Posted on 07/09/2020 2:40:20 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
Thanks, good stuff!
Wow. Amazing story! Thx much.
Understanding the above requires knowing a little paleoanthropolgy and who the East Asians of the pleistocene were. Ancient DNA indicates human population shifts and admixture in northern and southern China
"Genetic differentiation was higher in the past than the present, reflecting a major episode of admixture involving northern East Asian ancestry spreading across southern East Asia after the Neolithic, transforming the genetic ancestry of southern China. Mainland southern East Asian and Taiwan Strait island samples from the Neolithic show clear connections with modern and ancient samples with Austronesian-related ancestry, supporting a southern China origin for proto-Austronesians."
I'll cut to the chase about NAs ancestry. They are a Pleistocene mixture of 2 populations that no longer exist. Proto-Australasians (related to Aborigines) and Eurasians (the ancestral population that produced 3 large groups, Caucasions, NAs and East Asians. Modern East Asians are the newest of the groups and therefore cannot be the source for NAs south of the Polar regions.
The rest of your post about head morphology is out of the 19th century. Some are still trying to make these arguments but it doesn't hold up as the genetic evidence has come in. Primarily there is no relation between modern morphology and distant ancestry.
Thank you for your detailed answer.
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.