Racism is not a scientific field, storm front is not a technical journal, and trying to be politically correct can often lead to others respecting ones thought process a bit more.....rather than dismissing it as unevolved.
2 items. put 'we the people' at the top of the tree and then remember we all came from a single celled critter in the womb To get technical: i see the core lipids as sustaining specific wavelengths of energy, within a given environment. With them base colors, most all protiens can be built. I see the process ever evolving. See the fields (size), note the golden ratio at combinations (capture) the reaction (release) to build your data base.
bones don't survival very well in moist equatorial regions...finding fossils are like finding the proverbial needle in the haystack at the best of times...
Granny says, "Dat's right - we all come down from the 12 tribes o' Israel... Europeans had common ancestors 1,000 years ago May 7,`13 -- Europeans appear to be more closely related than previously thought.
This evidence is consistent with the idea that these populations derive a substantial proportion of their ancestry from various groups that expanded during the migration period from the fourth through ninth centuries [51]. This period begins with the Huns moving into eastern Europe towards the end of the fourth century, establishing an empire including modern-day Hungary and Romania, and continues in the fifth century as various Germanic groups moved into and ruled much of the western Roman empire. This was followed by the expansion of the Slavic populations into regions of low population density beginning in the sixth century, reaching their maximum by the 10th century [52]. The eastern populations with high rates of IBD are highly coincident with the modern distribution of Slavic languages, so it is natural to speculate that much of the higher rates were due to this expansion. The inclusion of (non-Slavic speaking) Hungary and Romania in the group of eastern populations sharing high IBD could indicate the effect of other groups (e.g., the Huns) on ancestry in these regions, or because some of the same group of people who elsewhere are known as Slavs adopted different local cultures in those regions. On the other hand, we find that France and the Italian and Iberian peninsulas have the lowest rates of genetic common ancestry in the last 1,500 years (other than Turkey and Cyprus), and are the regions of continental Europe thought to have been least affected by the Slavic and Hunnic migrations. These regions were, however, moved into by Germanic tribes (e.g., the Goths, Ostrogoths, and Vandals), which suggests that perhaps the Germanic migrations/invasions of these regions entailed a smaller degree of population replacement than the Slavic and/or Hunnic, or perhaps that the Germanic groups were less genealogically cohesive. This is consistent with the argument that the Slavs moved into relatively depopulated areas, while Gothic migrations may have been takeovers by small groups of extant populations [54],[55]. In addition to the very few genetic common ancestors that Italians share both with each other and with other Europeans, we have seen significant modern substructure within Italy (i.e., Figure 2) that predates most of this common ancestry, and estimate that most of the common ancestry shared between Italy and other populations is older than about 2,300 years (Figure S16). Also recall that most populations show no substructure with regards to the number of blocks shared with Italians, implying that the common ancestors other populations share with Italy predate divisions within these other populations. This suggests significant old substructure and large population sizes within Italy, strong enough that different groups within Italy share as little recent common ancestry as other distinct, modern-day countries, substructure that was not homogenized during the migration period. These patterns could also reflect in part geographic isolation within Italy as well as a long history of settlement of Italy from diverse sources. http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001555?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+plosbiology%2FNewArticles+(Ambra+-+Biology+New+Articles)
Tying my ideas to StormFront shows an inferior intellect that can't handle too many thoughts and has to bundle them into small packages. If I did that, I'd just equate your claims to Stalinism and arrogantly dismiss them as if you violated some infallible required conclusion. PC is intimidation; I wouldn't want my thought processes respected for being wimpy.
Many people were enslaved and carried thousands of miles until sold. This was the equivalent of a migration in spreading genes. Merchants would spread their genes all over the continent. Bastards from prostitution, rape, or casual affairs might have to leave or their mothers did. When crops failed, people might have to wander. Plagues would de-populate large areas, which would be filled with immigrants. Some may even have been invited. Petty wars, bandits, and knight-errants also spread genes. Priests were far from celibate and would change posts a lot. Those who stayed put might die out from inbreeding. The study is narrow-minded if it concentrates on mass migrations. There may have been more individualism in those times, especially by people who were forced to be that way in order to survive in a fragile and disorganized society.
You'd have better luck looking at our genetics and morphology for clues.. Fossilisation is too rare an event to be all that great for finding entire evolutionary family trees.
Another non-answer from people who think they have all the answers. Fanatics don't have to debate. To them, everything is self-evident and all they have to do is shout the opposition down.
what is self evident is that the life of nature has been here a long time, evolving. and now the knowledge to comprehend that fact has also evolved. ie.... existence can comprehend itself (pinnacle of evolution) Any others have the same idea?
Well one thing that stands out to me 1000 years ago is the viking raids. Where they looted, pillaged, plundered and raped. I would hypothesize that the Viking's raping everything with 2 legs in Europe played a large role in this sudden convergence.
Please don't respond to Prometheus anymore. I was reading this thread and it was awesome until he put in some political nonsense. It was an actual discussion. .
The term "species," however scientific, is a little vague. Hence, so is the definition of "sub-species." E.g., lions and tigers are of the same genus, but usually thought of as different species within that genus. Yet, they can inter-breed. Humans, Denisovans, and Neanderthals apparently could inter-breed, as well. On that ground, they should all be deemed of the same species. Neanderthals, at least, looked quite different from humans but, since they were of our species, I think it's fair to call them a sub-species. Likewise humans and Denisovans. But we should be prepared to revise our categories as we learn more.
lions and tigers interbreed but without viable/fertile offspring so the genetic difference is too great... yes "Humans, Denisovans, and Neanderthals apparently could inter-breed" but at what point in the time line? if the time from which they became isolated from each is too great they will lose their ability to interbreed...so at one point they/we were all the same specie with regional differences but at some point due to isolation we may changed genetically to a point where interbreeding no longer produces viable young or the regional variations no longer recognize each other as the same specie... I don't if anyone has any idea as yet what the denisovans looked like as remains are very scarce, neanderthals were not so different that they couldn't pass unnoticed in a crowd today... but I do agree there is still a lot of research to be done before this is definitively settled...species or sub-species is very debatable
No real disagreement. FYI, here is what is claimed to be the best researched reconstruction of what Neanderthals looked like: http://io9.com/5954078/scientists-c...nderthal-yet--including-all-the-naughty-parts Assuming for the moment that the reconstuctors got it right, and that Neanderthals looked like this fellow, I think most of us would take a second look if we saw him, and say, "Uh, there's something wrong with that guy." He looks human-ish, yes, but not fully human in the way that we usually mean. Of course, the reconstucters could be way off.
why so affixed on 'inter-breading'? Life!!! They'll have genes, that our evironment can use, s\let a living system may not fair well. Do you know what makes you conscious?
Of course there is a minority opinion that is interesting. http://www.themandus.org/what_they_looked_like.html
Yeah, until we find a Neanderthal who is really, really well-preserved, all our reconstructions are just educated guesses.
The first advanced Bronze Age civilization of Europe was established by the Minoans about 5,000 years before present. Since Sir Arthur Evans exposed the Minoan civic centre of Knossos, archaeologists have speculated on the origin of the founders of the civilization. Evans proposed a North African origin; Cycladic, Balkan, Anatolian and Middle Eastern origins have also been proposed. Here we address the question of the origin of the Minoans by analysing mitochondrial DNA from Minoan osseous remains from a cave ossuary in the Lassithi plateau of Crete dated 4,4003,700 years before present. Shared haplotypes, principal component and pairwise distance analyses refute the Evans North African hypothesis. Minoans show the strongest relationships with Neolithic and modern European populations and with the modern inhabitants of the Lassithi plateau. Our data are compatible with the hypothesis of an autochthonous development of the Minoan civilization by the descendants of the Neolithic settlers of the island. Our results strongly suggest that the principal matrilineal genetic relationships of the Minoans are with Neolithic, ancient and modern European populations. Such findings are in support of the hypothesis of an autochthonous origin of the Minoan civilization by the descendants of the Neolithic settlers of the island4, 13. As it has been proposed for the other Neolithic European populations21, 22, 23, the most likely origin of the Cretan Neolithic settlers was Anatolia and the Middle East4, 7, 9, 10, 11. Given that the timing of the first Neolithic inhabitants to reach Crete 9,000 YBP coincides with the migration of Neolithic farmers out of Anatolia3, it is highly probable that the same ancestral population that spread to Europe, also spread to Crete and contributed to the founding of the early Minoan civilization. It has been suggested24 that in addition to agricultural methods, the Anatolian farmers also brought with them the Indo-European language25, 26. The current prevailing hypothesis is that the Minoan language was unrelated to the Indo-European family. Alternatively, as suggested by Renfrew5, Proto-Minoan was one of the branches derived from the Proto-Indo-European language about 9,000 YBP. The PCA analysis also highlights the high affinity of the Minoans to the current inhabitants of the Lassithi plateau as well as Greece. Among the top 10 nearest neighbours to our Minoan population sample, four are Greek populations and two of these from Lassithi prefecture (Fig. 5). The close relationship of the Minoans to modern Cretans is also apparent, when analysis is restricted to populations originating from Greece (Fig. 6b). Particularly in respect to the first PCA (capturing 92% of the variance of this particular subset of the data), the Minoans are extremely close to the modern Lassithi population, the populations from the islands of Chios and Euboea, as well as the populations of Argolis and Lakonia (Southern Greece ) (Fig. 6b). Thus, the modern inhabitants of the Lassithi plateau still carry the maternal genetic signatures of their ancient predecessors of the Minoan population. http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n5/full/ncomms2871.html
it's difficult to know the correct thickness for muscle tissue and fat to place on them...they may look odd but certainly not out of place I've met a few people over the years that resemble the model pictured, one friend went by the name Java because of his resemblance to the classic image of Java man Java man
