...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Genetic Closeness of the East/West African SNP population clusters (blog source)
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Dead: [qb] [QUOTE]You've been told that modern day Sub Saharan Africans have the lowest expression of so called "continuity" traits (e.g. infraglabellar notch, supraorbital torus, overall robusticity), which have been used in the past to gauge cranio-facial similarity of modern humans to regional archaic humans.[/QUOTE]Then why are the earliest "anatomically modern" fossils claimed to derive from Sub-Saharan Africa? Between 200,000-40,000 BP., virtually all fossils from Sub-Saharan Africa are still "robust"/"archaic", or at least retain plenty of the latter features even if there are some discernable "modern" traits in the morphology: "It is often claimed that “AMHs” date from up to 200 ka ago, yet [b]no such specimens exist[/b]. The skulls from Omo Kibish offer some relatively modern features as well as substantially archaic ones; especially Omo 2 is very robust indeed (McDougall et al., 2005). Their dating, also, is not secure, and Omo 2 is a surface find. The much more complete and better dated Herto skull, BOU-VP- 16/1, is outside the range of all recent humans in several cranial measurements (White et al., 2003)—and is just as archaic as other specimens of the late Middle Pleistocene, in Africa or elsewhere. [b]The lack of “anatomically modern” humans from sub-Saharan Africa prior to the supposed Exodus is glaring[/b]: the Border Cave specimens have no stratigraphic context; Dar es Soltan is undated; and the mandibles of Klasies River Mouth lack cranial and post-cranial remains. The Hofmeyr skull from South Africa, about 36 ka old, features 'intermediate' morphol- ogy (Grine et al., 2007, 2010)." (Bednarik, 2013) Skulls in Sub-Saharan Africa are not even "anatomically modern human" by Stringer's criteria as recent as 40,000 years ago. [/qb][/QUOTE]Not that what you say above is true ([URL=http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.030905.154913]early UP modern humans from all regions have remnant "archaic" traits, not just the African ones[/URL]) I have no idea how what you're saying relates to my post, which says that MODERN DAY SSAs have a relatively low expression of so called continuity traits. Moreover, you're talking about ancient African skulls failing to cluster with modern African ones. You don't want to open that can of worms buddy, trust me: [IMG]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R_BZZam1jlk/Urwk1uI31XI/AAAAAAAACVM/_LI7YcKEdZU/s1600/Lochsbourskull.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://s17.postimg.org/pxd7w0dcf/5_12_2014_15_30_33.png[/IMG] ^Some Mesolithic Europeans (Lochsbour & Moča) [/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