posted
^I will check it out. Yeah, it does not look authentic.
-------------------- 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 |
Xyyman, here is some information about the sculpture. I must admit, this was sloppy work because there are some mixed feelings about the authenticity of this artifact.
Here is an article that touches on the authenticity of the sculpture and other relics.
posted
26000y old humans with saws. Stone age humans with saws.....yep. Fake.
Quote:
The bottom had been sawed horizontally at about the shoulder line. Marshack had seen fine-toothed blades from the Dolni Vestonice collection that might, when hafted, have been used to saw ivory in this way.
"Photo and text: National Geographic October 1988, photo by Alexander Marshack
In July 2008 I received this very interesting communication from Danylo Derkacz (a pseudonym):
I am a retired neuropathologist and part time forensic pathologist who has dissected and examined microscopically about 1 200 human heads and brains.
1) the ivory head is carved by someone with training and talent.
2) the head makes no sense physiologically, genetically, medically or culturally.
a) medically it represents the head of a microcephalic individual who even with today's medical and social care would not survive puberty.
b) the supraorbital ridges are those of a Neandertal but the head lacks the prognathia and recessed mentum (chin) of a Neandertal and has it protruding like that of H. sapiens sapiens.
c) the upturned nose is typical of a modern Slovyan (Slav) who at the time of discovery were considered as stupid peasants.
3) neither today nor then would any artist produce a labor intensive sculpture of a village idiot with microcephaly.
4) the nose of the ivory figure is so exaggerated that is better interpreted as that of a tertiary syphilitic which was then common in the pre-penicillin era and pre sulfonamides era.
In summary:
I think it is a half of the 20th century fake and caricature of the fashionable (at that time) concept of Neandertals admixed with westerners as an expression of disrespect for Slavs. "
=====================================
Originally posted by xyyman: Source..?
[/QUOTE]Xyyman, here is some information about the sculpture. I must admit, this was sloppy work because there are some mixed feelings about the authenticity of this artifact.
Here is an article that touches on the authenticity of the sculpture and other relics.
-------------------- 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 |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
posted
What made me post this image in the first place was the sculpture's features. I was typically struck by the sculpture's nose, which is snubbish.
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Sources? Don't make shyt up.
The paper has Neanderthal and Denisovan with black skin, black hair and black eyes. Sarah Tishkoff later confirmed black skin, and suggested there may be some with lighter skin but provided no genetic proof for that.
Please provide source for your claim. Or don't mislead readers. ONLY THE FACTS
quote:Originally posted by Forty2Tribes: [Q] Has there been any progress with pigment predictors? The 'Predicting Homo pigmentation phenotype through genomic data: from Neanderthal to James Watson' study from 2012 had a few **false predictions** with dark skin and blue eyed Africans and Papuans. Unless I see some evidence that this was addressed I assume that most of these WHGs had brown eyes with recessed blue eyed genes. They probably weren't super dark so Lola's complexion might be close. [/Q]
It predicted that a Papuan had blue eyes that a Yoruba had blue eyes, a Melanesian was borderline blue/brown,that a native American and Chinese person had blue eyes.
It was also missing on hair color but not as bad. Judging by Lioness's link it seems to have improved but not to the point where I'm convinced that Lola really had blue eyes.
AUC values were found to be higher for blue eye (0.88), brown eye (0.67), black hair (0.69), fair skin (0.70) and dark skin (0.70). Intermediate phenotypes reached lower values compared to those of the extreme phenotypes (light/dark). Our results demonstrate that the HIrisPlex-S system markers have great potential for use in admixed populations, including the Brazilian, but our results also demonstrate that the intermediate color groups are difficult to predict.
We analyzed each predicted category compared to the self-reported classification, evaluating their prediction index accuracy. For eye color,the system predicted only blue or brown eyes; no sample was predicted as intermediate color. In this group, 87.7% of the predictions were correct for blue eyes and 74.8% of the predictions for brown eyes. For hair color, blond hair prediction had only 32.5% of correct predictions,brown hair prediction had 84.6% accuracy, black hair color had 24.1%correct predictions and red hair had 20% precise predictions. For skin color the correct prediction rate was 95% for light skin, 10% for in-termediate skin and 13.3% for dark skin.Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yar roob: Either way modern European didn't arrive into Europe until 3000-2000bc. This the only time we see modern euro genetic's appear and the pale skin mutation on mass.
It's already been proven before on this site that Europeans did migrate from central Asia into Europe quite recently.
This is Egyptsearch. You got to replace Central Asia with the Canary Islands, Morocco, the Sudan, Algeria and Central Asia.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: nowadays, they wouldn't reconstruct an A.Egyptian to remotely resemble this girl. They save all that psuedo-biracial ambiguity for their Stoneage ancestors. The one good thing I can say about this example of romanticism/ borderline revisionist art depiction, is that at the very least she doesn't look contemporary African as they tend to make their Mesolithic ancestors look. She looks somewhat Australoid, which imo is more inline with they(Mesoeuros) probably looked, but still, making folks so old just resemble another group of people because of perceived primitive or Ancestral features seem short sided.
Look at the comment you decided to reply to.
That underlined part.... Which phenotypic features do you think I was referring to there? What do you think the point of that sentence was?
Everybody seems on the same page about which traits/features we'd see in these samples but you were the only one who felt the need to write a book about them, I would ask why, but pride tends to not allow people to reflect on their mistakes or furthermore, their relevancy.
You tried to relegate my elaboration down to semantics either because you can't see how you had no need to comment in the first place OR you're just trying to save face... If you weren't saying UP paleolithic Europeans look like modern Africans initially then what the fuck were you trying to say in the face of the fact that everybody already knows about phenotypic overlap going back in time?
You don't even have to answer that. I just want to make it abundantly clear, that all the phenotypic traits you decided to point out were already considered in my initial reasoning. Now, I'ma play along with you and your assesment of Lola. Granted I'll take the "L" for not assuming Lola lacked the epicanthic folds seen in East Asians, south Africans and speculated to be in some UP Europeans (via reconstructions)... For what it's worth it is hard to tell these things with a 2D drawing. But now lemme ask you something, If Lola looks way too old to be 5700... What do you thinK the few Neolithic Europeans who carried ancestral pigment related genes looked like 6Kya? matterfact, How would Lola look, being as she most probably carried ancestral pigment related genes, which features strike you as "Early Mesolithic" in this reconstruction?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
quote:Everybody seems on the same page about which traits/features we'd see in these samples but you were the only one who felt the need to write a book about them, I would ask why, but pride tends to not allow people to reflect on their mistakes or furthermore, their relevancy.
Elmaestro, if I was egotistical enough to make this judgment, I wouldn't have conceded or agreed with some of the points you were making.
quote:You tried to relegate my elaboration down to semantics either because you can't see how you had no need to comment in the first place OR you're just trying to save face... If you weren't saying UP paleolithic Europeans look like modern Africans initially then what the fuck were you trying to say in the face of the fact that everybody already knows about phenotypic overlap going back in time?
Elmaestro, the only argument that I was making about Lola's reconstruction was that she would be a better representative to what some Europeans of the Upper Paleolithic era would have looked like, instead of Europeans of the Mesolithic/Neolithic eras, nothing more.
quote:You don't even have to answer that. I just want to make it abundantly clear, that all the phenotypic traits you decided to point out were already considered in my initial reasoning. Now, I'ma play along with you and your assesment of Lola. Granted I'll take the "L" for not assuming Lola lacked the epicanthic folds seen in East Asians, south Africans and speculated to be in some UP Europeans (via reconstructions)... For what it's worth it is hard to tell these things with a 2D drawing. But now lemme ask you something, If Lola looks way too old to be 5700... What do you thinK the few Neolithic Europeans who carried ancestral pigment related genes looked like 6Kya? matterfact, How would Lola look, being as she most probably carried ancestral pigment related genes, which features strike you as "Early Mesolithic" in this reconstruction?
Alright, so be it. Let's agree to disagree about what the accurate phenotype for Europeans of the Upper Paleolithic was. But, if you have to ask me about what would be the most appropriate appearance for Europeans of the Mesolithic/Neolithic eras would be, my best guess would be the La brana reconstruction, since Europeans of that period wouldn't have been that much different than their modern predecessors, except for hue. The skin color cline of Europeans who were naturally dark skinned would be no more darker than La brana Man and no less than say your lightest example of a olive complexion.
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Baalberith: Alright, so be it. Let's agree to disagree about what the accurate phenotype for Europeans of the Upper Paleolithic was. But, if you have to ask me about what would be the most appropriate appearance for Europeans of the Mesolithic/Neolithic eras would be, my best guess would be the La brana reconstruction, since Europeans of that period wouldn't have been that much different than their modern predecessors, except for hue. The skin color cline of Europeans who were naturally dark skinned would be no more darker than La brana Man and no less than say your lightest example of a olive complexion.
1. I don't think the disagreement is on the accurate phenotype of UP Europeans, the disagreement is whether or not they look like they can fit in with modern populations, to which my stance is an unequivocal; no.
2. I agree that we should look at the la Brana specimen as a starting point for her and like samples, but I disagree with the reasoning. See, the La Brana artwork has the skin tone of modern populations who are known to have derived slc24a5... There's no evidence to suggest he should even be that light. If it's the skin-tone that has you sold on his accuracy then we are in disagreement. I'm looking more at the nasal bridge and brow ridges as well as the thickness of the upper lips and zygomatic arches.
..Take this Neolithic reconstruction for example. It encapsulates some of the physical characteristics of Europeans at the time with the predicted skin tone of someone who at least partially carried ancestral snps for pigment related genes. Moreso than most, if not all reconstructions adopted from physical remains of the Upper paleolithic, she, as she should, approaches the phenotype of a modern, "mixed" population. But the artist didn't model her after Contemporary black populations in Africa or elsewhere which is something I agree with.
Lioness is right when she/he/they said that children have features to soft to scrutinize for accuracy. And as I said before Lola isn't that bad of a re-imagining... BUT from my PoV, if a stoneage reconstruction can fit well into any modern population especially if it's one with a historically post neolithic culture... then we have a red flag.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Baalberith
Ungodly and Satanic Entity
Member # 23079
quote:1. I don't think the disagreement is on the accurate phenotype of UP Europeans, the disagreement is whether or not they look like they can fit in with modern populations, to which my stance is an unequivocal; no.
Ok, I can agree upon that point.
quote:2. I agree that we should look at the la Brana specimen as a starting point for her and like samples, but I disagree with the reasoning. See, the La Brana artwork has the skin tone of modern populations who are known to have derived slc24a5... There's no evidence to suggest he should even be that light. If it's the skin-tone that has you sold on his accuracy then we are in disagreement. I'm looking more at the nasal bridge and brow ridges as well as the thickness of the upper lips and zygomatic arches.
Oh no, I mainly concern upon his phenotype, but I wouldn’t disqualified his complexion. I typically do think that this could be the darkest complexion a Mesolithic European could have, but this is based upon my own point of view.
quote:..Take this Neolithic reconstruction for example. It encapsulates some of the physical characteristics of Europeans at the time with the predicted skin tone of someone who at least partially carried ancestral snps for pigment related genes. Moreso than most, if not all reconstructions adopted from physical remains of the Upper paleolithic, she, as she should, approaches the phenotype of a modern, "mixed" population. But the artist didn't model her after Contemporary black populations in Africa or elsewhere which is something I agree with.[/b]
Alright then, so be it.
Posts: 331 | From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: "She looks somewhat Australoid, which imo is more inline with they(Mesoeuros) probably looked,"
At least we agree on this. You are stealing my ideas again.
Keeping in mind La Brana genetic profile was black like Melanesians and not black like modern Africans
Dude stop spreading misinformation.
Actually, the DNA study, the paper on La Braña 1 genome suggested that current populations nearest to La Braña 1 are in northern Europe, such as Sweden and Finland.
Hence you are dead wrong and La Braña was genetically not Melanesian- like. The same goes for the Cheddar man that was falsely declared as a black African by many misled minds. The closest living relatives of the Cheddar man are also Europeans like for instance the Estonians from Northeastern Europe.
Contrary to this WHG girl from Denmark we have actually the skull of the WHG La Braña and he looked like a European with a heavy tan.
a modern European man looking similar to the La Brana.
quote:Originally posted by real expert: Actually, the DNA study, the paper on La Braña 1 genome suggested that current populations nearest to La Braña 1 are in northern Europe, such as Sweden and Finland.
Hence you are dead wrong and La Braña was genetically not Melanesian- like. The same goes for the Cheddar man that was falsely declared as a black African by many misled minds. The closest living relatives of the Cheddar man are also Europeans like for instance the Estonians from Northeastern Europe.
Contrary to this WHG girl from Denmark we have actually the skull of the WHG La Braña and he looked like a European with a heavy tan.
“This suggests a remarkable genetic uniformity and little phylogeographic structure over a large geographic area of the pre-Neolithic populations. Using Approximate Bayesian Computation, a model of genetic continuity from Mesolithic to Neolithic populations is poorly supported. Furthermore, analyses of 1.34% and 0.53% of their nuclear genomes, containing about 50,000 and 20,000 ancestry informative SNPs, respectively, show that these two Mesolithic individuals are not related to current populations from either the Iberian Peninsula or Southern Europe.
[...]
Indicate that La Bran ̃ a specimens (Figure 1) belong to the U5b haplotype (16192T-16270T).
Figure 2 | Ancestral variants around the SLC45A2 (rs16891982, above) and SLC24A5 (rs1426654, below) pigmentation genes in the Mesolithic genome.
The SNPs around the two diagnostic variants (red arrows) in these two genes were analysed. The resulting haplotype comprises neighbouring SNPs that are also absent in modern Europeans (CEU) (n = 112) but present in Yorubans (YRI) (n = 113). This pattern confirms that the La Braña 1 sample is older than the positive-selection event in these regions. Blue, ancestral; red, derived.
~Carles Lalueza-Fox Nature 507, 225–228 (13 March 2014) doi:10.1038/nature12960 Genomic Affinities of Two 7,000-Year-Old Iberian Hunter-Gatherers
In layman's language:
“Lalueza-Fox states: "However, the biggest surprise was to discover that this individual possessed African versions in the genes that determine the light pigmentation of the current Europeans, which indicates that he had dark skin, although we can not know the exact shade."
Baalberith, the above based on chewing gum is supposed to represent Denmark 5,700 years ago
you have been posting select reconstructions that are based on remains 4 or more times older than that
Very much Saami like. However, not the average Saami as we know most now. I suspecte the woman below who happens to be a Saami, is an exception to the rule. Not that I know that many Saami's btw. lol
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic