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.

 

DNA analysis: 7000 Year old Mesolithic Hunter-gatherer European had blue eyes and dark skin

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by Antigod
 


Reports suggest otherwise.

www.reuters.com...


Aug 1 (Reuters Life!) - Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.

Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.

The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.

Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.

"It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe -- there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to," said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.

Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.

"We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago," Scholz told Reuters.

It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.


Those reports are wrong. That's what happens when a journalist doesn't understand what he reads in a genetics paper.

There's one decent comment on it here:

dienekes.blogspot.co.uk...

If he is R1b, it's unlikely to be any European type. It's a good idea to read all the comments, as some make very good points. R1b1a is common in some african tribes and it's found down through Egypt into the Sudan in low frequencies. Trust me, I have a keen interest into the spread of the neolithic into North africa, and that Rib type does not come from Europe, the furthest possible origin I've seen for african r1b is Turkey, the origin point of the Neoilthic farmers that colonised Africa.

This published paper tracks one African variant of r1b1a known as v88.

www.nature.com...

A quote:


A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis.


That's the advantage to being well read in genetics, you know when someones making iffy claims.
edit on 28-1-2014 by Antigod because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-1-2014 by Antigod because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:51 AM
link   

jonnywhite
What about the Inuit that're supposed to live up in the arctic. Don't they have dark skin? Also the Yakuts, native to Arctic Siberia, also have dark skin. I think the Evenki are also native to Siberia and darker skinned. I think they're somehow asian acenstry. I got National Geogrpahic about tusk hunting and shows a picture with them and their skin is definitely not white like a fin.

I also know about the arm length thing. In the cold the shorter limbs helps to keep the heat in the body. Why isn't this shown with europeans? Maybe evolution of this sort is very loose and not predetermined.

I wonder if hte white skin and/or blond hair was just a freak mutation which coincided with the environment. And in fact I wonder if it coincides. This is speculation on my part, but what if they got vitamin D some other way or what if it didn't matter as much or what if their skin needed more protection from certain UV?

People and nature come up with creative answers. We shouldn't always judge evertyhing based on some empirical rules about how we think things must work.
edit on 27-1-2014 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



Inuit eat a very vit D heavy diet, they've never needed to evolve light skin.

There's a few good maps that show how skin colour matches UV exposure in winter. Also, very dark skin appears to protect B vitamins in the skin from UV.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Antigod
 


I didn't mention anything about the ORIGINS of Tut's haplotype nor seen it suggested anywhere else on this thread. I posted links to reports of the haplotype being prolific in Europe and even a map of Caucasus area origins of the haplotype.

medicalxpress.com...


For a film created for the Discovery Channel, scientists worked to reconstruct the DNA of the young male King, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III. They discovered that King Tut had a DNA profile that belongs to a group called haplogroup R1b1a2. This group can be found in over 50 percent of European men and shows the researchers that there is a common ancestor.
This genetic profile group is also found in 70 percent of Spanish males and 60 percent of French males however, it is only present in less than one percent of men in modern-day Egyptian men.
The R1b1a2 DNA haplogroup is believed to have originated in the Black Sea region some 9500 years ago and spread to Europe with the spread of agriculture in 7000BC. Researchers are unsure as to how and when the group first came to Egypt. They believe the reasoning the R1b1a2 haplogroup is rarely found in modern-day Egypt is due partially to European immigration throughout the last 2000 years.


en.wikipedia.org...(Y-DNA)#R1b1a2_.28R-M269.29
edit on 28-1-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by Antigod
 


I didn't mention anything about the ORIGINS of Tut's haplotype nor seen it suggested anywhere else on this thread. I posted links to reports of the haplotype being prolific in Europe and even a map of Caucasus area origins of the haplotype.

medicalxpress.com...


For a film created for the Discovery Channel, scientists worked to reconstruct the DNA of the young male King, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III. They discovered that King Tut had a DNA profile that belongs to a group called haplogroup R1b1a2. This group can be found in over 50 percent of European men and shows the researchers that there is a common ancestor.
This genetic profile group is also found in 70 percent of Spanish males and 60 percent of French males however, it is only present in less than one percent of men in modern-day Egyptian men.
The R1b1a2 DNA haplogroup is believed to have originated in the Black Sea region some 9500 years ago and spread to Europe with the spread of agriculture in 7000BC. Researchers are unsure as to how and when the group first came to Egypt. They believe the reasoning the R1b1a2 haplogroup is rarely found in modern-day Egypt is due partially to European immigration throughout the last 2000 years.


en.wikipedia.org...(Y-DNA)#R1b1a2_.28R-M269.29
edit on 28-1-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)


Well it looked like it was suggesting Tut's ancestry was European. Being familiar with the mummy and it's DNA, I can tell you that it is not. It shows typically Egyptian limb length and cranial development, and it's Y dna type is found in current north East Africans and has an Asian origin.

It can tell you the route it took into Africa, I'm pretty familiar with the neolithic expansion from The Turkey/Iran border, and it follows the route of Afro asiatic languages into Africa from asia. The Neolithic farmers arrived in Egypt about 7000 years ago (archaeological evidence), went south via Nubia and split into two branches. One went into east africa, the other group were pastoralists that followed Wadi Howar into the lake Chad area and were the ancestors of the Oldeme people where the majority of the males have the r1b1a Y chr type. You see this Y chr at low frequencies all down the Nile into the Sudan, and it was even taken further south buy the Bantu expansion which dates it's arrival in West africa to about 6,000 bp.

That article is incorrect in saying the R1b1a is in Africa from European migration, and it was probably written before the research into the African R1b1a was done a few years ago. if it's current, the author is a moron who needs to read the paper who's link I posted previously.

What I posted was a link to an actually published paper, and that's pretty much the only place you should be getting information as journalists generally don't know their butts from their elbows. What you posted was written by a journalist on a news site, not written by a scientist.
edit on 28-1-2014 by Antigod because: (no reason given)




A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis. The analysis of the distribution of the R-V88 haplogroup in >1800 males from 69 African populations revealed a striking genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the central Sahel and several other Afroasiatic-speaking groups from North Africa. The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9200–5600 kya, in the early mid Holocene. We suggest that R-V88 is a paternal genetic record of the proposed mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afroasiatic speakers through the Central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin, and geomorphological evidence is consistent with this view.


Simply put, The r1b came from Asia, came into africa in the Neolithic, and the 7k time depth fits into the time for the Neolithic entry into Africa.
edit on 28-1-2014 by Antigod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Antigod
 


Early migrations of human are all theories, as are the emergence of haplotypes. No scientist knows for certain nor can claim to. There are too many variants and factors that could have influenced so many possible scenarios.

Science and scientific theories evolve and often alters from that which was previously theorised, it's always good to remember that truth.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


The report from reuters is sensationalized, to say the least, as R1b1a2 as is alleged (but not scientifically confirmed) to belong to King Tut is not the same as what is found in Western Europe (Spain) nor Northwest Europe (England). The former of which belongs to R1b1a2a1a1b and the latter of which belongs to R1b1a2a1a1b4. Which means that even if it were confirmed that Tutankhamun belonged to R1b1a2, said haplogroup is actually ancestral/pre-dates those of Western/Northwestern Europe.

cormac



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by cormac mac airt
 


The fact that haplogroup R1B1 is prevalent among Europeans and is reportedly the haplogroup of Tut is true.

Sublineages are parts of the haplogroup and still belong to the same haplogroup, which in this case is prevalent in Europe.

www.familytreedna.com...



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


Yet you fail to understand the difference between haplogroup and haplotype when you posted "Reports suggest otherwise". The reports suggest no such thing. R1b1a2 in this case, regarding Tutankhamun, is a specific haplotype while R1b1a2a1a1b and R1b1a2a1a1b4 are specific subgroups of same. Do they share a common ancestor, certainly, but that doesn't make them all the same haplotype. What you're apparently missing is that the above differences are much like if you were to claim that everyone has the same bloodtype because their blood is red. One would hope that you know better, but that you apparently don't understand the distinction says alot IMO.

cormac

edit on 28-1-2014 by cormac mac airt because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I thought genetic science had determined that any eye color other than blue is actually a genetic abnormality?



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by babybunnies
 


That would be incorrect as dark skin/dark colored eyes are the original 'default' position of anatomically modern humans/AMH. Blue eye color emerged towards/just after the end of the last glacial period.

cormac



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Well I would have thought that many modern Spanish people would fit the description of this 7000 year old person.

There are a few Blonde fair Spanish, but most are the "Latino" look, to my understanding.

Not to mention, the millions of southern Italian and Greek people who, when in the Sun, turn Very dark, tho not Negro black of course.
This is the "Olive Skin", Swarthy people that is linked to people in that area. They were probably the same 7000 years ago.

Northern Italians are usually Fair skinned and haired, due to there closeness to Germania tribes.

Why are certain people so quick to always "diminish" White Europeans?

Is it an inferiority complex?

Its only been the last decade or so that Neanderthal man has been lifted from the primitive, dark, dumb, caveman, to the now recognized, probably fair skinned, blonde/red/light brown hair with multi coloured eyes, possibly including blue, with a language, culture, etc.

If skin colour changes fairly quickly in the cold clims, will black Africans in Europe and America (Northern), turn White, by natural means? (Not Interbreeding).

Seems in 300 years in America, they have'nt changed (other than interbreeding with white folk).



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by cormac mac airt
 


Again, presumptions.

I posted a link about a report, you presumed all sorts of things then argued about your own presumptions.

I know exactly the meaning of haplogroup, type and sublineage.

A report including most prevalent R1b haplotypes in the UK

Now please let's stay on track of the thread, instead of arguing about how general you think a report on Tut's DNA was. I simply posted it for information as an example.
edit on 28-1-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by gort51
 


The likeness to current European dark skinned light eyed people makes sense to me.

I guess Afrocentrism has a lot to answer for when anything about European ancestry appears the dismissive bunch seems to appear also.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
It´s good to know where we finns come from.. so i guess Basque people are our relatives as they also have blue eyes in common too and its just right next to the area where these ancestors we found.

Maybe in future they can track the path out to Scandinavia.
edit on 28-1-2014 by dollukka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


Could the fairer skin have come from ancient Chinese?



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by reject
 


From my understanding of things Chinese, Japanese, Korean etc are from a different lineage but who knows for sure.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by reject
 


There has been a discussion about this since 80´s. In Finland they assumed that finns were Proto-European ( which now seem to be proven ) and when they moved to North in isolated areas their genepool didn´t mixed much with other races. More North you live less pigment you need so pale skin is more likely a due evolution. They have also thought that as a hunter gatherers some moved to east and the facial look of mongolian is heritated from Proto-European.

Slovenian geneticist Andrej Marusic observed that the Finnish propensity to alcoholism could be explained by the ADH22 gene ‘which is common in Eastern peoples but almost unheard of Europe.


edit on 28-1-2014 by dollukka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 




Again, presumptions.


Yes you are when you post a link that actually actually doesn't suggest what you claim it does, as the poster 'Antigod' has shown.


I posted a link about a report, you presumed all sorts of things then argued about your own presumptions.


I presumed nothing. I assumed you'd realize the title in the link, "Does Pharaoh Tutankhamen's European Genes Confirm that the Ancient Egyptians Were White?" is just as racist a suggestion as any Afrocentrist idea that Egyptian kings were all black. Neither of which is true as evidence has shown that Egypt was a proverbial melting pot of ethnicities and anyone who lived within Ancient Egypt's borders, regardless of skin color, was considered Egyptian by the very people themselves. Apparently I assumed more than what you've shown thus far.


I know exactly the meaning of haplogroup, type and sublineage.


You've not shown anything thusfar to suggest that that is true.


Now please let's stay on track of the thread, instead of arguing about how general you think a report on Tut's DNA was. I simply posted it for information as an example.


A rather poor choice of an example IMO when the title of the article itself suggests a possible, yet unsupported, bias in either direction. And your backhanded slur concerning Afrocentricists aside, I detest Eurocentrists and Afrocentrists equally when the evidence has repeatedly shown that neither position is correct.

cormac

edit on 28-1-2014 by cormac mac airt because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by gort51
 


I'm curious as to what you'd consider "rather quickly" since anatomically modern humans have been around for some c.200,000 years yet the skin color change has only happened within the last 10 - 12,000 years? The earliest evidence for Hss in England circa 42,200 BP predates that change by about 30,000 years.

Evidence of Earliest Known Modern Human in Northwest Europe Discovered

cormac



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:05 PM
link   
We're all from different cosmic groups. And different areas are overseen by different groups.

Out of Africa is an annanuki labs thing, and there were plenty of other groups still alive.
edit on 28-1-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join