posted
Ignorant one - Please provide proof that the White man and the Mongol evolved from the Black man. This is not a religious school you know - proof is required. I say White people and Mongols are devils from outer space. How will you prove that a creature with white skin, straight hair, narrow nose, narrow lips, and an inhuman mind is descendant from the Black man who is the opposite of these things? he he.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Ignorant one - Please provide proof that the White man and the Mongol evolved from the Black man. This is not a religious school you know - proof is required. I say White people and Mongols are devils from outer space. How will you prove that a creature with white skin, straight hair, narrow nose, narrow lips, and an inhuman mind is descendant from the Black man who is the opposite of these things? he he.
Obviously as I mentioned, the poor kid Mike suffers from racism retardation, therefore not allowing his feeble mind to accept the FACTS of OOA, which proves all humans alive today can trace their lineages every single genetic lineage back to Africa. This is OOA Mike, you nitwit. This has been explained to you over and over and over again. But like a child who doesn't want to learn, you remain ignorant.
posted
Knowledgeiskey718 Quote: Obviously as I mentioned, the poor kid Mike suffers from racism retardation, therefore not allowing his feeble mind to accept the FACTS of OOA, which proves all humans alive today can trace their lineages every single genetic lineage back to Africa. This is OOA Mike, you nitwit. This has been explained to you over and over and over again. But like a child who doesn't want to learn, you remain ignorant.
^^^So the White man says: But where and when exactly did the Black man STOP being Black, and began being White and Yellow? I mean exactly which haplogroup - or anything else for that matter, shows this transition - or was it an overnight thing - you know; one morning he woke up looked in a stream and discovered that he had changed color. He was White and his buddy down stream was yellow. BTW - How come one of them became White and the other Yellow? Why weren't they BOTH White or BOTH yellow. Come to think of it, why weren't they multi-colored like Birds and other creatures. After all, once the need for melanin is removed, any color would work.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Genetic Evidence for the Convergent Evolution of Light Skin in Europeans and East Asians
Heather L. Norton*,1, Rick A. Kittles{dagger}, Esteban Parra{ddagger}, Paul McKeigue§, Xianyun Mao*, Keith Cheng||,¶, Victor A. Canfield¶, Daniel G. Bradley#, Brian McEvoy# and Mark D. Shriver*
Human skin pigmentation shows a strong positive correlation with ultraviolet radiation intensity, suggesting that variation in skin color is, at least partially, due to adaptation via natural selection. We investigated the evolution of pigmentation variation by testing for the presence of ***positive directional selection in 6 pigmentation genes*** using an empirical FST approach, through an ***examination of global diversity patterns of these genes*** in the Centre d'Etude du Polymorphisme Humain (CEPH)-Diversity Panel, and by exploring signatures of selection in data from the International HapMap project. Additionally, we demonstrated a role for MATP in determining normal skin pigmentation variation using admixture mapping methods. Taken together (with the results of previous admixture mapping studies), these results point to the importance of several genes in shaping the pigmentation phenotype and a complex evolutionary history involving strong selection. Polymorphisms in 2 genes, ASIP and OCA2, may play a shared role in shaping light and dark pigmentation across the globe, whereas SLC24A5, MATP, and TYR have a predominant role in the evolution of light skin in Europeans but not in East Asians. These findings support a case for the recent convergent evolution of a lighter pigmentation phenotype in Europeans and East Asians.
^^^^This above study is discussed in this below article that has been explained to you a thousand times..
Dr. Wells, of the National Geographic Society, said Dr. Pritchard's results were fascinating and would help anthropologists explain the immense diversity of human populations even though their genes are generally similar. The relative handful of selected genes that Dr. Pritchard's study has pinpointed may hold the answer, he said, adding, "Each gene has a story of some pressure we adapted to."
Dr. Wells is gathering DNA from across the globe to map in finer detail the genetic variation brought to light by the HapMap project.
Dr. Pritchard's list of selected genes also includes five that affect skin color. The selected versions of the genes occur solely in Europeans and are presumably responsible for pale skin. Anthropologists have generally assumed that the first modern humans to arrive in Europe some 45,000 years ago had the dark skin of their African origins, but soon acquired the paler skin needed to admit sunlight for vitamin D synthesis.
The finding of five skin genes selected 6,600 years ago could imply that Europeans acquired their pale skin much more recently. Or, the selected genes may have been a reinforcement of a process established earlier, Dr. Pritchard said. The five genes show no sign of selective pressure in East Asians.
Because Chinese and Japanese are also pale, Dr. Pritchard said, evolution must have accomplished the same goal in those populations by working through different genes or by changing the same genes — but many thousands of years before, so that the signal of selection is no longer visible to the new test.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
[Argyl writes] If you want to understand the 3 fruitcakes known as Clyde Winters, Marc Washington, and Egmund Codfried see below.
They are beatdown AAs. Clyde, Marc, and Egmond are ashamed of Africa. You see whites have told them that "blacks" in Africa are primitive, hapless, dumb, worthless, wretched people who are nothing but slaves to the rest of the world.
[Marc writes] Fruitcakes? Worthless? You can’t engage in polite, honest discourse as in saying, for instance, “Clyde, Marc, and Egmond have all said, a, b, c. I disagree with these opinions because of x, y, z.”
Then, being polite, inquire of Clyde, Egmond, or myself to explain these points.
This is the first time you have ever mentioned my name. You’ve never requested that I explain some point you disagree with.
Also, take care (if your desire is to engage in honest discourse) not to resort to name-calling after the second or third communication as is typically done with Elmer, Rasol, and Knowledge. Becoming rude only inflames animosities.
As your first introduction to me was one of crudity, then, I will return the favor:
. .
-------------------- The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation. Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^Knowledgeiskey718; you poor ditz. The words: "strong positive correlation" - "is at least partially" - "point to" - "may play a role".
Are NOT used in studies that "prove" something. They are used in studies where the analyzer is guessing. That study is no more valuable than my own, which suggests that White people "May" have come from outer space.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Are NOT used in studies that "prove" something. They are used in studies where the analyzer is guessing.
^ Incorrect, and frankly...quite dumb. All science is based on probability and theory. The language you are ridiculing is in fact the standard cautionary language of all real science.
Your problem is, you don't understand the basis of actual science, which makes you an easy 'sucker' for pseudos like Winters.
The antithesis of this appoach is Clyde Winters, who might say something like *It is clear that Abraham Lincoln was Black*.
In Winters case there is and inverse relationship between expressed confidence, and supporting evidence.
A perceptive individual can detect this - but, a sucker, like you cannot.
Winters thrives on your brand of naiveté.
When Winters claims something is true - there is a strong corellation with a *lack of actual evidence*.
Winter is also a faker and a coward. He made false claims about genetic evidence based upon confusing mtdna and y chromosome. When his error was pointed out, he didn't admit it, and he couldn't deny it.
He just hid, and waited for the subject to change in hopes that dupes like you would forget his mistakes.
He always does this.
He's a straight up charleton, and you're a huge fool for crediting him, when your intelligence should enable you to see thru his nonsense.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since you have reading comprehension problems, I will break it down for you. This following strong correlation is a scientific fact as skin color does correlate with ultraviolet radiation intensity. Which is why many lightskin A.A's and hispanics(or anyone human population with melanin, moving to northern latitudes) become darker in the summer, and lighter in the winter.
"Human skin pigmentation shows a strong positive correlation with ultraviolet radiation intensity, suggesting that variation in skin color is, at least partially, due to adaptation via natural selection. "
The scientist investigated the presence of 6 genes which are responsible in pigmentation, the genes studied were also tested in each population worldwide.
"We investigated the evolution of pigmentation variation by testing for the presence of ***positive directional selection in 6 pigmentation genes*** using an empirical FST approach, through an ***examination of global diversity patterns of these genes*** in the Centre d'Etude du Polymorphisme Humain (CEPH)-Diversity Panel, and by exploring signatures of selection in data from the International HapMap project."
This below discusses what is already known data and correlating it with new findings, this happens all the time in science Mike.
Additionally, we demonstrated a role for MATP in determining normal skin pigmentation variation using admixture mapping methods. Taken together (with the results of previous admixture mapping studies), these results point to the importance of several genes in shaping the pigmentation phenotype and a complex evolutionary history involving strong selection.
The below shows genes which are present in human populations worldwide and may play a shared role in pigmentation around the world. Wasn't direct towards Europeans, so stop the semantics.
Polymorphisms in 2 genes, ASIP and OCA2, may play a shared role in shaping light and dark pigmentation across the globe,
The below are the genes which have a predominant role in the evolution of pale skin in Europeans but not East Asians. With the other identified genes being responsible as well for Asians. Note: Europeans have the following genes which play a predominant role in pale skin in Euros
whereas SLC24A5, MATP, and TYR have a predominant role in the evolution of light skin in Europeans but not in East Asians. These findings support a case for the recent convergent evolution of a lighter pigmentation phenotype in Europeans and East Asians.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Stupid Troll the Andaman Islands are not part of the Sudanese continental shelf.
Southeast Asian Woman
Above is a Southeast Asian woman. She does not in anyway resemble the San and Munda people of India and Andaman Island.
LMAO
The only stupid trolls in here are YOU and your stupid servants, like Mike and Marc!
The Andaman Islands are part of Southeast Asia and geologically part of the Sundanese continental shelf which was formerly the Sundanese subcontinent!
IDIOT!
Also, what does that picture of a modern light-skinned Southeast Asian woman have to do with the issue?! It's nothing but a stupid strawman as the aboriginal peoples of Southeast Asia are black peoples such as the so-called 'Negritos' like the Senoi and Andamanese!!
And what "San" people of India are you talking about?! There are no San of India! The Munda are natives of India, but these people are different from the Andamanese who again don't live in India but in Southeast Asia!!
As usual, you don't have a clue what you talk about and only propagate the lies that are your fantastic wishful thinking!
This is the reason why you are not taken seriously by any of your scholarly peers! And why even Rasol has given up hope for you! Posts: 26307 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rasol and Knowledge, I really don't understand you guys trying to logically converse with the likes of Clyde, Meni, or Mike who obviously have NO comprehension of the science they cite and instead distort science with their own prejudices just like white supremacists!
Perhaps the only reason is maybe to warn the laypeople out there of their shenanigans(?)
Posts: 26307 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
rasol quote: Incorrect, and frankly...quite dumb. All science is based on probability and theory. The language you are ridiculing is in fact the standard cautionary language of all real science.
rasol you a-hole; you make the stuff up as you go. Show me a study that proves a theory, which talks about the probability of it being correct. It's correct ONLY if it can be PROVEN correct you idiot! Anything else is conjecture. But it is in keeping with you as the original ditz (the BIG ditz) - Knowledgeiskey718 is "little" ditz.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Perhaps the only reason is maybe to warn the laypeople out there of their shenanigans(?)
Well, more or less....as explained the poor scholarship - if can be called so - put forth by Clyde, Marc, Mike, Meni etc.. is pseudo-nonsense, and they prey on the misinformed, so to any newcomer entering into this site will be misinformed about OOA, believing crazy distortions that are fed by Clyde and Marc. So now they have a choice, and they can read the information for themselves. Newcomers can make their own correlation from actual facts, and not opinions and distortions from Clyde, Marc etc...
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: Show me a study that proves a theory, which talks about the probability of it being correct. It's correct ONLY if it can be PROVEN correct
Already shown and proven to you. Why do you deny the science, with semantics? Why not discuss the study and analyze it? Is this too hard for you? Ask questions if you don't understand, you won't be shunned, trust me.
Since you have reading comprehension problems, I will break it down for you. This following strong correlation is a scientific fact as skin color does correlate with ultraviolet radiation intensity. Which is why many lightskin A.A's and hispanics(or anyone human population with melanin, moving to northern latitudes) become darker in the summer, and lighter in the winter.
"Human skin pigmentation shows a strong positive correlation with ultraviolet radiation intensity, suggesting that variation in skin color is, at least partially, due to adaptation via natural selection. "
The scientist investigated the presence of 6 genes which are responsible in pigmentation, the genes studied were also tested in each population worldwide.
"We investigated the evolution of pigmentation variation by testing for the presence of ***positive directional selection in 6 pigmentation genes*** using an empirical FST approach, through an ***examination of global diversity patterns of these genes*** in the Centre d'Etude du Polymorphisme Humain (CEPH)-Diversity Panel, and by exploring signatures of selection in data from the International HapMap project."
This below discusses what is already known data and correlating it with new findings, this happens all the time in science Mike.
Additionally, we demonstrated a role for MATP in determining normal skin pigmentation variation using admixture mapping methods. Taken together (with the results of previous admixture mapping studies), these results point to the importance of several genes in shaping the pigmentation phenotype and a complex evolutionary history involving strong selection.
The below shows genes which are present in human populations worldwide and may play a shared role in pigmentation around the world. Wasn't direct towards Europeans, so stop the semantics.
Polymorphisms in 2 genes, ASIP and OCA2, may play a shared role in shaping light and dark pigmentation across the globe,
The below are the genes which have a predominant role in the evolution of pale skin in Europeans but not East Asians. With the other identified genes being responsible as well for Asians. Note: Europeans have the following genes which play a predominant role in pale skin in Euros
whereas SLC24A5, MATP, and TYR have a predominant role in the evolution of light skin in Europeans but not in East Asians. These findings support a case for the recent convergent evolution of a lighter pigmentation phenotype in Europeans and East Asians.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Rasol and Knowledge, I really don't understand you guys trying to logically converse with the likes of Clyde, Meni, or Mike who obviously have NO comprehension of the science they cite and instead distort science with their own prejudices just like white supremacists!
Perhaps the only reason is maybe to warn the laypeople out there of their shenanigans(?)
^ I treat all such ineducable idiots as irrelevant,,, useful only for and as an excuse to teach science to the educable.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Rasol and Knowledge, I really don't understand !!!
Yes, we fully realize this fact Artificial Intelligence DJ. We'll eventually get around to completing your program.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
Wrong again, miseducated child. It is clear that you either skipped 'high school science class' in America, or if you ever attended, you certainly flunked.
Actually a theory may be regarded as valid if it is falsifiable, yet not falsified.
And all theory is science are always subject to future falsification.
Here is what is correct...
Falsifiability (or "refutability") is the logical possibility that an assertion can be shown false by an observation or a physical experiment. That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that if it is false, then this can be shown by observation or experiment. Falsifiability is an important concept in science and the philosophy of science. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL, there is no comparison between the above and the absolute drivel you, KIK and American Patriot post, sans understanding. Einstein presents ORIGINAL theory (actually, I think he stole it) backed by solid math which can easily be checked, while you merely cut and paste other researcher's theories. Try again with something approaching apples to apples.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Einstein presents ORIGINAL theory (actually, I think he stole it)
^ I have no idea of how to regard your jibberish other than as irrelevant contradiction. You capitilise original, then claim something was stolen, err....'you think' (?)
Care to rewrite and so render it coherent, and relevant to mike's claim that science is *not* rooted in probability theory?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
[rASHOL writes] Dr. Winters, your discourse may be suitable for confusing the likes of Marc Washington, but to any serious scholar, it consists of and utterly broken logic.
quote:Einstein's theory of relativity is backed by solid math which can easily be checked
^ Really?
So there is and *easy* way to check the absolute nature of the speed of light, and the relativistic nature of time, which is the basis of the atomic clock..... and which is so qualitatively different than the molecular clock in genetics?
If so, then feel free to explain the difference?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pansy meninarmer: ^ LOL, there is no comparison between the above and the absolute drivel you, KIK and American Patriot post, sans understanding. Einstein presents ORIGINAL theory (actually, I think he stole it) backed by solid math which can easily be checked, while you merely cut and paste other researcher's theories. Try again with something approaching apples to apples.
Pansy's Meninarmer Translation: I hate science, and I hate you guys for understanding science while I'm stuck trying to get this square peg in this round hole.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Clyde stop with the bull sh*t. Almost ALL the research I have posted puts blacks as the first native Americans. So what the hell are you talking about me stealing?
The point is simple, you have NO direct evidence that Africans set foot in the Americas as a result of DIRECT migration from Africa. NONE. All you are doing is guessing. And because you can't PROVE your own hypothesis with SOLID EVIDENCE, you go around and misrepresent other studies and research in order to suit your agenda. Instead of MAKING UP research to prove your point, just FIND SOME REAL EVIDENCE.
You put on a grand show for someone with a theory that has yet to be proven beyond a doubt and all you can do is shuck and jive as opposed to putting in the WORK to see whether that hypothesis holds water.
I can provide better evidence for the first populations of the Americas being from Africa than you can. That is the point.
This science fool. You make a hypothesis then you confirm it.
Let's look at the facts:
1) the Australians represent the OOA population that settled Asia
2) during the OOA event much of Siberia and North America was under ice from 110,000 - 10,000BC. As a result there was no way Siberians could cross Beringa before the end of the ice age
3) Ice even separated much of South America east to west .
. 4) the first Americans appear in Brazil, Chile and Argintina Latin America around 30,000 BC
5)using craniometric evidence it is clear that the first Americans look like Africans not modern Asian Native Americans
6) using craniometrics I have pointed out that Asia was dominated by the Australian population until the rise of Suhulland when the Melanesian people appear in the area, at this time the Beringa was still under Ice
7) I pointed out that the Melanesian type reach East Asian mainland by 5000 BC, long after Africans had settled Latin America
8) between 15,000-12,000 we see numerous African populations in Mexico and Brazil; and skeletons dating to this period have even been found off the Yucatan coast in the Caribbean
9) these first Americans did not look like the Australians or modern Amerinds
10) iconography of PreClassic people like the Cherla, Ocos and other groups is of Negroes not Amerinds like the Maya
11) Amerind groups not associated with African slaves carry African genes
12) Maya carried African y chromosome
13) Chontal Mayan speakers were classified as Negroes by Quatrefages. This may explain why the Maya carry African genes
14)Negrocostachicanos claim that they have never been slaves and are indigenous to Guererro and Oaxaca on the Pacific coast
15) The Dufuna boat makes it clear that Africans probably had the technology to travel to the Americas 15,000 years ago.
16) Fuegians 100-400 BP carried haplogroup A1. Hg A1 is an African haplogroup.
17) Amerinds carry haplogroup N, just like Africans.
18)The y chromosome STRs of the Fuegians include DYS434,DYS437,DYS 439, DYS 393, DYS391,DYS390,DYS19, DYS 389I, DYS389II and DYS 388 (see: Garcia-Bour et al above). Except for DYS390 and DYS388 they are characteristic of haplogroup A1 . A1 is recognized as an African haplogroup.
19)Quatrefages noted numerous African Native American tribes
20)The antiquity of these populations is supported by the ancient iconography found in these countries which are of African Native Americans.
21) Most contemporary populations are descendants of the San people not Australians.
Up to now you have presented no evidence disconfirming any of this evidence all you say is that all Black people look alike and and any dark people in Asia are also Blacks this is stupid. All Black people do not look alike.
.
Clyde stop spamming your theories. Those are all unsubstantiated theories in that brain of yours.
Provide FACTS and EVIDENCE for a 30,000 year old settlement of the Americas. Where is it Clyde, or is the fact you cannot CITE any evidence for this some CONSPIRACY? YOU claim it and therefore YOU must provide the evidence. Which you can't. THAT makes you a fraud. If you CAN'T provide the evidence and you KEEP claiming it, then that also makes you a LIAR. Don't depend on me to prove your theories, prove them yourself as you are the so-called scholar. NO?
Bottom line, you can make claims all you want but that doesn't mean anything with out proof. THAT is what makes you a clown, because you continually take your theories and promote them as fact with NO EVIDENCE and pretend that you have GOT something. All you GOT is hot air.
On top of that you claim that the FIRST remains found in America do not match Australians, which goes AGAINST all the published research. But of course, you are providing NOTHING but your own THEORIES support for this, no research and no EVIDENCE of your own. Again, you DISTORT other studies in order provide support for your theories, as those studies DO NOT support what you are saying. Again, this makes you a liar. That is not science, that is BULL SH*T Clyde.
Theories are not the problem here, it is your CLOWN ACT that you put as some sort of PROOF for these theories. I am not interested in CLOWN ACTS, I want proof.
Fool you don't know what you're talking about.
Several types of blacks entered the Americas including the San, Anu or negrito type and the Proto-Saharan variety of blacks. Up until recently it was believed that the first humans crossed the Bering Strait 12,000 B.P., to enter the North American continent.(Begley 1991, p.15) This view was never accepted by physical anthropologists who have found skeletal remains far older than 12,000 B.P.
Today archaeologists have found sites from Argintina to Chile that range between 20,000 and 40,000 years old. There are numerous sites in South America which are over 35,000 years old (1). These sites are Pedra Furada (c.45,000 B.C.) (2), and Serra Da Capivara 50,000 BP. Given the fact that the earliest dates for habitation of the American continent occur below Canada in South America is highly suggestive of the fact that the earliest settlers on the American continents came from Africa before the Ice melted at the Bering Strait and moved northward as the ice melted.
The early presence of ice-age sites in South America suggest that these people probably came from Africa. This would explain the affinities between African languages and the Amerind family of languages (3).
In very ancient times the American continent was inhabited by Asian and African blacks. The oldest skeletal remains found in the Americas are of blacks. Marquez (1956,p.179) observed that "it is [good] to report that long ago the youthful America was also a Negro continent."
Lanning (1963) noted that "there was a possible movement of negritos from Ecuador into the Piura Valley, north of Chicama and Viru" in early times.
The appearance of pebble tools at Monte verde in Chile (c.32,000 B.P), and rock paintings at Pedra Furada in Brazil (c.22,000 B.P.) and mastodont hunting in Venezuela and Colombia (c.13,000 B.P.), and Dr. Walter Neves’ discovery of a 12,000 year old skeleton of an African woman in Brazil, have led some researchers to believe that the Americas was first settled from South America (4).
C. Vance Haynes noted that:"If people have been in South America for over 30,000 years, or even 20,000 years, why are there so few sites?....One possible answer is that they were so few in number; another is that South America was somehow initially populated from directions other than north until Clovis appeared"(5).
P.S. Martin and R. G. Klein after discussing the evidence of mastodont hunting in Venezuela 13,000 years ago observed that :"The thought that the fossil record of South America is much richer in evidence of early archaeological associations than many believed is indeed provocative .Have the earliest hunters been overlooked in North America? Or did the hunters somehow reach South America first" (6)?
2. Ibid, p.107; "Man's New World arrival Pushed back", Chicago Tribune, (9 May 1991) Sec.1A, p.40;and A.L. Bryan, "Points of Order". Natural History , (June 1987) pp.7-11.
3. Bryan, p.11.
4. C.V. Haynes,Jr.,"Geofacts and Fanny". Natural History ,(February 1988)pp.4-12:12.
5. P.S. Martin and R.G.Klein (eds.),Quarternary Extinctions: A Prehistoric Revolution, (Tucson:University of Arizona Press,1989) p.111.
6. M.Ruhlen,"Voices from the Past". Natural History, (March 1987) pp.6-10:10; J.H. Greenberg,Language in the Americas. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1987.
Tell your hero Dr. Winters to learn the difference between male and female lineages before he puts his foot in his mouth again, and is forced [again] into hiding.
Until then, keep spamming your photochop for dummies, as such brainless pablum is all you'e good for. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718: [qb] [QUOTE] Most native American populations are descended from people like Australian Aborigines Clyde.
Actually, like all modern humans, **ALL** Native Americans are descended from Australian like populations, this is the point Clyde doesn't understand. Clyde thinks all non Africans who don't look African are a result of space aliens, or some crazy deranged theory like Meninarmer or Marc.
quote: As to the similarities with Africans, the best way to explain it in terms of historical connections, is to assume that the **Asian** ancestral population that gave rise to the **Australians** and to the **first Americans** had its ultimate origins in the **African continent**, as it is in fact the case with **ALL*** modern humans (Stringer and Andrews, 1988; Stringer and McKie, 1996; Lahr, 1994, 1996), ***but which retained a very generalized morphology.***In accordance with Lahr (1996), the Australians are in fact the contemporary aboriginal population that retained the most primitive morphology when compared to the first modern humans.As she stressed "Groups like [...] Australo-Melanesians are all examples of relatively early diversifications without great amounts of gene flow from other groups..." (Lahr, 1996, p.335). Clyde you do understand that you didn't address the above, or discuss your claim of A2 and B2 being African in origin, carried by Khoisan and Pygmies respectively. Obviously you were confused -as always- about these genetic markers, which is why you made a delirious conclusion, based on your confusion of Mtdna and Y-dna. I hope you'll understand one day....
I understand this perfectly. You are the one who pretends to be blind to the facts.
Nope, not an answer to your claim of A2 and B2 being African in origin, carried by Khoisan and Pygmies respectively. Obviously you were confused -as always- about these genetic markers, which is why you made a delirious conclusion, based on your confusion of Mtdna and Y-dna. I hope you'll understand one day....
^^^^^I wonder when Clyde will address his Mtdna claim....???
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Winters writes: Fool you don't know what you're talking about.
^ Speaking of which...
Dr. Winters, please explain why you can't understand the difference between mtdna and Y chromosome.
Is science too hard for you?
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Dr. Winters is such a laughable phony.
Notice he ran and hid rather than respound to.....
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Winters: Here's my facts Stupid where are yours?
quote:rasol writes: [Winters] How many times must we tell you to STOP confusing Y chromsome and mtdna???
What is the point of making such stupid remarks when you know you are going to get debunked?
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
This is mtdna: [female] In human genetics, Haplogroup A is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup.
Haplogroup A is believed to have arisen in Asia some 60,000 years before present. Its ancestral haplogroup was Haplogroup N.
This is Y chromosome: [male] In human genetics, Haplogroup A (M91) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup.
Haplogroup A is common among Bushmen.Haplogroup A is localized mainly to Southern Africa with a small to notable presence among a few populations in East Africa.
Do not confuse these two again.
Fact is, you're getting senile and appear to have difficulty retaining facts.
quote:Posted by Clyde Fraud: and Dr. Walter Neves’ discovery of a 12,000 year old skeleton of an African woman in Brazil, have led some researchers to believe that the Americas was first settled from South America (4).
Clyde, here is what Neves proposes, maybe you know something he doesn't know. When will you address it?
quote:The oldest Americans' Negroid traits are not very specialized, making a direct immigration from Africa or Australia unlikely. Therefore, **Neves**(the head proponent for Australia/African like populations reaching America) believes that the America's more than 12,000 years ago did not necessarily occur by sea: "The traditional path across the Bering Strait is still the most plausible explanation for the entry of this non-Mongoloid population into the New World, if we assume that it was present in Northern Asia at the end of the Pleistocene." And indeed, Japan's aborigines, of whom a few still live in Hokkaido and on the Kurile Islands, display some Australian traits, such as round eye sockets and abundant body hair. A genetic comparison might solve the mystery...
''We know that today's Amerindians have ***four main groups***,'' said Dr. Pena, who found a genetic marker common to 17 different widely dispersed Indian groups across the Americans in the course of an earlier project. ''What would constitute molecular proof of ***Walter's (NEVES)*** hypothesis is to find ***DNA sequences COMPLETELY **different** from those ***four groups***.''
Dr. Meltzer said: ''This is clearly the way to resolve the issue. The skull is intriguing morphological evidence, but in order to really nail down this issue of affinity, you need evidence, and ***DNA*** is the way to go.''
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
[rASHOL writes] Dr. Winters, your discourse may be suitable for confusing the likes of Marc Washington, but to any serious scholar, it consists of and utterly broken logic.
[Marc writes] Serious scholar? You? ROFLMAO.
. .
-------------------- The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation. Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Winters writes: Fool you don't know what you're talking about.
^ Speaking of which...
Dr. Winters, please explain why you can't understand the difference between mtdna and Y chromosome.
Is science too hard for you?
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Dr. Winters is such a laughable phony.
Notice he ran and hid rather than respound to.....
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Winters: Here's my facts Stupid where are yours?
quote:rasol writes: [Winters] How many times must we tell you to STOP confusing Y chromsome and mtdna???
What is the point of making such stupid remarks when you know you are going to get debunked?
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
This is mtdna: [female] In human genetics, Haplogroup A is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup.
Haplogroup A is believed to have arisen in Asia some 60,000 years before present. Its ancestral haplogroup was Haplogroup N.
This is Y chromosome: [male] In human genetics, Haplogroup A (M91) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup.
Haplogroup A is common among Bushmen.Haplogroup A is localized mainly to Southern Africa with a small to notable presence among a few populations in East Africa.
Do not confuse these two again.
Fact is, you're getting senile and appear to have difficulty retaining facts.
Wrong again, miseducated child. It is clear that you either skipped 'high school science class' in America, or if you ever attended, you certainly flunked.
Actually a theory may be regarded as valid if it is falsifiable, yet not falsified.
And all theory is science are always subject to future falsification.
Here is what is correct...
Falsifiability (or "refutability") is the logical possibility that an assertion can be shown false by an observation or a physical experiment. That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that if it is false, then this can be shown by observation or experiment. Falsifiability is an important concept in science and the philosophy of science.
Great. Since you understand what science is about falsify the 21 points I have confirmed in support of my hypotheses.
Let's look at the facts:
1) the Australians represent the OOA population that settled Asia
2) during the OOA event much of Siberia and North America was under ice from 110,000 - 10,000BC. As a result there was no way Siberians could cross Beringa before the end of the ice age
3) Ice even separated much of South America east to west .
. 4) the first Americans appear in Brazil, Chile and Argintina Latin America around 30,000 BC
5)using craniometric evidence it is clear that the first Americans look like Africans not modern Asian Native Americans
6) using craniometrics I have pointed out that Asia was dominated by the Australian population until the rise of Suhulland when the Melanesian people appear in the area, at this time the Beringa was still under Ice
7) I pointed out that the Melanesian type reach East Asian mainland by 5000 BC, long after Africans had settled Latin America
8) between 15,000-12,000 we see numerous African populations in Mexico and Brazil; and skeletons dating to this period have even been found off the Yucatan coast in the Caribbean
9) these first Americans did not look like the Australians or modern Amerinds
10) iconography of PreClassic people like the Cherla, Ocos and other groups is of Negroes not Amerinds like the Maya
11) Amerind groups not associated with African slaves carry African genes
12) Maya carried African y chromosome
13) Chontal Mayan speakers were classified as Negroes by Quatrefages. This may explain why the Maya carry African genes
14)Negrocostachicanos claim that they have never been slaves and are indigenous to Guererro and Oaxaca on the Pacific coast
15) The Dufuna boat makes it clear that Africans probably had the technology to travel to the Americas 15,000 years ago.
16) Fuegians 100-400 BP carried haplogroup A1. Hg A1 is an African haplogroup.
17) Amerinds carry haplogroup N, just like Africans.
18)The y chromosome STRs of the Fuegians include DYS434,DYS437,DYS 439, DYS 393, DYS391,DYS390,DYS19, DYS 389I, DYS389II and DYS 388 (see: Garcia-Bour et al above). Except for DYS390 and DYS388 they are characteristic of haplogroup A1 . A1 is recognized as an African haplogroup.
19)Quatrefages noted numerous African Native American tribes
20)The antiquity of these populations is supported by the ancient iconography found in these countries which are of African Native Americans.
21) Most contemporary populations are descendants of the San people not Australians.
quote:Show me a study that proves a theory, which talks about the probability of it being correct.
rasol you idiot - CAN YOU READ?? I will help you. T H E O R Y.
Theory:
1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another2: abstract thought : speculation3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>4 a: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn> b: an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory<in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>6 a: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b: an unproved assumption : conjecture c: a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject.
Proven:
1archaic : to learn or find out by experience2 a: to test the truth, validity, or genuineness of <the exception proves the rule> <prove a will at probate> b: to test the worth or quality of ; specifically : to compare against a standard —sometimes used with up or out c: to check the correctness of (as an arithmetic result)3 a: to establish the existence, truth, or validity of (as by evidence or logic) <prove a theorem> <the charges were never proved in court> b: to demonstrate as having a particular quality or worth <the vaccine has been proven effective after years of tests> <proved herself a great actress>
BTW - This THEORY is NOT universally agreed with. Others have their own theories.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
[rASHOL writes] Dr. Winters, your discourse may be suitable for confusing the likes of Marc Washington, but to any serious scholar, it consists of and utterly broken logic.
[Marc writes] Serious scholar? You? ROFLMAO.
. .
-------------------- The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation. Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Winters writes: Fool you don't know what you're talking about.
^ Speaking of which...
Dr. Winters, please explain why you can't understand the difference between mtdna and Y chromosome.
Is science too hard for you?
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Dr. Winters is such a laughable phony.
Notice he ran and hid rather than respound to.....
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Winters: Here's my facts Stupid where are yours?
quote:rasol writes: [Winters] How many times must we tell you to STOP confusing Y chromsome and mtdna???
What is the point of making such stupid remarks when you know you are going to get debunked?
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
This is mtdna: [female] In human genetics, Haplogroup A is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup.
Haplogroup A is believed to have arisen in Asia some 60,000 years before present. Its ancestral haplogroup was Haplogroup N.
This is Y chromosome: [male] In human genetics, Haplogroup A (M91) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup.
Haplogroup A is common among Bushmen.Haplogroup A is localized mainly to Southern Africa with a small to notable presence among a few populations in East Africa.
Do not confuse these two again.
Fact is, you're getting senile and appear to have difficulty retaining facts.
I am talking about Y-chromosomes.
The Fuegian skeletons carry the same STRs as Africans based on the research literature as evidence I provide two citations.
Citation One (1)
quote: Titre du document / Document title Early population differentiation in extinct aborigines from Tierra del Fuego-Patagonia: Ancient mtDNA sequences and Y-chromosome STR characterization = Différentiation des populations anciennes chez les aborigènes éteints de la Patagonie-Terre de Feu : Séquences d'ADNmt et caractérisation STR du chromosome Y Auteur(s) / Author(s) GARCIA-BOUR Jaume (1) ; PEREZ-PEREZ Alejandro (1) ; ALVAREZ Sara (1) ; FERNANDEZ Eva (1) ; LOPEZ-PARRA Ana Maria (1 2) ; ARROYO-PARDO Eduardo (1 2) ; TURBON Daniel (1) ; Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s) (1) Secció d'Antropologia, Departament de Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, 08028 Barcelona, ESPAGNE (2) Laboratorio de Biologia Forense, Departamento de Toxicología y Legislación Sanitaria, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, ESPAGNE Résumé / Abstract Ancient mtDNA was succesfully recovered from 24 skeletal samples of a total of 60 ancient individuals from Patagonia-Tierra del Fuego, dated to 100-400 years BP, for which consistent amplifications and two-strand sequences were obtained. Y-chromosome STRs (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the biallelic system DYS199 were also amplified, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed. In two samples of the same ethnic group (Aonikenk), an identical and complete eight-loci haplotype was recovered. The DYS199 biallelic system was used as a control of contamination by modern DNA and, along with DYS19, as a marker of American origin. The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs revealed DNA from Amerindian ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central Chile and Argentina, but their high nucleotide diversity and the frequency of single lineages strongly support early genetic differentiation of the Fuegians through combined processes of population bottleneck, isolation, and/or migration, followed by strong genetic drift. This suggests an early genetic diversification of the Fuegians right after their arrival at the southernmost extreme of South America. Revue / Journal Title American journal of physical anthropology ISSN 0002-9483 Source / Source 2004, vol. 123, no4, pp. 361-370 [10 page(s) (article)] (47 ref.)
Here Garcia Bour et al note that: Fuegian Y-chromosomes STRs include “Y-chromosome STRs (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) “
Citation Two (2)
quote: Diversity of Y-STR haplotypes of chromosomes belonging to hgA1 and within the R surname. (a) Relationships of Y-STR haplotypes within hgA1. Weighted median joining network containing the 10-locus Y-STR haplotypes (DYS19, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393, DYS437, DYS438, DYS439, DYS389I, DYS389II-I) of eleven hgA1 chromosomes. Circles represent haplotypes, with area proportional to frequency and colored according to population.
European Journal of Human Genetics (2007) 15, 288–293. doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201771; published online 24 January 2007 Africans in Yorkshire? The deepest-rooting clade of the Y phylogeny within an English genealogy Turi E King1
In this paper, King et al make it clear that the “Y-STR haplotypes (DYS19, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393, DYS437, DYS438, DYS439, DYS389I, DYS389II-I) of eleven hgA1 chromosomes.[/b] “ belong to hg A1.
Note that Garcia Bour et al maintains Fuegians carry these STRs
You don’t have to be brain scientist to recognize that concordance exist between the two sets of STRs.
It stands to reason that if the Fuegians skeletons carry Y-STRs associated with haplogroup A1 which is an African haplogroup, these Fuegians had direct African ancestry.
Researchers have been able to recover samples from 24 out of 60 ancient skeletons from Tierra del Fuega y chromosome STRs were DYS434,DYS437,DYS 439, DYS 393, DYS391,DYS390,DYS19, DYS 389I, DYS389II and DYS 388 (see: Garcia-Bour et al below). Except for DYS390 and DYS388 are characteristic of haplogroup A1 (see: King et al, ).
Above we are looking at Y-chromosomes in both groups. This genetic data make it clear that Negro Fuegians were living in Fuego, 9000 years after Neves believed they had been replaced by mongoloid folk as illustrated by the pictures published above.
**Y-chromosome STRs** (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the **biallelic system** DYS199 ***were also AMPLIFIED***, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed. In two samples of the same ethnic group (Aonikenk), an identical and complete eight-loci haplotype was recovered. The DYS199 biallelic system was used as a control of contamination by modern DNA and, along with DYS19, as a marker of American origin. The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs revealed DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina*** , but their high nucleotide diversity and the frequency of single lineages strongly support early genetic differentiation of the Fuegians through combined processes of population bottleneck, isolation, and/or migration, followed by strong genetic drift. This suggests an early genetic diversification of the Fuegians right after their arrival at the southernmost extreme of South America. Revue / Journal Title American journal of physical anthropology ISSN 0002-9483 Source / Source 2004, vol. 123, no4, pp. 361-370 [10 page(s) (article)] (47 ref.)
Mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms in Chilean aboriginal populations: implications for the peopling of the southern cone of the continent.
The mitochondrial DNAs (mtDNAs) from individuals belonging to three Chilean tribes, the Mapuche, the Pehuenche, and the Yaghan, were studied both by RFLP analysis and D-loop (control region) sequencing. RFLP analysis showed that 3 individuals (1.3%) belonged to haplogroup A, 19 (8%) to haplogroup B, 102 (43%) to haplogroup C, and 113 (47.7%) to haplogroup D. Among the 73 individuals analyzed by D-loop sequencing, we observed 37 different haplotypes defined by 52 polymorphic sites. Joint analysis of data obtained by RFLP and sequencing methods demonstrated that, regardless of the method of analysis, the mtDNA haplotypes of these three contemporary South American aborigine groups clustered into four main haplogroups, in a way similar to those previously described for other Amerindians. These results further revealed the absence of haplogroup A in both the Mapuche and Yaghan as well as the absence of haplogroup B in the Yaghan. These results suggest that the people of Tierra del Fuego are related to tribes from south-central South America.
----------------
quote:Y-chromosome STRs (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the biallelic system DYS199 were also amplified, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed.
The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs **revealed** DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina***
Note Clyde, the Y STRs you're attributing to Fuegians, are actually STR's in which were amplified in the study, but the analysis clearly reveals Mtda and Y-STRs of Native American ancestry, not recent post OOA. Sorry Clyde, just more misinterpretations of genetics on your part.
quote: Y Chromosome-Specific STRs By Leonor Gusmão1 and Angel Carracedo2 1Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia, Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal and 2Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Y-STRs are the most used Y chromosome markers in the forensic field due to their typing simplicity and high level of diversity. STR typing involves simple and reliable polymerase chain reaction (PCR)(a) techniques and is tolerant of very degraded samples. Of all Y chromosome polymorphic STRs described to date, DYS19, DYS385, DYS389I, DYS389II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393 and YCAII have more data accumulated, being the most used in population and forensic genetics. Because of collaborative efforts to construct large databases (see www.ystr.org,www.ystr.org/usa and www.ystr.org/asia), these markers are the best characterized for amplification performance and specificity, multiplex amplification strategies, sequence structure and nomenclature, as well as worldwide allele frequency distributions.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
rasol - This on the other hand is FACTUAL science. A wide variety of samples are tested and the results are given.
Cranial morphology of early Americans from Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Implications for the settlement of the New World
Walter A. Neves* and Mark Hubbe Laborato´ rio de Estudos Evolutivos Humanos, Departamento de Gene´ tica e Biologia Evolutiva, Instituto de Biocieˆ ncias, Universidade de Sa˜o Paulo, 05508-090 Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved October 28, 2005 (received for review August 18, 2005)
Comparative morphological studies of the earliest human skeletons of the New World have shown that, whereas late prehistoric, recent, and present Native Americans tend to exhibit a cranial morphology similar to late and modern Northern Asians (short and wide neurocrania; high, orthognatic and broad faces; and relatively high and narrow orbits and noses), the earliest South Americans tend to be more similar to present Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans (narrow and long neurocrania; prognatic, low faces; and relatively low and broad orbits and noses).
However, most of the previous studies of early American human remains were based on small cranial samples. Herein we compare the largest sample of early American skulls ever studied (81 skulls of the Lagoa Santa region (brazil) with worldwide data sets representing global morphological variation in humans, through three different multivariate analyses. The results obtained from all multivariate analyses confirm a close morphological affinity between South- American Paleoindians and extant Australo-Melanesians groups, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct biological populations could have colonized the New World in the Pleistocene_Holocene transition.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718: [qb] [QUOTE] Most native American populations are descended from people like Australian Aborigines Clyde.
Actually, like all modern humans, **ALL** Native Americans are descended from Australian like populations, this is the point Clyde doesn't understand. Clyde thinks all non Africans who don't look African are a result of space aliens, or some crazy deranged theory like Meninarmer or Marc.
quote: As to the similarities with Africans, the best way to explain it in terms of historical connections, is to assume that the **Asian** ancestral population that gave rise to the **Australians** and to the **first Americans** had its ultimate origins in the **African continent**, as it is in fact the case with **ALL*** modern humans (Stringer and Andrews, 1988; Stringer and McKie, 1996; Lahr, 1994, 1996), ***but which retained a very generalized morphology.***In accordance with Lahr (1996), the Australians are in fact the contemporary aboriginal population that retained the most primitive morphology when compared to the first modern humans.As she stressed "Groups like [...] Australo-Melanesians are all examples of relatively early diversifications without great amounts of gene flow from other groups..." (Lahr, 1996, p.335). Clyde you do understand that you didn't address the above, or discuss your claim of A2 and B2 being African in origin, carried by Khoisan and Pygmies respectively. Obviously you were confused -as always- about these genetic markers, which is why you made a delirious conclusion, based on your confusion of Mtdna and Y-dna. I hope you'll understand one day....
I understand this perfectly. You are the one who pretends to be blind to the facts.
Nope, not an answer to your claim of A2 and B2 being African in origin, carried by Khoisan and Pygmies respectively. Obviously you were confused -as always- about these genetic markers, which is why you made a delirious conclusion, based on your confusion of Mtdna and Y-dna. I hope you'll understand one day....
^^^^^I wonder when Clyde will address his Mtdna claim....???
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: rasol - This on the other hand is FACTUAL science. A wide variety of samples are tested and the results are given.
Cranial morphology of early Americans from Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Implications for the settlement of the New World
Walter A. Neves* and Mark Hubbe Laborato´ rio de Estudos Evolutivos Humanos, Departamento de Gene´ tica e Biologia Evolutiva, Instituto de Biocieˆ ncias, Universidade de Sa˜o Paulo, 05508-090 Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved October 28, 2005 (received for review August 18, 2005)
Comparative morphological studies of the earliest human skeletons of the New World have shown that, whereas late prehistoric, recent, and present Native Americans tend to exhibit a cranial morphology similar to late and modern Northern Asians (short and wide neurocrania; high, orthognatic and broad faces; and relatively high and narrow orbits and noses), the earliest South Americans tend to be more similar to present Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans (narrow and long neurocrania; prognatic, low faces; and relatively low and broad orbits and noses).
However, most of the previous studies of early American human remains were based on small cranial samples. Herein we compare the largest sample of early American skulls ever studied (81 skulls of the Lagoa Santa region (brazil) with worldwide data sets representing global morphological variation in humans, through three different multivariate analyses. The results obtained from all multivariate analyses confirm a close morphological affinity between South- American Paleoindians and extant Australo-Melanesians groups, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct biological populations could have colonized the New World in the Pleistocene_Holocene transition.
Mike note the name of the head author in the study you posted, Walter Neves. Note that they say Australians, Melanesians, and Africans.
Now note the following which is Walter Neves' implication.........
quote:The oldest Americans' Negroid traits are not very specialized, making a direct immigration from Africa or Australia unlikely. Therefore, **Neves**(the head proponent for Australia/African like populations reaching America) believes that the America's more than 12,000 years ago did not necessarily occur by sea: "The traditional path across the Bering Strait is still the most plausible explanation for the entry of this non-Mongoloid population into the New World, if we assume that it was present in Northern Asia at the end of the Pleistocene." And indeed, Japan's aborigines, of whom a few still live in Hokkaido and on the Kurile Islands, display some Australian traits, such as round eye sockets and abundant body hair. A genetic comparison might solve the mystery...
''We know that today's Amerindians have ***four main groups***,'' said Dr. Pena, who found a genetic marker common to 17 different widely dispersed Indian groups across the Americans in the course of an earlier project. ''What would constitute molecular proof of ***Walter's (NEVES)*** hypothesis is to find ***DNA sequences COMPLETELY **different** from those ***four groups***.''
Dr. Meltzer said: ''This is clearly the way to resolve the issue. The skull is intriguing morphological evidence, but in order to really nail down this issue of affinity, you need evidence, and ***DNA*** is the way to go.''
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now if you will notice Mike, you are infamous for posting studies and sources which don't agree with you, and actually debunk you.
quote:My source: "The traditional path across the Bering Strait is still the most plausible explanation for the entry of this non-Mongoloid population into the New World, if we assume that it was present in Northern Asia at the end of the Pleistocene." And indeed, Japan's aborigines, of whom a few still live in Hokkaido and on the Kurile Islands, display some Australian traits, such as round eye sockets and abundant body hair.
quote: From Mikes own source: Lahr (1995) has reached a conclusion similar to ours when studying the cranial morphology of modern Fuegians. She realized that the morphology of modern Indians of Tierra del Fuego could not be described as typical Mongoloid as well. Since she detected a close association between historic ****Fuegians and Polynesians**** she opted to interpret the cranial morphology of the former as generalized Mongoloid, at best. In her opinion this generalized Mongoloid morphology could be explained as a retention of characteristics of the first inhabitants of the Americas.
quote: Froms Mikes own source: As to the similarities with Africans, the best way to explain it in terms of historical connections, is to assume that the Asian ancestral population that gave rise to the Australians and to the first Americans had its ultimate origins in the African continent, as it is in fact the case with all modern humans (Stringer and Andrews, 1988; Stringer and McKie, 1996; Lahr, 1994, 1996), ***but which retained a very generalized morphology.***In accordance with Lahr (1996), the Australians are in fact the contemporary aboriginal population that retained the most primitive morphology when compared to the first modern humans. As she stressed "Groups like [...] Australo-Melanesians are all examples of relatively early diversifications without great amounts of gene flow from other groups..." (Lahr, 1996, p.335).
**Y-chromosome STRs** (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the **biallelic system** DYS199 ***were also AMPLIFIED***, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed. In two samples of the same ethnic group (Aonikenk), an identical and complete eight-loci haplotype was recovered. The DYS199 biallelic system was used as a control of contamination by modern DNA and, along with DYS19, as a marker of American origin. The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs revealed DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina*** , but their high nucleotide diversity and the frequency of single lineages strongly support early genetic differentiation of the Fuegians through combined processes of population bottleneck, isolation, and/or migration, followed by strong genetic drift. This suggests an early genetic diversification of the Fuegians right after their arrival at the southernmost extreme of South America. Revue / Journal Title American journal of physical anthropology ISSN 0002-9483 Source / Source 2004, vol. 123, no4, pp. 361-370 [10 page(s) (article)] (47 ref.)
Mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms in Chilean aboriginal populations: implications for the peopling of the southern cone of the continent.
The mitochondrial DNAs (mtDNAs) from individuals belonging to three Chilean tribes, the Mapuche, the Pehuenche, and the Yaghan, were studied both by RFLP analysis and D-loop (control region) sequencing. RFLP analysis showed that 3 individuals (1.3%) belonged to haplogroup A, 19 (8%) to haplogroup B, 102 (43%) to haplogroup C, and 113 (47.7%) to haplogroup D. Among the 73 individuals analyzed by D-loop sequencing, we observed 37 different haplotypes defined by 52 polymorphic sites. Joint analysis of data obtained by RFLP and sequencing methods demonstrated that, regardless of the method of analysis, the mtDNA haplotypes of these three contemporary South American aborigine groups clustered into four main haplogroups, in a way similar to those previously described for other Amerindians. These results further revealed the absence of haplogroup A in both the Mapuche and Yaghan as well as the absence of haplogroup B in the Yaghan. These results suggest that the people of Tierra del Fuego are related to tribes from south-central South America.
----------------
quote:Y-chromosome STRs (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the biallelic system DYS199 were also amplified, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed.
The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs **revealed** DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina***
Note Clyde, the Y STRs you're attributing to Fuegians, are actually STR's in which were amplified in the study, but the analysis clearly reveals Mtda and Y-STRs of Native American ancestry, not recent post OOA. Sorry Clyde, just more misinterpretations of genetics on your part.
quote: Y Chromosome-Specific STRs By Leonor Gusmão1 and Angel Carracedo2 1Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia, Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal and 2Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Y-STRs are the most used Y chromosome markers in the forensic field due to their typing simplicity and high level of diversity. STR typing involves simple and reliable polymerase chain reaction (PCR)(a) techniques and is tolerant of very degraded samples. Of all Y chromosome polymorphic STRs described to date, DYS19, DYS385, DYS389I, DYS389II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393 and YCAII have more data accumulated, being the most used in population and forensic genetics. Because of collaborative efforts to construct large databases (see www.ystr.org,www.ystr.org/usa and www.ystr.org/asia), these markers are the best characterized for amplification performance and specificity, multiplex amplification strategies, sequence structure and nomenclature, as well as worldwide allele frequency distributions.
This does not deny the fact that both San and and Fuegians have the same Y-chromosomes. My comparison of the STRs make it clear that they are related to the ancient Fuegians.
quote:Einstein's theory of relativity is backed by solid math which can easily be checked
^ Really?
So there is and *easy* way to check the absolute nature of the speed of light, and the relativistic nature of time, which is the basis of the atomic clock..... and which is so qualitatively different than the molecular clock in genetics?
If so, then feel free to explain the difference?
Of course it can be verified simple. You merely need to understand quantum physics.
The atomic clock operates according to the vibrations of a particular atom. I built one at Johns Hopkins for the Naval academy. If you want to know more, open another thread.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
Genetic Evidence for the Convergent Evolution of Light Skin in Europeans and East Asians
- Dr. Rick A. Kittles
Why not post the names and photos of the other co-authors?
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
Genetic Evidence for the Convergent Evolution of Light Skin in Europeans and East Asians
- Dr. Rick A. Kittles
Why not post the names and photos of the other co-authors?
^ Because I'm not a racist, because I understand science, and therefore unlike you, I don't need to attack other peoples ethnic background in order to justify scientific illiteracy.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Naw. Because you wanted to exclude the co-authoring whites and pretend Kittles released the report on his own. Proving, you are a racist.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
**Y-chromosome STRs** (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the **biallelic system** DYS199 ***were also AMPLIFIED***, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed. In two samples of the same ethnic group (Aonikenk), an identical and complete eight-loci haplotype was recovered. The DYS199 biallelic system was used as a control of contamination by modern DNA and, along with DYS19, as a marker of American origin. The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs revealed DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina*** , but their high nucleotide diversity and the frequency of single lineages strongly support early genetic differentiation of the Fuegians through combined processes of population bottleneck, isolation, and/or migration, followed by strong genetic drift. This suggests an early genetic diversification of the Fuegians right after their arrival at the southernmost extreme of South America. Revue / Journal Title American journal of physical anthropology ISSN 0002-9483 Source / Source 2004, vol. 123, no4, pp. 361-370 [10 page(s) (article)] (47 ref.)
Mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms in Chilean aboriginal populations: implications for the peopling of the southern cone of the continent.
The mitochondrial DNAs (mtDNAs) from individuals belonging to three Chilean tribes, the Mapuche, the Pehuenche, and the Yaghan, were studied both by RFLP analysis and D-loop (control region) sequencing. RFLP analysis showed that 3 individuals (1.3%) belonged to haplogroup A, 19 (8%) to haplogroup B, 102 (43%) to haplogroup C, and 113 (47.7%) to haplogroup D. Among the 73 individuals analyzed by D-loop sequencing, we observed 37 different haplotypes defined by 52 polymorphic sites. Joint analysis of data obtained by RFLP and sequencing methods demonstrated that, regardless of the method of analysis, the mtDNA haplotypes of these three contemporary South American aborigine groups clustered into four main haplogroups, in a way similar to those previously described for other Amerindians. These results further revealed the absence of haplogroup A in both the Mapuche and Yaghan as well as the absence of haplogroup B in the Yaghan. These results suggest that the people of Tierra del Fuego are related to tribes from south-central South America.
----------------
quote:Y-chromosome STRs (DYS434, DYS437, DYS439, DYS393, DYS391, DYS390, DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, and DYS388) and the biallelic system DYS199 were also amplified, Y-STR alleles could be characterized in nine cases, with an average of 4.1 loci per sample correctly typed.
The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs **revealed** DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina***
Note Clyde, the Y STRs you're attributing to Fuegians, are actually STR's in which were amplified in the study, but the analysis clearly reveals Mtda and Y-STRs of Native American ancestry, not recent post OOA. Sorry Clyde, just more misinterpretations of genetics on your part.
quote: Y Chromosome-Specific STRs By Leonor Gusmão1 and Angel Carracedo2 1Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia, Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal and 2Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Y-STRs are the most used Y chromosome markers in the forensic field due to their typing simplicity and high level of diversity. STR typing involves simple and reliable polymerase chain reaction (PCR)(a) techniques and is tolerant of very degraded samples. Of all Y chromosome polymorphic STRs described to date, DYS19, DYS385, DYS389I, DYS389II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393 and YCAII have more data accumulated, being the most used in population and forensic genetics. Because of collaborative efforts to construct large databases (see www.ystr.org,www.ystr.org/usa and www.ystr.org/asia), these markers are the best characterized for amplification performance and specificity, multiplex amplification strategies, sequence structure and nomenclature, as well as worldwide allele frequency distributions.
This does not deny the fact that both San and and Fuegians have the same Y-chromosomes. My comparison of the STRs make it clear that they are related to the ancient Fuegians.
.
Of course it does Clyde. No Fuegans carry Y-chromosome A.
The analysis of both mtDNA and Y-STRs **revealed** DNA from ***Amerindian*** ancestry. The observed polymorphisms are consistent with the hypothesis that the ancient Fuegians are close to populations from south-central ***Chile and Argentina*** Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: [qb] [QUOTE]Einstein's theory of relativity is backed by solid math which can easily be checked
^ Really?
So there is and *easy* way to check the absolute nature of the speed of light, and the relativistic nature of time, which is the basis of the atomic clock..... and which is so qualitatively different than the molecular clock in genetics?
If so, then feel free to explain the difference?
quote:MN: Of course it can be verified simple.
^ Not by you, it can't.
No?
Then stop stalling and hop to it.
You don't understand science and so can't provide any verification of anything, period.
posted
Science is MY field. Genetics is SUPPOSED to be yours, yet you have trouble disproving OCA2 albinism in whites.
This is not the thread for Physics/Atomic (Cesium/Radium) clock discussions. Open another thread, but I can already tell it's far over your head.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Rasol and Knowledge, I really don't understand you guys trying to logically converse with the likes of Clyde, Meni, or Mike who obviously have NO comprehension of the science they cite and instead distort science with their own prejudices just like white supremacists!![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic