...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Kemet
»
Beware of the New Surge of 'Information War'
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Ish Gebor: LALALA, the same article says: [i]The haplogroup of PM1 falls within the U clade [Fig. 1B and Supplementary Table 3], which derived from the macro-haplogroup N possibly connected to the Out of Africa migration around 60–70 ky cal BP1,2,3,4 [/i] And NO specimen has been tested in Africa. And the FACT remains that U6a2 is most common in East Africa!!!!!!!! lol [/QUOTE]Everything outside of Africa is connected to the Out of Africa migration. Does that mean every haplogroup is African in origin? You think it does but it does not connection ≠ origin If a human being leaves Africa and then a mutation occurs outside of Africa, that mutation is not African and that is what these haplogroups are, mutations that occur in various places and JK2888 is B.C. 97-2 of the Ptolemaic period [/qb][/QUOTE]Your favorite website: [QUOTE] The largely intact facial bones indicate a woman with "rugged traits". This mosaic of features mirrors that seen in the Peștera cu Oase find, indicating possible Neanderthal admixture or generally robust (archaic) traits (or both).[2] The early date makes the find referable to the early Cro-Magnon group of finds. On the basis of radiocarbon dating and also the analysis of the archaeological context, some researchers advanced the hypothesis of the association of these bones with Cro-Magnons and the Aurignacian archaeological culture. Others mention the possibility that these findings could belong to a certain regional culture from the Southern Carpathians, from the period of the Final Middle Paleolithic and Early Upper Paleolithic. [/QUOTE]—wiki The Pre-Aurignacian and Mousterian originated in Africa. [QUOTE] [b] Recently, the Libyan MSA has been divided into two phases (Garcea, 2010): an early Middle Stone Age, defined by open air sites in the Central Sahara and some sites in caves on the Mediterranean coast, such as the Haua Fteah (where it was identified as MSA with a Levallois technology, and Pre-Aurignacian with Levallois, discoid and blade technology); and a recent MSA phase that corresponds to the Aterian (Garcea, 2010: 37). This classification requires further testing.[/b] In Libya, two Aterian and one MSA occurrences have been dated to the ‘Late Aterian Phase’: Jebel Gharbi (85e43 ka), and the Fazzan caves of Uan Tabu and Uan Afuda; the former has Aterian levels dated to 61 ` 10 ka, while at Uan Afuda an MSA level is dated to 90e 70 ka (Martini et al., 1998; di Lernia, 1999; Garcea, 2001). Else- where, a broad late Middle/Upper Pleistocene date of 150e40 ka has been proposed for the Aterian occupation of the Adrar Bous in Niger (Williams, 2008), and 70e40 ka in Egypt (Hawkins, 2001). Therefore, the current consensus view would suggest that the Aterian is a North African lithic tradition that follows a generalized local MSA tradition at the beginning of the last interglacial (MIS5d/ c), although as mentioned above, sites such as Ifri n’Ammar may be indicative of an earlier Aterian presence. The few dated stratigraphic sequences further point to important discontinuities between these two phases of MSA and MSA/Aterian occupation. These apparent discontinuities in chronology and technology between the MSA and the Aterian in North Africa raise the question of the nature of the relationship between the two industries. The traditional interpretation has been that the Aterian represents a local facies of the North African Mousterian, sometimes described as an ‘evolved Mousterian’ (Tixier, 1959; Balout, 1965), or as an ‘Epi- Mousterian’ (Bordes, 1961). From a technological perspective, the characterization of the generalized North African MP/MSA is not simple. Techno-typological definitions of the non-Aterian MP/MSA industries in the Maghreb are unclear: Aumassip (2001) suggests a relative rarity of retouched tools and a relatively high frequency of sidescrapers, while for others abundant and diversified side- scrapers mainly produced on Levallois blanks are what characterize non-Aterian MP/MSA assemblages in the area (Wengler, 2010: 68). However, non-Aterian regional variation in the MSA is high. Aumassip (2004) identifies a number of traditions within a scheme of Mousterian variation very similar to European Mousterian facies e (a) Mousterian of Acheulean tradition, rich in small bifaces and Levallois debitage, frequent in Morocco and the Maghrebian Sahara; (b) Denticulate Mousterian in Egypt and the Maghreb, rich in denticulates and notches; (c) Typical Mousterian across North Africa; (d) Ferrassie-type Mousterian in the Maghreb, rich in scrapers and points and without bifaces; (e) Nubian Mousterian in Egypt and Sudan, characterized by the Levallois production of Nubian points, as well as (f) the Khormusan, a distinct facies of the Sudanese record (Marks, 1968; Goder-Goldeger, 2013). However, Aumassip’s classification of the non-Aterian MP/MSA of North Africa has been criticized on the grounds that it uses a European rather than African framework, and specifically excludes a number of sites from this North African ‘Mousterian’ variation e those described by Clark and others as ‘Middle Stone Age’ in Niger and Mali, and a set of very localized industries, such as those from M’zab and Dede in Algeria. To these, one could add the Pre-Aurignacian of Cyrenaica (McBurney, 1967). This highlights the point made earlier, that to understand the Aterian and its relationship to the MSA requires a broader comparative approach to technology, and that comparative framework must be Africa. Aterian origins have usually been thought to lie in the Maghreb (Debènath et al., 1986; Pasty, 1997), although this view has been strongly criticized (Kleindienst, 1998: 8). Alternative origins have been suggested in sub-Saharan Africa, pointing to affinities with industries with foliates, such as the Lupemban and Sangoan (Caton- Thompson, 1946; Clark, 1982, 2008; Kleindienst, 1998; Wengler, 2010; Garcea, 2012). [b]Sub-Saharan links are pertinent, since all human fossil remains found in association with the Aterian are those of H. sapiens, thus representing one of the main regional early human populations of Africa prior to the colonization of Eurasia.[/b] [IMG]http://origin-ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1040618212033848-gr1.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://origin-ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1040618212033848-gr2.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://origin-ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1040618212033848-gr3.jpg[/IMG] [/QUOTE]—Robert A. Foleya, José Manuel Maíllo-Fernándezb, Marta Mirazón Lahra Volume 300, 25 June 2013, Pages 153–170 The Middle Palaeolithic in the Desert The Middle Stone Age of the Central Sahara: Biogeographical opportunities and technological strategies in later human evolution http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040618212033848 [/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