tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post7886759143726631995..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Kebara: 49-46 ky cal BPDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-23136779687435895452012-08-13T12:45:34.582+03:002012-08-13T12:45:34.582+03:00"why do we have to suppose that present-day A..."why do we have to suppose that present-day Aborigines descend from the earliest arrivals?" <br /><br />Good point. But most scientists seem to think there was minimum contact with the outside world after the first arrival. Personally I think there were actually several waves of settlement. <br /><br />"And wasn't Mungo man's mt DNA considered to be unrelated to any modern humans?" <br /><br />Again true. However the finding has been questioned by many. On the other hand even if the original conclusion was correct that line of mt-DNA could have since died out. Other lines still present in Australia were found in the same study: <br /><br />http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pnas.org%2Fcontent%2F98%2F2%2F537.full.pdf&ei=bMwoUJ6tD5GeiAfLooHwDQ&usg=AFQjCNH6_uizewzHi6KC7qpuFsg-JrZ76Aterrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-55438906847239745612012-08-13T09:06:02.355+03:002012-08-13T09:06:02.355+03:00terryt, why do we have to suppose that present-day...terryt, why do we have to suppose that present-day Aborigines descend from the earliest arrivals? <br />And wasn't Mungo man's mt DNA considered to be unrelated to any modern humans? aramthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04486006044411081900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-91571558949399775402012-08-13T05:02:53.503+03:002012-08-13T05:02:53.503+03:00"Whether transmission of new behavioral innov..."Whether transmission of new behavioral innovations was cultural or genetic" <br /><br />My guess is a bit of both. <br /><br />"From this study it is proposed that the MP-UP transition for this site can be placed immediately after 45,200 ± 700 14C years BP and before 43,600 ± 600 14C years BP or from 49/48 to 47/46 radiocarbon calibrated years before present (years Cal BP)". <br /><br />And that is more recent than the most likely time of first arrival in Australia. So that transition can hardly be used to define 'modern human, unless we're going to exclude Australian Aborigines from that term.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-78961001219595955762012-08-12T17:36:50.951+03:002012-08-12T17:36:50.951+03:00Dieneke
My bet would be a psychological change. Ei...Dieneke<br />My bet would be a psychological change. Either the awareness of an "I" or learning that this "I" could direct behavior. Thus the explosion in exploration of Art, Music etc. Aswell as curiosity about what is over the mountain.<br />Or more precisely, since it seems that this happened more than once, the invention of the ability to teach others how to do this.aeoliushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09528717028785728695noreply@blogger.com