Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

American Indian admixture in White Americans

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

  • Read your posted links - no red-headed giants mentioned. But the papers are worth reading nevertheless!

    Comment


    • oops it was when I was reading about luzia. sorry, I thought that link was in there.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luzia
      follow the link there also too

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patagon
      these are not legends because they are in every native nations legends and they were verified by white folks in boats 450+ years ago before there was any mixing of white people.... why do they not listen to their own dang writings. people had no reason to make this stuff up.
      Last edited by purple flowers; 16 March 2008, 09:23 PM.

      Comment


      • Oh ... no actual re-haired giant remains available for morphologic or DNA analysis, yet. Too bad!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by tomcat
          Oh ... no actual re-haired giant remains available for morphologic or DNA analysis, yet. Too bad!

          http://www.geocities.com/saqatchr/page46.html
          there are lots of sites about new world giants .

          now I do not know if these are pre flood..as I do believe that there was pre flood people who had to be destoyed .. but even if this is post flood.. either way what happened to these bones? .. they were called fake and everyother thing in the book.. and most likely distoyed because it did not fit in the box. their evil-ution box. these giantsandthe Patagonian giants do not fit your asian bering model either . now they sure could fit the Pheoncians and Caananite models hum? ( ie: Galioth and his big big cousins HUM?)who were also known to be red heads )
          what I am convinced of is the post flood populations headed for went and lived in every direction and to cities sites of the pre flood people or around places where their cities once were.

          Comment


          • Okey dokey, if you got no Patagonian giants I will take evidence of Phoenician or Canaanite giants instead. And if preservation does not allow determination of red hair, I'll just take your word for it.

            Comment


            • 40.000 year gap between Australia and Beringia

              Originally posted by tomcat
              1) Ample archaeological evidence from Europe and the Americas that Ice Age hunters were effective on the outwash plains below glacial fronts. Woolly mammoth were not tropical animals. We can assume that the preeminent concern of Ice Age hunters was not to get a tan but to hunt food.

              2) Contrary your earlier, Beringia was not a jam of ice floes but a grassland, with game.

              3) And as per my earlier, there was an ice-free corridor between the Laurentian and Cordilleran ice sheet about 15KYA and quite possibly an ice free corridor along the American west coast and/or ice-free mountain ranges earlier than 15KYA, certainly later. Hence the 'trip south' was possible.

              Consider the simplicity of a hunter's life. You just go where the game is. If the environment will support game it will support you because you are going to kill and eat that game. And while a plant can poison you, there are (to the best of my knowledge) no poisonous mammals ... even if they eat the very same plants that would make you sick.

              Fishing is good too. And you are free to imagine boats without contradiction by the archaeological record (as no evidence of paleo-Indian boats has yet been uncovered).
              Comment on the last paragraph:-
              Remind me to try and find out what ocean levels, currents and winds were doing for the,
              (yes yes !), 40,000 years
              between the arrival in Australia of our old folks walking along all the continental shores from the Near East, until the recent 10,000 ybp when our Siberian uncles obviously walked into Beringia.
              Our Abo forebears, (full-brained Homo Sapiens Sapiens, remember!) had finally crossed to Australia using paleolithic water transport ca 50,000 ybp.
              Didn't they then have plenty of time in hand to drift, paddle, sail, on to reach Patagonia. (Don't bother me, yet at least, with details!)

              However please note that the more recent great migration of the Polynesians as far as New Zealand (Read "Vikings of the Sunrise") only took a few hundred years of island-hopping using almost paleolithic water transport.

              And, despite Kon-Tiki, there are good arguments for possible Indonesian/Polynesian/Micronesian West-to East movement to Chili-Peru.
              If we have anatomic evidence for non-Siberian humans in ancient Panamerica, let us then try and explain how they got here.
              They had plenty of time!

              Comment


              • Hey, it ain't my problem. You guys want red-headed giants in boats, just produce the evidence. I am still waiving proof of red-headedness. Giant skeletons and giant-sized boats is way good enough for me. I am also open to parallel evolution of long-separated Australopithicines. Just show me the bones. Can dreaming about the past change it?

                Comment


                • FYI
                  do native Americans have black hair? do asians have black hair?
                  before you answer that you might want to look up what exactly "red hair" is. you might not be able to find the info in human dna info.. but you sure should in the animal sciences.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by purple flowers
                    FYI
                    do native Americans have black hair? do asians have black hair?
                    before you answer that you might want to look up what exactly "red hair" is. you might not be able to find the info in human dna info.. but you sure should in the animal sciences.
                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair

                    Is this the kind of info on red hair that you are looking for or were you just being facetious?

                    John

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Johnserrat
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair

                      Is this the kind of info on red hair that you are looking for or were you just being facetious?

                      John
                      every other continient ,why not here? why because of stereo types and the scientist jaded by it.
                      the red heads are here someplace... lost . doesn't make them any less native american.

                      Comment


                      • Jamba, maybe the red-headed giants are the legendary Bigfoot, Saskwatch (sp?), and Yeti (abominal snowman. had white hair in the Scooby Doo cartoon).

                        Originally posted by purple flowers
                        every other continient ,why not here? why because of stereo types and the scientist jaded by it.
                        the red heads are here someplace... lost . doesn't make them any less native american.
                        Last edited by rainbow; 20 March 2008, 11:20 AM.

                        Comment


                        • I'm sorry purple flowers. I had confused you with Jambalaia.

                          Comment


                          • Update:
                            AncestryByDna compared my genotypes with my mothers and I have one allele of my mother's two alleles at each marker, so there wasn't a mix-up of swabs/results and I am 17% Native American. They say that even though she has 0 Native American, that her confidence interval of 2x is 0-12.
                            No mix-up. I am 17%.

                            Comment


                            • Rainbow,
                              My mother was Cherokee and she did not show any Indian DNA. (FTDNA)
                              The Indian was on her fathers side.
                              Remember daughter/mother, daughter/mother for MTDNA tests.
                              Happy Friday, darroll

                              Comment


                              • Scientists offer revised dates for Amerind colonization of Americas.

                                http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0320120714.htm

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X