posted
The sensational title belies the fact that this study only really just potentially confirms the Saharan pump theory as the primary driver of human migration out of Africa.....
quote: Ancient fossil finger bone from Saudi Arabia could challenge theory of modern migration
he first fossil of an ancient human found in the Arabian Peninsula could disrupt the widely accepted theory of how modern humans migrated out of Africa. A fossil finger bone found in the heart of Saudi Arabia -- in the middle of what is now called the Nefud Desert -- dates to at least 85,000 years ago, seemingly belonging to a member of the Homo sapiens species.
....
Today, the site -- known as Al Wusta -- is a hyper-arid desert, but environmental analyses revealed that it would have once been a perennial fresh-water lake in a semi-arid grassland setting.
Enhanced monsoonal rainfall transformed the Arabian Peninsula into an area covered with lakes and rivers when humans lived there 85,000 years ago.
"We currently have, from satellite imagery, about 10,000 paleo-lakes -- ancient lakes in Arabia -- and we've worked on a couple 100 of these ancient lakes, and they're filled with archaeology," said Professor Michael Petraglia of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, the project lead and co-author of the study.
Groucutt speculates that animals from sub-Saharan Africa would have migrated into the Sahara and out of Africa into Arabia, too. Naturally, hunter-gatherers would have followed, he said.
Over 800 animal fossils including gazelle, hippopotamus and wild cattle were excavated at the site. "Most of the animals are of an African character, so what it shows is that Arabia and North Africa were similar ecologically so that humans could move within a similar ecological context," Groucutt said.
Archaeologists uncovered 380 stone tools at Al Wusta. Groucutt and Petraglia estimate that 20 to 40 hunter-gatherers might have lived there, demonstrating an early ability to occupy diverse habitats.
The big question now is what happened to this highly nomadic band of hunter-gatherers.
"We can say people were in Northern Arabia at about 90,000 years, but then what became of those people is quite unclear," Groucutt said. "It might be that they became extinct; it might be that they moved on into Asia."
posted
I had this covered over 5 years ago. The Sahara pump is real. Doesn't matter how they spin it, ALL LINES OF EVIDENCE confirms what I have been posting for years!! They are finally coming around. Arabia is an extension of Africa and always had. Indigenous Central Arabians are North Africans and Southern Arabians are Sub-Saharan Africans which spills over to Persia and the Harrapan Valley. Look at the Geography! The real question is... did the Ocean shore line change. The genetic profile of humans suggest that it did. We will see.
----------------- Quote:
"Groucutt speculates that animals from sub-Saharan Africa would have migrated into the Sahara and out of Africa into Arabia, too. Naturally, hunter-gatherers would have followed, he said.
Over 800 animal fossils including gazelle, hippopotamus and wild cattle were excavated at the site. "Most of the animals are of an African character, so what it shows is that Arabia and North Africa were similar ecologically so that humans could move within a similar ecological context," Groucutt said."
BTW- The Max Plank seems to have their hands in everything. They are the Reich Labs. They have controlling monopoly ?
-------------------- 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
If MOST of the animals are African then most of the humans are also African.
-------------------- 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 |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Nah. Whatever Napoleon meant it'd be more accurate to say Europe begins at the Atlas based on climate, flora, and fauna above the mountains to the tel and coast. That's what I'd say.
The Arabian tectonic subplate subsided under the Eurasian plate forcing up the Zagros chain. Those mountains are naturally the Asian border to the northeast African extension.
Everyplace in 'Asia' west of the Gulf of Aqaba, the Dead Sea, Jordan and Orontes river is still on the Nubian plate. Sinai, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, and coastal Syria are on that African plate. Some even place SE Cyprus on the African plate.
The African major plate has Nubian, Arabian, and Somali subplates. The Great Rift from Malawi to Syria is the border between Nubian and Arab/Somali plates. The Arabian plate has totally rifted from Africa. The Somali plate is still rifting. Djibouti's Afar triangle is where all three subplates meet.
Funny how Arabs, Beduins and Syro-Lebanese aren't 'African peoples' and Somalis are redefining them selves away from being an African people.
posted
Shouldn't the map be Africa above and Europe beneath?
-------------------- “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” Posts: 195 | From: Southern Africa(Azania) | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Nah. Whatever Napoleon meant it'd be more accurate to say Europe begins at the Atlas based on climate, flora, and fauna above the mountains to the tel and coast. That's what I'd say.
The Arabian tectonic subplate subsided under the Eurasian plate forcing up the Zagros chain. Those mountains are naturally the Asian border to the northeast African extension.
Everyplace in 'Asia' west of the Gulf of Aqaba, the Dead Sea, Jordan and Orontes river is still on the Nubian plate. Sinai, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, and coastal Syria are on that African plate. Some even place SE Cyprus on the African plate.
The African major plate has Nubian, Arabian, and Somali subplates. The Great Rift from Malawi to Syria is the border between Nubian and Arab/Somali plates. The Arabian plate has totally rifted from Africa. The Somali plate is still rifting. Djibouti's Afar triangle is where all three subplates meet.
Funny how Arabs, Beduins and Syro-Lebanese aren't 'African peoples' and Somalis are redefining them selves away from being an African people.
Let's not forget that during the late Pleistocene the Red Sea was more so an inland lake than it is today.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Nah. Whatever Napoleon meant it'd be more accurate to say Europe begins at the Atlas based on climate, flora, and fauna above the mountains to the tel and coast. That's what I'd say.
The Arabian tectonic subplate subsided under the Eurasian plate forcing up the Zagros chain. Those mountains are naturally the Asian border to the northeast African extension.
Everyplace in 'Asia' west of the Gulf of Aqaba, the Dead Sea, Jordan and Orontes river is still on the Nubian plate. Sinai, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, and coastal Syria are on that African plate. Some even place SE Cyprus on the African plate.
The African major plate has Nubian, Arabian, and Somali subplates. The Great Rift from Malawi to Syria is the border between Nubian and Arab/Somali plates. The Arabian plate has totally rifted from Africa. The Somali plate is still rifting. Djibouti's Afar triangle is where all three subplates meet.
Funny how Arabs, Beduins and Syro-Lebanese aren't 'African peoples' and Somalis are redefining them selves away from being an African people.
Let's not forget that during the late Pleistocene the Red Sea was more so an inland lake than it is today.
Yet (a few years back) they swor up and down that migrations did not take place at the Horn into the Southern Arabia peninsula.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic