It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Basque people DNA from ancient cave skeletons proves....

page: 2
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Marduk

For years I've been hearing that the Basque people were the first arriving modern humans in Europe and that they deliberately isolated themselves from outsiders, to keep their lineage pure. New irrefutable scientific evidence has proved all that fallacious.

This evidence is irrefutable?

An international team of geneticists may now have solved the riddle, delving deep into DNA history to find they descended from early farmers who mixed with local hunter-gatherers before becoming separated.

Take notice of the language here and here.

The language states the finding that the Basque descend from Iberian farmers far too late for Atlantis, and far FAR too late to consider them indigenous neolithic hunter-gatherers.

Does that burn your butt, or what?

The wiggle-words you're quoting come from a journalist, not the group that made the finding.

Harte
edit on 9/8/2015 by Harte because: I said so!




posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
the ydna is not neolithic. the men can still say what they like.



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Marduk

For years I've been hearing that the Basque people were the first arriving modern humans in Europe and that they deliberately isolated themselves from outsiders, to keep their lineage pure. New irrefutable scientific evidence has proved all that fallacious.

This evidence is irrefutable?

An international team of geneticists may now have solved the riddle, delving deep into DNA history to find they descended from early farmers who mixed with local hunter-gatherers before becoming separated.

Take notice of the language here and here.

The language states the finding that the Basque descend from Iberian farmers far too late for Atlantis, and far FAR too late to consider them indigenous neolithic hunter-gatherers.

Does that burn your butt, or what?

The wiggle-words you're quoting come from a journalist, not the group that made the finding.

Harte


No it doesnt burn my butt. I have no stake in the fight just that its ridiculous for someone to read a news article on a study and present it as the irrefutable fact.

Did you read the study or do you just believe it because you want to prove people wrong? If you did read the study please point me to it. I just read a paper published there on a similar subject. As you can see i actually presented the authors website at the swedish university. However i had trouble finding this paper. Not sure if the findings have been peer reviewed and put in a paper.

What was the sample base? Was it one cave site in spain? How many bones yielded good results? How certain are they with who the people at the dig site are?

These are just questions their peers will ask they may already be answered but none of the people making the claims in this thread have been able to actually site the study. Just an article which doesnt mean diddly squat.


edit on 8-9-2015 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

No it doesnt burn my butt. I have no stake in the fight just that its ridiculous for someone to read a news article on a study and present it as the irrefutable fact.

Did you read the study or do you just believe it because you want to prove people wrong? If you did read the study please point me to it. I just read a paper published there on a similar subject. As you can see i actually presented the authors website at the swedish university. However i had trouble finding this paper. Not sure if the findings have been peer reviewed and put in a paper.

What was the sample base? Was it one cave site in spain? How many bones yielded good results? How certain are they with who the people at the dig site are?

These are just questions their peers will ask they may already be answered but none of the people making the claims in this thread have been able to actually site the study. Just an article which doesnt mean diddly squat.




for the love of god, here... www.pnas.org... for a PDF of the entire paper, click the link below the list of the papers authors. and here's a press release as well...


www.uu.se...,8&typ=pm&lang=en


I would also argue that the article actually does mean diddly squat. Not everyone has access to papers being published and therefore allows one to do their own research and reach their own conclusions. In some instances an individual will have access to a paper as a result of a professional affiliation or particular journal subscription but are not able to share those links publicly.


The transition from a foraging subsistence strategy to a sedentary farming society is arguably the greatest innovation in human history. Some modern-day groups—specifically the Basques—have been argued to be a remnant population that connect back to the Paleolithic. We present, to our knowledge, the first genome-wide sequence data from eight individuals associated with archaeological remains from farming cultures in the El Portalón cave (Atapuerca, Spain). These individuals emerged from the same group of people as other Early European farmers, and they mixed with local hunter–gatherers on their way to Iberia. The El Portalón individuals showed the greatest genetic affinity to Basques, which suggests that Basques and their language...



Archaeological Samples. Sixteen bone and teeth human remains, representing sixteenindividualsfromtheChalcolithicandBronzeAgesiteofElPortalón(Spain) (14) were sampled for ancient DNA analyses. The samples had been excavated between 2000 and 2012, and C14 dates were obtained for each of them using accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). See SI Appendix, section S1for details.
Sequencing. DNA was extracted from bones and teeth (34–36); DNA extracts were converted into blunt-end Illumina libraries (37). All samples were pre- pared in dedicated ancient DNA (aDNA) facilities at the Evolutionary Biology Center in Uppsala, Sweden. The libraries were sequenced on Illumina’s HiSeq platform at the SNP&SEQ Technology Platform SciLife Sequencing Centre in Uppsala. All 16 samples were screened for human DNA, and only individuals with over 1% of human DNA content (n = 8) were used for downstream analysis. See SI Appendix, section S2and Dataset S8 for details.
Next Generation Sequencing Data Processing and Authentication. Paired-end reads were merged, and remaining adapters were trimmed (38). The merged and trimmed reads were subsequently mapped to the human reference genome using BWA (39); potential PCR duplicates with identical start and end coordinates were collapsed into consensus sequences. The sequences showed a deamination pattern toward fragment ends, which are charac- teristic for ancient DNA (16). Contamination was estimated based on
discordant sites in mitochondria and the X chromosome in males (40–42). A detailed description can be found in SI Appendix, section S3 .
Uniparental Haplogroups. Consensussequencesforthemitochondrialgenomesof allsampleswerecalledusingthe samtools package(43).Weused haplofind (44)to assign the mitochondrial genome to known mitochondrial haplogroups. Y haplo- groups were assigned based on PhylotreeY (45). We excluded all non-SNP sites, transition sites (to avoid deamination damage), and A/T and G/C SNPs (to avoid strand misidentification). See SI Appendix, sections S4 and S5 for details.

edit on 8-9-2015 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-9-2015 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk
a reply to: luthier

That would be true except that this isn't anthropology, its genetic science...



This is anthropology, anthropology is a broad subject, dealing with anything that involves a taxonomy of ape like creatures.
If human remains, or anything that resembles them, or, even just bones in general are found on a dig sight police need to be contacted and they use a physical anthropologist to determine if they are human, or not, they can also determine if they are ape like as well, which will lead to geneticists and such further down the line.



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Marduk

Any creditable archaeologist or anyone who has read a book or two on the subject of physical anthropology knows that ancient aliens, Atlantis, etc are all myths. When I was in university taking archaeology we spent a good two lectures talking about 'forbidden' zones, and pseudo science, mainly Atlantis.
But we were also taught not to discredit them entirely, there is usually some sort of truth to these claims, you have to remember that archaeologists are investigators of the past, and need to take in all sorts of information, including talking to the weirdos.
I just hope these findings finally put an end to the people who are extremely biased and completely ignore the actual evidence. You know, the people who aren't the leading archaeologists in the world right now.


That would be true except that he anthro and arch "leading" scientists have been wrong so many times and theories have been thrown out. Hell neither subject was even science until about 75 years ago. Previous to that it was just a way to advance and classify the coffers of emperialism. Magret meade was really the first unbiased anthro writer. The dates of civilization have been drastically changed as have physical anthros date of modern mans origons since i studied the subjects 20 years ago. The "leaders" in the field you speak are just the ones who are awarded large research grants. They are not always the best scientists by any means but rather the most well connected politically. I dont have any beliefs on ancient aliens or or that stuff but, anthro and arch are very often wrong just a few years later. We have discovered and understand very little of the ancient past. The proof is all still waiting to be found. The good side of anthro and arch is they are peer reviewed. So you cant just print unfounded theories. However they are just barely scratching the surface new discoveries often diaprove old theories. The same theories everyone used to spout off as the only truth.
So be careful being so bold about what arch and anthro "knows". Its actually very little.


'Well known' archaeologists are not that well known to the public, they tend to stick to the tight knit community within the academic world. And, archaeology was not recognized as an actual 'science' until the last 10 years or so.
The first year I took for archaeology was the first year it was a science degree, before this it was an arts degree, and you HAD to challenge a thesis even to just be a shovel monkey. Now days, I am not sure since a science degree is good enough.



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: luthier

No it doesnt burn my butt. I have no stake in the fight just that its ridiculous for someone to read a news article on a study and present it as the irrefutable fact.

Did you read the study or do you just believe it because you want to prove people wrong? If you did read the study please point me to it. I just read a paper published there on a similar subject. As you can see i actually presented the authors website at the swedish university. However i had trouble finding this paper. Not sure if the findings have been peer reviewed and put in a paper.

What was the sample base? Was it one cave site in spain? How many bones yielded good results? How certain are they with who the people at the dig site are?

These are just questions their peers will ask they may already be answered but none of the people making the claims in this thread have been able to actually site the study. Just an article which doesnt mean diddly squat.




for the love of god, here... www.pnas.org... for a PDF of the entire paper, click the link below the list of the papers authors. and here's a press release as well...




www.uu.se...,8&typ=pm&lang=en


The transition from a foraging subsistence strategy to a sedentary farming society is arguably the greatest innovation in human history. Some modern-day groups—specifically the Basques—have been argued to be a remnant population that connect back to the Paleolithic. We present, to our knowledge, the first genome-wide sequence data from eight individuals associated with archaeological remains from farming cultures in the El Portalón cave (Atapuerca, Spain). These individuals emerged from the same group of people as other Early European farmers, and they mixed with local hunter–gatherers on their way to Iberia. The El Portalón individuals showed the greatest genetic affinity to Basques, which suggests that Basques and their language...



Archaeological Samples. Sixteen bone and teeth human remains, representing sixteenindividualsfromtheChalcolithicandBronzeAgesiteofElPortalón(Spain) (14) were sampled for ancient DNA analyses. The samples had been excavated between 2000 and 2012, and C14 dates were obtained for each of them using accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). See SI Appendix, section S1for details.
Sequencing. DNA was extracted from bones and teeth (34–36); DNA extracts were converted into blunt-end Illumina libraries (37). All samples were pre- pared in dedicated ancient DNA (aDNA) facilities at the Evolutionary Biology Center in Uppsala, Sweden. The libraries were sequenced on Illumina’s HiSeq platform at the SNP&SEQ Technology Platform SciLife Sequencing Centre in Uppsala. All 16 samples were screened for human DNA, and only individuals with over 1% of human DNA content (n = 8) were used for downstream analysis. See SI Appendix, section S2and Dataset S8 for details.
Next Generation Sequencing Data Processing and Authentication. Paired-end reads were merged, and remaining adapters were trimmed (38). The merged and trimmed reads were subsequently mapped to the human reference genome using BWA (39); potential PCR duplicates with identical start and end coordinates were collapsed into consensus sequences. The sequences showed a deamination pattern toward fragment ends, which are charac- teristic for ancient DNA (16). Contamination was estimated based on
discordant sites in mitochondria and the X chromosome in males (40–42). A detailed description can be found in SI Appendix, section S3 .
Uniparental Haplogroups. Consensussequencesforthemitochondrialgenomesof allsampleswerecalledusingthe samtools package(43).Weused haplofind (44)to assign the mitochondrial genome to known mitochondrial haplogroups. Y haplo- groups were assigned based on PhylotreeY (45). We excluded all non-SNP sites, transition sites (to avoid deamination damage), and A/T and G/C SNPs (to avoid strand misidentification). See SI Appendix, sections S4 and S5 for details.


Why so upset? This is how it works. If someone did the same thing this op did and link a news article with no sources or link to the paper and made a claim its perfectly valid to raise this point.

Its also not in any way irrefuttable evidence of anything except that the eight farmers they used had dna similar to people from the basque region today and showed the mixing of iberian farmers and hunter gatherers. There are plenty of parts of the equation that could be off including the sample base of farmers. This was the first of its kind.

I think its great we can get a picture of these migrations this was a stepping stone not the rosetta stone though. Personally i dont hold any beliefs on where the basque people came from and certainly dont think it was aliens or atlantis but I dont feel the need to belittle people who do and then quote a news article as the proof.

I do hold the belief that San Sabastion has the best food in the world and I would love to live there.

Thanks for the pdf. Its a great find.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Marduk

For years I've been hearing that the Basque people were the first arriving modern humans in Europe and that they deliberately isolated themselves from outsiders, to keep their lineage pure. New irrefutable scientific evidence has proved all that fallacious.

This evidence is irrefutable?

An international team of geneticists may now have solved the riddle, delving deep into DNA history to find they descended from early farmers who mixed with local hunter-gatherers before becoming separated.

Take notice of the language here and here.

The language states the finding that the Basque descend from Iberian farmers far too late for Atlantis, and far FAR too late to consider them indigenous neolithic hunter-gatherers.

Does that burn your butt, or what?

The wiggle-words you're quoting come from a journalist, not the group that made the finding.

Harte


No it doesnt burn my butt. I have no stake in the fight just that its ridiculous for someone to read a news article on a study and present it as the irrefutable fact.

Did you read the study or do you just believe it because you want to prove people wrong?

I don't need the study to prove people wrong about the Basque being Atlantean descendants, which is what Marduk was referring to.

The study shows that the Basque were not the indigenous population in Europe as well, but that idea isn't as ridiculous as the Atlantis connection anyway.

Harte



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Lot of dis info flying here..and a main stream link? Ooh!

Atlantis and Hyperborea where real and are provably correct.

The origins of Rh negative and thus the Basque people is actually from cro Magnon both appeared 35,000 years ago. They were from Hyperborea I'm afraid! the migration patterns,hair and eye color Charts also point to this. I can tell you as a Pole shift and Planet X researcher, that these continents did exist! The furthest accepted sunken land is Doggaland and this went down two poleshifts ago 7200 years ago.

Cro Magnons were the result of the Annunaki (Reptilians) hybridizing with the Nordic Aryans and this creation was Cro Magnon,this creation was too smart and had the largest known cranial capacity.

This is an area of research I have been dedicated to for the past year (being Rh neg stock and a 'contactee') I have recently got in touch with Robert Sepher and He supports this theory, also pointing out that the Sumerien/Egyptian kings list exactly mirrors and dates back to this time frame of 35,000 years thereabouts. These guys were the red and blond haired cone headed Pharoahs as well btw and were the ones who established this global advance civilization...no not 'aliens'! These guys are also responsible for a significant amount of UFO sightings as they are still here in the background.

I also have personal experience confirming that RH negative Cro Magnon descendants are reptilian hybrids!! This doesn't just include RH negative pure bloods! Which number approx 10-15% of the global populace, there could be as many as 60% of people (certainly in Europe say) that have inherited RH negative alleles even though they are positive.

Please run these kind of threads by me before putting them up it will save immense amounts of tail chasing!





posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

What is most frightening is that I think you're actually serious with this delusional, nonscientific rubbish. Good luck with all of that.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: EndOfDays77

What is most frightening is that I think you're actually serious with this delusional, nonscientific rubbish. Good luck with all of that.


I'm waiting for it to come out at the movies



But lets wait for luthier to respond to EndOfDays77 post, because yanno, he claims it should be dealt with without ridicule

Balls all yours luthier
edit on 9-9-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: EndOfDays77

What is most frightening is that I think you're actually serious with this delusional, nonscientific rubbish. Good luck with all of that.


I'm waiting for it to come out at the movies



But lets wait for luthier to respond to EndOfDays77 post, because yanno, he claims it should be dealt with without ridicule

Balls all yours luthier
.

Yes i do because its not necessary and is what allows people to win debates when the opposing side is being trite. Watch for instance athesists be taken apart by craig. He isnt right but he understands how to debate and find fallacious statements made by people using ridicule and emotions to debate. Its best to just stick to the facts.

I personally do not believe any of what end of days77 says but I would prefer use facts other than presented in redicule to prove that. Part of my response would be using studies like this.

My problem with your op is that you make a claim your article cant back up. An article can be completely butchered by the press and they rarely check studies these days. This study is well researched but you cant go on a news article when making a claim.

If you had just simply presented this discovery as an interesting article for people to read that would be great. But imo all you did was link a news article that agrees with your opinion. Not much different than what some "true believers" do.

Your opinion happens to be grounded in what we know of reality but your method of proof of claim is no different than a "true believer". If you want to make strong claims you need to back them with evidence.

Just fyi I can gurantee the authors of this theory will not present this as a irrefuttable fact but rather a new theory that will be built apon and confirmed or upended with more studies.

You keep making fun of me for studying anthro 20 years ago but I have been around long enough to know theories are constantly overturned especially so with "first ever studies of their kind".

They could find bones that confirm there were genetically isolated people in spain. When you think of the sample size its extremely evident the whole picture is not known. Just the tip of the iceberg.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: EndOfDays77
Lot of dis info flying here..and a main stream link? Ooh!

Atlantis and Hyperborea where real and are provably correct.

The origins of Rh negative and thus the Basque people is actually from cro Magnon both appeared 35,000 years ago. They were from Hyperborea I'm afraid! the migration patterns,hair and eye color Charts also point to this. I can tell you as a Pole shift and Planet X researcher, that these continents did exist! The furthest accepted sunken land is Doggaland and this went down two poleshifts ago 7200 years ago.

Cro Magnons were the result of the Annunaki (Reptilians) hybridizing with the Nordic Aryans and this creation was Cro Magnon,this creation was too smart and had the largest known cranial capacity.

This is an area of research I have been dedicated to for the past year (being Rh neg stock and a 'contactee') I have recently got in touch with Robert Sepher and He supports this theory, also pointing out that the Sumerien/Egyptian kings list exactly mirrors and dates back to this time frame of 35,000 years thereabouts. These guys were the red and blond haired cone headed Pharoahs as well btw and were the ones who established this global advance civilization...no not 'aliens'! These guys are also responsible for a significant amount of UFO sightings as they are still here in the background.

I also have personal experience confirming that RH negative Cro Magnon descendants are reptilian hybrids!! This doesn't just include RH negative pure bloods! Which number approx 10-15% of the global populace, there could be as many as 60% of people (certainly in Europe say) that have inherited RH negative alleles even though they are positive.

Please run these kind of threads by me before putting them up it will save immense amounts of tail chasing!




I would be interested in sources and how you came to this conclusion. It seems you are making a bold claim against the anthropolgy community so this requires bold evidence to be taken seriously. Its not really enough to use anectdotal evidence if you are making a bold claim against research. Its not ok to hide behind antiestablishment ideas without showing proof they are wrong or corrupt in some way..



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

My problem with your op is that you make a claim your article cant back up. An article can be completely butchered by the press and they rarely check studies these days. This study is well researched but you cant go on a news article when making a claim.

Um, no, that again is your opinion, from my perspective I was posting a news article which I thought people who were already familiar with the claims made for the Basque would be familiar with, as you are not familiar with those claims, your claims that I was presenting a case without evidence are completely fallacious and to a certain extent laughable.
please allow me to fill in your knowledge gap here
read this
Baque Atlantis
www.ancient-atlantis.com...
and this
Basque descended from Lizard overlords
www.greatdreams.com...
I'm not bothering to include a link to Ripleys 1899 claim that the Basque were direct descendants from what you call Cro Magnon (which modern science calls European early modern humans (EEMH), because that was debunked by anthropologists long before you studied anything, so you probably aren't familiar with that argument at all. Besides, you'd have to read his entire book to understand his position and I won't ask you to do that, because you wouldn't. Thank me later

Now you will need to read these, Endofdays77 certainly will, otherwise, like before, you will be in a position of arguing from ignorance and you wouldn't want that would you...

These hypothesis were what I was referring to as now defunct because of this study, which imo, proves they are wrong
You were completely incorrect in your summation that I was claiming it proved anything else. I tried telling you that, but due to your bias you weren't prepared to listen.


You keep making fun of me for studying anthro 20 years ago but I have been around long enough to know theories are constantly overturned especially so with "first ever studies of their kind".

no, I simply mentioned that you were out of date with your knowledge of the Basque
Your own insecurity coloured in the rest.

So now, because of it, you are in a position where you are about to have a prolonged discussion with someone who has clearly been researching from all the wrong sources for a whole year. A whole year, imagine that. I wonder who knows more.. him, you or me, with my decade of research on this specific subject from academic sources
knock yourself out, show us how its done, we are all watching. I've even got popcorn.




originally posted by: luthier
Its not ok to hide behind antiestablishment ideas without showing proof they are wrong or corrupt in some way..


You should probably drop that approach before someone calls you a hypocrite


finally, I will point out to you that as an intelligent thinking human being, the reason that I sometimes use ridicule in my posts is because it forces the person being ridiculed to go do some more research to counter the ridicule more directly than any other method. That's fine for you to take your approach to win an argument on a website, personally I am more interested in furthering peoples long term education. I know quite a few others who post here do it for the same reasons (eh Harte).
edit on 9-9-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: luthier

My problem with your op is that you make a claim your article cant back up. An article can be completely butchered by the press and they rarely check studies these days. This study is well researched but you cant go on a news article when making a claim.

Um, no, that again is your opinion, from my perspective I was posting a news article which I thought people who were already familiar with the claims made for the Basque would be familiar with, as you are not familiar with those claims, your claims that I was presenting a case without evidence are completely fallacious and to a certain extent laughable.
please allow me to fill in your knowledge gap here
read this
Baque Atlantis
www.ancient-atlantis.com...
and this
Basque descended from Lizard overlords
www.greatdreams.com...
I'm not bothering to include a link to Ripleys 1899 claim that the Basque were direct descendants from what you call Cro Magnon (which modern science calls European early modern humans (EEMH), because that was debunked by anthropologists long before you studied anything, so you probably aren't familiar with that argument at all. Besides, you'd have to read his entire book to understand his position and I won't ask you to do that, because you wouldn't. Thank me later

Now you will need to read these, Endofdays77 certainly will, otherwise, like before, you will be in a position of arguing from ignorance and you wouldn't want that would you...

These hypothesis were what I was referring to as now defunct because of this study, which imo, proves they are wrong
You were completely incorrect in your summation that I was claiming it proved anything else. I tried telling you that, but due to your bias you weren't prepared to listen.


You keep making fun of me for studying anthro 20 years ago but I have been around long enough to know theories are constantly overturned especially so with "first ever studies of their kind".

no, I simply mentioned that you were out of date with your knowledge of the Basque
Your own insecurity coloured in the rest.

So now, because of it, you are in a position where you are about to have a prolonged discussion with someone who has clearly been researching from all the wrong sources for a whole year. A whole year, imagine that. I wonder who knows more.. him, you or me, with my decade of research on this specific subject from academic sources
knock yourself out, show us how its done, we are all watching. I've even got popcorn.




originally posted by: luthier
Its not ok to hide behind antiestablishment ideas without showing proof they are wrong or corrupt in some way..


You should probably drop that approach before someone calls you a hypocrite


finally, I will point out to you that as an intelligent thinking human being, the reason that I sometimes use ridicule in my posts is because it forces the person being ridiculed to go do some more research to counter the ridicule more directly than any other method. That's fine for you to take your approach to win an argument on a website, personally I am more interested in furthering peoples long term education. I know quite a few others who post here do it for the same reasons (eh Harte).


Thank you for the opportunity to debate the subject. Redicule only works if it works in your argument it does not.

As i say again this is a small study of 8 local farmers who shared similar geneology to modern people living in the basque region and they have iberian farmers dna mixed. It in no way proves or disproves anything about the theories you spoke of and thank god that was no its purpose.

What it proves is even though the language and culture is isolated from the sorrounding region its very possible it has nothing to do with genetics. This is something that seems confirmed in other,.. especially domestic scale culture examples in a anthro

All that other stuff well... How and why disprove it to begin with. When you talk about broad esoteric theories of any kind they are not worth debating unless they have compelling evidence. Anyone can say something. Proving it is what gives real ideas the rigor of testing.

I am not ignorant of such beliefs in ancestory i completely understand where you are coming from. A news article is just not a good source for science anymore. I can give you hundreds of examples but here is the first article i could find.

www.psychologytoday.com...

This is what i am talking about. Usually a good news article is sourced somewhere. Everything is moving towards a blog informal format. I am saying be careful and source stuff not to appear like your only goal is to redicule but rather to educate as you say.

As for my education and naivitee you may assume what you like but again in a real debate when you snipe without substance and proof you are only loosing the debate with overly emotional responses. I understand this isnt a real debate/message board in the academic sense but you bring it on yourself when you take radical esoteric beliefs and give them meaning by debating science fiction theories with actual science. Now the burden of proof is on you to be scientific.

Peter Vlar probably hates my guts and thinks I am trite but I respect how he debates with sources if he makes claims. In my opinion if you bring science into it then be sciencie darn it. Otherwise just be casual.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
As for my education and naivitee you may assume what you like but again in a real debate when you snipe without substance and proof you are only loosing the debate with overly emotional responses. I understand this isnt a real debate/message board in the academic sense but you bring it on yourself when you take radical esoteric beliefs and give them meaning by debating science fiction theories with actual science. Now the burden of proof is on you to be scientific.



I agree with everything else completely, but again will point out that I am not here for the online debate, but for the real results you get from allowing someone to research themselves into understanding the truth and then following it. Anyone can win an argument from their perspective from throwing what they believe to be the facts at someone unprepared to hear them. But educating someone into having a scientific approach, that's golden



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: luthier
As for my education and naivitee you may assume what you like but again in a real debate when you snipe without substance and proof you are only loosing the debate with overly emotional responses. I understand this isnt a real debate/message board in the academic sense but you bring it on yourself when you take radical esoteric beliefs and give them meaning by debating science fiction theories with actual science. Now the burden of proof is on you to be scientific.



I agree with everything else completely, but again will point out that I am not here for the online debate, but for the real results you get from allowing someone to research themselves into understanding the truth and then following it. Anyone can win an argument from their perspective from throwing what they believe to be the facts at someone unprepared to hear them. But educating someone into having a scientific approach, that's golden


The problem i see is wether or not you engage in a debating manor a discussion where one proves or disproves claims is naturally a debate. Philosophies rules of debate are very similar to the scientific method. Why not just be thorough. IMO debate is what makes people change their minds and has since the written language. Its what politicians and scientists do to policy and thesis. That way you win on an ethical and scientific level which has kind of been proven by history to be the best form of changing someones mind.

To me its not about just winning but doing so thoroughly and in which case the losing debator is forced to examine the beliefs that were thoroughly and calmly picked apart.

Maybe both ways work.

Anyway i am glad i pissed you guys off because I was able to get the paper and it is pretty cool to see the power of culture seems to trump genetics. I also think urban anthro has kind of proved this as well with studies on the effects of poverty overy different cultural ethnic groups.

All and all am just glad people care about more than what the kardashians are doing. Its nice to know not everyone has fully tuned out we are on the brink of some pretty major stuff in cosmology, origons, physics etc.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier



The problem i see is wether or not you engage in a debating manor a discussion where one proves or disproves claims is naturally a debate. Philosophies rules of debate are very similar to the scientific method. Why not just be thorough. IMO debate is what makes people change their minds and has since the written language. Its what politicians and scientists do to policy and thesis. That way you win on an ethical and scientific level which has kind of been proven by history to be the best form of changing someones mind.


My approach is based on about 13 years experience of online debates against people like Enfofdays77 and previous to that about 15 years of debate amongst friends. It doesn't work, not ever. You cannot convince someone who is credulous that they are wrong. Its far too easy for them to dismiss you as a misinformation agent and then ignore everything you have to say, no matter how well supported it is with scientific evidence. Even Mark Twain knew that..

This is pretty basic psychology, you'll note therapists don't tell people that they are wrong, they suggest approaches where the subject can discover how wrong they are for themselves.

The only person who can convince someone they have it wrong is the person themselves and the only way they can do that is to be challenged to a level that damages their ego and motivates them into more research.

Like this
Hey Endofdays77, I like the way you have managed to link the emergence of cro magnon and the Egyptian/Sumerian king list to 35,000 years ago, but as you seem incapable of any scientific approach to anything in the real world and as you have based your entire belief on outdated information which you stole from other idiots, what would happen to your entire hypothesis (which you stole from Sitchin and Icke and Leder) if it turned out that Cro Magnon actually dates from 45,000–43,000 calendar years before present. That would mean that they apparently evolved on their own without Alien help 10,000 years earlier wouldn't it, then you'd look a bit stupid eh.

Whats he going to do ?
What would you do ?




posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
"But where did the early Irish come from? For a long time the myth of Irish history has been that the Irish are Celts. Many people still refer to Irish, Scottish and Welsh as Celtic culture - and the assumtion has been that they were Celts who migrated from central Europe around 500BCE. Keltoi was the name given by the Ancient Greeks to a 'barbaric' (in their eyes) people who lived to the north of them in central Europe. While early Irish art shows some similarities of style to central European art of the Keltoi, historians have also recognised many significant differences between the two cultures.

The latest research into Irish DNA has confirmed that the early inhabitants of Ireland were not directly descended from the Keltoi of central Europe. In fact the closest genetic relatives of the Irish in Europe are to be found in the north of Spain in the region known as the Basque Country."


edit on 9-9-2015 by rowanflame because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Like this
Hey Endofdays77, I like the way you have managed to link the emergence of cro magnon and the Egyptian/Sumerian king list to 35,000 years ago, but as you seem incapable of any scientific approach to anything in the real world and as you have based your entire belief on outdated information which you stole from other idiots, what would happen to your entire hypothesis (which you stole from Sitchin and Icke and Leder) if it turned out that Cro Magnon actually dates from 45,000–43,000 calendar years before present. That would mean that they apparently evolved on their own without Alien help 10,000 years earlier wouldn't it, then you'd look a bit stupid eh.

Whats he going to do ?
What would you do ?



Usually completely ignore it. It depends how steadfast people are into creating mythos into science.

I look at it like this metaphysics are fine and impossible to debate. You either believe, disbelieve, or make no claim (all the spaces between as well) but its not debatable. Kant says it best when he says the shores of debate are littered with ship wrecks. Iits he said she said stuff.

Science and metaphysics are oil and water unless you have the etic and emic perspective. You need to look at what the myth could possibly be saying about ancienct history.

When someone presents metaphysics as science well i usually call them out on it. The two can meet for instance when some battle in the bible is unearthed in israel etc but then they go their seperate ways. Unless someone gets a magic sword past the cia I still cant accept myth as the scientific explaination.

I think the current migrations in Europe and the US should be a pretty good explaination of how these things often happen. Not so exciting but can be just as traumatic to the refugees and the host culturally.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join