Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

12,000-Year-Old Human Hair DNA
Earth Files ^ | 10-30-2001 | Linda Moulton Howe

Posted on 10/30/2001 10:13:42 AM PST by blam

Please click on the site to view this article. They have some pretty serious sounding, 'Don't reproduce' verbage on that page. Thanks.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last
To: white rose
If the hair does not match any known human DNA, what makes them think it's human?

Not a stupid question at all. (Because I was wondering the same thing.) The article really doesn't go into enough detail for us to evaluate their conclusion.

21 posted on 10/30/2001 5:52:50 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
"Is the Woodburn longhaired man/woman/sasquatch any relation to Kennewick Man?"

Probably another human species. See the book, Extinct humans." The Kennewick case is still in court and DNA samples were reported as 'inconclusive.'

22 posted on 10/30/2001 6:23:12 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: machman; sawsalimb
Mungo Man could be African: scientists

By Richard Macey

Scientists expressed caution yesterday over claims by Australian researchers that cast doubt over the theory that modern man emerged from Africa.

Dr Alan Thorne, an anthropologist with the Australian National University, scored headlines around the globe with findings suggesting that modern humans evolved everywhere.

His claims are based on DNA recovered from the skeleton of Mungo Man, who lived and died about 60,000 years ago near South Australia's Lake Mungo.

That makes the DNA about 32,000 years older than any human DNA found before.

Mungo Man, said to have been physically similar to people living today, had one significant difference. Within his DNA, the scientists found a gene that Dr Thorne described as "unlike any alive today".

The scientists argue that had Mungo Man descended from modern humans flowing out of Africa, his genetic line should have also flowed on, rather than become extinct.

They believe the discovery backs the theory of "regional continuity" that says modern man evolved around the world as people interbred.

They argue that Mungo Man's ancient gene, responsible for supplying energy to the brain, probably became extinct as his descendants mingled with new arrivals.

Scientists around the world lauded the team's success in extracting 60,000-year-old DNA.

But Dr Peter Underhill from California's Stanford University said Mungo Man's ancestors "could have originated in Africa".

"It doesn't mean out of Africa is kaput," he said. "The problem with such ancient DNA is such specimens are few and far between ... it would be nice to see it reproduced independently elsewhere.''

The Australian Museum's head of evolutionary biology, Dr Don Colgan, said there could be another theory on why Mungo Man's gene had become extinct: "Maybe if you looked hard you might find it. It's still one individual."

23 posted on 10/30/2001 6:29:51 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: blam
I don't know if I follow the argument. If Mungo Man had a gene which is not found among any living human beings, he was probably not the only person in Australia at that time with the gene, but if the gene died out in Australia for whatever reason, it could have disappeared likewise in whatever part of the world his ancestors came from. I don't see how Africa can be ruled out.

Have they tried to compare Mungo Man's DNA with a sample from Mungo Jerry?

24 posted on 10/31/2001 8:46:13 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
I think they are suggesting that his ancestors originated in Australia. There is an 'out of Asia' group out there that do not subscribe to the 'out of Africa' theory. I'm in the Milford Wolfpoft 'multi-regional' camp.
25 posted on 10/31/2001 11:17:03 AM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: blam
I always look forward to your interesting posts on stuff like this, 'the flood', etc.

LOL, I dunno about Linda Molting Owl, though...

26 posted on 10/31/2001 11:26:01 AM PST by Cogadh na Sith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chookter
"LOL, I dunno about Linda Molting Owl, though..."

Yeah, I know. I was intrigued by the subject though.

27 posted on 10/31/2001 12:48:13 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Not a stupid question at all. (Because I was wondering the same thing.)

The obvious conclusion being that the hair is non-human. From the article--

You can distinguish human hair from all other hair just from a little piece of follicle. ....

... And then if you can find the root of the hair that still has a follicle, you can do DNA on it. So researchers immediately sent the (Ice Age) hair off to a lab and they began to extract the DNA. Some of it was not so good, but a lot of it was well preserved in the oxygen-poor bogs of Woodburn. The geneticists found the hair didn't match any Asian hair DNA. It didn't match African, European. It didn't match anything.

28 posted on 11/04/2001 2:18:53 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson