Saber Posted January 23, 2023 Author Posted January 23, 2023 1 hour ago, Phi for All said: Probably "reacting" via the reputation system, to upvote those responding. Those are limited to a certain amount per day. I want to for example like or up vote other peoples posts it says i cant.... 3 hours ago, Genady said: Where does it say so? I don't know of such a limit. As the answers above indicate, it took a very long time and many different ways. Here is one scheme: Interesting in that scheme the first major branching point was were i live........ By the way did the Maori's in NZ originated from Aus. or from the Polynesian people who them selves originated from S.America ? Also another question @ the last ice age @ the maximum i mean the time the maximum amount of seas were frozen and the sea levels were @ minimum Was the Persian Gulf & the Gulf of Eden ( @ its narrowest point between Yemen and Djibouti ) Dry ? and animals and humans could pass by them ?
Genady Posted January 23, 2023 Posted January 23, 2023 41 minutes ago, Saber said: Polynesian people who them selves originated from S.America AFAIK, this hypothesis has been refuted long time ago. Current understanding is that they came from SE Asia.
sethoflagos Posted January 23, 2023 Posted January 23, 2023 1 hour ago, Saber said: Also another question @ the last ice age @ the maximum i mean the time the maximum amount of seas were frozen and the sea levels were @ minimum Was the Persian Gulf & the Gulf of Eden ( @ its narrowest point between Yemen and Djibouti ) Dry ? and animals and humans could pass by them ? Several times up until the last glacial maximum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bab-el-Mandeb had a land bridge crossing. Similarly, the continental shelf under the Strait of Hormuz was exposed at the same time (see https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/657397?seq=4) though there would still be at least one river crossing to make (Tigris and Euphrates have to exit somewhere!)
studiot Posted January 23, 2023 Posted January 23, 2023 Which all goes to show that we have several 'best guesses' about the spread but are finding substaintial new evidence all the time and these guesses are in a state of constant revision. It is important to acknowledge when we don't know enough.
Saber Posted January 24, 2023 Author Posted January 24, 2023 9 hours ago, Genady said: AFAIK, this hypothesis has been refuted long time ago. Current understanding is that they came from SE Asia. Both maoris & polynesians ? Or only the polyneisans ?
Genady Posted January 24, 2023 Posted January 24, 2023 4 hours ago, Saber said: Both maoris & polynesians ? Or only the polyneisans ? I don't know about Maoris.
studiot Posted January 24, 2023 Posted January 24, 2023 33 minutes ago, Genady said: I don't know about Maoris. 5 hours ago, Saber said: Both maoris & polynesians ? Or only the polyneisans ? This doesn't prove anything, but does rule some hypotheses out. I don't think the South American hypothesis is disproven. Note the maps refer to 'before the european expansion'.
Genady Posted January 24, 2023 Posted January 24, 2023 I don't remember the details, and I don't have any preference regarding the hypothesis, but I seem to remember that the people in SE Asia now came there after the previous people living there spread to Polynesia.
studiot Posted January 24, 2023 Posted January 24, 2023 42 minutes ago, Genady said: I don't remember the details, and I don't have any preference regarding the hypothesis, but I seem to remember that the people in SE Asia now came there after the previous people living there spread to Polynesia. Well as I understand the Aboriginals in Australia they are some of the most (or perhaps longest) undisturbed humans on the planet. Yet the maps show they are quite different from the Polynesians, Maoris and South American indigenous peoples. Yet Australia (the nearest parts) is thousands of miles closer to SE asia than New Zealand or most of the pacific islands. So why did they not get to Australia first or even at all ?
Genady Posted January 24, 2023 Posted January 24, 2023 Maybe because Australia had people already. As I remember, the Polynesians and Australians were trading in Australia's NE.
joigus Posted January 24, 2023 Posted January 24, 2023 (edited) I apologise for mistake when I said, On 1/23/2023 at 5:06 PM, joigus said: The dynamics of population change are, I think, as varied as can be. Some migrations take place in one generation --example: eastward migrations through the steppe--, others take many generations to advance significantly. It should've been "westward migrations throught the steppe." That's apparently the prevailing direction of migrations through the steppe. And it is no accident. Sometimes geography introduces an element of predictability to migrations, if not complete predictability. There's very intesting material by Oxford archaeologist Barry Cunliffe pointing out how the landscape there kind of invites you to go westward. I seem to suffer from some kind of mild --I hope-- directional dyslexia. I promise to get up to speed as to present discussion too ASAP. The latest arguments about Australia and Polynesia I find fascinating. Apparently there is a paleoanthropological mystery/gap in our knowledge as to populations of South Asia during the Middle Paleolithic[?]. There's also the quite puzzling presence of Denisovan genes in people from Melanesia and parts of South-East Asia[?]. Sorry for imprecision. The take-home lesson is --I think-- we still do not completely understand what happened in South Asia for too long a time to be sure about any kind of big picture of what happened there. There are far more uncertainties about this than there are answers or any kind of big picture. @studiot was indeed right when he said this is a huge subject. Edited January 24, 2023 by joigus minor correction+addition
studiot Posted January 25, 2023 Posted January 25, 2023 (edited) 23 hours ago, Genady said: Maybe because Australia had people already. As I remember, the Polynesians and Australians were trading in Australia's NE. Are you suggesting that the peoples in Australia did not come from 'the African Cradle' ? As a matter of interest you map appears to show that man never reached India ? 13 hours ago, joigus said: I apologise for mistake when I said, Only half a mistake really. The nomads of the steppes pushed both east and west, and into south northern India at one time or another. It's just that the older cultures in India and China were stronger and better at resisting that the weaker cultures in Europe. Edited January 25, 2023 by studiot
Genady Posted January 25, 2023 Posted January 25, 2023 1 minute ago, studiot said: Are you suggesting that the peoples in Australia did not come from 'the African Cradle' ? No, of course not. I suggest that people came to Australia in an earlier migration event. 7 minutes ago, studiot said: As a matter of interest you map appears to show that man never reached India ? I don't know any more details about that map. I used it to demonstrate to the OPer that the spread was long and not continuous.
joigus Posted January 25, 2023 Posted January 25, 2023 2 hours ago, studiot said: The nomads of the steppes pushed both east and west, and into south northern India at one time or another. Yes, that's true. My comments were really meant about the prevailing direction. But, as you said, this is a huge subject, with many exceptions and several levels of "turbulence" around the average tendencies.
mistermack Posted January 30, 2023 Posted January 30, 2023 I seem to remember that the dna of Denisovens is today represented most of all in Papua New Guinea and the Phillipines. Also in Australian Aboriginals, and the Denisovans were originally centred in central Asia. The Australian Dingo is also thought to have evolved from Asian dogs, so that supports the picture of a general spread from Central Asia eastwards and south.
joigus Posted January 30, 2023 Posted January 30, 2023 5 minutes ago, mistermack said: I seem to remember that the dna of Denisovens is today represented most of all in Papua New Guinea and the Phillipines. Also in Australian Aboriginals, and the Denisovans were originally centred in central Asia. The Australian Dingo is also thought to have evolved from Asian dogs, so that supports the picture of a general spread from Central Asia eastwards and south. That's quite correct from what I remember too from the mid-'10s. But we must stay tuned, because "Denisovan studies" is a very active field lately. I've recently read that experts are finding traces of Denisovan traits in native Americans. The study is based on protein analysis, rather than DNA. It has to do with the structure of the lips. https://www.sci.news/genetics/native-americans-lip-shape-gene-denisovans-09330.html I've also learnt that a third group of humans approximately contemporaneous of Neandertals and Denisovans is being guessed at based on statistical analysis. I'm trying to get more info on that.
mistermack Posted January 30, 2023 Posted January 30, 2023 1 hour ago, joigus said: I've also learnt that a third group of humans approximately contemporaneous of Neandertals and Denisovans is being guessed at based on statistical analysis. I'm trying to get more info on that. That's us, isn't it? 😉
joigus Posted January 31, 2023 Posted January 31, 2023 2 hours ago, mistermack said: That's us, isn't it? 😉 -giggle Sorry, I should've said "a fourth group of humans". Or fifth, or even sixth... Let's just say one more. We do have pretty good physical evidence of ourselves.
joigus Posted January 31, 2023 Posted January 31, 2023 Here's the paper with the find that Denisovan ancestry reveals two distinct pulses of Denisovan genes: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29551270/ And here's a paper based on applying Bayesian methods with a bundle of plausible models as contrasting hypotheses, and finding that there seems to be support for a "third" --meaning distinct, but genetically equidistant between Neanderthals and Denisovans-- group of humans: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08089-7 I learnt about these papers in this wonderful podcast by Stefan Milosavljevich: I always think twice before recommending a YT channel. This one is prime quality. Número uno... 2
sethoflagos Posted January 31, 2023 Posted January 31, 2023 41 minutes ago, joigus said: I always think twice before recommending a YT channel. This one is prime quality. Número uno... Many thanks for that Joss. I've been a subscriber to that channel for a couple of years and it rarely disappoints.
studiot Posted January 31, 2023 Posted January 31, 2023 @joigus Yes thanks for extending the discussion. I did not know how much new stuff has been done in the last couple of decades. +1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now