Study reveals the mysterious ancestors of modern Europeans

a reply to: RedMamba

Modern Europeans look more like the lighter-skinned Middle Eastern farmers that showed up about 7,000 years ago.
I think the argument for skin tone difference is more about a strong natural selection which was needed to survive, this is from the second link I posted above -

“There’s an evolutionary argument about this — that light skin in Europe is biologically advantageous for people who farm, because you need to make vitamin D,” Reich said. “Hunters and gatherers get vitamin D through their food — because animals have a lot of it. But once you’re farming, you don’t get a lot of it, and once you switch to agriculture, there’s strong natural selection to lighten your skin so that when it’s hit by sunlight you can synthesize vitamin D.”

a reply to: punkinworks10

Thank you for the link I will bookmark it for further reading later

a reply to: Lady_Tuatha

For a wee small country, we Scots seem to turn up everywhere. Not only did we invent the modern world we now have contributed mysterious genetic markers. It must be the red hair, blue green eyes and negative blood...

Tongue in cheek of course.

***Good morning ATSers***

Please remember that on ATS we go after the ball, not the player. The topic is quite clearly Study reveals the mysterious ancestors of modern Europeans. If you have comments to add that would seem relevant to that topic, please continue discussing. But personal snipes and accusations end now.

Thank you

bigfatfurrytexan
ATS Forum Moderator

Dear lord, protect me from people who live in a teapot and view the world through the teapot spout.....
What I find really out of place is that it seems that most inventions (modern ones at least) came from 'white brains' with the exception of the Chinese, who I have learned, invented such things as clocks, printing, paper money, possibly the wheel, arched bridges, cross bows, writing, (but the Sumerians might have beat the Chinese to it) waterwheels, but because the Chinese drink tea, they never got around to glass!
I think that's enough for an augment.

a reply to: Lady_Tuatha
Light skin has a genetic link to neanderthal ancestry, which makes sense. Neanderthals hunted in the dense forests of northern Eurasia. In an environment that sees little light, there is no need for protection from the sun. If one has never spent any time in a truley natural forest, it is hard to conceive of how dark it is on the forest floor.
If you look at the people who have the highest levels of Neanderthal ancestry, aboriginal Taiwanese, native americans, east Asians , eurasians, are all reasonably light skinned.
As far as the darker skin of the Neolithic farmers that is a readaption to being in the sun more, ie tending crops.
Being of extremely mixed ancestry, Filipino and native American on dads side, and English/Scots Irish and ukrainian German on moms side, when I'm out of the sun I have very light skin. Not as light as the northern euro side but lighter than a Mediterranean person. But , put me in the sun and I darken up considerably, darker than my pacific ocean relatives.

a reply to: Spider879

Thing is there is a lot of evidence to suggest Atlantis etc is very real and the descendants of this civilization are running things at the moment all through from Atlantis,Sumer,Babylon,Egypt,Greece,Romans and then on to today's royals elites etc.

So i might suggest that the Caucasian race (name derives from the Caucasus mountains where peoples descended after the flood) maybe comprised of different sub races and also my study suggests that there are populations of people who are related to the Annunaki (known by many names globally) they were known as the Tuatha De Danaan in Ireland (as i'm sure OP knows) these guys were the original inhabitants,who appeared after the flood of Atlantis's final islands and inbred with the Celts (hence red hair originating in this area) and large concentrations of rh neg blood.

The relation to these Tuuatha De Danaan/Annuanki/migrant Atlanteans is also true of the Berbers who are caucasian North Africans,the mysterious Basques of Northern Spain and also the Guanches,the original inhabitants of the Canary Islands,before the Spanish came in 1500's (if memory serves) plus other examples out there.

I may also suggest that many varieties of humans were created after the flood,that comprised of different 'stock' and like some one mentioned, all races were comprised of different hominids and some had more Annunaki DNA.

I don't know why you criticized the person you responded to and claimed he was effectively racist..i don't feel he was..i know this is sensitive to some?...but we need to get over that,the truth is more important and indeed we are all equal.

Some links here, regarding what i have just spoke about..

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
www.rhnegativeregistry.com...
www.atlanteanconspiracy.com...

a reply to: Buddyman

Howdy Buddyman

Off topic so I would suggest you start another thread on the subject you've commented on above

Buddyman said:

Thing is there is a lot of evidence to suggest Atlantis etc is very real and the descendants of this civilization are running things at the moment all through from Atlantis,Sumer,Babylon,Egypt,Greece,Romans and then on to today's royals elites etc.

Make up that thread and lets see this 'lots of evidence'.

One question thou why in the past did these elites kill themselves (ie attacking one another) or were killed by non-elites? However, that too is off topic perhaps we could look at that in the thread you will create?

We look forward to that thread.

a reply to: Buddyman

Well I'm O negative, red hair, blue eyes, white skin and yet I think we are all the same really. It would be nice though to have a mysterious lineage.

a reply to: RedMamba

The Middle East and Central Asians(for all intents and purposes, they're the same) have more green eyes than any other race. Check out this link:

hubpages.com...

Spain is probably a descendant of Middle Easterners, and people in Brazil with green eyes are probably natives mixed with Spanish. IMO, if we were to separate people on "race," then it should be like this:

Whites - defined by round eyes, blue eyes, blond hair and white skin

Middle Easterner/Central Asians - defined by round eyes, and "medium-light" skin. You can pretty much group them and Whites into the Caucasian category(Whites and Caucasians are not necessarily interchangeable. If you were to look at the central Caucasus area, which is Georgia and Armenia, you will see that they consisted of both black and blond hair people. My theory is that Japheth had descendants that had both black and blond hair, and one group went into Europe, the other group went into Central Asia and then Southern China and South East Asia, and by went, I mean, they got "teleported" there).

North East Asian - defined by epicanthic fold and light skin

South East Asians - defined by round eyes and medium-dark skin

Blacks - define by very big eyes and dark skin

Now here's the problem with the out of Africa theory. If supposedly we went out of Africa 160,000 years ago, and settled in the Middle East, then why did we wait 6000 years ago to move into other continents? Why didn't we move from the Middle East say 120,000 years ago and independently developed civilizations? It's clear that if you've been reading and researching, the Europeans and their languages came from the Middle East(eastern Turkey where Noak's Ark landed to be exact). In other words, there is clear evidence that the Middle East are the ancestors of Europeans.

There is not evidence, however, that Africans are the ancestors of Middle Easterners. Why? Because Blacks have more genetic diversity than Middle Easterners, which is contradictory if they were the ancestors of Middle Easterners. If my theory of the Towel of Babel is correct, then if we were to take DNA evidence of Europeans and Asians, and compare them with Middle Easterners(specifically from the area where the Towel of Babel was located), then their DNA should also be more complex than Middle Easterners. This would, IMO, prove conclusively that the Middle Easterners are everyone's ancestors, and very good evidence for the story of the Towel of Babel.

Here's a link that shows that languages came from Eastern Turkey/Southwest Russia:

www.bbc.com...

The question now is whether the 5000 year or 9000 year date is correct.

Here's the map of Mt Ararat where Noah's Ark was supposed to have landed. You can see it's right next to the Caucasus area:

en.wikipedia.org...

Why doesn't the Turkey government allow others to search Mt Ararat?

Here's where the term Caucasian come from. You can see it's consistent with the Table of Nation that I gave before, and his classification is rather similar to what I just wrote:

www.slate.com...#

Now if you look at the countries in the Caucasus area, you'll find that they're mostly mountains. Is there a reason why both language and genetics started from this area(in fact, one has to wonder how they managed to find their way in there), as opposed to say, where the Sumerian Civilization started?

originally posted by: np6888
Here's the map of Mt Ararat where Noah's Ark was supposed to have landed. You can see it's right next to the Caucasus area:

en.wikipedia.org...

Why doesn't the Turkey government allow others to search Mt Ararat?

They seem to fairly common

Noah's ark searches

a reply to: np6888

Now here's the problem with the out of Africa theory. If supposedly we went out of Africa 160,000 years ago, and settled in the Middle East, then why did we wait 6000 years ago to move into other continents? Why didn't we move from the Middle East say 120,000 years ago and independently developed civilizations? It's clear that if you've been reading and researching, the Europeans and their languages came from the Middle East(eastern Turkey where Noak's Ark landed to be exact). In other words, there is clear evidence that the Middle East are the ancestors of Europeans.

'We' didn't the Neanderthals had been in Europe for hundreds of thousands of years and later modern HS moved into the area around 40,000 years ago. In Asia those folks who became the Denisovians were there and bred with the waves of modern HS that came into the area. Another unknown homo species that is yet undiscovered had the same thing happened to them when they interbred with later waves of modern HS.

about 60,000 years ago the Australians made it to their homeland and about 15,000 years ago those folks who would become the native Americans arrived or more correctly the first waves from Asia came in and were followed later by others who became the NA.

A lot of Finns or Lapplanders have traits in common with Innuit and other northern tribes in Canada. Understandable as they're freely able to traverse the polar ice cap. So that's not too surprising. Russians native to the far eastern part of Sibera could be mistaken for Chinese or Korean, if not for having the occasional natural blonde or red hair and blue or green eyes typically not considered as an "Asian" trait. Also some of the lightest and darkest (even darker than "African") skin coloration is in India, although they're technically Asian, for all the other physical traits they could be considered Caucasian.

So yes, we humans are a mixed up bunch, there's probably a lot more to us than what's classified under the classical racial designations. It'd be a boring world if we all looked the same and had the same general culture.

a reply to: Nechash

What is you pic lol ?

originally posted by: Buddyman
a reply to: Spider879

Thing is there is a lot of evidence to suggest Atlantis etc is very real and the descendants of this civilization are running things at the moment all through from Atlantis,Sumer,Babylon,Egypt,Greece,Romans and then on to today's royals elites etc.

So i might suggest that the Caucasian race (name derives from the Caucasus mountains where peoples descended after the flood) maybe comprised of different sub races and also my study suggests that there are populations of people who are related to the Annunaki (known by many names globally) they were known as the Tuatha De Danaan in Ireland (as i'm sure OP knows) these guys were the original inhabitants,who appeared after the flood of Atlantis's final islands and inbred with the Celts (hence red hair originating in this area) and large concentrations of rh neg blood.

The relation to these Tuuatha De Danaan/Annuanki/migrant Atlanteans is also true of the Berbers who are caucasian North Africans,the mysterious Basques of Northern Spain and also the Guanches,the original inhabitants of the Canary Islands,before the Spanish came in 1500's (if memory serves) plus other examples out there.

I may also suggest that many varieties of humans were created after the flood,that comprised of different 'stock' and like some one mentioned, all races were comprised of different hominids and some had more Annunaki DNA.

I don't know why you criticized the person you responded to and claimed he was effectively racist..i don't feel he was..i know this is sensitive to some?...but we need to get over that,the truth is more important and indeed we are all equal.

Some links here, regarding what i have just spoke about..

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
www.rhnegativeregistry.com...
www.atlanteanconspiracy.com...

Ok here is where I have like the Scots say a "wee" problem, having been at this for sometime, researching what others wrote,there is always this tendency to try an distance one's self from Africa and Africans in historical and biological context as if everything even past things are contaminated with Ebola,this tendency especially for "some" modern white folks go on to create exotic explanations about their own origins as an exception to the rule this pov is then scattered in popular literature often pick-up by folks doing their own research where Caucasians..read "White" is automatically associated with civilized life and high culture and the dark other the primitive lurking in the dark or as gofers in such societies,even in what is known as New aged literature where one might think New age might mean a new way of thinking it is most prevalent ,as you can guess I do not take old myths and Legends at face value I simply enjoy them but even here folks often lie by omission or turned those myths and legends on it's head by adding things to the original lit that wasn't there in the first place.
Btw I don't think RedMamba had racist intent but he/she was just reflecting pop literature picked-up from somewhere and I have another wee problem Not that I am appealing to authority but do we simply toss out the works of folks working in various fields from geneticist to archaeologist in favor of lone wolves, I know they have their appeal and lone wolves can be right and at times , but something can be said for the tried and tested it often take a lot of hard evidence to the contrary to shift a paradigm.
One more thing pls start that new tread suggested by Hanslune I think it would be an interesting discussion without taking away from this current thread.

a reply to: Hanslune

Yes I agree, thankyou Hanslune for mentioning THE OLDEST untouched living tribe of Humans on Earth.

I have said it before, and I will say it again...The Australian Native Man IS the Original European Man.
A mixture of original Homo Erectus, Neanderthal and Denisovian, from the Ice locked reaches of the Ice age (maybe even pre Ice age). Migrated south to Warmer clims, but still left some tribes in the original homeland of Europe...to evolve to us whiteys.
Native Australians STILL bear children with blonde/light brown and reddish coloured hair.
Many tribes of Australian Natives are hairy (hairy chest and hairy back), straight/wavey hair, EXACTLY like modern Europeans, and in difference to Asians, and Most Africans.
There are historical photographs of traditional tribesman, of the southern tribes (cooler climate), who you would swear were of southern European extraction, but these photos were from the 1850s.

DNA tests of Australian natives show they have both Neanderthal and Denisovian DNA, unlike Africans.
They are the only "Black" people that have this (along with Melanesians..PNG/Solomons)
Polynesians (Maori's/Hawaiians) are related to Indigenous Taiwanese tribes. Who settled the islands only 1000 years ago.

Australian Rock Glyphs and cave art is 30-40,000 years old, the same as those of Europeans (Neanderthal/Caucasian)

Unfortunately, the Australian Natives are put into to too hard basket, as they cannot be joined directly to any "modern" tribe.
Heaven Forbid to suggest they were the original Europeans...How dare one!!!.

They left their legacy throughout India/Afghanistan and southern Asia.
There are tribes of Indians that are virtually identical to Aust. Native people......But they have had the blonde hair gene bred out of them. Whereas the Australian native has been relatively pure for 50,000+ years.

Certainly more intensive study needs to be done on the Australian/European connection.

a reply to: gort51

Gort,
Those indigenous Taiwanese have the highest level of Neanderthal ancestry, outside of certain native north Americans.
One must also recognize that native north americans are almost exclusively blood type o, HSN was blood type o.
Also the earliest Australians, mungo, has no genetic relation to modern aborigines.