MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,879
- Reaction score
- 1,291
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
all that could migrate some day to "ancient DNA" thread -
in a french (language) magazine of vulgarization ("Science et Vie") I found an astonishing report about the discovering of 5 skulls in Georgia (Caucasus) -
2 adolescents, 2 adults and 1 old "man" (without teeth) were found in a "sepulture" near Dmanisi - at least 3 different "species" (according to external features) would have been put under the ground, maybe 1,85 millions of years ago -
'homo habilis', 'homo ergaster' and 'homo rudolfensis' traits would be present in these skulls, sometimes in the same skull, putting the scientists in a great confusion!
someones put some reserves, considering the teeth - others think they are all varaitions of an unique specie, showing no more variations than Chimps -
I have some reserve me too about this last affirmation -
according to their amazing heterogeneity, I can see on pictures, they could be very more the result of recent enough crossings (recent at this period) than the result of an endogamous group, if they were all of the same "family" ("racial group") -
the report is very short concerning datations protocole - are they not the remnants of different periods and different human groups pushed under ground by far later inhabitants of the region?
I have no answer and no sufficient elements given by this magazine to have any valuable amateur feeling - maybe someones of yours have data?
in a french (language) magazine of vulgarization ("Science et Vie") I found an astonishing report about the discovering of 5 skulls in Georgia (Caucasus) -
2 adolescents, 2 adults and 1 old "man" (without teeth) were found in a "sepulture" near Dmanisi - at least 3 different "species" (according to external features) would have been put under the ground, maybe 1,85 millions of years ago -
'homo habilis', 'homo ergaster' and 'homo rudolfensis' traits would be present in these skulls, sometimes in the same skull, putting the scientists in a great confusion!
someones put some reserves, considering the teeth - others think they are all varaitions of an unique specie, showing no more variations than Chimps -
I have some reserve me too about this last affirmation -
according to their amazing heterogeneity, I can see on pictures, they could be very more the result of recent enough crossings (recent at this period) than the result of an endogamous group, if they were all of the same "family" ("racial group") -
the report is very short concerning datations protocole - are they not the remnants of different periods and different human groups pushed under ground by far later inhabitants of the region?
I have no answer and no sufficient elements given by this magazine to have any valuable amateur feeling - maybe someones of yours have data?