What “Native” American?

This again.

Why?

Because I can.

“Native American”, they cant presumptuously.

Allow me to continue dispelling this myth.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/mysterious-link-emerges-between-native-americans-and-people-half-globe-away

ASIAN.

“This week, two major studies of the DNA of living and ancient people try to settle the big questions about the early settlers: who they were, when they came, and how many waves arrived. But instead of converging on a single consensus picture, the studies, published online in Science and Nature, throw up a new mystery: Both detect in modern Native Americans a trace of DNA related to that of native people from Australia and Melanesia. The competing teams, neither of which knew what the other was up to until the last minute, are still trying to reconcile and make sense of each other’s data.”

ASIAN.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dna-search-first-americans-links-amazon-indigenous-australians-180955976/

Australasian, work with me here.

“The prevailing theory

bullshit

is that the first Americans arrived in a single wave, and all Native American populations today descend from this one group of adventurous founders. But now there’s a kink in that theory. The latest genetic analyses back up skeletal studies suggesting that some groups in the Amazon share a common ancestor with indigenous Australians and New Guineans. The find hints at the possibility that not one but two groups migrated across these continents to give rise to the first Americans.”

And they murdered the real natives they found there. Don’t mention that. Must have happened.

““Our results suggest this working model that we had is not correct. There’s another early population that founded modern Native American populations,” says study coauthor David Reich, a geneticist at Harvard University”

Also, suggests multi-regional hypothesis.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/multiregional_hypothesis.htm

AGAIN.

Unless you’re going to be claiming they wuz Africans too?

The funny part of the “everyone wuz African” rhetoric is the unfortunate logical consequence – they implicitly argue non-Africans are more evolved.

Who were the original Americans?

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/mastodon-bones-humans-north-america

130, 000 years ago?

Typical of Europeans and Neanderthals.
https://www.livescience.com/60088-stone-age-cannibals-engraved-human-bones.html
https://www.inverse.com/article/44462-neanderthal-art-engravings-culture

Genographic Southeast Asia

https://voices.nationalgeographic.org/2015/04/21/genographic-southeast-asia/

Oh look, more migrations they try to shoehorn into Out of Africa but actually fits Multiregional better.

I am shocked at the continual efforts to bury lies with genetic truth.

Over half of SE Asian males? At least the Yellow Fever acolytes have new reading material.

For exactly what type of cuck they are, on a precise genetic level.

European racial genes defy OOA, support Multi-Regional

OOA = Out of Africa

MRH = Multi-Regional Hypothesis, without which, everyone would share all their DNA.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/european-genetic-identity-may-stretch-back-36000-years

Europeans today are the descendants of a very old, interconnected population of hunter-gatherers that had already spread throughout Europe and much of central and western Asia by 36,000 years ago. “What is surprising is this guy represents one of the earliest Europeans, but at the same time he basically contains all the genetic components that you find in contemporary Europeans—at 37,000 years ago,” Willerslev says.

We’re older than they claimed.

As researchers recently sequenced the genomes of more than a dozen ancient members of our species,Homo sapiens, in Europe and Asia in rapid succession, they added a third genetic component: a “ghost” lineage of nomads who blew into northeast Europe from the steppes of western Asia 4000 to 5000 years ago.

There’s your MRH.

If that finding holds up, the mysterious DNA from western Eurasia must be very ancient, and not solely from a wave of nomads that entered Europe 5000 years ago or so, as proposed by researchers in September.

Instead of a mystery, perhaps they were just wrong?

The Victorians started the romantic notion of Africa as the Cradle of Life because it was so primitive, savage and untouched by industrialization. Along with Darwin, was the idea they’d been left behind, or were furthest behind in the ‘race for life’ of evolution.

Other researchers say that this new genome is important because “it is the first paper to document some degree of continuity among the first people to get to Europe and the people living there today,” says population geneticist David Reich of Harvard University, one of the authors on the triple migration model. It also is “a striking finding that the Kostenki 14 genome already has the three major European components present that we detect in modern Europeans,” says Johannes Krause of the University of Tübingen in Germany.

Looks like a land claim. Ours.
Perhaps some braniac could develop a salivary border test for it?

But even if the man from Kostenki in Russia had all these elements 36,000 years ago, that doesn’t mean that other Europeans did, Reich says. His team’s DNA data and models suggest that Europeans in the west and north did not pick up DNA from the steppes until much later. He and Krause also think that Willerslev’s study needs to be confirmed with higher resolution sequencing to rule out contamination, and to have more population genetics modeling explain the distribution of these genetic types. The bottom line, researchers agree, is that European origins are “seem to be much more complex than most people thought,” Willerslev says.

Population = race.

White people are a race. End of discussion.

Modern humans still bred with Neanderthals

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26435-thoroughly-modern-humans-interbred-with-neanderthals.html

(And killed, and ate.)

The oldest DNA of a modern human ever to be sequenced shows that the Homo sapiens who interbred with the Neanderthals were very modern – not just anatomically but with modern behaviour including painting, modern tools, music and jewellery.

Some previous estimates had placed the first interspecies liaison much earlier, before the emergence of these features. The new DNA sequence shows it actually happened in the middle of an age called the Initial Upper Palaeolithic, when there was an explosion of modern human culture.

– because of them. They taught us.

About 2 per cent of many people’s genomes today is made up of Neanderthal DNA, a result of interbreeding between the two species that can be seen in everyone except people from sub-Saharan Africa. The so-called Ust’-Ishim man, named after the town in western Siberia where he was found, carries a similar proportion of Neanderthal DNA in his genome as present-day Eurasians, and a combination of radiocarbon and genetic dating shows he died only about 45,000 years ago.

…The Initial Upper Palaeolithic was a period around 50,000 years ago when complex stone and bone tools appeared across Eurasia, along with body ornamentation like pierced shells and animal teeth, pigments and even musical instruments, says team member Tom Higham of the University of Oxford. It is unknown which human-like species made these sophisticated artefacts, but the finding that Ust’-Ishim man was in Siberia at this time means that it could have been modern humans, he says.

It isn’t. You know it isn’t.

“This is very exciting research that shows again the remarkable power of ancient DNA analysis to help solve seemingly intractable questions in human evolution science,” says Darren Curnoe from the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia.

By comparing Ust’-Ishim’s genome to various groups of modern and ancient humans, the researchers are filling in gaps in the map of initial human migrations around the globe. They found that he is as genetically similar to present-day East Asians as to ancient genomes found in Western Europe and Siberia, suggesting that the population he was part of split from the ancestors of both Europeans and East Asians, prior to their divergence from each other.

Uhuh…

“He represents a group that settled Siberia and then disappeared without leaving descendants,” says Curnoe. “This tells us that as early humans left Africa and settled Eurasia they weren’t all successful. There were more populations than we thought, some making no contribution to living people at all.” He notes this could make it difficult to interpret human fossils found in Eurasia, since we cannot assume that they are our ancestors.

Fuck. You.
There’s no reason to bring Africa into this at all, yet you do. There is negative evidence that Africa was NOT involved. Fuck. You.

But while Ust’-Ishim man does not appear to have any modern-day direct descendants living today, he is more genetically similar to present-day East Asians than to present-day Europeans. This finding is consistent with a recently proposed theory that present-day Europeans may have got some of their ancestry from later groups that weren’t part of the initial migration into the area. “It supports that very strongly,” says Reich, one of the researchers who developed the idea.

Yes, Europe is special.
See all our culture for further information.

Homo sapiens is believed to have taken on Neanderthal DNA from at least two bouts of interbreeding. While sub-Saharan Africans have no Neanderthal DNA, Asian populations have more than Europeans. [DS: cough cough IQ]

Exactly, the Africa comment was wrong. There is a LACK of evidence, a definitive NO.

“We know that there are likely to have been at least two admixture events into the ancestors of present-day people – the shared event early during modern human migration out of Africa, and a second event into the ancestors of present-day Asians,” says Kelso.

How are you so fucking stupid to keep dragging Out of Africa into this?
We have proof for the latter. Genomic proof.
There is negative evidence for the former. No genetic ties whatsoever. And still, you cling.

Because there are only a few of these longer stretches, they were unable to precisely date when this later interbreeding may have happened. But whatever the date, it seems humans and Neanderthals found each other irresistible, or at least mated with each other fairly commonly, whenever we inhabited the same areas. “The timing is most likely simply a result of the fact that this is where the two groups overlapped geographically and temporally,” says Kelso.

Rather fair-skinned, aren’t they? Didn’t they have red hair? Isn’t that a recessive trait?
So, if these guys came from Africa AT ALL, they couldn’t possibly have that many recessive traits.

Out of Africa has been repeatedly demonstrated as false because they keep having to add to it. It’s now Out of Africa more than once, which defeats the core of theory, a single migration pattern!
Multi-regional Hypothesis is supported by all the evidence! All of it! It predicted all these ‘surprising’ migration flows and multiple forms of ‘human’ genome!

In 2000, the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence of “Mungo Man 3” (LM3) of ancient Australia was published indicating that Mungo Man was an extinct subspecies that diverged before the most recent common ancestor of contemporary humans. The results, if correct, supports the multiregional origin of modern humans hypothesis.[27][28]

and from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans#Competing_hypotheses

The multiregional hypothesis, initially proposed by Milford Wolpoff, holds that the evolution of humans from H. erectus at the beginning of the Pleistocene 1.8 million years BP has been within a single, continuous worldwide population. Proponents of multiregional origin reject the assumption of an infertility barrier between ancient Eurasian and African populations of Homo. Multiregional proponents point to the fossil record and genetic evidence in chromosomal DNA.

You mean, actual science.

One study suggested that at least 5% of the human modern gene pool can be attributed to ancient admixture, which in Europe would be from the Neanderthals.[74] But the study also suggests that there may be other reasons why humans and Neanderthals share ancient genetic lineages.[75][76]

All this new evidence into Neanderthals show these doubters of MRH are wrong.

What’s a mutation like you doing in Asia like this?

http://phys.org/news/2014-07-discovery-neandertal-trait-ancient-skull.html

“It suggests instead that the later phases of human evolution were more of a labyrinth of biology and peoples than simple lines on a map would suggest.”

Of course, we know why.

Keywords: MRH, negative evidence, Denisovans, Cro Magnons.

“Modern Indigenous Europeans descend from the Cro-Magnon peoples.”

Why did skin colour evolve? Water retention.

evolution study here

“In their new study, the researchers identified a strikingly higher prevalence of inborn mutations in the filaggrin gene among Northern European populations. Up to 10 percent of normal individuals carried mutations in the filaggrin gene in these northern nations, in contrast to much lower mutation rates in southern European, Asian and African populations.

Moreover, higher filaggrin mutation rates, which result in a loss of urocanic acid, correlated with higher vitamin D levels in the blood. Latitude-dependent variations in melanin genes are not similarly associated with vitamin D levels, according to Elias. This evidence suggests that changes in the skin barrier played a role in Northern European’s evolutionary adaptation to Northern latitudes, the study concluded.

Yet, there was an evolutionary tradeoff for these barrier-weakening filaggrin mutations, Elias said. Mutation bearers have a tendency for very dry skin, and are vulnerable to atopic dermatitis, asthma and food allergies. But these diseases have appeared only recently, and did not become a problem until humans began to live in densely populated urban environments, Elias said.”

They still back OOA though, against all reason, because they want to keep their jobs. Multi-regional explains this, OOA cannot. Science should befit the evidence.
They don’t look into brain evolution, do they? Cranial capacity? Hardiness aside from the face? How diet informs…? No. Don’t bother.

Next they should look to skin layer thickness, white skin is thinner.