posted
I knew Basal Eurasian/EEF was from Africa. But when I first read the digest several years ago I missed that part when they implied that ANE/WHG?ENA were separated from Basal Eurasian also ....in Africa.
From DNATribes: Quote: Sequential analyses of non-local genetic components in Europe using both autosomal STR and SNP data express ancestral components related to Middle Eastern and North Eurasian populations. Subsequent steps in each iterative analysis reveal deeper genetic relationships to populations of the Indian Subcontinent and Horn of Africa, possibly related to Early European Farmer (EEF) populations that first emerged near the Fertile Crescent as a synthesis integrating migratory hunter-gatherer and sedentary cultures from West Eurasia (possibly Anatolia) within Basal Eurasian populations (possibly the Nile Valley). Results are also consistent with a third element that helped shape European genetic structure: North Eurasian ancestry, related to not only West Asian (Mesopotamian and Caucasus Mountains) populations, but also to Siberian, Native American, and (in later iterations that show deeper relationships) to Asian-Pacific populations. This might reflect contacts between European (WHG) and Siberian (ANE) hunter-gather populations and Eastern Non-African (ENA) populations during the Paleolithic and Mesolithic period, in which Basal Eurasians were geographically separated from Eurasia (possibly near the Nile Valley). As new data become available, including new ancient genomes, it might become possible to further clarify these models of early population history and reveal new insights about the ancestral populations that shaped world genetic structure in Africa, Eurasia, Oceania, and the Americas.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The data has consistently shown that the Nile was indeed a "barrier" or some sort demarcation. Remember the Luyha are ancestral to Berbers and ultimately Europeans while the Maasai are ancestral to SSA Egyptians. Also mtDNA has bifurcation along the Nile. with H1 and H3 to the West and H2 and others to the East of the Nile. This is seen with many haplotypes...BOTH female and male.
R1b-m269 has Bifurcation there also. A middle Eastern version and a West European version.
-------------------- 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: [QB] I knew Basal Eurasian/EEF was from Africa. But when I first read the digest several years ago I missed that part when they implied that ANE/WHG?ENA were separated from Basal Eurasian also ....in Africa.
The private testing company DNA Tribes is not the primary research. The one who put emphasis on the term "Basal Eurasian" and "EEF" "ANE" etc was Iosif Lazaridis as they reference. So if you want to make statements about the location of Basal Eurasian you would have to go to his articles and charts and quote rather the secondary source
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Remember the Luyha are ancestral to Berbers and ultimately Europeans while the Maasai are ancestral to SSA Egyptians.
How the hell do you come up with this crap? Luhya are ancestral to Berbers?
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
"How the hell". I assume you are the dude from Davidski? You know I was banned. I assume you are still there.
So...now...let us talk. Anyways have you read the Henn paper? If you haven't then you are NOT qualified to have this discussion with me. Also have you researched ANY of the many ADMIXTURE chart of Luyha? Where do you want to start?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I actually registered here back then in order to bring the discussion over here, because your shitposting on Eurogenes was drawing out the racist trolls and the good posters were complaining. But my registration request hung in limbo for 2 weeks and now I don't even remember what we were arguing about.
But I like to learn about African genetics and prehistory and there are some knowledgeable people here. Even you know something - if you would treat your own ideas critically and not just merrily assemble cherry-picked evidence into nonsense theories.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just post whatever sentence from whatever paper you are taking completely out of context in order to draw your whacky conclusion.
Luhya are mostly West/Central African with some mixed East African admixture of a kind not too different from Maasai.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: "How the hell". I assume you are the dude from Davidski? You know I was banned. I assume you are still there.
So...now...let us talk. Anyways have you read the Henn paper? If you haven't then you are NOT qualified to have this discussion with me. Also have you researched ANY of the many ADMIXTURE chart of Luyha? Where do you want to start?
I thought in that paper that Luyha were simply used as a kind of proxy or stand in for Ancient Egyptian ancestry.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would you stop your mis-directing and confusing readers. DANTribes is doing the same thing as many Genetic testing companies like DNAConsultants and Ancestry.com. They have an extensive database and the applicable software to run comparison and other types of analysis. Even John Public can run these analysis with free software and BAM files and free database available. There is no need for DNATribes to do any type of "research". All they are doing is comparing publish results from Lazaridis et al and others like Amarna JAMA and COMPARE it with what is in their databases.
Their Digest is a write-up of what they observed when they did their comparison analysis against published results by Lazaridis. If Lucas Martin was alive he would be doing a lot more write-up of all the new aDNA coming out. But Lazaridis has basically confirmed that DNATribes was correct when he stated Natufian and Basal Eurasian was African. Lucas Martin was ahead of the curve.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] I knew Basal Eurasian/EEF was from Africa. But when I first read the digest several years ago I missed that part when they implied that ANE/WHG?ENA were separated from Basal Eurasian also ....in Africa.
The private testing company DNA Tribes is not the primary research. The one who put emphasis on the term "Basal Eurasian" and "EEF" "ANE" etc was Iosif Lazaridis as they reference. So if you want to make statements about the location of Basal Eurasian you would have to go to his articles and charts and quote rather the secondary source
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are right ..sort of. The point is there is a separation along the Nile. With Certain population migrating East of the Nile and others West of the Nile. This is seen both in Paleolithic/Mesolithic and Neolithic OOA migrants. Yes, Luyha was the best CHOSEN population in the database(HGDP?). There may be closer matches but they are not in the database.
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: "How the hell". I assume you are the dude from Davidski? You know I was banned. I assume you are still there.
So...now...let us talk. Anyways have you read the Henn paper? If you haven't then you are NOT qualified to have this discussion with me. Also have you researched ANY of the many ADMIXTURE chart of Luyha? Where do you want to start?
I thought in that paper that Luyha were simply used as a kind of proxy or stand in for Ancient Egyptian ancestry.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"bringing out the racist trolls" guess Davidski was losing money from the liberal Advertisers. Racist trolls is not good for business. Keep in mind I never used ANY racial terms, my point of reference is always geographical. Or population based. Eg Villabruna was tropical adapted and the closest "tropical" region to where he was discovered was Africa. Morphologically he is closest to North Africans. He carried ancestral alleles for SLC45A2 and SLC24A5 like Africans. If I was a betting man my money is he came from Sub-saharan Africa..or his ancestors did. I don't visualize his ancestors migrating to Italy from........ Tahiti.
What does it all mean? "Eurasian" ancestry is African like I have been saying all along. And I am not being "racist". Trolls are welcome.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman, I didn't say you yourself were being racist; I said you were attracting racist trolls with your behaviour. Didn't you notice who was replying to you most?
Of course Eurasian ancestry is *originally* African. But Villabruna is not even as tropically adapted as his relatives who lived further north in a colder part of the Ice Age (and were equally dark-skinned). He has evolved toward more cold-tolerance. Genetically, he is in the same clade of Palaeolithic Europeans. There is no good reason to claim he came from Africa - you only wish it to be so.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
Villabruna 1 is an outlier in its post-cranial measurements. Its not typical of skeletons from same time-period across Europe:
"Nevertheless, Villabruna 1, more then the majority of his contemporaries, retains climatic adaptation typical of the ancestral African population." (Vercellotti et al. 2008 "The Late Upper Paleolithic skeleton Villabruna 1")
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: xyyman, I didn't say you yourself were being racist; I said you were attracting racist trolls with your behaviour. Didn't you notice who was replying to you most?
Of course Eurasian ancestry is *originally* African. But Villabruna is not even as tropically adapted as his own ancestors who lived further north in a colder part of the Ice Age. He has evolved toward more cold-tolerance. Genetically, he is in the same clade of Palaeolithic Europeans. There is no good reason to claim he came from Africa - you only wish it to be so.
Lots of problems with the idea early Upper Paleolithic Europeans (EUP) were originally tropically adapted to begin with though, e.g. craniometric data has them closest to modern European populations, but supposedly they had tropical adapted limbs. If EUP were tropically adapted, one would also expect them to resemble modern Sub-Saharan African populations in craniofacial form, but they don't.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Lots of problems with the idea early Upper Paleolithic Europeans (EUP) were originally tropically adapted to begin with though, e.g. craniometric data has them closest to modern European populations, but supposedly they had tropical adapted limbs. If EUP were tropically adapted, one would also expect them to resemble modern Sub-Saharan African populations in craniofacial form, but they don't.
Why would they though? Australian Aborigines don't look like Africans craniofacially. What would even be climate adapted? Nose shape or something like that?
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Lots of problems with the idea early Upper Paleolithic Europeans (EUP) were originally tropically adapted to begin with though, e.g. craniometric data has them closest to modern European populations, but supposedly they had tropical adapted limbs. If EUP were tropically adapted, one would also expect them to resemble modern Sub-Saharan African populations in craniofacial form, but they don't.
Why would they though? Australian Aborigines don't look like Africans craniofacially. What would even be climate adapted? Nose shape or something like that?
Isn't it a prediction of the Out-of-Africa theory the earliest "AMH"s in Europe, Levant etc., look Sub-Saharan African (SSA) since they migrated from there? Yet early Upper Paleolithic (EUP)skulls don't look like SSA's in craniofacial form. The reason Out-of-Africa proponents quickly adopted the supposed tropical limb metrics of early Upper Paleolithics was so they could argue this was proof the earliest "AMH" Europeans had SSA ancestry/were migrants from SSA. However, why would EUP's retain SSA limb measurements, but not cranial measurements? None of this makes sense, at least not for the Out-of-Africa theory. I'm not even a proponent of this, but I've never seen an explanation provided.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which SSA fossils are you comparing them with? Everyone back then was weird and robust as far as I know.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: xyyman, I didn't say you yourself were being racist; I said you were attracting racist trolls with your behaviour. Didn't you notice who was replying to you most?
Of course Eurasian ancestry is *originally* African. But Villabruna is not even as tropically adapted as his own ancestors who lived further north in a colder part of the Ice Age. He has evolved toward more cold-tolerance. Genetically, he is in the same clade of Palaeolithic Europeans. There is no good reason to claim he came from Africa - you only wish it to be so.
Lots of problems with the idea early Upper Paleolithic Europeans (EUP) were originally tropically adapted to begin with though, e.g. craniometric data has them closest to modern European populations, but supposedly they had tropical adapted limbs. If EUP were tropically adapted, one would also expect them to resemble modern Sub-Saharan African populations in craniofacial form, but they don't.
You keep repeating the same mistakes. You learn slow.
SSA's
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fact is, of all the "leaked" information from these studies at the recent symposium, the more interesting thing is the speculation that the LSA Malawi individual carried "Eurasian" ancestry and sex related haplogroups. Of all that I read that may come out from the Symposium THAT!! is the stunning thing. It is not stunning to me beause I have speculated about it all along. "Eurasian" ancestry only means it rose to high frequency IN Europe/Eurasia not that it originated IN Europe or Eurasia. Of these European researchers will try to spin it like Europeans were back-migrating to deep into inner Africa like Malawi ....100,000years ago. Delusional liars they are!
Middle Kingdom AEians carrying haplogroups that is basal to Kenyans is not news! Really people!?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Cass. I am still trying to get my hands on that paper on the morphology of the LSA individual from Malawi. Some reports label him as "Caucasoids". WTF! As I always said there is no such race. Europeans....and Asians and Native Americans are a subset of Africans.
-------------------- 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 |
DNA Tribes Digest for March 1, 2014: The First Human Diaspora: Basal Eurasians and the Horn of Africa This month’s article explores the Horn of Africa’s links with Africa and Eurasia, in search of genetic traces of the first human migrations out of Africa.
________________________________
This is why I don't like Lazaridis' using the term "Basal Eurasian" One should not use a geographical term and then not say where it may have developed.
^ thus DNA tribes has question marks along with the term "Basal Eurasian" both inside and outside of Africa.
That is too fuzzy to work with
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: Where did it say anything about the LSA Malawi guys being Eurasian?
He's talking about some old physical anthropology on mid-Holocene Malawian skulls. Some folks were apparently labelling having some Caucasoid-traits or affinities at one point.
quote:When Tobias (1971) wrote The Men Who Came Before the Malawian History, only two sets of human skeletal remains from the sites of Hora and Fin- gura could be associated with the latter part of the Later Stone Age in that country. Wells (1957) and Sandelowsky and Robinson (1968) had published only brief reports on the two sites, and neither series had been fully analyzed. On the basis of Wells (1957) and Brothwell (1963), Tobias (1971) postulated that the Holocene people were a blend of incoming African Mediterranean groups with a prior Khoisanoid population. This interpretation by Tobias (1971) was consistent with the then-current model that human variation in Africa could be explained as a result of the melding proc- ess between Caucasoid, Negroid, and Khoisanoid types. Current approaches based on our improved knowl- edge of the genetics of these groups suggest that reliance on racially identified groups is counterproductive, and that population changes should be seen as complex results of ancient demographic events as well as gene flow (Kittles and Keita, 1999). Nevertheless, the preliminary assessment by Tobias (1971) was tempered by his hopes that new finds would be added to the Malawian sample, and that these would be compared to wider-ranging samples from neighboring territories. Sadly, the three decades that have passed since Tobias' publication have not produced a wealth of new human skeletal remains. Only two further Mala- wian specimens have been excavated from two rock shel- ters in the Dedza district of the western highlands
let us just say xyyman has a erm... unorthodox view of interpreting all this. I don't want to insult the guy because occasionally he can post something good.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
DNA Tribes Digest for March 1, 2014: The First Human Diaspora: Basal Eurasians and the Horn of Africa This month’s article explores the Horn of Africa’s links with Africa and Eurasia, in search of genetic traces of the first human migrations out of Africa.
________________________________
This is why I don't like Lazaridis' using the term "Basal Eurasian" One should not use a geographical term and then not say where it may have developed.
^ thus DNA tribes has question marks along with the term "Basal Eurasian" both inside and outside of Africa.
That is too fuzzy to work with
This basically says there was a transition.
Figure 1: Map of possible migration routes Out of Africa (Basal Eurasian and descendant EEF populations shaded in red), based on the fitted tree model of West Eurasian population history described in Lazaridis et. al.5
Conclusion (SNP): Sequential analysis of non-local genetic components in the Horn of Africa expresses substantial Sub-Saharan African and West Eurasian (Middle Eastern and European) related percentages, possibly expressing genetic traces of modern Homo sapiens expansions in Africa (Sub- Saharan African;
Not much different from this:
quote:
Figure 2. Haplotype Sharing between African and Non-African Populations
So far, neither fossil and archaeological2–4 nor genetic5,6 evidence has been able to distinguish between an exit through Egypt and Sinai (northern route)7 or one through Ethiopia, the Bab el Mandeb strait, and the Arabian Peninsula (southern route).8–10 Genetic evidence has more often been interpreted as favoring a southern route,5,6,9 although the Neandertal admixture present in all non- Africans11 is more readily explained by a northern route given that Neandertal fossils are currently known from the Levant, but not from the southern part of the Arabian Peninsula.1
[…]
The fact that we could identify in Egyptians an African genomic component that is distinct from West and East African components further supports a minor degree of population continuity in Egypt since the OOA dispersal. These findings point to the northern route as the preferential direction taken out of Africa.
--Luca Pagan et al.
Tracing the Route of Modern Humans out of Africa by Using 225 Human Genome Sequences from Ethiopians and Egyptians
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks Cass. All I could find about the remains was that they weren't really Khoisan and were kind of like modern South Africans.
For anyone who didn't see the conference abstract, it says: "Our reexamination of the skeletons also produced the first ancient DNA from the central African region, which together with previous morphological analysis demonstrates that the LSA foragers of the area cannot be readily fit within the known genetic and phenotypic parameters of living foragers."
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
"canNOT be readily fit within the known GENETIC and PHENOTYPE parameters of LIVING foragers"
The statement says a lot with a few words.
1. genetically there will be a surprise 2. Phenotypical he is different 3. He is unlike current LIVING populations in the area.
As Cass pointed out it was determined he was looked upon as "African Mediterranean" whatever that means which I interpret to mean "non-Negroid". Correct me. Isn't that how Europeans think?
LSA African deep in the heart of Africa carrying African Mediterranean features and genes. That is what the result will show. And it will be interpreted as an Early back-migration from Europe to Central Africa.
Of course it is not but rather a part of African diversity.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suppose "African Mediterranean" would mean something like Horners, and that was in some old paper where they were taken to be a mix between the former and Khoisan. In the more recent paper they are said to be relatively Negroid, not too different from present-day Bantu speakers in the same area.
These remains are quite recent and not directly dated, so it is not out of the question that they could have Horner-related pastoralist ancestry, though that certainly doesn't seem to be what the abstract is getting at.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe the abstract is stating that "This is a guy that is not suppose to be here" especially during the Late Stone Age in Africa . And yes. He may be a "hamite" Hutu or Tutsi? Meaning that the historical "documentation" of the arrival pastoralist from East is another lie. " Caucasoid" is part of African diversity.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am still confused as to what Cass is arguing about Villabruna. I believe Cass is stating that Villabruna "above the neck" is Caucasoid but "below the neck" is Negroid or tropical? Wouldn't that make him a African Tutsi or Hutu ? Which ever one it is? Keep in mind also, I may be wrong, but I rarely am, that I don't think he migrated over 1000miles North during his lifetime. In other words , he is a descendent meaning he carried the genes of his daddy and mommy and maybe he had brothers, uncles etc. What I am saying? He wasn't the only one!!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are wrong at a much higher than chance frequency. It's almost a talent.
But totally, Villabruna was a Tutsi. I think we can consider this mystery solved. Also, obviously if the abstract says "not like living foragers" it must mean native African quasi-Eurasians. What other possibility is left?
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no idea what is a Tutsi or Hutu. I know they had their beef and one was supposed Caucasoid...deep in Central Africa. So my point is, is this LSA African in the same geographic region with Caucasoid features ancestral to the ...Tutsi? You said it not me.
The Geneticist is hinting at we will be surprised by the results when it is published. Since the aDNA make up seems dissimilar to modern LIVING surrounding populations.
-------------------- 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: "canNOT be readily fit within the known GENETIC and PHENOTYPE parameters of LIVING foragers"
The statement says a lot with a few words.
1. genetically there will be a surprise 2. Phenotypical he is different 3. He is unlike current LIVING populations in the area.
That is NOT really what it means. They said they are unlike living FORAGERS. Do you know who living "FORAGERS" are? Put on your thinking cap.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW- Seems like my ban at Davidski is lifted. I ran a "test" this morning.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed "Foragers'" is who they are. That is why I went back to see how the LSA Malawi sKull was 'described" . It was described as "African Mediterranean". Are Bantus "African Mediterranean'?
quote:Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: "canNOT be readily fit within the known GENETIC and PHENOTYPE parameters of LIVING foragers"
The statement says a lot with a few words.
1. genetically there will be a surprise 2. Phenotypical he is different 3. He is unlike current LIVING populations in the area.
That is NOT really what it means. They said they are unlike living FORAGERS. Do you know who living "FORAGERS" are? Put on your thinking cap.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Agreed with what? You implied that the researchers said they are " dissimilar to modern LIVING surrounding populations."
That is not what they said. They basically saying they are NOT like Khoisan and Twa.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hadza are the nearest geographically (about 1000 km away by modern road). I guess some people still call them Khoisan though.
I'm not getting my hopes up that they got any very interesting or high quality results.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree they are not Khoisan and Twa......For once you got something correct. But what is so remarkable about that? That is why I delved further about what they are implying.
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: ^ Agreed with what? You implied that the researchers said they are " dissimilar to modern LIVING surrounding populations."
That is not what they said. They basically saying they are NOT like Khoisan and Twa.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am betting they do. At least it will be more interesting than Great Lakes Kenyans haplogroups found in Middle Kingdom AEians
quote:Originally posted by capra: Hadza are the nearest geographically (about 1000 km away by modern road). I guess some people still call them Khoisan though.
I'm not getting my hopes up that they got any very interesting or high quality results.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am still confused as to what Cass is arguing about Villabruna. I believe Cass is stating that Villabruna "above the neck" is Caucasoid but "below the neck" is Negroid or tropical?
I'm just saying its an outlier and not typical, this is expected for populations because of the nature of genetic/phenotypic variation - you always find outliers, for example as expected the vast majority of Serbs have narrow (leptorrhine) noses, but 2% have wide noses ["platyrrhine 1.91% in males and 0.85% in females).] http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0354-4664/2014/0354-46641401227J.pdf
Villabruna is 14,000 years old (almost Holocene); the typical European then would look most similar to recent/living Europeans in cranial and limb measurements. There's no doubt about this. Its the same for earlier skulls like Cro-Magnon which most resemble recent/living European populations in overall craniometric studies, however the earliest Upper Paleolithic Europeans like kostenki 14 and Oase do not nor in the ancient DNA studies we now have (I should have clarified this above, my usage of "early" was too ambiguous, I only mean it from Cro-Magnon). kostenki 14 looks so-called "Australoid"?
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Its the same for earlier skulls like Cro-Magnon which most resemble recent/living European populations in overall craniometric studies,
quote: "...the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans....were more like present-day Australians or Africans..."
--Chris Stringer, African Exodus ((Michael Witzel, The Origins of the World's Mythologies) 2013)
quote:"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
quote: If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are “us” (47) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains.
--C. Loring Brace(2006) The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
quote: It has been proposed that heat adapted, relatively long-legged Homo sapiens from Africa replaced the cold adapted, relatively short-legged Homo neandertalensis of the Levant and Europe
—Bogin B, Rios L. et al.
J Hum Evol 32 (1997a) 423]
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
As for the holotype Cro-Magnon 1 (c. 25,000 BP), its clearly "Caucasoid" since its closest match is with medieval Norse (from Howells skull data set). And note that although Brace et al argued for discontinuity between Upper Paleolithics and later Europeans, their own data shows Cro-Magnon still closest to more recent Europeans. lol.
Cro-Magnon a lot closer to more recent European samples than Sub-Saharan Africans. Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
^The boy is delusion. He talks about the reappearance of certain traits in situ.
quote:"Molecular biology has traced the ancestry of the Cro-Magnons deep into tropical Africa, into the territory of the hypothetical African Eve"...
—Brian Fagan,
Cro-Magnon:How the Ice Age Gave Birth to the First Modern Humans, (2010),pg 89.
quote:In modern humans, this elongation is a pattern characteristic of warm-adapted populations, and this physique may be an early Cro-Magnon retention from African ancestors. Similar retentions may be observed in certain indices of facial shape ...
--Eric Delson
Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory: Second Edition
--B. Lewis et al. 2008. Understanding Humans: Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archaeology. p 297
As for the holotype Cro-Magnon 1 (c. 25,000 BP), its clearly "Caucasoid" since its closest match is with medieval Norse (from Howells skull data set). And note that although Brace et al argued for discontinuity between Upper Paleolithics and later Europeans, their own data shows Cro-Magnon still closest to more recent Europeans. lol.
Cro-Magnon a lot closer to more recent European samples than Sub-Saharan Africans.
quote: Many feel Cro-Magnon is more similar in appearance to modern Africans than modern Europeans, suggesting that this population came from Africa or Asia.
quote:At about 40,000 years ago, however, Homo sapiens, in the form of the Cro-Magnons, began trickling into Europe, probably from an initially African place of origin.
[...]
It was brought with them by the Cro-Magnons, whose new qualities had emerged elsewhere. Probably this was in Africa, for it is from this continent that we have not just the first suggestions of the emergence of modern anatomical structure, but of modern behaviors as well.
[...]
The most remarkable early evidence of symbolic activity in Africa comes in the form of the recent find of engraved ochre plaques, such as this one, from Blombos Cave on the southern coast of Africa (Fig. 10). This is an unequivocally symbolic object, even if we cannot directly discern the significance of the geometric design that the plaque bears; and it is dated to around 70,000 years ago, over 30,000 years before anything equivalent is found in Europe.
To evidence such as this can be added suggestions of a symbolic organization of space at the site of Klasies River Mouth (Fig. 11), also near the southern tip of Africa, at over 100,000 years ago. Pierced shells, with the strong implication of stringing for body ornamentation, are known from Porc-Epic Cave in Ethiopia at around 70,000 years ago. Bone tools of the kind introduced much later to Europe by the Cro-Magnons, are found at the Congolese site of Katanda, dated to perhaps 80,000 years ago. Blade tool industries, again formerly associated principally with the Cro-Magnons, are found at least sporadically at sites in Africa that date to as much as a quarter of a million years ago. Also in the economic/technological realm, such activities as flint-mining, pigment-processing and long-distance trade in useful materials are documented in Africa up to about 100,000 years ago. These and other early African innovations are reviewed by McBrearty and Brooks (2000).
posted
^ Nice round. So Cro-magnon is from Africa and resembles modern Africans more than modern Europeans.
So why do those Euro-Nut get by playing off Cro-Magnon. Don't these fools understand what or who is Cro-Magnon? Are they "talking heads"?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obviously they are not in business of telling an accurate account of human history but why is everybody else is different from them.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
If EUP were tropically adapted, one would also expect them to resemble modern Sub-Saharan African populations in craniofacial form, but they don't.
Printer-friendly view of this topic