Europeans had common ancestors 1,000 years ago Associated PressBy FRANK JORDANS | Associated Press – 1 hr 52 mins ago
Email Share 1 Tweet Print
BERLIN (AP) — Europeans appear to be more closely related than previously thought.
Scientists who compared DNA samples from people in different parts of the continent found that most had common ancestors living just 1,000 years ago.
The results confirm decade-old mathematical models, but will nevertheless come as a surprise to Europeans accustomed to thinking of ancient nations composed of distinct ethnic groups like "Germans," ''Irish" or "Serbs."
"What's remarkable about this is how closely everyone is related to each other," said Graham Coop of the University of California, Davis, who co-wrote the study published Tuesday in the journal PLoS Biology.
Coop and his fellow author Peter Ralph of the University of Southern California used a database containing more than 2,250 genetic samples to look for shared DNA segments that would point to distant shared relatives.
While the number of common genetic ancestors is greater the closer people are to each other, even individuals living 2,000 miles (3,220 kilometers) apart had identical sections of DNA that can be traced back roughly to the Middle Ages.
The findings indicate that there was a steady flow of genetic material between countries as far apart as Turkey and Britain, or Poland and Portugal, even after the great population movements of the first millennium A.D. such as the Saxon and Viking invasions of Britain, and the westward drive of the Huns and Slavic peoples.
The study did find subtle regional variations. For reasons still unclear, Italians and Spaniards appear to be less closely related than most Europeans to people elsewhere on the continent.
"The analysis is pretty convincing. It comes partly from the enormous number of ancestors each one of us have," said Mark A. Jobling, a professor of genetics at the University of Leicester, England, who wasn't involved in the study.
Since the number of ancestors each person has roughly doubles with each generation, "we don't have to go too far back to find someone who features in all of our family trees," he said.
Jobling cited a scientific paper published in 2004 that went so far as to predict that every person on the planet shares ancestors who lived just 4,000 years ago.
Experts say the study's findings need to be compared with what we know about population movements in Europe and elsewhere from other fields, including archeology and linguistics.
"Although, as the authors note, the approach is inherently 'noisy' (i.e. error-prone), it still does give results for European populations that are in reasonable agreement with historical expectations," said Mark Stoneking, a professor evolutionary anthropology at the University of Leipzig, Germany, who also wasn't involved in the study. "It would be interesting to see this applied in situations where we don't have such good historical information."
Coop and Ralph said the findings might change the way Europeans think about their neighbors on a continent that has had its fair share of struggle and strife.
"The basic idea that we're all related much more recently than one might think has been around for a while, but it is not widely appreciated, and still quite surprising to many people, even scientists working in population genetics, including ourselves," they said in an email to The Associated Press. "The fact that we share all our ancestors from a time period where we recognize various ethnic identities also points at how we are like a family — we have our differences, but are all closely related."
Just don't expect news of closer family ties to prompt a surge of brotherly love in Europe or elsewhere.
"There have been many studies that we've been involved in showing that groups which are fighting each other furiously all the time are actually extremely closely genetically related. But that's never had any impact on whether they continue to fight each other," Jobling said.
"So for example Jewish and non-Jewish populations in the Middle East are extremely similar genetically, but to tell them they are genetic close relatives isn't going to change their ways."
Note the part where it says -
"For reasons still unclear, Italians and Spaniards appear to be less closely related than most Europeans to people elsewhere on the continent."
Posted by DHDoxies (Member # 19701) on :
Dana, please explain the point you are trying to make with this post.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by DHDoxies: Dana, please explain the point you are trying to make with this post.
Well I think this at least speaks to the point of how many Europeans were or rather, were not, present in the world 1000 years ago.lol!
And I'm not knocking any group but when you have half the black population in the U.S. that can trace a direct descent from lady godiva William the conqueror and Charlemagne or some other crusader on ancestry.com - that's saying something.
Its what I've been saying all along most of Europe was occupied by other populations until relatively recently or before the late Bronze Age. Believe it, OR NOT!
Posted by DHDoxies (Member # 19701) on :
So basically Dana you are trying to say that William The Conqueror, Charlemagne, etc were all Black & Whites are not true Europeans right?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by DHDoxies: So basically Dana you are trying to say that William The Conqueror, Charlemagne, etc were all Black & Whites are not true Europeans right?
He,he,he:
Posted by DHDoxies (Member # 19701) on :
Mike take your trouble making butt on somewhere, I want to hear what Dana has to say. I'll deal with you later lol.
Posted by Ponsford (Member # 20191) on :
Modern Europeans seem to have the least genetic diversity and the most linkage disequilibrium in their genome,also the most deleterious mutations.
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Why can't he accept the fact his homeland is Central Asia and not Europe?
What is the big deal.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Why can't he accept the fact his homeland is Central Asia and not Europe?
What is the big deal.
It IS a big deal!
They have wrapped their identity around their myth of European origins. Once that falls then many other questions must be answered. Not least of which is...
SO WHO WERE THE ORIGINAL EUROPEANS AND WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM?
That leads to the reality of their European and American Black genocides.
Once they have to accept responsibility for what they have done, and acknowledge themselves as genocidests, then the world changes.
Posted by DHDoxies (Member # 19701) on :
No XYYman you stupid White people hating, kill Whitey, Black racist Black supremacist, Whites do NOT come from Central Asia, it is NOT our homeland, Europe IS our homeland. Stop trying to steal my people's history, our heritage, our identities, our homeland. Also stop fricking slandering me calling me a he when I'am and always have been a she.
Mike you stupid White people hating Black racist moron why don't you & XYYman go kill some Whiteys like you desire to do & stop trying to steal others' stuff. White people ARE Europans with European origins. There was NO genocide of Blacks in Europe or the Americas. Stop trying to commit cultural genocide against my people & the Amerindians.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Europeans were or rather, were not, present in the world 1000 years ago.lol!
It's amazing how millions of white people magically materialized out of nowhere 1000 years ago.
It's the new revolution in anthropology
the Mike and Marniche Think Tank
Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
Back to reality...
"And the Cro-Magnons were already racially European, i.e., Caucasoid. This has always been accepted because of the general appearance of the skulls: straight faces, narrow noses, and so forth." (Howells, 1997)
Posted by GOMTUU (Member # 19606) on :
Yeah, central Asia was their home,Cauc-asians.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Back to reality...
"And the Cro-Magnons were already racially European, i.e., Caucasoid. This has always been accepted because of the general appearance of the skulls: straight faces, narrow noses, and so forth." (Howells, 1997)
Cass, why are you such an ignorant putz?
THE FIRST EUROPEAN
Quote: This clay sculpture portrays the face of the earliest known modern European - a man or woman who hunted deer and gathered fruit and herbs in ancient forests more than 35,000 years ago. It was created by Richard Neave; one of Britain's leading forensic scientists, using fossilized fragments of skull and jawbone found in a cave seven years ago.
His recreation offers a tantalizing glimpse into life before the dawn of civilization. It also shows the close links between the first European settlers and their immediate African ancestors. It was made for the BBC2 series The Incredible Human Journey. This will follow the evolution of humans from the cradle of Africa to the waves of migrations that saw Homo sapiens colonize the globe. (The program will be shown on BBC2 at 9.30pm on May 10).
The head is based on remains of one of the earliest known anatomically modern Europeans. The lower jawbone was discovered by potholers in Pestera cu Oase, the "cave with bones", located in the southwestern Carpathian Mountains of Romania in 2002. The rest of the fragments were found the following year. The bones were carbon-dated to between 34,000 and 36,000 years ago when Europe was occupied by two species of human. They were the Neanderthals, who had arrived from Africa tens of thousands of years earlier, and the more recent modern humans, also known as Cro-Magnons. Although the skull is similar to a modern human head, it has a larger cranium, is more robust and has larger molars.
--Norman A. Johnson (2007) Darwinian Detectives: Revealing the Natural History of Genes and Genomes pg100
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
There has been a lot of these kinds of articles on European DNA appearing lately:
quote: DNA sequenced from nearly 40 ancient skeletons has shed light on the complex prehistoric events that shaped modern European populations.
A study of remains from Central Europe suggests the foundations of the modern gene pool were laid down between 4,000 and 2,000 BC - in Neolithic times.
These changes were likely brought about by the rapid growth and movement of some populations.
The work by an international team is published in Nature Communications.
Decades of study of the DNA patterns of modern Europeans suggests two major events in prehistory significantly affected the continent's genetic landscape: its initial peopling by hunter-gatherers in Palaeolithic times (35,000 years ago) and a wave of migration by Near Eastern farmers some 6,000 years ago. (in the early Neolithic)
Family tree
Analysis of DNA from ancient remains in Central and Northern Europe appears to show that the genetic legacy of the hunter-gatherers was all but erased by later migrations, including pioneer Neolithic farmers but possibly by later waves of people too.
The latest paper reveals that events some time after the initial migration of farmers into Europe did indeed have a major impact on the modern gene pool.
In the study, an international team of researchers focused on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), the information in the cell's "batteries". This type of DNA is passed down, almost unchanged, from a mother to her children.
By studying the mutations, or changes, in mtDNA sequences, researchers are able to probe the maternal histories of different human populations. It has enabled them to build a "family tree" of maternal ancestry, and group different mtDNA lineages together based on shared mutations.
For the latest paper, the authors chose to focus on one of these groupings known as haplogroup H.
Haplogroup H dominates mtDNA variation in Europe. Today, more than 40% of Europeans belong to this genetic "clan", with frequencies much higher in the west of the continent than in the east.
The team selected 37 human remains from the Mitelelbe Saale region of Germany and two from Italy, all of whom belonged to the "H" clan. This area has a very well preserved collection of human skeletons forming a continuous record of habitation across different archaeological cultures since Palaeolithic times.
The remains investigated here span 3,500 years of European prehistory, from the Early Neolithic to the Bronze Age.
Sequencing the mitochondrial genomes of these 39 remains revealed dynamic changes in DNA patterns over time. The team found that the genetic signatures of people from the Early Neolithic period were either rare or absent from modern populations.
And only about 19% of the Early Neolithic remains from Central Europe belonged to the H haplogroup.
But, from the Middle Neolithic onwards, DNA patterns more closely resembled those of people living in the area today, pointing to a major - and previously unrecognised - population upheaval around 4,000 BC.
Co-author Prof Alan Cooper, from the University of Adelaide in Australia, said: "What is intriguing is that the genetic markers of this first pan-European culture, which was clearly very successful, were then suddenly replaced around 4,500 years ago, and we don't know why.
"Something major happened, and the hunt is now on to find out what that was."
Population growth and migration from western Europe may have driven up the frequency of people carrying haplogroup H. Migrant wave
A significant contribution appears to have been made in the Late Neolithic, by populations linked to the so-called Bell Beaker archaeological culture. Sub-types of haplogroup H that are common today first appear with the Beaker people and the overall percentage of individuals belonging to the H clan jumps sharply at this time.
The origins of the "Beaker folk" are the subject of much debate. Despite having been excavated from the Mittelelbe Saale region of Germany, the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
Other remains belonging to the Late Neolithic Unetice culture attest to links with populations further east.
"We have established that the genetic foundations for modern Europe were only established in the Mid-Neolithic, after this major genetic transition around 4000 years ago," said co-author Dr Wolfgang Haak.
"This genetic diversity was then modified further by a series of incoming and expanding cultures from Iberia and Eastern Europe through the Late Neolithic."
Dr Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic Project, which was behind the study, commented: "Studies such as this on ancient remains serve as a valuable adjunct to the work we are doing with modern populations in the Genographic Project.
"While the DNA of people alive today can reveal the end result of their ancestors' ancient movements, to really understand the dynamics of how modern genetic patterns were created we need to study ancient material as well."
And yet we have all those European Y haplogroups. R, I, E--with all their permutations all supposedly at least 10,000 years old. A study is just that--a study. Hey, scientists at one time wrote papers claiming that cigarette smoking was harmless. Phillip Morris spent billions pushing that line. More recently, scientists were stating that eggs contained abundant cholesterol and were bad for health, now the claim has been reversed.
Again, caveat lector Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin: And yet we have all those European Y haplogroups. R, I, E--with all their permutations all supposedly at least 10,000 years old. A study is just that--a study. Hey, scientists at one time wrote papers claiming that cigarette smoking was harmless. Phillip Morris spent billions pushing that line. More recently, scientists were stating that eggs contained abundant cholesterol and were bad for health, now the claim has been reversed.
Again, caveat lector
He,he,he:
Doxie, I say lamin is one of your cousins from Appalachia. Will you out him/her?
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
Do you have a link for this?
Just asking...
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
OUT OF AFRICA MIGRATIONS
35,000 year ago
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: [QB] ^^^?
35,000 years old
^^^ note evolutionary changes in features over time
There is land between Central Europe and Africa. The first Africans out of Africa left through Egypt not across the Gibralter. Note oldest European remains locations
M168 is African M89 is Middle Eastern There are two branches of M89 >
1) M9 40kya branches to M45 Central Asia 35kya branches to M173 35,000 years ago (first Europeans)
2) M172, agriculturaists, 10,000 years ago The original "Old man of Crô-Magnon", Musée de l'Homme, Paris about 28,000 years old
Posted by DHDoxies (Member # 19701) on :
Mike, if Lamin says he or she is Black then I believe they are Black unless I get undeniable proof otherwise.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
did your dna results come in?
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by DHDoxies: Mike, if Lamin says he or she is Black then I believe they are Black unless I get undeniable proof otherwise.
Yet you are a man who thinks that he is a woman... Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by DHDoxies: So basically Dana you are trying to say that William The Conqueror, Charlemagne, etc were all Black & Whites are not true Europeans right?
Does it look like I said that Doxie. you are a descendant of Africans does that mean they were white with your kind of hair (the kind you show on youtube)?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Europeans were or rather, were not, present in the world 1000 years ago.lol!
It's amazing how millions of white people magically materialized out of nowhere 1000 years ago.
It's the new revolution in anthropology
the Mike and Marniche Think Tank
lol! please stop giving away the smallness of your brainsize, Avee. The article doesn't say anything about "white" Europeans evolving only 1000 years ago, and I definitely didn't see the word "millions" of Europeans 1000 years ago. Did YOU!?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Back to reality...
"And the Cro-Magnons were already racially European, i.e., Caucasoid. This has always been accepted because of the general appearance of the skulls: straight faces, narrow noses, and so forth." (Howells, 1997)
Funny how times change. And the definition of what defines cro-magnon man must have really changed.
"The importance of the skeleton of the Cro- Magnon type is that in stature, prognathism and shape of the orbits they exhibit approximation to the negro type more than any other which have been found in Europe.” P. 96 in Isaac Taylor, The Origin of the Aryans, 1914.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The article doesn't say anything about "white" Europeans evolving only 1000 years ago, and I definitely didn't see the word "millions" of Europeans 1000 years ago. Did YOU!?
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Europeans were or rather, were not, present in the world 1000 years ago.lol!
Did you?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: There has been a lot of these kinds of articles on European DNA appearing lately:
quote: DNA sequenced from nearly 40 ancient skeletons has shed light on the complex prehistoric events that shaped modern European populations.
A study of remains from Central Europe suggests the foundations of the modern gene pool were laid down between 4,000 and 2,000 BC - in Neolithic times.
These changes were likely brought about by the rapid growth and movement of some populations.
The work by an international team is published in Nature Communications.
Decades of study of the DNA patterns of modern Europeans suggests two major events in prehistory significantly affected the continent's genetic landscape: its initial peopling by hunter-gatherers in Palaeolithic times (35,000 years ago) and a wave of migration by Near Eastern farmers some 6,000 years ago. (in the early Neolithic)
Family tree
Analysis of DNA from ancient remains in Central and Northern Europe appears to show that the genetic legacy of the hunter-gatherers was all but erased by later migrations, including pioneer Neolithic farmers but possibly by later waves of people too.
The latest paper reveals that events some time after the initial migration of farmers into Europe did indeed have a major impact on the modern gene pool.
In the study, an international team of researchers focused on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), the information in the cell's "batteries". This type of DNA is passed down, almost unchanged, from a mother to her children.
By studying the mutations, or changes, in mtDNA sequences, researchers are able to probe the maternal histories of different human populations. It has enabled them to build a "family tree" of maternal ancestry, and group different mtDNA lineages together based on shared mutations.
For the latest paper, the authors chose to focus on one of these groupings known as haplogroup H.
Haplogroup H dominates mtDNA variation in Europe. Today, more than 40% of Europeans belong to this genetic "clan", with frequencies much higher in the west of the continent than in the east.
The team selected 37 human remains from the Mitelelbe Saale region of Germany and two from Italy, all of whom belonged to the "H" clan. This area has a very well preserved collection of human skeletons forming a continuous record of habitation across different archaeological cultures since Palaeolithic times.
The remains investigated here span 3,500 years of European prehistory, from the Early Neolithic to the Bronze Age.
Sequencing the mitochondrial genomes of these 39 remains revealed dynamic changes in DNA patterns over time. The team found that the genetic signatures of people from the Early Neolithic period were either rare or absent from modern populations.
And only about 19% of the Early Neolithic remains from Central Europe belonged to the H haplogroup.
But, from the Middle Neolithic onwards, DNA patterns more closely resembled those of people living in the area today, pointing to a major - and previously unrecognised - population upheaval around 4,000 BC.
Co-author Prof Alan Cooper, from the University of Adelaide in Australia, said: "What is intriguing is that the genetic markers of this first pan-European culture, which was clearly very successful, were then suddenly replaced around 4,500 years ago, and we don't know why.
"Something major happened, and the hunt is now on to find out what that was."
Population growth and migration from western Europe may have driven up the frequency of people carrying haplogroup H. Migrant wave
A significant contribution appears to have been made in the Late Neolithic, by populations linked to the so-called Bell Beaker archaeological culture. Sub-types of haplogroup H that are common today first appear with the Beaker people and the overall percentage of individuals belonging to the H clan jumps sharply at this time.
The origins of the "Beaker folk" are the subject of much debate. Despite having been excavated from the Mittelelbe Saale region of Germany, the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
Other remains belonging to the Late Neolithic Unetice culture attest to links with populations further east.
"We have established that the genetic foundations for modern Europe were only established in the Mid-Neolithic, after this major genetic transition around 4000 years ago," said co-author Dr Wolfgang Haak.
"This genetic diversity was then modified further by a series of incoming and expanding cultures from Iberia and Eastern Europe through the Late Neolithic."
Dr Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic Project, which was behind the study, commented: "Studies such as this on ancient remains serve as a valuable adjunct to the work we are doing with modern populations in the Genographic Project.
"While the DNA of people alive today can reveal the end result of their ancestors' ancient movements, to really understand the dynamics of how modern genetic patterns were created we need to study ancient material as well."
Thank you for this information. More proof that there was an sudden change in population genetics about 2000 -2500 BC
"What is intriguing is that the genetic markers of this first pan-European culture, which was clearly very successful, were then suddenly replaced around 4,500 years ago, and we don't know why"
"We have established that the genetic foundations for modern Europe were ONLY ESTABLISHED in the Mid-Neolithic, AFTER this major genetic transition around 4000 years ago," said co-author Dr Wolfgang Haak.
Corresponding to the round-headed bell-beaker people (celts?) who have roots in Central Asia.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ponsford: Modern Europeans seem to have the least genetic diversity..
And apparently some - like Lyin -ss, i.e. Avee - can't handle that fact, or its implications.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
^^^^ his ancestors came from Central Asia
So now your implying Europeans only appeared 4,000 yrs ago blanketing Europe as Negroids? Naaaah - I don't buy that. Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
quote:Funny how times change. And the definition of what defines cro-magnon man must have really changed.
"The importance of the skeleton of the Cro- Magnon type is that in stature, prognathism and shape of the orbits they exhibit approximation to the negro type more than any other which have been found in Europe.” P. 96 in Isaac Taylor, The Origin of the Aryans, 1914.
There's no alveolar prognathism in Cro-Magnon skulls.
Even Diop (1991) has an image comparing Grimaldi to Cro-Magnon and notes: "Compare the prognathism of the two Negroids... to the orthognathism of the Cro-Magnon".
Diop (Ibid):
"The first White appeared only around 20,000 years ago: the Cro-Magnon man".
You talk of "change", but Afrocentrism clearly has. Only 20 years ago, Afrocentrics defined "Blacks" via the Negroid morphology. Suddenly now though you guys are spamming forums claiming "Blacks have thin noses and straight hair", and claiming Cro-Magnons were "Black" [despite the fact they have Caucasoid features].
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
Corresponding to the round-headed bell-beaker people (celts?) who have roots in Central Asia.
dana chile, as I demonstrated with the out of Africa migation map/timeline the first Europeans came into Europe from across southern Russia from Central Asia However nobody says the bell beakers were Central Asian, Stop making up stuff, thanks
most scientists believe that they originated in Iberia as the quote from the article Doug posted verifies:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote: the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
Ancient Europeans mysteriously vanished 4,500 years ago Published April 23, 2013 - LiveScience
The genetic lineage of Europe mysteriously transformed about 4,500 years ago, new research suggests.
" people sweeping out from Turkey colonized Europe, likely as a part of the agricultural revolution, reaching Germany about 7,500 years ago"
"about 5,000 to 4,000 years ago, the genetic profile changes radically, suggesting that some mysterious event led to a huge turnover in the population that made up Europe. The Bell Beaker culture, which emerged from the Iberian Peninsula around 2800 B.C., may have played a role in this genetic turnover"
The people who "disappeared" were themselves a wave of migants from the Turkey region who only arrived 7,500 years ago
lioness productions, updating yo ass daily Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
35 KYA
^^^^ his ancestors came from Central Asia
So now your implying Europeans only appeared 4,000 yrs ago blanketing Europe as Negroids? Naaaah - I don't buy that.
No silly Negroids evolved into Caucasoids by then. Much of Europe became depopulated during the last glacial maxium 15-20kya. Recent research suggests that skin depigmentation occured 6-12,000 years ago. During the LGM, last glacial maximum people retreated areas in southern Europe called "refugia"
refugia
(dark red) Solutrean and Proto-Solutrean Cultures
(purple) Epi-Gravettian Culture
8500 KYA Mesolithic man from Murzak-Koba, Crimea, reconstruction Gerasimov
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
^^^^ his ancestors came from Central Asia
So now your implying Europeans only appeared 4,000 yrs ago blanketing Europe as Negroids? Naaaah - I don't buy that.
No silly Negroids evolved into Caucasoids by then. Much of Europe became depopulated during the last glacial maxium 15-20kya. Recent research suggests that skin depigmentation occured 6-12,000 years ago. During the LGM, last glacial maximum people retreated areas in southern Europe called "refugia"
refugia
(dark red) Solutrean and Proto-Solutrean Cultures
(purple) Epi-Gravettian Culture
Caucasoid and Negroid refer to facial morphology Lyin- ss it is a shame that you can not accept that. The man you showed as was thus a Negroid and not a Caucasoid.
There is no such thing as race Avee, only populations. I don't know how many times I have to say it.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
^^^^ his ancestors came from Central Asia
So now your implying Europeans only appeared 4,000 yrs ago blanketing Europe as Negroids? Naaaah - I don't buy that.
No silly Negroids evolved into Caucasoids by then. Much of Europe became depopulated during the last glacial maxium 15-20kya. Recent research suggests that skin depigmentation occured 6-12,000 years ago. During the LGM, last glacial maximum people retreated areas in southern Europe called "refugia"
refugia
(dark red) Solutrean and Proto-Solutrean Cultures
(purple) Epi-Gravettian Culture
Caucasoid and Negroid are only viable terms as facial and other morphological characterizations, Lyin- SS. it is a shame that you can not accept that. The man you showed as was thus a Negroid and not a Caucasoid.
There is no such thing as race Avee, only populations. I don't know how many times I have to say it. And that earliest of Eurasian populations still apparently retained its African NEGROID characteristics, and like the article states doesn't become distinguishably modern European i.e. until a much later period than u would like to accept.
Though it hurts you need to get used to it.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
dana you are getting very thick here. lioness productions onward and upward 35,000 years is a long span of time an there is a process going on you might look into called "evolution" Features can change within that time as the fossil record attests, lioness productions/museum of natural history to the fullest
I didn't say anything about race, lioness productions reigns supreme. You used the term "Negroid" first so I used it in trying to use terms you are comfortable with and said were "viable terms" tillbaka ner innan du blir smackade ner
Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
quote:And that earliest of Eurasian populations still apparently retained its African NEGROID characteristics
Have you ever looked at the Upper Palaeolithic fossil record?
Where are these mythical Negroids, or Negroid traits?
Yea, there's the two Grimaldi. However there's a controversy over their reconstruction.
"Some anthropologists (e.g. Vlcek 1965, Legoux 1962, 1963) have argued that the "negroid" characteristics of the Grimaldi have been distorted by incorrect reconstruction." (Jelinek et al., 1969)
Legoux, P. (1962). Nouvelle etude anthro- pologique des "Negroides de Grimaldi." Comptes Rendus des Siances de l'Academie des Sciences, Paris 225: 2276-77.
Legoux, P. (1963). Étude odontologique de la race de Grimaldi. Bulletin du Musée d'Antropologie Préhistorique de Monaco 10: 63-121.
Indeed Legoux' own reconstruction of Grimaldi, shows the nasal indices as much lower in the Caucasoid range, and virtually no prognathism.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Back to reality...
"And the Cro-Magnons were already racially European, i.e., Caucasoid. This has always been accepted because of the general appearance of the skulls: straight faces, narrow noses, and so forth." (Howells, 1997)
Sorry but modern forensic specialists don't agree with Carleton Coon think-alikes. You need to stay off the Racial "Reality" site if you want to make your points. Howells who got his degree in about 1934 is just about one step up from Coon using morphometric analysis to classify populations into "RACES" such as Caucasoid, Mongoloid, etc. So quoting from him means about as much to modern anthropologists reliant on discrete genetically determined traits as quoting from the much maligned Coon.
Only the Neandernutzies have been doing that.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
quote:And that earliest of Eurasian populations still apparently retained its African NEGROID characteristics
Have you ever looked at the Upper Palaeolithic fossil record?
Where are these mythical Negroids, or Negroid traits?
Yea, there's the two Grimaldi. However there's a controversy over their reconstruction.
"Some anthropologists (e.g. Vlcek 1965, Legoux 1962, 1963) have argued that the "negroid" characteristics of the Grimaldi have been distorted by incorrect reconstruction." (Jelinek et al., 1969)
Legoux, P. (1962). Nouvelle etude anthro- pologique des "Negroides de Grimaldi." Comptes Rendus des Siances de l'Academie des Sciences, Paris 225: 2276-77.
Legoux, P. (1963). Étude odontologique de la race de Grimaldi. Bulletin du Musée d'Antropologie Préhistorique de Monaco 10: 63-121.
Indeed Legoux' own reconstruction of Grimaldi, shows the nasal indices as much lower in the Caucasoid range, and virtually no prognathism.
I wonder if somebody distorted the Grimaldi statues hair and buttocks as well (as the Olmec's noses and lips).
If their noses were in the Caucasoid rance so is a Turkana's and Shilluk's.
Be for real!
Lastly do you think just because an African moves into the Levant and northward it's going to magically turn "Caucasoid" . You people have to start using some sense before you rant about "afroloons". Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Dhoxie bro, because you say so doesn’t make it so. He! He! He! Not all of us are like an Ostrich. Some us do believe Dinosaurs did exist, why, because of the bones we see in museums.
quote:Originally posted by DHDoxies: No XYYman you stupid White people hating, kill Whitey, Black racist Black supremacist, Whites do NOT come from Central Asia, it is NOT our homeland, Europe IS our homeland. Stop trying to steal my people's history, our heritage, our identities, our homeland. Also stop fricking slandering me calling me a he when I'am and always have been a she.
Mike you stupid White people hating Black racist moron why don't you & XYYman go kill some Whiteys like you desire to do & stop trying to steal others' stuff. White people ARE Europans with European origins. There was NO genocide of Blacks in Europe or the Americas. Stop trying to commit cultural genocide against my people & the Amerindians.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: There has been a lot of these kinds of articles on European DNA appearing lately:
quote: DNA sequenced from nearly 40 ancient skeletons has shed light on the complex prehistoric events that shaped modern European populations.
A study of remains from Central Europe suggests the foundations of the modern gene pool were laid down between 4,000 and 2,000 BC - in Neolithic times.
These changes were likely brought about by the rapid growth and movement of some populations.
The work by an international team is published in Nature Communications.
Decades of study of the DNA patterns of modern Europeans suggests two major events in prehistory significantly affected the continent's genetic landscape: its initial peopling by hunter-gatherers in Palaeolithic times (35,000 years ago) and a wave of migration by Near Eastern farmers some 6,000 years ago. (in the early Neolithic)
Family tree
Analysis of DNA from ancient remains in Central and Northern Europe appears to show that the genetic legacy of the hunter-gatherers was all but erased by later migrations, including pioneer Neolithic farmers but possibly by later waves of people too.
The latest paper reveals that events some time after the initial migration of farmers into Europe did indeed have a major impact on the modern gene pool.
In the study, an international team of researchers focused on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), the information in the cell's "batteries". This type of DNA is passed down, almost unchanged, from a mother to her children.
By studying the mutations, or changes, in mtDNA sequences, researchers are able to probe the maternal histories of different human populations. It has enabled them to build a "family tree" of maternal ancestry, and group different mtDNA lineages together based on shared mutations.
For the latest paper, the authors chose to focus on one of these groupings known as haplogroup H.
Haplogroup H dominates mtDNA variation in Europe. Today, more than 40% of Europeans belong to this genetic "clan", with frequencies much higher in the west of the continent than in the east.
The team selected 37 human remains from the Mitelelbe Saale region of Germany and two from Italy, all of whom belonged to the "H" clan. This area has a very well preserved collection of human skeletons forming a continuous record of habitation across different archaeological cultures since Palaeolithic times.
The remains investigated here span 3,500 years of European prehistory, from the Early Neolithic to the Bronze Age.
Sequencing the mitochondrial genomes of these 39 remains revealed dynamic changes in DNA patterns over time. The team found that the genetic signatures of people from the Early Neolithic period were either rare or absent from modern populations.
And only about 19% of the Early Neolithic remains from Central Europe belonged to the H haplogroup.
But, from the Middle Neolithic onwards, DNA patterns more closely resembled those of people living in the area today, pointing to a major - and previously unrecognised - population upheaval around 4,000 BC.
Co-author Prof Alan Cooper, from the University of Adelaide in Australia, said: "What is intriguing is that the genetic markers of this first pan-European culture, which was clearly very successful, were then suddenly replaced around 4,500 years ago, and we don't know why.
"Something major happened, and the hunt is now on to find out what that was."
Population growth and migration from western Europe may have driven up the frequency of people carrying haplogroup H. Migrant wave
A significant contribution appears to have been made in the Late Neolithic, by populations linked to the so-called Bell Beaker archaeological culture. Sub-types of haplogroup H that are common today first appear with the Beaker people and the overall percentage of individuals belonging to the H clan jumps sharply at this time.
The origins of the "Beaker folk" are the subject of much debate. Despite having been excavated from the Mittelelbe Saale region of Germany, the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
Other remains belonging to the Late Neolithic Unetice culture attest to links with populations further east.
"We have established that the genetic foundations for modern Europe were only established in the Mid-Neolithic, after this major genetic transition around 4000 years ago," said co-author Dr Wolfgang Haak.
"This genetic diversity was then modified further by a series of incoming and expanding cultures from Iberia and Eastern Europe through the Late Neolithic."
Dr Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic Project, which was behind the study, commented: "Studies such as this on ancient remains serve as a valuable adjunct to the work we are doing with modern populations in the Genographic Project.
"While the DNA of people alive today can reveal the end result of their ancestors' ancient movements, to really understand the dynamics of how modern genetic patterns were created we need to study ancient material as well."
Thank you for this information. More proof that there was an sudden change in population genetics about 2000 -2500 BC
"What is intriguing is that the genetic markers of this first pan-European culture, which was clearly very successful, were then suddenly replaced around 4,500 years ago, and we don't know why"
"We have established that the genetic foundations for modern Europe were ONLY ESTABLISHED in the Mid-Neolithic, AFTER this major genetic transition around 4000 years ago," said co-author Dr Wolfgang Haak.
Corresponding to the round-headed bell-beaker people (celts?) who have roots in Central Asia.
All of which reinforces the fact that Europe was settled as a result of multiple waves of migrations from outside Europe right up until very recently. Which is in direct contradiction to the idea of Europe being the primary origin of various lineages it is primarily the recipient of lineages.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
quote:Funny how times change. And the definition of what defines cro-magnon man must have really changed.
"The importance of the skeleton of the Cro- Magnon type is that in stature, prognathism and shape of the orbits they exhibit approximation to the negro type more than any other which have been found in Europe.” P. 96 in Isaac Taylor, The Origin of the Aryans, 1914.
There's no alveolar prognathism in Cro-Magnon skulls.
Even Diop (1991) has an image comparing Grimaldi to Cro-Magnon and notes: "Compare the prognathism of the two Negroids... to the orthognathism of the Cro-Magnon".
Diop (Ibid):
"The first White appeared only around 20,000 years ago: the Cro-Magnon man".
You talk of "change", but Afrocentrism clearly has. Only 20 years ago, Afrocentrics defined "Blacks" via the Negroid morphology. Suddenly now though you guys are spamming forums claiming "Blacks have thin noses and straight hair", and claiming Cro-Magnons were "Black" [despite the fact they have Caucasoid features].
First off Cro-Magnon's had no more Caucasoid features than a Shilluk or Turkana. And many black Central East Africans, Maasaai, Samburu, Iraqw, etc do have thin noses - certainly a lot thinner than many European noses.
You didn't evolve in the Sahara and other hot dry places with a neolithic diet as did many of the blackest peoples on the planet who THEREFORE frequently have orthagnathism, and slender narrow or gracile elongated nasal form and slender gracile or elongated everything.
(These are the features you want us to call Caucasoid).
Second of all don't confuse me with the people on this site going around claiming straight hair as "Negroid" or black. (which doesn't mean it isn't associated with proto-Negroid" or so called "Australoid" blacks).
Lastly, Diop was a great Africanist but he wasn't superman and could only go by what forensics he was familiar with or were available to him at the time.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:The origins of the "Beaker folk" are the subject of much debate. Despite having been excavated from the Mittelelbe Saale region of Germany, the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
All of which reinforces the fact that Europe was settled as a result of multiple waves of migrations from outside Europe
somebody explain to racist Doug that Spain and Portugal are in Europe Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:The origins of the "Beaker folk" are the subject of much debate. Despite having been excavated from the Mittelelbe Saale region of Germany, the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
All of which reinforces the fact that Europe was settled as a result of multiple waves of migrations from outside Europe
somebody explain to racist Doug that Spain and Portugal are in Europe
Actually u are the real racist here, Avee. Why is it racist to understand that people moved into Europe including Spain and Protugal over time in waves, which is exactly what geneticists and forensic anthropologists have been confirming. Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: First off Cro-Magnon's had no more Caucasoid features than a Shilluk or Turkana. And many black Central East Africans, Maasaai, Samburu, Iraqw, etc do have thin noses - certainly a lot thinner than many European noses.
A single Pleistocene fossil doesn't exist in Africa with a low nasal index.
Thin noses aren't a Negroid trait.
Jeeze, you Afronuts can't get that into your thick skulls.
If "Blacks" evolved thin noses, where are the fossils? On the contrary, lower nasal indices appeared very late in Africa with the arrival with Caucasoids - the same for wavy hair.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Why is it racist to understand that people moved into Europe including Spain and Protugal over time in waves, which is exactly what geneticists and forensic anthropologists have been confirming. [/QB]
because Doug misrepresents the article
quote:"This genetic diversity was then modified further by a series of incoming and expanding cultures from Iberia and Eastern Europe through the Late Neolithic."
^^^ this article is NOT saying anything about a much earlier time when people moved into Spain and Protugal. The article is talking a paticular expansion "FROM Iberia and Eastern Europe" into Central Europe.
You and he are trying to twist what the article says
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^What, a pencil nose is now a badge of honor???
To whom exactly?
He,he,he:
Certainly not to fighters, even a girl can break one of those with a sissy punch.
Albinos - they're delusional about everything.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: First off Cro-Magnon's had no more Caucasoid features than a Shilluk or Turkana. And many black Central East Africans, Maasaai, Samburu, Iraqw, etc do have thin noses - certainly a lot thinner than many European noses.
A single Pleistocene fossil doesn't exist in Africa with a low nasal index.
Thin noses aren't a Negroid trait.
Jeeze, you Afronuts can't get that into your thick skulls.
If "Blacks" evolved thin noses, where are the fossils? On the contrary, lower nasal indices appeared very late in Africa with the arrival with Caucasoids - the same for wavy hair.
No, you are actually the nut.
Negroid traits are defined as having broad flat or platyrrhine or chamaerrhine nasal index, and especially with prognathism.
And according to that description many black sub-Saharan people in Africa are not NEGROID. GET IT?!
Narrow nosed people can hardly be found in the most ancient Egypt because of course those blacks had mostly broad noses w some degree of prognathism, but long narrow noses can be found in places like the Elmenteitan and other cultures created by black Africans.
"they are represented by the Gamble's Cave and Naivasha skeletons, as well as the skeleton from Olduvai in northern Tanganyika. They were tall and dolichocephalic, with long face and narrow nose (the 'Elmenteitan type')" from good 'ole Sonia Cole
Maybe you need to delve more into some of your favorite scientists Coon and Howells, if you don't know about narrow nasal indexes of ancient East African populations as in Elmenteitan culture. Then try to figure out why they are found in their books with names like Races of Europe and Origin of Races.
"The role of tall, linearly built populations in eastern Africa's prehistory has always been debated. Traditionally, they are viewed as late migrants into the area. But as there is better palaeoanthropological and linguistic documentation for the earlier presence of these populations than for any other group in eastern Africa, it is far more likely that they are indigenous eastern Africans. ... prehistoric linear populations show resemblances to both Upper Pleistocene eastern African fossils and present-day, non-Bantu-speaking groups in eastern Africa, with minor differences stemming from changes in overall robusticity of the dentition and skeleton. This suggests a longstanding tradition of linear populations in eastern Africa, contributing to the indigenous development of cultural and biological diversity from the Pleistocene up to the present." (L . A . SCHEPARTZ, "Who were the later Pleistocene eastern Africans?" The African Archaeological Review, 6 (1988), pp. 57- 72)
“. This is especially clear in the case of individuals from Bromhead's Site, Willey's Kopje, and Nakuru, and the evidence HARDLY SUGGESTS post-Pleistocene domination of the Rift and surrounding territory by "Mediterranean" Caucasoids, as has been claimed. Recent linguistic and archaeological findings are also reviewed, and these seem to support application of the term Nilotic Negro to the early Rift populations." (Rightmire GP. New studies of post-Pleistocene human skeletal remains from the Rift Valley, Kenya. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1975 May;42(3):351-69. )
BTW - I already mentioned a noted a lot of this in Egypt Child of Africa and I'm really getting tired of having to repeat over and over the confirmation of modern European scholarship.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: First off Cro-Magnon's had no more Caucasoid features than a Shilluk or Turkana. And many black Central East Africans, Maasaai, Samburu, Iraqw, etc do have thin noses - certainly a lot thinner than many European noses.
A single Pleistocene fossil doesn't exist in Africa with a low nasal index.
Thin noses aren't a Negroid trait.
Jeeze, you Afronuts can't get that into your thick skulls.
If "Blacks" evolved thin noses, where are the fossils? On the contrary, lower nasal indices appeared very late in Africa with the arrival with Caucasoids - the same for wavy hair.
what about this reconstruction of an early Euroepan?
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Why is it racist to understand that people moved into Europe including Spain and Protugal over time in waves, which is exactly what geneticists and forensic anthropologists have been confirming.
because Doug misrepresents the article
quote:"This genetic diversity was then modified further by a series of incoming and expanding cultures from Iberia and Eastern Europe through the Late Neolithic."
^^^ this article is NOT saying anything about a much earlier time when people moved into Spain and Protugal. The article is talking a paticular expansion "FROM Iberia and Eastern Europe" into Central Europe.
You and he are trying to twist what the article says [/QB]
Doug first off, wasn't making a statement about what the article's focus was and thus your statement does not take away the fact that science is now proving waves of people moved into Europe assisting in the formation of its current genetic diversity.
Obviously not just by WAY OF Iberia. Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
Corresponding to the round-headed bell-beaker people (celts?) who have roots in Central Asia.
dana chile, as I demonstrated with the out of Africa migation map/timeline the first Europeans came into Europe from across southern Russia from Central Asia However nobody says the bell beakers were Central Asian, Stop making up stuff, thanks
most scientists believe that they originated in Iberia as the quote from the article Doug posted verifies:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote: the Beaker individuals in this study showed close genetic similarities with people from modern Spain and Portugal.
[b]
[/i] [/QUOTE]
True - "This idea not only challenges traditional views of a linguistic spread of Celtic westwards from Central Europe during the Iron Age, but also implies that Indo-European languages arrived in Western Europe substantially earlier, presumably with the arrival of farming from the Near East."
And this doesn't change the fact that the present diversity in Europe - including Iberia was due to waves of IN -COMING migration.
I guess you are hoping that early Bell Beaker broad heads are the first Europeans too though. Right, Avee.
In truth they don't know what components originally made up the Bell Beaker culture. Most of them were originally broad headed people but it really depended on the region.
I like what this guy says, "The fact that the Basque are high in R1b means that R1b arrived in the region surely pre-Indo-European (which arrives in these regions by 1200 BCE), but perhaps as late as the Chalcolithic (ca. 3200-2900 BCE) expanding with the proto-Basque who could be the Bell Beaker people. This would be two or three thousand years after the first farmers in many of these places."
We can also consider the studies showing diversity of Bell Beaker people themselves "At this period during the Late Neolithic (ca. 2,800–2,000 BC), regionally distinctive burial patterns associated with two different cultural groups emerge, Bell Beaker and Corded Ware, and may reflect differences in how these societies were organized. Ancient DNA analyses of human remains from the Late Neolithic Bell Beaker site of Kromsdorf, Germany showed distinct mitochondrial haplotypes for six individuals, which were classified under the haplogroups I1, K1, T1, U2, U5, and W5, and two males were identified as belonging to the Y haplogroup R1b. In contrast to other Late Neolithic societies in Europe emphasizing maintenance of BIOLOGICAL RELATEDNESS in mortuary contexts, the diversity of maternal haplotypes evident at Kromsdorf suggests that burial practices of Bell Beaker communities operated outside of social norms based on shared maternal lineages."
"Emerging genetic patterns of the european neolithic: Perspectives from a late neolithic bell beaker burial site in Germany", American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Esther J. Lee et al.
Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
quote: "they are represented by the Gamble's Cave and Naivasha skeletons, as well as the skeleton from Olduvai in northern Tanganyika. They were tall and dolichocephalic, with long face and narrow nose (the 'Elmenteitan type')" from good 'ole Sonia Cole
Olduvai doesn't have a narrow nose. The rest are post-Pleistocene. You're just proving my point: no Pleistocene or Palaeolithic skull exists in Africa that has a low nasal index. Narrow noses only arrived post-Pleistocene, with the arrival of Caucasoids in significant numbers.
The two narrow nosed specimens from Gamble's Cave II, date between 8,000 - 6,000 BC (Rightmare, 1975), they aren't Pleistocene.
The Elmenteitan crania, date 9,000 BC (again, Righmare). They aren't Pleistocene either.
While two of the Gamble's Cave are leptorrhine, note the following criticism by Rightmare:
quote:Of the five Gamble's Cave skeletons, only two could be reconstructed, and this job was carried out in England after the material had been sent there from East Africa. Results were certainly far from perfect, owing to warping and crushing of the original bone, and further insult was to follow. The Royal College of Surgeons in London and the skeletal collections housed there received heavy bomb damage during World War II. So by the time that the skulls were transferred to the British Museum (Natural History) in 1948, they were scarcely in mint condition. Skull number 4 is the less well preserved of the two, and all of the base as well as a substantial portion of the facial skeleton are present only in plaster. Distortion renders this specimen quite unfit for measurement. Number 5 also lacks much of the skull base, and the missing parts have been heavily reconstructed. Although these skulls have been called non-Negro in morphology, the evidence is certainly far from clear cut, and any such diagnosis is questionable by virtue of the state of the material alone.
Funny how Afronut quote Rightmare (1975) but forget to include this passage from him... the crania were bombed to pieces and no reconstruction has proven to be reliable. Rightmare questions the status of these as thin nosed.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Update,
quote:It has been proposed that heat adapted, relatively long-legged Homo sapiens from Africa replaced the cold adapted, relatively short-legged Homo neandertalensis of the Levant and Europe
--[J Hum Evol 32 (1997a) 423], Bogin B, Rios L. et al.
quote:The subsequent post-28,000-B.P. Gravettian human sample of Europe includes numerous associated skeletons (Table 2) (Zilhão & Trinkaus 2002). Most of these specimens are fully modern in their morphology, and there is a persistence in them of both linear (equatorial) limb proportions and more "African" nasal morphology (Trinkaus 1981, Holliday 1997, Franciscus 2003). However, one Iberian specimen (Lagar Velho 1) exhibits Neandertal limb segment proportions and a series of relatively archaic cranial and postcranial features (Trinkaus & Zilhão 2002). In addition, central incisor shoveling, ubiquitous among the Neandertals, absent in the Qafzeh-Skhul sample, and variably present in the earlier European sample, persists at modest frequencies. And scapular axillary border dorsal sulci, an apparently Neandertal feature also absent in the Qafzeh-Skhul sample, is present (Trinkaus 2005)."
quote: The out-of-Africa scenario1 has hitherto provided little evidence for the precise route by which modern humans left Africa. Two major routes of dispersal have been hypothesized: one through North Africa into the Levant, documented by fossil remains2, and one through Ethiopia along South Asia, for which little, if any, evidence exists3. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) can be used to trace maternal ancestry. The geographic distribution and variation of mtDNAs can be highly informative in defining potential range expansions and migration routes in the distant past. The mitochondrial haplogroup M, first regarded as an ancient marker of East-Asian origin4, 5, has been found at high frequency in India6 and Ethiopia7, raising the question of its origin.(A haplogroup is a group of haplotypes that share some sequence variations.) Its variation and geographical distribution suggest that Asian haplogroup M separated from eastern-African haplogroup M more than 50,000 years ago. Two other variants (489C and 10873C) also support a single origin of haplogroup M in Africa. These findings, together with the virtual absence of haplogroup M in the Levant and its high frequency in the South-Arabian peninsula, render M the first genetic indicator for the hypothesized exit route from Africa through eastern Africa/western India. This was possibly the only successful early dispersal event of modern humans out of Africa.
--Norman A. Johnson (2007) Darwinian Detectives: Revealing the Natural History of Genes and Genomes pg100
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
EARLY MODERN HUMANS
Erik Trinkaus [...]
Annual Review of Anthropology Vol. 34: 207-30 (Volume publication date: October 2005) First published online as a Review in Advance on June 14, 2005 DOI: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.030905.154913
ABSTRACT
quote:Abstract Perceptions of the emergence and spread of modern humans have changed recently through the reanalysis of fossils, an improved geochronological framework, and the discovery of a few specimens. Early modern humans in various portions of the Old World exhibit complex and varying mosaics of archaic, modern, and regional morphological characteristics. On the basis of this pattern, in conjunction with the emerging chronology of the earliest modern humans, the paleontological data indicate an assimilation model for modern human origins, in which the earliest modern humans emerged in eastern Africa, dispersed briefly into southwestern Asia, and then subsequently spread into the remainder of Africa and southern Asia, eventually into higher latitude Eurasia. The earliest modern humans outside of the core area of eastern Africa can be understood only if a variable degree of admixture with regional groups of late archaic humans occurred. Current and expected fossil and molecular data are unlikely to illuminate the degree of assimilation that took place in most regions of the Old World. However, the current chronological and phylogenetic framework provides the basis for ongoing investigation of the nature of this Late Pleistocene transitional period.
quote:"The European early modern humans at least 28,000 years old exhibit parietal expansion, clear parietal bosses, absence of nuchal tori with variable development of an external occipital protuberance, large and laterally bulbous mastoid processes, superiorly positioned and horizontal temporal zygomatic processes, reduced nasal breadths, some facial shortening, angled zygomatic bones with clear canine fossae, a projecting tuber symphyseos, reduced upper limb muscularity, and formation of a femoral pilaster (Szombathy 1925; Rainer & Simionescu 1942; Vallois 1958; Nicolaescu-Plopsor 1968; Frayer 1986; Garralda et al. 1992; Trinkaus et al. 2003a,b, 2005a,b; E. Trinkaus, personal observations). Although most of these crania (N = 6) lack a supraorbital torus, one is present on Cioclovina 1. In addition, the preserved nasal apertures appear tropical in their lack of a clear angulation of the inferior sill (Franciscus 2003, Trinkaus et al. 2003a), and biomechanical scaling of the Mladec limb remains indicates linear bodies (Trinkaus et al. 2005b); both features support substantial and relatively recent tropical (probably African) ancestry.
--Erik Trinkaus. Annual Review of Anthropology. Palo Alto: 2005. Vol. 34 pg. 207, 24 pgs
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
quote: "they are represented by the Gamble's Cave and Naivasha skeletons, as well as the skeleton from Olduvai in northern Tanganyika. They were tall and dolichocephalic, with long face and narrow nose (the 'Elmenteitan type')" from good 'ole Sonia Cole
Olduvai doesn't have a narrow nose. The rest are post-Pleistocene. You're just proving my point: no Pleistocene or Palaeolithic skull exists in Africa that has a low nasal index. Narrow noses only arrived post-Pleistocene, with the arrival of Caucasoids in significant numbers.
The two narrow nosed specimens from Gamble's Cave II, date between 8,000 - 6,000 BC (Rightmare, 1975), they aren't Pleistocene.
The Elmenteitan crania, date 9,000 BC (again, Righmare). They aren't Pleistocene either.
While two of the Gamble's Cave are leptorrhine, note the following criticism by Rightmare:
quote:Of the five Gamble's Cave skeletons, only two could be reconstructed, and this job was carried out in England after the material had been sent there from East Africa. Results were certainly far from perfect, owing to warping and crushing of the original bone, and further insult was to follow. The Royal College of Surgeons in London and the skeletal collections housed there received heavy bomb damage during World War II. So by the time that the skulls were transferred to the British Museum (Natural History) in 1948, they were scarcely in mint condition. Skull number 4 is the less well preserved of the two, and all of the base as well as a substantial portion of the facial skeleton are present only in plaster. Distortion renders this specimen quite unfit for measurement. Number 5 also lacks much of the skull base, and the missing parts have been heavily reconstructed. Although these skulls have been called non-Negro in morphology, the evidence is certainly far from clear cut, and any such diagnosis is questionable by virtue of the state of the material alone.
Funny how Afronut quote Rightmare (1975) but forget to include this passage from him... the crania were bombed to pieces and no reconstruction has proven to be reliable. Rightmare questions the status of these as thin nosed.
***
quote:The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery...
The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region... all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions...
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
--Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa (Peoples of the World Series) (1975)
quote:"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:
only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."
--Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa (Peoples of the World Series) (1975)
quote: The cileuliad transsition may date to as early as 250,000 BP in the Kenya Rift Valley (McBrearty et al. 1996). Some central Rift MSA sites may thus span the penultimate interglacial-glacial cycle (isotope stages 7 and 6), including those with significant numbers of handaxes in Marula Valley (table Ib). It should be possible to use obsidian source use patterns at such sites to determine if there are significant
--STANLEY H. AMBROSE, MIDDLE AND LATER STONE AGE SETTLEMENT PATTERNS 1E.i THE CENTRAL RIFT VALLEY
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
Wait...Wait...Wait...So what this study is saying is that modern Europeans such as these...
...Appeared recently??? Is that6 what its saying???
Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins*1
Trenton W. Holliday
Department of Anthropology, The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, U.S.A.
Abstract
Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins*1 Trenton W. Holliday Department of Anthropology, The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, U.S.A. Abstract Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection. Ontogenetic research and migrant studies have demonstrated that body proportions are largely genetically controlled and are under low selective rates; thus studies of body form can provide evidence for evolutionarily short-term dispersals and/or gene flow. Following these observations, competing models of modern human origins yield different predictions concerning body proportion shifts in Late Pleistocene Europe. Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess “tropical” body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. This study tests these predictions via analyses of osteometric data reflective of trunk height and breadth, limb proportions and relative body mass for samples of Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) and Mesolithic (MES) humans and 13 recent African and European populations. Results reveal a clear tendency for the EUP sample to cluster with recent Africans, while LUP and MES samples cluster with recent Europeans. These results refute the hypothesis of local continuity in Europe, and are consistent with an interpretation of elevated gene flow (and population dispersal?) from Africa, followed by subsequent climatic adaptation to colder conditions. These data do not, however, preclude the possibility of some (albeit small) contribution of genes from Neandertals to succeeding populations, as is postulated in Bräuer’s “Afro-European Sapiens” model. Posted by Ponsford (Member # 20191) on :
^^Ancient Europeans mysteriously vanished 4,500 years ago based on mitochondrial dna haplo group H.Modern Europeans do not descend from these ancient ones except for Italy and Spain.Modern Europeans go back only 1,000 years[TMRCA]and are all Identical By Descent[fstIBD].
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
^^^How the heck do modern Europeans only go back 1,000 years ago?
Some people say modern Europeans are descendants of Central Asians. How the heck is that possible?
I thought modern Europeans went back at least 15,000 BC.
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
I do know their were Africana in Europe 6000 BC during the Neolithic era.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: ^^^How the heck do modern Europeans only go back 1,000 years ago?
Some people say modern Europeans are descendants of Central Asians. How the heck is that possible?
I thought modern Europeans went back at least 15,000 BC.
How sad, this poor child foolishly believed his lying brethren, and now, with just the least bit of truth exposed, is now mentally and emotionally adrift.
I do not wish to do any more harm to him, so I will introduce the truth Sloowly.
Son of Ra, start off by reading this page on the migration age, it is not particularly accurate, which is just what you need, to much truth suddenly will only hurt you more.
(Read between the lines and you will see that you came from Asia - Huns and Mongols chased you into Europe).
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: ^^^How the heck do modern Europeans only go back 1,000 years ago?
Some people say modern Europeans are descendants of Central Asians. How the heck is that possible?
I thought modern Europeans went back at least 15,000 BC.
thread topic article quote:
"Scientists who compared DNA samples from people in different parts of the continent found that most had common ancestors living just 1,000 years ago"
^^^^ Dunderhead interpretation =
modern Europeans only go back 1,000 years ago
recent other article: "Ancient Europeans mysteriously vanished 4,500 years ago"
+ dunderhead "only go back 1000 yrs" interpretation =
(4500 years ago = 2487 BC)
(1000 years ago = 1013 AD)
therefore bewteen 2487 BC and 1013 AD a period of 3500 years, Central and Northern Europe was totally vacant, yeah right
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Relax lioness, I will explain everything to you, Just Submit a list of questions.
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
@Mike111
Are you freaking trying to imply that I'm European just because I'm criticizing this study??? I'm NOT European/white. -__-
And as I read your link I don't see anything about Europeans coming from Asia. And do you not know that the Mongel empire controlled parts of Eastern Europe?
Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: ^^^How the heck do modern Europeans only go back 1,000 years ago?
Some people say modern Europeans are descendants of Central Asians. How the heck is that possible?
I thought modern Europeans went back at least 15,000 BC.
thread topic article quote:
"Scientists who compared DNA samples from people in different parts of the continent found that most had common ancestors living just 1,000 years ago"
^^^^ Dunderhead interpretation =
modern Europeans only go back 1,000 years ago
recent other article: "Ancient Europeans mysteriously vanished 4,500 years ago"
+ dunderhead "only go back 1000 yrs" interpretation =
(4500 years ago = 2487 BC)
(1000 years ago = 1013 AD)
therefore bewteen 2487 BC and 1013 AD a period of 3500 years, Central and Northern Europe was totally vacant, yeah right
I see.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Europeans had common ancestors 1,000 years ago Associated PressBy FRANK JORDANS | Associated Press – 1 hr 52 mins ago
Email Share 1 Tweet Print
BERLIN (AP) — Europeans appear to be more closely related than previously thought.
Scientists who compared DNA samples from people in different parts of the continent found that most had common ancestors living just 1,000 years ago.
The results confirm decade-old mathematical models, but will nevertheless come as a surprise to Europeans accustomed to thinking of ancient nations composed of distinct ethnic groups like "Germans," ''Irish" or "Serbs."
"What's remarkable about this is how closely everyone is related to each other," said Graham Coop of the University of California, Davis, who co-wrote the study published Tuesday in the journal PLoS Biology.
Coop and his fellow author Peter Ralph of the University of Southern California used a database containing more than 2,250 genetic samples to look for shared DNA segments that would point to distant shared relatives.
While the number of common genetic ancestors is greater the closer people are to each other, even individuals living 2,000 miles (3,220 kilometers) apart had identical sections of DNA that can be traced back roughly to the Middle Ages.
The findings indicate that there was a steady flow of genetic material between countries as far apart as Turkey and Britain, or Poland and Portugal, even after the great population movements of the first millennium A.D. such as the Saxon and Viking invasions of Britain, and the westward drive of the Huns and Slavic peoples.
The study did find subtle regional variations. For reasons still unclear, Italians and Spaniards appear to be less closely related than most Europeans to people elsewhere on the continent.
"The analysis is pretty convincing. It comes partly from the enormous number of ancestors each one of us have," said Mark A. Jobling, a professor of genetics at the University of Leicester, England, who wasn't involved in the study.
Since the number of ancestors each person has roughly doubles with each generation, "we don't have to go too far back to find someone who features in all of our family trees," he said.
Jobling cited a scientific paper published in 2004 that went so far as to predict that every person on the planet shares ancestors who lived just 4,000 years ago.
Experts say the study's findings need to be compared with what we know about population movements in Europe and elsewhere from other fields, including archeology and linguistics.
"Although, as the authors note, the approach is inherently 'noisy' (i.e. error-prone), it still does give results for European populations that are in reasonable agreement with historical expectations," said Mark Stoneking, a professor evolutionary anthropology at the University of Leipzig, Germany, who also wasn't involved in the study. "It would be interesting to see this applied in situations where we don't have such good historical information."
Coop and Ralph said the findings might change the way Europeans think about their neighbors on a continent that has had its fair share of struggle and strife.
"The basic idea that we're all related much more recently than one might think has been around for a while, but it is not widely appreciated, and still quite surprising to many people, even scientists working in population genetics, including ourselves," they said in an email to The Associated Press. "The fact that we share all our ancestors from a time period where we recognize various ethnic identities also points at how we are like a family — we have our differences, but are all closely related."
Just don't expect news of closer family ties to prompt a surge of brotherly love in Europe or elsewhere.
"There have been many studies that we've been involved in showing that groups which are fighting each other furiously all the time are actually extremely closely genetically related. But that's never had any impact on whether they continue to fight each other," Jobling said.
"So for example Jewish and non-Jewish populations in the Middle East are extremely similar genetically, but to tell them they are genetic close relatives isn't going to change their ways."
Note the part where it says -
"For reasons still unclear, Italians and Spaniards appear to be less closely related than most Europeans to people elsewhere on the continent."
Complementary to this,
Oldest Dutchman found in road excavations
Friday 24 September 2010
quote:Archaeologists in Flevoland have uncovered what they believe may be the oldest human remains ever found in the Netherlands, news agency ANP reports.
Bones from possibly more than one person have been found in a grave, which may date back to between 5,000 and 7,000 BC, the agency said. Other finds in the Swifterbant area are that age, ANP said.
The oldest human remains found in the Netherlands so far is the skeleton of ‘Trijntje’ found in Hardinxveld-Giessendam and dating to 5,500 BC.
The Swifterbant excavations have uncovered a mid-Stone Age camp, with thousands of flints, arrow-heads and other remains. They are being carried out in the route of a new road between Alkmaar and Zwolle.
What may be the oldest fragments of the modern human genome found yet have now been revealed — DNA from the 7,000-year-old bones of two cavemen unearthed in Spain, researchers say.
These findings suggest the cavemen there were not the ancestors of the people found in the region today, investigators added.
Scientists have recently sequenced the genomes of our closest extinct relatives, the Neanderthals and the Denisovans. When it came to our lineage, the oldest modern human genomes recovered yet came from Ötzi the Iceman, a 5,300-year-old mummy found in the Alps in 1991. Researchers have salvaged DNA from even older human cells, but this comes from the mitochondria that generate energy for our bodies, and not from the nucleus where our chromosomes are housed. (Mitochondrial DNA is passed down only by mothers.)
Now researchers have rescued fragments of genomes from the remains of two cavemen unearthed in northern Spain.
"These are the oldest partial genomes from modern human prehistory," researcher Carles Lalueza-Fox, a paleogeneticist at the Spanish National Research Council, told LiveScience.
The skeletons of two young adult males were discovered by chance in 2006 by cave explorers in a cavern high in the Cantabrian mountain range, whose main entrance is found at 4,920 feet (1,500 meters) altitude. Winters there are notably cold, which helped preserve the DNA in the bones.
These bones date back to the Mesolithic period, before agriculture spread to the Iberian Peninsula with Neolithic settlers from the Middle East. These cavemen were hunter-gatherers, judging by the ornament that one was found with of red-deer canines embroidered onto a cloth.
The scientists recovered 1.34 percent and 0.5 percent of the human genomes from the bones of these two cave men. Analyses revealed that current populations of the Iberian Peninsula, which includes Spain, Portugal and Andorra, are not genetically linked with these ancient hunter-gatherers. Instead, these cavemen were closer genetically to the current populations of northern Europe.
"There are many works that claim the Basques [of the Iberian Peninsula] could be descendants from Mesolithics that became isolated in the Basque country," Lalueza-Fox said. "We found the modern Basques are genetically not related to these two individuals."
The scientists also recovered the complete mitochondrial DNA of one of these cavemen. This revealed that European populations during the Mesolithic were very uniform genetically.
"Despite their geographical distance, individuals from the regions corresponding to the current England, Germany, Lithuania, Poland and Spain shared the same mitochondrial lineage," Lalueza-Fox said. "These hunters-gatherers shared nomadic habits and had a common origin."
The researchers now aim to complete the genomes of both cavemen. Such data could help "explore genes that have been modified with the arrival of the Neolithic in the European populations," Lalueza-Fox said.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
