tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Dienekes’ Anthropology BlogDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger31149125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-4140581140805016452016-08-06T21:22:10.185+03:002016-08-06T21:22:10.185+03:00Terry said: Thanks for your contribution Gregory76...Terry said: Thanks for your contribution Gregory76.<br /><br />I reply: You're welcome.<br /><br />I said: "Tibet has not been inhabited very long. And the Tibetan phenotype is less Mongoloid than the phenotypes of Mongolia and eastern Siberia".<br /><br />Terry said: I did say from the EDAR370A mutation it seems to have originated near the Tibet border with Inner Mongolia. The fact that the phenotype is particularly pronounced in Mongolia and eastern Siberia supports that idea.... <br /><br />I reply: Close, but Tibet and even Mongolia are not close enough: in the same climate and vegetation to the west of Mongolia, in Turkestan, Mongoloids are late arrivals. It seems that only in North Asia were Mongoloids first (although of course there ancetors were not fully Mongoloid at first). Also, the most extreme version of the Mongoloid type is found in Siberia: the northern Tungus are more Mongoloid than the Mongols.Gregory76https://www.blogger.com/profile/16796327568266234469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-16561175223583817102016-08-05T08:54:24.678+03:002016-08-05T08:54:24.678+03:00"So to me it's still looking like NO live..."So to me it's still looking like NO lived somewhere in Sundaland" <br /><br />Although it is pretty obvious that K2 is basically a Sundaland haplotype to me it is unlikely that NO developed there. K2 haplotypes are spread from the Burma/South China/Northeast India region all the way to New Guinea and Australia. K2a, from which NO developed, is probably from the northern portion of that distribution. Adding to that is the almost certainty that O haplotypes are invasive into SE Asia, where they have largely replace the other K2 haplotypes as well as the earlier C Y-DNA lines. From that I would guess that O first developed in the region between the upper Yangtze and Yellow Rivers, and N somewhere north of there. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-85578791511046399242016-08-05T08:11:43.446+03:002016-08-05T08:11:43.446+03:00Thanks for your contribution Gregory76.
"wh...Thanks for your contribution Gregory76. <br /><br />"when we postulated multiple waves of settlement we do not have to attribute all phenotypical differences to different ratios of Mongoloid and non-Mongoloid mixture: some of the differences may have already been found in the different wave of invaders". <br /><br />I would expect the majority of difference existed before any migration. Since any arrival in America we would expect at least some level of hybridisation. That would have been so before any arrival but it seems, from the evidence as we have it, that the first people into eastern Siberia were not particularly Mongoloid. They are presumably represented by the MA-1 individual. <br /><br />"Tibet has not been inhabited very long. And the Tibetan phenotype is less Mongoloid than the phenotypes of Mongolia and eastern Siberia". <br /><br />I did say from the EDAR370A mutation it seems to have originated near the Tibet border with Inner Mongolia. The fact that the phenotype is particularly pronounced in Mongolia and eastern Siberia supports that idea as further south it has been diluted with admixture into a more Papuan-like population. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-23722803111596100642016-08-04T19:59:11.014+03:002016-08-04T19:59:11.014+03:00So to me it's still looking like NO lived some...So to me it's still looking like NO lived somewhere in Sundaland, and as it submerged N was in the population that ventured into mainland China. It likely left SE Asia from a source close to P, shortly after P left to venture into South and Central Asia. N was later pushed into the north by its sibling O, assimilating and following the retreat of the ice sheets with various cultures that already lived there, and which included C, D, and to a lesser extent, R.Joe Lyonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07853388386082915414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-56645846411200724792016-08-01T08:30:16.952+03:002016-08-01T08:30:16.952+03:00I said: "There is more to the Mongoloid pheno...I said: "There is more to the Mongoloid phenotype than the epicanthic fold,....That collection of features is well-known as an adaptation to cold"<br /><br />Terry replied: "Are you suggesting that high altitude is not necessarily cold?"<br /><br />I reply: No: they could result from high altitude, if it produced cold enough conditions. But climate maps seem to indicate that Tibet is not quite as cold as Mongolia and especially Siberia. Further, as you indicated in an earlier post, Terry, Tibet has not been inhabited very long. And the Tibetan phenotype is less Mongoloid than the phenotypes of Mongolia and eastern Siberia. So those more extremely Mongoloid phenotypes did not evolve there. <br /><br />"most of the Amerinds on the west side of the Americas are brachycephalic and more Mongoloid than those on the eastern side of the Americas, who probably have much non-Mongoloid blood"<br /><br />Terry said: "That could easily be an indication that the people on the western side tend to be mainly people from a later wave."<br /><br />I reply: Yes, I am a strong believer in multiple waves of settlement in the Americas. <br /><br />I said: "it is still the case that most of those on the western side, especially south of the Nadene, lack on epicanthic fold, and that is probably not the result of meeting non-Mongoloids all over that area".<br /><br />Terry replied: I would expect elements of non-Mongoids to have survived quite widely. <br /><br />I reply: But when we postulated multiple waves of settlement we do not have to attribute all phenotypical differences to different ratios of Mongoloid and non-Mongoloid mixture: some of the differences may have already been found in the different wave of invaders.Gregory76https://www.blogger.com/profile/16796327568266234469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-36499618499330801652016-08-01T06:29:38.028+03:002016-08-01T06:29:38.028+03:00It is possible that UKcentrism more than Eurocentr...It is possible that UKcentrism more than Eurocentrism guided Selzam and GPS et al for their conclusions. Hopefully to their 9% non-ignorance work for retracting this rubbish-research paid with public money. This explains why Brexit was so popular.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05094153657364088065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-39902917195925042852016-07-29T14:21:51.694+03:002016-07-29T14:21:51.694+03:00Lars wrote a lot of wrong things...
börü (wolf) i...<b>Lars</b> wrote a lot of wrong things...<br /><br /><b>börü</b> (wolf) is not Iranic, it is Turkic, came from Old Turkic < <b>boru</b> means (grey), it is today > <b>boz</b> (zetaism)<br /><br /><b>tengri</b> is Turkic too, not Yenissean. In Yenissean languages <b>tojga</b> means (high) not "tenger". In Yenissean languages there are <b>ēs</b> word, means (sky 2. "God" 3. heaven 4. weather) If Turks borrow "God" word from them, they would loan "ēs"...<br /><br />Tengiri < came from old Turkic <b>ten</b>- means (go to sky, go up). In old Turkic <b>tengek</b> means (air), <b>tengir</b>- means (make something go to sky, arrow, bird etc.) In Old Turkic <b>Tengiri</b> means (sky 2. God 3. heaven).<br /><br /><b>Kagan/kan</b>, <b>iğne</b> and <b>kaşık</b> are Turkic too, not Yenissean. In Yenissean languages <b>qân</b> means (king) < loan from Turkic. In Yenissean <b>qoˀn</b> means (needle), and <b>qɯ̄kt</b> means (spoon).<br /><br /><b>Kam</b> means (shaman) is Turkic too, not Iranic etc.Bilig Bétig https://www.blogger.com/profile/02155447041307679733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-9854288506449086772016-07-29T07:01:59.498+03:002016-07-29T07:01:59.498+03:00Iroquois have no European DNA in pre-columbian tim...Iroquois have no European DNA in pre-columbian times, never did. That's a fallacy that most white Americans are promoting. The Iroquois have the same Native American indigenous ancestry that all NAs share. There were no Europeans in America at that time.NKent805https://www.blogger.com/profile/06311041906627739245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-34037395164915204502016-07-28T07:23:52.501+03:002016-07-28T07:23:52.501+03:00"Genetic egalitarianism is an edifice on whic..."Genetic egalitarianism is an edifice on which too much has been invested and I doubt that it will go down without a fight. It's of course a great idea to optimize learning for the students you've got. But, at the end of the day there's only so much you can do to foster achievement in a trait that is mostly genetically determined."<br /><br />Given the great deal of public interest (and governmental funding) for research into the genetic bases of complex psychiatric conditions such as autism spectrum disorders or bipolar spectrum disorders, one should wonder why "genetic egalitarianism" would somehow selectively apply to studying possible genetic bases of educational achievement.<br /><br />Moreover, even if "educational achievement" taken as a simple scalar (as it appears to have been reduced to in this study) were found to be 99% heritable with respect to some country at some time (note that the study takes place in the UK), then policy-makes could easily claim that there is something wrong with their educational system. It would certainly be difficult to make a study encompassing <i>all possible educational models</i>. Of course, "general cognitive abilities" becomes the elephant-in-the-room, though interestingly the EduYears GPS explained that to a much lesser extent than it explained socio-economic status.<br /><br />Nor do I think that the general public response to these kinds of studies would be necessarily contentious, at least here in the U.S. where "educational achievement" is unfortunately not valued all that much. Being a college-drop-out-CEO is just-the-best. The awareness of the emergency-state of mathematics in the U.S. only made that many more Americans use "I'm just not good at math," as an excuse. So they can always find something else "to be good at" or claim that their boredom or inherent-lack-of-interest is always due to the subject itself.<br /><br />Imagine a world in which we had a "perfect" EduYears GPS that not only predicted general educational achievement, but also the subset of subjects towards which our genetics "optimally" predisposed us. What would prevent policy makers to then incentivize each individual moving towards the subjects (and therefore professions) to which they are "best predisposed"? China and Russia are not <i>genetic</i> egalitarian states but…<br /><br />And, I don't know if <i>I</i> am a "genetic egalitarian" as I am tempted to narcissistically pat myself on the back with results of this study. However, I feel overall that these sorts of studies make the world seem more boring than it really is without doing anything to relieve real human suffering.MomOfZohahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09787348878657753214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-22585224709512737822016-07-27T23:00:16.869+03:002016-07-27T23:00:16.869+03:00To Cosodehombres,
You have seemed to have ignored...To Cosodehombres,<br /><br />You have seemed to have ignored this piece from the abstract about these "white" natives.<br /><br />From the study's abstract.<br /><br />"We sequenced Early Neolithic genomes from the Zagros region of Iran (eastern Fertile Crescent), where some of the earliest evidence for farming is found, and identify a previously uncharacterized population that is *neither ancestral to the first European farmers nor has contributed significantly to the ancestry of modern Europeans*. "<br /><br />" they plot closest to modern-day Pakistani and Afghans and are well-separated from European hunter-gatherers (HG) and other Neolithic farmers."<br /><br />"Consistent with this, outgroup f3 statistics indicate that Iranian Zoroastrians are the most genetically similar to all four Neolithic Iranians, followed by other modern Iranians (Fars), Balochi (SE-Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan), Brahui (Pakistan and Afghanistan), Kalash (Pakistan) and Georgians (figs. S12-S15). Interestingly, *WC1 most likely had brown eyes, relatively dark skin, and black hair*, although Neolithic Iranians carried reduced pigmentation-associated alleles in several genes and derived alleles at 7 of the 12 loci showing the strongest signatures of selection in ancient Eurasians (3) (tables S29-S33). "<br /><br />"Given the evidence of domestic species movement from East to West across SW-Asia (21), it is surprising that EN human genomes from the Zagros are *not closely related to those from NW-Anatolia and Europe. Instead they represent a previously undescribed Neolithic population. Our data show that the chain of Neolithic migration into Europe does not reach back to the eastern Fertile Crescent, also raising questions about whether intermediate populations in southeastern and Central Anatolia form part of this expansion. On the other hand, it seems probable that the Zagros region was the source of an eastern expansion of the SW-Asian domestic plant and animal economy.* Our inferred persistence of ancient Zagros genetic components in modern day S-Asians lends weight to a strong demic component to this expansion."<br /><br />So this paper mainly pertain to SW-Asians of both Ancient and Modern status, not "whites" or "Indoeuropeans".<br /><br />Also, as for debunking OOA by dates alone, that's in correct.<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans#Movement_out_of_Africa<br /><br />Second, those dates you mentioned were based on when the ancestors had split, NOT when the cultures actually formed.<br /><br />As for Your "Arabs" comments, Yemeni samples in the study were among the samples that had affinity to the ancient DNA.<br /><br />"Modern groups from S-, C- and NW-Europe shared haplotypes predominantly with European Neolithic samples LBK and NE1, and European HGs, *while modern Near and Middle Eastern, as well as S-Asian samples had higher sharing with WC1 (figs. S28-S29). Modern Pakistani, Iranian, Armenian, Tajikistani, Uzbekistani and Yemeni samples were inferred to share >10% of haplotypes with WC1*."Macedo78https://www.blogger.com/profile/15009713179494103409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-5879283022851723542016-07-27T10:47:10.104+03:002016-07-27T10:47:10.104+03:00You are correct modern research is debunking this ...You are correct modern research is debunking this racist crap. I have been looking into population genetics and you will be surprised about the genome in the Horn. Horners are mixed due to an ancient prehistoric back migration event from the middle east. And thus as much as 40% of their genome is West Eurasian. But that large 60% non Eurasian component is of interest. I have found the following blog by a Somali guy who has studies from the best Universities in the world:<br /><br />http://anthromadness.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/horn-africans-mixture-between-east.html?m=1<br /><br />That 60% non Eurasian component among Somalis, Beja,Habesha and Oromo is closely related to the modern Southern Sudanese like the Acholi, Dinka and Anuak. Thus Horners are related to other Africans, they are indigenous to Africa and they are not part of a separate Caucasian race. They have admixture. Nobody with admixture can be assigned the label of Caucasian, black Caucasian or Hamite. These terms are false, there are no such thing as Black Caucasians in Africa and this is true for the rest of the world even in India. This is based on research into the deeply pigmented skin of black Africans. It's been proven that the Australoids that at times share the black African phenotype share the same alleles with black Africans regardless of the fact that genetic drift means that they have no modern African haplogroups. Australoids like the Andamanese are Asian negroes that retained their phenotype in Africa before their ancestors migrated out. Black skin evolved once over millions of years in Africa amongst the pre-human hominids. It's a trait passed down from ancestors.<br /><br />So even in India there are no black Caucasians because Black Indians get this phenotypical trait from Australoid admixture. Which is not suprising because the Andaman Islands are located near South India and Sri Lanka. Their language is similar to the languages spoken in South India and Sri Lanka and they are closely related to these Asian populations.<br /><br />Those are the facts. The major flaw in this debate is that scientific racists focus on recent history thus 30,000bc. The oldest modern human remains are found all across Africa even in Morrocco and have been dated as being more than 100,000 years old. I have a book by a prominent English Anthropologist that did this study and employed some of the best forensic Scientists to reconstruct the faces of these remains. They are all "Negroid" proving that the typical Negro Phenotype prevalent among Bantus and Niger Congo speakers as well as Nilotics in Sudan predates all other phenotypes like the so called Caucasoid/Caucasian. By the Book by Dr Alice Robert's it's called Evolution the Human story.duge_buwembohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671078175031481458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-86032012410134325402016-07-26T13:09:46.814+03:002016-07-26T13:09:46.814+03:00I believe that in any case, the idea is always pas...I believe that in any case, the idea is always passed through an artist that is, a person can transform the reality that surrounds him.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00212421877474610806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-63254612241626625352016-07-26T09:53:20.386+03:002016-07-26T09:53:20.386+03:00I truly adore perusing and taking after your post ...I truly adore perusing and taking after your post as I discover them greatly instructive and fascinating. This post is similarly instructive and also intriguing. Much obliged to you for data you been putting on making your site such a fascinating <a href="http://bestessaywritingservice.co/" rel="nofollow">best essay writing service company</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11214278117207510448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-42331256278135436492016-07-25T16:19:02.436+03:002016-07-25T16:19:02.436+03:00D, heads up re: OOA
http://www.express.co.uk/news...D, heads up re: OOA<br /><br />http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/692980/Humans-Africa-race-evolved-from-CHINA<br /><br />THE idea that modern day humans evolved in Africa is under question by Chinese academics who claim to have fossil evidence showing our ancestors stemmed from the east Asian country...<br /><br />The discovery of three human teeth in an ancient limestone cave in the district of Bijie in China could blow our understanding of human origin wide open.<br /><br />The teeth, according to the researchers, are between 112,000 years and 178,000 years old – which is shockingly 75,000 years older than the first modern human fossils found in Africa.<br /><br />When the teeth were first discovered, it was thought they belonged to an extinct ancestor of humans known as homo altaiensis, or Denisovian.<br /><br />But new analysis shows that they belonged to homo sapiens.<br /><br />apostateimpressionshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08992369104954433139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-65059316764588310612016-07-24T21:01:01.669+03:002016-07-24T21:01:01.669+03:00The inequalities that exist throughout society and...The inequalities that exist throughout society and which cause differential access to resources outweigh any heritability of academic achievement. That 9% is irrelevant unless or until the inequality is removed. Even if it is, the definition of academic achievement and its connection to career success and other outcomes are in constant flux, so any advantage might be ephemeral. This is all before considering ethical aspects of applying supposed heritability to society, which are significant.<br /><br />Physical anthropology should remain a science and refrain from delving into activism. It also cannot replace sociology, and when it attempts to the consequences are problematic.<br /><br />Basanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00994045157434847046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-20226518945950355832016-07-24T17:39:28.881+03:002016-07-24T17:39:28.881+03:00You all sound like reporters hovering over him, as...You all sound like reporters hovering over him, asking questions unrelated to his article post.VampDarlinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151897867361808048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-52818056363945246002016-07-22T04:03:48.499+03:002016-07-22T04:03:48.499+03:00A few further remarks concerning human arrival in ...A few further remarks concerning human arrival in America. <br /><br />I am reasonably sure the movement into the previously uninhabited region would have been similar to that of the Austronesians into the previously uninhabited islands of the Pacific. The islands mean the immigrant population has tended to form discrete populations on each island group, which some will say is different from any migration into continuous land. However even in the latter case the immigrants would tend to concentrate originally on the most desirable habitat 'islands'. <br /><br />In the case of the Austronesians we see the most distant islands (New Zealand, Easter Island and Hawai'i) are primarily mt-DNA B4a1a1a and Y-DNA C1b2a1a, both originally from island SE Asia. I'll turn to the minority haplotypes soon but the above are the most westerly in origin. B4a1a1a has its origin in the Philippines or, possibly, from Taiwan: very much associated with the Austronesian origin. C1b2a2 originated in southern Wallacea with probably a later presence in western New Guinea. <br /><br />As a result it appears that the early Austronesian haplotypes made it all the way to the extremities of the Austronesian expansion. But along the way the movement apparently picked up long-established haplotypes from New Guinea and Melanesia. In fact these picked up Y-DNAs especially have come to dominate the region between island SE Asia and the Polynesian extremity. B4a1a1a is common right through the Solomon islands but C1b2a2 is virtually absent. Melanesian Y-DNA lines such as M1, M2 and K2b1a have reached as far as Fiji and Tonga. It is apparent that these Melanesian Y-DNA lines were part of a later movement that has replaced the Y-DNA C. Yet all the evidence indicates that such a migration is almost simultaneous with the original Austronesian expansion. The expansion was complicated. <br /><br />I suspect that closer examination of the distribution of American haplotypes will reveal a possible sequence of their arrival. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-15301748951138699432016-07-22T00:38:21.384+03:002016-07-22T00:38:21.384+03:00Keep in mind that 9% is NOT "most". I s...Keep in mind that 9% is NOT "most". I suggest the movie GATTACA for a sci-fi take on the ethics surrounding this. dzdthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06546063512375699302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-35270015768579121612016-07-21T12:53:27.832+03:002016-07-21T12:53:27.832+03:00BTW I didn't intend to imply that there are di...BTW I didn't intend to imply that there are differences between populations in genes that influence educational achievement, I was just loosely meandering on the catchword genetic egalitarianism.Simon_Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04454497745874406294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-49319573299465786112016-07-21T12:40:01.333+03:002016-07-21T12:40:01.333+03:00Believe it or not, but recently I read in a respec...Believe it or not, but recently I read in a respected newspaper that race has no biological basis, and that it thus cannot be ascertained with a DNA test, because there is no such thing as a „black“ or „white“ DNA. You can read opinions like this from time to time in the press – in the newspaper in question mostly from an otherwise sympathetic leftist journalist, who has got completely out of touch with the latest developments in DNA research. Of course scientists now speak of West Eurasian and Subsaharan instead of black or white, but that's the same. The poor guy probably really believed that he was propagating an established scientific truth. While in reality it's one of the easiest tasks to discriminate between West Eurasian and Subsaharan DNA, and widely practiced in personal genomics services for example. But I understand well that objective differences between human populations that are more than „skin-deep“ would go to some extent against the humanist stance that all humans are the same. And there is the fear that the acknowledgment of genetic differences would lead to racism and discrimination. Hence humanist, egalitarian people are eager to believe that there is no basis for race in our DNA. The best strategy against this fear is perhaps to affirm that the human dignity is inviolable, and that all sane people would agree with this, and that there is perhaps even some moral superiority in the insight that everyone should follow his nature, his interests and likings instead of expecting the same from everyone.Simon_Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04454497745874406294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-21304632467026869992016-07-21T03:03:50.007+03:002016-07-21T03:03:50.007+03:00As a university graduate with a Master of Arts deg...As a university graduate with a Master of Arts degree in history and having as parents carpenter and nurse, and as grandparents cobbler, shoemaker, truck-driver and waitress I find this just so much non-egalitarian hogwash, a prime example of forcing results to fit a pre-existing ideological construct. Elites trying to justify their position and unequal opportunities now on genetic basis, when old excuses have fallen away. You should learn from us historians and give up this pre-ordained stuff.Raimo Kangasniemihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07317328563337885584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-53241776365501854492016-07-20T14:56:37.820+03:002016-07-20T14:56:37.820+03:00Predicting 9% of educational achievement from DNA ...Predicting 9% of educational achievement from DNA is quite good. vs in a trait that is mostly genetically determined.<br /><br />Huh? 9% is far from "most"<br />Mark Phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14462250693712068754noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-75211743595835524322016-07-20T03:30:55.922+03:002016-07-20T03:30:55.922+03:00I know I'm late to this thread, but, for what ...I know I'm late to this thread, but, for what it's worth - I'm not surprised by what surprises the authors, the Rib in 14,000 yo Italy. I've long been uncomfortable with all the Celts of the Atlantic Modal descending from steppe pastoral horsemen. I've thought for a very long time that R1b spread around the Med, that it was a littoral migration, possibly originating around the Black Sea and/or Caucasus and only the lack of ancient DNA on coastal areas subjected to flooding after the LGM would account for its absence so far. Moreover, there is an R1b isolate in interior Algeria unrelated to French colonialism. One doesn't have to subscribe to "Celtic from the West" to see that R1b could have spread around Italy and into Iberia, and then north to Gaul and the British Isles.<br /><br /> Mark Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03792117663748801194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-63368973891359190472016-07-20T01:56:27.110+03:002016-07-20T01:56:27.110+03:00"There is more to the Mongoloid phenotype tha..."There is more to the Mongoloid phenotype than the epicanthic fold, including a thickset body, a round face, a tendency to a short head, relatively short limbs, extremities and digits, a small nose, etc. That collection of features is well-known as an adaptation to cold" <br /><br />Are you suggesting that high altitude is not necessarily cold? <br /><br />"most of the Amerinds on the west side of the Americas are brachycephalic and more Mongoloid than those on the eastern side of the Americas, who probably have much non-Mongoloid blood" <br /><br />That could easily be an indication that the people on the western side tend to be mainly people from a later wave. I would expect from the small evidence MA-1 provides that the movement to America was not instantaneous. The vanguard could well have been less Mongoloid than later elements of the stream. Later movements would not have been able to enter as far as the first elements. That is supported somewhat by the Inuit people who are probably the most recent arrivals and also the most Mongoloid. <br /><br />"it is still the case that most of those on the western side, especially south of the Nadene, lack on epicanthic fold, and that is probably not the result of meeting non-Mongoloids all over that area". <br /><br />I would expect elements of non-Mongoids to have survived quite widely. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-47370348669582972362016-07-19T21:14:32.958+03:002016-07-19T21:14:32.958+03:00No one is really dumb enough to believe it. The re...No one is really dumb enough to believe it. The real problem is in many countries the differences between groups is large and catering to the least common denominator has completely ruined the educational system. Of course the rich all go to private schools so are unaffected. Or they used to be before the ivy league became such a joke.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com