How Early Humans Migrated into Europe: The Origins of Our Ancient Ancestors

reply to post by Hanslune


Thanks for posting that. I didn't know about the mild obfuscation of the Basque gene pool. It gives a little more context and I'm always happy to find some new info to broaden my research.

Originally posted by peter vlar
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Thanks for posting that. I didn't know about the mild obfuscation of the Basque gene pool. It gives a little more context and I'm always happy to find some new info to broaden my research.

That was just an example of what might have happened. In my family we found out just a few decades ago that our Great grandmother was a Choctaw Indian. It neither showed up in our looks or documentation we had. If you go back twenty generations people have no idea who their ancestors were or where they came from.

reply to post by Hanslune


It's a great perspective to add to my tool box. Sometimes you get so set in your thinking that you become somewhat insular and forget the other angles. Just shows that we would benefit from a worldwide DNA database to properly explore our past as opposed to relying self on papers and oral history and give us a broader perspective. Again, thanks for being a bastion of light. It's times me this that I'm rather eased to reevaluate how I've looked at things the past couple of decades haha

reply to post by peter vlar


You are right we'll need a world wide databse on this subject. I have no idea where or if they will be consolidated at one point. Science tends to take 10-15 years to do the obvious and in this time of smaller amounts for this type of research it will probably take some time indeed - somewhere, sometime some grad students are gonna get one heck of a project.

Originally posted by Hanslune
No I have shown you made an unsupportable statement, refused to discuss it and established that you really need to think about what participation on a discussion board means.

Is there something wrong with your thought process Hans? I have been discussing it with others here, just not with you! Do you know why? Here, let me help you along............because you never tried to discuss it with me, but others did. You chimed in and talked about me to another poster, but you never asked me anything. I would be happy to debate anything whatsoever here with you.

In this case I don't think people will have the slightest difficulty determining who that is eh? lol

There you go again, concerned with other people and what they think. I bet that works out great for you in the real world eh? Come on let it go already, who cares. If you want to have a discussion, then address the poster that you desire to have that discussion with, which you never did and you know it. I still hope you have a good day though, it's not personal.

Here let me try then. How did primates reach Central and South America then? ~$heopleNation

reply to post by Hanslune


It would be hugely beneficial to initiate a project of that magnitude. But as you say, the funding is rather lacking and if it started in the near future we wod realistically be looking at 20+ years to compile the data and begin to analyze it.

Originally posted by peter vlar
It's a great perspective to add to my tool box. Sometimes you get so set in your thinking that you become somewhat insular and forget the other angles.

I would have to agree 100% with that statement peter. Keeping an open mind in regards to this subject is the number one policy that should be without a doubt implemented. I mean, there is a lot that they know, but still a lot that they do not know. Half of what is left over is mostly based on theory as well. So what then are we left with? = Keeping an open mind, and using one's imagination during trial and error. There are no limits, only fear. ~$heopleNation

reply to post by SheopleNation


I think where you're losing people is in how you define theory. In science a theory isn't the same as a theory or hunch in Scooby Doo. In lay mans terms, what most people think if as a theory would in science be called a hypothesis. To become a scientific theory it has to have a basis in reality as opposed to "I think this is how it goes and its the most likely scenario so that's what we're going with". To become a prevalent accepted theory you have to produce verifiable data that can be reproduced Independantly. Trust me, I've had many a hypothesis ripped limb from limb while in grad school. And believe it or not, I appreciated it every time because egos aside, most people doing good science appreciate the fact that a wrong answer or incorrect hypothesis can open a new door and show you where you went wrong. Aside from defining theory were somewhat in agreement.

Originally posted by peter vlar
I think where you're losing people is in how you define theory. In science a theory isn't the same as a theory or hunch in Scooby Doo. In lay mans terms, what most people think if as a theory would in science be called a hypothesis. To become a scientific theory it has to have a basis in reality as opposed to "I think this is how it goes and its the most likely scenario so that's what we're going with". To become a prevalent accepted theory you have to produce verifiable data that can be reproduced Independantly. Trust me, I've had many a hypothesis ripped limb from limb while in grad school. And believe it or not, I appreciated it every time because egos aside, most people doing good science appreciate the fact that a wrong answer or incorrect hypothesis can open a new door and show you where you went wrong. Aside from defining theory were somewhat in agreement.

peter, I can appreciate what you just explained. You seem like a very intelligent person, as well as a reasonable one. Yeah ego is a strange thing, but I never meant to insult any scientists or people of that nature. Scientists have given so much to this World, some good and some bad, but I believe more good.

I just like to question things and keep an open mind, and it's not like I do not take any of the science behind the topic into consideration, it's just that I am not fully sold as of yet concerning the migration theory. At the end of the day, I respect Science, the scientists themselves, and the people who defend it. Human progress is the only way as long as we do not destroy planet Earth in the process. ~$heopleNation

Originally posted by SheopleNation

In this case I don't think people will have the slightest difficulty determining who that is eh? lol

There you go again, concerned with other people and what they think. I bet that works out great for you in the real world eh?

Come on let it go already, who cares. If you want to have a discussion, then address the poster that you desire to have that discussion with, which you never did and you know it. I still hope you have a good day though, it's not personal.

Nope you tried a clumsy simplistic personal attack against me and I turned it against you....that was your fault dude. The question is why you think scientists are 'reckless'? Any particular reason for that opinion?

Here let me try then. How did primates reach Central and South America then?

It has nothing to do with the op and you already know the answer....don't you?

I'll explain to the lurkers. This question is one of the unanswered questions in science - of which there are many - DNA studies say that the common ancestor of the two types of primates was around 40my while theg geological studies show that the land was separated before that. So this is a cause for more research, either a piece of data is missing or one of the pieces of evidence is flawed (I would suggest that the DNA is off).

I believe SheopleNation is trying to use the question in support of Bellweather Fallacy attempt....we shall see, eh?

reply to post by SheopleNation


You don't seem to understand why people are going at you on this subject.

You attack "scientists" for proposing theories based on actual evidence and fact. No scientist will ever say they are absolutely positively correct, or at least not a true man of science. So you attack them for their theory, and you also attack them because of their choice to suggest such a theory in the first place.

Then you go on to suggest several of your own theories, without a shred of real evidence or fact, and wonder why people call you on it? Nobody is saying you can't have opinions and ideas. That's what makes sites like ATS flourish. But to propose YOUR ideas without any backing, while at the same time attacking people with real evidence and facts to back their theories up, is incredibly hypocritical, and no amount of attempted table turning is going to hide that simple concept. ATS members hate hypocrites, being such a long term member you should know that, and also know hypocrites WILL get called out.

To add to the hypocrite fire, you got after someone else for making personal attacks, and then made some yourself. If you want to call out others, then you must accept them coming back at you, and also accept that you may actually have little to no "moral" ground to stand on.

Your theories on the origin of the human race are interesting, heck I personally have thought of those same ideas and find them exciting, and possible to some degree. But I'm not going to go around bashing mainstream ideas on the subject for not being 100% proven beyond any measure of a doubt, when my own ideas and theories are backed up by nothing but daydreaming, and selective evidence found by those same scientists.

You keep demanding the other posters stay on topic, what is the topic? Because the article linked in the OP doesn't really have anything to do with humans being made by aliens or coming here from different planets, which is where you seem keen on taking this thread. If that's the subject, what do you want to discuss about it? There is no evidence to be discussed, no 20,000 year old alien body to look at, that subject can go nowhere other than simple back and fourth daydreaming. Which I have nothing against, but there are places for that here on ATS.

Originally posted by Hanslune
My understanding is that the differences are caused by using different data bases of test subjects, different criteria etc, like most questions in science there is insufficient data (DNA) sampling to determine a large number of questions. There is also the problem of genetic inclusions, ie people marrying or having children outside whatever small group they are associated with and that material distorting what is being seen.

There have been some pretty good 'Y' studies in the past few years using standardised criteria. Since Huddersfield are really only collating data, it seems odd that they are focusing primarily on MtDNA when there is a growing body of Y studies indicating contradictions with those conclusions. The constraints that you point to, after all, apply to all previous genetic studies, Y and Mt, so I still don't understand why the focus on Mt if they are claiming to be doing something 'new'. Only by comparison and integration of both the male lines and the female lines will we get a true picture of migrationary patterns. All human groups were, initially, small, by necessity of resources. During the Palaeolithic we have evidence of congregations for social purposes, and genetic studies, as well as analysis of teeth for environmental isotopes, have confirmed that these groups travelled considerable distances for social purposes and communal efforts. Following the retreat of the glaciers that pattern changed somewhat, and groups became less communal and more insular. In order to understand how this worked, socially and implicated diversity, we need to compare genetic material from both sexes. Which is why I continue to fail to understand what Huddersfield are doing that is new.

Originally posted by Hanslune
ie a Basque group that is thought to be 'pure' and has lived in a small village up in the hills but they have forgotten that in the 14th century, one man left the village, became a shipwreck sailor on the island of Malta married a local Jewish girl, brought her back and her genetic material is still in the Basque 'stock', etc.

Then they had at least one female child, which subsequently passed on her genetic material to a daughter and so on and so forth to the present, MtDNA makes that easy to trace. Of course if they had only male progeny, she would have ceased to exist in the Mt record. Yet, by applying our knowledge of male genetic material in natural selection of alleles, it is possible that inclusion to the group of characteristics, such as green eyes, knobbly knees or the presence of familial Mediterranean fever within the village, by tracing the Y line we could still identify when her genetic material arrived within the group.

Very recent studies have already pushed back 'Y Adam' thousands of years, making 'him' contemporary with 'Mt Eve', this should more than ever indicate that we need comparative data analysis if we are to understand our prehistorical movements and interactions.

Originally posted by Hanslune
I'd say we should get a clearer picture, DNA wise, in about 25-30 years.

How clear that picture is though depends upon the direction of funding.

reply to post by Hanslune


I didn't say Scientists were reckless. I said they sometimes make reckless speculations, which is the truth. In fact, I said I respect what they have given the World. So calm down now. ~$heopleNation

Originally posted by James1982
You don't seem to understand why people are going at you on this subject.

Sure I do, and don't tell me what you think that I comprehend.

To add to the hypocrite fire, you got after someone else for making personal attacks, and then made some yourself. If you want to call out others, then you must accept them coming back at you, and also accept that you may actually have little to no "moral" ground to stand on.

Who said that I do not? You sure assume a lot about me. Wait a minute, maybe you are me?

Your theories on the origin of the human race are interesting, heck I personally have thought of those same ideas and find them exciting, and possible to some degree. But I'm not going to go around bashing mainstream ideas on the subject for not being 100% proven beyond any measure of a doubt, when my own ideas and theories are backed up by nothing but daydreaming, and selective evidence found by those same scientists.

Well good then, you and I agree on that. You guys get so butt hurt. It's just a discussion. ~$heopleNation

Originally posted by SheopleNation

This is what you said

Basically these Scientists made some reckless speculations about where Man originated from, and they did it without the slightest consideration that maybe

That seems reckless to me eh? But anywho....we got you to calm down and to stop throwing around baseless charges against scientists as a whole, so now you love them, great. See yah around dude, lol

Originally posted by SheopleNation

Originally posted by James1982
You don't seem to understand why people are going at you on this subject.

Sure I do, and don't tell me what you think that I comprehend.

Really? Because if you understand that you're being hypocritical, then why not cut it out?

Don't tell you what I think you comprehend? Do you comprehend the meaning of your own sentence? You're telling me, to stop telling you, my opinion. No, thank you, I'll keep sharing my opinions as freely as I please.

Originally posted by SheopleNation


Who said that I do not? You sure assume a lot about me. Wait a minute, maybe you are me?

Yes, I'm you. SURPRISE. Really, you might think your little quips and what not are clever, there not. You refuse to actually address anything, and in desperation try to cover it up with faux intellectual banter. Fail. Nobody is taking you seriously, because you aren't actually discussing anything.

Who said you do not? I don't know? Why are you asking me? I never said you didn't accept people coming back on you, I simply stated that if you behave the way you do, then you must expect people to behave a certain way back. Just stating an idea. You are the one, in reality, who is making assumptions.

Originally posted by SheopleNation


Well good then, you and I agree on that. You guys get so butt hurt. It's just a discussion. ~$heopleNation

Evidently we don't agree, because you are bashing mainstream ideas. But that's OK, it's not against the rules here to be a hypocrite. Funny again how you say other people get so butt hurt, when you are the one that started crying about people going at your posts.

Originally posted by Hanslune
This is what you said

What did I say, you posted nothing. Oh ok, sounds good though I guess for idiots, "dude".

Jeez, all this over asking how primates made it to South America? You guys sure get weird when anyone questions your doctrine whatsoever.

That seems reckless to me eh? But anywho....we got you to calm down and to stop throwing around baseless charges against scientists as a whole, so now you love them, great. See yah around dude, lol

I don't understand why you are so angry about something so meaningless, is it your ego, Try to relax for a minute ok Hans? Here, let me try to help you out one more time my friend. This is what I said...........

Originally posted by SheopleNation
Yeah ego is a strange thing, but I never meant to insult any scientists or people of that nature. Scientists have given so much to this World, some good and some bad, but I believe more good.

There it is for your own eyes, and anyone else who can read! Nobody swayed me into believing anything, certainly not you.

Now please don't follow up by becoming unhinged again over absolutely nothing my friend because there are serious things about to go down in the World and I have wasted enough time trying to walk you through a position of reason on this topic that at the very end of the day, does not matter right now during these times.

At this point, You are continuing to argue over the color of each other's poop, but who really cares? I am willing to meet you half way and take my part of the blame for it going this far, now are you?

It's not a pissing contest, you and I disagree, so we move on and let it be, ok my friend? Let's insert a little reason and commonsense here before someone higher up at ATS is forced to do so. Enjoy the rest of your evening. ~$heopleNation

Originally posted by James1982
Don't tell you what I think you comprehend? Do you comprehend the meaning of your own sentence? You're telling me, to stop telling you, my opinion. No, thank you, I'll keep sharing my opinions as freely as I please.

Actually you're too slow to understand that if you accuse someone of not understanding why people are giving themselves (being me) a hard time about my position here, that is telling me what you think that I comprehend.

Did you go to school Jr, can you read? Cause your spin artist agenda will certainly not work on me. Nor will your gang mentality. You're nothing standing on your own. You came on in here out of nobody land and decided to look for trouble. You were not even involved in our disagreement. I have seen cowards show more honor.

Evidently we don't agree

I could care less if you and I do, or do not. Get over yourself, your opinion is just that, your opinion. It doesn't matter to me whatsoever. Why do you care so much about what other people on the internet think? Calm down and take a few fish oils and a cold shower.

because you are bashing mainstream ideas

That is correct, and I will bash them again, again and again. Sorry, I am not a yes man robot like many people here.

But that's OK, it's not against the rules here to be a hypocrite.

Nor is it against the rules here to be a moron now is it? LMAO!

Funny again how you say other people get so butt hurt, when you are the one that started crying about people going at your posts.

Oh really, where did I cry? How about you provide a link or a post where I cried about that within this thread? Good luck Jr! You really should learn to pick your battles my friend. Geez, Why are you so angry at me anyway? ~$heopleNation

Originally posted by SheopleNation

because you are bashing mainstream ideas

That is correct, and I will bash them again, again and again. Sorry, I am not a yes man robot like many people here.

Yet "bashing" mainstream ideas when you yourself have exposed your own utter ignorance of the ideas you think you are "bashing" is in actuality only bashing your own reputation.

Harte

Originally posted by Harte
Yet "bashing" mainstream ideas when you yourself have exposed your own utter ignorance of the ideas you think you are "bashing" is in actuality only bashing your own reputation. Harte

And there is another one! LMAO! Hey Harte, I would rather live with honor than live like a coward who uses gang mentality to enforce their doctrine or insecurities. Yeah I know your type, and theirs. Your wives (not in all cases) deserted you all because you were too weak to keep them and they knew better Men walked the Earth.

Get over yourself, I never even said it was "bashing the mainstream", he did, so I retorted his drivel. I don't hate the mainstream bro, nor do I hate Science, I actually love and live for it. However I will speak my mind and that I believe should be ok cause that is what we all do here.

I will conform to the rules where that is required though. Like here at ATS, The best forum and more soon to be, Website on the Internet. ~$heopleNation