|
|
Post by nebsen on Jul 11, 2019 18:54:20 GMT -5
I'm sure folks here on ESR have seen in the news about earliest human remains out side Africa found in Greece ..so if this correct than it pushes back much further out of African than was believed to have happened..but in this video their are doubters ..this is the only news piece that I have seen that shows a divide in this information..what I have seen has been more well... assured that this is the missing piece..I myself had to do my on deductions about this against the knowledge base I have..So what are your conclusion about this...??
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 12, 2019 6:53:22 GMT -5
Very interesting. This can be spun different ways. 210K years ago!!! So much for migration first to Australia and the Levant. I always contend that The Mediterranean Islands were always part of Africa and migration through that route always existed...just as today.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jul 12, 2019 11:19:29 GMT -5
In print
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02075-9
www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1376-zFrom Africa, but where? Big azz continent that.  Given that the Apidima 1 fossil and those from Misliya and Zuttiyeh are only partial skulls, some might argue that the specimens are too incomplete for their status as H. sapiens to be certain. Could molecular approaches be used to determine the species they are from? It is not always possible to recover DNA from ancient fossils. However, analysing ancient proteins preserved in fossils, a method termed palaeoproteomics, is starting to be used to identify species (see go.nature.com/2xkosom). Compared with analysis of ancient DNA, palaeoproteomics requires less specialized handling of the fossil to prevent contamination. |
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Jul 13, 2019 9:10:22 GMT -5
Very interesting. This can be spun different ways. 210K years ago!!! So much for migration first to Australia and the Levant. I always contend that The Mediterranean Islands were always part of Africa and migration through that route always existed...just as today. It would not be surprising if Greece is on the early migration track though the Palestine/Arabian zone being closer to Africa, as well as Spain, right near from Gibraltar across the Mediterranean, seem to be more in keeping with earliest sites. Plus the fragmentary nature of the evidence to date doesn't make that strong a case for Greece at present. WHat info do you have on an early cross-Medit track circa 100k plus ago? |
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 13, 2019 9:22:17 GMT -5
Where in Africa? That huge continent. IIRC ...I wrote a piece on it. Henn- Deep in Southern Africa Tishkoff - Namibia Area One author I cannot recollect who- The Sahara Leakey - East Africa, Kenya area My Personal view - ?? not sure. But I believe there were two main "emergence" and migrations. First South East Africa below below Zimbabwe. 2nd further north Botswana/Great Lakes. In print
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02075-9
www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1376-zFrom Africa, but where? Big azz continent that. Given that the Apidima 1 fossil and those from Misliya and Zuttiyeh are only partial skulls, some might argue that the specimens are too incomplete for their status as H. sapiens to be certain. Could molecular approaches be used to determine the species they are from? It is not always possible to recover DNA from ancient fossils. However, analysing ancient proteins preserved in fossils, a method termed palaeoproteomics, is starting to be used to identify species (see go.nature.com/2xkosom). Compared with analysis of ancient DNA, palaeoproteomics requires less specialized handling of the fossil to prevent contamination. |
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 13, 2019 9:30:50 GMT -5
These are all theories...  ancientpatriarchs.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/atlantide.jpg?w=474&h=258 Very interesting. This can be spun different ways. 210K years ago!!! So much for migration first to Australia and the Levant. I always contend that The Mediterranean Islands were always part of Africa and migration through that route always existed...just as today. It would not be surprising if Greece is on the early migration track though the Palestine/Arabian zone being closer to Africa, as well as Spain, right near from Gibraltar across the Mediterranean, seem to be more in keeping with earliest sites. Plus the fragmentary nature of the evidence to date doesn't make that strong a case for Greece at present. WHat info do you have on an early cross-Medit track circa 100k plus ago? |
|
|
|
Post by nebsen on Jul 13, 2019 21:49:49 GMT -5
Very interesting. This can be spun different ways. 210K years ago!!! So much for migration first to Australia and the Levant. I always contend that The Mediterranean Islands were always part of Africa and migration through that route always existed...just as today. It would not be surprising if Greece is on the early migration track though the Palestine/Arabian zone being closer to Africa, as well as Spain, right near from Gibraltar across the Mediterranean, seem to be more in keeping with earliest sites. Plus the fragmentary nature of the evidence to date doesn't make that strong a case for Greece at present. WHat info do you have on an early cross-Medit track circa 100k plus ago? Well, this made me think about Diop's book " Civilization Or Barbarism"...chapter 3 the Myth Of Atlantis Restored To Historical Science Through Radiocarbon Analysis : Explosion of the Island Of Santorini In the Cyclades in 1420 BC He goes at length talking about Cretan ancient Minoan civilization which was a forerunner of the Greeks & how Africa played a very important role in their development..no I know this is far removed from this find in dates ..but he (Diop) almost speaks of them being a satellite of ancient Africa = ancient Egypt..thoughts   |
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jul 14, 2019 8:34:45 GMT -5
Where in Africa? That huge continent. IIRC ...I wrote a piece on it. Henn- Deep in Southern Africa Tishkoff - Namibia Area One author I cannot recollect who- The Sahara Leakey - East Africa, Kenya area My Personal view - ?? not sure. But I believe there were two main "emergence" and migrations. First South East Africa below below Zimbabwe. 2nd further north Botswana/Great Lakes. I agree that modern/recent/post Pleistocene African populations expanded just from where you say. Dunno know enough paleontology to speak on populations in locations way back 2 - 300,000 years gone. I imagine, however, they migrated to Greece from somewhere on Africa's east to central Mediterranean coast after expanding, who knows much earlier, from points much further south. Wish Swenet was here to inform us on Africa and peripheries earliest Middle Stone Age Homo sapiens. |
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Jul 14, 2019 14:27:54 GMT -5
It would not be surprising if Greece is on the early migration track though the Palestine/Arabian zone being closer to Africa, as well as Spain, right near from Gibraltar across the Mediterranean, seem to be more in keeping with earliest sites. Plus the fragmentary nature of the evidence to date doesn't make that strong a case for Greece at present. WHat info do you have on an early cross-Medit track circa 100k plus ago? Well, this made me think about Diop's book " Civilization Or Barbarism"...chapter 3 the Myth Of Atlantis Restored To Historical Science Through Radiocarbon Analysis : Explosion of the Island Of Santorini In the Cyclades in 1420 BC He goes at length talking about Cretan ancient Minoan civilization which was a forerunner of the Greeks & how Africa played a very important role in their development..no I know this is far removed from this find in dates ..but he (Diop) almost speaks of them being a satellite of ancient Africa = ancient Egypt..thoughts View Attachment THis would be after the distant 150-200k prehistoric timeline, but true, based on the skeletal phenotypes, some more recent ancient inhabitants appeared as African type tropicals (Larry Angel etc) which SOY Keita notes in his writings. Djehuti used to quote a passage about Crete on ES about this. |
|
|
|
Post by nebsen on Jul 14, 2019 15:44:03 GMT -5
Well, this made me think about Diop's book " Civilization Or Barbarism"...chapter 3 the Myth Of Atlantis Restored To Historical Science Through Radiocarbon Analysis : Explosion of the Island Of Santorini In the Cyclades in 1420 BC He goes at length talking about Cretan ancient Minoan civilization which was a forerunner of the Greeks & how Africa played a very important role in their development..no I know this is far removed from this find in dates ..but he (Diop) almost speaks of them being a satellite of ancient Africa = ancient Egypt..thoughts View Attachment THis would be after the distant 150-200k prehistoric timeline, but true, based on the skeletal phenotypes, some more recent ancient inhabitants appeared as African type tropicals (Larry Angel etc) which SOY Keita notes in his writings. Djehuti used to quote a passage about Crete on ES about this. I think since I took Civilization or Barbarism out of my book case I my as well read more ..it's been a while since I took this book out by Diop I think it was his last book..also I miss Djehuti...!! |
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 21, 2019 18:59:50 GMT -5
Just came across this paper....significance Mozambican genetic variation provides new insights into the Bantu expansion -Armando Semoa , Magdalen Abstract The Bantu expansion, which started in West Central Africa around 5,000 BP, constitutes a major migratory movement involving the joint spread of peoples and languages across sub-Saharan Africa. Despite the rich linguistic and archaeological evidence available, the genetic relationships between different Bantu-speaking populations and the migratory routes they followed during various phases of the expansion remain poorly understood. Here, we analyze the genetic profiles of southwestern and southeastern Bantu-speaking peoples
located at the edges of the Bantu expansion by generating genome-wide data for 200 individuals from 12
Mozambican and 3 Angolan populations using ~1.9 million autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms. Incorporating a wide range of available genetic data, our analyses confirm previous results favoring a “late split” between West and East Bantu speakers, following a joint passage through the rainforest. In addition, we find that Bantu speakers from eastern Africa display genetic substructure, with Mozambican populations forming a
gradient of relatedness along a North-South cline stretching from the coastal border between Kenya and
Tanzania to South Africa. This gradient is further associated with a southward increase in genetic homogeneity, and involved minimum admixture with resident populations. Together, our results provide the first genetic evidence in support of a rapid North-South dispersal of Bantu peoples along the Indian Ocean Coast, as inferred from the distribution and antiquity of Early Iron Age assemblages associated with the Kwale archaeological tradition. ---- Where in Africa? That huge continent. IIRC ...I wrote a piece on it. Henn- Deep in Southern Africa Tishkoff - Namibia Area One author I cannot recollect who- The Sahara Leakey - East Africa, Kenya area My Personal view - ?? not sure. But I believe there were two main "emergence" and migrations. First South East Africa below below Zimbabwe. 2nd further north Botswana/Great Lakes. I agree that modern/recent/post Pleistocene African populations expanded just from where you say. Dunno know enough paleontology to speak on populations in locations way back 2 - 300,000 years gone. I imagine, however, they migrated to Greece from somewhere on Africa's east to central Mediterranean coast after expanding, who knows much earlier, from points much further south. Wish Swenet was here to inform us on Africa and peripheries earliest Middle Stone Age Homo sapiens. |
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Jul 23, 2019 17:02:34 GMT -5
Just came across this paper....significance Mozambican genetic variation provides new insights into the Bantu expansion -Armando Semoa , Magdalen Abstract The Bantu expansion, which started in West Central Africa around 5,000 BP, constitutes a major migratory movement involving the joint spread of peoples and languages across sub-Saharan Africa. Despite the rich linguistic and archaeological evidence available, the genetic relationships between different Bantu-speaking populations and the migratory routes they followed during various phases of the expansion remain poorly understood. Here, we analyze the genetic profiles of southwestern and southeastern Bantu-speaking peoples
located at the edges of the Bantu expansion by generating genome-wide data for 200 individuals from 12
Mozambican and 3 Angolan populations using ~1.9 million autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms. Incorporating a wide range of available genetic data, our analyses confirm previous results favoring a “late split” between West and East Bantu speakers, following a joint passage through the rainforest. In addition, we find that Bantu speakers from eastern Africa display genetic substructure, with Mozambican populations forming a
gradient of relatedness along a North-South cline stretching from the coastal border between Kenya and
Tanzania to South Africa. This gradient is further associated with a southward increase in genetic homogeneity, and involved minimum admixture with resident populations. Together, our results provide the first genetic evidence in support of a rapid North-South dispersal of Bantu peoples along the Indian Ocean Coast, as inferred from the distribution and antiquity of Early Iron Age assemblages associated with the Kwale archaeological tradition. [/quote] You said in times past you had doubts about the Bantu expansion. How does this paper square with those? It seems to show such an expansion. What are your thoughts? QUOTE: "Together, our results provide the first genetic evidence in support of a rapid North-South dispersal of
Bantu peoples along the Indian Ocean Coast, as inferred from the distribution and antiquity of Early
Iron Age assemblages associated with the Kwale archaeological tradition. " |
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jul 23, 2019 19:56:32 GMT -5
Ain't there a no baNtu expansion thread? No, there was no mass demic migration from Nigeria/Cameroon/Gabon of a Bantu people. This study and ADMIXTURE support Bantu genomics is East African with two basic origin ancestries. One is southeastern and the other is eastern. Yes, there's a 3rd very minor W Afr ancestry. What it says about iron totally ignores the fact that supposed source and sink are contemporaneous. Does it consider that the production technology differs? Independent invention not borrowing. books.google.com/books?id=C1NPDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT35&lpg=PT35&dq=mubuga+katuruka+grunderbeekBasically, I don't heed these articles. I just examine the raw data. Ytes heavily invest in a needed make believe Africa that independent Africans who think with their own minds and knowledge simply do not recognize as factual. The 1980's UNESCO General History published but distanced itself from the conclusions that a baNtu wrote for them, going so far as to delete his article from the paperback edition. BANTU SPEAKERS ARE NOT OF SINGLE ORIGINOrange is southeastern. Watermelon is eastern. The Mozambique originated component expanded north! Yellow is western (Gulf of Guinea).   Samwiri Lwanga-Lunyiigo told everybody back in 1976
"... movement of Bantu speakers from West Africa to
central, eastern, and southern Africa did not take place."  The problem is these Euros are self-proclaimed experts about what they really know not. How many of them dream in a baNtu language when asleep at night? Yet they know more about it than a born baNtu speaking African who may speak 2 or 3 baNtu languages as a matter of course. |
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 23, 2019 20:17:15 GMT -5
ditto
No, there was no demic expansion from
Nigeria/Cameroon/Gabon of a Bantu folk.
This study and ADMIXTURE support Bantu
genomics is East African with two basic
origin ancestries. One is southeastern
and the other is eastern. Yes, there's a
3rd very minor W Afr ancestry.
"Basically, I don't read these articles.
I just examine the raw data. Euros are
heavily invested in a make believe Africa
that independent Africans who think with their own minds and knowledge simply do
not recognize as factual. " No, the data do NOT show a Bantu expansion from West Africa the authors are "wrongly interpreting" it that way ala Heather Norton. What they should have done was INCLUDE the supposed source population....Nigeria/Cameroon They did not. Just came across this paper....significance Mozambican genetic variation provides new insights into the Bantu expansion -Armando Semoa , Magdalen Abstract The Bantu expansion, which started in West Central Africa around 5,000 BP, constitutes a major migratory movement involving the joint spread of peoples and languages across sub-Saharan Africa. Despite the rich linguistic and archaeological evidence available, the genetic relationships between different Bantu-speaking populations and the migratory routes they followed during various phases of the expansion remain poorly understood. Here, we analyze the genetic profiles of southwestern and southeastern Bantu-speaking peoples
located at the edges of the Bantu expansion by generating genome-wide data for 200 individuals from 12
Mozambican and 3 Angolan populations using ~1.9 million autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms. Incorporating a wide range of available genetic data, our analyses confirm previous results favoring a “late split” between West and East Bantu speakers, following a joint passage through the rainforest. In addition, we find that Bantu speakers from eastern Africa display genetic substructure, with Mozambican populations forming a
gradient of relatedness along a North-South cline stretching from the coastal border between Kenya and
Tanzania to South Africa. This gradient is further associated with a southward increase in genetic homogeneity, and involved minimum admixture with resident populations. Together, our results provide the first genetic evidence in support of a rapid North-South dispersal of Bantu peoples along the Indian Ocean Coast, as inferred from the distribution and antiquity of Early Iron Age assemblages associated with the Kwale archaeological tradition. You said in times past you had doubts about the Bantu expansion. How does this paper square with those? It seems to show such an expansion. What are your thoughts? QUOTE: "Together, our results provide the first genetic evidence in support of a rapid North-South dispersal of
Bantu peoples along the Indian Ocean Coast, as inferred from the distribution and antiquity of Early
Iron Age assemblages associated with the Kwale archaeological tradition. "[/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 23, 2019 20:32:21 GMT -5
My post is not about the supposed Bantu Expansion....my point was Mozambique/Zimbabwe plays an important part in the OOA dispersal and origin of AMH,
|
|
