...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample (Holliday 2013)
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: Other than the fact that it doesn't bespeak sense to attempt to juxtapose bodyplan related data with (isolated) cranio-metric data, you're not being truthful. What you're not telling everyone is that the Afalou sample included individuals with brachycephaly, and I quote: ''[i]But brachycephalism was not an unknown characteristic in Algeria in the Epipalaeolithic period, for a small number of brachycephalic individuals have been found at Afalou and Columnata[/i]'' --Physical Anthropology of European Populations, 1980, p259 The same can be said of your other comparisons; you're comparing population averages with a single specimen, without having taken into account whether the Ohalo falls within the range of the Ibero-Maurusian group. In addition, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about, as you're clumsily presenting your excerpts as 'Natufian vs Ibero-Maurusian', even though the Ohalo II specimen isn't even Natufian. Brings to mind your earlier confused misrepresentation of nasal breadth data as ''nasal index''. [/QB][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^^ Interesting that Ain Dokhara Capsian cluster with Africans yet they came later in the Maghreb than the Mechta-Afalou Iberomaurusian who cluster with Alaskan Eskimo groups, Koniag, Ipiutak an Tigara.[/QUOTE]Again, clarity on the traits under study is warranted, but it should be noted that the Afalou series have generally been found to have similar or close attributes with the Taforalt series, even though there are certainly peculiarities [in trends] respective to each series; as such, they have generally been pooled as a composite group, and have been found to have clearly distinct body proportions from their contemporaries like the Natufians, or even other Levantine types, like the Ohalo II H2 specimen possibly represents. How so, one might ask? The Mesolithic Maghreb series lean more towards the tropical Africans, when limb proportions are considered. Against such a backdrop, I'd caution the prospect of the Afalou clustering with the likes of Alaskan groups, which tend to be fairly "cold-adapted" by many accounts, in a limb proportions comparison. [/qb][/QUOTE]yet it icould be consistent with the Brenna Henn back migration hypothesis, the reason for the cold adapted limb ratios and also brachycephalism of some of the Afalou ( as well as Achilli 2005 finding common U5 hgs between Lapps (Saami) and berber) Capsians, referred in the article to as Ain Dokhara ,on the other hand, who replaced the Iberomaurusian according to this dendogram did have tropical limb ratios. However there is a 2000 year or more gap in the archaeological record between any green period hunter forager such as the Iberomaurusian or Capsians and modern Maghrebians although some continuity is possible. Some of this is provisional as per this article of now because at this point it appears that Truthcentric is the only one who has read the whole article so far. And limb ratios for certain groups can be hard to find or not well researched. San for one I'm not sure about. By well researched I mean a decent sample with raw data numerical indices recorded note: Explorer seem to have quoted some things from> http://www.academia.edu/431095/Skeletal_robusticity_in_the_Epipalaeolithic_of_North_Africa_and_the_Levant [/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