...
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 Explorer: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: Agree, but it should be noted that the Ibero-Maurusians are likely not cold-adapted [i]in their limbs[/i].[/QUOTE]Well, what an interesting turn of events. For several threads you were senselessly fidgeting and crying like a baby about the idea of Mesolithic Maghrebi having "tropical body proportions", as something like that would have most definitely contradicted your fantasy story of these folks having no physiological relations with "sub-Saharan" Africans. Nice to see that progress is being forced into your throat, however slow and begrudgingly. :) [QUOTE] Mesolithic European and East Asians fossils also have relatively high limb proportions. In fact, [b]Mesolithic Europeans have much higher crural and brachial indices than Ibero-Maurusians[/b]. Their crural and brachial index are at 85.5% and 77.5 respectively per Holiday 1997.[/QUOTE]Rubbish. If we consider pooled Mesolithic North African limb proportions, as I noted above, the average was 78 and 85, for brachial and crural indexes respectively. The Taforalt brachial index is reportedly similar to the 76.3 of the Nazlet Khater (Hershkovitz et al.), while as noted above, the Taforalt range for crural indexes was even higher than that reported for the Afalou, which was said to range from 82.4 to 87.1. BTW, who are these Mesolithic Europeans. Name them! [QUOTE] Its simply a pleisiomorphic trait from their Upper Palaeolithic ancestors, and ultimate from Africans. What you want to look at is their bodyplan in its entirety or their absolute limb length, both of which are unlikely to retain a plesiomorphic state for as long as limb proportions. [i]Additionally, [b]brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length,[/b] and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and [b]Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans,[/b] they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs. The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length [b]is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.[/b][/i] --Holiday, 1999[/QUOTE]As a matter of fact, the Ohalo II H2 specimen, if it's any indicator of what a Levantine population was like in the Upper Paleolithic, bears sub-tropical limb proportions, while the Mesolithic Maghrebi series have longer limb bones than the Natufians [who seem to have higher limb proportions than the Ohalo specimen], as evidenced by the femoral size. Long lower-limb bones suggests that the EpiPaleolithic Maghreb series were relatively linear in stature, as compared to their contemporaries in the Levant, while the Holliday piece above suggests that body linearity seems to have become less of an attribute in the later early Europeans. So, your attempt at trying to portray the Mesolithic Maghrebi series as extensions of Eurasians is proving to be a fiasco. But all this is a distraction. We must not lose focus over the fact that the tropical body proportions in fact points to affinities that you denied were there between Mesolithic Maghrebi series and "sub-Saharans". [/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