|
Post by anansi on Jan 1, 2019 1:34:00 GMT -5
Asante said: [ Well firstly Africans themselves had to deal with the devastating affects of colonial diseases on the indigenous populations. Some sources have noted an entire small villages of Africans affected by small pox were almost completely eradicated. ]
Yes but the supposed Africans who traveled and settled among the Hawaiians were pre colonial as far back as the AEs already had those pathogens linked to Eurasian domesticated animals, see your link.
|
|
|
Post by asante on Jan 1, 2019 12:49:45 GMT -5
Asante said: [ Well firstly Africans themselves had to deal with the devastating affects of colonial diseases on the indigenous populations. Some sources have noted an entire small villages of Africans affected by small pox were almost completely eradicated. ] Yes but the supposed Africans who traveled and settled among the Hawaiians were pre colonial as far back as the AEs already had those pathogens linked to Eurasian domesticated animals, see your link. What pathogens?? Y'all little naysaying brigade is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Jan 1, 2019 23:45:25 GMT -5
Asante said: [ Well firstly Africans themselves had to deal with the devastating affects of colonial diseases on the indigenous populations. Some sources have noted an entire small villages of Africans affected by small pox were almost completely eradicated. ] Yes but the supposed Africans who traveled and settled among the Hawaiians were pre colonial as far back as the AEs already had those pathogens linked to Eurasian domesticated animals, see your link. What pathogens?? Y'all little naysaying brigade is ridiculous. Check your link.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jan 5, 2019 18:57:46 GMT -5
^In addition to the above, how the heck didn't the egyptians teach the hawaiians how to work metal but supposedly taught them hieroglyphs? Hawaiians were a stone age people. Metal working would've been helpful. Well for starters the Island of Hawaii has no iron ore to mine! There is virtually nothing that can come from that lava formed island as far as metallurgy. Give me an example of this being done. You're only talking about of your azz again. If you're not familiar with the late Ivan Van Sertima's book "they came before Columbus" he makes reference to the mixed race individuals from the data set; "This is rather surprising because Constance Irwin and Dr. Wiercinski (1972) have both reported that skeletal remains of Africans have been found in Mexico."
Dr. Wiercinski (1972) supports this claim with skeletal evidence from several Olmec sites where he found skeletons that were analogous to the Negroid type black.
Wiercinski discovered that 13.5 percent of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5 percent of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were Africoid (Rensberger,1988; Wiercinski, 1972; Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975). He made a more detailed reference to the findings in one of his famous lecture tours that's on youtube. ....You just prove my point that you are a retard. "Something" real? So you are a linguist qualified to validate or dismiss a genetic relationships between languages? There are too many grammatical errors your post with regards to your language transition for me to think that you are capable of any sort of linguistic critique. Again you show that I should never entertain your post. I road you out so bad in that thread about cooning Africans earlier this year that you have obsessed with trying to one up or besmirch any and every thing that comes I present. Something that you failed to acnknowledge in your pettiness is the actual f^cking stories of the Hawaiians and the ancient Kemites were telling the same thing. If the diffusion of the story of one culture's supreme deity is not proof of cultural interaction by your standards then so be it. I and others (and an actual Hawaiian who noted the comparison) on the other hand see it as heavy proof. Edit by mgt. You know why. I thought telling ppl f this and f that, and saying they need to go suck things were grounds for being banned or at least an account suspension. All I see here is a modified post and no punitive action. Maybe ESR has devolved into the worse parts of ES? Oh well... I know Asante wouldn't bust a grape in a food fight. Typical online anonymous tough guy but straight sucka in real life. Now let's get to the scholarship for those so inclined. Below is a genetic study of native Hawaiians and they failed to find any african dna: journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0047881#pone-0047881-g001Now let's address the supposed "negroid" skeletons found among ancient americans. Asante posted 3 sources: Rensberger,1988; Wiercinski, 1972; Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975. However, there are really 1 source cuz the other 2 get their "negroid skeleton" claim from here: Wiercinski,A. (1972). "Inter- and Intrapopulational Racial Differentiation of Tlatilco, Cerro de Las Mesas, Teothuacan, Monte Alban and Yucatan Maya", XXXlX Congreso Intern. de Americanistas, Lima 1970, Vol. 1, p. 231-252. As is obvious from the title of Wiercinski's paper he believes in race and is operating off the bogus racial (and racist) anthropology of the times. Race is social construct but has no biological validity as shown by bio-anthropologists for the last 30 years or so now. That's why Asante has to use these old ass studies to try to back his claim. Now how did Wiercinski classify some of the skeletons as "negroid"? There're several different models that assign race based on various cranial measurements. All these models don't agree (that's red flag #1). Wiercinski then compared the measurements of the ancient native american skulls to those of what he thought was 3 racial representatives: mongolians, ugandans and polish. Then he assigned their race based on how close the native american skulls were to these 3 groups based on the model he used. Any bioanthropologist who did this today would be laughed out of academia. That's how ridiculous his methods were. But it gets even worse, he actually thought these native americans were descended from more than just "negroids". Actually he's more specific than "negroids"--he says "equatorial - Bushmenoid" so that rules out Ancient Egyptians and West Africans as the source of the supposed "negroid" ancestry. See below for table of his findings: Racial composition: % of Tlatilco % of Cerro Laponoid 21% 32% Armenoid 18% 4.5% Ainoid-Arctic 11% 14% Pacific 36% 45% Equatorial - Bushmenoid 14% 4.5% So according to Wiercinski, the 2nd largest ancestry of the olmecs were NE Europeans such Laplanders (Laponoid), people from the area of Armenia/N Iran/W Turkey (Armenoid) contributed even more ancestry than africans, Ainu ppl from Japan/Siberians (Ainoid-Artic) and ppl from the Pacific all contributed more ancestry to Native Ams than Africans. It's obvious that Wiercinski's "study" was pseudo-science at best. But ideologues eat up his nonsense like pie and cherry pick his findings to back their wacky claims. Also cranial measurement is a faulty way to assign a skeleton to a population or ancestry because it's highly biased by the sample skulls and measurement model one uses. Some bioanthropologists who did genetic study of Native Americans even called out this problem in this study:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4733658/. They too got incorrect ancestry assignment of Native Am skeletons using skull measurements. Also there's the famous case of Kennewick Man. See this study: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4878456/I know Asante can't understand the above but this post isn't for him. It's for those who wanna learn.
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 6, 2019 14:03:29 GMT -5
Hahaha The Ancient One proved to be an upsetter. DNA proves ancestral relationships. Eske Willerslev's genomic analysis showed one thing. Regardless of long or broad head • Eva • Clovis peoples • the Ancient One it's the same general genepool as modern indigenous Americans.
I used to ponder a southern Pacific crossing of 'Austro-Melanesian' to South America. I wonder what ADMIXTURE would make of that? I mean what frequency their K is in an Indigenous American chart.
I accept medieval Malien mariners reached South America. Don't know if there were enough to leave much of a genomic impact over 600 yrs later.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jan 7, 2019 1:14:06 GMT -5
Hahaha The Ancient One proved to be an upsetter. DNA proves ancestral relationships. Eske Willerslev's genomic analysis showed one thing. Regardless of long or broad head • Eva • Clovis peoples • the Ancient One it's the same general genepool as modern indigenous Americans. I used to ponder a southern Pacific crossing of 'Austro-Melanesian' to South America. I wonder what ADMIXTURE would make of that? I mean what frequency their K is in an Indigenous American chart. I accept medieval Malien mariners reached South America. Don't know if there were enough to leave much of a genomic impact over 600 yrs later. You can make out a bit of austro-melanesian type dna among Nat Ams at k6 in Fig5 of the Willerslev paper. It's more present in some Nat Am pops than others. I believe the Willerslev paper argues it came from N America. Another paper from Reich came out the same year and found the same austro-mela dna among Nat Ams even in Alaska/Canada. They believed it was from a shared ancestor that mixed in Asia before Nat Ams crossed over to the americas. I stopped considering the southern pacific crossing after I found out polynesians got to polynesia not that long ago. I don't know much about the alleged Malian crossing aside from what I read in Van Sertima's They Came Before Columbus a while back. I'm not confident in much of what he writes on the topic though. But, regarding the genetic impact if it did happen, idk if we'd even be able to tell. There were africans from the Mali and Senegambia regions taken to Mexico in the slave trade so how would we sort that out.
|
|
|
Post by asante on Jan 7, 2019 12:12:49 GMT -5
Well for starters the Island of Hawaii has no iron ore to mine! There is virtually nothing that can come from that lava formed island as far as metallurgy. Give me an example of this being done. You're only talking about of your azz again. If you're not familiar with the late Ivan Van Sertima's book "they came before Columbus" he makes reference to the mixed race individuals from the data set; "This is rather surprising because Constance Irwin and Dr. Wiercinski (1972) have both reported that skeletal remains of Africans have been found in Mexico."
Dr. Wiercinski (1972) supports this claim with skeletal evidence from several Olmec sites where he found skeletons that were analogous to the Negroid type black.
Wiercinski discovered that 13.5 percent of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5 percent of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were Africoid (Rensberger,1988; Wiercinski, 1972; Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975). He made a more detailed reference to the findings in one of his famous lecture tours that's on youtube. ....You just prove my point that you are a retard. "Something" real? So you are a linguist qualified to validate or dismiss a genetic relationships between languages? There are too many grammatical errors your post with regards to your language transition for me to think that you are capable of any sort of linguistic critique. Again you show that I should never entertain your post. I road you out so bad in that thread about cooning Africans earlier this year that you have obsessed with trying to one up or besmirch any and every thing that comes I present. Something that you failed to acnknowledge in your pettiness is the actual f^cking stories of the Hawaiians and the ancient Kemites were telling the same thing. If the diffusion of the story of one culture's supreme deity is not proof of cultural interaction by your standards then so be it. I and others (and an actual Hawaiian who noted the comparison) on the other hand see it as heavy proof. Edit by mgt. You know why. No aDNA? If not then you have no point! Why? "A study published Thursday in the journal Current Biology found only evidence of Polynesian DNA in human remains on the island that predate European contact in 1722. "link
The title of this thread refutes this alone. This same type of study on the population structure of "living" populations on Easter Island, found no sign of the African E1b1a that the study which is the subject of this thread found in ancient Easter Island populations. The same sources from Ivan Van Sertima's famous " They Came Before Columbus" book, in which he used to established the presence of Africoid populations here in the Americas. You must not confide in the works of one of the late Rutgers professor and master teacher (how did I not know this)?
While it's not denied that the source used in Van Sertima's book to confirm the presence of "Negroid" populations in the Americas is based on old models of "racial" characterizations, the reality is is that there is genetic and phenotypic distinction of so called "Negroid" populations as CA Diop stated in 'The African Origins of Civilization'.
Ehhh no! Unless you can point to a living population that the "Negroid" classification can possibly be confused with then you have no point.
So you sifted through all of that information, but forgot to read the context to the data?
"Poe (1997), Keita (1993,1996), Carlson and Gerven (1979)and MacGaffey (1970) have made it clear that these people were Africans or Negroes with so-called 'caucasian features' resulting from genetic drift and microevolution (Keita, 1996; Poe, 1997). This would mean that the racial composition of 26.9 percent of the crania found at Tlatilco and 9.1 percent of crania from Cerro de las Mesas were of African origin."
This statement was directly below the last table. Don't know how you missed it. READ IN BETWEEN THE LINES OF RESEARCH. It takes genuine intelligence to decipher the true narrative, as there is no standard for this type of investigation.
Unless you can find a modern living population that can be mistaken as Negroid with no genetic relationship to "Negroid" populations then your claim is bunk. As I've stated before the trail of sickle cell that goes throughout southeast Asia is the proof of a genetic relationship between Niger-Congo speakers (where sickle cell came from) and certain southeast Asian populations who may resemble one another. This study finding E1b1a coming from the Southeast Asian Pacific (as one would also logically conclude that the Polynesian ancestry of the Island came from as well) only strengthens my argument. It's funny because Africurious is the same dude who didn't even know how to properly format your post. Your original post that I'm responding to was so horribly formatted that it was unreadable, and you obviously took that advise when I brought it up in my recent post that you had pressed Anansi to delete. You like throw shots, but you can't take them. Then you want to cry about abuse pretending to be the victim. That is so weak and cowardly!
ANANSI is he getting threatened with suspension in his inbox for these constant sly insults or is it only me? Are his insults being "personally edited" by you, as mines are. I hope that this isn't only going to be on me because we have opposing views on certain topics!
As stated close to half a century ago in the "Destruction of Black Civilization" this is perhaps the worst issue with certain members on Egyptsearchreloaded and the old forum.
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Jan 7, 2019 23:43:06 GMT -5
Asante said [is he getting threatened with suspension in his inbox for these constant sly insults or is it only me? Are his insults being "personally edited" by you, as mines are. I hope that this isn't only going to be on me because we have opposing views on certain topics!]
It's certainly not about the topic or disagreement. You obviously read the regs so now you definitely know what the triggered response will be from staff. Do not reply on this specific topic in this thread, avoid derailment.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jan 8, 2019 22:36:48 GMT -5
No aDNA? If not then you have no point! Why? "A study published Thursday in the journal Current Biology found only evidence of Polynesian DNA in human remains on the island that predate European contact in 1722. "link
The title of this thread refutes this alone. This same type of study on the population structure of "living" populations on Easter Island, found no sign of the African E1b1a that the study which is the subject of this thread found in ancient Easter Island populations. The same sources from Ivan Van Sertima's famous " They Came Before Columbus" book, in which he used to established the presence of Africoid populations here in the Americas. You must not confide in the works of one of the late Rutgers professor and master teacher (how did I not know this)?
While it's not denied that the source used in Van Sertima's book to confirm the presence of "Negroid" populations in the Americas is based on old models of "racial" characterizations, the reality is is that there is genetic and phenotypic distinction of so called "Negroid" populations as CA Diop stated in 'The African Origins of Civilization'.
Ehhh no! Unless you can point to a living population that the "Negroid" classification can possibly be confused with then you have no point.
So you sifted through all of that information, but forgot to read the context to the data?
"Poe (1997), Keita (1993,1996), Carlson and Gerven (1979)and MacGaffey (1970) have made it clear that these people were Africans or Negroes with so-called 'caucasian features' resulting from genetic drift and microevolution (Keita, 1996; Poe, 1997). This would mean that the racial composition of 26.9 percent of the crania found at Tlatilco and 9.1 percent of crania from Cerro de las Mesas were of African origin."
This statement was directly below the last table. Don't know how you missed it. READ IN BETWEEN THE LINES OF RESEARCH. It takes genuine intelligence to decipher the true narrative, as there is no standard for this type of investigation.
Unless you can find a modern living population that can be mistaken as Negroid with no genetic relationship to "Negroid" populations then your claim is bunk. As I've stated before the trail of sickle cell that goes throughout southeast Asia is the proof of a genetic relationship between Niger-Congo speakers (where sickle cell came from) and certain southeast Asian populations who may resemble one another. This study finding E1b1a coming from the Southeast Asian Pacific (as one would also logically conclude that the Polynesian ancestry of the Island came from as well) only strengthens my argument. It's funny because Africurious is the same dude who didn't even know how to properly format your post. Your original post that I'm responding to was so horribly formatted that it was unreadable, and you obviously took that advise when I brought it up in my recent post that you had pressed Anansi to delete. You like throw shots, but you can't take them. Then you want to cry about abuse pretending to be the victim. That is so weak and cowardly!
ANANSI is he getting threatened with suspension in his inbox for these constant sly insults or is it only me? Are his insults being "personally edited" by you, as mines are. I hope that this isn't only going to be on me because we have opposing views on certain topics!
As stated close to half a century ago in the "Destruction of Black Civilization" this is perhaps the worst issue with certain members on Egyptsearchreloaded and the old forum.
I didn’t ask Anansi to delete squat. That’s between you and him. My post wasn’t meant for you as I clearly stated: And your reply just proves me right. You don’t understand what I wrote. That’s why you said below nonsense: But, as is shown from the part of the study I quoted, aDNA was tested. In fact, almost everything in the quote concerns aDNA as I've highlighted below: So you've proven yourself to be a careless scholar. The rest of the stuff you wrote doesn’t even make enough sense for me to address. All you have is a surface understanding of the relevant terms and concepts. And you will never get far beyond that cuz you’re too busy trying to win arguments with poor reasoning and ad hominem instead of learning.
|
|
|
Post by asante on Jan 9, 2019 11:15:20 GMT -5
No aDNA? If not then you have no point! Why? "A study published Thursday in the journal Current Biology found only evidence of Polynesian DNA in human remains on the island that predate European contact in 1722. "link
The title of this thread refutes this alone. This same type of study on the population structure of "living" populations on Easter Island, found no sign of the African E1b1a that the study which is the subject of this thread found in ancient Easter Island populations. The same sources from Ivan Van Sertima's famous " They Came Before Columbus" book, in which he used to established the presence of Africoid populations here in the Americas. You must not confide in the works of one of the late Rutgers professor and master teacher (how did I not know this)?
While it's not denied that the source used in Van Sertima's book to confirm the presence of "Negroid" populations in the Americas is based on old models of "racial" characterizations, the reality is is that there is genetic and phenotypic distinction of so called "Negroid" populations as CA Diop stated in 'The African Origins of Civilization'.
Ehhh no! Unless you can point to a living population that the "Negroid" classification can possibly be confused with then you have no point.
So you sifted through all of that information, but forgot to read the context to the data?
"Poe (1997), Keita (1993,1996), Carlson and Gerven (1979)and MacGaffey (1970) have made it clear that these people were Africans or Negroes with so-called 'caucasian features' resulting from genetic drift and microevolution (Keita, 1996; Poe, 1997). This would mean that the racial composition of 26.9 percent of the crania found at Tlatilco and 9.1 percent of crania from Cerro de las Mesas were of African origin."
This statement was directly below the last table. Don't know how you missed it. READ IN BETWEEN THE LINES OF RESEARCH. It takes genuine intelligence to decipher the true narrative, as there is no standard for this type of investigation.
Unless you can find a modern living population that can be mistaken as Negroid with no genetic relationship to "Negroid" populations then your claim is bunk. As I've stated before the trail of sickle cell that goes throughout southeast Asia is the proof of a genetic relationship between Niger-Congo speakers (where sickle cell came from) and certain southeast Asian populations who may resemble one another. This study finding E1b1a coming from the Southeast Asian Pacific (as one would also logically conclude that the Polynesian ancestry of the Island came from as well) only strengthens my argument. It's funny because Africurious is the same dude who didn't even know how to properly format your post. Your original post that I'm responding to was so horribly formatted that it was unreadable, and you obviously took that advise when I brought it up in my recent post that you had pressed Anansi to delete. You like throw shots, but you can't take them. Then you want to cry about abuse pretending to be the victim. That is so weak and cowardly!
ANANSI is he getting threatened with suspension in his inbox for these constant sly insults or is it only me? Are his insults being "personally edited" by you, as mines are. I hope that this isn't only going to be on me because we have opposing views on certain topics!
As stated close to half a century ago in the "Destruction of Black Civilization" this is perhaps the worst issue with certain members on Egyptsearchreloaded and the old forum.
I didn’t ask Anansi to delete squat. That’s between you and him. My post wasn’t meant for you as I clearly stated: No if my interpretation of the skeletal data is "flawed" then "school me"! I beg you Actually it's not aDNA
"Materials and Methods
Study Subjects
We utilized high-resolution genome-wide SNP data and mitochondrial genomes of 148 and 160 Native Hawaiians, respectively (discussed below). In total, we had 192 individuals, who self-identified as solely Native Hawaiian ancestry and reported only Native Hawaiian ancestry for each parent (herein we refer as 100% self-reported Native Hawaiian). Thirty and 35 individuals identified one parent belonging to either an Asian or European-ancestry descent group, respectively, which we classified as 50% Native Hawaiian. The remaining 25 and 18 individuals comprised of those who reported one of their parents heritage as Asian and/or European, which we classified as 75% Native Hawaiian. We classified Asian heritage as those who reported themselves as Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and/or Filipino (see Table S1 and Table S2) for descriptions of each individual as well as the available data). This study was approved by the institutional review boards at the University of Hawaii and the University of Southern California. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.....To identify the mitochondrial haplogroup diversity of Native Hawaiians and estimate their population expansion, we sequenced the 16.5 kb mitochondrial genome in 160 100% self-reported Native Hawaiians, using the Affymetrix GeneChip Human Mitochondrial Resequencing Array 2.0..... For each of the 2,781 total mitochondrial sequences (including the 160 Native Hawaiians we sequenced), we extracted all aligned base information, excluding the hypervariable region,].....
Figure S1. MDS analysis of mitochondrial haplogroup.
(TIF)
Table S1. Sample information for GWAS and mitochondrial sequence data.
(XLS)
Table S2. Summary counts of subjects used for AIMS, GWAS, and mtDNA analysist.
(XLS)
Table S3. Individuals used for MDS mtDNA sequence analysis and corresponding haplogroup.
(XLS)
Table S4. Corresponding mtDNA position numbers used for mtDNA sequence analysis and rCRS allele.
(XLS)
Table S5. Nine diagnostic markers for mtDNA haplogroup Q1 and allelic states for individual 52 and rCRS.
(XLS)"
linkAFRICURIOUS - WHAT ANCIENT DNA SAMPLES WERE SEQUENCED IN THIS ANALYSIS? These are inferences of the island's population history based on the living population's genetic structure. Now I did mispeak on the study of this thread dealing with aDNA, but it instead deals with the living structure. The point that I was connecting to was that the populations of both islands have common origins in the Marquesas Islands. The E1b1a found in modern Easter Island populations, likely came from that place of common origins. Anansi.... THIS IS THE ISH THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! Now if I were to 'go in' on Africurious in response to this INSULT in the way that I normally would...then Africurious would cry "Me thut Dese eez eh inti-llectual forAAm", and then YOU would respond by self editing my ISH, and all up in my inbox telling me to cut it out and all of that. Why not "self edit" HIS insults towards me, and get up in HIS inbox with the suspension threats? I'm not with the double standards here man. I can DEFINITELY crank it up a notch if this is the way the discussions will go here.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 15, 2019 9:39:00 GMT -5
HLA in Uros from Peru Titikaka Lake: Tiwanaku, Easter and Pacific Islanders. Hum Immunol. 2018 Nov 13. Abstract Uros people live in floating reed islands in Titikaka Lake in front of Puno town (Peru). They could have started Tiwanaku culture and shared genes and culture with Pacific Islanders; it is particularly relevant the giant hat covered men statues found in both Tiwanaku at Titikaka Lake shore and Easter Island (3700 km far from Chile in Pacific Ocean). These giants monoliths are very similar one another and unique in America and Pacific Islands. The following HLA alleles are shared in a specifically high frequency between Uros and Pacific Islanders : HLA-A*24:02, HLA-B*35:05, HLA-B*48:01, HLA-DRB1*04:03, HLA-DRB1*08:02 and HLA-DRB1*09:01. Uros also have 3 unique HLA haplotypes: A*24:02-B*15:04 - DRB1*14:02-DQB1*03:01, A*68:01:02-B*35:05-DRB1*04:03-DQB1*03:02, A*24:02-B*48:01-DRB1*04:03-DQB1*03:02. Also Uros seem to be one of the most ancient population in Titikaka Lake that could have started Tiwanaku culture. Prehistoric contacts between Amerindians and Pacific Islanders are strongly suggested by genetic and cultural traits. It is not discarded that Uros could have come from Pacific Islands: Uros show melanic skin and are dolichocephalic; in contrast, surrounding Aymara people have a clear skin and are brachicephalic. The Kon-Tiki project led by Thor Heyerdahl showed that a simple sailing is possible between Peru and Polynesia Islands; also, the most ancient skull found in America is of black origin: Luzia, suggesting that first America peopling was also carried out by Black/coloured people.
|
|
jhosx
Craftsperson
Posts: 19
|
Post by jhosx on Apr 9, 2019 17:08:05 GMT -5
Also Uros seem to be one of the most ancient population in Titikaka Lake that could have started Tiwanaku culture. Prehistoric contacts between Amerindians and Pacific Islanders are strongly suggested by genetic and cultural traits. It is not discarded that Uros could have come from Pacific Islands: Uros show melanic skin and are dolichocephalic; in contrast, surrounding Aymara people have a clear skin and are brachicephalic. The Kon-Tiki project led by Thor Heyerdahl showed that a simple sailing is possible between Peru and Polynesia Islands; also, the most ancient skull found in America is of black origin: Luzia, suggesting that first America peopling was also carried out by Black/coloured people.That's huge. Do I even have to ask at this point why this didn't make more noise when it was published? Has nobody looked at this?
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Apr 9, 2019 18:41:10 GMT -5
|
|