posted
I downloaded a YouTube Video on the subject of the First Americans. It said that the people of Tierra Del Fuego came from Melanesia. There are people there who retained ancient stories of Melanesian origin and retained some of the DNA.
They of course, look more Mongoloid. Y Chromosome D-M174 is Pan Asian. The Melanesian DNA was kept alive more along the female line.
This video said the Mongoloids killed off the original Blacks in South America. They have proof by Rock Art. I have to find the YouTube link. Please keep this open a few days, so that I can find the video link. Thank You.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks. This is exactly what I needed for my research.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didn't watch the video, but I'm guessing it's talking about people with Paleoamerican morphology like those studied by Raghavan et al in 2015 (possibly the same skulls). They did not turn out to be related to Melanesians.
They tested DNA from the 300-800 year old Pericues samples from Baja California and 100-200 year old Selknam and Yaghan remains from Tierra del Fuego, who have Paleoamerican cranial types. They all group with other Native Americans and far from Oceanians.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
There were black natives all over central and south America when Europeans got there. For them to sit here and claim that "mongoloids" killed off the dark skinned Native Americans is nonsense.
posted
Julius Popper states in a speech that some natives of tierra del fuego had woolly hair.
"the central portions of tierra de fuego are inhabited by a race of corpulent, strong, and muscular natives, whose height sometimes exceed six feet. their skin is of a clear copper color, and is soft and oily to the touch. their dark, lusterless, woolly hair falls in tufts around a large tonsure, cut close in the top of the head." Monthly Consular and Trade Reports, Volume 23, Issues 81-84 By United States. Bureau of Manufactures pg 392
original Spanish "los cabellos negros, apagados y lanudos" Boletin, Volume 8 By Instituto Geográfico Argentino, Buenos Aires pg 103
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: There were black natives all over central and south America when Europeans got there. For them to sit here and claim that "mongoloids" killed off the dark skinned Native Americans is nonsense.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: There were black natives all over central and south America when Europeans got there. For them to sit here and claim that "mongoloids" killed off the dark skinned Native Americans is nonsense.
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian:
This video said the Mongoloids killed off the original Blacks in South America. They have proof by Rock Art. I have to find the YouTube link. Please keep this open a few days, so that I can find the video link. Thank You.
The video says the Fuegians are "somehow related to the ancestors of the Australian Aborigines" They present zero evidence of them being killed off
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: Didn't watch the video, but I'm guessing it's talking about people with Paleoamerican morphology like those studied by Raghavan et al in 2015 (possibly the same skulls). They did not turn out to be related to Melanesians.
They tested DNA from the 300-800 year old Pericues samples from Baja California and 100-200 year old Selknam and Yaghan remains from Tierra del Fuego, who have Paleoamerican cranial types. They all group with other Native Americans and far from Oceanians.
Genetic evidence for two founding populations of the Americas Pontus Skoglund, Swapan Mallick, Maria Cátira Bortolini, Niru Chennagiri, Tábita Hünemeier, Maria Luiza Petzl-Erler, Francisco Mauro Salzano, Nick Patterson & David Reich Nature 525, 104–108 (03 September 2015) doi:10.1038/nature14895
Abstract
Genetic studies have consistently indicated a single common origin of Native American groups from Central and South America1,2,3,4. However, some morphological studies have suggested a more complex picture, whereby the northeast Asian affinities of present-day Native Americans contrast with a distinctive morphology seen in some of the earliest American skeletons, which share traits with present-day Australasians (indigenous groups in Australia, Melanesia, and island Southeast Asia)5,6,7,8. Here we analyse genome-wide data to show that some Amazonian Native Americans descend partly from a Native American founding population that carried ancestry more closely related to indigenous Australians, New Guineans and Andaman Islanders than to any present-day Eurasians or Native Americans. This signature is not present to the same extent, or at all, in present-day Northern and Central Americans or in a ∼12,600-year-old Clovis-associated genome, suggesting a more diverse set of founding populations of the Americas than previously accepted.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: There were black natives all over central and south America when Europeans got there. For them to sit here and claim that "mongoloids" killed off the dark skinned Native Americans is nonsense.
posted
The populations of the Americas just like the populations of everywhere else were and are diverse. They have a range of skin tones and features. All native americans did not and do not look the same. There have always been some very dark native Americans with skin tones no different than those found in Africa and Asia. And many of the darker skinned natives look very similar to darker skinned Aboriginal types of Asians found in the Pacific and Australia. So they weren't killed off by later mongoloids.
There are plenty of Spanish and Portuguese image repositories of Native Americans from the late 1800s to early 1900s online you can look for to see that diversity. The point being that most Native Americans do not look "mongoloid" outside certain specific populations.
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: I downloaded a YouTube Video on the subject of the First Americans. It said that the people of Tierra Del Fuego came from Melanesia. There are people there who retained ancient stories of Melanesian origin and retained some of the DNA.
They of course, look more Mongoloid. Y Chromosome D-M174 is Pan Asian. The Melanesian DNA was kept alive more along the female line.
This video said the Mongoloids killed off the original Blacks in South America. They have proof by Rock Art. I have to find the YouTube link. Please keep this open a few days, so that I can find the video link. Thank You.
I was hoping the documentary discussed new YDNA D-M174 in America. What source are you using for placing that YDNA haplogroup in America? The doc doesn't talk about it.
This is why I was interested in the documentary when you mentioned D-M174: it could have been a paternal counterpart of Australasian 'Population Y' (see the paper lioness just posted).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Yahgan, Piraha & Ojibwe were original earliest settlers, using bark canoes (like Tasmanians and Australian Aborigines), unlike other AmerInds & Na Dine & Eskimos that used log dugouts & skin boats. The North Dakota Mandan used bull boats which may have been more primitive than bark canoes, but uncertain on that.
All transited through Beringia or the Bering Straits.
posted
The official story is that Native Americans are mainly derived from people from North East Asia who came across the Bering Strait long ago.
They now admit that Melanesians and Africans reached the New World first. Then, they say that those original people were killed off.
Dr. C. Winters said something that I did not know which is African and European DNA found when testing modern Native Americans is discounted. The reason for doing this is based on the idea that Christopher Columbus and crew went where no other Old Worlder went before.
No Egyptian, Nubian, Phoenician, West or Southern African came across the Atlantic Ocean following the natural paths of hurricanes and tropical storms.
Some say that the true history is being hidden by academics. If we say Africans came here before Columbus and interbred with Native Americans and affected the growth of New World Civilizations, then the 200+ Africans in the Americans will look at themselves differently.
That is why it will be hard to find what you are looking for - what we are looking for.
I thank Dr. Winters for going against an academic wall that hides facts. I wish you all would stop talking badly to each other, because this topic does not belong to you or me, but it belongs to our ancestors, our neighbors and our future generations.
Help each other.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: The official story is that Native Americans are mainly derived from people from North East Asia who came across the Bering Strait long ago.
They now admit that Melanesians and Africans reached the New World first. Then, they say that those original people were killed off.
Dr. C. Winters said something that I did not know which is African and European DNA found when testing modern Native Americans is discounted. The reason for doing this is based on the idea that Christopher Columbus and crew went where no other Old Worlder went before.
No Egyptian, Nubian, Phoenician, West or Southern African came across the Atlantic Ocean following the natural paths of hurricanes and tropical storms.
Some say that the true history is being hidden by academics. If we say Africans came here before Columbus and interbred with Native Americans and affected the growth of New World Civilizations, then the 200+ Africans in the Americans will look at themselves differently.
That is why it will be hard to find what you are looking for - what we are looking for.
I thank Dr. Winters for going against an academic wall that hides facts. I wish you all would stop talking badly to each other, because this topic does not belong to you or me, but it belongs to our ancestors, our neighbors and our future generations.
Help each other.
Actually it is mainstream academia that has been saying that many of the earliest native populations in America had more in common with AustraloAsians and Pacific Asians than current Northern Asians.
That is not the same as "Africans" sailing direct from Africa. And up to now very little direct evidence has been found showing that. Even the Olmec heads aren't a "smoking gun" in this respect, although it is highly intriguing nonetheless. But even if they are "hiding" the fact that Africans and South Asians were in direct contact and trade with Central and South America, this still doesn't change idea the original Asians who came to America as being of a different "type" than later migrants. And it still is not true that those "aboriginal" types of Native Americans were killed off by Europeans and replaced by "African mixed" natives before European arrival. There is no 'conspiracy' covering that up. That is simply bogus. However I do believe that there was more contact with South America, Africa and Asia prior to European contact.
quote: The DNA that links these groups had to come from somewhere. Because the groups have about as much in common with Australians as they do with New Guineans, the researchers think that they all share a common ancestor that lived tens of thousands of years ago in Asia but that doesn't otherwise persist today. One branch of this family tree moved north to Siberia, while the other spread south to New Guinea and Australia. The northern branch likely migrated across the land bridge in a separate surge from the Eurasian founders. The researchers have dubbed this hypothetical second group "Population y" for ypykuera, or "ancestor" in Tupi, a language spoken by the Suruí and Karitiana.
posted
There is plenty of evidence that Africans came to ancient America. Dr.Nieda Guidon claims that Africans were in Brazil 100,000 years ago. The evidence that fire existed in Brazil 65kya is an indication that man was at the site 65,000 years ago, since researchers found charcoal, which is the result of fire making. The New York Times, reported that humans were Brazil 100,000 years ago .
If you would see the New York Times video you would noted that Dr.Nieda Guidon supports her dating of human population in Brazil 100,000 years ago to ancient fire and tool making. Look at the New York Times video: Human’s First Appearance in the Americas @:
If you view the video you will see that human occupation of Brazil 100,000 years ago is supported by man made fire, e.g., the charcoal, and tools.
Dr. Guidon who conducted excavation at the site notes at 2:09 the site is 100,000 years old. At 3:17 in the video scientists proved that the tools are the result of human craftsmanship . You reject this evidence because it proves that Blacks were here before the mongoloids.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: I downloaded a YouTube Video on the subject of the First Americans. It said that the people of Tierra Del Fuego came from Melanesia. There are people there who retained ancient stories of Melanesian origin and retained some of the DNA.
They of course, look more Mongoloid. Y Chromosome D-M174 is Pan Asian. The Melanesian DNA was kept alive more along the female line.
This video said the Mongoloids killed off the original Blacks in South America. They have proof by Rock Art. I have to find the YouTube link. Please keep this open a few days, so that I can find the video link. Thank You.
I was hoping the documentary discussed new YDNA D-M174 in America. What source are you using for placing that YDNA haplogroup in America? The doc doesn't talk about it.
This is why I was interested in the documentary when you mentioned D-M174: it could have been a paternal counterpart of Australasian 'Population Y' (see the paper lioness just posted).
DJ what do you think about my comments here? How do you see D-M174?
I was hoping the documentary discussed new YDNA D-M174 in America. What source are you using for placing that YDNA haplogroup in America? The doc doesn't talk about it.
there's a whole thread on that. See the 10th post. The video link is there. I think I've heard of the guy who made it, just can't put my finger on the name. I think his las name is W.... something
I was hoping the documentary discussed new YDNA D-M174 in America. What source are you using for placing that YDNA haplogroup in America? The doc doesn't talk about it.
there's a whole thread on that. See the 10th post. The video link is there. I think I've heard of the guy who made it, just can't put my finger on the name. I think his las name is W.... something
posted
It's an inside joke. Some of Clyde's claims can be... well, let's just say, distinctive. Because of this, many of us know when someone repeats a claim that traces back to him. I call that having a radar.
This is what happens when you don't have a radar for bs. He really thinks he's Native American.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: I downloaded a YouTube Video on the subject of the First Americans. It said that the people of Tierra Del Fuego came from Melanesia. There are people there who retained ancient stories of Melanesian origin and retained some of the DNA.
I didn't see the video and don't have time to, but I've never heard of any Indigenous Amerians having traditions of coming from "Melanesia" maybe from another ancestral homeland but I've never heard of any traditions of originating by sea. Though I heard of isolated individials or tiny groups in South America who are of recent Polynesian origin.
quote:They of course, look more Mongoloid. Y Chromosome D-M174 is Pan Asian. The Melanesian DNA was kept alive more along the female line.
Actually Y Chromosome D is a proto-Asian clade that derived from DE whose sibling E is moreso pan-African. D is not really Pan-Asian because it is not that common in Asia however that video must be mistaken because as far as I'm aware there are no Indigenous Americans with Y-DNA hg D! Mitochondrial haplogroup D is one of the founding maternal lineages of Amerindians and one of the more common lineages in South Americans is D1 hence the confusion you or the author of that video may have.
quote:This video said the Mongoloids killed off the original Blacks in South America. They have proof by Rock Art. I have to find the YouTube link. Please keep this open a few days, so that I can find the video link. Thank You.
This is nonsense. I've never heard of original blacks being killed off anywhere in America. But here's the truth.
There are certain groups in South America today who carry certain autosomal traits similar to to those of Australasians i.e. Australian Aborigines, Papuan-Melaneseians, and Andamanese. However according to a 2015 paper by Reich & Skoglund et ales. Genetic evidence for two founding populations of the Americas, the differences in the genomic sequences suggest that instead of a direct contribution from Australians, instead these Aboriginal Americans share common ancestry with Australians via a ghost population that once existed in East Asia called 'Population Y'. It is this ghost population who contributed genes to both the ancestors of Amerindians in northeast Asia as well as some ancestors to some Southeast Asians and Australasians!
If you don't have time to read the paper I cited, you can at least read the couple articles which cite it below:
One thing I should also point out is that it is an easy mistake to think early Paleo-American crania who exhibit "negroid" morphology must carry such ancestry from 'Population Y'. The problem however is that we still don't know the nature of the morphological diversity that existed in Paleo-Americans. The skull of Naia for example shows such morphology yet her DNA shows her population to be directly ancestral to many Native Americans today who don't have such a morphology. This provides an excellent clue to how morphology of populations can change over time.
To make things more complicated. All Indigenous Americans are merely a subset of East Asian populations so just imagine the type of genetic and morphological diversity that once existed in Eastern Asia as shown in Doug's thread here
[ 21. January 2018, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Elite Diasporan ]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic