tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post3331439917034038236..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: More on Kennewick ManDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-82600756650335430872016-05-10T06:40:23.096+03:002016-05-10T06:40:23.096+03:00"Australasia is a term referring to the regio..."Australasia is a term referring to the region occupied by Australia, New Zealand, and most of Indonesia (excluding Borneo, Java and Sumatra)". <br /><br />Usually 'Australasia' includes only New Zealand and Australia, and usually New Guinea and the islands of Melanesia very close to it. The problem for using it as a genetic region is that it has undergone at least three separate and independent migrations into it from west of Wallace's Line. This raises the problem: <br /><br />"the Karitiana and other Amozonian people in South America have an Australasian heritage". <br /><br />Which Australasians are you specifically referring to? terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-18856853394218092952016-05-08T06:42:12.376+03:002016-05-08T06:42:12.376+03:00@Joyce: Australasia is a term referring to the reg...@Joyce: Australasia is a term referring to the region occupied by Australia, New Zealand, and most of Indonesia (excluding Borneo, Java and Sumatra). So by extension, Australasians are the people inhabiting that region.Dooghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14075820175869199670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-90479883407179598962016-05-08T04:43:33.725+03:002016-05-08T04:43:33.725+03:00@Dr. Winters, so you reject genetics completely. ...@Dr. Winters, so you reject genetics completely. Who are "Australasians'? Polynesians are "admixtures" between East Asians(Y haplo O?) and Melanesians. Australian Aborigines did not have "bow and arrow" before they were isolated, much earlier than peopling of America. Because mtDNA B is not common in Northern Asia now, it has been speculated that some Polynesians reached central America in boat. Some believe that central Americans continued to have contact with Polynesians because of crops, but I believe that Agriculture probably started very early in East Asia (earlier expansion of population) because both Chinese and Central Americans were very serious about their lunar calendars. Dogs had long been believed to be domesticated in Middle East until genetic studies, top three possible sites are southern China(number 1), northern China and Siberia. Dogs seem related to European grey wolves, well, wolves might not have known that they were European and stayed in Europe. Besides, Ice Age "Europeans" mostly carries Aisans Y and mtDNA. Joycehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07637831260814255433noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-77059874425175698452016-05-05T00:42:03.808+03:002016-05-05T00:42:03.808+03:00"the way forward is to keep studying Kennewic..."the way forward is to keep studying Kennewick Man (and modern Native Americans) with ever-better data and techniques which may turn up (who knows?) a real (rather than imagined) ancestral link"<br /><br />That's probably not going to happen, sadly. Because the words "related to" and "native american" appeared, the tribes are going to petition his reburial. And given how Anzick 1 and Buhl Woman were both repatriated without a strong link, Kennewick Man's days are likely numbered.Dooghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14075820175869199670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-44187254038044924492016-05-01T22:15:55.865+03:002016-05-01T22:15:55.865+03:00This report when you check other data does not mak...This report when you check other data does not make Kennewick related to modern Native Americans, instead of Australasians. Novembre et al (2015) claims that genetically Kennewick man is related to the Karitiana. A relationship between the Karitiana and Kennewick falsifies their hypothesis. It is falsified because Skoglund et al (2015) found that the Karitiana and other Amozonian people in South America have an Australasian heritage. The identification of a relationship between Kennewick man and the Karitiana, more so than any other American population, would continue to situate this Native American in the Paleoamerican group--not contemporary Native Americans who most resemble mongoloids, rather than the Australoid, Polynesian and Sub-Saharan African types associated with the Paleoamericans.<br /><br />Reference:<br /><br /> Skoglund et al (2015), Genetic evidence for two founding populations of the Americas , NATURE ,525 ( 3 SEPTEMBER):104-108. Retrieved 5/1/2016 at : http://www.nature.com/articles/nature14895.epdf?referrer_access_token=4TuRenNBfBRS7tHNMAY1qdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N6yB-nEyCdRoL51ykMO5E9z_7mdrRF_UTJvxtpDQnayOfwuJnrOCxIhdm8_7djDnDo9Obq-VbpDatHfBozg8WnuFcDDHGC6D1QQbbgmyediLKefzmJLdqOP9IYieqkoaey_M8XA-n4Ua9CD3IbOslIqWUnXzIWbLwafl9bJMOQNAJlELt6cfooH162H7W_3B8%3D&tracking_referrer=mobile.nytimes.com<br />Dr. Clyde Wintershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01153945762719431061noreply@blogger.com