"...and that Asia wasn't as genetically homogenous back then as people tend to assume." I came to that conclusion a couple years ago. The people that are presently in China are not the same people who were there as short as 6,000 years ago.
Looks like the Canadians are getting something correct. NAGRA ought to be on it's last leg in this country, but it's not.
1 posted on
01/01/2005 9:22:58 PM PST by
blam
To: SunkenCiv
2 posted on
01/01/2005 9:24:10 PM PST by
blam
To: blam
The people that are presently in China are not the same people who were there as short as 6,000 years ago.
If they are you've got a very very big story. : )
3 posted on
01/01/2005 9:25:13 PM PST by
bigsigh
To: blam
In Ohio, within some of the Indian mounds, are the remnants of a race of people who were giants, avg. height of 7 ft or more, and they had twin rows of teeth.
For a time, beginning two centuries ago, some "grave robbers," so to speak, would dig into the mounds, and skulls and such were collected.
These artifacts were too fragile to survive exposure and all decomposed in short order. There are none remaining, except in some of the mounds that long ago were ordered OFF LIMITS.
So the story goes.
4 posted on
01/01/2005 9:31:55 PM PST by
First_Salute
(May God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
To: blam
I think that there would be real legs on the matter if this was about 200 years ago, not thousands of years ago.
6 posted on
01/01/2005 9:33:16 PM PST by
kingu
(Which would you bet on? Iraq and Afghanistan? Or Haiti and Kosovo?)
To: blam
7 posted on
01/01/2005 9:33:54 PM PST by
Mercat
(I know my Redeemer lives)
To: blam
Damn! This is major and it changes the "history" of mankind radically. However, I have a feeling that mainstream science will "bury" this information until it becomes impossible to ignore. I can also see how this has the potential to throw put even more doubt on the unproven theory of evolution.
15 posted on
01/01/2005 9:54:46 PM PST by
wagglebee
(Memo to sKerry: the only thing Bush F'ed up was your career)
To: blam
Looks like the Southern border has been porous for a long time.
To: blam
Good article, as usual. However, some of the comments which follow ("twin rows of teeth" and "it changes the history of mankind radically" and "even more doubt on the unproven theory of evolution") seem to miss the importance of this article and these finds. Following an agenda in spite of where the date lead?
But, DNA is providing major clues to population movements, and the rest of us will let the chips fall where they may! Exciting times!
To: blam
Thanks Blam. "As the Smithsonian article notes, it's also becoming more popular to look at boats as the means of humanity's spread." The problem for the Clovis First and Only school of non-thought is, if people came to the Americas by boat 10,000 years ago, what stopped them after that point? The obvious answer is nothing, and that destroys the cuckoo fantasyland of pristine isolation that grew from politics, analogous to (and similarly rooted) the current Edenic delusion that feeds the global warming bulldung. Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest -- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
26 posted on
01/02/2005 4:00:35 AM PST by
SunkenCiv
(the US population in the year 2100 will exceed a billion, perhaps even three billion.)
To: blam; FairOpinion; Ernest_at_the_Beach; SunkenCiv; 24Karet; 3AngelaD; 4ConservativeJustices; ...
27 posted on
01/02/2005 4:01:11 AM PST by
SunkenCiv
(the US population in the year 2100 will exceed a billion, perhaps even three billion.)
To: Professional Engineer
30 posted on
01/02/2005 7:04:30 AM PST by
msdrby
(Even the smallest person can change the course of the future.)
To: blam
"I came to that conclusion a couple years ago. The people that are presently in China are not the same people who were there as short as 6,000 years ago."
Could you elaborate on that? Who were the people in 'China' 6,000 years ago and why did you come to that conclusion?
34 posted on
01/02/2005 7:39:37 AM PST by
johnmilken
(All opinions are just part of the ecology)
To: zot
49 posted on
04/05/2006 11:56:19 AM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson