The Old World is a reference to those parts of Earth known to Europeans before the voyages of Christopher Columbus; it includes Europe, Asia and Africa.
with potentially significant implications in the matter of Pleistocene transatlantic population links.
Europe went through a major population upheaval about 14,500 years ago, at the end of the last ice age, according to DNA from the bones of hunter-gatherers.
Ancient DNA studies published in the last five years have transformed what we know about the early peopling of Europe. The picture they paint is one in which successive waves of immigration wash over the continent, bringing in new people, new genes and new technologies.
These studies helped confirm that Europe's early hunter-gatherers - who arrived about 40,000 years ago - were largely replaced by farmers arriving from the Middle East about 8000 years ago. These farmers then saw an influx of pastoralists from the Eurasian steppe about 4500 years ago, meaning modern Europe was shaped by three major population turnover events.
About 14,500 years ago, when Europe was emerging from the last ice age, the hunter-gatherers who had endured the chilly conditions were largely replaced by a different population of hunter-gatherers. Exactly where this new population came from is still unclear, but it seems likely that they came from warmer areas further south. "The main hypothesis would be glacial refugia in south-eastern Europe," says Johannes Krauseat the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena, Germany, who led the analysis.
"The population turnover after 14,500 years ago was completely unexpected," says Iosif Lazaridis at the Harvard Medical School in Boston. "It seems that the hunter-gatherers of Europe braved the worst of the ice age during the last glacial maximum but were then replaced when the ice age had begun to subside."
The work also may solve a long-standing mystery of why a certain genetic signature is missing in people of European ancestry. All people today are members of one of a relatively small number of distinct groups based on their mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down the maternal line. The distribution of people in each group gives us a sense of how humans spread across the world in prehistory.
It always seemed that Europe had a very unusual history of colonisation because one major haplogroup - the M clade - is almost entirely missing, despite being very common across Asia and even found in Native Americans. Instead, another major haplogroup - the N clade - is most common.
"Some authors had argued that the M and N haplogroups represented two different dispersal events from Africa," says Toomas Kivisild at the University of Cambridge. But Krause and his colleagues found that the M clade might actually have been common in Europe before the population turnover 14,500 years ago: three of the 18 most ancient humans they studied belonged to the M clade.
Lily wrote:So if ancient human remains are found in (the east of) the new world and they belong to the M clade that would reinforce the Solutrean crossing hypothesis?
At a minimum, it would reduce the pompous ass pseudo-certainty that Eastern New World Paleolithic populations were unrelated to their European contemporaries to the dustbin of unsupported speculation.
Not only would any valid comparison require Western European genetic data from previous to 14.5ky, but the strangely distinct-from-others-before-and-after-them Solutrians would have to cough up some of their remains (so far never found) to supply it.
Still ambiguous, but a great improvement over the idiocy of comparing recent Amerindian genetics against recent Europeans and triumphantly announcing no relationship as if that settled anything.
uniface wrote:At a minimum, it would reduce the pompous ass pseudo-certainty that Eastern New World Paleolithic populations were unrelated to their European contemporaries to the dustbin of unsupported speculation.
Not only would any valid comparison require Western European genetic data from previous to 14.5ky, but the strangely distinct-from-others-before-and-after-them Solutrians would have to cough up some of their remains (so far never found) to supply it.
Still ambiguous, but a great improvement over the idiocy of comparing recent Amerindian genetics against recent Europeans and triumphantly announcing no relationship as if that settled anything.
The Solutrean hypothesis is unsupported speculation /fantasy .
The results from ancient DNA are unambiguous and in every case none support the fantasy .
Lily wrote:So if ancient human remains are found in (the east of) the new world and they belong to the M clade that would reinforce the Solutrean crossing hypothesis?
An "if" as big as all the Ritzes combined .
Tomorrow or next week someone will stumble on a whole graveyard of 'm. You can wait for it.
It's not a matter of IF, only of WHEN.
Not ancient mt DNA haplogroup M found in America though .
You 'll be saying that for ever . Pure fantasy with absolutely nothing to support it .
"Because it'll be true every time. History bears witness. "
There is no evidence of mt DNA haplogroup M to be found in any ancient DNA from the Americas .
You obviously have a different understanding of the meaning of truth from the rest of us ,along with a an overdose of wishful thinking .
Not unusual in the alt /ufo.fundamentalist /supremacist crowds .
Pure fantasy with absolutely nothing to support it .
Yet.
And except the small matter of the fluted arrowheads and spearpoints from successive, linked eras and clearly from the same culture in their thousands on both sides of the Atlantic of course. You forgot to mention that little factoid, unsurprisingly. It wouldn't fit your narrative.
Artefacts ,even hugely contentious ones don't have any DNA , never mind the specific mt DNA (haplogroup M ) .
We know the narrative associated with the fantasists who ignore all contrary evidence and have nothing to support their own .
Tiompan wrote:... and have nothing to support their own .
Except those thousands of fluted arrowheads and spearpoints again. OOPS, talk about ignoring...
You have a huge blind spot, you know. You should go see an an opticien for the mind, mate.
Yep , " opoticien " says all .
Your blind spopt is reading and understanding the simplest of points (pun intended ) .
Read what was written .You seem unable to follow the simple points . e.g. In response to your comment “Tomorrow or next week someone will stumble on a whole graveyard of 'm. It's not a matter of IF, only of WHEN.” I said “Not ancient mt DNA haplogroup M found in America though . You 'll be saying that for ever . Pure fantasy with absolutely nothing to support it . “
Note how simple it is no evidence to support your comment re. “m” .
Hugely contentious supposedly pre Clovis artefacts does not support the presence of pre Clovis ancient mt DNA haplogroup m , even the nuttiest of the alt crowd could appreciate that .
It is not only illogical it also highlights your lack of understanding about what we know about Solutrean genetics and mt DNA haplogroup M in particular .
This is how the scam works, Tiompan : On one hand, DNA evidence is insisted on. Loudly and intransigently. While on the other hand, DNA analysis of recovered remains that could settle the issue is forbidden. Case in point : Windover Bog
Professor Doran’s team at Windover had the advantage of operating in the pre-NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) environment, NAGPRA became a law later in 1990. Extreme care was given by the team to avoid the introduction of race issue into the excavations. Windover must be the most politically correct (PC) archeological event of America. Professor Doran did not publish a single skull image out of the 168 skulls he found at Windover. Five years after finishing the excavations Doran published his book in 2002: Windover Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery. The book is an extremely valuable detailed collection of the information recovered, printed in large format on 393 pages. However, all images are of extremely poor quality and not a single image was printed of a human skull.
In fact Doran might be the first anthropologist on this planet who managed to write a book where in the indexing the word “skull” is not present. Maybe he has some sort of deep seated childhood fear of human skulls after hearing too many pirate stories…
The Brevard Museum of History and Natural Science, Fl. - with a dedicated section to Windover - has not a single image or a fully visible human skull displayed on their website or in their exhibition. The hundreds of scientific publications contain incredible details on the cavities and condition of every single tooth of the 168 individuals recovered, images of every single tool, fabric piece, etc. but not a single image of a skull. Also the average height of the Windover population is dramatically taller than the Indian population of the area but it is difficult to get exact data.
The documentation and proper scientific measurements of skulls is extremely important, a critical component in anthropological studies. The lack of this data – topped with the lack of proper connected DNA research – is a clear indication of an organized attempt to cover up the racial identities of the Windover population. Anthropologists traditionally use the method of multivariate analysis to establish racial identity based on skull measurements. For example Professor Jose Garcia from Spain used sophisticated instrumentation to take 90 different measurements of each of 33 skulls he found in the South of Baja, California Sur of the Pericu people and proved that they were not part of the Amerindian population but late survivors of a racially different group. The last members of this group died in the early 20th century.
Prof. Doran was asked by this writer in an email for images of skulls and related statistical data from Windover in February of 2006, and he replied with a long list of studies. There was one single item there that has been dedicated to the issue – and it has never been published, nor can Donna Fried, the writer be located. While writing this article in September of 2010 I sent similar requests to Professor Doran and the Brevard Museum again and I did not receive a reply.
Fried, Donna, 2000 A study of intrapopulation variation of the Windover site (8BR246) using multivariate analysis of craniometrics. Unpublished Masters thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee.
Professor Doran dedicated 14 pages and numerous pictures, tables of his book to the methods and studies of the DNA of the Windover people. His final conclusion is:
“Since the haplogroup frequency distribution of the prehistoric Windover population is unlike that of any known surviving or prehistoric group, they may represent the only demonstrated instance of the recent extinction of a group of Native Americans with no close surviving relatives.”
And that is a very tricky sentence, spoken like a true Talmudic scholar.
However he is still calling the Bog People “Native Americans” who have no close relatives hanging around today in America. He is trying to state that members of a different race were living at Windover, he is just not allowed to use the word “race.”
Dr. Joseph Lorenz from Coriell Institute for Medical Research was also searching hard for the DNA markers typical of “Native Americans” in the DNA samples taken from the bones of five individuals from Windover. He did not find what he was looking for but he did not stop. After comparing the Windover DNA to present European people’s he said:
“I went back to the screen and I looked at the sequences again, the first person’s DNA it looked European. When I looked at the second one it looked European. When I looked at the third, fourth and fifth it was slightly different from the first two but they looked European.”
The video clip where Dr. Lorenz makes his statement, see video above.
The Learning Channel had a program titled “Secrets of the Bog People: Windover” where Dr. Gregory from Cornell also stated that DNA samples taken from the brains of the Bog People show European origin.
Lily wrote:Whatever your 'understanding of Solutrean genetics – and you're obviously an 'expert'... – you still can't explain away the inconvenient thousands of fluted spearpoints and arrowheads on both sides of the pond.
Yet again you misunderstand , I never said I was an experrt but compared to you even some of the alt crowd are .
Yet again you are attempting to evade errors by changing the subject to artefacts .
There are no thousands of inconvenient fluted spearpoints , as mentioned earlier "Artefacts ,even hugely contentious ones " are just that ,hugely contentious ,you obviously are as unaware of their problems as you are the genetics .
Dr. Gregory from Cornell also stated that DNA samples taken from the brains of the Bog People show European origin.
TADA!
That tada sounds like the same one that thought the nature didn't "do " right angles , believed the natural geologiocal phenomena were megaliths , believed that Hagar Qim was built in the middle to late Pleistocene ,believes that pre Clovis mt DNA haplogroup M findings will be found in the Americas and thus provide support for the Solutrean hypothesis and god knows what else .
Count to ten, think then go and read before you post .
Do you know results of the DNA findings from Windover ?
Do you know the dates from Windover ?
The artifactual bottom line is that Clovis (and its immediate antecessors on the east coast) and Solutrian lithic technology are virtually identical -- a unique situation in archaeology. They differed in some details -- as each differed within itself at times, but their common identity and differentiation from the practices of all other peoples,before, during and after them, is incontestable.
The likelihood of this having happened by sheer chance (longer odds than winning the Irish Sweepstakes) being a non-starter, what's left is cultural transmission. Which, the last time I checked with Ockham, pretty much settles it.
With identity established artifactually, genetic confirmation will be gravy.
Tiompan wrote:Do you know results of the DNA findings from Windover ?
Dr. Gregory from Cornell stated that DNA samples taken from the brains of the Bog People show European origin.
Tiompan wrote:Do you know the dates from Windover ?
Irrelevant.
Yes , dates tend to irrelevant for you . That is why you believed that Hagar Qim was Paleolithic etc .
Look at the dates of the Solutreans , then look at the date of Windover .
The genetics are not irrelevant either and make a mockery of the believers .
You didn't respond to the question about whether you knew the DNA results from Windover.
Last edited by Tiompan on Sun Feb 07, 2016 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
uniface wrote:The artifactual bottom line is that Clovis (and its immediate antecessors on the east coast) and Solutrian lithic technology are virtually identical -- a unique situation in archaeology. They differed in some details -- as each differed within itself at times, but their common identity and differentiation from the practices of all other peoples,before, during and after them, is incontestable.
The likelihood of this having happened by sheer chance (longer odds than winning the Irish Sweepstakes) being a non-starter, what's left is cultural transmission. Which, the last time I checked with Ockham, pretty much settles it.
With identity established artifactually, genetic confirmation will be gravy.
Tiompan's red herring Mockery notwithstanding.
The genetics are not a red herring although they do make a mockery of the beliefs of the proponents in the hypothesis .
Identity is much better established genetically rather than with some similarities in the use of pressure flaking in relatively simple tool kits temporally and spatially distant , whcih are not best explained by hyper diffusionism .
And not forgetting that Clovis seems to have stopped at that one similarity with the Solutrean culture , where are the others ? maybe all the artists drowned en route .
Further, fwiw they were not identical ,Solutrean points had a diamond shape bottom whilse Clovis tended to have a concave bottom .
Tiompan wrote:You didn't respond to the question about whether you knew the DNA results from Windover.
Because I do while you clearly don't. And that would be a bit embarrassing for you. But you apparently insist on embarrassing yourself.
So be my guest!
We can use some entertainment on archaeologica. This stuff can get very dry. We need a jester like you to liven things up a bit.
But you obviously didn't .
The only one embarrasiing themselves here is you .
How many times have you simply got it wrong ,and failed to provide anything to support the fantasies ?
How many times has the eveidence shown you to have got it wrong . ?
As ever all you have is to offer is making personal comments minus any content or evidence and continually managing to refute the evidence provided .
There will be plenty mmore I'm sure to add the the growing catalogue .