Ancient Native American Baby DNA Suggests an interesting story

reply to post by SLAYER69


Yet another great thread.

I think perhaps its forgotten when we look at ancient people in the Americas and in particular the ancestory of the little boy, that the sea level must have had a lot to do with their choices of where to move to because of the huge fluctuations in land and sea levels.

NASA tells us that 125,000 years ago the sea level was actually 4 - 6 meters higher than today. However, around 20,000 years ago it was 120 meters lower.

Now floods etc have meant nothing to me since I was a child, when I lived in Kent in a flood area with a river in the back garden.
I had forgotten the fear of the steadily rising water. We were inland so it was the water table that caused our area to flood. I doubt the fear factor was any different in the past and caused people to move considerbly more than they may have wished to.

But the effect of flooding, the mess, unhygienic condition and destruction meant a lot of people in the end moved in the 1960s which was when I experienced it.

Ancient peoples had had to contend with these huge rises and falls so I don't think we should be surprised at the distances they travelled or the inter relationships because looking at England today with its flood problems, you notice that everyone helps out and the feeling of uniting against a common enemy probably existed among ancient people as it does today.

I suspect we know very little about life in the Southern Hemisphere where the water level would have been very different, although we know from places like Nan Madol that ancient people were very advanced and competent with structures and artificial island building. Perhaps there was a lot more travel and trade actoss that hemisphere than we would think possible due to there bing considerably more land for stop -offs. Who knows?

Great thread Slayer. A thought occured to me while reading through this thread. perhaps some one here could explain to me why this idea would not be viable.

If the polynesians come here long ago, and they have asian ancestery, Why could they not be the source for some of the asian genes that are seen in the America's? I remember the thread that you did on the Polynesian migration and that came to mind while reading this thread.

Perhaps asian genes came to the America's from multiple sources.

I don't see why the aboriginals could not have reached the America's. I noticed some one posted a link to a skull study earlier here. After all they reached Australia around 50,000 years ago. They were clearly adventurous people and were capable explorers.

reply to post by Indigent


I don't believe any of the Migration over the Bering Strait and down the coast theories. Those theories are just another attempt to claim the North American continent as some kind of Magical "New World" open to foreign invasion. The North American continent has been inhabited by indigenous peoples as long as every other continent on the Earth. Migration theories are just another attempt at the justification of the "Manifest Destiny" that brought god, guns, and germs to the continent with the immigration of modern era foreigners. Illegal Aliens? What a Joke. Anyone who's ancestors arrived here by boat or plane within the last 1000 years is an Illegal alien.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Let first say that I enjoy your threads greatly. Secondly I am unable to send you a personal message so can only speak here.
The two effigy pipes in your OP are misidentified.
The top one is affectionately known as the Lucifer pipe, it is 23 centimeters high, the bottom is known as Big Boy or Resting Warrior and is 26 centimeters high. They are both made from red flint clay mined near Cahokia, but they were both excavated
from Craig Mound at Spiro Mounds in Oklahoma.

gort51
IT it always fascinating to try to understand the migrations and mixing of man.

But Early Humans were in the Americas, way before the "Asians" invaded.

Up to 50,000 years before.

originalpeople.org...

news.bbc.co.uk...

It is still not Unreasonable to suggest that early man developed in "Asia" and migrated back to Europe to displace the African Invaders.

We are talking about a long time, tho 100-500,000 years is still a spec in time in the overall scheme of life.

It is even more fascinating, and reasonable to suggest that "man" has developed very often from other help than just migrating around and "evolving".

When you are caught up in the belief that things progress "naturally" it reduces the options far too much, and smacks of a control scheme, to make sure nothing further is properly hunted out.

I read most of the posts on the first page and I'm still struggling to understand why this is interesting. People had legs.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Interesting article. the fact that there's been only limited endeavors in the past to discover and understand the peoples of these 2 continents is a concern.

Last year, there was an article in the Nexis Magazine, of the discovery of chinese dna in all of the Amerikan Indians, as well as the fact that the Chinese had a massive comprehension of the currents of the northern and southern hemispheres, and used these currents to circumnavigate the world tens of hundreds of years before the Europeans. The article might be available to read online through the magazines' web page.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Very good thread. Neno and I were talking about this last night.

S&F

reply to post by SLAYER69


I hate how narrow-minded most academics are with historical cultures. There is a level of logic that seems to fail most of them. They present evidence and hard date everything. To top it all off they fight more logical, competing theories tooth and nail.

The real question is this... will we find out where we really came from before the next great reset?

WCmutant
To top it all off they fight more logical, competing theories tooth and nail.

The real question is this... will we find out where we really came from before the next great reset?

Nobody fights any logical let alone a 'more logical' competing theory. Science isn't based on logic or what one thinks sounds better. It is based on the evidence and data. Both of which must be able to be independently reproduced by a 3rd party. If your "more logical" alternative doesn't have the evidence to support it there's not much to fight against is there? If it does have the data to back it up then again, there's not much of a fight there either is there?

I'd be willing to go with the idea that the Americas were populated by at least 3 different main routes in pre-Columbian times. Obviously you have the polar ice cap bridge from the Eurasian landmass, but the seaworthyness of primitive Polynesian-style dugout canoes or Egyptian-style reed canoes has been proven well enough it's plenty possible to make it across the Atlantic or Pacific with some oars and the most basic of sail technology. This doesn't even have to be a bronze-age level of technology, if you're from a fishing society at a stone age level you'll know all you need to make such a trip.

Plenty of proof of multiple migrations from the northern route, but I'm surprised don't have solid evidence of other small populations arriving in South America from Africa or Southeast Asia when considering that such passages are viable with a minimum sea-faring ability.

There was a recent "America Unearthed" on H2 about this, explaining how the land between France and Greenland over to canada was all connected through ice and the 120 m drop in water level extended the European coastline out pretty far. So basically all anyone had to do was walk that coastline. Good theory, the dude with it was with the Smithsonian.

Not sure how to URL on here anymore.


www.history.com...

Thanks for the post. Another link showing that the elders of a lot of native peoples are correct when they say that the trade and communication routes ran from the snow in the north to the snow in the south.
I've heard archaeologists argue that there was no connection from Mexico to the middle Mississippi Valley---and say in the next breath that the 3 staple crops were maize, beans and squash.
Since you mentioned Cahokia, I remember an early genetics study I saw from that area, done from one of the excavations of the '70s for interstate highway construction that shows at least five distinct genetic "groups" present in the village cemetery. As I recall it was a fairly small, temporally tight sample, about 70 people over a couple of generations (80 yrs.) if memory serves.
My fondest wish was for genetic testing of all materials of the site where I worked before the remains were reburied. Sadly, it was not to be. No rich funding source.

SLAYER69
reply to post by EyesOpenMouthShut

 

So do I obviously

I think the more they dig the more certain beliefs will have to be changed as more information reveals a truer picture of the past. Not just here but world wide.

my hope is that one day science, maybe by dna, will show all races to be mixed.
then all these artificial labelling of humans will become meaningless.
when no one can claim to be of only one group.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Great way to start off a thread I love that you have put this together it makes alot more sense looking at it this way ,it seems the entire history of the world and of human kind is not at all what we think and what we've been taught.