Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

American Indian admixture in White Americans

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

  • I only flagged the article because I found it an intriguing counter-intuitive argument. I am not a Clovis First proponent.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by PDHOTLEN
      I can accept that the Kuroshio-Japanese current may have shifted in the North Pacific when the Bering land bridge was in place. At present, cold water coming down out of the Bering Sea slams into the warm Japanese Current, and probably deflects it to its present course across the North Pacific Ocean. That current may have followed the coastline (offshore) around the Gulf of Alaska and on down, during the LGM. In that case, it would have been more likely to aid the distribution of mt-hg-H into North America from East Asia. I don't think very many people ever survived the long trip drifting on the Japanese Current in its present course.
      Yes, PDH, this would be a relevant factor for longer passages; but even more supportive of Inuit-type subsistence-culture making a gradual eastward ice-fringe migration. This would have to be be at a more southerly latitude than present Beringia, imposed by the ice cap, and taking the time of many human generations.
      Relevant too, is that the sea level in what I call this long "pre-LGM dark period" would mostly have been up to 50 fathoms (100 metres) lower than the present, and the ice-fringe relatively stable, for up to (!) forty millenia of global LTP (lower temperatures than present). Plenty of time for a very patient scenario, for that very small estimated human population; a scenario that would leave very scarce archaeologic residuals, as we are finding; or not finding!.

      Comment


      • Oh, I am glad you did

        Originally posted by tomcat
        I only flagged the article because I found it an intriguing counter-intuitive argument. I am not a Clovis First proponent.
        We need more discussion of this nature I think. I have as one of my principles of daily life a goal to learn something new every day (and also to laugh a lot, which often go hand in hand). I enjoyed reading the article and I enjoyed critiquing it. I learned from both processes.

        I remember walking into my first college class at 16, sitting down with no doubt the proverbial deer in the headlight eyes. In strode a larger than life character named "Mike" Wagner- Dr. Walter Wagner- an economist who served on the staffs of Eisenhower and Marshall. He looked around the room like a preacher getting ready to let it all out. He wrapped his lower lip up across his upper lip, what I later understood was characteristic preparation for a dramatic pronouncement we were supposed to burn into our heads. "The questions you ask determine the answers you receive." It stuck.

        And for much of the remaining now 42 years I have seen the wisdom of that advice replayed over and over again. I think the entire debate concerning native american origins and migrations suffers from failing to be aware that the right answer to the wrong question remains wrong, that it is the question that we fail to ask because we "know" the answer that limits our discoveries. With native american origins the entire subject has been delimited by the ascendency of Clovis first despite finds to the contrary. So ascendant was the theory that archaeologists did not dig beneath the Clovis layer thinking it a waste of time. A classic example of what Dr. Walter Wagner was talking about.

        In the legal profession, if the glove don't fit you must acquit. It is really time to explore "beyond Clovis."

        Comment


        • Interesting pdfs from DNA Tribes website showing where American Indian genes are.

          http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-d...2008-10-25.pdf

          http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-d...2008-12-26.pdf

          http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-d...2008-11-28.pdf

          http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-d...2008-09-27.pdf


          I think the pdfs are very interesting and I hope some forum members who look at this thread will think so too.
          Last edited by rainbow; 5 January 2009, 03:53 PM.

          Comment


          • http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre...iamonds-comet/

            "These discoveries provide strong evidence for a cosmic impact event at approximately 12,900 years ago that would have had enormous environmental consequences for plants, animals and humans across North America."

            Link from O'Connor in another thread.
            Last edited by rainbow; 5 January 2009, 05:42 PM.

            Comment


            • I wonder if my paternal grandmother is actually Native American & European, or if my Slavic paternal grandfather had a lot of Central Asian markers, or if my Slavic paternal grandfather was my fathers real biological father. My grandmother once sent me a photo of one of my cousins baptism that included two of the pastors of my grandmothers church. One of the pastors was an older male who looked 100% Native American, in my opinion. So I wonder if he is my fathers actual biological father. It's the only photo my grandmother sent me of one of my cousins that didn't include my grandmother. And at the time I thought it was odd that she would send me that.


              I wonder if actual Native Americans get autosomal matches to Bashkir & Turkey & Uzbek in their extended report.
              Last edited by rainbow; 18 February 2009, 08:12 PM.

              Comment


              • *bump* I can't believe I haven't posted in this thead since February 18. I still haven't been able to find out where my 17% comes from. In my latest DNA Tribes report (not their newest March 14th one-I didn't order that one-the one before that) my Alaska Athabaskan became a non-match again. In my world region section I match a bunch of regions and have a match to the Mestizo category but no matches at all to a specific region(s) in the Americas. My global matches have a lot of Brazilian matches but my top global is the diaspora population of Puerto Rico. My top native match (not Native American) is Syria. Don't ask me how I got that because I don't know. It does not match up with my actual ancestry.
                Interesting development this week -info for anyone who subscribed to get email alerts of this thread and doesn't visit the forum as ofte as me - an American male who always thought his direct male line was French has found

                Comment


                • ....out his ydna is American Indian C3.

                  Comment


                  • Interesting . . .

                    I just came back from Williamsburg, VA, and I was able to speak to some of the local experts . . . He thinks talking with local experts always helps in ones search . . .

                    Originally posted by rainbow View Post
                    ....out his ydna is American Indian C3.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rainbow View Post
                      ....out his ydna is American Indian C3.
                      I have been reading this very long thread with great interest. A lot of great points have been brought up.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ragincajun View Post
                        I have been reading this very long thread with great interest. A lot of great points have been brought up.
                        This is one of my favorite threads. It has a wide variety of info.

                        Comment


                        • *gentle bump*

                          In case anyone interested in this thread/subject is interested in Native American autosomal genetics in general, please take a look at the various DNATribes Digests. They are free and in pdf format. Native American genetics are found in so many places outside of the Americas.

                          Here is the link to the thread I made for the digests:
                          http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=13912




                          Last night I watched Mel Gibson's Apocalypto for the first time. Gruesomeness aside, it was an awesome story. It made me think of various things, but one was that the population(s) trying to flee the brutally is probably based on truth, though it wasn't known to be true at the time (the end credits said it was meant to be a fictictious story). I thought of the DNA Tribes digests showing that there was gene flow from South (and Central?) America to North America.
                          Also, seeing so many genuine Native Americans on the screen....so many individuals and each of their looks....there is a lot of variety....some have long noses with flared nostrils....some have tiny thin noses....some have beak/hook noses. The different eyes. Not all have high cheekbones. Some have high cheekbones and some are slate faced. I am convinced that my paternal grandmother is/was part Native American, even though there is none in the paper trail/family history (I think dna trumps paper trail, even though it is the autosomal kind that most frown on. Sorry I don't have the mtdna or ydna to prove beyond anyones' doubt).
                          Back to my grandmother...all of her kids, from both marriages, have traits that I have seen in the actors. In photos of my grandmother where I can see her eyes she looks like that little girl in the movie who had the sickness and told a prophecy about the jaguar man. She has the same eyes.
                          When I met my grandmother in 1991 I asked her then (and since then) if there was any Native American ancestry on her side, but she never answered me. Just avoided it. Never said yes, but never said no either.
                          What I don't know is if her parents were her real parents and that their families were mixed White & Indian since colonial days, or if she was adopted. I've read about Lost Birds and I wonder if she was one, or the child of one. I will probably never know for sure. One thing I know was that she was NOT written about in the local paper when she was born. The local paper is online for the years 1928 and 1930, and it lists a variety of miscellaneous facts, such as kiddie birthday parties, most importantly the births and marriages and deaths of locals. Her elder sister is mentioned in the 1928 paper because she attended a birthday party, but my grandmother who was born in the spring of 1928 isn't mentioned at all. A younger brother is mentioned as being born in the 1930 paper (he was born in 1930). My grandmother is listed on the 1930 census, so if she was adopted, she was adopted by the time the census was finished.
                          Last edited by rainbow; 20 June 2009, 01:11 PM. Reason: typos

                          Comment


                          • I am at another road block for all lines for my paper trail. Family stories seem to go further back than any written record, and genetics agree with family stories (so far).

                            When I look at the pioneering side of the family, I looked at the regional historical record concerning when they settled. Examining the years between, 1800 and 1870, there is little family like contact with Native Americans. Maybe, this is because of the political and religious viewpoints of the people at that time. And then after 1870, there is someone with partial Native American ancestry (not in my direct line) who has an influence upon the family's migration habits. And this is due to a romantic association with a family member.

                            When I examine my father's maternal side, the family farmed tobacco and other things on the east coast, and somehow tribal partnership was lost with the political policies of the states after 1830 to the 1850s with an imposed cattle drive to the west (who knows how far back in history we really have to go?). It is very easy to obtain other stories from other lines too.

                            So paper trails are often but not always lost with migration while oral history often but not always go back to three or so generations before the migration unless something historical happens.

                            I was hoping for a little more from autosomal results, but so far, mt-DNA and Y-DNA seems to be better. I would guess XY and XX pairing to produce interesting results, but are they real?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by rainbow View Post
                              *gentle bump*

                              In case anyone interested in this thread/subject is interested in Native American autosomal genetics in general, please take a look at the various DNATribes Digests. They are free and in pdf format. Native American genetics are found in so many places outside of the Americas.

                              Here is the link to the thread I made for the digests:
                              http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=13912
                              Hi rainbow,

                              My family had a legend that my maternal great-grandmother was full-blooded Cherokee. We all have facial characteristics that could be interpreted as NA-like.

                              And then I had my mtDNA analyzed - and guess what? no NA !!!

                              I am trying to persuade my sister to have hers done, so that we have a female representation, which may reveal something, but so far, nothing.

                              So I guess you can say the discrimination against NA blood is reversed in my family at least. I can tell you that when I first learned of it, I was SO proud - and now, through FTDNA testing, I have been thrown back on the European heap that currently is so complex and undefined yet due to a lack of testing (except by the Irish).

                              Best wishes,
                              Douglas
                              YSearch 2KJBR

                              Comment


                              • Hi Douglas,

                                In my case it's autosomal dna. The Native American tests that FTDNA perform is only a YDNA or MTDNA test. If you have a great-grandmother on your mothers side that is Cherokee, you would only get a MTDNA Native American match if it was your mothers mothers mothers mothers mothers mothers mothers mothers side, NOT your mothers mothers fathers mother, etc.
                                You said you already tested your MTDNA. Your sister does not need to test hers. The two of you would have the same MTDNA. Save her/your money.

                                And if you meant to say it was your YDNA, YDNA represents only your fathers fathers fathers fathers fathers father etc ....going along the male-only line for thousands of years. If your fathers mother was part Native American, it would not show in your YDNA.


                                A percentage test and autosomal test is what is needed to know if you have a detectable amount of Native American ancestry.

                                I took the percentage test because I wondered if I had a detectable amount of Mongolian or Hun ancestry from my paternal grandfather, who was of Slavic origin. I was stunned when I was told I am 17% Native American. I never expected that. And my mom later tested and had none. That means my NA ancestry is from my New Jersey paternal grandmother, but her family is Dutch, English, Scottish, German, and French (and Belgian).

                                Best Wishes to You Too,
                                Elizabeth


                                Originally posted by justusla View Post
                                Hi rainbow,

                                My family had a legend that my maternal great-grandmother was full-blooded Cherokee. We all have facial characteristics that could be interpreted as NA-like.

                                And then I had my mtDNA analyzed - and guess what? no NA !!!

                                I am trying to persuade my sister to have hers done, so that we have a female representation, which may reveal something, but so far, nothing.

                                So I guess you can say the discrimination against NA blood is reversed in my family at least. I can tell you that when I first learned of it, I was SO proud - and now, through FTDNA testing, I have been thrown back on the European heap that currently is so complex and undefined yet due to a lack of testing (except by the Irish).

                                Best wishes,
                                Douglas
                                YSearch 2KJBR
                                Last edited by rainbow; 24 June 2009, 03:48 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X