Posted on 06/15/2010 6:36:50 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Two distinct groups from Asia settled in the New World and not one single migration as suggested by previous genetic studies, experts said Monday after comparing the skulls of early Americans.
Paleoanthropologists from Brazil, Chile and Germany compared the skulls of several dozen Paleoamericans, dating back to the early days of migration 11,000 years ago, with the more recent remains of more than 300 Amerindians.
"We found that the differences between Early and Late Native American groups match the predictions of a two-migration scenario far better than they do those of any other hypothesis," they said.
"In other words, these differences are so large that it is highly improbable that the earliest inhabitants of the New World were the direct ancestors of recent Native American populations."
Their landmark research found differences in the cranial morphology that could only be explained by the fact that the last common ancestor of the Early and Late Native American groups came from outside the continent.
The experts agreed the differences were best explained by a scenario in which a first wave of settlers came across the Bering Strait from Northeast Asia followed by a second group from East Asia much later via the same route.
"We conclude that the morphological diversity documented through time in the New World is best accounted for by a model postulating two waves of human expansion into the continent originating in East Asia and entering through Beringia," they said.
"This disparity between our results and those of most genetic studies points to a large gap in our understanding of the peopling of the New World."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
So, does that change who gets to have casinos?
Thought it was a Caucasian skull - no?
Jareites and Nephites, this is old news.
Skull morphology is a rather poor way of supporting a theory. Genetic studies already pointed toward several distinct groups of people and admixtures of peoples forming Native American populations.
If we’re talking Kennewick Man then it wasn’t Caucasian. The study I read said it didn’t cluster with any present group but had features that placed it closest to people from the south Asia/Pacific.
Only if ghosts dead millenia without descendants can run casinos.
http://patrickmead.net/2009/11/16/hidden-history-the-si-te-cah/
Yet false news Grig. Mongoloids, not Mediterranean caucasoids. 11K years is far too early for even the Jareites. Just more book of mormon fiction and wishful thinking.
There is no history that is not written down. This is the definition of “history” as a word. I wonder just how much we've lost over the past (pick a convenient number) of years. One of my SF writers (Heinlein?) said we don't know what happened in the last war, not to mention what Alley Oop did to the Upstairs Maid.
"The oldest human remains found in the Americas were recently "discovered" in the storeroom of Mexico's National Museum of Anthropology. Found in central Mexico in 1959, the five skulls were radiocarbon dated by a team of researchers from the United Kingdom and Mexico and found to be 13,000 years old. They pre-date the Clovis culture by a couple thousand years, adding to the growing evidence against the Clovis-first model for the first peopling of the Americas."
"Of additional significance is the shape of the skulls, which are described as long and narrow, very unlike those of modern Native Americans."
[snip]
Here's one posted to FR back in 2003.
Yet false news Grig. Mongoloids, not Mediterranean caucasoids. 11K years is far too early for even the Jareites. Just more book of mormon fiction and wishful thinking.
"We found that the differences between Early and Late Native American groups match the predictions of a two-migration scenario far better than they do those of any other hypothesis," they said.
'In other words, these differences are so large that it is highly improbable that the earliest inhabitants of the New World were the direct ancestors of recent Native American populations.'
Their landmark research found differences in the cranial morphology that could only be explained by the fact that the last common ancestor of the Early and Late Native American groups came from outside the continent.
"This disparity between our results and those of most genetic studies points to a large gap in our understanding of the peopling of the New World."
Keep looking! (further back)
We already know there were people here before Younger Dryas.
I’ve taken more than one class in North American archaeology and this was never covered or mentioned. What was mentioned is that there are quite a number of fraudulent claims involving European or Middle Eastern people in the ancient new world. If there were really 7ft red haired people found it would be an exciting find but my suspicion is that this belongs in the Jackalope wing of the museum.
That old thread notes the same differences as the article in this thread. It always strikes me as an odd remark to say how unlike current NA’s these Pleistocene skulls were. Pleistocene people in Eurasia were different than modern Eurasians but nobody constantly drums up that fact.
Not a problem. The “earlier” immigrants were killed, enslaved, or eaten by the later immigrants...
And had you bothered to read the article you would notice a few GLARING difference from mormon fiction - the 'first' migration NEVER killed themselves off (woops, so much for the jaredite theory). Second, neither group is genetically linked to Jews from palestine. And third - they entered via the land bridge between alaska and siberia - not on boats with holes drilled in the bottom or other non-existent boats. Read closer, you may learn something real.
What, you are using facts?
The question how do you feel...
Hobbits...
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.