it “folklore.” QUOTE: "When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. .. If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are “us” (46) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains..." --CL. Brace 2005. The Questionable contribution of the Neolithic to European craniofacial form
2–Africans possessing the highest phenotypical diversity on earth, producing variants covering most features. Several Cro-Magnon specimens are described as ‘negroid.’ QUOTE:
“Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africato have the highest levels of phenotypic variation consistent with many genetic studies.“ [-- Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity .” Hum Bio v73, n5, -629-636])
---------------------- Three scholars (Arthur Keith, M Boule and HV Valloid found ‘negroid’Cro-Magnon features: QUOTE: "The ancient Grimaldi woman and boy are of the mixed or negroid type." --(Arthur Keith. Ancient Types of Man. p. 60)
3- Several Upper Paleolithic European specimens show high cural indices in limb proportions- more akin to dark-skinned tropical Africans than today’s Europeans, who show lower cural indices. QUOTE: "As with all the other limb/trunk indices, the recent Europeans evince lower indices, reflective of shorter tibiae, and the recent sub-Saharan Africans have higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae... The Dolno Vestonice and Pavlov humans.. have body proportions similar to those of other Gravettian specimens. Specifically, they are characterized by high bracial and cural indices, indicative of distal limb segment elongation.." --Trinkaus and Svoboda. 2005. Early Modern Human Evolution in Central Europe]
– AND--
-Body proportions of early European H. sapiens fossils suggest a tropical adaptation and support an African origin (Holliday & Trinkaus, 1991; Ruff, 1994; Pearson, 1997, 2000; Holliday, 1997, 1998, 2000).” -–McBrearty and Brooks 2000. The Revolution that Wasn’t. Jrn Hu Evo 39, 453-563
4-- Traits like narrow noses occur naturally in African environments: ".. low mean nasal indices (high, narrow noses) tend to [also] be found in arid regions, such as the desert areas of east Africa.. -- Mays. S. (2010). The Archaeology of Human Bones. Pg 100-101
5-- Several Upper Paleolithic European types- Predmost (Czech), Combo Capelle (France) Grimaldi (Italy) and Teviec (France) show a variant of “African” affinities like prognathism. Some scholars hold this to be an ‘Eastern Cro-Magnon’ variant: QUOTE:
------ "others like Predomost and to a lesser degree Grimaldi and Teviec, are more prognathic like Skhul 5." --Marta Mirazón Lahr. 2005. The Evolution of Modern Human Diversity: A Study of Cranial Variation
and
---------- ".. on whose basis, many specialists define the eastern Cro-Magnon variant in the Upper Paleolithic population of western Europe." --S. De Laet (1994). History of Humanity, UNESCO
6– DNA provides clear evidence of tropical African types migrating to Paleolithic era Europe, contradicting claims of “Caucasoid” evolution in situ. Tropical limb evidence confirms DNA. The African tropical types may have interbred with local Neanderthals, but in any event would have adapted to the colder conditions of Europe over time. QUOTE:
"Early modern Europeans reflect both their predominant African early modern human ancestry and a substantial degree of admixture between those early modern humans and the indigenous Neandertals. Given the tens of millennia since then and the limitations inherent in ancient DNA, this process is largely invisible in the molecular record. It is readily apparent in the paleontological record.“ --E. Trinkhaus (2004) European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals. PNAS 2007 vol. 104 no. 18 7367-7372
and
"The so-called Old Man [Cro-Magnon 1] became the original model for what was once termed the Cro-Magnon or Upper Paleolithic "race" of Europe.. there's no such valid biological category, and Cro-Magnon 1 is not typical of Upper Paleolithic western Europeans- and not even all that similar to the other two make skulls found at the site. Most of the genetic evidence, as well as the newest fossil evidence from Africa argue against continuous local evolution producing modern groups directly from any Eurasian pre-modern population.. there's no longer much debate that a large genetic contribution from migrating early modern Africans infuenced other groups throughout the Old World.“ --B. Lewis et al. 2008. Understanding Humans: Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archaeology. p 297 ------------------------------------
posted
The pink assed, stringy haired monkey has no life! hahahaha! this scumbag is finished! but cannot let go because this IS its pathetic life! Hahahahaha
Posts: 3642 | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Those that live in the tropic zone unaffected by migrants from the North do have Tropical limbs. They also typically have dark skin. This is not only true for India but POSSIBLY Aboriginal populations in the Arabian peninsula and definitely populations in the South Pacific as well.
Correct. Tropical adaptation is not a phenomenon confined to Africans only. Limb proportion adaptation is known in biology as Allen's Rule which state that endothermic that is warm-blooded animals have shorter limbs in adaptation to cold climate while they have longer limbs in adaptation to hot climate. Longer limbs means greater dissipation of heat while shorter limbs mean conservation of heat. Of course it's not just a matter of hot and cold but in between as well which is why populations adapted to temperate climate display intermediate type limb proportions. What's interesting is that there was a study presented before showing limb proportions of different populations and Indians, particularly northern Indians displayed such intermediate limb lengths. This could mean that such Indians have ancestors from more temperate areas.
By the way, there are exceptions to the Allen's Rule, namely pedomorphic reduction which I will discuss sometime in the future.
quote:These Indians though, regardless of their body type had nothing to do with the peopling of the Nile Valley or Sahara. So what is your point in bringing them up?
The lyinass knows this she just wants to get attention away from Africa as per her anti-African sentiments.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ancient Ainu(Japan) are tropically adapted. Study posted on ESR. That is why I am in the camp that the Ainus are "negritos's".
-------------------- 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 xyyman: Ancient Ainu(Japan) are tropically adapted. Study posted on ESR. That is why I am in the camp that the Ainus are "negritos's".
what is the link I can't find it?
I don't see the word "Ainu" mentioned on any thread in ESR
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Ancient Ainu(Japan) are tropically adapted. Study posted on ESR. That is why I am in the camp that the Ainus are "negritos's".
Do you have a link to that study? Also, since when does being tropically adapted mean "Negrito"??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
_______________________________________________________________________________^^^SOUTHERN _______________________________________________________________________________HALF OF INDIA
Look at the Southern half of India. It is below the latitude of Egypt It is on the same latitude as Sudan Niger, N. Nigeria, Senegal etc,
So do some South Indians have tropical limb ratios?
Firts off all, it's you who proposes this theory. So it's up to you to give peer reviewed evidence of this.
Second, none of us have claimed that Africans are solely tropical adapted. As was shown, some Ameridians do have tropical body portions as well. However, the studies shown on ancient Egypt, clearly put ancient Egyptians closest to modern Southern Egyptians. A people related on many levels to Sahara-Sahel Africans. Hence they used words like "super-negroid" etc in older studies...the cause of this is partly in the environmental change of the Saraha belt. Multiple peer reviewed studies have been shown as well. The clue in it is that Africans dwelled in this ecogeographic belt for tens and thousands of years, not your propossed South Indians.
So the conclusion is, multiple ecogeographic morphological factors, are the lead, why indigenous Africans are ancient Egyptians.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: The irony is the Cro Magnons were tropical adapted
What has this got to do with their racial origin?
There are tropical adapted Caucasoids, while others are cold adapted. Same for Mongoloids. Heck in South America some Amerindian tribes only miles apart are cold or tropical adapted in crural or brachial index...
''[...]Neighboring peoples in South America from related ethnic groups were found to have evolved markedly different limb proportions due to one group having adapted to a higher, colder elevation than the others from lower, more tropical elevations.
"Living human populations from high altitudes in the Andes exhibit relatively short limbs compared with neighboring groups from lower elevations as adaptations to cold climates characteristic of high-altitude environments."
LMAO. Are you therefore saying Amerindian tribes only miles apart are seperate races? :
Its got to a lot with who these people were and their origin.
Especially the origin. Which was early East African! Because during the time of the Cro Magnons Europe and Eurasia was extremely cold. Due to the Last Glacial Maximum. And Africa was the only place where tropical adapted people resided and came from, those days. The study you've posted on tropical vs cold adapted Amerindians also confirms this. Therefore I say, thank you.lol
But the explanation was also posted in my previous post.
So what "Caucasoids" are you talking about. Because I have posted info on the Caucasus. Where caucasoids originate from. And I have know idea what the heck you are talking about?
As I already have stated, Amerindians are tropical adapted, in some regions and others aren't, because they have moved from one place to another. They had a nomadic live style, within the Amazone Jungle. While others have remained in place for a long time.
Not all places in South America are tropical, but Sub Tropical. The Amazone region is Sub Tropical. In some places it is even very cold to intermediate. Like Peru for instance.
Hence you've posted a study.
Read s...l....o....w....l....y.....what it say.
Living human populations from high altitudes in the Andes exhibit relatively short limbs compared with neighboring groups from lower elevations as adaptations to cold climates characteristic of high-altitude environments.
Did you read that?
What is a high-altitude environment in Peru like? lol
So this brings us back to the quintessential. In order to develop tropical adapted limbs on needs to have sex based tropical adapted heritage in lineage. Or come directly from a tropical region in longer lineage.
Now, next...: ''[...] Neighboring peoples in South America from related ethnic groups were found to have evolved markedly different limb proportions due to one group having adapted to a higher, colder elevation than the others from lower, more tropical elevations.
And at the same time it's also explanatory and backs up, why in Africa people from the same ethnic group have different tropical body portions and "even more tropical" to intermediate.
Ecology and Biodiversity
The richest and most diverse region on Earth, the Tropical Andes passes through central Ecuador. Along the coast lies the Tumbes-Chocó-Magdalena biodiversity hotspot, which includes a wide variety of habitats and South America's only remaining coastal dry forests. There are a number of diverse terrestrial ecoregions throughout Ecuador (1 - 10):
posted
^ The problem with Anglo-pisspot is he fails to understand that evolution utterly destroys his racial categorical nonsense! Because all Eurasians descend from Africans, it would make sense that these early Eurasians resembled Africans in morphology both in body and skull.
"..Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans. Some were more like present-day Australians or Africans, judged by objective anatomical observations." -- Christopher Stringer (1998)
What's funny is that one of the reasons why anthropologists for so long considered Neanderthal to be ancestral to modern Europeans was the fact that they had cold adapted limb proportions, yet genetics has disproven this along with limb proportions of actual European ancestors-- Cro-Magnon. Ironically, the modern human populations with the most cold adapted forms that actually approximate Neanderthal are Siberian and descended Inuit groups yet you never hear about them having Neanderthal ancestors!
Getting back to the topic...
I forgot to mention about the picture above that South India has experienced many migrations of peoples from North India and most South Indians are much darker i.e. black and tropically adapted unlike the lighter types seen above though are a few dark ones there. In fact a similar argument can be made for North India as well. Those lighter skinned individuals in the pic above are likely of a high-caste group.
Below are pictures of individuals of indigenous 'tribal' groups of India.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Herodotus wrote there are two kind of Ethiopian(black). The Western Ethiopian with wooly hair and the Eastern Ethiopian with soft hair.The Western Ethiopian live in Africa and west Asia.The Eastern Ethiopian live in India and East asia.
posted
@ the Liar(s)...will post soon. It might of been Brace and /or Holliday
-------------------- 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 xyyman: @ the Liar(s)...will post soon. It might of been Brace and /or Holliday
LIES you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
As of now, the Ainu have not even been mentioned at all on ESR. And the Jomon foragers study hasn't even been mentioned on ESR. -and it's not Brace or Holiday
The very long Jōmon period is the time in Japanese prehistory from about 14,000 BC to about 300 BC, when Japan was inhabited by a Neolithic culture which reached a considerable degree of cultural sophistication, above all in pottery, despite limited development of agriculture and no use of metal.
The relationship of Jōmon people to the modern Japanese and Ainu remains uncertain. Some consider the Japanese of today to be descended from a mixture of the ancient hunter-gatherer Jōmon culture and a largely different group who populated the later rice agriculture Yayoi culture. According to this theory these two major ancestral groups came to Japan over different routes at different times. Recent Y-DNA haplotype testing has led to the popularly accepted (though untested) hypothesis that haplogroup D2 Y-DNA, which has been found in some percentages of samples of modern Japanese, Ryukyuan, and Ainu males, may reflect patrilineal descent from members of a Jōmon period culture of the Japanese Archipelago.Analysis of mitochondrial DNA of Jomon skeletons from Hokkaido indicates that haplogroups N9b and M7a are likely a Jomon contribution to the modern Japanese mtDNA pool. Other studies show these haplogroups appearing with the greatest frequency in Ainu and Ryukyuan populations and much less in mainland Japanese, suggesting additional, later migrations to the Japanese islands. Mark J. Hudson of Nishikyushu University says Japan was settled by a Proto-Mongoloid population in the Pleistocene who became the Jōmon, and that their features can be seen in the Ainu and Okinawan people.The Jomon share many physical characteristics with Caucasians, but Brace says that they are a separate genetic stock. Recent anthropological studies suggest immigration from Siberia via Korea and/or Polynesia to be the ancestors of the earliest settlers in Japan.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 Oct;137(2):164-74. Variation in limb proportions between Jomon foragers and Yayoi agriculturalists from prehistoric Japan.
Temple DH, Auerbach BM, Nakatsukasa M, Sciulli PW, Larsen CS. Source Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Abstract Variation in limb proportions between prehistoric Jomon and Yayoi people of Japan are explored by this study. Jomon people were the descendents of Pleistocene nomads who migrated to the Japanese Islands around 30,000 yBP. Phenotypic and genotypic evidence indicates that Yayoi people were recent migrants to Japan from continental Northeast Asia who likely interbred with Jomon foragers. Limb proportions of Jomon and Yayoi people were compared using RMA regression and "Quick-Test" calculations to investigate relative variability between these two groups. Cluster and principal components analyses were performed on size-standardized limb lengths and used to compare Jomon and Yayoi people with other groups from various climatic zones. Elongated distal relative to proximal limb lengths were observed among Jomon compared to Yayoi people. Jomon limb proportions were similar to human groups from temperate/tropical climates at lower latitudes, while Yayoi limb proportions more closely resemble groups from colder climates at higher latitudes. Limb proportional similarities with groups from warmer environments among Jomon foragers likely reflect morphological changes following Pleistocene colonization of the Japanese Islands. Cold-derived limb proportions among the Yayoi people likely indicate retention of these traits following comparatively recent migrations to the Japanese Islands. Changes in limb proportions experienced by Jomon foragers and retention of cold-derived limb proportions among Yayoi people conform to previous findings that report changes in these proportions following long-standing evolution in a specific environment. PMID: 18484628 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
______________________________________________________ lioness productions each and every day like a vitamin
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ For once the lyinass is not lying. Skeletal remains of the Jomon people show little if any difference with modern Japanese. This shows that the Ainu were not Jomon people but may well represent the even older Pre-Jomon or Pre-Ceramic Culture. Either way, I don't know what any of this has to do with the topic.
quote:Originally posted by mena7: Herodotus wrote there are two kind of Ethiopian(black). The Western Ethiopian with wooly hair and the Eastern Ethiopian with soft hair.The Western Ethiopian live in Africa and west Asia.The Eastern Ethiopian live in India and East asia.
That's correct, though I'm sure the Anglo-Idiot will claim BOTH that is all Ethiopians as 'Caucasoid' or Caucasoid-mixed. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ha! Ha! Difficult to post from a tablet. When I get to a keyboard I will. On the road. That is why I am with Clyde now. .....un-admixed Ainu are/were black skinned.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's correct, though I'm sure the Anglo-Idiot will claim BOTH that is all Ethiopians as 'Caucasoid' or Caucasoid-mixed
You are honestly the dumbest poster on this board, even worse than Zaharan.
Anyone who knows the basics, realises the African Ethiopia of antiquity was not the Ethiopia of today.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Political Correctness The popularity of the Out of Africa model is due to the fact it is politically correct, not because it has scientific support. Dr. Wolpoff (1997) in his book Race and Human Evolution shows how political correctness is fuelling the support in the Out of Africa theory through the fact it emphasizes the unity or "brotherhood" of all Homo Sapiens, and deconstructs any differences (for example racial or ethnic).[4] Out of Africa proponents themselves have admitted their theory is driven by egalitarian politics; Stephen Jay Gould for example in 1988 wrote: "Human unity is no idle political slogan [...] all modern Humans form an entity united by physical bonds of descent from a recent African root" (Quoted in Wolpoff, 1997, p. 46). Most contemporary anthropologists to question the Out of Africa theory are those from Asian countries, which are free from political correctness (see external links).
When I post you should really shut up and get your note pad out and take notes. I am a busy man. And I am sorry I have no pictures to post. You will have to read and understand(get out a dictionary out). He! He! He!
To get started. I have about 1500 research papers to go through. I will post the piece on Ainu are a tropical adapted people. But it can inferred since they came from the south and were first to occupy Japan. Stay tuned
Quote: ======
Differentials of Yayoi immigration to Japan as derived from dental metrics H. MATSUMURA National Science Museum, Tokyo
It is now widely accepted that the morphology of human skeletal remains from northern Kyushu Island and the Yamaguchi prefecture of western Honshu Island (figure 2) from the Aeneolithic Yayoi period (ca. 300 BC to AD 300) differs substantially from the skeletons of the Neolithic Jomon period (ca. 10,000 BC to 300 BC) (figure 1). The skeletal remains of the younger Yayoi period are regarded as representing the people and their descendants who migrated from the East Asian continent into the Japanese archipelago, by way of the Korean peninsula (see e.g. Kanaseki et al. 1960, Nakahashi et al. 1989). Many studies, based on the cranial and dental morphology, corroborate that the modern Japanese people is a hybrid of the indigenous Jomon and the immigrant Yayoi (e.g. Yamaguchi 1985a, Ossenberg 1986, Hanihara 1987, 1991, Mizoguchi 1988, Dodo & Ishida 1990, 1992, Kozintsev 1990, Nakahashi 1993). Hanihara (1991) has popularized this view in his «dual structural model». According to this model, the genes of the Yayoi immigrants gradually spread throughout Japan, a process that continues to this day. Fig. 1:
More importantly, as is the case for cranial traits, the dental morphology of the Yayoi skeletons has been found to be substantially different when compared to Jomon skeletons [u](Brace & Nagai[/u] 1982, Matsumura 1994, 1995). The teeth of the Yayoi immigrants have been characterized as metrically larger and morphologically more complex, including such non-metric crown features as well developed shovelling and deflecting wrinkles when compared to the Jomon teeth (figure 1).
These findings, combined with the cranial affinities to the surrounding East Asians, allow to trace the ancestry of the Jomon back to Southeast Asia and that of the Yayoi immigrants to Northeast Asia (Hanihara 1985, 1992a, Various researchers who examined cranial and dental morphology concur that the Hokkaido Ainu are the direct descendants of the native Jomon (e.g. Howells 1966; Turner 1976, Bracae & Nagai 1982, Yamaguchi 1982, Hanihara 1985, 1991, Mouri 1986, Matsumura 1989, 1994, 1995, Dodo & Ishida 1990, Pietrusewsky 1994). The results of the present study also suggest that the metric characteristics of the Ainu dentition are predominantly similar to those of native Jomon,
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
As far as tropical limb ratios go I can find hardly any information in any study talking about any modern non-African populations having tropical limbs, limbs specifically
Obviously dark skin does not necessarily = tropical limbs.
The Jōmon share many physical characteristics with Caucasians, but Brace says that they are a separate genetic stock ( Lost World: Rewriting Prehistory— How New Science Is Tracing America's Ice Age Mariners. New York: Atria Books. Madsen, DB, ed) xyyman seems to be out on a limb here with the Ainu. So far he has only been able to dig up a study suggesting the Ainu had similar tooth complexity to the Jomon.
As per dark skin many Central Americans are dark skinned yet they are one of the populations most genetically distant from Africans.
The Ainu are from the Northernmost island of Japan, Hokkaido Hokkaido's annual mean temperature is around 10 C (50 F) same latitude as Romania.
Okinawa's climate is semi-tropical with an average annual temperature of 22C (72 F)
Full-blooded Ainu are lighter skinned than their Japanese neighbors and have more body hair. Some have slighty brownish skin from outdoor labour. ( Travis, John "Jomon Genes:Using DNA, researchers probe the genetic origins of modern Japanese" Science News February 15, 1997 Vol. 151 No. 7 p. 106)
Ainu have an eye shape typical of Europeans, with a large and prominent browridge, large ears, hairy and prone to baldness, According to Cavalli-Sforza, Ainu are in the same genetic cluster as the "Northeast and East Asian". As we know Europeans are closer to African than are Asians
A recent reevaluation of cranial traits suggests that the Ainu resemble the Okhotsk more than they do the Jōmon.
( Shigematsu, Masahito; et al. (2004). "Morphological affinities between Jomon and Ainu: Reassessment based on nonmetric cranial traits". Anthropological Science 112 (2): 161–172. doi:10.1537/ase.00092)
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Political Correctness The popularity of the Out of Africa model is due to the fact it is politically correct, not because it has scientific support. Dr. Wolpoff (1997) in his book Race and Human Evolution shows how political correctness is fuelling the support in the Out of Africa theory through the fact it emphasizes the unity or "brotherhood" of all Homo Sapiens, and deconstructs any differences (for example racial or ethnic).[4] Out of Africa proponents themselves have admitted their theory is driven by egalitarian politics; Stephen Jay Gould for example in 1988 wrote: "Human unity is no idle political slogan [...] all modern Humans form an entity united by physical bonds of descent from a recent African root" (Quoted in Wolpoff, 1997, p. 46). Most contemporary anthropologists to question the Out of Africa theory are those from Asian countries, which are free from political correctness (see external links).
^^Lmao.. at the bogus "Metapedia" insert.. On the same article another "editor" wrote:
The '''Out of Africa''' hoax ..is mainly supported by Jews. Since Jews seem to have Negroe roots. the theory seems to be another Jewish hoax, when Jews to try to lend their own characteristic features to the rest of humanity.
SOmeone took that bit of "knowledge" off and restated it in more "acceptable" form... Such are the "supporting references" being proffered.. lmao... ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the meantime.. back to bidniss...
It has nothing to do with "political correctness." This is the whining claim used by "heriditarianism and "biodiversity" types when hard science explodes their little racialist fantasies. They whine about "political correctness" in the face of hard data, then they go to Wikipedia to do "stealth" inserts disguising their BS, to continue their whining, as if they imagine their BS will be the "last word." Sorry. The more up to date and accurate data on ES and elsewhere continually destroys the "HBD" crybabies, who have their own version of "political correctness" when debunked.
Wolpoff and his "multi-regionalists" have been debunked comprehensively. Djehuti, XYZ, Patrol, Explorer etc take a look at what he said in the quote below, in a paper with FOUR other prominent "multiregional" advocates. His/their bold assertions have been completely refuted. QUOTE:
Wolpoff et al claim: "The evolutionary patterns of three different regions show that the earliest "modern" humans are not Africans and do not have the complex of features that characterize the Africans of that time or any other... There is no evidence of specific admixture with Africans at any time, let alone replacement by them.. " END WOLPOFF et all quote.
Wolpoff et al comprehensively debunked by fossil and DNA evidence of the Out OF Africa model: Respected paleontologist Chris Stringer notes: (continued)
"This model gave Africa no special place in our evolution and claimed specific connections in individual features between Homo erectus fossils more than a million years old in each region and humans in the same regions today.. these particular views have been pretty comprehensively shown to be false." ----Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth p267
THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 19: He says there is no OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts his claim. ------------------------- [b]Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:
OOA never happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans ----------------------------- The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim but the very same "supporting reference" he gives states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that hominid species came from Africa in the first place. Their argument is for continuity and distinct development in separate locations AFTER the initial OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.
Quote from Anglo-Idiot's "supporting" reference:
This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]
^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ainu have an eye shape typical of Europeans, with a large and prominent browridge, large ears, hairy and prone to baldness
Yep, they were quasi-Caucasoid.
Note how the afronut trolls have claimed on this forum 'whites' are "ugly hairy eurasians", but now claim the Ainu who were extremely hairy were somehow magically "Black"...
Just one among countless contradictions. They don't even believe in what they post here.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim.
Fail once again.
Read the HEADER:
quote:This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information.
Not only is it out of date by around 5 years, but a lot of it is wrong in the first place, I only linked to it for a brief overview.
Out of Africa, for pre-Homo, Homo and Humans has all been challenged. You ony cling to the "out of africa" and "everything = africa" thing because of your bogus political views.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
As far as tropical limb ratios go I can find hardly any information in any study talking about any modern non-African populations having tropical limbs, limbs specifically
Obviously dark skin does not necessarily = tropical limbs.
The Jōmon share many physical characteristics with Caucasians, but Brace says that they are a separate genetic stock ( Lost World: Rewriting Prehistory— How New Science Is Tracing America's Ice Age Mariners. New York: Atria Books. Madsen, DB, ed) xyyman seems to be out on a limb here with the Ainu. So far he has only been able to dig up a study suggesting the Ainu had similar tooth complexity to the Jomon.
As per dark skin many Central Americans are dark skinned yet they are one of the populations most genetically distant from Africans.
The Ainu are from the Northernmost island of Japan, Hokkaido Hokkaido's annual mean temperature is around 10 C (50 F) same latitude as Romania.
Okinawa's climate is semi-tropical with an average annual temperature of 22C (72 F)
Full-blooded Ainu are lighter skinned than their Japanese neighbors and have more body hair. Some have slighty brownish skin from outdoor labour. ( Travis, John "Jomon Genes:Using DNA, researchers probe the genetic origins of modern Japanese" Science News February 15, 1997 Vol. 151 No. 7 p. 106)
Ainu have an eye shape typical of Europeans, with a large and prominent browridge, large ears, hairy and prone to baldness, According to Cavalli-Sforza, Ainu are in the same genetic cluster as the "Northeast and East Asian". As we know Europeans are closer to African than are Asians
A recent reevaluation of cranial traits suggests that the Ainu resemble the Okhotsk more than they do the Jōmon.
( Shigematsu, Masahito; et al. (2004). "Morphological affinities between Jomon and Ainu: Reassessment based on nonmetric cranial traits". Anthropological Science 112 (2): 161–172. doi:10.1537/ase.00092)
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Wolpoff is an antiquated "bones man". His approach has been completely ruled as old-fashioned and most mainstream research is now done from the standpoint of genetics.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim.
Fail once again.
Read the HEADER:
quote:This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information.
Not only is it out of date by around 5 years, but a lot of it is wrong in the first place, I only linked to it for a brief overview.
Out of Africa, for pre-Homo, Homo and Humans has all been challenged. You ony cling to the "out of africa" and "everything = africa" thing because of your bogus political views.
Pitiful failure on 2 counts:
1) Failure #1: Your own "supporting reference" says the fossils in question are too weathered to offer any clear conclusion as to if they are homo erectus, and (b) competent scientists say the Dmansi specimens STILL represent hominids evolving from Africa originals. So yea, there may have been subsequent development in Asia but the originals were STILL from Africa. Your "just say no to OOA" is a bust.
-----Debunk 1A: QUOTE from Article: " The presence of a tool-using population on the edge of Europe so early hints that the northern continent, rather than Africa, may have been the evolutionary birthplace of H. erectus. Unfortunately, the fossils of the hominins responsible for making the tools are not proving very helpful to the debate. Fossilized bone fragments found in the same sedimentary layers as the Dmanisi artefacts are too weathered to be identified as belonging to any one species, so it is impossible to say for sure whether the tools were made by H. erectus." --Matt Kaplan. 2011. Human ancestors in Eurasia earlier than thought. Nature magazine
-----Debunk 1B: QUOTE by Palentologist CHris Stringer: "This alternative scenario has a small brained and small-bodied pre-erectus species, perhaps comparable to Homo Hablis, or even a late australopithecine, dispersing from Africa with primitive tools over 2 million years ago, reaching the Far East and eventually, FLores. In Asia this ancestral species also gave rise to the Dmanisi people and Homo-erectus.." --Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth
^^There you have it. The fossils offer little firm conclusion due to their state AND the ORIGINAL hominids are STILL from Africa, which you keep denying again and again. And you are debunked again and again by your own "supporting" references...
Failure #2: ANthropoid primates 37 million years ago that may have come to Africa STILL does not affect the migrations of HUMANS out of Africa to colonize the world. We are dealing with HUMANS not quasi ape-like primates 37 millions years past. Said anthropoid primates may 37 million years ago have been around in Asia and relatives may have wandered into Africa. Even so, this STILL is irrelevant to your argument, which denies that humans evolved in Africa and migrated out to colonize the globe. The 37 million years old primates were in Asia, but even if the LIbyan fossils turn out to be related, it was HUMANS that came out of Africa. OOA also has several variants- replacement, interbreeding, etc. But no matter the flavor, all variants hold the central point that it is humans than came out of Africa. You attempt to deny this, and repeatedly fail. --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyramidologist Read the HEADER: quote:This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information.
^^Dumbass. YOU were the one who used the article as YOUR "supporting reference". Now you are trying to back away from your debunking by referring to a Wikipedia tag someone added? LMAO.. This is a new low for your idiocy. WHat? You went to the WIkipedia page to add the tag and now use that as an escape hatch? Pathetic.. But It STILL doesn;t matter. WHat matters is that you cited the article to support your argument. Instead the article text YOU proffered, itself contradicted your argument. Now you are disavowing YOUR OWN citation, essentially admitting defeat, and that your whole argument was a fraud to begin with. Alack and alas.. pitiful buffoon... why do you bother?
Can someone tell me why racists are so bothered by the fact of OOA?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ainu have an eye shape typical of Europeans, with a large and prominent browridge, large ears, hairy and prone to baldness
Yep, they were quasi-Caucasoid.
Note how the afronut trolls have claimed on this forum 'whites' are "ugly hairy eurasians", but now claim the Ainu who were extremely hairy were somehow magically "Black"...
Just one among countless contradictions. They don't even believe in what they post here.
Dorky, can you explain what Ainu have to do with the Caucasus region? And when did I claim Ainu as black or African? loooool
On many levels you fail, fake university student!!lol
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim.
Fail once again.
Read the HEADER:
quote:This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information.
Not only is it out of date by around 5 years, but a lot of it is wrong in the first place, I only linked to it for a brief overview.
Out of Africa, for pre-Homo, Homo and Humans has all been challenged. You ony cling to the "out of africa" and "everything = africa" thing because of your bogus political views.
LOL at this university wannbe student, at some obscure prestige university, departement of anthropology. Yeah RIGHT!!!!LOL
REPOST!!!!!!!
quote: A new study suggests that Homo erectus, a precursor to modern humans, was using advanced tool-making methods in East Africa 1.8 million years ago, at least 300,000 years earlier than previously thought. The study, published this week in Nature, raises new questions about where these tall and slender early humans originated and how they developed sophisticated tool-making technology.
Homo erectus appeared about 2 million years ago, and ranged across Asia and Africa before hitting a possible evolutionary dead-end, about 70,000 years ago. Some researchers think Homo erectus evolved in East Africa, where many of the oldest fossils have been found, but the discovery in the 1990s of equally old Homo erectus fossils in the country of Georgia has led others to suggest an Asian origin. The study in Nature does not resolve the debate but adds new complexity. At 1.8 million years ago, Homo erectus in Dmanisi, Georgia was still using simple chopping tools while in West Turkana, Kenya, according to the study, the population had developed hand axes, picks and other innovative tools that anthropologists call “Acheulian.”
In the summer of 2007, a team of French and American researchers traveled to Kenya’s Lake Turkana in Africa’s Great Rift Valley, where earth’s plates are tearing apart and some of the earliest humans first appear.
Anthropologist Richard Leakey’s famous find – “Turkana Boy”, a Homo erectus teenager who lived about 1.5 million years ago – was excavated on Lake Turkana’s western shore and is still the most complete early human skeleton found so far.
The East African landscape that Homo erectus walked from about 2 million to 1.5 million years ago was becoming progressively drier, with savanna grasslands spreading in response to changes in the monsoon rains. “We need to understand also the ancient environment because this gives us an insight into how processes of evolution work—how shifts in early human biology and behavior are potentially caused by changes in the climate, vegetation or animal life that is particular to a habitat,” said Lepre. The team is currently excavating a more than 2 million year old site in Kenya to learn more about the early Oldowan period.
quote: The initial occupations of Dmanisi are possibly older than the first appearance of Homo erectus in East Africa.
With the ex- ception of the surface find of a human occipital fragment (KNM- ER 2598) at Koobi Fora, the earliest appearance of African Homo erectus is considered to be ca. 1.78 Ma (21) but probably is closer to 1.65 Ma (22).
The newly dated horizons at Dmanisi also accommodate the increasingly older ages documented for hominin fossils in both eastern and western Eurasia. Human presence in China is dated to ca. 1.7 Ma (23, 24), and Homo erectus fossils...
The possibility that Homo erectus evolved in Eurasia provokes two obvious corollaries. The first, that a more primitive ancestor arrived from Africa more than ca. 1.85 Ma (1, 19), is consistent with anatomical analyses of both the Dmanisi fossils (17) and those of Homo floresiensis (33). The second, that Homo erectus
..."may have" migrated back to Africa, receives support from the conclusion that Homo erectus and Homo habilis survived as contemporaries after the appearance of the former in the East African fossil record (34).
Although the presence of hominins beyond East Africa as early as 1.9 Ma is documented at Ain Hanech in North Africa (35), claims for occupations of that age or somewhat earlier in Israel (36) and Pakistan (37, 38) are based on lithic materials collected from gravels.
Although it seems ever more probable that hominins were in Eurasia before Dmanisi was first occupied, well-dated materials in unequivocal contexts are required.
Both the age and evolutionary affiliations of the earliest hominins to arrive in Eurasia remain to be determined by new discoveries. This important, unresolved issue in human evolution is a call for the aggressive survey for evidence of even earlier colonists.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim.
Fail once again.
Read the HEADER:
quote:This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information.
Not only is it out of date by around 5 years, but a lot of it is wrong in the first place, I only linked to it for a brief overview.
Out of Africa, for pre-Homo, Homo and Humans has all been challenged. You ony cling to the "out of africa" and "everything = africa" thing because of your bogus political views.
Dorky, READ!!!!
quote:
The Acheulian is one of the first defined prehistoric techno-complexes and is characterized by shaped bifacial stone tools1, 2, 3. It probably originated in Africa, spreading to Europe and Asia perhaps as early as ~1 million years (Myr) ago4, 5, 6. The origin of the Acheulian is thought to have closely coincided with major changes in human brain evolution, allowing for further technological developments7, 8. Nonetheless, the emergence of the Acheulian remains unclear because well-dated sites older than 1.4 Myr ago are scarce. Here we report on the lithic assemblage and geological context for the Kokiselei 4 archaeological site from the Nachukui formation (West Turkana, Kenya) that bears characteristic early Acheulian tools and pushes the first appearance datum for this stone-age technology back to 1.76 Myr ago. Moreover, co-occurrence of Oldowan and Acheulian artefacts at the Kokiselei site complex indicates that the two technologies are not mutually exclusive time-successive components of an evolving cultural lineage, and suggests that the Acheulian was either imported from another location yet to be identified or originated from Oldowan hominins at this vicinity. In either case, the Acheulian did not accompany the first human dispersal from Africa9, 10 despite being available at the time. This may indicate that multiple groups of hominins distinguished by separate stone-tool-making behaviours and dispersal strategies coexisted in Africa at 1.76 Myr ago.
An earlier origin for the Acheulian
Christopher J. Lepre et al.
Nature 477, 82–85 (01 September 2011) doi:10.1038/nature10372 Received 08 June 2011 Accepted 13 July 2011 Published online 31 August 2011
Hunters of the Ice Age: The biology of Upper Paleolithic people.
Holt BM, Formicola V.
quote: Abstract
The Upper Paleolithic represents both the phase during which anatomically modern humans appeared and the climax of hunter-gatherer cultures. Demographic expansion into new areas that took place during this period and the diffusion of burial practices resulted in an unprecedented number of well-preserved human remains. This skeletal record, dovetailed with archeological, environmental, and chronological contexts, allows testing of hypotheses regarding biological processes at the population level. In this article, we review key studies about the biology of Upper Paleolithic populations based primarily on European samples, but integrating information from other areas of the Old World whenever possible. Data about cranial morphology, skeletal robusticity, stature, body proportions, health status, diet, physical activity, and genetics are evaluated in Late Pleistocene climatic and cultural contexts. Various lines of evidence delineate the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) as a critical phase in the biological and cultural evolution of Upper Paleolithic populations. The LGM, a long phase of climatic deterioration culminating around 20,000 BP, had a profound impact on the environment, lifestyle, and behavior of human groups. Some of these effects are recorded in aspects of skeletal biology of these populations. Groups living before and after the LGM, Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) and Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP), respectively, differ significantly in craniofacial dimensions, stature, robusticity, and body proportions. While paleopathological and stable isotope data suggest good health status throughout the Upper Paleolithic, some stress indicators point to a slight decline in quality of life in LUP populations. The intriguing and unexpected incidence of individuals affected by congenital disorders probably indicates selective burial practices for these abnormal individuals. While some of the changes observed can be explained through models of biocultural or environmental adaptation (e.g., decreased lower limb robusticity following decreased mobility; changes in body proportions along with climatic change), others are more difficult to explain. For instance, craniodental and upper limb robusticity show complex evolutionary patterns that do not always correspond to expectations. In addition, the marked decline in stature and the mosaic nature of change in body proportions still await clarifications. These issues, as well as systematic analysis of specific pathologies and possible relationships between genetic lineages, population movements and cultural complexes, should be among the goals of future research.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2007 May;133(1):655-68.
Regional variation in the postcranial robusticity of late Upper Paleolithic humans.
Shackelford LL.
quote:
Abstract
Early modern humans from the European Upper Paleolithic (UP) demonstrate trends in postcranial biomechanical features that coincide with the last glacial maximum (LGM). These features have been interpreted as evidence that ecological changes of the LGM played a critical role in cultural and biological adaptation in European UP populations. In areas outside of Europe, similar environmental changes occurred with the LGM. This analysis introduces postcranial material from the Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) of North Africa and Southeast Asia and tests two related hypotheses: 1) LUP samples across the Old World had similar patterns of postcranial robusticity and 2) relative to an available Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) sample, regional LUP samples demonstrate similar trends in robusticity that may be attributable to climatic effects of the LGM. Cross-sectional geometric data of the humeri and femora were obtained for 26 EUP and 100 LUP humans from Europe, Africa, and Asia. Despite regional differences, LUP samples are similar relative to the EUP sample. In the humerus, bilateral asymmetry decreases in all LUP samples relative to the EUP sample. In the femur, LUP samples demonstrate increasingly circular femoral midshaft sections, reflecting reduced anteroposterior bending strength relative to the EUP sample. These patterns suggest changes in subsistence behavior and mobility after the LGM across the Old World that are most consistent with reduced mobility and broad-spectrum resource exploitation. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nature 488, 201–204 (09 August 2012) doi:10.1038/nature11322
Received 25 March 2012 Accepted 12 June 2012 Published online 08 August 2012
New fossils from Koobi Fora in northern Kenya confirm taxonomic diversity in early Homo
Meave G. Leakey, Fred Spoor, M. Christopher Dean, Craig S. Feibel, Susan C. Antón, Christopher Kiarie & Louise N. Leakey
quote:
Since its discovery in 1972 (ref. 1), the cranium KNM-ER 1470 has been at the centre of the debate over the number of species of early Homo present in the early Pleistocene epoch2 of eastern Africa. KNM-ER 1470 stands out among other specimens attributed to early Homo because of its larger size, and its flat and subnasally orthognathic face with anteriorly placed maxillary zygomatic roots3. This singular morphology and the incomplete preservation of the fossil have led to different views as to whether KNM-ER 1470 can be accommodated within a single species of early Homo that is highly variable because of sexual, geographical and temporal factors4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or whether it provides evidence of species diversity marked by differences in cranial size and facial or masticatory adaptation3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Here we report on three newly discovered fossils, aged between 1.78 and 1.95 million years (Myr) old, that clarify the anatomy and taxonomic status of KNM-ER 1470. KNM-ER 62000, a well-preserved face of a late juvenile hominin, closely resembles KNM-ER 1470 but is notably smaller. It preserves previously unknown morphology, including moderately sized, mesiodistally long postcanine teeth. The nearly complete mandible KNM-ER 60000 and mandibular fragment KNM-ER 62003 have a dental arcade that is short anteroposteriorly and flat across the front, with small incisors; these features are consistent with the arcade morphology of KNM-ER 1470 and KNM-ER 62000. The new fossils confirm the presence of two contemporary species of early Homo, in addition to Homo erectus, in the early Pleistocene of eastern Africa.
New fossils hint at ancestral split African discoveries point to two early species in the human genus
A nearly 2 million-year-old lower jaw discovered recently in East Africa, along with other new finds, differs substantially from smaller, earlier discoveries of Homo fossils in the region, a new study finds. Credit: Mike Hettwer, courtesy of National Geographic
posted
Fossils confirm three early humans roamed Africa
August 2012 by Douglas Heaven
Few treasure hunts last 40 years. Fewer still end with the unearthing of three bits of broken bone that could help untangle the roots of our family tree.
In 1972, the skull of an early human – known as KNM-ER 1470 – was found in Koobi Fora in northern Kenya. Homo habilis, an early member of our own genus, was thought to have had the plains of Africa to itself 2 million years ago, but the 1.9-million-year-old skull didn't quite fit with the known remains of that species.
Some were convinced this was a tantalising glimpse of a whole new species, dubbed Homo rudolfensis. Others attributed the differences in shape between this skull and others belonging to Homo habilis to geographical or sexual variation within the species – the unusually large 1470 skull perhaps belonged to a male H. habilis. Without any other specimens to decide either way, the debate rolled on.
Meave Leakey and her colleagues have now discovered three new fossils that share many of the distinctive features of the anomalous skull. The finds finally look set to confirm that the 1470 skull is not an anomalous oddity, but belonged to a distinct species, which will probably continue to be called Homo rudolfensis.
Given the paucity of previous specimens, the three new fossils – a well-preserved face, a complete lower jaw, and part of a lower jaw – are a rich haul. To find such complete fragments is very unusual, Leakey says.
The new face is smaller than 1470 and belonged to a juvenile, but it has the same long, flat form that has bugged Leakey ever since 1972. "It's been a long search," she says.
Unlike the 1470 skull, the new face still has many of its teeth, making it possible to work out the probable shape of the lower jaw – another feature lacking in the 1470 skull. Both of the new jaws are a likely fit for the species.
Together, the finds confirm that the differences between Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis are too great to imply they are male and female members of the same species. No modern ape shows such an extreme level of difference between male and female members of the species.
The fossil record actually suggests there were three roughly contemporaneous species of Homo around 2 million years ago. "The specimens can be readily divided into a Homo erectus group, and two others: one including 1470 and the new specimens, and the other including everything else," Leakey says.
However, this still might not tie things up completely. In a commentary piece published alongside the new paper, Bernard Wood at George Washington University in Washington DC notes that some researchers have suggested that our evidence for Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis stretches the definition of the genus Homo too far. While it now seems certain that these fossils belong to two distinct species, we may yet find that they are not in fact part of the same lineage that led to Homo sapiens.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Not only is it out of date by around 5 years, but a lot of it is wrong in the first place, I only linked to it for a brief overview.
For a man who uses the works of Carlton Coon, are you seriously calling research that is 5 years old outdated? Isn't this a hypocritical contradiction? Whether you linked to it for a brief overview or not - if you hold such standard for a 5 year old paper - why don't you hold the same standards for Carlton Coon's work which is outdated and filled with racist inaccuracies?
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @ the Liar(s)...will post soon. It might of been Brace and /or Holliday
LIES you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
As of now, the Ainu have not even been mentioned at all on ESR. And the Jomon foragers study hasn't even been mentioned on ESR. -and it's not Brace or Holiday
The very long Jōmon period is the time in Japanese prehistory from about 14,000 BC to about 300 BC, when Japan was inhabited by a Neolithic culture which reached a considerable degree of cultural sophistication, above all in pottery, despite limited development of agriculture and no use of metal.
The relationship of Jōmon people to the modern Japanese and Ainu remains uncertain. Some consider the Japanese of today to be descended from a mixture of the ancient hunter-gatherer Jōmon culture and a largely different group who populated the later rice agriculture Yayoi culture. According to this theory these two major ancestral groups came to Japan over different routes at different times. Recent Y-DNA haplotype testing has led to the popularly accepted (though untested) hypothesis that haplogroup D2 Y-DNA, which has been found in some percentages of samples of modern Japanese, Ryukyuan, and Ainu males, may reflect patrilineal descent from members of a Jōmon period culture of the Japanese Archipelago.Analysis of mitochondrial DNA of Jomon skeletons from Hokkaido indicates that haplogroups N9b and M7a are likely a Jomon contribution to the modern Japanese mtDNA pool. Other studies show these haplogroups appearing with the greatest frequency in Ainu and Ryukyuan populations and much less in mainland Japanese, suggesting additional, later migrations to the Japanese islands. Mark J. Hudson of Nishikyushu University says Japan was settled by a Proto-Mongoloid population in the Pleistocene who became the Jōmon, and that their features can be seen in the Ainu and Okinawan people.The Jomon share many physical characteristics with Caucasians, but Brace says that they are a separate genetic stock. Recent anthropological studies suggest immigration from Siberia via Korea and/or Polynesia to be the ancestors of the earliest settlers in Japan.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 Oct;137(2):164-74. Variation in limb proportions between Jomon foragers and Yayoi agriculturalists from prehistoric Japan.
Temple DH, Auerbach BM, Nakatsukasa M, Sciulli PW, Larsen CS. Source Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Abstract Variation in limb proportions between prehistoric Jomon and Yayoi people of Japan are explored by this study. Jomon people were the descendents of Pleistocene nomads who migrated to the Japanese Islands around 30,000 yBP. Phenotypic and genotypic evidence indicates that Yayoi people were recent migrants to Japan from continental Northeast Asia who likely interbred with Jomon foragers. Limb proportions of Jomon and Yayoi people were compared using RMA regression and "Quick-Test" calculations to investigate relative variability between these two groups. Cluster and principal components analyses were performed on size-standardized limb lengths and used to compare Jomon and Yayoi people with other groups from various climatic zones. Elongated distal relative to proximal limb lengths were observed among Jomon compared to Yayoi people. Jomon limb proportions were similar to human groups from temperate/tropical climates at lower latitudes, while Yayoi limb proportions more closely resemble groups from colder climates at higher latitudes. Limb proportional similarities with groups from warmer environments among Jomon foragers likely reflect morphological changes following Pleistocene colonization of the Japanese Islands. Cold-derived limb proportions among the Yayoi people likely indicate retention of these traits following comparatively recent migrations to the Japanese Islands. Changes in limb proportions experienced by Jomon foragers and retention of cold-derived limb proportions among Yayoi people conform to previous findings that report changes in these proportions following long-standing evolution in a specific environment. PMID: 18484628 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
______________________________________________________ lioness productions each and every day like a vitamin
The irony in it is that you have no problem with the variation here. But when it comes to Africans....well then it becomes another story.lol
Dietary Variation and Stress Among Prehistoric Jomon Foragers From Japan
Do body proportions among Jomon foragers from Hokkaido conform to ecogeographic expectations? evolutionary implications of body size and shape among northerly hunter-gatherers
Daniel H. Temple1,*, Hirofumi Matsumura2 Article first published online: 26 NOV 2009
International Journal of Osteoarchaeology Volume 21, Issue 3, pages 268–282, May/June 2011
quote:Abstract This study documents and interprets adaptive postcranial morphology among prehistoric Jomon period foragers from Hokkaido, Japan (HKJ). The Hokkaido climate is differentiated from other Japanese islands by freezing winters with sea-ice accumulation in the northern regions. Increased brachial and crural indices are, however, observed among HKJ foragers, while body mass (BM) has not yet been estimated for these groups. Based on previous observations and paleoclimatic reconstructions, it was predicted that increased BM and increased distal relative to proximal limb lengths would typify HKJ foragers. Similar BM was observed between HKJ foragers and groups from colder environments. Intralimb indices do, however, suggest similarity between HKJ foragers and groups from high-latitude, warm environments. It is likely that HKJ foragers retained cold-derived BM in association with Pleistocene migrations to Hokkaido via Northeast Asia. That is, enlarged BM among HKJ foragers is associated with long-term evolution in a colder environment. Relatively elongated distal limbs may represent morphological response to a slightly warmer environment. Following migration to Japan from a colder environment, elongation of distal limb segments resulted in elevated brachial and crural indices. Relatively elongated distal appendages may also reflect positive nutritional status as HKJ people experienced lesser rates of systemic stress than other Jomon groups. It is also possible that elongated distal relative to proximal limbs are associated with neutral mutation and genetic drift. This interpretation suggests a neutral mutation associated with relative limb length in some HKJ ancestor with subsequent spread of this allele through isolation and drift. Ontogenetic and temporal studies of intralimb indices among Jomon people are necessary to further evaluate these interpretations.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yamaguchi, 1989). Previous studies report that Jomon foragers had higher brachial and crural indices than Yayoi people and were similar in limb proportions to low latitude, tropical groups such as the African San (Yamaguchi, 1989).
quote:^^Dumbass. YOU were the one who used the article as YOUR "supporting reference". Now you are trying to back away from your debunking by referring to a Wikipedia tag someone added? LMAO.. This is a new low for your idiocy. WHat? You went to the WIkipedia page to add the tag and now use that as an escape hatch? Pathetic.. But It STILL doesn;t matter. WHat matters is that you cited the article to support your argument. Instead the article text YOU proffered, itself contradicted your argument. Now you are disavowing YOUR OWN citation, essentially admitting defeat, and that your whole argument was a fraud to begin with. Alack and alas.. pitiful buffoon... why do you bother?
Can someone tell me why racists are so bothered by the fact of OOA?
Multiregionalism does not state Humans evolved in a single location. You set up a straw man by derailing and talking about Homo Erectus. The fact is, you looked at the wiki article and suddenly realised there is fossil and genetic evidence against OOA, so all you could do is pick out an outdated (and bogus) line quotation about Erectus originating in Africa.
The article has since been updated on Erectus. None of this though has anything to do with Humans originating in Africa, you were just desperate to change the topic.
Recap -
(a) There is no evidence for Out of Africa for Humans or Erectus. Regarding the latter, the most recent Erectus findings are in Asia. (b) You were left instead of debating the origins of Homo Sapiens to desperately nitpick something out of the posted article, which is why you derailed to Homo Erectus. What you quoted though is years outdated (as the headline read) and has since been corrected.
As I clarified, I linked to the Wikipedia article to give a brief overview, nothing more. As bad as Wikipedia is, its all there is. There are actually no other websites on Multiregionalism, and I have no way of scanning my own books here. Wolpoff et al have never set up their own sites to upload their data. As i also stated, Multiregionalism is the minority position in the West because of political correctness. In places like China though - it is the mainstream view.
According to a recent poll 85% of Chinese anthropologists believe in multiregionalism.
In the West, multiregionalism is only supported by a handfull of scholars, if a single percent.
A single Human exodus out of Africa is not supported by the evidence. Look at the problems I typed up with OOA at Metapedia.
It also should be pointed out that strict OOA models are debunked anyway. Its a proven fact Caucasoids have 4% Neanderthal genes. So you are left with:
(a) Neanderthals mated with Humans (only in the Caucasoid belt, hence modern Europeans and Western Asians have Neanderthal admixture). (B) Modern Caucasoids (cro-magnons) directly evolved out of Neanderthals as Coon et al argued.
Either way, a strict OOA view has been DISPROVEN.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Pathetic buffoon, all your claims above are bullshiit.. You are only now trying to save face by robotic repetition. Your own "supporting references" debunk you. You claims are nonsense. Your bogus Metapedia /WIkipedia "reference" remains bogus- and now you are trying to backtrack and talk 'bout "brief overview. BS. Your "corrected headline" does not help your case at all- you still stand debunked. ANd there are a variety of OOA models, but in whatever flavor, they debunk your BS claim that OOA never happened. -------------------------
Originally posted by Troll Patrol: MANKIND COMES FROM AFRICA, AS YOU CAN READ FOR YOURSELF!!!!!LOL
^Excellent job Patrol with those references above. Keep them coming and keep hitting the racists hard. Its like the old Raider backfield. Mofos who ventured there, had to pay the price. Another ref shown below (Klein).
African Homo Erectus pioneered advanced tool-making technology long before said technology appeared elsewhere on the planet. ----------------------------------- A new study suggests that Homo erectus, a precursor to modern humans, was using advanced tool-making methods in East Africa 1.8 million years ago, at least 300,000 years earlier than previously thought. The study, published this week in Nature, raises new questions about where these tall and slender early humans originated and how they developed sophisticated tool-making technology.
Homo erectus appeared about 2 million years ago, and ranged across Asia and Africa before hitting a possible evolutionary dead-end, about 70,000 years ago. Some researchers think Homo erectus evolved in East Africa, where many of the oldest fossils have been found, but the discovery in the 1990s of equally old Homo erectus fossils in the country of Georgia has led others to suggest an Asian origin. The study in Nature does not resolve the debate but adds new complexity. At 1.8 million years ago, Homo erectus in Dmanisi, Georgia was still using simple chopping tools while in West Turkana, Kenya, according to the study, the population had developed hand axes, picks and other innovative tools that anthropologists call “Acheulian.”
In the summer of 2007, a team of French and American researchers traveled to Kenya’s Lake Turkana in Africa’s Great Rift Valley, where earth’s plates are tearing apart and some of the earliest humans first appear. Anthropologist Richard Leakey’s famous find – “Turkana Boy”, a Homo erectus teenager who lived about 1.5 million years ago – was excavated on Lake Turkana’s western shore and is still the most complete early human skeleton found so far.
The East African landscape that Homo erectus walked from about 2 million to 1.5 million years ago was becoming progressively drier, with savanna grasslands spreading in response to changes in the monsoon rains. “We need to understand also the ancient environment because this gives us an insight into how processes of evolution work—how shifts in early human biology and behavior are potentially caused by changes in the climate, vegetation or animal life that is particular to a habitat,” said Lepre. The team is currently excavating a more than 2 million year old site in Kenya to learn more about the early Oldowan period." --S. Bjelland (2011) New evidence from Lake Turkana suggests humans shaped stone axes 1.8 million years ago, Turkana Basin Institute http://www.turkanabasin.org/geoblog/2011/08/new-evidence-from-lake-turkana-suggests-humans-shaped-stone-axes-1-8-million-years-ago/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced Acheulian tool technology and skill pioneered in Africa by ancient hominids.
"The Acheulian is one of the first defined prehistoric techno-complexes and is characterized by shaped bifacial stone tools1, 2, 3. It probably originated in Africa, spreading to Europe and Asia perhaps as early as ~1 million years (Myr) ago4, 5, 6. The origin of the Acheulian is thought to have closely coincided with major changes in human brain evolution, allowing for further technological developments7, 8. Nonetheless, the emergence of the Acheulian remains unclear because well-dated sites older than 1.4 Myr ago are scarce. Here we report on the lithic assemblage and geological context for the Kokiselei 4 archaeological site from the Nachukui formation (West Turkana, Kenya) that bears characteristic early Acheulian tools and pushes the first appearance datum for this stone-age technology back to 1.76 Myr ago. Moreover, co-occurrence of Oldowan and Acheulian artefacts at the Kokiselei site complex indicates that the two technologies are not mutually exclusive time-successive components of an evolving cultural lineage, and suggests that the Acheulian was either imported from another location yet to be identified or originated from Oldowan hominins at this vicinity. In either case, the Acheulian did not accompany the first human dispersal from Africa9, 10 despite being available at the time. This may indicate that multiple groups of hominins distinguished by separate stone-tool-making behaviours and dispersal strategies coexisted in Africa at 1.76 Myr ago." -- Christopher J. Lepre et al. (2011). An earlier origin for the Acheulian. Nature 477, 82-85
Oldowan tools were later used by the first members of the genus Homo, and were carried out of Africa during the global spread of Homo erectus. By 1.4 million years ago, African Homo erectus was using the far more involved and sophisticated Acheulian tool technology, which later made its way out of Africa. But the transition between the two tool types has remained unclear. Now, scientists are reporting the first find where Oldowan and Acheulian tools have been found at the same site, one that's old enough to indicate that Acheulian tools were available when Homo erectus first left Africa. --John Timmer. 2011. Homo erectus forgot to pack its best tools when it left Africa [/b] ------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Proponents of a "fast track" human "revolution" in cognition, organization and technology locate the "revolution" as beginning in, and being sustained from Africa, not other parts of the globe. Other scholars argue for a more gradual evolution of the traits that brought about advances in Africa where anatomically modern humans first appeared, and their expansion to Europe and Asia circa 50kya. Whatever scenario is followed, it makes little difference. The "revo", gradual or "fast track", began in Africa and was sustained from thence. - QUOTE:
"..distance and small population size probably limited gene flow, and the composite fossil and archeological records indicate that the African lineage spread to replace or swamp the others beginning roughly 50 ky ago. It is thus reasonable to supply the lineages with biological species labels: Homo sapiens in Africa, H. neanderthalensis in Europe, and H. erectus in the Far East. The European lineage is the best documented,73 and it is marked by the progressive accumulation of Neanderthal features, culminating in the classic Neanderthals by 130 ky ago. During the long interval when the Neanderthals were evolving, from at least 500 to 130 ky ago, Europe was generally much cooler than it has been historically, and some conspicuous Neanderthal distinctions, including massive trunks and short limbs, were probably physiological adaptations to cold. Other key distinctions— including, for example, the strong forward projection of the face along the midline, the unique configuration of the mastoid region and the occipital, and some peculiarities of the postcranium— may owe more to gene drift in populations that periodically crashed when climate became especially cold.
The pertinent African fossil record is much less complete, but it contains no specimens that anticipate the Neanderthals, and it shows that anatomically near-modern people were widespread in Africa by 130 ky ago,74 when only Neanderthals inhabited Europe. The Far Eastern record is the most sketchy,75 and it may actually comprise two distinct evolutionary trajectories: one in southeastern Asia that suggests continuity within Indonesian Homo erectus from before 500 ky ago until perhaps 50 ky ago,76 and a second in China that may indicate evolution from classic H. erectus before 500 ky ago to populations that by 100 ky ago, retained few distinctive H. erectus features and that approached H. sapiens in braincase size and form.77 The relevant archeology suggests that even as Europeans and Africans progressively diverged in morphology after 500 ky ago, they remained fundamentally similar in behavior.
Thus, both Europeans and Africans produced Acheulean artifacts before 250 ky ago, and they made very similar kinds of non-Acheulean artifacts afterwards. From a strictly artifactual perspective, a conspicuous difference between Africa and Europe arose only after 40 ky ago, and it then occurred in the absence of a morphological contrast, for the artifact makers on both continents were now H. sapiens of African origin. Archeological divergence was followed on each continent by a significant acceleration in artifactual (cultural) differentiation through time and space. This surely signals the existence of the historically familiar modern human ability to innovate. If as I suggest, the development of this ability depended on a biological (neural) change in Africa 50–40 ky ago, then the name H. sapiens should probably be restricted to fully modern humans after this time, and their preceding near-modern African ancestors should be assigned to another species, for which the name H. helmei is available.78
The more fundamental point, however, is that the sudden origin of the modern capacity for culture in Africa 50–40 ky ago could help explain both how and why fully modern Africans were then able to expand at the expense of their nonmodern Eurasian contemporaries... The issue is complicated by the realization that Middle Paleolithic people in Europe were Neanderthals, whereas MSA people in Africa more closely resembled living people. contexts.
Using this criterion, the most plausible evidence for modern human behavior before 50 ky ago comes from the Katanda sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo121–124 and from Blombos Cave in South Africa.125–128 At Katanda, electron spin-resonance dates on hippopotamus teeth and luminescence dates on covering sands bracket mammal and fish bones, stone artifacts that could be either MSA or LSA, eight whole or partial barbed bone points, and four additional formal bone artifacts between 150 and 90 ky ago. At Blombos Cave, luminescence dates on enclosing sands suggest that mammal and fish bones, classic MSA stone artifacts, three whole or fragmentary polished bone points, and 17 less formal bone artifacts accumulated around 100 ky ago.129 At both Katanda and Blombos Cave, the most striking discoveries are the formal bone artifacts..
.. credible claims for art or other modern human behavioral markers before 50 ky ago must involve relatively large numbers of highly patterned objects from deeply stratified, sealed contexts would antedate other known examples, from LSA/Upper Paleolithic sites, by 50 to 40 ky. If the stratigraphic associations and age estimates at both sites are accepted, they could imply that modern human behavioral traits and modern morphology arose in Africa together, at or before 100 ky ago..."
--Richard Klein. Archeology and the Evolution of Human Behavior.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Folks, allow me to show scaale than either Homo Erectus, Neanderthal of Denisova. Allow me to show you the animal that is closer to Homo sapien than Neanderthal!
We all get that the cracker is the offspring of Neanderthal right? and therefore is Neanderthal is its direct ancestor. But Science tells us that Neanderthal is more distant from UNMIXED Homo sapiens or in other words TRUE hompo sapisns, that a Gorilla or a damn chimp! LOL
posted
LOL look at this 48 chromosome ape that is higher on the evolutionary scale thanh Neanderthal! Look at this ape making stone tools yall! LOL
This ape is making stone flake tools and unlike Neanderthal homo sapiens are not taking credit for the ingenuity! You are looking at neanderthals master yall! No wondetr we exterminated that Neanderthal dimwit, while Chimps and bonobos still survive!
It should be noted that the crackers daddy was less evolved than a Gorilla or a chimp.. Chimps are a step upward from an evolutionary standpoint than their Neanderthal daddy. Let me show you another one of the crackers relatives yall! (RH factor) well I'll be a monkeys uncle! I encourage you to research RH factor yall! These crackers continue to chase their tails in an attempt to explain why they possess monkey DNA! LOL the monkey fairy gave it to them! bwahahaha!
^^More tropically proportioned diversity ...... note brachial and cural indexes
And just as tropical African environments are diverse, so are tropical African peoples as credible scientists note time and time again. QUOTES:
Most phenotypic variation – Quote: "Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africa to have the highest levels of phenotypic variation, consistent with many genetic studies." --- Relethford, John 2001. Global Analysis of Regional Differences.. Human Biology - V73, n5, pp. 629-636)
Most genetic diversity – Quote: "Africa contains tremendous cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity.. Studies using mitochondrial (mt)DNA and nuclear DNA markers consistently indicate that Africa is the most genetically diverse region of the world." ---Tishkoff & Williams. 2002. Genetic analysis of African populations.. NatuRevGen (8)
Most skin color diversity – Quote: "Regional differences in local within-population [skin color] diversity were examined using two measures of variability: the sample variance and the sample coefficient of variation. For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions. This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits." -- Relethford JH.(2000). Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations. Hum Biol. 72(5):773-80.)
hhh
Most ancestral and intra-regional dental diversity – Quote: “.. research by the first author revealed that, relative to other modern peoples, sub-Saharan Africans exhibit the highest frequencies of ancestral (or plesiomorphic) dental traits.." --Irish JD, Guatelli-Steinberg D.(2003) Ancient teeth.. Hum Evol. 45(2):113-44
"The patterns of inter- and intra-regional variation among 12 major geographical groups from around the world were investigated .. Subsaharan Africans show the largest intra-regional diversity among the groups compared." --Hanihara 2008 Morphological variation of major human populations AJPA 136,2 169-182
Highest level of albinism in the world and built-in native diversity gives tropical Africans variation in hair and eye color. Quote- "Blondism, especially in young children, is common in many dark haired populations (e.g. Australian, Melanesian), and is still found in some Nubian villages.“ (-Hardy D. 1978. Analysis of Hair..AJPA 49) Though Europe posts more people by volume, Africa’s high albinism means differing hair and eye colors are present.
Quote: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1 100 to 1 in 3900.“ (-Roach and Miller. 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.)
Hair also varies in Africa – from the Horn, to the Atlantic to the Cape. Quote: “Extremely "wooly" hair is not the only kind native to tropical Africa.." (S. Keita 1993. "Studies and Comments)
"Thutmose has a much more rounded cranium (than Amenhotep), and prognathism of the maxilla and mandible as well as of the dentition. His skull is most similar to that of Nubians from the ancient cemetaries of Gebel Adda examined by the Michigan expedition. Measurable variables also confirm similarities between Thutmose I and Thutmose II ( Appendix Table A1)"
--Harris and Wente: An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies -----------------------------------------------------
Emergence of Haplogroup M occurred among dark-skinned tropical peoples
Emergence of Haplogroup M occurred among dark-skinned tropical peoples ---QUOTE:
"Macaulay's research team analyses the Orang Asli, the aboriginal inhabitants of the Malay Penisula, while Thangaraj and colleagues focused on the Andamese islanders, called 'Negritos' (for the characteristic phenotype of dark skin), both groups performing a large number of complete mitochondrial sequences in order to clarify the origin of these populations. They discovered that both Orang Asli and Andaman islanders harboured ancient mtDNA lineages, belonging to the founder haplogroups M, N, and R, with coalescence ages of ~44,000 to ~63,000 years, which were considered the legacy of an early diffusion of modern humans out of Africa. Thus, there was a single rapid out of Africa dispersal (~70,000 years ago) involving a founding group of individuals harbouring the L3 mtDNA haplogroup and starting from the Horn of Africa towards the Persian Gulf and further along the tropical coast of the Indian Ocean to Southeast Asia and Australasia. During this coastal migration, haplogroups M, N and R evolved and the ancestral L3 was lost. Moreover, this scenario is strongly supported by palaeoenvironmental evidence, confirming that a northern migration would have been impossible during the glacial period extending from ~70,000 to 50,000 years ago."
Haplogroup M not found much in Europe or the Middle East, but in Africa, M1 appears - QUOTE.
"The richest basal variation in the founder haplogroups , N and R is found among the southern stretch of Eurasia, particularly in the Indian subcontinent (Figure 1), suggesting a rapid colonization along the southern coast of Asia.. Western Eurasians, in contrast with Southern Asians, eastern Eurasians, and Australasians, have a high level of haplogroup diversity within the haplogroup N and R, but lack haplogroup M also entirely (Figure 1)... Although Haplogroup M differentiated soon after the out of Africa exit and it is widely distributed in Asia (east Asia and India) and Oceania, there is an interesting exception for one of its more than 40 sub-clades: M1.. Indeed this lineage is mainly limited to the African continent with peaks in the Horn of Africa." --Paola Spinozzi, Alessandro Zironi . (2010). Origins as a Paradigm in the Sciences and in the Humanities. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. pp. 48-50
Misleading "Eurasian" label flagged by some scholars - QUOTE: "The historical linguistic data reported earlier would apply in the case of maternal lineages as well.. it is not likely that the "northern" genetic profile is simply due to "Eurasians" having colonized supra-Saharan regions from external African sources. It might be likely that the greater percentage of haplotypes called "Eurasian" are predominantly, although not solely, of indigenous African origin. As a term "Eurasian" is likely misleading, since it suggests a single locale of geographical origins. This is because it can be postulated that differentiation of the L3* haplogroup began before the emigration out of Africa, and that there would be indigenous supra-Saharan/Saharan or Horn-supra-Saharan haplotypes. More work and careful analysis of mtDNA and the archeological data and likely probabilities is needed. Early hunting and gathering paleolithic populations can be modeled as having roamed between northern Africa and Eurasia, leaving an asymmetrical distribution of various derivative variants over a wide region, giving the appearance of Eurasian incursion." --Keita, A, Boyce, A. (2005) Genetics, Egypt, and History... History in Africa, 32, 221-246
"the M1 presence in the Arabian peninsula signals a predominant East African influence since the Neolithic onwards." -- Petraglia, M and Rose, J (2010). The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia: ---------------------------------------------------------------
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Modern Egyptians cluster with Sub-Saharan Africans on several counts QUOTE:
"The biological characteristics of modern Egyptians show a north-south cline, reflecting their geographic location between sub-Saharan Africa and the Levant. This is expressed in DNA, blood groups, serum proteins and genetic disorders (Filon 1996; Hammer et al. 1998; Krings et al. 1999). They can also be expressed in phenotypic characteristics that can be identified in teeth and bones (Crichton 1966; Froment 1992; Keita 1996). These characteristics include head form, facial and nasal characteristics, jaw relationships, tooth size, morphology and upper/lower limb proportions. In all these features, Modern Egyptians resemble Sub-Saharan Africans (Howells 1989, Keita 1995)."
-- Smith, P. (2002) The palaeo-biological evidence for admixture between populations in the southern Levant and Egypt in the fourth to third millennia BCE. in E.C.M van den Brink and TE Levy, eds. Egypt and the Levant: interrelations from the 4th through the 3rd millenium, BCE. Leicester Univ Press: 2002, 118-28 -----------------------------------------------------------
Dental studies- re "tropical types
quote:
"Still, it appears that the process of state formation involved a large indigenous component. Outside influence and admixture with extraregional groups primarily occurred in Lower Egypt—perhaps during the later dynastic, but especially in Ptolmaic and Roman times (also Irish, 2006). No large-scale population replacement in the form of a foreign dynastic ‘race’ (Petrie, 1939) was indicated. Our results are generally consistent with those of Zakrzewski (2007). Using craniometric data in predynastic and early dynastic Egyptian samples, she also concluded that state formation was largely an indigenous process with some migration into the region evident. The sources of such migrants have not been identified; inclusion of additional regional and extraregional skeletal samples from various periods would be required for this purpose."
--Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians. Schillaci MA, Irish JD, Wood CC. 2009
Most ancestral and intra-regional dental diversity – Quote: “.. research by the first author revealed that, relative to other modern peoples, sub-Saharan Africans exhibit the highest frequencies of ancestral (or plesiomorphic) dental traits.." --Irish JD, Guatelli-Steinberg D.(2003) Ancient teeth.. Hum Evol. 45(2):113-44
"The patterns of inter- and intra-regional variation among 12 major geographical groups from around the world were investigated .. Subsaharan Africans show the largest intra-regional diversity among the groups compared." --Hanihara 2008 Morphological variation of major human populations AJPA 136,2 169-182
--------------------------------
Tropical peoples replaced cold-climate types in Europe
[QUOTE]: "The transition in Europe from Neandertals to “early anatomically modern” (Late Paleolithic) humans 40,000 to 25,000 years ago and subsequent changes in morphology within the latter group, are especially interesting in that they may provide evidence of adaptation following migration to a new climatic zone if these populations were derived from farther south, as suggested by the preponderance of current evidence (Klein 1999). The lack of change between European Early and Late Paleolithic samples in distal-to-proximal limb length proportions (crural and brachial indices) was initially puzzling in this regard because a reduction would have been predicted if climatic adaptation were taking place (Trinkaus 1981).
However, more recent work has shown that relative to measures of trunk (vertebral column) height, limb length did decrease significantly within the Upper Paleolithic in Europe, beginning at proportions similar to those of sub-Saharan Africans and ending at proportions similar to those of modern Europeans (Holliday 1997a).
Comparisons of long bone lengths to bi-iliac breadths in available European Upper Paleolithic specimens (nD15–19, about a third from the Early Upper Paleolithic) also indicate significant reductions in limb length to body breadth between the Early and Late Upper Paleolithic (unpublished results based on data given in Ruff et al. 1997, supplementary information). Thus, body shape did change significantly in Upper Paleolithic Europeans after exposure to colder climatic conditions, although the change was mosaic in nature, beginning with a general reduction in limb lengths followed by a reduction in distal-to-proximal limb element proportions." [ENDQUOTE]:
-- Ruff. C. 2002. Variation in Human Body Size and Shape. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2002. 31:211-32.
Incoming Neolithic to Europe included clear "sub-Saharan" tropical African elements - Brace 2005
QUOTE: "The assessment of prehistoric and recent human craniofacial dimensions supports the picture documented by genetics that the extension of Neolithic agriculture from the Near East westward to Europe and across North Africa was accomplished by a process of demic diffusion (11–15). If the Late Pleistocene Natufian sample from Israel is the source from which that Neolithic spread was derived, then there was clearly a Sub-Saharan African element present of almost equal importance as the Late Prehistoric Eurasian element. At the same time, the failure of the Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in central and northern Europe to tie to the modern inhabitants supports the suggestion that, while a farming mode of subsistence was spread westward and also north to Crimea and east to Mongolia by actual movement of communities of farmers, the indigenous foragers in each of those areas ultimately absorbed both the agricultural subsistence strategy and also the people who had brought it. The interbreeding of the incoming Neolithic people with the in situ foragers diluted the Sub-Saharan traces that may have come with the Neolithic spread so that no discoverable element of that remained. This picture of a mixture between the incoming farmers and the in situ foragers had originally been supported by the archaeological record alone (6, 9, 33, 34, 48, 49), but this view is now reinforced by the analysis of the skeletal morphology of the people of those areas where prehistoric and recent remains can be metrically compared."
-- Brace, et al. The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 January 3; 103(1): p. 242-247.)
Ancient Egypt and nearby tropical peoples- cultural links
QUOTE:
"The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on."
-- FROM: "(Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa: Their Interaction. Encyclopedia of Pre-colonial Africa, by Joseph O. Vogel, AltaMira Press, (1997), pp. 465-472) --------------------------------------------------
Numerous Pharaohs show tropical limb proportions
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Caucasoid racial affinities of ancient Egyptians
Craniometric
SOURCE : Brace, C. L., D. P. Tracer, L. A. Yaroch, J. Robb, K. Brandt, and A. R. Nelson. 1993. Clines and Clusters Versus "Race": A Test in Ancient Egypt and the Case of a Death on the Nile. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 36:1-31. http://wysinger.homestead.com/brace.pdf
Cranial Non-metric
SOURCE : HANIHARA, TSUNEHIKO, HAJIME ISHIDA, AND YUKIO DODO. 2003. Characterization of biological diversity through analysis of discrete cranial traits. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121:241-251.
Cranial Non-metric
SOURCE : Ricaut, F. X. and Waelkens, M (2008) "Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements," Human Biology: Vol. 80: Iss. 5, Article 5.
Dental affinities
Dental Metric
SOURCE : Hanihara T and Ishida H, (2005) Metric dental variation of major human populations American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 128 Issue 2, Pages 287 - 298.
Dental Non-metric
SOURCE : Irish J.D. 1998b. Diachronic and synchronic dental trait affinities of late and post-pleistocene peoples from North Africa. Homo. 49(2) 138-155
==
All these modern studies cluster the ancient egyptians with Western Eurasians (Europeans, Western Asians) - Caucasoids, not Sub-Saharan Africans.
- Don't expect a responce from Zaharan though. All he does is spam this place up to bury the scientific facts that prove the AE's were Caucasoids.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
When I have time I will find and post
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic