'First Americans Were Australian'
Posted on 09/30/2010 2:04:50 PM PDT by Palter
Cranial features distinctive to Australian Aborigines are present in hundreds of skulls that have been uncovered in Central and South America, some dating back to over 11,000 years ago.
Evolutionary biologist Walter Neves of the University of São Paulo, whose findings are reported in a cover story in the latest issue of Cosmos magazine, has examined these skeletons and recovered others, and argues that there is now a mass of evidence indicating that at least two different populations colonised the Americas.
He and colleagues in the United States, Germany and Chile argue that first population was closely related to the Australian Aborigines and arrived more than 11,000 years ago.
Cranial morphology
The second population to arrive was of humans of 'Mongoloid' appearance - a cranial morphology distinctive of people of East and North Asian origin - who entered the Americas from Siberia and founded most (if not all) modern Native American populations, he argues.
"The results suggest a clear biological affinity between the early South Americans and the South Pacific population. This association allowed for the conclusion that the Americas were occupied before the spreading of the classical Mongoloid morphology in Asia," Neves says.
Until about a decade ago, the dominant theory in American archaeology circles was that the 'Clovis people' - whose culture is defined by the stone tools they used to kill megafauna such as mammoths - was the first population to arrive in the Americas.
Clovis culture
They were thought to have crossed the Bering Strait from Siberia into Alaska at the end of the last Ice Age, some 10,000 or so years ago, following herds of megafauna across a land bridge created as water was locked up in glaciers and ice sheets.
But in the late 1990s, Neves and his colleagues re-examined a female skeleton that had been excavated in the 1970s in an extensive cave system in Central Brazil known as Lapa Vermelha.
The skeleton - along with a treasure trove of other finds - had been first unearthed by a Brazilian-French archaeological team that disbanded shortly after its leader, Annette Laming-Emperare, died suddenly. A dispute between participants kept the find barely examined for more than a decade.
The oldest female skeleton, dubbed Luzia, is between 11,000 and 11,400 years old. The dating is not exact because the material in the bones used for dating - collagen - has long since degraded; hence, only the layers of charcoal or sediment above and below the skeleton could be dated.
"We believe she is the oldest skeleton in the Americas," Neves said.
Luzia has a very projected face; her chin sits out further than her forehead, and she has a long, narrow brain case, measured from the eyes to the back of the skull; as well as a low nose and low orbits, the space where the eyes sit.
These facial features are indicative of what Neves calls the 'generalised cranial morphology' - the morphology of anatomically modern humans, who first migrated out of Africa more than 100,000 years ago, and made it as far as Australia some 50,000 years ago, and Melanesia 40,000 years ago.
New finds in seven sites
When Neves first announced his discovery of Luzia in the late 1990s, he faced criticism from a number of archaeologists, who claimed the dating was not accurate. He has since returned to excavate four other sites, and is still cataloguing skeletons from the most recent dig.
In total, there are now hundreds of skeletons with the cranial morphology similar to Australian Aborigines, found in seven sites - as far north as Florida in the United States to Palli Aike in southern Chile.
In 2005, he published a paper in the U.S journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, analysing the characteristics of a further 81 skeletons he recovered from one of four sites, in which he said strengthened his argument that there were migrations to the Americas from at least two major populations.
Not related to Native Americans
In June 2010 in the journal PLoS ONE, Neves and colleagues Mark Hubbe of Chile's Northern Catholic University and Katerina Harvati from Germany's University of Tübingen, showed that it was not possible for the Aborigine-like skeletons to be the direct ancestors of the Native Americans.
Nor was it possible for the two populations to share a last common ancestor at the time of the first entrance into the continent, they argued, based on the 57 cranial measurements that can be made on a skull.
So far, almost all DNA studies of Native Americans points to a single entry from Siberia. This may mean that the original population died out, or simply that DNA studies have been too narrow, argue a number of archaeologists.
Genetic evidence needed
"The lack of a perfect match between morphological and molecular information can be easily explained by a very frequent event in molecular evolution: loss of DNA lineages throughout time," Neves says.
"At first, I thought there had been a complete replacement of the population [in South America]," just as there was a replacement of a similar population in East Asia during the Pleistocene/Holocene boundary.
However, he now thinks that the original people were, at least partly, absorbed into the colonising groups. "I have not detected anything that could say they interbred [such as skulls exhibiting mixed cranial features].
"But I think we will. It would be unlikely if these people lived side-by-side for 10,000 years and did not interbreed," he added.
Neves is now calling on molecular archaeologists - experts in the recovery and analysis of DNA - to turn their focus to the question of who Luzia's Aborigine-like people were.
Not according to the Scientologist story of Creation.
btw, a great reference site:
What the hell do i know?
I think it was Jewish traders looking for a nice sunny spot away from suicide bombers...
Dont forget the Chinese report that they reached the New World. Every year there’s a new group making the same claim. Even pResident Dumbo said the mexicans were here first...and they’ve never left.
Not unless there was a bottle store here.
Give them the wealth! Give them the wealth! (sarc)
Does the word Didgeridoo appear anywhere in the Book of Marmot .... uhhh, Mormon?
I had to turn my computer back on because I remembered there is a Russian song about that.
There are changes through time that literally mean nothing ~ one important one has to do with ROUND SKULLS. Currently East Asians have "round skulls". So do North Asians and, lo and behold many West Asians ~ take a good look at those Eastern European skulls and darned if they don't look round. Yet, the Eastern Europeans have no more ancestors from East Asian than do Western Europeans! The only major population of "white folks" with a large East Asian background are in the Middle East, and South Asia (Pakistan, India, etc.) And virtually none of them have "round skulls" except that sometimes they find remains with round skulls.
This particular report is based on skull measurements ~ and for every item brought forward, there is, somewhere, in somebody's scientific journal, a demonstration of the exact opposite finding.
You have to go way beyond skull shape and "roundness" into fundamental individual identification points ~ which I don't see in this report although I do see facial reconstructions that do exactly that.
Makes me think the author has some other news up his sleeve, and it's going to be all about Australians and Homo habilis. You have to remember, they claim there were still wild, natural homo habilis types wandering the land as recently as 14000 years ago ~ and they have some skulls and skeletons to prove it. Now we have a report that Australian types were in the Americas.
What the Australians want to prove, and may have, is that homo habilis and local successors had the ability to sail sea worthy boats for thousands of miles!~
That explains all the digiridoo music.
"The oldest human remains found in the Americas were recently "discovered" in the storeroom of Mexico's National Museum of Anthropology. Found in central Mexico in 1959, the five skulls were radiocarbon dated by a team of researchers from the United Kingdom and Mexico and found to be 13,000 years old. They pre-date the Clovis culture by a couple thousand years, adding to the growing evidence against the Clovis-first model for the first peopling of the Americas."
"Of additional significance is the shape of the skulls, which are described as long and narrow, very unlike those of modern Native Americans."
Anyone ever think that the Americas didn’t need to be *discovered*?
Maybe there were and have been people here all along?
Gents -
The weak minds will want to use this to imagine boats - which is silly.
What it really says is that - if an earlier wave came here - they are similar in time to the wave that reached Australia, and may have similar development schedule/timeline.
Put a common group in SE Asia. Have one split and go North for America. Have one split and go South for Aussieland.
Approx same time to cover these distances - with some variation for game -rate of movement etc.
It would make sense or nonsense if the whole Pacific landmass was stuck together with Gowanaland and Lemuria and they just walked to Rio from Perth.
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.
