Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
whereas the First Nations, who we assume made the trek are full tilt modern human beings. Your timing is off here by tens of thousands of years.

That's an incorrect statement, friend. Cro-Magnon 'man' settled northern Europe, not homosapien sapien which is whom I think you are trying to categorize as 'modern man'. The statement 'modern man' is, in itself, off by tens of thousands of years

according to wikipedia : "From the Lower Paleolithic, approximately 1.8 million[citation needed] years ago, and far into the Upper Paleolithic or 20,000 years ago, Europe was populated by Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis.In the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic, from approximately 40,000 to 6,000 years ago, Europe had Homo sapiens hunter-gatherer populations." So, not tens of thousand of years ago.

Originally posted by TheAnuraOne

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
whereas the First Nations, who we assume made the trek are full tilt modern human beings. Your timing is off here by tens of thousands of years.

That's an incorrect statement, friend. Cro-Magnon 'man' settled northern Europe, not homosapien sapien which is whom I think you are trying to categorize as 'modern man'. The statement 'modern man' is, in itself, off by tens of thousands of years

according to wikipedia : "From the Lower Paleolithic, approximately 1.8 million[citation needed] years ago, and far into the Upper Paleolithic or 20,000 years ago, Europe was populated by Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis.In the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic, from approximately 40,000 to 6,000 years ago, Europe had Homo sapiens hunter-gatherer populations." So, not tens of thousand of years ago.

Those who crossed the Bering Land Bridge were modern human beings, and I suggest you don't try to convince any of our indigenous brethren otherwise.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Those who crossed the Bering Land Bridge were modern human beings, and I suggest you don't try to convince any of our indigenous brethren otherwise.

I was unaware that a homosapien sapien living today could recall exactly HOW and WHO migrated to the North American continent? You obviously talk as if you have firsthand knowledge of afforementioned subject! Start a thread of your own and debunk this one with your thread. For your information, this is all speculation so take your negativity elsewhere. I mean to offend no one, because I am a civil person, so if you are offended it appears you have personal issues. Don't derail my thread with your negative emotions, friend.

Originally posted by TheAnuraOne

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Those who crossed the Bering Land Bridge were modern human beings, and I suggest you don't try to convince any of our indigenous brethren otherwise.

I was unaware that a homosapien sapien living today could recall exactly HOW and WHO migrated to the North American continent? You obviously talk as if you have firsthand knowledge of afforementioned subject! Start a thread of your own and debunk this one with your thread. For your information, this is all speculation so take your negativity elsewhere. I mean to offend no one, because I am a civil person, so if you are offended it appears you have personal issues. Don't derail my thread with your negative emotions, friend.

The difference is apparent in the skeletal remains. I'm not trying to derail your thread, nor express negative emotions by throwing a little anthropology your way, but suit yourself.

Originally posted by TheAnuraOne

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
whereas the First Nations, who we assume made the trek are full tilt modern human beings. Your timing is off here by tens of thousands of years.

That's an incorrect statement, friend. Cro-Magnon 'man' settled northern Europe, not homosapien sapien which is whom I think you are trying to categorize as 'modern man'. The statement 'modern man' is, in itself, off by tens of thousands of years

according to wikipedia : "From the Lower Paleolithic, approximately 1.8 million[citation needed] years ago, and far into the Upper Paleolithic or 20,000 years ago, Europe was populated by Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis.In the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic, from approximately 40,000 to 6,000 years ago, Europe had Homo sapiens hunter-gatherer populations." So, not tens of thousand of years ago.

I really would not rely on Wikipedia as a good source too often if I was you. The term Cro-Magnon refers to Homo sapiens sapiens, and is really out of favor as a classification. Genetic studies are much more enlightening here, the use of Bioinformatic techniques have been used well the last decade or so.

If we are going to use a purely anatomical classification for modern and pre-modern humans, you are going to find that it's subjective, and inaccurate.

So yeah, Wikipedia is not your friend. I suggest looking for some more comprehensive source material if you want to go down this path of thought

Slan agat

Gareth (a Bioinformatician)

Originally posted by Noinden

So yeah, Wikipedia is not your friend. I suggest looking for some more comprehensive source material if you want to go down this path of thought

Slan agat

Gareth (a Bioinformatician)

I didn't say that wikipedia was my only source. Like I said, my friend is an archaeologist and this has been debated. My thread was not about WHO settled North America. My thread was about why is it that 2 seperate peoples have different mtDNA if they are supposed to be from the same ancestors and the migration paths of these people. We can debate the evolution of upright humanoids in another thread. Let's please get back on topic.

Originally posted by TheAnuraOne

I do not believe that early man exclusively crossed into North American via the Beringia land bridge. I believe they also crossed into North America via the Northern Polar Cap.

I agree. If hominids crossed into the Americas heading east via a frozen Bering Straight, the existence of the Sami of the Laplands and Inuit of Greenland would hold evidence that a west-bound arctic migration occurred.

Genetically, I see no mystery here. The Inuit, Native Americans, and Sami migrated from Asia. In a land soon to be dominated by caucasoids (Europe), the Sami were able to hold onto their ethnic identity, thus keeping their mongoloid gene-pool. Similar to the Kohen and other "Jewish" genetic markers surviving in Hebrew people from Palestine to southern Africa.

Originally posted by TheAnuraOne

My thread was about why is it that 2 seperate peoples have different mtDNA if they are supposed to be from the same ancestors and the migration paths of these people.

Are you discussing the difference between the Mongoloid Sami People versus the Caucasoid Nordics? In this case, we can deduct the Caucasoids migrated to Europe from northern Africa and/or the Middle East, while the Mongoloids migrated from Asia following the Arctic coastlands. The Komsa (ancestors of the Sami People) and the Nordics reached the same area (Laplands) using different paths and at different points in history. All the while the Caucasoids and Mongoloids undergo separate genetic mutations that distinguish them today.


______________________________________
______________________________________


Want to talk about re-writing human history? Take into consideration that Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosomal Adam are separated by thousands of years! Or even the discovery that Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapien Sapien interbred.


______________________________________________
______________________________________________


I don't understand why you want to shun human evolutionary debate from this thread.
In fact, your OP is laced with references to Pre Homosapien sapiens, Cro-Magnon, Homo Erectus, Homo Ergaster, Homo Heidelbergensis, evolutionary ancestors, and ancient migratory paths. Perhaps you are presenting your ideas for non-speculation, non-debatable purposes only?
How can discussion or advancement occur when one sets limits of discussion?

Who !

Hold up .. You guys are totally forgetting Atlantis.

Besides I believe they are now talking about to waves of migration events from Africa. with in between almost 100.000 years. The first wave could have easily been different from the other and even intermingled again later on.

Some could have gotten to isolated to mingle with which could explain the differences in between north and South Americans. I would assume the first wave traveled further. The second wave was limited to colonize the south cause of the massive jungle in between.

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
Who !

Hold up .. You guys are totally forgetting Atlantis.

Besides I believe they are now talking about to waves of migration events from Africa. with in between almost 100.000 years. The first wave could have easily been different from the other and even intermingled again later on.

Some could have gotten to isolated to mingle with which could explain the differences in between north and South Americans. I would assume the first wave traveled further. The second wave was limited to colonize the south cause of the massive jungle in between.

What I think you will find is that human migrations were controlled by the ice-ages, so you get an early migration and a latter one. One of the most interesting is the one that led to the colonization of Australia, I think that was around 60 000 years ago.

Originally posted by Noinden

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
Who !

Hold up .. You guys are totally forgetting Atlantis.

Besides I believe they are now talking about to waves of migration events from Africa. with in between almost 100.000 years. The first wave could have easily been different from the other and even intermingled again later on.

Some could have gotten to isolated to mingle with which could explain the differences in between north and South Americans. I would assume the first wave traveled further. The second wave was limited to colonize the south cause of the massive jungle in between.

What I think you will find is that human migrations were controlled by the ice-ages, so you get an early migration and a latter one. One of the most interesting is the one that led to the colonization of Australia, I think that was around 60 000 years ago.

There is also the consideration that sea levels were lower due to water locked up in ice...so the continental shelf could offer passage. There are hints that Monte Verde could date to 40kya.

Originally posted by Sahabi

Are you discussing the difference between the Mongoloid Sami People versus the Caucasoid Nordics?

No, I am not. I want to know why the Saami (not Sami) have different mtDNA than the Lower American Indians and the Kalaallits of Greenland? But have the same as the Inuit of Alaska and Canada? Yes, I know there are Inuit in Greenland as well.

My whole thread was that more than ONE prehistoric man must have endured than previously thought of having only one. Like I said, educae me. I am no expert. I just found all of this interesting

People come into this thread and get stars for trying to debunk what I believe to be interesting, yet don't star the thread? Wow.