Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Potential Origins of Europeans Found
Yahoo News ^ | November 10, 2005 | RANDOLPH E. SCHMID

Posted on 11/11/2005 1:09:32 AM PST by AlaskaErik

A study of DNA from ancient farmers in Europe shows sharp differences from that of modern Europeans — results that are likely to add fuel to the debate over European origins.

Researchers led by Wolfgang Haak of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, argue that their finding supports the belief that modern residents of central Europe descended from Stone Age hunter-gatherers who were present 40,000 years ago, and not the early farmers who arrived thousands of years later.

But other anthropologists questioned that conclusion, arguing that the available information isn't sufficient to support it.

Haak's team used DNA from 24 skeletons of farmers from about 7,500 years ago, collected in Germany, Austria and Hungary. Six of the skeletons — 25 percent — belonged to the "N1a" human lineage, according to genetic signatures in their mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited from the mother.

The N1a marker is extremely rare in modern Europeans, appearing in just 0.2 percent.

"This was a surprise. I expected the distribution of mitochondrial DNA in these early farmers to be more similar to the distribution we have today in Europe," co-author Joachim Burger, also from Johannes Gutenberg University, said in a statement.

"Our paper suggests that there is a good possibility that the contribution of early farmers could be close to zero," added co-author Peter Forster from the University of Cambridge in England.

Absence of the marker in modern people indicates they are descended from ancient hunter-gatherers rather than the later-arriving farmers, the researchers said.

But others challenged that conclusion.

"The data are new, the analysis is not compelling, and the conclusions are illogical," said anthropologist Milford H. Wolpoff of the University of Michigan.

Anthropologist Joao Zilhao of the University of Bristol, England, noted that the study didn't compare the DNA of the ancient farmers with that of the ancient hunter-gatherers, adding that there are plenty of hunter-gatherer burials in German cave sites that could have been sampled for comparison.

Without that comparison it's hard to say that the difference between modern DNA and that of the ancient farmers means current people are descended from the ancient hunter-gatherers.

"In this particular case, the reason may be because of a farmer input that was subsequently diluted, assuming that the N1a haplotype is a marker of spreading farmers, and that it was as rare in pre-Neolithic Europe as it is today," Zilhao said.

But, he added, "I see nothing in the data that would necessarily carry the exclusion of, for instance, the opposite hypothesis ... that (the N1a marker) represents the incorporation of hunter-gatherer females in the farming communities that are coming into Europe about 7,500 years ago, that incorporation being in such small numbers that, eventually, it all but disappeared."

The research was funded by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Germany; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: agriculture; aliaksu; animalhusbandry; arab; archaeology; aryan; asia; austria; blacksea; catastrophism; creationism; danuberiver; dietandcuisine; dna; england; europe; europeans; evolution; france; germany; godsgravesglyphs; hairy; helixmakemineadouble; hindu; history; hungary; huntergatherers; india; iran; ireland; joaozilhao; liviugiosan; milfordwolpoff; noahsflood; nutcrackerman; orehistoric; origins; petkodimitrov; prehistoric; prehistory; richardhiscott; robertballard; samothrace; uk; wolfganghaak
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
After the past two weeks, Europeans should be more concerned about their future rather than their past.
1 posted on 11/11/2005 1:09:33 AM PST by AlaskaErik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
"After the past two weeks, Europeans should be more concerned about their future rather than their past."

What future? Spread your legs Oh yea Sons and Daughters of Charlemagne! The Mullahs are coming.
2 posted on 11/11/2005 1:34:29 AM PST by wmileo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
Here's an illustration of the excavation site:


3 posted on 11/11/2005 1:39:10 AM PST by thoughtomator (Bring Back HUAC!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik; Cronos


4 posted on 11/11/2005 1:41:12 AM PST by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
A study of DNA from ancient farmers in Europe shows sharp differences from that of modern Europeans — results that are likely to add fuel to the debate over European origins.

I take it they won't present this as "sugar and spice and everything nice".

How about French Socialists?

Scum filled bags and surrender flags, that's what French Socialists are made from...

OK, not contributing to the intellectual content here, but thank you for letting me vent!

Very interesting post BUMP!

5 posted on 11/11/2005 1:59:54 AM PST by Caipirabob (Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik

well, now that we know todays europeans are not native, i guess more weight should be given to the idea that europe really was islamic in the formative years. reclaiming what was once yours is ok with me. sarcasm off.


6 posted on 11/11/2005 2:11:54 AM PST by son of caesar (son of caesar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: johnnydoe

The term Indo-European language group does not mean the European languages came from India but rather that they all seem to have a common origin.


8 posted on 11/11/2005 4:00:22 AM PST by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
Potential Origins of Europeans Found

Early Bureaucrat-Man?

9 posted on 11/11/2005 4:07:25 AM PST by 12B
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Sanskrit is the "common origin".


10 posted on 11/11/2005 4:29:30 AM PST by Gengis Khan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: johnnydoe

Aha denial,....... but that the modern thoery of anthropology, cant help it.

Face it, you guys came from India.


11 posted on 11/11/2005 4:37:21 AM PST by Gengis Khan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: johnnydoe

This is interesting. Evolution of the species is a good description of life on earth. Everybody recognizes that languahge has evolved--Spanish, Italian, French, Portuguese, Romanian from Latin. English, modern German, Dutch from Old Teutonic. Etc. Evolution of language is well-documented, showing modification over generations, selection based on surroundings, and nobody pretends it was "intelligently designed".

Seems to be a good model for evolution vs. creationism.


13 posted on 11/11/2005 4:42:05 AM PST by thomaswest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: johnnydoe
About the only reliable and interesting thing that linguists have managed in the evo-linguistics file is the discovery that the Gypsies were not Egyptian, but come from somewhere in Pakistan or India, due to all the sanskrit remnants found in "Rom."

We use a couple of Gyspy/Sanskrit words commonly. "Punch" means five, five flavors for a drink or five fingers for a fist to hit you with. Also "shiv" for blade or knife.

16 posted on 11/11/2005 5:29:36 AM PST by Mamzelle (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: thomaswest

Of course language was intelligently designed. It was clearly designed by intelligences to improve communication of concepts and ideas.

Obviously, though, these intelligences designed and modified it on an ad-hoc basis.

Oddly enough, Esperanto, an intelligently designed language, has not caught on. Maybe designing language in an ad-hoc manner has some real advantages over pre-planning it?


17 posted on 11/11/2005 5:31:40 AM PST by Netheron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik; blam

The article says nothing, to small a sample to be significant.


18 posted on 11/11/2005 5:39:06 AM PST by Little Bill (A 37%'r, a Red Spot on a Blue State, rats are evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thomaswest
Evolution of language is well-documented, showing modification over generations, selection based on surroundings, and nobody pretends it was "intelligently designed".

You don't believe language changes as a result of mental reflection and effort?

The evidence that language is the result of not merely intelligent agents, but agents with exceptionally large brains, is not only self-apparent, it is overwhelming.

If this weren't true, rocks would speak--and in local dialects.

19 posted on 11/11/2005 5:51:17 AM PST by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Netheron
Oddly enough, Esperanto, an intelligently designed language, has not caught on. Maybe designing language in an ad-hoc manner has some real advantages over pre-planning it?

Esperanto is to languages what communism is to economics.

20 posted on 11/11/2005 5:55:32 AM PST by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson