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.

 

Rewriting Greenland's immigration history

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:43 PM
link   
From Siberia




Most recently two months ago when he and his team discovered that the ancestors of the North American Indians were the first people to populate America, and that they came to the country more than 1,000 years earlier than originally assumed. And the evidence is, so to speak, quite tangible: DNA samples of fossilised human faeces found in deep caves in southern Oregon.

This time, focus is on Greenland, and the scientific evidence is DNA analyses of hair from the Disco Bay ice fjord area in north-west Greenland, which are well-preserved after 4,000 years in permafrost soil. The team’s discovery makes it necessary to review Greenland’s immigration history. Until now, science regarded it as a possibility that the earliest people in Greenland were direct ancestors of the present-day Greenlandic population.

It now turns out that the original immigrants on the maternal side, which is reflected in the mitochondrial DNA, instead came from a Siberian population whose closest present-day descendants come from the Aleutian Islands on the boundary between the Northern Pacific Ocean and the Bering Sea and the Seriniki Yuit in north-east Siberia.





posted on May, 31 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Why are you surprised they follow the coast line.

All cultures follw the water and follow the food, as generations grow people expand the behaviour just like the Apes we are studying today.

X number follow a leader after a whie Someone else wants to be the leader so their followers either fight or go off to create their own life.

The only real surprise is how humans developed from the limited gene pool. In those remote places if cousin and incest are so bad.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 10:40 PM
link   
The "news article" is put out by the researcher himself, and I'm a bit skeptical of his claims that he's "rewritten history." However, I see that he's frequently published papers on DNA (in spite of his youth...busy guy!) His work seems fairly solid and he picks some interesting topics.

BUT -- I'd like to see some followups by others on this research.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Hey publish or perish - but the self promotion is a tad annoying.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Hey publish or perish - but the self promotion is a tad annoying.


It is... but perhaps it's that I've gotten tired of the "I'm rewriting the history books" approach. While it's true that folks have caused history to be rewritten, it's kinda premature to announce it before it's seen if the basic idea is actually accepted as the best possible explaination.

On the other hand, as I said, he's got some interesting papers. I'd like to see more work done on this, however.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Agreed the marketing/propaganda way of presenting ideas if a bad trend.




top topics
 
0

log in

join