Chinese Bones

[Apech]

2 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Ah!, the famous "Bridge to Nowhere".

 

 

 

yep

 

[Marblehead]

And governments around the world are still having them built.  Padding the pockets of their buddies.

 

I'm still looking for the bridge that leads to the area where the Chinese bones were found.

 

There have been some great finds recently in China from the period of the dinosaurs.

 

But then Texas has footprints of dinosaur and man walking hand in paw along the side of a river.  China will never match that.

 

[Brian]

3 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 

Could you repeat that in Proto-Uralic I'm sick of all this PIE talk.  Thank you.

Mmmmm...

 

Pie.

[Brian]

3 hours ago, Marblehead said:

And governments around the world are still having them built.  Padding the pockets of their buddies.

 

I'm still looking for the bridge that leads to the area where the Chinese bones were found.

 

There have been some great finds recently in China from the period of the dinosaurs.

 

But then Texas has footprints of dinosaur and man walking hand in paw along the side of a river.  China will never match that.

 

Texas rocks!

[voidisyinyang]

Quote

These data imply that Uralic-speakers too would have been part of the Yamnaya > Corded Ware movement, which was thus not exclusively Indo-European in any case.

 

Dang no more "Aryan Europeans" -

 

What will the Neo-Nazi's cling to as their McDonalds Bosom "Homeland" search?

 

http://dlc.hypotheses.org/807

 

Quote

That means (see map below) Indo-European languages not just in northern and eastern Europe, but also right across southern and western Europe, ancient Anatolia, Armenia, much of the Middle East (Kurdish-speaking areas, Iran, Afghanistan), and most of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.  That far greater scale is ‘the Indo-European question’. And that is what the two main rival hypotheses — pastoralism out of the Steppe, or farming out of Anatolia — claim to answer:  where all of Indo-European comes from.

 

[Marblehead]

Note that the Prussians (Northern Germans and Poles) were doing their own thing.

 

But if I remember correctly, the oldest Neanderthal remains have been found in Spain near Gibraltar.  (Crossed over from Morocco during an ice age when the Med was not linked with the Atlantic.)

 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2017 by Marblehead

[voidisyinyang]

Quote

Borrowing a technique used to reconstruct family trees for viruses, an international research team has come down squarely on one side of the debate: Indo-European languages originated in Anatolia, a southwestern Asian peninsula that is now part of Turkey, between 8,000 and 9,500 years ago, and were carried, at least in part, by the spread of agriculture.

Quote

 

The researchers included about 20 extinct languages in their sample of 100 Indo-European languages; some of these extinct languages, such as Hittite, were spoken more than 3,000 years ago. These ancient languages helped the team look further back in time.

They looked to historical events, such as the breakup of the Roman Empire's language Latin into the Romance languages, to establish a time scale for the evolution of the Indo-European languages. 

They then used a statistical method to focus in on the family trees that best explained their data. The result strongly favors the Anatolian hypothesis, Atkinson said.

 

https://www.livescience.com/22639-indo-european-language-tree.html

 

So this study along with the 2013 study proving that Minoans were from older neolithic farmers of West Asia - puts the nail in the coffin on the Indo-European language claim.

 

Just as "Arya" as an Afro-semitic cognate before Indo-European Aryan - so too did the Steppe chariot culture come from the older Indo-European farming culture.

 

 

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

Dang no more "Aryan Europeans" -

 

There never was in the first place   .... you invented them yourself in this thread . 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Note that the Prussians (Northern Germans and Poles) were doing their own thing.

 

But if I remember correctly, the oldest Neanderthal remains have been found in Spain near Gibraltar.  (Crossed over from Morocco during an ice age when the Med was not linked with the Atlantic.)

 

 

 

 

..... and when that link 'broke open'  ... was it gradual innundation   .... or  ... 

 

[Marblehead]

6 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

..... and when that link 'broke open'  ... was it gradual innundation   .... or  ... 

 

It was The Great Flood.

 

[Apech]

I'm British Neolithic personally myself.

[Dainin]

 

[Nungali]

3 hours ago, Apech said:

I'm British Neolithic personally myself.

 

and  ohhhh   ....  so   white  ! ....   so white  like snow   ....    

 

Spoiler

 

[Nungali]

I am sorta  blue coloured  ...      

 

 

 

 

 

no, it isnt the cold   .... thats the  'Aryan colour '       

 

Spoiler

 

Another theory refers to Vishnu implanting two hairs, one black and the other white in Devaki's womb which miraculously got transferred to Rohini's and as a result, from the black hair Krishna took birth, with a dark skin, and from the white hair his brother Balarama.

 

or 

 

The deity who has the qualities of bravery, manliness, determination, the ability to deal with difficult situations, of stable mind and depth of character is represented as blue colored. 

 

 (oh, that's me  ! ) 

 

In Hinduism, persons who have depth of character and the capacity to fight evil are depicted as blue skinned.

 

or 

 

Shiva, the Destroyer, is also depicted in light blue tones and is called neela kantha, or blue-throated, for having swallowed poison in an attempt to turn the tide of a battle between the gods and demons in the gods' favour. 

 

or even 

 

“Atha kaiscid uktam. yadi sva-prakaso lila-rasa-mayah paramatma-svarupas tasmin katham syama-varnatvam sarvatra prasiddham. yatha srutau rupam na vedyam na ca bindunadah ity adi. tad aha

 

syama bhatvam vidhatte yat sarva-varno 'tra liyate nityam ca prabhavaty eva kalo 'smin naiva vidyate "

 

syama  ...   sarva-varno    ?      Someone spilt their paint jars !    

 

( yes, I finally did it .... I mentioned skin color  . )

 

[voidisyinyang]

On 7/10/2017 at 8:47 PM, Nungali said:

 

 

No , you said Aryan meant noble  ( from Arya - sanskrit  )  but  later ...that it was not  PIE word but African . 

 

So , are Africans Aryans now ?       Or where Aryans an African incursion into India that drove the   Australoids out ?    

 

O.K. I replied to this with a previous link in this thread.

 

I'll repeat that link (look it up in the thread) and investigate its implications.

 

First of all we have this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Semitic_languages

 

Quote

the relevant units of comparison instead appear to be Eurasiatic and Afroasiatic, the immediate precursors of Indo-European (controversially) and Semitic (uncontroversially).

 

So I have established now that Minoan culture was from the original white Neolithic farmers - white skin from malnutrition - that then spread into Europe - starting in Minoan from the Near East Levant - and then later from Anatolia - but all before any "indo-european Yamnaya" invasion.

 

In fact - as far as Minoan could be related to Indo-European it would be Proto-Indo-European and that it now appears that Southern European "Indo-European languages" are from not the same source as the Yamnaya Indo-European languages.

 

So now we have established an older "advanced civilization" of pre-Aryan - not even "proto-Aryan" - would could possible say "proto-Indo-European" but more likely we should say Afroasiatic or Eurasiatic language. https://www.quora.com/Is-Minoan-Linear-A-a-Proto-European-language-or-does-it-come-from-Asia-Africa-or-a-mixture-of-all-three

 

Quote

I'm with Cyrus Gordon, Linear A probably does encode a language in the Afro-Asiatic family.

 

Right.  And so the debate gets intense about Minoan language - since Minoans were early immigrants of the first monocultural malnutrition wheat (white skinned) farmers: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04/minoans-in-ancient-canaan.html

 

Quote

agriculture did not originate in eastern Anatolia (look e.g. at Fig. 1 of the Gignoux et al. paper you just posted). Thus, with due respect, in my opinion, the languages I listed above from the Levant and western Anatolian/Caucasus/Euphrates-Tigris and beyond are more pertinent to the discussion than some hypothetical, undocumented early PIE in western Anatolia. ... early Anatolian languages most likely originated from the LGM refugia that most profited from early serial foraging and domestication. I see that origin in the east and south - not in west Anatolia.

 

So - we are talking after 20,000 years ago....

 

Quote

Tyrrhenian is a much more likely a candidate for being related to Linear A/ Minoan/ Eteo-Cretan. ... The core lexicon of Linear A/ Minoan/ Eteo-Cretan is purely non-IE. The structure of the words...morphologically, typologically, syntactically...it is at its core non-IE. The connections to Tyrrhenian are far stronger than those to Indo-European. ... Hattic is the first known language of Anatolia that we have record of and it is CLEARLY NOT Indo-European. ... Western Anatolia was also home to Etrusco-Lemnian (Tyrrhenian)...NOT AN Indo-European Language family.

 

So then the proto-Indo-Iranian (Aryan) is from the steppes chariot culture that is later.

Quote

1 of the flaws of the pontic steppes theory is that the old toponyms of the pontic steppes region are indo-iranian and not proto indo-european

So then the Proto-Indo-European is an older farming language that developed into a chariot language as well:

Quote

Aratta was located near the Caspian Sea, in the vicinity of Lake
Urmia. This is approximately the area we propose as the Proto-Indo-European homeland"

 

Quote

there were languages and cultures present in Anatolia before IE showed up and that the invaders...in this case...the Anatolian IE's picked up traces of culture and language from the non-Indo-Europeans that preceded them.

To me, the Anatolian IE's seem to migrate in from the north either via the Caucasus or the Balkans. I doubt it is from the west...as there are few if any Aegean loan words present in the substrates of the best attested Anatolia IE language, Hittite.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-origins-of-proto-indo-european.html

Quote

Evidence will be presented to demonstrate that Proto-Indo-European is the result of the imposition of a Eurasiatic language — to use Greenberg’s term — on a population speaking one or more primordial Northwest Caucasian languages.

 

Right so we have Eurasiatic as the older origin of Proto-Indo-European and Afroasiatic as the older origin of Minoan.

 

So the Eurasiatics are "Eastern Hunter Gatherers" originally - again just after 20,000 years ago.

 

Quote

 

the "Eurasiatic" Pre-Proto-Indo-Europeans are EHG from the steppe, not farmers from Afghanistan. ... PPIE came from Central Asia, and then PIE developed in Eastern Europe near the North Caucasus.

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

Hattic is thought to have been related to Northwest Caucasian languages, no?

If Indo European is the result of an EHG language intruding onto a Northwest Caucasian language, could Hittite and the Anatolian branch of IE be the result of a separate but equivalent mixing?

It would reconcile the evidence for the Anatolian hypothesis into the Steppe hypothesis rather elegantly. Hittite would be the most diverged Indo European language because it would actually be the result of an EHG language on to a separate but related branch of NW Caucasian languages.

 

 

Quote

EHGs indeed have (North) Central Asian ancestors but they brought ANE to far eastern Europe without carrying any ENF and this migration happened more than 10000 years ago. EHGs represent the paternal ancestry of PIEs and certainly spoke Proto-PIE so if we go enough back in time the very distant ancestor of PIE was spoken in Central Asia/Siberia for sure.

 

Right so after 20,000 years ago but more then 10,000 years ago.

 

Quote

The point here is that a linguistics paper identifies two main groups that made up the Proto-Indo-Europeans in Eastern Europe: a North Eurasian group and a North Caucasian group.

This gels very nicely with the ancient DNA results we've seen to date.... The North Eurasian Eurasiatics identified by Bomhard are obviously EHG foragers carrying R1. These are the people who imposed themselves on a North Caucasian substrate population somewhere near the North Caucasus to create the Proto-Indo-Europeans.

And hence the overlap between Afro-Asiatic and Indo-European language:

Quote

for instance the number seven with this he also demonstrates that there is a rich comparative material showing that all seven first numbers are common between Indo-European and Semitic!

 

The creation of Indo-European languages came later:

 

Quote

The mixing process between the Georgian or Armenian-like population and EHG started around 5,000 BCE, during the Khvalynsk period or before.

That means the relevant migrations had to have happened earlier, because different human groups don't just start mixing when they meet.

So where in any of the data are you seeing a migration here from Central Asia 5,000 BCE or later?

There's nothing like that in any of the data. All I'm seeing is mixing between Eurasiatic EHG and Northwest Caucasians.

 

Quote

I think the Northwest Caucasian speakers were women from the Caucasus and surrounds who brought those Near Eastern mtDNA lineages to the steppe (via female exogamy).

 

Again hence the semitic and Indo-European linguistic connections.

 

Quote

R1a is an EHG marker.

 

in comparison to Eurasiatic - we have AFroasiatic:

 

 

Quote

 

Today we have DNA analyses that have exposed the great migrations of people. In the past of this time frame little or no East-African DNA travelled to Southwest Asia. Some was found in Egypt and Yemen but in both cases, it is clear that this DNA travelled recently, mainly in the last three thousand years. The reverse however is true. South-West Asian DNA came to East and Central Africa spread quickly to West Africa.

 

 

 

 

https://marcivermeersch.wordpress.com/category/language/afro-asiatic/

Edited July 13, 2017 by voidisyinyang

[Kongming]

The Indo-European Urheimat is still a matter of controversy and not set in stone. It may well be that the old Northern European plain hypothesis is correct, it may be that the Kurgan hypothesis is correct, Anatolia could be correct, etc. we don't know for certain. In the end the IE Urheimat has no bearing on the racial or ethnic makeup of the proto-Indo-Europeans and later Indo-Europeans as they spread across Eurasia.

 

Similarly while in large the Indo-European expansion is correlated to R1 genetics, with (most) R1b roughly correlating to the centum branch and (most) R1a to the satem branch (but not absolutely), there may have also been different genetic markers involved in the wider expansion. Furthermore ones genetic marker doesn't say anything about ones race since a white Englishman with R1b-L21 DNA could marry a black African and his son in turn could marry another African and the predominately black/African grandson would have the same genetic marker despite that genetic marker being strongly associated with the insular British Celts. Thus in turn DNA will not inform absolutely about the racial or ethnic make up of the proto-Indo-Europeans.

 

Furthermore the presence of non-Indo-European linguistic influence on Indo-European languages says nothing about ones ethnic or racial makeup.

 

Thus much of the information posted dealing with these facets does nothing to disprove the notion that the Indo-Europeans or Aryans were originally of a Northern European racial type, which was my claim, which was accepted by most pre-Second World War scholars, which is still accepted by many today, and which the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of.

 

Again, it seems the main source of controversy and argumentation against these claims are "Nazis said this and some neo-Nazis believe this. Nazis are evil, therefore their claim is wrong."

 

What must be relied on to determine the answer to this question is archaeology, ancient history, and observing modern populations while using genetics and other elements in support. When doing so we discover (recapping some what I stated earlier):

 

--Celts, Germanics, Slavs, Balts, Italics, Greeks, etc. are European today and various isolated groups in the East, such as Kalash, Pamiris, Nuristani, etc. also share this appearance in significant degree. Various Kurds, Iranians, Armenians, etc. also share this appearance.

 

--Tocharian mummies and ancient Chinese description of the Yuezhi also have this appearance. Ancient descriptions of the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, etc. also depict these people as of a Northern European type easily confused with Celts, etc.

 

--As noted people model their gods after themselves and the red-bearded thunderer god Thor/Indra/Taranis, etc. has clear proto-Indo-European roots

 

--While DNA studies again have flaws, Yamna DNA is most strongly present in population groups with the more stereotypical Northern European appearance:

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

58 minutes ago, Kongming said:

The Indo-European Urheimat is still a matter of controversy and not set in stone. It may well be that the old Northern European plain hypothesis is correct, it may be that the Kurgan hypothesis is correct, Anatolia could be correct, etc. we don't know for certain. In the end the IE Urheimat has no bearing on the racial or ethnic makeup of the proto-Indo-Europeans and later Indo-Europeans as they spread across Eurasia.

 

Similarly while in large the Indo-European expansion is correlated to R1 genetics, with (most) R1b roughly correlating to the centum branch and (most) R1a to the satem branch (but not absolutely), there may have also been different genetic markers involved in the wider expansion. Furthermore ones genetic marker doesn't say anything about ones race since a white Englishman with R1b-L21 DNA could marry a black African and his son in turn could marry another African and the predominately black/African grandson would have the same genetic marker despite that genetic marker being strongly associated with the insular British Celts. Thus in turn DNA will not inform absolutely about the racial or ethnic make up of the proto-Indo-Europeans.

 

Furthermore the presence of non-Indo-European linguistic influence on Indo-European languages says nothing about ones ethnic or racial makeup.

 

Thus much of the information posted dealing with these facets does nothing to disprove the notion that the Indo-Europeans or Aryans were originally of a Northern European racial type, which was my claim, which was accepted by most pre-Second World War scholars, which is still accepted by many today, and which the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of.

 

Again, it seems the main source of controversy and argumentation against these claims are "Nazis said this and some neo-Nazis believe this. Nazis are evil, therefore their claim is wrong."

 

What must be relied on to determine the answer to this question is archaeology, ancient history, and observing modern populations while using genetics and other elements in support. When doing so we discover (recapping some what I stated earlier):

 

--Celts, Germanics, Slavs, Balts, Italics, Greeks, etc. are European today and various isolated groups in the East, such as Kalash, Pamiris, Nuristani, etc. also share this appearance in significant degree. Various Kurds, Iranians, Armenians, etc. also share this appearance.

 

--Tocharian mummies and ancient Chinese description of the Yuezhi also have this appearance. Ancient descriptions of the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, etc. also depict these people as of a Northern European type easily confused with Celts, etc.

 

--As noted people model their gods after themselves and the red-bearded thunderer god Thor/Indra/Taranis, etc. has clear proto-Indo-European roots

 

--While DNA studies again have flaws, Yamna DNA is most strongly present in population groups with the more stereotypical Northern European appearance:

 

 

 

Kongming - you should read the links I posted - you throw out three options as being equally valid.

 

This is not true - based on the genetics and the linguistics, one option is valid.

 

What I am debunking is the Neo-Nazi Aryan claim repeated by Nungali, from the OP and most recently as this Proto-Aryan claim:

Quote

 

Then a   ' culture'  or a 'connection between people'  started to develop, that was later  to be known as Aryan , named after the country they first formed that cultural connection 'hub'  and or  enclave .

 

The PIE languages may have been developed as a 'trade language' 

 

The influences  out of PII culture  were equally  cyclic, 'in and out'   ..... SOME  of those influences went into Europe and joined in with other influences there or coming into it . 

 

Just as several components came together to form the 'Aryans '   

 

 

So notice it is claimed that PIE developed from Aryans and then spread into Europe!

 

Not True - that is a Neo-Nazi claim and has been debunked by both linguistics and genetics.

 

PIE developed from "eastern hunter gatherers" and Georgian "ancient near eastern" (Afro-Asiastic) farmers.

 

Then those people developed the chariot culture that spread into Europe as Yamnaya and spread later into Bactria as the "Aryan Homeland" that you and Nungali keep clinging to. haha.

 

Time to let go of the "ancient Aryan" homeland lie.

 

Kongming: This is total Neo-Nazi b.s. and you need to stop your belief in this nonsense:

Quote

Aryans were originally of a Northern European racial type

 

 

Edited July 13, 2017 by voidisyinyang

[Marblehead]

8 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

 

 

 

 

https://marcivermeersch.wordpress.com/category/language/afro-asiatic/

Well, based on this map everyone is a Jew.

 

[Brian]

33 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Well, based on this map everyone is a Jew.

 

Wait, I thought everyone is a Muslim?

[Marblehead]

4 hours ago, Brian said:

Wait, I thought everyone is a Muslim?

No, Jews came first.  Sorry.

 

[Brian]

9 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

No, Jews came first.  Sorry.

 

No need to apologize to me but you may wanna talk to these fellas:

http://islam101.com/dawah/newBorn.htm

[Marblehead]

2 minutes ago, Brian said:

No need to apologize to me but you may wanna talk to these fellas:

http://islam101.com/dawah/newBorn.htm

Naw.  That would be like me trying to piss up a tree.

 

[voidisyinyang]

4 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Well, based on this map everyone is a Jew.

 

 

I think you mean everyone is a neanderthal.

 

It was Stan Gooch's contention that neanderthal DNA is the secret reason for antisemitism (be it against Jews or Muslims).

 

Gooch was half-Jewish and he retired to a Caravan (trailer) in Wales. I corresponded with him in long hand letters.

 

I tried to get him interested in the San Bushmen original human culture that was dominant for 90% of human history - as the real basis for the paranormal spiritual lunar abilities that Gooch attributed to the neanderthals.

 

But Gooch was correct in naming the cerebellum as the key secret to paranormal powers and the subconscious. He realized a fascination asymmetric secret dealing with left brain dominance and the solar calendar - whereas the Neanderthal cerebellum dominance reverses the symmetry. So increase of left brain thinking being right hand dominant - for the neanderthal left hand, right brain thinking, also is left vagus nerve dominant via the cerebellum.

 

This actually aligns with Taoist alchemy training as well.

 

It seems that modern Westernized humans are deeply mass mind controlled in terms of "blood lines" and DNA and materialistic Darwinism - when as modern biological humans the only unifying culture we have actually is music as the 1-4-5 music intervals.

 

So "culture" is imposed on a deeper biology that remains untapped - as Gurdjieff called it the Kundabuffer as the blockage in the lower back.

 

So Gooch had a kind of Reichian approach to the Neanderthal culture - since he didn't know about the original human Bushmen training.

 

But since Gooch embraced the Neanderthals and the paranormal then his psychology career was short-circuited. But his tome book for popular reading, "Total Man," is an excellent work - he predicted how political views are hard-wired.

 

I go into this in my free pdf "The Alchemy of Rainbow Heart Music" on "antisemitism and antiscience."

 

 

What this image neglects to point out is that it's now proven that San Bushmen also have "archaic Homo" cross-breeding as much as Eurasians have neanderthal cross-breeding - about 3%.

Quote

 

The first is that the totally fortuitous biological mixing of Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon genes (for, as already proposed above, it seems that the mix occurred solely in the context of rape and slavery) produced virtually overnight the vigorous and gifted hybrid that is ourselves, modern man. This specifically biological claim will be discussed in more detail later in the book, but is not, however, its chief concern.

 

The second aspect, the second claim, is that, at the time of his, for him, unfortunate encounter with Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal had evolved a culture of the mind (a) not only of a very high order indeed (for as I often say, whereas we build cities of stone, Neanderthal built cities of dreams) but also (b) of a strangeness that is very hard for us to imagine or, even having imagined, to come to terms with (since we have, after all, experience of only one kind of human mind – our own).

 

At the purely psychological/cultural level, I suggest that Neanderthal dealt Cro-Magnon a culture-shock of such magnitude that its consequences are still with us today. Though it left little physical trace, there is in fact, as will be shown, not one aspect of our present lives, our attitudes and our institutions which does not today bear that ancient culture's stamp.

 

 

http://www.aulis.com/twothirds7.htm

 

I don't agree with Gooch - as again he ignored the original human culture - but then so too does mainstream modern science (and even the supposed "alternative" sciences). haha.

 

https://www.aulis.com/testimonials2.htm

 

Wow they published letters to Stan Gooch!

 

Let's see if mine are there.

 

I'm guessing not, since I make a point to make fun of the medium of writing.

 

Nope - just one page of letters.

 

But Stan gooch was very nice - sending me several responses. He had plans for a new book titled something about how modern humans got everything all wrong.

 

So Gooch's book "The Neanderthal Legacy" title got lifted by an academic published by Princeton University Press. haha.

 

Quote

That's because all non-Africans – be they from France, China or Papua New Guinea – share the same amount of Neanderthal DNA, suggesting that interbreeding occurred before those populations split. The timing makes the Middle East the likeliest place where humans leaving Africa and resident Neanderthals did the deed.

 

 

Quote

Trinkaus and Stewart subjected every Neanderthal bone then known to a forensic-style analysis and found over twice the number of violence-inflicted injuries as among any similar number of bones from other fossil humans. Nonetheless, though extremely violent, Neanderthals took care of their injured and elderly people (Trinkaus and Stewart; see also Ralph Solecki's later work at Shanidar cave).

So here's where they try to link to schizoids:

Quote

A report from the National Institute of Mental Health says a gene variant that reduces dopamine activity in the prefrontal cortex  is related to poorer performance and inefficient functioning of that brain region during working memory tasks, and to slightly increased risk for schizophrenia.

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,18696.90/wap2.html

Now some real science:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/humans-mated-neandertals-much-earlier-and-more-frequently-thought

 

So based on Neanderthal DNA - it's been determined that the first modern humans who left AFrica had Neanderthal sex 100,000 years ago and then the humans went extinct.

 

So then a 2nd line of humans left Africa after mt. Toba explosion - and also bred with Neanderthals.

 

But I should point out that the South Indian new DNA study shows they lived in India before Mt. Toba explosion 70,000 years ago. Which means not all those early humans out of Africa went extinct.

 

Quote

Denisovans themselves did indeed interbred with a “superarchaic” hominin, possibly H. erectus, whom they encountered as early as 400,000 years ago. There are also hints that Denisovans interbred with modern humans in Asia more than once,

 

So the Hominin Genus can cross-breed with Sapien subspecies....

 

Quote

computational biologists have recently uncovered about 12,000 Neandertal gene versions, or haplotypes, in living Europeans and Asians. Researchers had clues to the function of a handful of these haplotypes—some were thought to be involved in the immune system, or the development of skin or hair, for example. But nailing down their precise function has required costly gene expression studies in tissue or animal models.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/our-hidden-neandertal-dna-may-increase-risk-allergies-depression

[Nungali]

15 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Well, based on this map everyone is a Jew.

 

 

Finally !  

 

I even have the maps !  Actually i am using to type on now, it supports my laptop on my lap ( good size )  its a large thin book that the pages concertina out of to go longer than this room. 

 

It used to go around the wall at the British Museum ... I got this book copy version of a 7th day adventist , or  some such ;

 

 

lets see now .... 

 

 

 

The sons of Ham became the   Edomites ... the Sons of  ..... became the Egyptians  .... this really bad son seems to have made all the black people  ......

 

Oh ... excuse the sarcasm ....  I am supposed to be a neo nazi   .....   I forgot for a moment there    

[Nungali]

 

 

hats right l the beginning of  'linguistics  '  ....  something about not building big towers ...

 

of curse they eventually had to remove it from the British Museum    , and they made the book, now it goes all the way to Lady Di , President reagan  ... yes, you can trace their lines backwards in the book  and see which sons they came from