RufusAtticus

Mibby,

You need to clam down if you still want to post here in good favor.

So I guess you're not familar with the well publicized genetic studies that show that humans originated in africa and that Indigenous Americans are descended from the "Mongoloid" stock, just like many East Asian peoples. That makes a pretty good case that East Asians migrated across the North Pacific to settle America.

The Lone Ranger

Your grandma was a Cherokee princess enit? LOL

My (paternal) grandparents are Penobscots, actually.

You, sirrah, are behaving in a most dishonourable manner.

mibby529

Shoehorning, combined with circular logic. Since the theory was based on de Acosta's (fallacious) assumption...

Radiocarbon date the fossils. Otherwise, it might be from Pangaea for all we know.

Anyway, it still doesn't explain away plate tectonics, or the geography of Siberia and Alaska.

You see, that's the difference: To disprove a theory, I simply have to prove that one of the conditions is physically impossible.

Are you sure? Are you really sure? History books' ideas on the Aztecs and Mayans are quoted entirely from the Book of Mormon. (The "bearded Quetzalcoatl," for example.)

Also, I don't trust anything on Indians written by non-Indians. Do you know what the most damning evidence in the Peltier case was? An expert witness said that Indians were "racially prone to violence."

But the African samples were black Americans - who are mixed with other races by default - and the American Indian samples were only a few northern California Indians, made even less diverse by genocide. Besides which, genetically, race doesn't exist. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

So what? Aborigines are negroid. I guess they're from Kenya. You'll have to do better than some arbitrary categories based solely on appearance. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Duck!

RufusAtticus specifically said that the conclusion that Native Americans were descended from Mongoloid peoples was based on genetic studies not on "arbitrary categories based solely on appearance".


Duck!

Vorkosigan

mibby, it doesn't seem like you are really listening to a thing anyone is saying. Genetic evidence proves indisputably that the current aboriginal population was descended from Eurasian peoples out of Siberia. One view says that they came over the land bridge from Siberia after 13000 BP, another that they came down the coast of N America earlier, in some cases much earlier.

The Mammoth Trumpet, which I've linked to above, has lots of interesting articles.

<a href="http://www.peak.org/csfa/mt14-4.html#part7" target="_blank">Coastal Entry?</a>

<a href="http://www.peak.org/csfa/mt12-3.html#part5" target="_blank">DNA studies and Asian lineages</a>

Schurr has studied more than 800 Native American samples and more than 500 Siberian and Asian samples. Looking at both mtDNA and Y-chromosome markers, he has found several lineages occurring in various populations across Siberia, East and Southeast Asia. In general, all four of the mtDNA lineages occurring in Native American groups have been found in Asian groups, while only three of them appear in Siberian populations. Haplogroup A is concentrated in northeastern Siberia, but also found in East Asia; haplogroups C and D are widespread across Siberia and also found at low frequencies in East Asia; and haplogroup B is seen in East and Southeast Asia but not in Siberia. Another Siberian haplogroup, still under investigation, and thus described as "X," may cluster with the fifth lineage reported by Stone.

I think, though, all of us would like to know where you think these people came from.

[ August 16, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

The Lone Ranger

mibby529:

Dozens of genetic studies have been done, and they all give the same results: people of Native American descent are genetically very similar to the peoples now occupying northeastern Asia.

For example, the initial genetic studies identified four distinct mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) haplogroups (labelled “A” – “D”) that are found in people of Native American descent. Interestingly, these same mtDNA haplogroups are also found in the peoples who currently occupy Mongolia, Tibet, and central China. These mtDNA haplogroups are not found in any other people.

A few examples for your reading pleasure:

• Greenberg, J. H., G. G. Turner III, and S. L. Zegura. 1986. The settlement of the Americas: A comparison of linguistic, dental and genetic evidence. Current Anthropology. 27:477-497.
  
• Horai, S., R. Kondo, Y. Nakagawa-Hattori, S. Hayashi, S. Sonoda, and K. Tajima. 1993. Peopling of the Americas foounded by four major lineages of miochondrial DNA. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 10:23-47.
  
• Kolman, C. J., N. Sambuughin, and E. Bermingham. 1996. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of Mongolian popultions and implications for the origin of New World founders. Genetics. 142:1321-1334.
  
• Sambuughin, N., Y. G. Rychokov, and V. N. Petrishchev. 1992. Genetic differentiation of Mongolian population: The geographical distribution of mtDNA RFLPs, mitotypes and population estimation of mutation rate for mitochondrial genome. Genetika. 28:136-153.
  
• Shields, G. F., A. M. Schmiechen, B. l. Fraier, A. Redd., M. i. Voevoda, J. K. Reed, and R. H. Ward. 1993. Mitochondrial DNA sequences suggest a recent evolutionary divergence for Beringian and northern North American populations. American Journal of Human Genetics. 53:549-562.
  
• Torroni, A., R. I. Sukernik, T. G. Schurr, Y. B. Starikovshaya, M. F. Cabell, M. H. Crawford, A. G. Comuzzie, and D. C. Wallace. 1993. mtDNA variation of aboriginal Siberians reveals distinct genetic affinities with Native Americans. American Journal of Human Genetics. 53:591-608.
  
• Ward, R. H. 1997. Phylogeography of human mtDNA: An Amerindian perspective. In Progress in Population Genetics and Human Evolution, P. Donnelly and S. Tavaré (eds.). New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 33 – 53.
  

Cheers,

Michael

[Oops. I see I've partially duplicated Vorkosigan's post.]

[ August 16, 2002: Message edited by: The Lone Ranger ]</p>

RufusAtticus

Many studies have been done. These studies do use samples from Black Africans and many Indian Tribes. It's silly to claim that only African Americans have been used in the studies. Since, for instance, the last study I saw showed relationships between various African Peoples, most notably that the bushmen and pygmies form a natural out-group and are the most basal population. Furthermore, genocide doesn't modify DNA. See Lone Ranger's post for approprate references.

But DNA markers do.

*Sigh* Since when do genetic studies corespond to skin color? Notice I refered to "Mongoloid" as a "stock" and not a "race." That is to reflect the fact that it is a viable historical population but not some fundemental high level and absolution division of man.

You are appearing to be letting your emotions cloud your comprehension. In your rush to write some rebutal to what you fear are eurocentric and bigoted remarks, you are missing important parts to our arguments. Maybe you think that all white men (Note: we are not all white men.) are fundamentally biased and you can't read our posts without interpreting them as some ethnic attack on your heritage.

Maybe this issue is too sensitive for you to address at this moment, so maybe you should take a break and cool down and pick it back up in a week or two.

~~RvFvS~~

lpetrich

I don't care if I agree with de Acosta. And which origin would you prefer, O mibby529? Separate evolution from South American monkeys?

I'm sure that those describing the fossils can tell the difference between Pleistocene and Permian/Triassic ones.

During the last Ice Age, a few hundred meters of ocean water were turned into continental ice sheet, revealing the land of Beringia. When that ice melted, Beringia became submerged again.

Actually, it was the other way around. Joseph Smith, the author of the Book of Mormon, must have copied off of accounts of the Aztecs and Mayans.

Just become some white people are prejudiced does not mean that all white people are.

I'm losing patience with mibby529; he reminds me too much of a creationist.

ps418

Well, I suppose you can lead a creationist to the evidence, but you cant make him look at it. Golly, maybe you should've followed Megath's link before rattling off more lame objections? It reports radiocarbon dates from peats from the Chukchi shelf:

<a href="http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/pub/info/current/AGU-ASLO/Phillips.ASLO.html" target="_blank">New Evidence on the Timing of Inundation of the Bering Land Bridge, Based on Radiocarbon Ages of Macrofossils</a>

Plate tectonics has nothing to do with it. Even at the fastest rates of closure or seperation measured between any two points on seperate plates (~15cm/yr), we're talking about a maximum distance change of 2.25km over the past 15k years. Did you miss my earlier post on this, or were you just ignoring it, as you did the radiocarbon dates?


Patrick

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]</p>

mibby529

You know? Until this thread, I had no idea atheists were creationists.

And genetic studies prove race doesn't exist, Duck of Death. You'll have to do better than that.

And to peoples in Africa, Australia, Polynesia, Europe...RACE DOESN'T EXIST GENETICALLY!

But it makes DNA less diverse. Why? Because a lot of ppl died before they could have children. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

You're ASSuming I need an alternative theory in order to disprove an existing theory. I suggest you read up on straw man arguments.

Repeat the experiment, and I'll send it to Darwin Awards. Clothing from that time was all animal skins, and this includes shoes, if they existed. And those shoes would have NO TRACTION. Indian steps on the ice and falls in the water. LOL You didn't think Indians invented iceskating, did you?

Ah, but it was ppl who should KNOW better. It was an EXPERT TESTIMONY. Of fuckin' course!

Actually, George Gaylord Simpson first said the land bridge was impossible. ("Of Mammals and Land Bridges") Hardly a creationist by any account.

I'm glad you agree with me there.

So far, all I've heard from everyone here is meta-arguments, shoehorning, and defying all common sense.