Migration of Pre- Homosapien sapiens and how we need to take another look

According to wikipedia and a general consensus among archaeologists,geneticists and scientists alike homo erectus, homo ergaster and homo heidelbergensis, took a specific path out of Africa roughly 2 million years ago. The species homo ergaster eventually became extinct, whereas the homo erectus and homo heidelbergensis species endured. It's up for grabs to say which species evolved into Cro-Magnon man and which species died out. I propose that both species are our true ancestors and neither died out. I will explain why I believe this later on. I have stumbled upon a very recent and hushed debate going on in the archaeological and genetic world via a friend who's an archaeologist here in Sweden.

Here's a couple of charts which, until recently, has been widely accepted as the migration paths of early man.


]



Notice that over time, Cro-Magnons eventually crossed over into North America (from Siberia) by way of a land bridge called the Beringia land bridge. Ok, there is no doubt about this. Eventually, they settled all of North America and South America. DNA evidence shows that these settlers of North America are an exact mtDNA match of the Native Americans of today. So, one can safely assume that the Native Americans of today are direct descendants of either homo erectus or homo heidelbergensis or both as I assume. Here's a chart of the natives of the North American continent:




Now, one could assume that homo erectus and/or homo heidelbergensis migrated from Africa and eventually settled into North America. Let me now introduce what my problem with all of this is. Here in Sweden, the native Swedes are NOT caucasoid as one would imagine. Our true natives are a people who refer to themselves as the Saami. Here is a picture:



Look at the similarities between the Saami and the American Indians! Same facial features, even the same abode (in the past, of course!). So, one could safely assume that the Saami and the Native Americans are from the same DNA? No, they are not! The Saami peoples have the same mtDNA as the Inuits (Native Alaskans and/or Canadians) but they do not have the same mtDNA as the Kalaallit (Native Greenlanders) nor the (lower) American Indians of today!. Why is that?

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. Another thing I cannot comprehend is the difference in the mtDNA? One would think the Saami would also be genetically related to the Kalaallit! However, they are not. This is why I believe BOTH the homo erectus and the homo heidelbergensis are the ancestors of us homosapien sapiens!

Please educate me if I am wrong. Thanks for your valuable time.

reply to post by TheAnuraOne


Either way it doesn't matter a bit, why you say?
Because Swedish chicks are light years hotter than them 2 in the wiki pic!!
Neat article, ancient man in any story, form, context fascinates me as we truly don't understand our past nearly as much as some people would like to think.
Great find.

reply to post by TheAnuraOne

One sticking point...the folks who would be known as paleoindians in North American were not cro magnon, which I would consider (not having a text in front of me) early modern humans, 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.

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.

reply to post by TheAnuraOne


However you've deviated into that subject. Look "my friend is" arguments are circular at best, and fallacies at worst. My wife is a Global Data Privacy Project Manager for a fortune 100 company, my mothers is an artist, and I've got friends who are anthropologists, it does not make me any more an expert in those area's than it makes you one. I'm not trying to be inflammatory or insulting here, but you have hijacked your own thread, and used some rather out of date concepts in doing so. So your "friend" who is an "anthropologist", are they working in the field, or learning it, or perhaps they took a "few papers".

You mentioned only Wikipedia, so I have to assume from that evidence, and your apparent lack of understanding the modern concepts of migration of hominids, that you were using Wikipedia as your primary source material.

If you really truely want to look at migration patterns of hominids, look at the genes, Stephen Oppenheimer, and Brian Sykes are two authors who have put great work out on the genetic and linguistic evidence for migratory patterns with modern humans.

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.

Oh yes I agree with both.

Migration as a result of climate change most definitely. Not only 100 or 60,000 years ago but even up until recent history. The movement of people during the last 2 millennium can all be linked to climate change / events that triggered it.

Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths Part-1

A MUST read for those unfamiliar

reply to post by Noinden


First of all, I can't type a link to what he said to me. Secondly, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I never said I was an expert.

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.

Oookay.. some comments...

Originally posted by TheAnuraOne
According to wikipedia and a general consensus among archaeologists,geneticists and scientists alike homo erectus, homo ergaster and homo heidelbergensis, took a specific path out of Africa roughly 2 million years ago. The species homo ergaster eventually became extinct, whereas the homo erectus and homo heidelbergensis species endured. It's up for grabs to say which species evolved into Cro-Magnon man and which species died out.

You do have to check wikipedia sources... in this case, some of the information seems outdated and other bits of it are culturally biased.

There's no such thing as "Cro-Magnon." That's the name of a group of modern humans who have a particular set of artifacts ("assemblage" in anthropological terms.) It's like trying to make the case for "Cherokee" being a distinct race of humans.

Your first chart here appears to be based on Martin's "Clovis First" model, which assumes that the Clovis culture was the first. It actually has a number of holes in it and was challenged as early as 1993:
alliance.la.asu.edu...

Since that time, new techniques and new materials has changed that picture. Coprolites (fecal material) and other traces show that humans (h. sapiens) may have been pushed out of Central Asia during a series of long droughts and into the Americas.
geology.geoscienceworld.org...

There's been a huge argument over how many migrations occurred. Most seem to favor multiple migrations over a long time period, with three (or five) distinct waves.

Here's a chart of the natives of the North American continent:

A good but slightly misleading chart. You get a clearer picture if you look at the families of languages and what''s known as "linguistic isolates".
www.nanations.com...

Better picture here, and good info in the Wikipedia article:
en.wikipedia.org...:Langs_N.Amer.png
en.wikipedia.org...

Look at the similarities between the Saami and the American Indians! Same facial features, even the same abode (in the past, of course!). So, one could safely assume that the Saami and the Native Americans are from the same DNA? No, they are not! The Saami peoples have the same mtDNA as the Inuits (Native Alaskans and/or Canadians) but they do not have the same mtDNA as the Kalaallit (Native Greenlanders) nor the (lower) American Indians of today!. Why is that?

Basing identification on superficial looks isn't a good method of making an identification. People tend to call small long-tailed rodents "rats" or "mice" because they "look the same" -- yet they can be very different families and species (and can't interbreed.) Humans are a very diverse species, and classifying them on the basis of a select number of photos of living individuals can be very misleading (group type is established by very a cluster of slight but distinct bone changes.)

At this point, it's believed modern humans (as a group) have genes from a number of archaic types, including Neanderthals.
news.discovery.com...

There has been some discussion whether or not the Clovis points are similar enough to the Mousterian points to establish an European origin for some branches of Native Americans. The argument is ongoing (very politely) and awaits better evidence.

In any case, h. erectus and archaic h. sapiens and h. neanderthalis are all involved in the makeup of modern human DNA. However, erectus predates sapiens and neanderthals
www.wsu.edu:8001...

A more detailed timeline is here, but it's not easy to pick out specific dates. However, you can see that 4 - 5 species of humans (each far different from the other than the Europeans are from the Asiatics) were around at the same time.
www.wsu.edu...

Hope this is of some help.

reply to post by Byrd


It was a great help and thank you for your input. I just thought it was a fascinating topic and have just recently shown an interest in early man. Thanks