Man's Genetic voyage. Fact, Speculation and Theories...

Very well done... Question for you, where do the megalithic peoples fit into this?

Excellent job my friend.

I was helping my daughter with some homework last week and had ran across this site.


Human Evolution

First I think we need to do away with once and for all the notion that Neanderthal was simply an apish brute.

Hard to do when it is instilled in one from a young age.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
Very well done... Question for you, where do the megalithic peoples fit into this?

Quick and short answer....

Wait for Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths Part-3

I realized before I presented the third and final thread on that topic I had to put forward this thread on DNA.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Thank you for elaborating on yet another piece of the puzzle, John.

Your style and grace are expanding nicely, too,

I would be appalled to hear of anyone being offended by this work.

It seems more common sense to me than anything else. Yes, common sense.

Migration... and interbreeding along the way is something that just seems so human that it is in fact my humble opinion that any being not seeing just how human and "natural" that progression is - is simply a fool, for whatever reason.

That may be harsh and insensitive on my part, but, to me the scenarios that are presented are more than touched by the obvious.

Humans like to travel. They like to, um, breed, too. 'Exotic' females were rife in stories told in my youth by various elders who had been to the other side of the world for wars and whatnot. And I hope we can agree that there's nothing wrong in that. Trekking through sparsely populated lands can get a bit tedious, you know.

I'd not previously been aware of the existence of the Denisovans, so, thank you for that. Nice looking fellow.

I'm going to read on now and see what others think before we get to 300 posts...

Peace,
Pixel

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

I'm going to add a congratulatory note as well.

I see you included the excellent book/video "Guns, Germs and Steel". Have you seen the "Journey of Man" series of episodes, too?:


Part 1 -

I was debating on whether or not to include that video series in the thread.

It's an awesome series. I have it on DVD

reply to post by kinda kurious


Hey buddy I appreciate the pat on the back.

reply to post by SLAYER69


humans are a "shell/carcase" for a soul witch must be punnished by reincarnating here on earth!
Eventually that "shell" will "wear out" , the soul will be free , and IF IT DID "WASHED" ALL ITS SINS maybe will remain in that state (soul) .
Genetics don't matter that much...
Not even a chimp wouldn't be a bad ideea to punish a soul

or am I just speculating ?

Stellar thread yet again

I don't know if this is of any interest but I was thinking about the interaction of the Neanderthal cultural and Modern Man possibly causing an advancement of some kind and as I was browsing I came across the Aurignacian culture

The Aurignacian culture (pronounced /ɔrɪɡˈneɪʃən/ or /ɔrɪnˈjeɪʃən/) is an archaeological culture of the Upper Palaeolithic, located in Europe and southwest Asia. It lasted broadly within the period from ca. 45,000 to 35,000 years ago in terms of conventional radiocarbon dating, or between ca. 47,000 and 41,000 years ago in terms of the most recent calibration of the radiocarbon timescale

The oldest known example of figurative art, the Venus of Hohle Fels, comes from this culture

and noticed this statement

At least three robust but typically anatomically modern individuals from the Pestera cu Oase cave in Romania, were dated directly on the bones to ca. 35,000–36,000 BP

Aurignacian Culture

The reference to them being robust caught my eye and I wondered if this was a very early mixing of the gene pool? The fact that there also appears to have been a 'leap forward' in tools decorations etc might point to a cultural mixing as advancements are often found where 2 or more cultures meet and swap ideas etc.

There is more to be found here LINK

Anyway it may be that I've misunderstood something I just skimmed through it

reply to post by randyvs


Well hopefully not too heated.

reply to post by SLAYER69


This is the exact reason why I now frequent this site. What a wonderful, easy to understand and informative thread you have laid on everyone SLAYER69. Many thanks for that. I have always thought the whole "out of Africa" theory too simplistic. And thank goodness you didn't throw in alien DNA, kept the integrity of your thread intact. I will be reading on with much interest.

Originally posted by sunsetatdawn And thank goodness you didn't throw in alien DNA, kept the integrity of your thread intact.

Ah but what you don't know is that Neanderthals actually were Aliens

reply to post by Versa



Yeah we may still find some ancient cave painting where they depict being probed by aliens

reply to post by Versa


When I posted that I wondered if someone would bite!! Kudo's to you Versa, I like your style.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


Thanks for the link.
I appreciate the feedback

Originally posted by jam321

First I think we need to do away with once and for all the notion that Neanderthal was simply an apish brute.

Hard to do when it is instilled in one from a young age.

Their tendency to wear jewellery and decorate themselves might help to dispel that notion

The objects in question consist mostly of seashells, many of them pierced, with bits of pigment on them. It's always possible that the pigment was simply present in the soil where the shells ended up — but then you'd expect the coloring to be widespread. In fact, it's specific to certain shells. Beyond that, several shells contain different pigments that were clearly mixed together deliberately. In some cases, the pigments were of a type that is only known to have been used (in ancient Egypt, for example, so we have actual records) for body painting.

SOURCE

Originally posted by sunsetatdawn
reply to post by Versa

 

When I posted that I wondered if someone would bite!! Kudo's to you Versa, I like your style.

Drat I'm so predictable

Awesome as usual m8,

couple of points i am gonna talk to you about .. (i think) but i nead to read , then re-read your post , then go over it one more time for luck before i make an idiot of myself..

I will get back to you ......

Edit ti add hint :

I am pretty sure the out of africa theory has been .. slightly wobbled recently with the discovery of organized civilizations pre-dating this migration theory.

hence specualting that out of Africa we did not all arrive............ i could be wrong , gonna do some checking




interbreeding?

currently 2 main schools of thought ( lots of other more diverse theories) , Chro mag , Neand, modern man,

either..

A. interbreeded into what we all are today .
B. killed each other ( likely knowing our species history) and what we see today is the victor with the spoils.......


I also favour A coz if their is one thing in commen we have rather than trying to kill each other.. its trying to hump each other.....

S&F

I can already see this is going to be a great read by the amount of work you have put in.

Ill be back to comment soon

I like reading your threads they're written well BUT there is a whole society's that explanation fails to include..There is Ancient Civiliziations that have dissapeared such as The Underwater Pyramids/Cities and other Megalithic Builders that are unexplainable...I'm not saying your wrong in any way I don't doubt that is a part of our past but to me there is clearly Hidden/Forgotten/Secret History of Our Evolution.

As always, a very wonderful and well-written piece!

I would suggest that you add (or make clearer) the timeframe range and add in a bit about dear old homo erectus and possibly Australopithecus -- though I know that genetic material really isn't available. But the bones and cultural pieces are there even if the material is very scanty.

As to the skin variations, that's an adaptation due to sunshine. Very pale skinned people (like myself) do much better where there's less direct sun. I turn lobster red in a matter of hours because there's not much pigment in my skin. Darker skinned people eating a non-modern diet (non-fortified with vitamins and with all sorts of diverse food sources available) will fare far worse in a non-tropical environment. Other body adaptations (minor) increase survival rates -- short and stocky people with more body fat (the tribal people of the Antarctic circle) do better in cold conditions than tall people with long limbs.

Something else that's not accounted for is culture.

One of the first "rules" developed by any group of humans seems to be "who can have sexual relations with whom." Along with this go "standards of beauty" and as groups get larger, status becomes more important. Child and bride exchanges (and captives in war) are not unknown. Populations that get "left behind" when others go wandering tend to be a purer stock than those who wander. Those who wander can get separated for many generations by rivers, mountains, and a lot of geology.

This is why the Native Americans are similar to but not identical to their most recent genetic ancestors, the Siberian steppe peoiple.

So there's a lot of time (90,000 years -- more if you go back to Australopithecus and Erectus) and environment that goes into our makeup. Looking at material beyond genes is more revealing -- one person's genes can, through accident or fate, end up as a surviving lineage even if they were brought in as a captive or a slave.

But time and location... I think those are important to make clear. BTW, some of the territory that these people are walking into were already inhabited by homo erectus.