!!!

Atlanteans.

File: celestial turks.jpg (125KB, 700x524px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 700x524px

>very common among modern Asian, Australiasians and Native Americans
THE STEPPES OF EUROPA WERE OURS

ayo we wuz anatolians n shiet
*builds chariot*

WE WUZ ALL IMMIGRANTS 'N SHEIT

>>1841286
Well, I won't lie, prehistory is not my strength. What does this mean for the whole out of Africa theory, can these populations still be traced to Africa?

>this will support my personal researches and article (you need translator apps for this as it's written in Filipino) with the Legitimate DIVINE Govt. Kingdom Filipina Hacienda of Grandfather Maharlikhan Tribe, regarding the Biblical Noah's Ark originating from LUPANG PANGAKO (Land of Promise).
THE MOST POWERFUL RACE

>>1841286
>Common among Asians
Finno-Hyper Empire confirmed?

>>1841360
What are you babbling about?
According to you were the fuck did humanity evolve?
It seems to me that the idiots that try to disprove the out of Africa theory only try to push back the date by a few thousand years like that changes anything

>>1841472
I've read theories that suggest humans migrated out of south america. I'm not certain but it's important to keep an open mind to all finds and research as long as theories remain theories

>>1841286
So are these the people I've seen classified as Western Hunter Gatherers or did the WHG look Asia by and get replaced by these guys, who I assume are the ancestors of basques and other pretty neolithic farmer, president Yamnaya people? I'm still new to Archaeogenetics

why does any of this matter

File: 1450183450257.png (423KB, 588x450px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 588x450px

>>1841675
>why does any of this history matter on a history board

>>1841286
There was a presentation about this or something very similar at PAG (the Plant & Animal Genome conference) this year which I happened to attend and it was an interesting treat in more ways than one.

The person presenting was positively gleeful to talk about "(possibly violent) population replacement and not population mixing" and would comment to the tune of "our friends in anthropology departments won't like this, but..." to the general amusement of the audience.

It's well outside my area of expertise (plant genomics) but throughout academia I have seldom seen contempt as open as the one shown by the human (paleo-)genomics community towards the anthropology community. It's uncanny.

>>1841286

Also a lot of stuff coming out challenging the Clovis first theory, such as Asian metal fragments found in Alaska predating Clovis.

>>1841728
sounds interesting

>>1841728
The HBD community seems to be populated by poltards

>>1841286
>>1841295
>>1841628
>>1841728
>implying us Australoids didnt conquer the world

>implying us Australoids didnt rule Americas before the Mongoloids

>implying us Australoids didnt rule Europe before the Caucasoids

>implying us Australoids didnt rule SEA before the Mongoloids


Our model suggests that during this period of climatic upheaval, the descendants of the hunter-gatherers who survived through the Last Glacial Maximum were largely replaced by a population from another source

The new data show that the mitochondrial DNA of three individuals who lived in present-day Belgium and France before the coldest period in the last Ice Age -- the Last Glacial Maximum -- belonged to haplogroup M. This is remarkable because the M haplogroup is effectively absent in modern Europeans but is extremely common in modern Asian, Australasian, and Native American populations.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204150602.htm


“Prior to the Druids Western Europe was undoubtedly inhabited by a squat Mongoloid race”
- H.P. Lovecraft

Haplogroup M2 [2] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M3 [3] - found mainly in South Asia
Haplogroup M29'Q found among Papuans, Australian Aborigines
Haplogroup M31 [24] - found among the Onge, in the Andaman Islands[15]
Haplogroup M32 [25] - found in Andaman Islands
Haplogroup M33 [26] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M33a - found in India
Haplogroup M34 [27] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M40 [30] - found in South Asia[15]
Haplogroup M41 - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M42 [31] - found among Australian Aborigines
Haplogroup M5 [5] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M6 [6] - found mainly in South Asia

>>1842155
>>1841286
this Haploshit M is the Veddoids/Australoids


50k yrs ago veddoids from india followed coastal route to australia to become aussie abs

~5k yrs ago veddoids from india returned and reinforced themselves in australia

veddoids form the bedrock race and have spawned the mongoloids/caucasoids/negroids

elamites are persians who dominated over veddoids before yamna

dravids are veddoids who adopted elamite language

in india there still exists veddoids who speak the original australoid language related to austro-aboriginal lang

File: shit-poster.png (251KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 900x900px

>>1842155
>us

>>1842166
2nd most retarded post I've read today.

Congrats.

>>1841728
>and would comment to the tune of "our friends in anthropology departments won't like this, but..." to the general amusement of the audience.

Isn't that because most of the anthropologist community is still hung up on the whole "noble savage"/peaceful hunter-gatherers thing?

>>1841360
>What does this mean for the whole out of Africa theory
It doesn't change it at all you stupid fuck
You're out by a good million years

File: tumblr_my41m287YZ1rntt8co1_400.png (17KB, 309x311px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 309x311px

g-guys

>>1841680
Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a man before throwing him out of a plane?

this thread is a disaster

>>1843306
see>>1843153

>>1841728
That makes a lot of sense, considering most of the people I've known in that field are weirdos that get hung up on positivism too much. They're convinced that since they're doing more STEM-ish things, that simple answers are the best ones, so their go-to explanations are usually simplistic and informed by old anthropology theory.

That's not to say that violence couldn't be a reason. But an archaeologist/anthropologist would probably see the issue as more complex and be less willing to just explain away a hge even with a simplistic explanation like that.

>>1843222
>Isn't that because most of the anthropologist community is still hung up on the whole "noble savage"/peaceful hunter-gatherers thing?
Nope. Anthropology as a field has been criticizing that for about 50 years.

>>1841472
>were the fuck did humanity evolve?

Space.

>>1843471
>our theories are vastly superior to their facts

ah yes v. good

>>1843554
>>our theories are vastly superior to their facts
Not really. What happened is a fact, how you explain it is the theory, regardless of what side is comes from. "Violence" as that explanation is just as useless an explanation as anything else is, without the proper evidence to back it up.

My point is that it makes sense a geneticist would just to "violence" as an answer, because it's a simple, easy answer that can be explained with positivism. It makes a lot of sense that's what a geneticist would come up with, and it makes as much sense that a person like that would criticize a person with a more nuanced answer.

>>1843597
What part of "possibly" do you not understand?

But you are right, we should reject the simplest ideas based on new data and ridicule people willing to consider them as simpletons because the new data may be in concordance with old (and therefore incorrect) theories and is at odds with current (and therefore correct) ones.

>>1843669
Why are you getting mad about this? Someone (you?) mentioned how he thought it was funny that a geneticist was shit talking anthropology, and I explained why. It's basically just STEM elitism. if you're not happy with that explanation, then fine.

I don't know how it happened, and I don't really care. I'm certainly not arguing for any one position, just explaining where both sides come from.

>>1843699
Also, just to throw it out there, "violence" is still one of the most common explanations in anthropology/archaeology for things. I guess I didn't' make it clear earlier, so I thought I'd state it outright. There's a general trend among non-anthro people to think that the field is all about feelings and complicated answers, but in general, explanations are kept pretty simple. Reading the original story made me think of a typical STEM-ish dude badmouthing a social science based on his perception of what the field must be like.

In reality, an archaeologist observing similar trends would probably give a similar explanation, except with slightly more nuance (including things like migration patterns and competition for resources - things which the geneticist wouldn't think about).

>>1843719
>migration patterns and competition for resources - things which the geneticist wouldn't think about

right

>>1843719
>attacks people in another field as weirdos and simpletons
>calls them elitist

Projecting much?

>things which the geneticist wouldn't think about
Quite an attitude from someone without the faintest grasp of the other field (confusing genomics with genetics...)