No they haven't, which is why I made that comment.So does that mean that DNA has been recovered from HE?
It would finally settle a lot of arguments if it was ever found that's for sure.
Roy.
Races.
Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
No they haven't, which is why I made that comment.
One would think they'd be less definitive with such statements given that lack.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
-
Rokcet Scientist
As DNA of 65 mio year dinos has been recovered and analysed, the odds of HE's DNA being recovered and analysed are good, imo.Digit wrote:No they haven't, which is why I made that comment.So does that mean that DNA has been recovered from HE?
It would finally settle a lot of arguments if it was ever found that's for sure.
Well I watched part two, when the scene moved to Asia and mainland China.
Apparently the Chinese schools teach that modern day Chinese are direct descendants from Erectus with no African HSS intervention.
A Chinese geneticist sampled the DNA of 12000 men and found that evry single one had a DNA marker that arose in Africa 80000 yrs ago, thus disproving the Erectus claim.
Or does it?
Does anyone know how the rise of a given DNA marker can be aged as I'm way out of my depth on that?
Also of course the existence of that marker in no way disproves an Erectus connection despite what was inferred in the programme.
In addition the Chinese site the type of stone tools found all over central Asia, they are Acheulean to my eyes and they suggest this is proof of the Erectus connection.
An Australian? disputed that, saying that flint was rare in Asia and that the early people used tools made from Bamboo, and demonstrated the idea with an arrow point made from Bamboo and butchered a fowl with a Bamboo knife.
But! The knife was undoubtedly inferior to a stone one. Also Flint is not by any means the only material that has been used, in addition I cannot make the connection between a shortage of material and crudeness in the finished article!
Roy.
Apparently the Chinese schools teach that modern day Chinese are direct descendants from Erectus with no African HSS intervention.
A Chinese geneticist sampled the DNA of 12000 men and found that evry single one had a DNA marker that arose in Africa 80000 yrs ago, thus disproving the Erectus claim.
Or does it?
Does anyone know how the rise of a given DNA marker can be aged as I'm way out of my depth on that?
Also of course the existence of that marker in no way disproves an Erectus connection despite what was inferred in the programme.
In addition the Chinese site the type of stone tools found all over central Asia, they are Acheulean to my eyes and they suggest this is proof of the Erectus connection.
An Australian? disputed that, saying that flint was rare in Asia and that the early people used tools made from Bamboo, and demonstrated the idea with an arrow point made from Bamboo and butchered a fowl with a Bamboo knife.
But! The knife was undoubtedly inferior to a stone one. Also Flint is not by any means the only material that has been used, in addition I cannot make the connection between a shortage of material and crudeness in the finished article!
Roy.
First people deny a thing, then they belittle it, then they say it was known all along! Von Humboldt