...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Europe's little known mini-ice age in history
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mindovermatter: [QB] ^^^^^he he he he he he he he he he he he, same old Liarness using cherry picking and flawed and pick and choose pictures and clues and arguments to make lies and more lies and lying flawed arguments; even when all the DIRECT EVIDENCE has been offered thus far, you intentionally ignore it and then intentionally pick and choose stuff that supports and expands your own agenda! EVEN WHEN THERE IS OTHER EVIDENCE THAT CONTRADICTS AND GOES AGAINST IT THAT IS POSTED HERE. AND EVEN IGNORE STUFF THAT I SAID, LIKE THE FACT THAT THE NEOLITHIC BLACK FARMER TYPE POPULATIONS WERE DISPLACED AND ERADICATED BY THE FACTORS THAT I DESCRIBED IN THIS THREAD! And it becomes OBVIOUS TO ANYONE READING THIS THREAD! AND YOU ALSO MAKE LIES UP AS WELL AS YOU GO ALONG! LIKE HERE: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26823-More-evidence-of-genetic-discontinuity-between-Neolithic-and-modern-Europeans [QUOTE][b] More evidence of genetic discontinuity between Neolithic and modern Europeans Here is more ancient DNA from the Danubian Neolithic. The remains come from the Great Hungarian Plain and date from circa 6000 BCE, so approximately 500 years before the Linear Pottery Culture (LBK). They are therefore the oldest Neolithic DNA from Europe so far, and the second from Hungary (Haak et al. 2005 found a single N1a1b sample). This time they were able to test 23 samples and identify five haplogroups. All of them are extremely rare in Europe today : N9a, N1a, C5, D1/G1a and M/R24. This is an astonishing array of haplogroups to say the least. Although N1a has popped up frequently in Neolithic sites from Western and central Europe before, and is still common in the Caucasus nowadays, the others are typical of various regions Asia and not normally found in the same population. - N9a has a very wide range. It is found all the way from East Asian (including China, Japan, Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia) to Eastern Europe, via Central Asia. - C5 is more typical of Northern and Central Asia, but is also found at very low frequencies in Eastern and Central Europe. - D1/G1 : G1 and D1 are both typical of Siberia and Northeast Asia. - R24 is normally found in the Philippines (never heard of other places), so it's probably a mistake. I cannot see how any of these haplogroups besides N1a could be of Near Eastern origin. It's more likely that a group of Siberian or Central Asian Palaeolithic nomads reached Hungary and were absorbed by the West Asian herders/farmers who had barely arrived in the region. Unfortunately the abstract doesn't say how many individuals of each haplogroup there were. I suppose that N1a was in higher proportion than the rest. comment: These mt dna results are indeed unusual for Europe today, but in general terms, as the title of the thread itself indicates, this is just the latest in a line of scholarly articles showing the discontinuity between modern populations and ancient ones. Paleolithic mt dna seems to be quite different from Neolithic mtdna, which is again different from modern mt dna. The same was found to be true for Etruscan and modern Tuscan populations as the overall distributions were very different. (although there was continuity between early medieval results and modern Tuscan results). The extinction rate for mtdna is high (see Oetzi's results for example) and certain lineages can, even in a very short time, become highly under or over represented, as this study done on Icelandic mt dna makes clear, and this is true even absent any significant migration. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...HGv72p1370.pdf The same is true for y-dna, although perhaps not to as great an extent. One member of the amateur community recently did a mathematical analysis to illustrate just that. A population of 1000 males undergoes 4 percent per generation growth for past 150 generations, resulting in 370,000 males today. With sufficient dna tags (STRs, SNPs, etc) one could imagine each of those 1000 original males representing a distinctive genetic y line. What do we see today among those 370,000 descendants in the way of distinct original lines? 87 percent of those 1000 lines went extinct; they are gone from today’s population. The most populous represented original line accounts for 4.4 percent of today’s population. The 10 most populous lines represented today account for 24.1 percent of the 370,000. And the 20 most populous lines represent 40.6 percent of the 370,000. The above results indicate the very strong creation of demographic “winners” and “losers” of y lines based solely on statistical flucuations --- before any other factors are brought into consideration. This source of demographic winners versus losers must be understood before speculations about connnections of populous y haplogroups today to migrating, militarily advanced, technically advanced, culturally advanced......... etc. tribes of the distant past can be even tried intelligently. I couldn't agree more. "Originally Posted by Angela View Post More vast generalizations with no supporting data. There is no way that you could possibly know that the exact mtDNA lineages of all the adna remains found (all those U4's and U5's for example), still exist, because we don't have the exact lineages for most of them. There is no need to know the exact lineages. It's enough to know that if various Paleolithic, Neolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age sites throughout northern Europe constantly yielded U4 and U5 lineages, while these were never found in the Middle East, the probabilities that modern U4 and U5 lineages descend from Paleolithic northern Europeans are extremely high compared to any other region. Testing the whole mtDNA sequence is useless because : 1) Mutations in mtDNA can occur at any birth. Actually mtDNA is very fickle, and private mutations often occurs within a same individual, so that different cells coming from the same person will not necessarily have the exact same mutations (I have a family member who got 5 different mutations by testing with different companies, although the haplogroup and subclade was always the same). One or two unique private mutations do no mean anything. 2) In several millennia some many mutations should have taken place that it would be dazzling to find lineages that had not evolved at all since then. 3) We can only test a tiny fraction of any ancient population from any period in a given region, due to the scarcity of remains. Since not every individual procreated. Some died from diseases, were killed or just didn't have a chance to have children who reached sexual maturity and procreate too. There is a high chance that a person who lived 8000 years ago didn't pass on her mtDNA to the modern population are quite high. But that doesn't mean that the source population isn't the same ! The important is to be able to determine where and when a lineage originated. Otzi is mtDNA K. Obviously there are many K lineages that still exist today. However, thanks to the preservation of Otzi's remains, detailed tests could be done, and the result is that for now his specific lineage appears to be extinct. Actually it is too soon to tell if Ötzi's mtDNA is still present in the modern population or not, because not enough people were tested for the whole mtDNA sequence, especially around the Alps and in the Middle East. Anyway, Ötzi being a man, he couldn't have passed his mtDNA. How do we know that some (distant) female cousins had the mutations that made him K1ö ? It doesn't rule out that modern K1 Europeans descend from the same Central European Neolithic/Chalcolithic culture which Ötzi belonged to. Of course, neither is it proven, for now, that those adna lineages are, indeed, extinct. What we do know, however, based on actual research, is that certain lineages, at least in certain areas, do indeed go extinct, some predominate, and others become minor lineages. Also, for now, the process appears to be random. (Did you bother to read the paper?) We also know, from mathematical modeling, that this should not be a surprise. Without a much better understanding of the statistical fluctuations, the actual mutational processes involved, what role, if any, selection plays etc. etc., all these speculations of this or that superior tribe moving to x or y area, are just fairy tales, and usually fairy tales based on some jingoistic or racist agenda. This whole hobby is really getting to be a waste of time. Mathematical models and statistical analysis may work well for theoretical phenomenons, or even physical and chemical ones, but they are not suited to the study of human history. There are many reasons for that. 1) Y-DNA and mtDNA lineages can prosper or go extinct simply for evolutionary reasons. MtDNA especially seems to be linked to adaptation to the environment (climate, diseases). People move and climate changes. This cannot be predicted by mathematics. 2) Whole local lineages are sometimes wiped out by wars, famines or diseases. This also cannot be predicted by mathematics. 3) mathematics do not take into consideration the variations in population sizes over the ages (it could, but we simply do not have the data). Large populations will naturally develop more new mutations. This is the single biggest problem encountered by mathematicians who tried to calculate the age of haplogroups based on the number of mutations (such as STR variances). The evolution of human society is so complex and linked to so many external factors that trying to understand it through mathematics is futile. It would be like trying to understand economics with the help of chemical laws. The important is always to look at the bigger picture and keep one's common sense. Most of the Neolithic studies from the Danubian region have yielded mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups that are now rare in the European population. This, I think, is enough to say that there is a strong discontinuity of lineages between the Neolithic period and now in that particular region. Just to be clear, 'discontinuity' here doesn't mean that modern people do not descend at all from Neolithic people. It means that only a (small) minority of their genes (at least based on mtDNA and Y-DNA) were inherited from them. [/b][/QUOTE] http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000536 [QUOTE][b] Bayesian Serial Simcoal Analysis While an apparent affinity of Neolithic farmers to modern-day Near East populations is revealed by the shared haplotype analyses, PCA, MDS, and genetic distance maps, the population-specific pairwise FST values among ancient populations (hunter–gatherers and LBK) and the modern population pools (Central Europe and Near East) tested were all significant (p>0.05; Table 3), suggesting a degree of genetic discontinuity between ancient and modern-day populations. The early farmers were closer to the modern Near Eastern pool (FST = 0.03019) than hunter–gatherers were (FST = 0.04192), while both ancient populations showed similar differences to modern Central Europe, with the hunter–gatherers slightly closer (FST = 0.03445) than the early farmers (FST = 0.03958). The most striking difference was seen between Mesolithic hunter–gatherers and the LBK population itself (FST = 0.09298), as previously shown [20].[/b][/QUOTE] http://www.pnas.org/content/100/11/6593 [QUOTE][b] Evidence for a genetic discontinuity between Neandertals and 24,000-year-old anatomically modern Europeans Abstract During the late Pleistocene, early anatomically modern humans coexisted in Europe with the anatomically archaic Neandertals for some thousand years. Under the recent variants of the multiregional model of human evolution, modern and archaic forms were different but related populations within a single evolving species, and both have contributed to the gene pool of current humans. Conversely, the Out-of-Africa model considers the transition between Neandertals and anatomically modern humans as the result of a demographic replacement, and hence it predicts a genetic discontinuity between them. Following the most stringent current standards for validation of ancient DNA sequences, we typed the mtDNA hypervariable region I of two anatomically modern Homo sapiens sapiens individuals of the Cro-Magnon type dated at about 23 and 25 thousand years ago. Here we show that the mtDNAs of these individuals fall well within the range of variation of today's humans, but differ sharply from the available sequences of the chronologically closer Neandertals. This discontinuity is difficult to reconcile with the hypothesis that both Neandertals and early anatomically modern humans contributed to the current European gene pool.[/b][/QUOTE]Also Liarness, MODERN MIDDLE EASTERN POPULATIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH NEOLITHIC MIDDLE EASTERN POPULATIONS! IT'S A HISTORICAL FACT THAT MANY MARAUDING AND INVADING GROUPS SETTLED AND LEFT A GENETIC PRESENCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST REGIONS FROM THE MAMLUK AND OTTOMAN TURKS, TO EUROPEAN COLONISTS AND CRUSADER's LIKE THE FRENCH/NORMANS/ENGLISH, TO WHITE INDO-EUROPEAN GROUPS LIKE THE SCYTHIANS AND CIMMERIANS, TO THE PARTHIANS, AND THE KURDS, TO THE MONGOLS etc etc, OVER THE VAST TIME SPAN FROM THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO WHEN MIDDLE EASTERN FARMER POPULATIONS EXPANDED INTO EUROPE TILL TODAY! THUS MODERN MIDDLE EASTERN POPULATIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ANCIENT NEOLITHIC FARMER MENA POPULATIONS AS SIMPLE LOGIC DICTATES TO US! Illustrated here: http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/imperial-history.html AND HERE: [QUOTE][b] You dumbed it down well. Turk & Mongol Rule (930 - 1534) http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/images/turkish_seljuk_empire.jpg http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/images/kurd_ayyubid_dynasty.jpg http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/images/mongol_ilkhanate_empire.jpg http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/images/turk_rule.jpg http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/turk_mongol_rule.htm Ottoman Empire in Iraq (1534 - 1917) http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/images/ottoman_empire.jpg http://www.worldology.com/Iraq/ottoman_empire.htm [/b][/QUOTE]And the FACT THAT MANY OF THESE MONGREL MUTT MIDDLE EASTERN POPULATIONS ARE SO DARK TODAY AND HAVE MANY DARK LOOKING SUBSETS OF THEIR POPULATION; PROVE THAT THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THE MIDDLE EAST AREA WERE BLACK/COLORED PEOPLE AND EVEN GENETICS SUPPORTS THAT! THIS IS HOW THE NEOLITHIC BLACK EUROPEAN FARMER TYPE POPULATIONS LOOKED LIKE AND PROBABLY ACTUALLY DID! [QUOTE]Originally posted by Mindovermatter: [qb] More: Benedict the Moor (about 1526 in San Fratello in Messina in Italy): [IMG]http://www.katakombe.net/images/benediktus_moor/santo%20benediktus%20orang%20moor3.jpg[/IMG] Coat of arms of Uettingen 6 June 1966: [IMG]http://www.firmendb.de/grafik/wappen/orte/wappen_uettingen.png[/IMG] Coat of arms of the Bishop of Freising, Bavaria Germany: [IMG]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/b5/a2/2f/b5a22fc796e55f6c43f086e03b5b6fed.jpg[/IMG] In gold and black diagonally left divided blade Ethiopian lion in confused color, a green branch with both hands", early 19th century?: [IMG]https://www.kommunalnet.at/fileadmin/media/Bilder/Themen/Bilder_aus_Gemeinden/2016/Abfaltersbach_Tirol/Abfaltersbach_Wappen_BR_ZVG_web_.jpg[/IMG] Coat of arms of the Freising county of Germany, Munchen region: [IMG]http://www.freistaat.bayern/bilder/0660469469665[/IMG] Coat of arms of the city of Lauingen (1270): [IMG]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/7d/4e/c6/7d4ec6e99a3d582804f695eedfa536ad.jpg[/IMG] Coat of arms of Pappenheim (1251): [IMG]http://de.academic.ru/pictures/dewiki/49/180px-Wappen_Pappenheim.png[/IMG] The Adoration of the Magi, Dutch 1515-25: [IMG]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/474x/34/55/80/345580a4da5060d5ebcaea0d9d6ac8ba.jpg[/IMG] [/qb][/QUOTE] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3