Cornwall is the homeland of the Cornish people and is recognised as one of the Celtic nations, retaining a distinct cultural identity that reflects its history.
The six territories widely considered Celtic nations are Brittany (Breizh), Cornwall (Kernow), Wales (Cymru), Scotland (Alba), Ireland (Éire), and the Isle of Man (Mannin)
Crainometry has never been abandon, it is used today to determine the ancestry of murder victims in Forensics. There are many papers linking Africans Melanesians and Native Americans. There is also plenty of empirical evidence placing amh in America before 30kya. I have already presented much of this evidence.
There is archaeological evidence linking Africans and Melanesians, and Melanesians and Native Americans. Neves etc., make it clear that the paleoamericans were phenotypically Melanesian, African or Australian.The Botocudos of Brazil are classified as Melanesian in origin. As a result, when Neves says the Botocudos are related to paleoamerican it was based on the fact that phenotypically they were African or Melanesian.
South Brazilian Native Americans came from Melanesia. This is especially true for the Botocudos.The Botocudos are descendants of Meleanesians and Melanesians are phenotypically Negroes. See: A.S. Malaspinas et al,, Two ancient human genomes reveal Polynesian ancestry among the indigenous Botocudos of Brazil. Curr Biol. 2014 Nov 3;24(21):R1035-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.09.078. Epub 2014 Oct 23.Abstract“Understanding the peopling of the Americas remains an important and challenging question. Here, we present (14)C dates, and morphological, isotopic and genomic sequence data from two human skulls from the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, part of one of the indigenous groups known as 'Botocudos'. We find that their genomic ancestry is Polynesian, with no detectable Native American component. Radiocarbon analysis of the skulls shows that the individuals had died prior to the beginning of the 19th century. Our findings could either represent genomic evidence of Polynesians reaching South America during their Pacific expansion, or European-mediated transport.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/term=Bastos%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25455029
The Botocudo were a Native American tribe of Brazil. They were also called Aimoré (Aymore, Aimboré) . The name Botocudo comes from the Portuguese term: botoque, a plug. This was an allusion to the wooden disks or tembetás worn in their lips and ears of people who belonged to these tribes. The Botocudo had many names for themselves. Some Boyocudos called themselves Nac-nanuk or Nac-poruk. The name Nac-nanuk or Nac-poruk means "sons of the soil". Over the centuries the Botocudos disappeared. Paul Ehrenreich estimated their population at 5,000 in 1884. By April 1939, there was only 68 Botocudo alive in Eastern Brazil.
Pedra Furada, Dr.Nieda Guidon in numerous articles claims that Africans were in Brazil between 65,000-100,000 years ago. Dr. Guidon claims that man was at the Brazilian sites for early Americans, 65,000 years ago. She told the New York Times, that her dating of human populations in Brazil 100,000 years ago , was based on the presence of ancient fire and tools of human craftsmanship at human habitation sites.
Guidon, N. and Delibrias, G. 1986. “Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32,000 years ago.” Nature 321:769-771.
Guidon, N., and B. Arnaud. 1991. “The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.” World Arch. 23(2):167-178.
Guidon, N., et al.1996. "Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay," Antiquity, 70:408.
Meltzer, David J.; Adovasio, James M.; Dillehay, Tom D in “On a Pleistocene human occupation at Pedra Furada, Brazil”, noted that :” The excavations at Pedra Furada have produced a total of 55 radiocarbon determinations of which 46 are currently accepted (TABLE 1; Paranti 1993a; pers. comm.); 32 of these are in the Pedra Furada phase. The Pedra Furada phase is further divided into three sub-phases. The sub-phases and their ages are: PF1, from 48,000 to 35,000 b.p.; PF2, from 32,160 to 25,000 b.p.; and PF3, from 21,400 to 14,300 b.p. (see TABLE 1, and Paranti 1993a: 307-8)”, See: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/On+a+Pleistocene+human+occupation+at+Pedra+Furada,+Brazil.-a016352243
Tlapacoya ,Mexico 24,000 BC, Lorenzo, Jose Luis, and Lorena Mirambell, Coordinadores (1986) Tlapacoya: 35.000 aZos de Historia del Lago de Chalco. México, D.F. I.N.A.H., collección Científica, Serie Prehistórica, pp. 296.
No one has disputed the research of Guidon. Please post any papers proving her wrong
Haplotypes with HVSI transitions defining 16129-16223-16249-16278-16311-16362; and 16129-16223-16234-16249-16211-16362 have been found in Thailand and among the Han Chinese (Fucharon et al, 2001) , these haplotypes were originally members of Haplogroup M1. However, on the basis of currently available FGS sequences, carriers of these markers have been found to be in the D4a branch of Haplogroup D , the most widespread branch of M1 in East Asia (Fucharon et al, 2001; Gondor et al, 2006; Yao et al , 2002). The transitions 16129,16189,16249 and 16311 are known to be recurrent in various branches of Haplogroup M, especially M1 and D4. Gonder et al (2006) for example, noted that the mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania. See: Fucharoen G, Fucharoen S, Horai S.(2001). Mitochondrial DNA polymorphism in Thailand. J Hum Genet , 46:115-125; Gonder MK, Mortensen HM, Reed FA, de Sousa A, Tishkoff SA.(2006). Whole mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages. Mol Biol Evol., 24(3):757-768; Yao YG, Kong QP, Bandelt HJ, Kivisild T, Zhang YP.(2002). Phylogeographic differentiation of mitochondrial DNA in Han chinese. Am J Hum Genet , 70:635-651.
Africans and Melanesians share y-Chromosome haplogroups K-M9, E-M2. E-35, E.M78 according to Cordaux et al.,(2003). Mitochodrial DNA analysis reveals diverse tribal histories of tribal populations from India, Eur. J Hum Genet ,11(2):253-264; Merriwether et al.(n.d.) Mitochondrial DNA in the South Pacific, p.159. In SS Papilia, R. Deka & R. Chakraborty (Ed.), Genomic Diversity; Merriwether et al. (1994). Origins and dispersal in the mtDNA region V 9bp deletion and insertion in Nigeria and the Ivory Coast, Am. J Hum Genet.
The whole notion that prior ages were repressed, is just more evidence of nonsense leftism that has infected this country, and the west, for the past 100 years. Leftism IS Idiocracy.
Like most leftist nonsense, a simple common sense observation can prove them wrong - Specifically the fact that population has continually grown. Massively since the beginning of the Industrial Age. This obviously means people been fuckin'. Just like they always have. And if you've ever indulged in the act, you know that once instinct takes over, you are a little more feral(if you are doing it right), than you normally are. This is ancient instinctual behavior. Nothin' new. They had the same hormones and drives as we do. Actually, our population is decreasing. Maybe we are the repressed?
As i once heard from my teacher, in fear of what they didn't comprehend, the first settlers destroyed all traces of the previous cultures in the islands, some early reports suggest that the statues where made in the egiptian style.
And now you begin to back pedal on your claims and accuse me of not providing any evidence? LOL. I have provided you with multiple lines of evidence. You have insisted upon outmoded lines of evidence (crainometry) and less than accepted "facts". Genetic analysis has confirmed the NE Asian origin of Native Americans and this trumps morphometrics. Your arguments ignore this entire line of evidence and the possibility of convergence as a reason for the craniometric data you present. You insist upon an African origin foe Native Americans without presenting any evidence other than "well, they look alike so, they must be related" in spite of the evidence to the contrary. I challenge you to find a single paper or study that demonstrates a direct genetic mother-daughter relationship between African populations and Native Americans, Pacific Islanders or Melanesians and Native Americans. Further, I challenge you to present any empirical evidence that backs up the humans in the Americas before 30,000 years bp claims other that the original papers. Surely a claim as earth shattering as that has been independently confirmed by a number of investigators!
First of all, I am not claiming Africans were in Brazil 100,000 years ago. This date assigned to early man in the Americas is the finding of Dr.Nieda Guidon. Nor did I personally claim the PaleoAmericans and contemporary Mongoloid Native Americans belonged to different populations; this is based on the research of Neves and Chatters discussed above.
There is abundant evidence for an African origin of the Native Americans. Yet, you have not presented any facts from a number of disciplines supporting your view that Native Americans are a monophyletic group descended from a common East Asian ancestor.
Please stop trying to make it appear that I made up the idea that PaleoAmericans and contemporary Native Americans belonged to two different populations. Let’s examine the evidence in support of the reality that the first Native Americans were Africans, I have presented 1) the archaeological evidence of Africans in America found by Dr. Guidon, 2) the Craniometric quantitative analysis and multivariate research that indicates PaleoAmericans were not mongoloid published by Neves, Chatters and etc., 3) the archaeological evidence of Chan, Sanz and Weidenreich that the first AMH in East Asia were Melanesians—not mongoloids; and 4) the first EAST Asians who were Melanesians date to 24kya, while AMH had been in the Americas 66ky before AMH were in East Asia.
You have presented no evidence disputing Dr. Guidon, Neves or Weidenreich. You are asking us to reject the primary research of these established scholars simply on the basis of your personal belief.
You exaggerated the difference between contemporary Africans and Africans 100,000 years ago. Anatomically modern Africans today look little different from how Africans looked 100,000 years ago, <b>except that differences between these Black populations include Negro/ Melanoid brows being vertical and without eyebrow ridges, whereas the first AMHs had brows, that were sloping and with prominent ridges like the Australian aborigines.</b>
The fact that the first AMH Africans looked just like contemporary African populations, is why Chatters and Neves classified the PaleoAmericans as Africans/Melanesian/Australian.
You say that you have read all the literature and that Dr. Guidon’s work is a factoid . This is false, her research is supported by careful archealogical excavation in Brazil. Moreover, no researchers have been able to prove that the PaleoAmericans and contemporary Native Americans belonged to the same populations, because the craniometrics of these populations differ.
I have not cherry picked anything. I have discussed the literature on the PaleoAmericansand AMH in East Asia , but you have presented no evidence that contemporary mongoloid Native Americans are related to the PaleoAmericans. You claim that your arguments are based on science, but, when the science negates your arguments you fall back to a position of conjecture and personal opinions.
And England/Britain certainly DOES have a very proud Celtic history - I am a Celt and very aware of my rich British history. Britain was a Celtic nation LONG before the Romans arrived. Your statements are ignorant ill-informed rubbish.
El Del : Where the hell did you get that from ?? Cornwall is most certainly NOT a nation, not in any sense of the word. Cornwall is a county - not a country/nation - in the south-west of England. Perhaps you had better check the criteria required to be called a nation/country - not a single
one of them apply to Cornwall.This is a major problem today, misinformation distributed by people who make it up, or are told things and believe them without bothering to check facts first before commenting and passing it on..
It might surprise you to find that I have in fact read ALL of these articles before. I am well versed in the reading of the scientific literature and the scientific method as well. There are many reasons why C14 dating can give erroneous dates. Until there is corroborating evidence from other sites these examples mean very little. Are they interesting? Certainly. Are they factual? Not yet. Until then we have to go where the Provable evidence leads us and avoid wishful thinking. Look, as a person of Native American decent, nothing would make me happier than proof that NAs have been here for 100,000 years or more but, the proof is simply not there and these claims fly into the face of the known facts. It's not that I have anything against Africans. I am proud to say that I am descended from the first 20 Africans that came to America in 1619. Further, Homo sapiens IS an African species. We are ALL Africans. It's just that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Proof that does not contradict the established facts of the case. There is no such proof here. You are making an extraordinary claim, i.e. that Native Americans are descended from Africans who arrived in the Americas 100,000 years bp. Your proof consists of a few tenuously dated sites which may or may not indicate a human presence in America between 34,000 and 100,000 years bp. You base the claim that these people were from Africa on another extraordinary claim. To wit, that because all northern avenues of terrestrial entry into the Americas were blocked by ice NAs "MUST HAVE" come from Africa and refuse to acknowledge any other possibilities. This again ignores the contradicting genetic evidence as well as firmly dated archaeological data and completely dismisses the fact that there were other avenues open via oceanic travel. Your basic premise is that because early Americans "look like" modern Africans (a people who did not even exist 100,000 years bp) one must be ancestral to the other. Morphology can only take us so far and changes so rapidly that it can often take us down the wrong road. However, the genetic trail is unmistakable. I am not attempting to steal anybody's history. You are taking a bunch of tenuous factoids and attempting to weave a narrative that supports your preconceived notions from them. That is simply not how science works. We do not begin with a conclusion and cherry pick the facts that support our supposition while disregarding those that do not. We gather the facts (all of them) and follow them where they lead. In this case the facts from a number of disciplines lead us to the inescapable conclusion that Native Americans are a monophyletic group descended from an East Asian ancestor that was also the common ancestor of the Chukchi and other NE Asian populations. There is no more evidence for an African origin of Native Americans than there is for a European one.
"Tintagel Castle is a castle located on Tintagel Island, a peninsula connected to the North Cornwall coast in England" In the UK. Cornwall is a nation with its own Celtic history and identity. England is not.
Also just to clear this up, Buddhism isn't a religion. Its a way of life, the whole point of Buddhism is that anyone can become enlightened, the exact opposite of any true dumbassery religion like Christianity or Islam where all you do is beg your maker.
Actually the process of self-mummification takes many years. Often consuming so much toxic materials (certain tree-barks for food and tea etc), that even bacteria cannot live in their corpses. Thus the exceptionally well preserved state. There weren't many monks who did this successfully though.
I am often puzzled when supposedly scientific publications treat the legends and myths of the bible as historical fact. These stories are no more factual than Washington and the cherry tree. Church "holy" relics have been proven time and again as frauds and its disingenuous to present them as real.
I am not going around in circles, my comments are consistent. I understand your hesitation in accepting the reality that the Native Americans represented two diverse populations. But I can’t understand why you continue to make uninformed comments when I have provided you numerous sources supporting my comments. It is obvious that you have read much of the popular literature but you did not critically read my article. Granted, researchers believe that there was a refuge in Beringa, but while people may have been waiting in Beringa to migrate into the Americas when the Ice melted , I have pointed out in this article that there were already Native Americans at Old Crow Basin (c.38,000 BC) in Canada; Orogrande Cave (c.36,000 BC) in the United States; and Pedra Furada (c.45,000 BC) in Brazil while Asian people lived in the Beringa refuge. These people had to have come from Africa because the Ice Age prevented anyone from walking across Beringa into the Americas, or sailing from Asia to the Americas.
The New York Times, reported that Dr. Nieda Guidon claimed humans from Africa, were in Brazil 100,000 years ago . Dr.Nieda Guidon supports her dating of human population in Brazil 100,000 years ago to ancient fire and tool making. Look at the New York Times video: Human’s First Appearance in the Americas @: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/americas/discoveries-challenge-b...
Dr. Guidon who conducted excavation at the site notes at 2:09 of the New York Times Video the site is 100,000 years old. At 3:17 in the video scientists proved that the tools are the result of human craftsmanship . You can reject this evidence but it proves that Africans were here before the mongoloids. Stop trying to steal the history of the Black Native Americans.
Neves et al argues that the Paleoamericans came from East Asia because of the amh remains found at the Zhoukoudian Cave. Weidenreich (1939) found hominid fossils in the Upper and Lower Cave at Zhoukoudian. The individual in the Lower Cave was a Homo Erectus hominid (Sinanthropus pekinensis ) , and in the Upper Cave he found Oceanic or Melanesoid skeletons (Chang, 1977; Weidenreich, 1939). The Melanesoid skeletons are dated between 24-27kya (Sanz, 2014).
There are two major problems with the East Asia theory. First, the Ice shelf was too thick to make an overland trek into North America 27kya (See: Figure 1). Secondly, the Melanesoid people do not expand out of China until the expansion of the Lapita culture onto the Pacific Islands between 1600-500 BC (Winters,2014b).
The Paleoamericans were in South America at least between 65-48kya (Guidon and Arnoud,1991; Guidon and Delibris, 1986, Guidon et al,1996; NYT,2015). This placed Paleoamericans almost 20,000 year in South America before they appear in East Asia. The archaeological evidence and Ice shelf in East Asia forces us to reject the Neves hypothesis.
It is not strongly indicated that both waves of Native Americans were from the same ancestral stock in NE Asia, because Sanz and Weidenreich have shown that the first anatomically modern humans in East Asia 24kya were Melanoid (i.e., Negroes), not mongoloids .
In conclusion, there were two diverse Native American populations one African/Melanesian, and the other Mongoloid. According to Dr. Guidon Africans have been in Brazil for 100,000 years.
References:
Chang. K (1977). The archaeology of ancient China. New Haven, Yale University Press .
Guidon, N. and Delibrias, G. 1986. “Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32,000 years ago.” Nature 321:769-771.
Guidon, N., and B. Arnaud. 1991. “The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.” World Arch. 23(2):167-178.
Guidon, N., et al.1996. "Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay," Antiquity, 70:408.
Sanz, Nuria . (2014). Human origin sites and the World Heritage Convention in Asia. UNESCO.
Weidenreich. F. 1939. On the earliest representative of modern mankind recovered on the soil of East Asia( in BC.ull. Nat. Hist. Soc. Peiping 13:161-173.
Here you can navigate quickly through all comments made in any article sorted by date/time.
"Carthage was founded in the 1st century B.C. ..." Really? With whom did Rome fight the First Punic War in the 3rd century B.C.?
thanks
I'm pretty sure that Willy is a Troll. I have seen such people in different forums many times.
Cornwall is the homeland of the Cornish people and is recognised as one of the Celtic nations, retaining a distinct cultural identity that reflects its history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornwall
The six territories widely considered Celtic nations are Brittany (Breizh), Cornwall (Kernow), Wales (Cymru), Scotland (Alba), Ireland (Éire), and the Isle of Man (Mannin)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_nations
Crainometry has never been abandon, it is used today to determine the ancestry of murder victims in Forensics. There are many papers linking Africans Melanesians and Native Americans. There is also plenty of empirical evidence placing amh in America before 30kya. I have already presented much of this evidence.
There is archaeological evidence linking Africans and Melanesians, and Melanesians and Native Americans. Neves etc., make it clear that the paleoamericans were phenotypically Melanesian, African or Australian.The Botocudos of Brazil are classified as Melanesian in origin. As a result, when Neves says the Botocudos are related to paleoamerican it was based on the fact that phenotypically they were African or Melanesian.
South Brazilian Native Americans came from Melanesia. This is especially true for the Botocudos.The Botocudos are descendants of Meleanesians and Melanesians are phenotypically Negroes. See: A.S. Malaspinas et al,, Two ancient human genomes reveal Polynesian ancestry among the indigenous Botocudos of Brazil. Curr Biol. 2014 Nov 3;24(21):R1035-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.09.078. Epub 2014 Oct 23.Abstract“Understanding the peopling of the Americas remains an important and challenging question. Here, we present (14)C dates, and morphological, isotopic and genomic sequence data from two human skulls from the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, part of one of the indigenous groups known as 'Botocudos'. We find that their genomic ancestry is Polynesian, with no detectable Native American component. Radiocarbon analysis of the skulls shows that the individuals had died prior to the beginning of the 19th century. Our findings could either represent genomic evidence of Polynesians reaching South America during their Pacific expansion, or European-mediated transport.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/term=Bastos%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25455029
The Botocudo were a Native American tribe of Brazil. They were also called Aimoré (Aymore, Aimboré) . The name Botocudo comes from the Portuguese term: botoque, a plug. This was an allusion to the wooden disks or tembetás worn in their lips and ears of people who belonged to these tribes. The Botocudo had many names for themselves. Some Boyocudos called themselves Nac-nanuk or Nac-poruk. The name Nac-nanuk or Nac-poruk means "sons of the soil". Over the centuries the Botocudos disappeared. Paul Ehrenreich estimated their population at 5,000 in 1884. By April 1939, there was only 68 Botocudo alive in Eastern Brazil.
Monte Verde has Radiocarbon date 43,000=19,000 BC , Dillehay TD, Ocampo C, Saavedra J, Sawakuchi AO, Vega RM, et al. (2015) Correction: New Archaeological Evidence for an Early Human Presence at Monte Verde, Chile. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141923
Pedra Furada, Dr.Nieda Guidon in numerous articles claims that Africans were in Brazil between 65,000-100,000 years ago. Dr. Guidon claims that man was at the Brazilian sites for early Americans, 65,000 years ago. She told the New York Times, that her dating of human populations in Brazil 100,000 years ago , was based on the presence of ancient fire and tools of human craftsmanship at human habitation sites.
Guidon, N. and Delibrias, G. 1986. “Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32,000 years ago.” Nature 321:769-771.
Guidon, N., and B. Arnaud. 1991. “The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.” World Arch. 23(2):167-178.
Guidon, N., et al.1996. "Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay," Antiquity, 70:408.
Meltzer, David J.; Adovasio, James M.; Dillehay, Tom D in “On a Pleistocene human occupation at Pedra Furada, Brazil”, noted that :” The excavations at Pedra Furada have produced a total of 55 radiocarbon determinations of which 46 are currently accepted (TABLE 1; Paranti 1993a; pers. comm.); 32 of these are in the Pedra Furada phase. The Pedra Furada phase is further divided into three sub-phases. The sub-phases and their ages are: PF1, from 48,000 to 35,000 b.p.; PF2, from 32,160 to 25,000 b.p.; and PF3, from 21,400 to 14,300 b.p. (see TABLE 1, and Paranti 1993a: 307-8)”, See: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/On+a+Pleistocene+human+occupation+at+Pedra+Furada,+Brazil.-a016352243
Tlapacoya ,Mexico 24,000 BC, Lorenzo, Jose Luis, and Lorena Mirambell, Coordinadores (1986) Tlapacoya: 35.000 aZos de Historia del Lago de Chalco. México, D.F. I.N.A.H., collección Científica, Serie Prehistórica, pp. 296.
No one has disputed the research of Guidon. Please post any papers proving her wrong
Haplotypes with HVSI transitions defining 16129-16223-16249-16278-16311-16362; and 16129-16223-16234-16249-16211-16362 have been found in Thailand and among the Han Chinese (Fucharon et al, 2001) , these haplotypes were originally members of Haplogroup M1. However, on the basis of currently available FGS sequences, carriers of these markers have been found to be in the D4a branch of Haplogroup D , the most widespread branch of M1 in East Asia (Fucharon et al, 2001; Gondor et al, 2006; Yao et al , 2002). The transitions 16129,16189,16249 and 16311 are known to be recurrent in various branches of Haplogroup M, especially M1 and D4. Gonder et al (2006) for example, noted that the mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania. See: Fucharoen G, Fucharoen S, Horai S.(2001). Mitochondrial DNA polymorphism in Thailand. J Hum Genet , 46:115-125; Gonder MK, Mortensen HM, Reed FA, de Sousa A, Tishkoff SA.(2006). Whole mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages. Mol Biol Evol., 24(3):757-768; Yao YG, Kong QP, Bandelt HJ, Kivisild T, Zhang YP.(2002). Phylogeographic differentiation of mitochondrial DNA in Han chinese. Am J Hum Genet , 70:635-651.
Africans and Melanesians share y-Chromosome haplogroups K-M9, E-M2. E-35, E.M78 according to Cordaux et al.,(2003). Mitochodrial DNA analysis reveals diverse tribal histories of tribal populations from India, Eur. J Hum Genet ,11(2):253-264; Merriwether et al.(n.d.) Mitochondrial DNA in the South Pacific, p.159. In SS Papilia, R. Deka & R. Chakraborty (Ed.), Genomic Diversity; Merriwether et al. (1994). Origins and dispersal in the mtDNA region V 9bp deletion and insertion in Nigeria and the Ivory Coast, Am. J Hum Genet.
The whole notion that prior ages were repressed, is just more evidence of nonsense leftism that has infected this country, and the west, for the past 100 years. Leftism IS Idiocracy.
Like most leftist nonsense, a simple common sense observation can prove them wrong - Specifically the fact that population has continually grown. Massively since the beginning of the Industrial Age. This obviously means people been fuckin'. Just like they always have. And if you've ever indulged in the act, you know that once instinct takes over, you are a little more feral(if you are doing it right), than you normally are. This is ancient instinctual behavior. Nothin' new. They had the same hormones and drives as we do. Actually, our population is decreasing. Maybe we are the repressed?
As i once heard from my teacher, in fear of what they didn't comprehend, the first settlers destroyed all traces of the previous cultures in the islands, some early reports suggest that the statues where made in the egiptian style.
And now you begin to back pedal on your claims and accuse me of not providing any evidence? LOL. I have provided you with multiple lines of evidence. You have insisted upon outmoded lines of evidence (crainometry) and less than accepted "facts". Genetic analysis has confirmed the NE Asian origin of Native Americans and this trumps morphometrics. Your arguments ignore this entire line of evidence and the possibility of convergence as a reason for the craniometric data you present. You insist upon an African origin foe Native Americans without presenting any evidence other than "well, they look alike so, they must be related" in spite of the evidence to the contrary. I challenge you to find a single paper or study that demonstrates a direct genetic mother-daughter relationship between African populations and Native Americans, Pacific Islanders or Melanesians and Native Americans. Further, I challenge you to present any empirical evidence that backs up the humans in the Americas before 30,000 years bp claims other that the original papers. Surely a claim as earth shattering as that has been independently confirmed by a number of investigators!
First of all, I am not claiming Africans were in Brazil 100,000 years ago. This date assigned to early man in the Americas is the finding of Dr.Nieda Guidon. Nor did I personally claim the PaleoAmericans and contemporary Mongoloid Native Americans belonged to different populations; this is based on the research of Neves and Chatters discussed above.
There is abundant evidence for an African origin of the Native Americans. Yet, you have not presented any facts from a number of disciplines supporting your view that Native Americans are a monophyletic group descended from a common East Asian ancestor.
Please stop trying to make it appear that I made up the idea that PaleoAmericans and contemporary Native Americans belonged to two different populations. Let’s examine the evidence in support of the reality that the first Native Americans were Africans, I have presented 1) the archaeological evidence of Africans in America found by Dr. Guidon, 2) the Craniometric quantitative analysis and multivariate research that indicates PaleoAmericans were not mongoloid published by Neves, Chatters and etc., 3) the archaeological evidence of Chan, Sanz and Weidenreich that the first AMH in East Asia were Melanesians—not mongoloids; and 4) the first EAST Asians who were Melanesians date to 24kya, while AMH had been in the Americas 66ky before AMH were in East Asia.
You have presented no evidence disputing Dr. Guidon, Neves or Weidenreich. You are asking us to reject the primary research of these established scholars simply on the basis of your personal belief.
You exaggerated the difference between contemporary Africans and Africans 100,000 years ago. Anatomically modern Africans today look little different from how Africans looked 100,000 years ago, <b>except that differences between these Black populations include Negro/ Melanoid brows being vertical and without eyebrow ridges, whereas the first AMHs had brows, that were sloping and with prominent ridges like the Australian aborigines.</b>
The fact that the first AMH Africans looked just like contemporary African populations, is why Chatters and Neves classified the PaleoAmericans as Africans/Melanesian/Australian.
You say that you have read all the literature and that Dr. Guidon’s work is a factoid . This is false, her research is supported by careful archealogical excavation in Brazil. Moreover, no researchers have been able to prove that the PaleoAmericans and contemporary Native Americans belonged to the same populations, because the craniometrics of these populations differ.
I have not cherry picked anything. I have discussed the literature on the PaleoAmericansand AMH in East Asia , but you have presented no evidence that contemporary mongoloid Native Americans are related to the PaleoAmericans. You claim that your arguments are based on science, but, when the science negates your arguments you fall back to a position of conjecture and personal opinions.
And England/Britain certainly DOES have a very proud Celtic history - I am a Celt and very aware of my rich British history. Britain was a Celtic nation LONG before the Romans arrived. Your statements are ignorant ill-informed rubbish.
El Del : Where the hell did you get that from ?? Cornwall is most certainly NOT a nation, not in any sense of the word. Cornwall is a county - not a country/nation - in the south-west of England. Perhaps you had better check the criteria required to be called a nation/country - not a single
one of them apply to Cornwall.This is a major problem today, misinformation distributed by people who make it up, or are told things and believe them without bothering to check facts first before commenting and passing it on..
It might surprise you to find that I have in fact read ALL of these articles before. I am well versed in the reading of the scientific literature and the scientific method as well. There are many reasons why C14 dating can give erroneous dates. Until there is corroborating evidence from other sites these examples mean very little. Are they interesting? Certainly. Are they factual? Not yet. Until then we have to go where the Provable evidence leads us and avoid wishful thinking. Look, as a person of Native American decent, nothing would make me happier than proof that NAs have been here for 100,000 years or more but, the proof is simply not there and these claims fly into the face of the known facts. It's not that I have anything against Africans. I am proud to say that I am descended from the first 20 Africans that came to America in 1619. Further, Homo sapiens IS an African species. We are ALL Africans. It's just that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Proof that does not contradict the established facts of the case. There is no such proof here. You are making an extraordinary claim, i.e. that Native Americans are descended from Africans who arrived in the Americas 100,000 years bp. Your proof consists of a few tenuously dated sites which may or may not indicate a human presence in America between 34,000 and 100,000 years bp. You base the claim that these people were from Africa on another extraordinary claim. To wit, that because all northern avenues of terrestrial entry into the Americas were blocked by ice NAs "MUST HAVE" come from Africa and refuse to acknowledge any other possibilities. This again ignores the contradicting genetic evidence as well as firmly dated archaeological data and completely dismisses the fact that there were other avenues open via oceanic travel. Your basic premise is that because early Americans "look like" modern Africans (a people who did not even exist 100,000 years bp) one must be ancestral to the other. Morphology can only take us so far and changes so rapidly that it can often take us down the wrong road. However, the genetic trail is unmistakable. I am not attempting to steal anybody's history. You are taking a bunch of tenuous factoids and attempting to weave a narrative that supports your preconceived notions from them. That is simply not how science works. We do not begin with a conclusion and cherry pick the facts that support our supposition while disregarding those that do not. We gather the facts (all of them) and follow them where they lead. In this case the facts from a number of disciplines lead us to the inescapable conclusion that Native Americans are a monophyletic group descended from an East Asian ancestor that was also the common ancestor of the Chukchi and other NE Asian populations. There is no more evidence for an African origin of Native Americans than there is for a European one.
"Tintagel Castle is a castle located on Tintagel Island, a peninsula connected to the North Cornwall coast in England" In the UK. Cornwall is a nation with its own Celtic history and identity. England is not.
I am glad I could help. Be well. Carlene
Also just to clear this up, Buddhism isn't a religion. Its a way of life, the whole point of Buddhism is that anyone can become enlightened, the exact opposite of any true dumbassery religion like Christianity or Islam where all you do is beg your maker.
Actually the process of self-mummification takes many years. Often consuming so much toxic materials (certain tree-barks for food and tea etc), that even bacteria cannot live in their corpses. Thus the exceptionally well preserved state. There weren't many monks who did this successfully though.
I would think the correct amount of heat applied to any metal object would allow it to bend or unfold easily, no?
I am often puzzled when supposedly scientific publications treat the legends and myths of the bible as historical fact. These stories are no more factual than Washington and the cherry tree. Church "holy" relics have been proven time and again as frauds and its disingenuous to present them as real.
Some statistics would be helpful. Assuming they exist. With our without error bars.
I am not going around in circles, my comments are consistent. I understand your hesitation in accepting the reality that the Native Americans represented two diverse populations. But I can’t understand why you continue to make uninformed comments when I have provided you numerous sources supporting my comments. It is obvious that you have read much of the popular literature but you did not critically read my article. Granted, researchers believe that there was a refuge in Beringa, but while people may have been waiting in Beringa to migrate into the Americas when the Ice melted , I have pointed out in this article that there were already Native Americans at Old Crow Basin (c.38,000 BC) in Canada; Orogrande Cave (c.36,000 BC) in the United States; and Pedra Furada (c.45,000 BC) in Brazil while Asian people lived in the Beringa refuge. These people had to have come from Africa because the Ice Age prevented anyone from walking across Beringa into the Americas, or sailing from Asia to the Americas.
The New York Times, reported that Dr. Nieda Guidon claimed humans from Africa, were in Brazil 100,000 years ago . Dr.Nieda Guidon supports her dating of human population in Brazil 100,000 years ago to ancient fire and tool making. Look at the New York Times video: Human’s First Appearance in the Americas @: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/americas/discoveries-challenge-b...
Dr. Guidon who conducted excavation at the site notes at 2:09 of the New York Times Video the site is 100,000 years old. At 3:17 in the video scientists proved that the tools are the result of human craftsmanship . You can reject this evidence but it proves that Africans were here before the mongoloids. Stop trying to steal the history of the Black Native Americans.
Neves et al argues that the Paleoamericans came from East Asia because of the amh remains found at the Zhoukoudian Cave. Weidenreich (1939) found hominid fossils in the Upper and Lower Cave at Zhoukoudian. The individual in the Lower Cave was a Homo Erectus hominid (Sinanthropus pekinensis ) , and in the Upper Cave he found Oceanic or Melanesoid skeletons (Chang, 1977; Weidenreich, 1939). The Melanesoid skeletons are dated between 24-27kya (Sanz, 2014).
There are two major problems with the East Asia theory. First, the Ice shelf was too thick to make an overland trek into North America 27kya (See: Figure 1). Secondly, the Melanesoid people do not expand out of China until the expansion of the Lapita culture onto the Pacific Islands between 1600-500 BC (Winters,2014b).
The Paleoamericans were in South America at least between 65-48kya (Guidon and Arnoud,1991; Guidon and Delibris, 1986, Guidon et al,1996; NYT,2015). This placed Paleoamericans almost 20,000 year in South America before they appear in East Asia. The archaeological evidence and Ice shelf in East Asia forces us to reject the Neves hypothesis.
It is not strongly indicated that both waves of Native Americans were from the same ancestral stock in NE Asia, because Sanz and Weidenreich have shown that the first anatomically modern humans in East Asia 24kya were Melanoid (i.e., Negroes), not mongoloids .
In conclusion, there were two diverse Native American populations one African/Melanesian, and the other Mongoloid. According to Dr. Guidon Africans have been in Brazil for 100,000 years.
References:
Chang. K (1977). The archaeology of ancient China. New Haven, Yale University Press .
Guidon, N. and Delibrias, G. 1986. “Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32,000 years ago.” Nature 321:769-771.
Guidon, N., and B. Arnaud. 1991. “The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.” World Arch. 23(2):167-178.
Guidon, N., et al.1996. "Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay," Antiquity, 70:408.
Sanz, Nuria . (2014). Human origin sites and the World Heritage Convention in Asia. UNESCO.
Weidenreich. F. 1939. On the earliest representative of modern mankind recovered on the soil of East Asia( in BC.ull. Nat. Hist. Soc. Peiping 13:161-173.
Winters,C. (2014b). AFRICAN AND DRAVIDIAN ORIGINS OF THE MELANESIANS. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences , 4(3):694-704. http://www.cibtech.org/J-LIFE-SCIENCES/PUBLICATIONS/2014/Vol-4-No-3/JLS-103-JLS-073-JUN-CLYDE-AFRICAN-MELANESIANS.pdf
Pages