Deluge of Atlantis

Deluge of Atlantis
Deluge of Atlantis

Saturday, October 6, 2012

Another recent "Archaic Human" from Africa

Revisit the idea of this archaic tradition in Africa there are less than 20,000 years?
[ie, of the Glacial Recession age or Younger?]
 This favors high returns in Africa there are less than 100,000 years are to be in connection with another theory, theory that Homo sapiens African would they too (like the Homo sapiens with Eurasian Neanderthal) crossbred with archaic human lineage has recently in Africa. This is at least suggest that some genetic studies. [9] Better still this archaic human lineage have been present in Africa 13,000 years only there as indicate the recent discovery in Nigeria a skull appearing possess characteristics of archaic human lineages! [10] [Compare to the so-called "Eyasi Man"-DD]

Human skull 13,000 years old, and about to be owned by some archaic human lineage to a clearly distinct from ours and would have continued until very recently in SSA. However, this last conclusion is questionable for the reasons outlined below. Image from Katerina Harvati et al (2011) [10]

Thus, according to this theory, Homo sapiens African would also intermarried with archaic hominids disappeared today and even better representatives of this archaic tradition had survived until there very recently in Africa. But even if, as already mentioned above a skull 13,000 years discovered in Nigeria has been interpreted as belonging to a possible representative of this hypothetical archaic hominid lineage, nothing is less certain! Because, as Maju  has well reminded us  [Below] it has always been a significant morphological variability within populations of Homo sapiens . Maju thus having given good reasons to doubt the idea that the skull found in Nigeria is that of a representative of an archaic tradition has now disappeared. Indeed images support it shows that there are other bones of modern humans with a cranial vault similar to the specimen Nigeria and this without the status of "Modern Men" individuals with such cranial vaults, is questioned!
[9] Joseph Lachance et al (2012), Evolutionary History and Adaptation from High-Coverage Whole Genome Sequences- of Hunter-Gatherers Diverse African , Cell
[10] Katerina Harvati et al (2011), The Later Stone Age Calvaria Eleru from Iwo, Nigeria: Morphology and Chronology ,

Claims of Nigerian late "archaic" human… highly dubious

That’s the least I can say after looking at the matter with some attention: that the claims made by a recent paper are not sufficiently justified to say the least.
They tell us of a recent pair of skulls from SW Nigeria. They were discovered in 1965 and at least one of them belongs to a whole skeleton, including a critical piece: the mandible. Sadly this paper totally ignores anything but the calvaria (the top of the skull). They have been dated by uranium series to c. 12-6 Ka ago.
Sloppiness seems too common in this paper: not just the two skulls and skeletons are not properly shown in full but, in fig. 1, they claim to be showing both calvaria, they only show one from four angles:

Fig. 1

Then we are thrown into PC analysis, which seems to be their main working tool:

Fig. 2
Of course PC analysis is limited in its ability to discern and can only provide a very rough view. In any case, here we have PC2/CV2 occupied by intra-modern variability, while only PC1/CV1 show anything that resembles modern-archaic differences: a totally unilinear analysis in the end.
As we know, sample size matters; but instead of balancing it by reducing the number of modern samples (grey dots), the authors have totally ignored this matter.
So we get an (unclearly legitimate) linear archaic-modern horizontal dimension in which some individuals typically considered Homo sapiens of archaic traits (magenta and black triangles) tend to occupy intermediate positions between the erectus-neanderthal-heidelbergensis conglomerate (left) and the modern human oversized sample (right). Iwo Eleru (IE, black cross) is within this “ambiguous” group and resembles other archaic H. sapiens from the Middle Paleolithic (magenta triangles), as well as similarly aged Upper Cave 101, from North China.

UC 101 (UC1, pictured left) is a great counter-example because with Jebel Irhoud or the Palestinian skulls, there’s always someone claiming archaic admixture, typically with Neanderthals. But Upper Cave individuals are invariably described as modern in spite of their low vaults, so similar to those of “archaic” Homo sp. A good reason is that they have clear, unmistakably modern, chins.
[They are also both described as "Australoid", ie, like Australia Aboriginals-DD]
To me, the calvarium looks very similar in shape to Iwo Eleru. To be safe I compared them both using fig. 4-A as tool:
Inner drawing: Iwo Eleru, outer drawing: modern mean
[Which to my eye DEFINITELY places it in the Neanderthaloid category-DD]

The comparison may be a bit imperfect but it is clear that the shape of both calvaria, of similar age, one from West Africa and the other from East Asia, are very much alike – and both are somewhat different from the modern mean.
I think therefore that at least serious doubt must be casted on the conclusions that some want to extract from this paper: that there was some sort of archaic hominin in West Africa until recently. Nothing in this data suggests this, instead it does suggest that a better methodology is much needed.
--I pretty much have to disagree with Maju's conclusions here because the skulls in question ARE quite definitely postglacial in age (End of Ice Age and Neolithic, one from S Africa has been dated as "ONLY" 3000 years old at most) and visually distinctive to MOST researchers. Usually they are only described as "Archaic" or even "Australoid" but once or twice it has even been said they were like "Rhodesian man" or thought to be halfbreeds with the type. There are several skulls of the type scattered all over Africa, from furthest North to furthest South at he beginning of Postglacial times and yet there is no known modern single, unified population that remotely corresponds to this physical type printed in all of the Ethnographies made since the colonisation of Africa began which corresponds to the physical type indicated in these skulls! The originating  population itself is generally accepted as being completely extinct.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This blog does NOT allow anonymous comments. All comments are moderated to filter out abusive and vulgar language and any posts indulging in abusive and insulting language shall be deleted without any further discussion.