You can download the whole paper in .pdf format here:
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?FileName=AA20120200005_81998944.pdf&paperID=19566
1 posted on
06/20/2012 2:20:05 PM PDT by
Renfield
To: SunkenCiv; blam; Ernest_at_the_Beach
2 posted on
06/20/2012 2:21:53 PM PDT by
Renfield
(Turning apples into venison since 1999!)
To: blam
4 posted on
06/20/2012 2:27:59 PM PDT by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: Renfield
Interesting ~ the authors could have simply postulated that advances and retreats of the great ice sheets served to both distribute the white folks, but also to create some variability in them.
Then, having noted that they could have named the last interglacial (which ended about 114,000 years bp) ~ and the one before that which ended about 228,000 years bp).
The ancestor common to all of us is in that neighborhood, but it's the conditions of the interglacials and the glacial advances and interstdials to made us what we are ~ not just the Toba event ~ which may have been a fizzle anyway.
7 posted on
06/20/2012 2:42:54 PM PDT by
muawiyah
To: Renfield
Interesting read.
This is all based on the Y chromosome that is passed only from male to male.
I'm looking forward to the day when they analyze the rest of our DNA, will it corroborate these findings or not.
9 posted on
06/20/2012 2:45:21 PM PDT by
BitWielder1
(Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
To: Renfield
Downloading the paper was easy, comprehending it is another matter.
Thanks for the post, very interesting. The point being made is that the “Out of Africa” theory is not data driven, but agenda driven.
To: Renfield
No. So sorry. Oldest human bones founding in China, so wassa matta you?
<|;-)=-
18 posted on
06/20/2012 3:04:16 PM PDT by
familyop
("Wanna cigarette? You're never too young to start." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
To: Renfield
Let’s settle this once and for all. Dress all of the liberal/left university instructors up as monkeys, and put them in the Congo. That way, they’ll serve a purpose.
19 posted on
06/20/2012 3:08:51 PM PDT by
familyop
("Wanna cigarette? You're never too young to start." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
To: Renfield
Worthless speculation. These studies are founded on the assumption that there was a uniform genome derived from a common ancestor, and that all the descendants of that common ancestor experienced a constant rate of genetic mutation over time, resulting in the variations between haplotypes that we see today. I’m not sure what to call that, but it certainly isn’t science.
To: Renfield
The finding that the Europeoid haplogroups did not descend from African haplogroups A or B is supported by the fact that bearers of the Europeoid haplogroups, as well as all non-African haplogroups do not carry either SNPs M91, P97, M31, P82, M23, M114, P262, M32, M59, P289, P291, P102, M13, M171, M118 (haplogroup A and its subclades SNPs) or M60, M181, P90 (haplogroup B), as it was shown recently in Walk through Y FTDNA Project (the reference is incorporated therein) on several hundred people from various haplogroups. I call BS. How could they overlook the impact of SNP M70 pre-64(K)?
28 posted on
06/20/2012 4:49:01 PM PDT by
2nd Bn, 11th Mar
(The "p" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
To: Renfield
34 posted on
06/21/2012 5:24:58 AM PDT by
ZULU
(See: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=D9vQt6IXXaM&hd)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson