Ancient Europeans Mysteriously Vanished 4,500 Years Ago - Possible Evidence of the Noatian Flood?

People migrated from modern-day Turkey and the Near East to colonize Europe during the agricultural revolution of the Mesolithic period some 7,500 years ago, according to a new study of mitochondrial DNA taken from skeletal remains discovered in Germany and Italy. But their population was later replaced by another group. “What is intriguing is that the genetic markers of this first pan-European culture, which was clearly very successful, were then suddenly replaced around 4,500 years ago, and we don’t know why,” said Alan Cooper of the Australian Center for Ancient DNA.

Firstly take note that the heading says Possible Evidence. The question being asked here is if there is evidence that can be interpreted as a genetic bottleneck in the human story at the approximate time of the biblical flood, if only the mainstream science culture would tolerate such preposterous idea. According to one widely accepted biblical chronology the flood happened about 4200 years ago.

ETA source

Wasn't that also around the time the Sumerian's were around with their genetic manipulation. The flood washes away most of the natives and it is gradually replaced with the newest model.

Just a thought.

Hi how's it going,
Awsome paper you came across, kudos.
As far ad the subject matter at hand, no it is not evidence of the biblical flood.
Sorry, but it is evidence of more agressive horse oriented people moving into western Europe and replacing earlier cattle based people, who in turn replaced the first farmers, who replaced the original people of Europe.

reply to post by punkinworks10


Thanks for the comment, but both populations were farmers. The sites they were looking at were in Northern Italy and Germany, both places heavily wooded until cleared for farming, the horse people would have had to traverse a least a thousand miles of wooded Europe before they got there, highly unlikely, they would have had to become farmers themselves and thus loose the advantage of being aggressive horse people you speak of.

Based on what I have read the study shows that an expansion from Iberia took place which replaced the dominant population of the LBK Culture. So west to east instead of east to west as previously thought.

This study looks at MTDNA which is the maternal side, it would be interesting if the same is true of the Y-DNA (Paternal) part to. If it is it would explain why most ancient DNA samples from LBK and such have been G Haplogroup for Y-DNA which would lead one to believe originally that was the dominant haplogroup but is now one of the smallest in Europe (4% I think?).

If so it appears in the mid-neolithic whoever invaded/expanded/took over from the previous farmers pushed the remnants of the previous population into places like the Alps where G Haplogroup is the strongest today.

Originally posted by punkinworks10
Hi how's it going,
Awsome paper you came across, kudos.
As far ad the subject matter at hand, no it is not evidence of the biblical flood.
Sorry, but it is evidence of more agressive horse oriented people moving into western Europe and replacing earlier cattle based people, who in turn replaced the first farmers, who replaced the original people of Europe.

For once i would have to say i disagree with you here Punkinworks (unless i have misread the information, which is a distinct possibility!).

The report appears to state that the Beaker Peoples were Bow orientated and the groups in Central Europe were Axe orientated. This would give the Beaker People a huge advantage at the time, particularly given the terrain. Using a suitable ambush spot, a group of the Germanic Axe orientated people could be pretty much destroyed significantly before they even had the chance to engage the Beaker People.

This military advantage would also help to explain the rapid expansion and dominance, which, as the post above mine states, seems to indicate West to East expansion (at this period rather than originally into Europe). However, as i say above, i could have misunderstood the evidence presented.

ETA:

Forgot to thank Cinrad for posting this.

I was going to but wussed out. One day i will get the balls / mental fortitude (Mods delete as appropriate!) to actually do it though......

reply to post by Cinrad

Our mainstream press is also reporting on that finding. Very interesting...so we are no real Europeans...there are no real europeans lol.
Now joke aside, the minoan eruption might be a clue.
It has also been linked to biblical events in Egypt, when the Israeli people left for their promised land. This event has received much attention recently.

For more info and further research if you are interested : en.wikipedia.org...

They even found ashes from the eruption in Iceland. This eruption had effects on the whole northern hemisphere.

Originally posted by MagnusMaximus
Based on what I have read the study shows that an expansion from Iberia took place which replaced the dominant population of the LBK Culture. So west to east instead of east to west as previously thought.

The Bell Beaker culture, which emerged from the Iberian Peninsula around 2800 B.C., may have played a role in this genetic turnover. The culture, which may have been responsible for erecting some of the megaliths at Stonehenge,

bold added

It seems that we don't know very much about them. And this is what I meant by "if the main stream science culture would entertain such a preposterous idea". The archaeological record is hugely incomplete, we don't have all the evidence. Every day dates are being moved back or forward (back mostly), and scenarios thought too far fetched (such as catastrophic ones) are seeming more likely. Yet archaeologists will pick their favourite theory and propose it as a possible scenario. They should be proposing as many possibilities as they can think of.


ETA I'm glad you guys found it interesting too.

Hi OP! My post wont add very much to the thread, but I just wanted to say that you have a very interesting theory here and I wanted to give the thread a bump since I think it's worthy of further discussion. I'm going to read further into this and hopefully will be able to add more to the thread afterwards.

S&F from me!

considering that the only people who spared from the great flood were noah, his sons, and his sons' wives, i do not by this. if this were true, then noah would have had to have a black son with a black wife, an asian son with a an asian wife, etc.... and where are the tales and histories of these peoples' travels? noah's time on the ark was chronicled, so why not those who traveled later on? how did they cross the atlantic?

and if it were only noah and his sons, then we are all descendants of incest. first cousin had to marry first cousin, and maybe even some brother and sister so as to repopulate the earth. thought the bible was against that.

reply to post by blackthorne


Hi Blackthorne and thanks for your interest. The things you bring up are really about whether the Biblical flood happened the way the Bible says, but this thread was more about whether the above finding could be explained by the flood. I probably didn't explain that very well but here it is now "can the above finding be explained by the flood?"

reply to post by Cinrad


I don't think this has anything to do with the "flood". If that did happen, I think it would have been around the end of the last Ice Age when the thaw would have increased sea levels. Also, I think the Bibles assertion only Noah and his progeny survived is rubbish too, it is a metaphor not a literal story.

If, in 2,500 BC, there had been a flood of Epic proportions that wiped out the first groups of people, then there would a geological record of it all over Europe. There isn't. It is probably more mundane and human related. Even as recently as the first few centuries AD, whole tribes of people would migrate, settle, migrate, settle - each time pushing other groups of people around causing them to do the same. This is, in part, what led to the collapse of the Roman Empire as they had waves of these migrants being pushed West into the Empire by other tribes further East.

reply to post by stumason


I would go further Stu as this topic is discussed to death on ATS, with plenty of links, etc. Quite simply, the geological record (as well as ancient shorelines, etc) show there was no single global flood following the end of the last Ice Age.

In the Baltic alone there were 3 meltwater pulse events over an 8'000 year period (and possible longer). When sea levels were stable in the Med, they were rising in the Caribbean (and vice-versa). This is the same all over the planet.

Even back when the Bosphorous was breached, filling the Black Sea, it is estimated that people had plenty of time to pack up and escape the flood waters - in other words it wasn't a sudden deluge, rather a gradual filling.

reply to post by Flavian


Indeedy - I quite like the topic but didn't want to "derail" it, per se

It would be really interesting to have some academics focus on this "pre-thaw" Human society... I have always had difficulty with the fact modern Humans have existed in their current form (with language and brain power) for 100,000+ years, but we apparently only figured out farming and building a house in the past 10,000 years.. What did we do for the previous 90? Now, that would an interesting topic.....

reply to post by stumason


I would suggest we were learning how to build really good fires to keep warm, how to make decent clothing that doesn't simply fall apart and all the other little but hugely important survival skills that would have been completely essential for the survival of the species back then. I personally wouldn't fancy hunting over glaciers without any clothes!

And to Cinrad, big apologies for going off topic...........

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by stumason

 

I would suggest we were learning ... how to make decent clothing that doesn't simply fall apart

Ahh, a skill we have seem to have since forgotten judging by the clothes I have been buying in the last 3-4 years.

And to Cinrad, big apologies for going off topic...........

Thant's OK, I know there are lots of flood posts here so I didn't want it to turn into one. Nevertheless I do believe in the biblical flood, but I am not dogmatic about how to interpret the word "whole world". Was it written from the point of view of Noah, God? Was it speaking geographically or using the word in relation to the whole world of people, or a mix of the two as in the whole inhabited world? I find it hard to believe that all the marsupials migrated to the furthest points from the middle east (Australia and South America) and the placentals didn't. If the Annunaki were doing genetic experiments on people and animals then God only had to destroy all the ones that were affected. But then again if it was a global flood I wouldn't be surprised either, I am open to it either way.