Ancient DNA suggests people settled South America in at least 3 waves
New genetic analyses are filling in the picture of who the earliest Americans were By Tina Hesman Saey 9:00am, November 9, 2018
DNA from a 9,000-year-old baby tooth from Alaska, the oldest natural mummy in North America and remains of ancient Brazilians is helping researchers trace the steps of ancient people as they settled the Americas. Two new studies give a more detailed and complicated picture of the peopling of the Americas than ever before presented.
People from North America moved into South America in at least three migration waves, researchers report online November 8 in Cell.
The child’s skeleton was found with artifacts from the Clovis people, who researchers used to think were the first people in the Americas, although that idea has fallen out of favor. Scientists also previously thought these were the only ancient migrants to South America.
But DNA analysis of samples from 49 ancient people suggests a second wave of settlers replaced the Clovis group in South America about 9,000 years ago. And a third group related to ancient people from California’s Channel Islands spread over the Central Andes about 4,200 years ago, geneticist Nathan Nakatsuka of Harvard University and colleagues found.
Early Americans moved into prehistoric South America in at least three migratory waves, a study proposes. Ancestral people who crossed from Siberia into Alaska first gave rise to groups that settled North America (gray arrows). The first wave of North Americans (blue) were related to Clovis people, represented by a 12,600-year-old toddler from Montana called Anzick-1. They moved into South America at least 11,000 years ago, followed by a second wave (green) whose descendants contributed most of the indigenous ancestry among South Americans today. A third migration wave (yellow) from a group that lived near California’s Channel Island moved into the Central Andes about 4,200 years ago. Dotted areas indicate that people there today still have that genetic ancestry.
People who settled the Americas were also much more genetically diverse than previously thought.
Genetically related, but distinct groups of people came into the Americas and spread quickly and unevenly across the continents, says Eske Willerslev, a geneticist at the Natural History Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen and a coauthor of the Science study. “People were spreading like a fire across the landscape and very quickly adapted to the different environments they were encountering.”
Both studies offer details that help fill out an oversimplified narrative of the prehistoric Americas, says Jennifer Raff, an anthropological geneticist at the University of Kansas in Lawrence who was not involved in the work. “We’re learning some interesting, surprising things,” she says.
For instance, Willerslev’s group did detailed DNA analysis of 15 ancient Americans different from those analyzed by Nakatsuka and colleagues. A tooth from Trail Creek in Alaska was from a baby related to a group called the ancient Beringians, who occupied the temporary land mass between Alaska and Siberia called Beringia. Sometimes called the Bering land bridge, the land mass was above water before the glaciers receded at the end of the last ice age.
The link between Australia and ancient Amazonians also hints that several genetically distinct groups may have come across Beringia into the Americas.
The Australian signature was first found in modern-day indigenous South Americans by Pontus Skoglund and colleagues (SN: 8/22/15, p. 6). No one was sure why indigenous Australians and South Americans shared DNA since the groups didn’t have any recent contact. One possibility, says Skoglund, a geneticist at the Francis Crick Institute in London and a coauthor of the Cell paper, was that the signature was very old and inherited from long-lost ancestors of both groups.
So Skoglund, Nakatsuka and colleagues tested DNA from a group of ancient Brazilians, but didn’t find the signature.
supporting the idea that modern people could have inherited it from much older groups. And Skoglund is thrilled. “It’s amazing to see it confirmed,” he says.
How that genetic signature got to Brazil in the first place is still a mystery, though. Researchers don’t think early Australians paddled across the Pacific Ocean to South America. “None of us really think there was some sort of Pacific migration going on here,” Skoglund says.
That leaves an overland route through Beringia. There’s only one problem:
Still, Raff thinks it likely that an ancestral group of people from Asia split off into two groups, with one heading to Australia and the other crossing the land bridge into the Americas. The group that entered the Americas didn’t leave living descendants in the north. Or, because not many ancient remains have been studied, it’s possible that scientists have just missed finding evidence of this particular migration.
If Raff is right, that could mean that multiple groups of genetically distinct people made the Berigian crossing, or that one group crossed but was far more genetically diverse than researchers have realized.
The studies may also finally help lay to rest a persistent idea that some ancient remains in the Americas are not related to Native Americans today.
The Lagoa Santans from Brazil and a 10,700-year-old mummy from a place called Spirit Cave in Nevada had been grouped as “Paleoamericans” because they both had narrow skulls with low faces and protruding jaw lines, different from other Native American skull shapes. Some researchers have suggested that Paleoamericans — including the so-called Kennewick Man, whose 8,500-year-old remains were found in the state of Washington (SN: 12/26/15, p. 30) — weren’t Native Americans, but a separate group that didn’t have modern descendants.
Willerslev presented the results about the Spirit Cave mummy to the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone tribe when the data became available. Based on the genetic results, the tribe was able to claim the mummy as an ancestor and rebury the remains.
[caption The Suruí from the Brazilian Amazon carry traces of Australasian ancestry, now confirmed to have arrived in South America more than 10,400 years ago. Craig Stennett/Alamy Stock Photo ]
. . . . the data decisively dispel suggestions, based on the distinctive skull shape of a few ancient remains, that early populations had a different ancestry from today's Native Americans. "Native Americans truly did originate in the Americas, as a genetically and culturally distinctive group. They are absolutely indigenous to this continent," Raff says.
(MAP) C. POSTH ET AL., CELL, 175 (2018) ADAPTED BY J. YOU/SCIENCE; (DATA) J. MORENO-MAYAR ET AL., SCIENCE 10.1126/SCIENCE.AAV2621
. . . . Just as mysterious is the trace of Australasian ancestry in some ancient South Americans. Reich and others had previously seen hints of it in living people in the Brazilian Amazon. Now, Willerslev has provided more evidence: telltale DNA in one person from Lagoa Santa in Brazil, who lived 10,400 years ago. "How did it get there? We have no idea," says geneticist José Víctor Moreno-Mayar of the University of Copenhagen, first author of the Willerslev paper.
The signal doesn't appear in any other of the team's samples, "somehow leaping over all of North America in a single bound," says co-author and archaeologist David Meltzer of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas. He wonders whether that Australasian ancestry was confined to a small population of Siberian migrants who remained isolated from other Native American ancestors throughout the journey through Beringia and the Americas. That suggests individual groups may have moved into the continents without mixing.
posted
^ the above article again is referring to the journal Science article one of the two articles in published in late 2018 Willerslev is one of the authors as well as André Strauss who has been quoted in related non-journal articles as well
Research Article Early human dispersals within the Americas 2018
Research Article Early human dispersals within the Americas
J. Víctor Moreno-Mayar1,*, Lasse Vinner1,*, Peter de Barros Damgaard1,*, Constanza de la Fuente1,*, Jeffrey Chan2,*, Jeffrey P. Spence3,*, Morten E. Allentoft1, Tharsika Vimala1, Fernando Racimo1, Thomaz Pinotti4, Simon Rasmussen5, Ashot Margaryan1,6, Miren Iraeta Orbegozo1, Dorothea Mylopotamitaki1, Matthew Wooller7, Clement Bataille8, Lorena Becerra-Valdivia9, David Chivall9, Daniel Comeskey9, Thibaut Devièse9, Donald K. Grayson10, Len George11, Harold Harry12, Verner Alexandersen13, Charlotte Primeau13, Jon Erlandson14, Claudia Rodrigues-Carvalho15, Silvia Reis15, Murilo Q. R. Bastos15, Jerome Cybulski16,17,18, Carlos Vullo19, Flavia Morello20, Miguel Vilar21, Spencer Wells22, Kristian Gregersen1, Kasper Lykke Hansen1, Niels Lynnerup13, Marta Mirazón Lahr23, Kurt Kjær1, André Strauss24,25, Marta Alfonso-Durruty26, Antonio Salas27,28, Hannes Schroeder1, Thomas Higham9, Ripan S. Malhi29, Jeffrey T. Rasic30, Luiz Souza31, Fabricio R. Santos4, Anna-Sapfo Malaspinas32, Martin Sikora1, Rasmus Nielsen1,33,34, Yun S. Song2,33,35,†, David J. Meltzer1,36,†, Eske Willerslev1,37
RATIONALE
Claims of migrations into the Americas by people related to Australasians or by bearers of a distinctive cranial morphology (“Paleoamericans”) before the divergence of NAs from Siberians and East Asians have created controversy. Likewise, the speed by which the Americas were populated; the number of basal divergences; and the degrees of isolation, admixture, and continuity in different regions are poorly understood. To address these matters, we sequenced 15 ancient human genomes recovered from sites spanning from Alaska to Patagonia; six are ≥10 ka old (up to ~18× coverage).
Soon after arrival in South America, groups diverged along multiple geographic paths, and before 10.4 ka ago, these groups admixed with a population that harbored Australasian ancestry, which may have been widespread among early South Americans. Later, Mesoamerican-related population(s) expanded north and south, possibly marking the movement of relatively small groups that did not necessarily swamp local populations genetically or culturally.
Rapid expansion, compounded by the attenuating effect of distance and, in places, by geographic and social barriers, gave rise to complex population histories. These include strong population structure in the Pacific Northwest; isolation in the North American Great Basin, followed by long-term genetic continuity and ultimately an episode of admixture predating ~0.7 ka ago; and multiple independent, geographically uneven migrations into South America. One such migration provides clues of Late Pleistocene Australasian ancestry in South America, whereas another represents a Mesoamerican-related expansion; both contributed to present-day South American ancestry.
We further explored the fit of the model [Fig.3A] for each South American group by fixing the Australasian contribution into Lagoa Santa and the Mesoamerican contribution [Fig. 3, D and E]into the test SNA population across a range of values .Whereas an Australasian contribution of less than 1% and greater than ~6%
The Australasian contribution into Lagoa Santa was consistently nonzero when we modeled South Americans, although we did not observe in every case a significant improvement when modeling Australasian admixture into SNA groups through Lagoa Santa (13). This result suggests that this ancestry was widespread among early South Americans. Although we are unable to estimate the Lagoa Santa–related admixture proportion for these groups with confidence, we observea general trend for populations east of the Andes(e.g.,the Suruí)to bear more of this ancestry than Andean groups (e.g., the Aymara) (Fig. 3F) (13)
Although we detected the Australasian signalin one of the Lagoa Santa individuals identified as a Paleoamerican, it is absent in other Paleoamericans (2,10), including the Spirit Cave genome with its strong genetic affinities to Lagoa Santa. This indicates that the Paleoamerican cranial form is not associated with the Australasian genetic signal, as previously suggested (6), or anyother specific NA clade (2). The Paleoamerican cranial form, if it is representative of broader population patterns, evidently did not result from separate ancestry but likely from multiple factors,including isolation, drift, and nonstochastic mechanisms Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Lies and damned lies
Yte bias against negroid features is the root of introducing an imaginary so-called "Luzia people" to replace the actual real Luzia.
It's acceptable because Eurocentrics are yte people and therefore not bad like blk Afreccentrics. So expect no stink as it soothes yte consciousness to have nothing remotely African like Oceanic features in early America.
Not that I don't doubt the agenda you speak of, but I find it odd that they have a problem with the features now, and why the early Lagoa Santa people??
For example, "negroid" features are found among paleolithic individuals in Sungir, Russia and Grimaldi, Italy--both in Europe and allegedly ancestral to Europeans. Yet they never had any issues with them or rather just explained away their features as "generalized modern" or something. Why then would they be so concerned with what features ancestral Native Americans had?
And again why now? Ever since the discovery of not only Luzia but her folk in Lagoa Santa it has been pretty much been taken for granted they have "negroid/Australoid" type features and there seemed to have been no complaints.
And what about the older Naia girl of Mexico who also had the same type of features??
quote:OP referenced article from TV Globo
quote: Study contradicts America's settlement theory and suggests Luzia's face was different than previously thought
USP and Harvard researchers have extracted DNA from buried human bones for over 10,000 years.
Por César Menezes, TV Globo 08/11/2018 17h50 Atualizado há 8 meses
Researchers discover the DNA of the people of Luzia, the oldest human in South America.
I have not yet read the paper though I am curious as to their reasons for contradicting the 2005 Neves & Hubbe study with its findings below: Comparative morphological studies of the earliest human skeletons of the New World have shown that, whereas late prehistoric, recent, and present Native Americans tend to exhibit a cranial morphology similar to late and modern Northern Asians (short and wide neurocrania; high, orthognatic and broad faces; and relatively high and narrow orbits and noses), the earliest South Americans tend to be more similar to present Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans (narrow and long neurocrania; prognatic, low faces; and relatively low and broad orbits and noses). However, most of the previous studies of early American human remains were based on small cranial samples. Herein we compare the largest sample of early American skulls ever studied (81 skulls of the Lagoa Santa region) with worldwide data sets representing global morphological variation in humans, through three different multivariate analyses. The results obtained from all multivariate analyses confirm a close morphological affinity between SouthAmerican Paleoindians and extant Australo-Melanesians groups, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct biological populations could have colonized the New World in the Pleistocene/Holocene transition.Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Ytes negated Grimaldi negroid features over 50 yrs ago saying such facial features were the result of accidental pressure, faulty reconstrucion, etc. That's part of what I was talking about when mentioning Grimaldi, Iwo Eleru, and no full negro features before 6000 BCE in my 1st post.
The site name 'Grimaldi' is practically verboten. To abolish the memory, Gravettian now names the Grimaldi related industry and same type osteo remains clear across Europe and Russia.
MDW Jeffries (1951) The Negro Enigma West African Review for the infamous "us, not negro" tirade
Pierre Legoux (Ocy. 1962] Proceedings of the French Academy of Sciemces pp 2276-7 explains away prognathism and limb proportion
If it's one thing ytes will not abide it's the presence of the blk with anything approaching the set of extreme facial features they have labeled negro, rarely if at all seen in the media or the professional work force where people greet potential clients or rub elbows in day to day career employment.
Read your Jomon post. Interesting. Must admit, basal this and basal that terminology turns me off. Confusing term that. When does it mean outlier and when does it mean forerunner and why not just use a real population name (with pre or proto or extinct for Ghosties)?
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Oh, you asked why now.
The Trump presidency has made racist tendencies acceptable worldwide. Younguns wouldn't know it but us oldheads can see society has reverted to the 1970's in many circumstances. Jim Crow II is blatant now political racialism is acceptable and promoted now in Israel and the EU & Britain.
Yes, there're many ytes, and others, fighting it. They don't appear to be winning where it counts. The mote racism and racialism incidents occur the more 'polite society' is less shocked by and grows calloused toward it.
Who's outraged by Trump racism anymore? It was never thought an impeachable offense.
Scientists have not said this reconstruction is wrong. It seems to be some Brazilian news media that took it upon themselves to say it is wrong
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
By agenda, I did not mean YOU but the whites you speak of.
quote:Ytes negated Grimaldi negroid features over 50 yrs ago saying such facial features were the result of accidental pressure, faulty reconstrucion, etc. That's part of what I was talking about when mentioning Grimaldi, Iwo Eleru, and no full negro features before 6000 BCE in my 1st post.
The site name 'Grimaldi' is practically verboten. To abolish the memory, Gravettian now names the Grimaldi related industry and same type osteo remains clear across Europe and Russia.
MDW Jeffries (1951) The Negro Enigma West African Review for the infamous "us, not negro" tirade
Pierre Legoux (Ocy. 1962] Proceedings of the French Academy of Sciemces pp 2276-7 explains away prognathism and limb proportion
If it's one thing ytes will not abide it's the presence of the blk with anything approaching the set of extreme facial features they have labeled negro, rarely if at all seen in the media or the professional work force where people greet potential clients or rub elbows in day to day career employment.
Yes I'm well aware of how Euronuts would explain away such features. Again, not just in Grimaldi but also in Sungir which they use "generalized modern" as an excuse. It is also a double-standard at play because when "negroid" features were found among Natufians or even Badarian Egyptians they would explain these as "primitive traits" retained among a white population but when "caucasoid" traits are found in mesolithic Kenyans, viola prehistoric Caucasoids in sub-Sahara.
quote:Read your Jomon post. Interesting. Must admit, basal this and basal that terminology turns me off. Confusing term that. When does it mean outlier and when does it mean forerunner and why not just use a real population name (with pre or proto or extinct for Ghosties)?
But to each their own. Live and let die.
'Basal East Asian' is my own moniker for this population as they seemed to have originated in East Asia north of the Australasians and south of the Siberians to whom they contributed their ancestry to both. Experts are calling them 'Population Y' after Ypykuéra which is the word for ancestor in the Suruí and Karitiana languages.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Oh, you asked why now.
The Trump presidency has made racist tendencies acceptable worldwide. Younguns wouldn't know it but us oldheads can see society has reverted to the 1970's in many circumstances. Jim Crow II is blatant now political racialism is acceptable and promoted now in Israel and the EU & Britain.
Yes, there're many ytes, and others, fighting it. They don't appear to be winning where it counts. The mote racism and racialism incidents occur the more 'polite society' is less shocked by and grows calloused toward it.
Who's outraged by Trump racism anymore? It was never thought an impeachable offense.
I'm no fan of Trump either, but I have to be honest that I don't find the guy racist. I've read his tweets and heard his speeches to see what the mainstream media says and I don't see any of it as racist. He's been a public figure for over 45 years and was never called racist until he ran against Hillary Clinton. Also I find it odd how a white guy like Trump who spent the last several decades investing in black owned businesses, black owned banks, and even donated to historically black colleges, desegregated Mar-a-Lago after buying it and inviting blacks like Snoop Dog, and was encouraged to run as president back in the 90s by his friend Oprah Winfrey would all of a sudden be a white supremacist.
That said, there's no denying that alt-right racists and white supremacists have joined into his bandwagon no doubt conflating his nationalism with their white nationalism despite his policies to help blacks and other minorities.
All in all, I don't think you can blame Trump or any one man for whatever racist activities are at foot especially in academia.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
You don’t think it’s suspicious that Trump recently told four congresswomen of color to “go back where they came from” despite three of them having been born in the US? Or that he was on the Birther bandwagon even before running for President? And then there’s his Muslim ban, his stereotyping Mexican immigrants, his wanting immigrants to come from Norway and other affluent European nations rather than Third World “shitholes”, etc...
The man may very well not be too invested in the white nationalist movement, but you can’t deny that he has no problem pandering to that crowd for his own self-interests. Which is pretty scummy in its own right.
Could you please do cite a reputable source claiming Trump has supported all those black businesses, colleges, etc.?
posted
What are you talking about? He's a political figure who has express racial intolerance and him having Black folks around is of little importance because there has been many instances of white folks expression whites supremacy with "Black " friends, a example would be dylann roof also racism isn't about racial hatred necessarily.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I made a thread in Deshret on this topic with quotes of the above people commenting so we can stay topic for this thread
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Djehuti
• Again, everyone has an agenda. Me. You. Everybody. Nothing nefarious. Without agendas no ambition.
• It wasn't what you call Euronuts just your every day yte anthropologist, ethnologist, paleontologist. You know standard yte western, claiming to be universal, university degreed, respected, academicians et al.
• Ok, I see how you define basal. I dig.
• [comment removed to appropriate thread]
I think my proposal is inline with the below snippets from the Science on PaleoAmericans.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Oh, you asked why now.
The Trump presidency has made racist tendencies acceptable worldwide. Younguns wouldn't know it but us oldheads can see society has reverted to the 1970's in many circumstances. Jim Crow II is blatant now political racialism is acceptable and promoted now in Israel and the EU & Britain.
Yes, there're many ytes, and others, fighting it. They don't appear to be winning where it counts. The mote racism and racialism incidents occur the more 'polite society' is less shocked by and grows calloused toward it.
Who's outraged by Trump racism anymore? It was never thought an impeachable offense.
I'm no fan of Trump either, but I have to be honest that I don't find the guy racist. I've read his tweets and heard his speeches to see what the mainstream media says and I don't see any of it as racist. He's been a public figure for over 45 years and was never called racist until he ran against Hillary Clinton. Also I find it odd how a white guy like Trump who spent the last several decades investing in black owned businesses, black owned banks, and even donated to historically black colleges, desegregated Mar-a-Lago after buying it and inviting blacks like Snoop Dog, and was encouraged to run as president back in the 90s by his friend Oprah Winfrey would all of a sudden be a white supremacist.
That said, there's no denying that alt-right racists and white supremacists have joined into his bandwagon no doubt conflating his nationalism with their white nationalism despite his policies to help blacks and other minorities.
All in all, I don't think you can blame Trump or any one man for whatever racist activities are at foot especially in academia.
It's ironic how he attracts a racist base. Calling Black males who protest against police brutally son's of bitches, and till this day keeps claiming the (exonerated) Central Park Five are guilty of whatever crime.
As posted by Tyler Pasco, a posted at Quora.
quote:What if Obama had acted like Trump?
So an overweight black man in his 40s, known for marrying the women with whom he has cheated on his wives, decides to run for president.
And that's the end of the story. But let's say he gets further.
It comes out, following accusations of rape and sexually harassing teenagers, that there's audio of him admitting to "grabbing [women] by the pussy."
That will certainly be the end, right? I mean, it just proves we can't have a black president in this country!
But he musters through it. Speaks like a 10-year old, lies about his wealth, his whole campaign team quits, is fired, or is later charged with crimes related to money laundering and working on behalf of a foreign agent.
He proceeds to call Europe "shithole countries" and suggests we need more immigrants from Lagos. He proposes a ban on Christians, which is only realized through a ban on anyone from the EU.
He wants to make cuts to the healthcare system that, while imperfect (2008 here) works to some degree. He wants to build a border wall with Canada. After all, "they send their worst people, they're sending their rapists, their murderers, their drugs!"
He begins rounding up every European that overstayed their Visa and sending them packing, and instructs ICE to enforce the law toward children first and foremost.
Had it been anyone other than a rich old white guy, you can imagine the shitstorm.
Here is a Nice article I found, which gives deep look at things. And it's very much in line with "our" poster "Celtic Warrior" was is far right wing:
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: @ Djehuti
You don’t think it’s suspicious that Trump recently told four congresswomen of color to “go back where they came from” despite three of them having been born in the US? Or that he was on the Birther bandwagon even before running for President? And then there’s his Muslim ban, his stereotyping Mexican immigrants, his wanting immigrants to come from Norway and other affluent European nations rather than Third World “shitholes”, etc...
I don't think his tweet was directed at those congresswomen because of their "color" or race but rather his anger of the way they talk about America. Ilhan Omar is from Somalia but his tweet didn't say anything about 'country' only that they should go back to the broken "places" they come from to "fix it up and then come back and show us how it's done"
By the "places" he means either the districts they hail from or he mistook them all as foreign. Either way I don't see how them being non-white was the issue to begin with.
You're right about the "birther" nonsense though I fail to see how that relates to 'race' since the vast majority of blacks in the U.S. were born here just like whites and Obama's mother was white. Race has nothing to do with a person's place of birth and Trump even called out Ted Cruz as not being qualified for the presidency because he's a "Canadian anchor-baby". Yet Cruz is white last time I checked. Also his pathetic reason was the source of the birther conspiracy-- his then friend Hillary Clinton or rather her campaign manager Sidney Blumenthal who not only started the rumor that Obama was born in Kenya but that he was also a drug dealer, not to mention the pornographic pictures of Obama's mother leaked into the internet! Yet funny how nobody called Blumenthal or Hillary racist.
Also there was no "Muslim ban" but rather a ban on a list countries that pose a threat to national security which was first compile under the Obama administration. He also never insulted Mexican immigrants. That is a blatant misquote of a speech he gave in Arizona during his campaign which he referred specifically to illegal immigrants from Mexico and not even all of them. As for the "shithole" comment, that was something claimed by an opponent at a meeting at the oval office and is not something confirmed. Even if it was said, he didn't use "shithole" to describe all 3rd world nations but presumably messed up ones which by the way doesn't pertain to any particular race. According to the claims, his list affluent countries also included South Korea which is not a white country. Funny how despite this claim this past month his administration issued H1B work visas to India and Nigeria.
quote:The man may very well not be too invested in the white nationalist movement, but you can’t deny that he has no problem pandering to that crowd for his own self-interests. Which is pretty scummy in its own right.
I don't know if he is purposely doing that but as a politician that's what they all do-- pander to even the lowest common denominator. Which is why I never support them. I hear his supporters say he's a businessman but he's not anymore and is now another public asshole. He was a private asshole in NY now he's a public one in DC.
quote:Could you please do cite a reputable source claiming Trump has supported all those black businesses, colleges, etc.?
Dude. This was common knowledge back in the 90s. In fact just last month in Atlanta the richest black man in America Robert F. Smith who spoke at Morehouse College graduating class out of charity decided to pay off the student debt of all the members of the graduating class. Smith was a friend and business partner who Trump helped back in the day. The same with Robert L. Johnson the co-founder of BET, and Daymond John the founder of FUBU. There were also a bunch of investors here in Atlanta who got their start as stockbrokers in Wall Street thanks in part to Donald Trump. Again, I find it bizarre that despite Trump's history in civil rights which got him 2 NAACP awards he is now branded a Nazi. Yet the Clintons both had Klansmen as their mentors and aren't called racist at all by the media.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: What are you talking about? He's a political figure who has express racial intolerance and him having Black folks around is of little importance because there has been many instances of white folks expression whites supremacy with "Black " friends, a example would be dylann roof also racism isn't about racial hatred necessarily.
Read my posts above. It's not simply having black "friends". The Clintons had black friends too despite being mentored by klansmen and supporting policies detrimental to minorities. Having black friends and investing money in companies and other institutions owned by blacks is entirely different was something not seen in other white politicians let alone democrats which he himself was/is. I really don't want to get into this issue because for one, I don't like politics. And secondly, I definitely don't like Trump which is why I get aggravated having to defend this man!
Because one thing I hate more is lies, and I hate when people are wrongfully defamed and smeared and yes that includes assholes like Trump.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Scientists have not said this reconstruction is wrong. It seems to be some Brazilian news media that took it upon themselves to say it is wrong
LOL
Ah! So this is the crux of the issue. It's not the scientists but the Brazilian media. It doesn't surprise me considering that Brazil is a racist country whose issues by the way have nothing to do with the current U.S. president but predates him by centuries.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [qb] Someone previously posted Luzia's skull fossilized completely to stone. If that's a fact, then like that ES member says, Luzia's DNA does not exist.
If Luzia in fact had DNA like other contemporaneous same locale finds then she'd be proof an East Asian genome existed in an Oceanic featured person.
Recall the Lagoa Santa man called Apiuna:
2017
His and other prehistoric folk of South America were indeed tested and shown ancestral ties to modern Native Americans.
And yet the findings of the 2005 Neves & Hubbe cranial study still holds true: Comparative morphological studies of the earliest human skeletons of the New World have shown that, whereas late prehistoric, recent, and present Native Americans tend to exhibit a cranial morphology similar to late and modern Northern Asians (short and wide neurocrania; high, orthognatic and broad faces; and relatively high and narrow orbits and noses), the earliest South Americans tend to be more similar to present Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans (narrow and long neurocrania; prognatic, low faces; and relatively low and broad orbits and noses). However, most of the previous studies of early American human remains were based on small cranial samples. Herein we compare the largest sample of early American skulls ever studied (81 skulls of the Lagoa Santa region) with worldwide data sets representing global morphological variation in humans, through three different multivariate analyses. The results obtained from all multivariate analyses confirm a close morphological affinity between SouthAmerican Paleoindians and extant Australo-Melanesians groups, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct biological populations could have colonized the New World in the Pleistocene/Holocene transition.
Luzia
Luzia Photogrammetry of all skull sides by Cicero Moraes 3D scan of Luzia's skull made with PPT-GUI and Blender 3D, from photography taken by archaeologist Dr. Moacir Elias Santos. Left: Textured wireframe view. On the right: Renderings.
Were Africans the 'first Americans'? 3D reconstruction of 10,000-year-old caveman's face controversially challenges long-held theories about the first settlers
Man's skull was discovered inside a cave during an archaeological dig in south east Brazil 50 years ago Digital imaging by a Brazilian graphic designer shows the features of a 40 to 50-year-old prehistoric man Apiuna bears a close likeness to Luzia, the name given to the 11,500-year-old skull of a young African woman Discovery reignites a decades old argument that Africans were the first colonisers and not Asians
The face of a 10,000 year old African caveman has been revealed for the first time, reigniting the debate over whether the first ancient people to set foot on American soil were African or Asian.
Digital imaging by Brazilian graphic designer, Cicero Moraes - who is not of African decent himself - shows the features of a 40 to 50-year-old prehistoric African man whose face resembles Australian Aborigines.
Lagoa Santa man called Apiuna:
Luzia, Lagoa Santa Brazill, Richard Neave reconstruction 1999
Walter Neves, an anthropologist at the University of São Paulo, who measured the skull suggested that Luzia's features most strongly resembled those of Australian Aboriginal or African peoples. Richard Neave of Manchester University, who created the forensic facial reconstruction of Luzia in 1999 described it as negroid.
Big difference with the 2017 Apiuna reconstruction though. The pencil thin lips which have been speculated by the forensic artist would not be described as African and apart from the hair and skin the general look of it is not look very African at all in my opinion. Looks like an old Italian guy dipped in chocolate
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Strauss is the Brazilian SCIENTIST media is based on.
The blame is where it belongs, on a scientist.
quote:
“Accustomed as we are to the traditional facial reconstruction of Luzia with strongly African features, this new facial reconstruction reflects the physiognomy of the first inhabitants of Brazil far more accurately, displaying the generalized and indistinct features from which the great Amerindian diversity was established over thousands of years,” Strauss said.
Wilkinson's ideological directed retrodeformat Lapo do Santo man officially replaces Luzia as do his people of Luzia/Luzia people likewise not merely replace Luzia but strip her of her name.
The Luzia skulled reconstruction looks Papuan not African.
So what now the skull forensics that delineated Paleos from Moderns just dissipated into the atmosphere to soothe Brazil's negrophobes?
60 years ago science pushed this 'undifferentiated' tauroscat for the early Homo sapiens, an African species who, in the unmasked words of Jeffries in the African Review, are us [the yte race] not negro.
Of course those dismissive of independent Africana know nothing of this and in fact perpetuate current day sentiments saying essentially the same but not so forthright directly or honestly.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] Strauss is the Brazilian SCIENTIST media is based on.
The blame is where it belongs, on a scientist.
quote:
“Accustomed as we are to the traditional facial reconstruction of Luzia with strongly African features, this new facial reconstruction reflects the physiognomy of the first inhabitants of Brazil far more accurately, displaying the generalized and indistinct features from which the great Amerindian diversity was established over thousands of years,”Strauss said.
the above is a key quote from André Strauss in Eurek Alert, a publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science
The is a key quote from archeologist André Strauss, who coordinated the Brazilian part of the two DNA articles which came out in late 2018
"An article on the study has just been published in the journal Cell a group of 72 researchers from eight countries, affiliated with the University of São Paulo (USP) in Brazil, Harvard University in the United States, and Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Germany, among others."
^ Here, posted in Feb 23, 2019 an animation of a digitized Luzia image that is tightly based in the Richard Neave 1999 with the Australian/African features. Neave called it negroid and emphasized not mongoloid or typical Native American morphology
So Strauss has this up on his youtube uncritically. Something fishy going on
Yet in his remarks in this Eurek Alert article from 2018 he suggests it's inaccurate. And in the same article the Caroline Wilkinson image is credit to Strauss and her
Yep, the scientist is the culprit not as much Brazilian media. I am changing my opinion here
If he thinks that the Caroline Wilkinson image is more representative of the Lagoa Santa remains he analyzed it's a reasonable opinion but he discredits Luzia as if she could not represents one of the ancestral components at Lagoa Santa
André Strauss It Max Planck agent-scientists up to their racial tricks again, the German-Brazilian connection
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
The Posth et al article in Cell is the mainstream optimum. All our old friends are on it!
The Willerslev corresponding author article is independent of the above clique and not as well funded. But then, Willerslev, who went to bat for Original Americans, has plenty published too.
Of course both articles, neither critical of the other, needed Strauss & Crew to paddle the Brazilian artifact and data connection.
The Willerslev corresponding author article is independent of the above clique and not as well funded. But then, Willerslev, who went to bat for Original Americans, has plenty published too.
Of course both articles, neither critical of the other, needed Strauss & Crew to paddle the Brazilian artifact and data connection.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QB] ^ the above article again is referring to the journal Science article one of the two articles in published in late 2018 Willerslev is one of the authors as well as André Strauss who has been quoted in related non-journal articles as well
Research Article Early human dispersals within the Americas 2018
Research Article Early human dispersals within the Americas
J. Víctor Moreno-Mayar1,*, Lasse Vinner1,*, Peter de Barros Damgaard1,*, Constanza de la Fuente1,*, Jeffrey Chan2,*, Jeffrey P. Spence3,*, Morten E. Allentoft1, Tharsika Vimala1, Fernando Racimo1, Thomaz Pinotti4, Simon Rasmussen5, Ashot Margaryan1,6, Miren Iraeta Orbegozo1, Dorothea Mylopotamitaki1, Matthew Wooller7, Clement Bataille8, Lorena Becerra-Valdivia9, David Chivall9, Daniel Comeskey9, Thibaut Devièse9, Donald K. Grayson10, Len George11, Harold Harry12, Verner Alexandersen13, Charlotte Primeau13, Jon Erlandson14, Claudia Rodrigues-Carvalho15, Silvia Reis15, Murilo Q. R. Bastos15, Jerome Cybulski16,17,18, Carlos Vullo19, Flavia Morello20, Miguel Vilar21, Spencer Wells22, Kristian Gregersen1, Kasper Lykke Hansen1, Niels Lynnerup13, Marta Mirazón Lahr23, Kurt Kjær1, André Strauss24,25, Marta Alfonso-Durruty26, Antonio Salas27,28, Hannes Schroeder1, Thomas Higham9, Ripan S. Malhi29, Jeffrey T. Rasic30, Luiz Souza31, Fabricio R. Santos4, Anna-Sapfo Malaspinas32, Martin Sikora1, Rasmus Nielsen1,33,34, Yun S. Song2,33,35,†, David J. Meltzer1,36,†, Eske Willerslev1,37
and the key quote in the Eurek Alert de-legitimizing Luzia is from Andre Strauss of the same Willerslev Journal Science article as bolded above
The main culprit is coming from this article in Journal Science not the one in Cell
Willerslev added the Spirit Cave data to 14 other new whole genomes from sites scattered from Alaska to Chile and ranging from 10,700 to 500 years old. His data join an even bigger trove published in Cell by a team led by population geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School in Boston. They analyzed DNA from 49 new samples from Central and South America dating from 10,900 to 700 years old, at more than 1.2 million positions across the genome.
Willerslev added the Spirit Cave data to 14 other new whole genomes from sites scattered from Alaska to Chile and ranging from 10,700 to 500 years old. His data join an even bigger trove published in Cell by a team led by population geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School in Boston.
Eske Willerslev, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Copenhagen who led the Science team, worked closely with the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe in Nevada to gain access to some of the new samples. The tribe had been fighting to repatriate 10,700-year-old remains found in Nevada's Spirit Cave and had resisted destructive genetic testing. But when Willerslev visited the tribe in person and vowed to do the work only with their permission, the tribe agreed, hoping the result would bolster their case for repatriation.
Reconstructing the Deep Population History of Central and South America Cosimo Posth, Nathan Nakatsuka,Iosif Lazaridis, ..., Lars Fehren-Schmitz,Johannes Krause, David Reich
We report genome-wide ancient DNA from 49 individuals forming four parallel time transects in Belize,Brazil, the Central Andes, and the Southern Cone,each dating to at least9,000 years ago.
18calculated by BEAST itself. The tree was visualized and edited for clarity on FigTree (Figs. S12 and S13). The approximate geographicallocations of all samples were obtained either on Genbank or in their original paper, and was plotted on Figs. S14 and S15(listed in Table S10). Of the six Early Holocene human remains from Lagoa Santa, all belonged to mitochondrial haplogroup D4, which contains both D1 and D4h3a subhaplogroups. Three samples (Sumidouro4, mtDNA coverage: 26.54x; Sumidouro6, mtDNA coverage: 48.66x; Sumidouro7, mtDNA coverage: 10.24x) could be confidently placed at a basal position at haplogroup D1, carrying all expected variants for D1 and being negative for further downstream placement (Fig. S12). Out of the other three sequences, only Sumidouro5 (mtDNA coverage: 227.31x) could be placed at D4h3a by automated callers, and the placement of Sumidouro8 (mtDNA coverage: 3.6x) was done by visually inspecting for diagnostic variants (Table S9). The high-coverage D4h3a sequence was found to be negative for downstream variants, and we found a G to A transition at position 4769 shared between Anzick1 (3), Sumidouro5 and Sumidouro8, but negative for all other sampled D4h3a sequences, as supported by both ML and Bayesian analyses (Figs. S11 and S13). The split time between the Anzick1 and Sumidouro5 mitogenomes were estimated to have taken place around 13.5 ka(upper bound: 15.1 ka, lower bound: 12.6 ka), similarly to as proposed by our demographic modelling. The TMRCA for D4h3a was estimated at 15.3 ka(upper bound: 19.4 ka, lower bound:13 ka), in agreementwith previous estimations (9).
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
He was on of the Max Plank researchers on the ancient Brazilian DNA, and professor at the University of São Paulo
In February 2019 he posted a video based on the Richard Neves reconstruction of 1999 and marked Luzia
So apparently on his youtube he supports that reconstruction
So what is your take on that? Do you think the new reconstruction is accurate or the older one from Neves. Both reconstruction can‘t be accurate.
However if you look at the olmec statues they appear to display "negroid" facial features.
Yet when you see Natives in real life with Olmec features they don‘t really look negroid. So the reconstructions of skulls even when they are pretty accurate give us only an indication how the reconstructed people looked like in real life. Hence even when Neves reconstruction of Luzia was accurate that doesn'mean that she couldn't pass for a Native. There are still Native Americans with broad features like this Luzia.
Modern South American Natives with similar features like Luzia.
Scientists have not said this reconstruction is wrong. It seems to be some Brazilian news media that took it upon themselves to say it is wrong
LOL
Ah! So this is the crux of the issue. It's not the scientists but the Brazilian media. It doesn't surprise me considering that Brazil is a racist country whose issues by the way have nothing to do with the current U.S. president but predates him by centuries.
You are just mad that Afrocentrics can't have the monopoly of politicizing ancient DNA for pushing their agenda. I find stealing other people's history and identity very racist and Afrocentrics are guilty all of that.
Black Americans should stop obsessing with other people's DNA, culture, history or heritage just to distract from their real ancestors and history.
The reconstruction of Luzia, if accurate would still look like some Southern American Natives in real life.
A Native man with the facial features of the Olmec heads.
posted
@ real expert No one knows those folks in those pictures background as they could be recently mixed with Africans or remnant paleoindians as Mexican has a African population who are somewhat mixed but don't resemble the people in the photos.
You are just mad that Afrocentrics can't have the monopoly of politicizing ancient DNA for pushing their agenda. I find stealing other people's history and identity very racist and Afrocentrics are guilty all of that.
Black Americans should stop obsessing with other people's DNA, culture, history or heritage just to distract from their real ancestors and history.
There is a movement online, Dane Calloway and others getting a lot of views on youtube by saying that most of the modern black population in America today are primarily aboriginal Americans and not primarily Africans and that most were already living in America before the Europeans.
This is incorrect but doesn't seem to me harming the native Americans since it's just talk on youtube and not going anywhere in terms of land rights.
I can also understand how some people would adopt an alternate history if they got tired of being seen as descendants of slaves.
But as for the Luzia reconstruction above. It was made by white European researchers and they were the ones calling it Australian/African/Negroid type
That was done not just by looking at it by also by taking comparative measurements of the skull.
So the said "Africaness" or "Austrailian Aboriginalness" of this 1999 reconstruction was never part of one of the famous Afrocentric books which are more prominant in the early 90s and earlier
Afrocentricity is in decline and is not nearly as active as it was in the 90s so don't even worry about it. There is nothing at stake for you
Also several of the most famous Afrocentric authors have passed away
_____________________
List of prominent authors Pile of books on Afrocentrism
Marimba Ani,[61] professor, author and activist: Yurugu: An Afrikan-centered Critique of European Cultural Thought and Behavior (Trenton: Africa World Press, 1994). Molefi Kete Asante, professor, author: Afrocentricity: The Theory of Social Change; The Afrocentric Idea; The Egyptian Philosophers: Ancient African Voices from Imhotep to Akhenaten Jacob Carruthers, Egyptologist; founding director of the Association for the Study of Classical African Civilization; founder and director of the Kemetic Institute, Chicago Cheikh Anta Diop,[62][63] author: The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality; Civilization or Barbarism: An Authentic Anthropology; Precolonial Black Africa; The Cultural Unity of Black Africa: The Domains of Patriarchy and of Matriarchy in Classical Antiquity; The Peopling of Ancient Egypt & the Deciphering of the Meroitic Script Yosef Ben-Jochannan, author: African Origins of Major "Western Religions"; Black Man of the Nile and His Family; Africa: Mother of Western Civilization; New Dimensions in African History; The Myth of Exodus and Genesis and the Exclusion of Their African Origins; Africa: Mother of Western Civilization; Abu Simbel to Ghizeh: A Guide Book and Manual Jones, Gayl (1998). The Healing. Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 978-0-8070-6314-9. The protagonist of this novel describes her ongoing daily experiences in the US using a consistently Afrocentric perspective. Runoko Rashidi,[64] author: Introduction to African Civilizations; The global African community: The African presence in Asia, Australia, and the South Pacific J.A. Rogers, author: Sex and Race: Negro-Caucasian Mixing in All Ages and All Lands: The Old World; Nature Knows No Color Line; Sex and Race: A History of White, Negro, and Indian Miscegenation in the Two Americas: The New World; 100 Amazing Facts About the Negro With Complete Proof: A Short Cut to the World History of the Negro Ivan van Sertima, author: They Came before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America, African Presence in Early Europe ISBN 0-88738-664-4; Blacks in Science Ancient and Modern; African Presence in Early Asia; African Presence in Early America; Early America Revisited; Egypt Revisited: Journal of African Civilizations; Nile Valley Civilizations; Egypt: Child of Africa (Journal of African Civilizations, V. 12); The Golden Age of the Moor (Journal of African Civilizations, Vol. 11, Fall 1991); Great Black Leaders: Ancient and Modern; Great African Thinkers: Cheikh Anta Diop[65] Chancellor Williams, author: The Destruction of Black Civilization: Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C. to 2000 A.D. Théophile Obenga, author: Ancient Egypt and Black Africa: a student's handbook for the study of Ancient Egypt in philosophy, linguistics, and gender relations Asa Hilliard, III, author: SBA: The Reawakening of the African Mind; The Teachings of Ptahhotep
quote:Originally posted by real expert: Black Americans should stop obsessing with other people's DNA, culture, history or heritage just to distract from their real ancestors and history.
You can dispute "Afrocentric" claims all you want, but barbs like yours targeting African-Americans in general are (at the very least) bordering on plain racist. It's like you have this beef with the African-American ethnic group that you're conflating them with "Afrocentrics" (never mind that many prominent "Afrocentric" writers throughout history, most notably Cheikh Anta Diop, haven't actually been American but African or Afro-Caribbean).
I will report posts like this to the admins in a moment, mark my words.
quote:Originally posted by real expert: Black Americans should stop obsessing with other people's DNA, culture, history or heritage just to distract from their real ancestors and history.
You can dispute "Afrocentric" claims all you want, but barbs like yours targeting African-Americans in general are (at the very least) bordering on plain racist. It's like you have this beef with the African-American ethnic group that you're conflating them with "Afrocentrics" (never mind that many prominent "Afrocentric" writers throughout history, most notably Cheikh Anta Diop, haven't actually been American but African or Afro-Caribbean).
I will report posts like this to the admins in a moment, mark my words.
The term "Euronut" has been used 4 times in he thread. Do you think it's acceptable or is it asking for trouble?
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Scientists have not said this reconstruction is wrong. It seems to be some Brazilian news media that took it upon themselves to say it is wrong
LOL
Ah! So this is the crux of the issue. It's not the scientists but the Brazilian media. It doesn't surprise me considering that Brazil is a racist country whose issues by the way have nothing to do with the current U.S. president but predates him by centuries.
You are just mad that Afrocentrics can't have the monopoly of politicizing ancient DNA for pushing their agenda. I find stealing other people's history and identity very racist and Afrocentrics are guilty all of that.
Black Americans should stop obsessing with other people's DNA, culture, history or heritage just to distract from their real ancestors and history.
The reconstruction of Luzia, if accurate would still look like some Southern American Natives in real life.
A Native man with the facial features of the Olmec heads.
The poster your replying to is not even Black-American but Asian. And his background has little relevance to this discussion. In the Egyptology section we don't tolerate trolling. Anyways, you earned yourself a 3 day vacation.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by real expert: Black Americans should stop obsessing with other people's DNA, culture, history or heritage just to distract from their real ancestors and history.
You can dispute "Afrocentric" claims all you want, but barbs like yours targeting African-Americans in general are (at the very least) bordering on plain racist. It's like you have this beef with the African-American ethnic group that you're conflating them with "Afrocentrics" (never mind that many prominent "Afrocentric" writers throughout history, most notably Cheikh Anta Diop, haven't actually been American but African or Afro-Caribbean).
I will report posts like this to the admins in a moment, mark my words.
The term "Euronut" has been used 4 times in he thread. Do you think it's acceptable or is it asking for trouble?
"Euronut" is not targeting a specific ethnic group.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: what about "Afronut" ?
Same.
Did you actually read my post calling "real expert" out to begin with? You should have picked up that my problem with him went beyond what he had to say about "Afrocentrics".
posted
@Lioness How? You can support ideas or talking points inline with what is seen as Eurocetric without being European.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Unfortunately the term Afrocentric was co-opted by the media and popularized into something quite unrecognizable by Africalogy degree holders from major mainstream universities who use the term and apply it to themselves.
For instance Ivan Van Sertima went to his grave fighting against any and all such notions he was Afrocentric, nevermind Blackcentric/Afreccentric which is what the common person really means by 'Afrocentric'.
Eurocentricity is unavoidable by all scholarship. Many Euro envisaged concepts pervade all Africana scholarship. Face it, the system of education most everywhere in the world is a colonial European inheritance.
Eg, West African schools still credit Berbers and Yeminis for creating the W Afr empires, though that can largely be attributed to 'Islamocentricity' of the major tarikh W Afr authors themselves. Ironically, it's Euros who overturned thoze submissive errors and placed the agency for civilization in African hands.
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: @Lioness How? You can support ideas or talking points inline with what is seen as Eurocetric without being European.
"Eurocentric" is reasonable. You could say "Eurocentric" or "Afrocentric" in an academic debate or lecture.
But "Euronut" and "Afronut" is infantile and derogatory and it inspires fights.
people don't like being called nuts, it's troll talk
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Continuing on topic
Precision to falsehoods about Strauss.
Strauss is a senior but not equally contributing author of the Cell article but is neither for the Science article.
Strauss serves, among other posts, a university museum in the country hosting Luzia, Apiuna, and the so-called "people of Luzia." He also serves a paleo institute in Germany.
Both Cell and Science articles rely on Strauss as Brazilian 'liaison' serving as an important team member on both, providing: • conceptualization, resources, and supervision in the Cell; • archaeological and bioanthropological analyses in the Science. Strauss has himself written extensively on early Holocene cultures in Brazil.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Precision to falsehoods about Strauss.
Strauss is a senior but not equally contributing author of the Cell article but is neither for the Science article.
I didn't notice Strauss was in the Cell article authors list but I see he is. And he's also in the journal Science article author list also
But for him to be stepping out and talk about features not being accurate is not a part of either article. They are genetic research articles. I have read each one.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Again, to stem off confusion
quote:
Both Cell and Science articles rely on Strauss as Brazilian 'liaison' serving as an important team member on both, providing: • conceptualization, resources, and supervision in the Cell; • archaeological and bioanthropological analyses in the Science. Strauss has himself written extensively on early Holocene cultures in Brazil.
In any event, the pre 9000 yr old Brazilians are only partial ancestral to the original peoples of pre Brazil. The Lusitanias who founded Brazil and other Old World migrants there who run the gov and infrastructure are totally unrelated and heretofor distance themselves from the peoples they conquered.
posted
The Yanomami are also called the Yanomamö (pronounced Yah-no-mah-muh), and are one of the largest indigenous tribes in the Amazon. Some authors have used various other names and spellings, including Guaharibo, Guaica, Guajaribo, Ianomâmi, Yanoama, Yanomama, Yanomame, and Xirianá. There are approximately 30,000 Yanomami living in southern Venezuela and northern Brazil. Although they were first contacted in 1929, their culture has remained relatively unchanged until recently due to their isolated locations on unnavigable upland streams rather than living on the main rivers
Exploring the Mitochondrial DNA Variability of the Amazonian Yanomami 2016
Ninety eight percent of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences analyzed belonged to Native American haplogroups, while 2% belonged to African haplogroups.
Haplotype data are reported in Supporting InformationTable S2, along with their frequencies. Except for two samples (1.94%), which were classified within macro-haplogroup L, all of the rest were classified within NativeAmerican mtDNA haplogroups A2, B2, C1, D1, and D4(Achilli et al., 2008). These haplogroups are distributed inthe sample as follows: 28 subjects (27.18%) belonged tohaplogroup A2; 28 (27.18%) to haplogroup B4, 23 (22.34%)to haplogroup C1, and 22 (21.36%) to haplogroup D, 20(19.42%) belonged to haplogroup D and 2 belonged tohaplogroup D4 (1.94%). Therefore, the Native American haplogroups are relatively evenly distributed in this sample.
Accordingly, the Yanomami currently living in the Rio Negro Basin are experiencing the consequences of contact with colonizers, in particular gold miners (Cabralet al., 2010; Paula et al., 2002). Therefore, in ancient times, the Rio Negro might have functioned as an important hub of communication for Amazonian people as well,so that—unlike the other Yanomami groups—the SantaIsabel group may have had contact with other Amazonian populations.This model could also explain the current genetic com-position of the rural population from Santa Isabel. Differ-ent Amazonian Native American groups contributed tothe population, making it ethnically admixed, as sug-gested by Saloum de Neves Manta et al. (2013). Theseauthors also identified, through autosomal AIM-indelanalysis, an African component in the Santa Isabel popu-lation. The same component was observed, at a low fre-quency, in the Santa Isabel Yanomami mtDNAs analyzedin the present study.
Other phenom-ena in addition to founder effects could be the cause of thegenetic structure of the Santa Isabel Yanomami sample,such as the introduction of new African and Native Amer-ican haplotypes by gold miners who were probably highlyadmixed. The latter hypothesis would also be supportedby the gold rush in the Rio Negro basin and by the noncor-relation between genetic and geographic distances shownby the Santa Isabel Yanomami and its neighboring non-Yanomami populations. Furthermore, geographical fac-tors may have influenced the patterns of mtDNA diversityin South American populations (Bisso-Machado et al.,2012)
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Journal of the University of Sao Paulo says
quote:In addition to the scientific publications, the new genetic data also allowed to create a new face for the old population of Lagoa Santa. Forensic reconstruction expert Caroline Wilkinson's proposal from Liverpool John Moores University in England is based on information from the article published Thursday in Cell. The new image was created from the retroformed digital skull model of the archaeological site of Lapa do Santo and brings a face, it is expected, more accurate of the first inhabitants of Brazil.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Journal of the University of Sao Paulo says
quote:In addition to the scientific publications, the new genetic data also allowed to create a new face for the old population of Lagoa Santa. Forensic reconstruction expert Caroline Wilkinson's proposal from Liverpool John Moores University in England is based on information from the article published Thursday in Cell. The new image was created from the retroformed digital skull model of the archaeological site of Lapa do Santo and brings a face, it is expected, more accurate of the first inhabitants of Brazil.
Google xlation
Is the above a reasonable statement or not? This particular statement does not mention Luzia.
As regards to Luzia there are two or more different interpretations possible of other non-journal articles and that should not be the case in my opinion
a) the Luzia reconstruction is accurate but this individual is not representative of the ancient population of Lagoa Santa
OR
b) the Luzia reconstruction is not accurate The Skull structure is the foundation of a reconstruction but alone cannot predict every aspect of how the person might have looked DNA evidence, it's ethnological associations is also considered by forensic artists in reconstructing soft tissue features not informed by the skull. New DNA has come to light and has shown the Luzia reconstruction's features to be incorrect
______________________________
The following is my interpretation of these skulls>>
Both reconstructions are legitimate. More than one type of skull was found in Lagoa Santa. The reason for this unknown. DNA was not recoverable from the Luzia skull
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Yet funny how nobody called Blumenthal or Hillary racist.![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
[/IMG] 
Printer-friendly view of this topic