Check your head.
Posted on 12/17/2005 7:59:25 AM PST by Lessismore
Comparative morphological studies of the earliest human skeletons of the New World have shown that, whereas late prehistoric, recent, and present Native Americans tend to exhibit a cranial morphology similar to late and modern Northern Asians (short and wide neurocrania; high, orthognatic and broad faces; and relatively high and narrow orbits and noses), the earliest South Americans tend to be more similar to present Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans (narrow and long neurocrania; prognatic, low faces; and relatively low and broad orbits and noses). However, most of the previous studies of early American human remains were based on small cranial samples. Herein we compare the largest sample of early American skulls ever studied (81 skulls of the Lagoa Santa region) with worldwide data sets representing global morphological variation in humans, through three different multivariate analyses. The results obtained from all multivariate analyses confirm a close morphological affinity between South-American Paleoindians and extant Australo-Melanesians groups, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct biological populations could have colonized the New World in the Pleistocene/Holocene transition.
Head Check Ping.
But they ought not expect anyone to take them seriously anymore.
Check your head.
So what happened to the Paleoindians? They had a faulty foreign policy vision and became extinct?
Why not? This isn't phrenology; rather, cranial morphology is one of the most important tools of anthropology. The study was published in a leading scientific journal, the Proceedings of the US National Academy of Sciences.
Pretty much is, actually.
I could drive acress the country in a Model-T.
No, not really. Nobody's attempting to divine personality traits or intelligence from skull shape. But that doesn't mean that cranial morphology isn't a function of genetics (and genetic origins). People from different parts of the world look different -- that's a fact.
Are you're saying that if anthropologists found elephant skulls on top of human bodies that wouldn't be a noteworthy finding because it would carry the stigma of phrenology?
Really? I suppose you are right -- that is a major finding that only could have come about from trying to measure properties of thousand year old decayed skull fragments.
Will wonders never cease.
I could drive across the US in a model-T. Or I could use a nice 10 year old Camry.
In one I'd get to the same place much faster and in much less time.
I'm not sure I understand your point.
I could drive across the US in a model-T. Or I could use a nice 10 year old Camry.
And your motives are as clear as your metaphors are obscure.
Most likely they became victim to the earliest race war
One advantage the arriving Asian-Indians may have had was domesticated dogs, who would have made their camps more secure from night raids
What are you talking about?
I could also take my Camry and in half the time and with half the money anc compared to limiting myself to a Model-T could in half the time and half the money drive a lot more places than just one route cross country.
I'd see and learn a lot more.
The take home message for this obscure metaphor is that current technologies can tell you a lot more than technologies of two centuries ago.
Are you an idiot?
About what, cranial morphology? What are you talking about?
Not a definitive answer in its own right, no, but a potentially valuable tool and not something you can simply laugh off as "phrenology."
Brasil and Head. My two favorite subjects! Off to discuss one of them with minha namorada...Ja se...TMI...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.