U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 06-16-2013, 01:59 PM
Status: "happy again, no longer catless! t...." (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,421 posts, read 16,686,996 times
Reputation: 16425

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjh View Post
I wonder how much of this is due to overall body size changes though. Cro-magnon were bigger than modern humans, but smaller than Neanderthals. I recently watched a documentary or two about Neanderthals on youtube. Just do a search on there, if you want to see what they offer and have the time and inclination.

Some may already know this stuff, but others might find it interesting:

-Neanderthals were much larger in part because they need bigger bodies for heat retention during the ice age.

-They never perfected hunting the way humans did of creating spears that could be thrown. They had nowhere near the intelligence to invent bows and arrows. It's thought they actually stalked right up to their prey and jabbed the animal while still holding the spear. As a result they had to be incredibly strong.

-As for their diet, it's been said they ate almost all meat, like 90% and that their digestive tracts were well capable of processing raw meat.

-Also their throats had a larynx similar to humans, and it's believed they did have speech.
I saw a documentary on the recent rewriting of the Neanderthal culture/lifestyle based on their ability to speak some sort of language. It has long been suspected that they did, given the complexity of their hunting behavior and the need for communications with each other and their social life. They would have passed the knowledge on by including younger hunters in hunting parties but unlike other predators they are like us in that knowledge is not intuitive and must be taught.

If you consider they survived for most of their long existance in an ice age, eating meat was likely a necessity. There would have been very little vegitation to sustain them in the cold and it takes more vegitation than meat to provide sufficent calories even today in a physically stressed situation.

What ultimately doomed them as a species was that they were made for the cold and ice and when it changed and became more temperate they could not adjust so easily. But as we carry their dna and there is some evidence of children of mixed subspecies they must have lived and shared with modern humans. One study found not just a smattering of neanderthal dna, but a variety which suggests it was not simply a phenomina in one place but many and different genes are predominant in some areas and unknown in others.

If only we could go back in a time machine... (have been fascinated by anthropology since high school a bunch of years ago)
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-16-2013, 04:00 PM
 
5,799 posts, read 4,812,198 times
Reputation: 17499
Hey youse guys,

All this interesting conversation got me wondering about all kinds of things. Like, the Aborigines of Australia, what does their DNA say about their origins?

I've just read a little bit, but it seems their ancestors were those who went from Africa through south Asia (Indonesia) even before Europeans and Asians began developing separately. Their ancestry is mixed with Denisovan hominids and they came to the Australian continent more than 50,000 years ago, which means that Australian Aborigines have been developing independently in one area longer than any other group outside of Africa. Pretty cool!

Seems like there have been so many exciting finds in this subject area in the past five years. It would be so interesting to be a paleontologist with a genetic specialty right now! Or maybe they are paleobiologists?

What an interesting topic! I appreciate those of you who have knowledge in this area.

Harking back to the original question, a discussion about DNA in the context of "White People" seems pretty simplistic, doesn't it?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2013, 04:47 AM
bjh
 
Location: Memphis - home of the king
26,094 posts, read 22,785,932 times
Reputation: 119716
^
The geneticist Spencer Wells, did a series about worldwide DNA. He found that Australians are the 2nd oldest group after Africans. Their ancestors traveled around the edge of the Indian Ocean and managed to get to Australia via boat.

Look him up on youtube for more:


National Geographic Live! - Spencer Wells: The Human Journey - YouTube
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2013, 04:54 AM
 
1,163 posts, read 1,153,346 times
Reputation: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
My sister had it done. We were 66 percent British Isles, 27 percent Scandinavian, and 7 percent Unknown.

It's weird, because while great-greats on my father's side came from England, most of the rest came from The Netherlands. We know when they came and where they lived in Holland. We're not sure how that fits in with "British Isles" and "Scandinavian". There is one thread of family who was in New England since before the Revolution.

No clue as to what "Unknown" could be.
Dutch East Indies connection?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2013, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Central Oregon
1 posts, read 1,916 times
Reputation: 10
Default Recent Ancestry DNA Testing By My Brother

Recently my brother did a DNA testing and came back with these results....

61% European, 26% Sub-Saharan African, 9% East Asian, and 4% Indigenous American.

Here is my question to the group. What does all that really mean? Would it be the same percentage for full blood siblings... all female? How do I find a good testing lab that is not going to charge a ton of cash for a reliable complete test.

Thank you all. I will be doing some more research as we have been told that there is more Indigenous American (would that be the same as aboriginal or Algonquin from the east coast of Canada?) then the numbers seem to indicate. Several of us are also double cousins.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2013, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,498 posts, read 26,089,700 times
Reputation: 26456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abeque View Post
Recently my brother did a DNA testing and came back with these results....

61% European, 26% Sub-Saharan African, 9% East Asian, and 4% Indigenous American.

Here is my question to the group. What does all that really mean? Would it be the same percentage for full blood siblings... all female? How do I find a good testing lab that is not going to charge a ton of cash for a reliable complete test.

Thank you all. I will be doing some more research as we have been told that there is more Indigenous American (would that be the same as aboriginal or Algonquin from the east coast of Canada?) then the numbers seem to indicate. Several of us are also double cousins.
It would be expensive to have your entire genome --- all your DNA --- tested, if that is what you mean by a "complete" test.

None of the commercial sites test the whole genome. They test selected genes for which they have comparison populations.

Depending on how far back your indigenous ancestors are, you may have just not happened to inherit the genes that Ancestry is testing for. Someone at Ancestry might be able to tell you how much comparison material they have for Canadian tribes.

Siblings should fall roughly in the same ballpark, but unless there are identical twins or other identical multiples the percentages likely will not be identical.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2013, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Illinois
3,168 posts, read 4,154,040 times
Reputation: 5580
Well I see that Gedmatch has added a Neanderthal and Denisovian comparison tool. It appears to not be available to everyone at this time.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2013, 09:28 AM
 
1,661 posts, read 1,871,379 times
Reputation: 2119
I did a test with 23andme. Results came back 44% British, 13% French/German, 3% Scandinavian with about 35% non specific and small amounts of Finnish, Balkan, North African and SSA sprinkled in to make up 100%. Expected more German based on paper trail, but tho knows.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2013, 06:37 AM
 
13,140 posts, read 35,978,090 times
Reputation: 12074
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjh View Post
I wonder how much of this is due to overall body size changes though. Cro-magnon were bigger than modern humans, but smaller than Neanderthals.
Neanderthals had much denser bones and striated muscle than Cro-Magnons as they were designed for ''close kill'' however they (cro-magnon's) were vastly taller including that of todays modern humans (sapiens) and infact most Cro-Magnon females were by average taller than Neanderthal males.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjh View Post
-They never perfected hunting the way humans did of creating spears that could be thrown. They had nowhere near the intelligence to invent bows and arrows. It's thought they actually stalked right up to their prey and jabbed the animal while still holding the spear. As a result they had to be incredibly strong.
I'm not sure if Neanderthals didn't have the intelligence to invent bow and arrows as their enviroment of living in the thickened forests of Europe ''probably'' wouldn't allow for that or the throwing of spears as for example when modern humans had firstly done so in the open savannahs of east Africa around 120,000 years ago. Neanderthals did have larger cranial capacities as the males averaged 1750 cc vs modern human males average 1350 cc (cro-magnon males 1600 cc) although they lacked our larger '''Frontal Lobe''' size needed for creativity, abstract thought etc.

Comparison of both modern Homo Sapiens and Neanderthal skulls.
Attached Thumbnails
How Many White People Here Got A DNA Test With 23andMe ?-sapiens_neanderthal_comparison.jpg  

Last edited by Six Foot Three; 08-29-2013 at 08:02 AM.. Reason: Edit - 6 ft 3
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2013, 03:15 PM
 
1,006 posts, read 1,778,622 times
Reputation: 1556
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE View Post
I say that we had at least 2 groups of people that came here. One group documented their trip from Jerusalem quite well. They came here 400 years or so before Jesus was born. They ended up spliting up into 2 main groups. Their decendents are the American Indian people. Another group of people came here after the tower of Babel was destroyed. They built barge like structures and came over. They ended up getting destroyed but did leave a record. The record that was left by both groups is still available to this day. You can learn about it here: Explanation*
Interesting fictional read.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top