Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ancient DNA Suggests Steppe Migrations Spread Indo-European Languages

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ancient DNA Suggests Steppe Migrations Spread Indo-European Languages

    David Reich speaking at the American Philosophical Society Annual Meeting, April 2017.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ybYxg2vHE

    I think I have posted this before but this is a better lecture.

    DNA patterns in Europe indicate mass migrations after farming was established is the major take away. A question we may ask is why didn't novel pathogens decimate populations similar to what happened when Europeans introduced them to the Americas. I would think the answer is that groups in Europe and Asia were never completely isolated.
    We hunt the hunters

  • #2
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ybYxg2vHE

    I think I have posted this before but this is a better lecture.

    DNA patterns in Europe indicate mass migrations after farming was established is the major take away. A question we may ask is why didn't novel pathogens decimate populations similar to what happened when Europeans introduced them to the Americas. I would think the answer is that groups in Europe and Asia were never completely isolated.
    The epidemiological answer supports Darwinism: early Mankind was literally immersed in a sea of new organisms everywhere they went, including pathogens. Only those with robust immune systems survived the shock of initial migration into new pathogen zones.

    Side note: Modern medicine has virtually destroyed Modern Man's immune system to the point where we face catastrophic at any given moment, made exponentially worse by our lack of facilities to handle a large-scale, lethal pandemic, and a worldwide transportation system that moves people around the globe faster than the incubation period for most really lethal diseases. At the same time, we are actively exploring some of the worst places in the world looking for possible new medicines. The odds of our finding the perfect killer are very high.

    The perfect killer at the moment are the prion diseases such as Crutchfield-Jacob Disease (spongiform encephalitis aka Mad Cow) This class of diseases crosses species, and there are no treatment or curative drugs even in the near future for them. The mortality rate at present for a disease such as CJD is 100%, and it is a slow enough incubator to go anywhere in the world before anyone knows it's there, and by then it is far too late.

    FYI Wolf: the real reason the Europeans conquered the new World is that the indigenous populations had no immunity to the wide range of lethal diseases carried by them, such as smallpox. This indicates that cultural isolation began relatively late in history and persisted until the issue of transportation across long distances continent-continent over intervening oceans was solved.
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

      early Mankind was literally immersed in a sea of new organisms everywhere they went, including pathogens. Only those with robust immune systems survived the shock of initial migration into new pathogen zones.
      I think you missed the point I was making.

      Is there archeological evidence that suggest death rates during periods of mass migration into Europe similar to those experience by Native Americans when exposed to European diseases. If not then contact between groups from East Asia to Northern Europe must have been at least somewhat common. Further evidence to support this hypothesis is that Asian and Europeans seem to have similar death rates of around 30 percent during Plague outbreaks. Also the death rates from smallpox are estimated at 90 percent in the Americas and only 30 percent in both Europe and Asia.

      In any case I was just speculating about the way in which immigration took place and how the immigrants interacted with the existing population. Exploitation as exposed to extermination seems to be a common pattern. Perhaps that is only because where extermination took place there is no record.


      We hunt the hunters

      Comment


      • #4
        America was isolated from the rest of the world from last ice age until the Europeans "discovered" it. Europe, Asia and Africa had no such isolation. Plagues and diseases could and always did travel between the three continents.

        However, to continue on subject of steppe migration. It seems that this was a major route between Europe and Asia, with one major proof of this being the lower levels of lactose intolerance in these areas. Furthermore, I recall reading that a lot of European populations were replaced by steppe migrants, though I am not sure if the replace should rather be integrated. There certainly has been a lot of back and forth in that sense.

        There was a study published just recently in Finland which suggested that there was actually quite a lot of moving around in early populations. Surprisingly, the western populations seem to have had a lot of influence from hunter gatherers, whereas the eastern populations were farmers (something which later turned around). Certainly the steppes of the east and the waterways of the west saw plenty of different migrating groups since the ice age ended.

        Interestingly enough, the Finnish population in general is quite different from the rest of the Europe (and in fact, there are more genetical difference between eastern and western Finnish populations than there are between the English and German populations)...there is a famous quote of some Finnish politician or whatnot saying "we aren't Swedish, we don't want to be Russians, so we shall be Finnish". This holds true genetically as well. Clearly, we are the only true Europeans, with the rest of you scum carrying inferior eastern/western/southern genes and speaking those dirty indo-european languages.
        Wisdom is personal

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

          I think you missed the point I was making.

          Is there archeological evidence that suggest death rates during periods of mass migration into Europe similar to those experience by Native Americans when exposed to European diseases. If not then contact between groups from East Asia to Northern Europe must have been at least somewhat common. Further evidence to support this hypothesis is that Asian and Europeans seem to have similar death rates of around 30 percent during Plague outbreaks. Also the death rates from smallpox are estimated at 90 percent in the Americas and only 30 percent in both Europe and Asia.

          In any case I was just speculating about the way in which immigration took place and how the immigrants interacted with the existing population. Exploitation as exposed to extermination seems to be a common pattern. Perhaps that is only because where extermination took place there is no record.

          Understood; however what I posted was the epidemiological theory that counters your DNA version. Since the affected populations did mot mass migrate into Europe, but in fact the opposite occurred, your comment is moot and indicates nothing whatsoever about contact between ancient populations in Europe and the Americas. However, when such contact did occur the results were devastating to the populations in the Americas, which supports my contention that contact, and thus increased resistance, did not occur. There was essentially zero resistance to European diseases among the indigenous populations of the Americas.

          Likewise, your comment on the relative mortality of smallpox also supports my contention. Had there actually been fairly frequent constant, the resistance rate would have been greater. Medically speaking, the contact between Asia and Europe was sufficient to boost resistance considerably, again supporting my point.

          Immigration was an outcome of population pressure, expansionism and greed. DNA did not figure into it. Likewise, susceptibility to new diseases was a specific result of population isolation, again not DNA. Interestingly, however, there are specific conditions more common in certain population groups, such as G6PD deficiency in some Mediterranean and Sephardic Jewish populations, and things like thalassemia in blacks.
          An interesting study took place some years ago, attempting to validate by means of DNA the Lucy Theory, i.e., a black female was literally the original distant ancestor of all of us, originally postulated by Leaky while working in the Oldivai Gorge region. The study failed; in fact, it proved the impossibility of such an event and ended up supporting the current theory of the simultaneous evolution of a number of small groups widely scattered across the globe.

          Migration actually ended with the end of the Ice Age, which raised sea levels and obliterated land bridges that had served as migratory travel routes. Epidemiologically speaking, the end of the Ice Age was the beginning of the Isolation Age and would remain so until the discovery of the sail and rudimentary navigational tools. This is supported by DNA studies of ancient remains, indicating "pure" population groupings which had not intermingled with those of Europe or Asia, and most often not even with outsiders of any kind.
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Karri View Post
            America was isolated from the rest of the world from last ice age until the Europeans "discovered" it. Europe, Asia and Africa had no such isolation. Plagues and diseases could and always did travel between the three continents.

            However, to continue on subject of steppe migration. It seems that this was a major route between Europe and Asia, with one major proof of this being the lower levels of lactose intolerance in these areas. Furthermore, I recall reading that a lot of European populations were replaced by steppe migrants, though I am not sure if the replace should rather be integrated. There certainly has been a lot of back and forth in that sense.

            There was a study published just recently in Finland which suggested that there was actually quite a lot of moving around in early populations. Surprisingly, the western populations seem to have had a lot of influence from hunter gatherers, whereas the eastern populations were farmers (something which later turned around). Certainly the steppes of the east and the waterways of the west saw plenty of different migrating groups since the ice age ended.

            Interestingly enough, the Finnish population in general is quite different from the rest of the Europe (and in fact, there are more genetical difference between eastern and western Finnish populations than there are between the English and German populations)...there is a famous quote of some Finnish politician or whatnot saying "we aren't Swedish, we don't want to be Russians, so we shall be Finnish". This holds true genetically as well. Clearly, we are the only true Europeans, with the rest of you scum carrying inferior eastern/western/southern genes and speaking those dirty indo-european languages.
            By and large, the steppes often had less access to supplies of irrigation water necessary during the summers, and farming was labor intensive while the abundant grass and open spaces made migratory herding or hunting more popular. Might have been a distinct lack of male enthusiasm in male-dominant groups, too!) The same took place among the Amerinds in America. Plains Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers, hardly surprising given the huge numbers of buffalo and the availabilty of game such as prairie antelope, while groups like the Puebloans, the Anazazi and even one of the three peoples of the Cheyenne Nation turned to farming. Other Amerind Nations like the Navaho, OTH, in the dry central southwest, were herders.
            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Karri View Post
              America was isolated from the rest of the world from last ice age until the Europeans "discovered" it. Europe, Asia and Africa had no such isolation. Plagues and diseases could and always did travel between the three continents.

              However, to continue on subject of steppe migration. It seems that this was a major route between Europe and Asia, with one major proof of this being the lower levels of lactose intolerance in these areas. Furthermore, I recall reading that a lot of European populations were replaced by steppe migrants, though I am not sure if the replace should rather be integrated. There certainly has been a lot of back and forth in that sense.

              There was a study published just recently in Finland which suggested that there was actually quite a lot of moving around in early populations. Surprisingly, the western populations seem to have had a lot of influence from hunter gatherers, whereas the eastern populations were farmers (something which later turned around). Certainly the steppes of the east and the waterways of the west saw plenty of different migrating groups since the ice age ended.

              Interestingly enough, the Finnish population in general is quite different from the rest of the Europe (and in fact, there are more genetical difference between eastern and western Finnish populations than there are between the English and German populations)...there is a famous quote of some Finnish politician or whatnot saying "we aren't Swedish, we don't want to be Russians, so we shall be Finnish". This holds true genetically as well. Clearly, we are the only true Europeans, with the rest of you scum carrying inferior eastern/western/southern genes and speaking those dirty indo-european languages.
              My understanding is replaced rather than integrated. Most of our DNA is from the farmers. On iPhone now but think that only c5% of our (European) DNA is from the original hunter gatherers.
              It could have just been that the farmers massively outbreed the hunters as farming supports a much larger population.




              "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                Understood; however what I posted was the epidemiological theory that counters your DNA version. Since the affected populations did mot mass migrate into Europe, but in fact the opposite occurred, your comment is moot and indicates nothing whatsoever about contact between ancient populations in Europe and the Americas. However, when such contact did occur the results were devastating to the populations in the Americas, which supports my contention that contact, and thus increased resistance, did not occur. There was essentially zero resistance to European diseases among the indigenous populations of the Americas.

                Likewise, your comment on the relative mortality of smallpox also supports my contention. Had there actually been fairly frequent constant, the resistance rate would have been greater. Medically speaking, the contact between Asia and Europe was sufficient to boost resistance considerably, again supporting my point.

                Immigration was an outcome of population pressure, expansionism and greed. DNA did not figure into it. Likewise, susceptibility to new diseases was a specific result of population isolation, again not DNA. Interestingly, however, there are specific conditions more common in certain population groups, such as G6PD deficiency in some Mediterranean and Sephardic Jewish populations, and things like thalassemia in blacks.
                An interesting study took place some years ago, attempting to validate by means of DNA the Lucy Theory, i.e., a black female was literally the original distant ancestor of all of us, originally postulated by Leaky while working in the Oldivai Gorge region. The study failed; in fact, it proved the impossibility of such an event and ended up supporting the current theory of the simultaneous evolution of a number of small groups widely scattered across the globe.

                Migration actually ended with the end of the Ice Age, which raised sea levels and obliterated land bridges that had served as migratory travel routes. Epidemiologically speaking, the end of the Ice Age was the beginning of the Isolation Age and would remain so until the discovery of the sail and rudimentary navigational tools. This is supported by DNA studies of ancient remains, indicating "pure" population groupings which had not intermingled with those of Europe or Asia, and most often not even with outsiders of any kind.
                I have no idea what you are talking about. Certainly not anything I said.

                All the DNA study was concerned with is migration patterns. Immunity is a separate issue.

                My hypotheses was that had there been less contact between groups across Asia and Europe before the "mass" migration then death rates do to novel pathogens would have favored replacement rather than integration of populations. For purposes of of this hypothesis the Americas are only a control group.

                Climate change seems a more likely cause for "mass" migration in the period we are talking about than overpopulation. Although population and overgrazing are unavoidably related.

                As to the out of Africa theory of course evolution didn't stop as people migrated. That is why we have "races". People just don't like the idea of "subspecies" in humans for obvious reasons. As far as I know the only serious researchers who believe in convergent human evolution are the Chinese.
                We hunt the hunters

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

                  I have no idea what you are talking about. Certainly not anything I said.

                  All the DNA study was concerned with is migration patterns. Immunity is a separate issue.

                  My hypotheses was that had there been less contact between groups across Asia and Europe before the "mass" migration then death rates do to novel pathogens would have favored replacement rather than integration of populations. For purposes of of this hypothesis the Americas are only a control group.

                  Climate change seems a more likely cause for "mass" migration in the period we are talking about than overpopulation. Although population and overgrazing are unavoidably related.

                  As to the out of Africa theory of course evolution didn't stop as people migrated. That is why we have "races". People just don't like the idea of "subspecies" in humans for obvious reasons. As far as I know the only serious researchers who believe in convergent human evolution are the Chinese.
                  I'm beginning to wonder why others are expected to understand and accept your convoluted arguments while you never understand or accept any of theirs.
                  Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                    I'm beginning to wonder why others are expected to understand and accept your convoluted arguments while you never understand or accept any of theirs.
                    I don't expect anyone to accept my arguments. I don't think there are in unqualified facts or truth that are not trivial. There are facts and truths that exists within artificial domains but we don't have the time or energy to define the domains clearly. That is why I reject debate as a reasonable format for conversation. Debate is a sport and I'm not sporting.

                    I'm not going to go through and pick apart people's arguments line by line. I had plenty of fun doing that professionally. I do not see what we are doing as much more than throwing out ideas. That said I do appreciate obvious errors I have made pointed out.

                    The other thing is that as my arch enemy AJR loved to point out I'm not a very good writer or communicator. Sorry about that.
                    We hunt the hunters

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

                      I don't expect anyone to accept my arguments.
                      Yes, you do, and you are clearly offended that I have differing views. Unfortunately, this is a forum, not a college campus and we discuss here, not lecture.

                      I find your views interesting, often extremely convoluted, and subject to differing interpretations, but I'm not interested in arguing about the right to differ or to advance other explanations that also satisfy the same parameters.

                      Nothing on this earth is set in concrete. Even highly regarded scientific experts disagree on many of the most basic things that we often take for granted. There are, after all, many paths to the same destination, and as a colleague once pointed out to me: "Truth changes."

                      Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                        That is why I reject debate as a reasonable format for conversation.
                        Well that killed the moment.
                        "Advances in technology tend to overwhelm me."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Slug View Post
                          Well that killed the moment.
                          Look nothing stops people from commenting with their own opinions.

                          The point I'm trying to make is that the "facts" are sufficiently in play that in a debate the only thing left is points on logic. I'm not saying the facts should not be contested but rather if you are going to have a debate the basic premise should be agreed on and the debate centered around theory. That brings up the next problem in that it is expected that only experts have the ability to rationally discuss theory.
                          We hunt the hunters

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Slug View Post
                            Well that killed the moment.
                            \
                            Friday night. \the wolfman is going prowling....

                            The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by marktwain View Post
                              \
                              Friday night. \the wolfman is going prowling....
                              I'm not ashamed to be more dog like than other people. Dogs are faithful, reliable, self sacrificing, and pack oriented.
                              We hunt the hunters

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X