Thanks Openurmind.
Posted on 11/10/2019 5:43:46 AM PST by Openurmind
Yes, absolutely, within the general larger area which encompasses the Levant, Israel is not “carved out of it” on purpose for religious reasons, lol. When discussing early man cultures from the stand point of anthropology, all of the shores and inland areas adjacent to the Eastern Mediterranean are all considered the Levant. 40,000 years ago there were no formal religions, and no borders. Would the geographical labels “Eastern Steppes”, or “Iberia” used in the field of anthropology also be considered as denying? It is just a scientific term used by anthropologists for a general geographical area, no religious politics intended at all. I have absolutely no clue how you were able to dig that one out of your hat and turn it into politics about religion.
Yes, there is a post here on FR about this, They also recently found some teeth in a cave and did the DNA. One was identified as having all three. So this one here would be the second conformation of hybridization.
Here is one of the Levant including Israel based on much later sources than Anthropologists refer to and a much smaller area, in fact, based on the bible it’s self.
https://www.thoughtco.com/maps-of-the-levant-119279
General area.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Early+man+in+prehistoric+Levant+maps&t=lm&iax=images&ia=images
have you ever heard of a ‘historian’ named Andrew Collins? I got one of his books yesterday which deals with the Denisovans.
Hancock has mentioned him. There are some interesting things he proposes I would like to read more about myself. Be interested to find out what you think when you get done with it? :)
Hancock has quite a few of his articles I just found. :)
https://grahamhancock.com/author/andrew-collins/
Be a while, but if I catch you on some similar thread, I will.
They aren’t articles but books.
I understand, he writes books. But on Hancock’s page is his books list, but below that are also a few articles he shares on Graham’s site there.
Thanks Openurmind.
As always my privilege, I think you will personally find both of those very interesting. :)
Believe the Arabs began their conquest of the Levant in 636 AD. They were not native to the region.
Oh I looked at the wrong links which lead back to the same page.
They are just teasers for his books but still interesting. :)
The rest of the Aurignacian keyword, chrono sort:
And from our fine selection of keywords:
It's nice to see migration getting coverage again, although it's probablyh driven by open-borders politics. For a long while now historical and prehistoric mass migration was being branded as "myth".
I’m going to guess most could not, or there was an extremely high infant mortality rate and just a few reproductions and births actually resulted. We are talking about a time line of tens of thousands of years. If given that amount of time to adapt and evolve, Mules might become fertile and be able to also reproduce at sometime in the future.
Campi Flegrei (eruption 39,000 years ago) keyword, sorted, edited a little:
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.
