Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Early Ancestors Are Pictured Together for the First Time

  1. #1
    Germania incognita
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Hersir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Norwegian
    Ancestry
    Norway
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    I2b1
    mtDNA
    J2a1a1b
    Country
    Norway Norway
    State
    South Trondelag South Trondelag
    Location
    Norway
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Posts
    6,150
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,249
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    928
    Thanked in
    428 Posts

    Early Ancestors Are Pictured Together for the First Time

    A mysterious species of ancient human has been discovered in a cave in southern Siberia.

    Nicknamed X-Woman, scientists say the human lived alongside our ancestors tens of thousands of years ago. The discovery, which could rewrite mankind's family tree, was made after analysis of DNA from a fossilised finger bone.



    Back in the beginning: Living 6.8million years ago this is Sahelanthropus tchadensis. Parts of its jaw bone and teeth were found nine years ago in the Djurab desert, Chad, and from this scientists created this model head
    .




    This young woman lived between 100,000 and 90,000 years ago. Her skull and mandible were found in a cave in Israel in 1969 along with the remains of 20 others. The size of their skulls was higher than that of the average person today
    . Experts believe the finger belonged to a child who died 48,000 to 30,000 years ago.

    It was thought only two species of early humans lived at that time - the ancestors of modern man and the Neanderthals, who died out soon afterwards. But the DNA evidence published in the journal Nature reveals a third species. The latest study was based on an analysis of 'mitochondrial' DNA - a genetic code passed from mothers to children.

    Researcher Dr Svante Pääbo said the code was different from that of Neanderthals and modern humans and was 'a new creature that's not been on our radar screens so far'. The scientists are unable to say what X-Woman looked like and are even unsure if the finger belonged to a male of female, but Dr Pääbo said they named her X-Woman 'because its mitochondrial and we want to take a feminist tack on this'.

    The discovery of the 'X-Woman' comes as scientists revealed images of what man looked like millions of years ago. Gathering bone fragments from across the globe, paleoanthropologists used sophisticated research methods to form the 27 model heads, which are on show at the Senckenberg Natural History Museum in Frankfurt, Germany.

    The exhibition goes back seven million years to sahelanthropus tchadensis and traces the numerous stages of man culminating with modern-day homo sapiens. Each of the heads is used to tell its story: where they lived; what they ate; and what killed them.

    It shows how researchers today use satellite image analysis and computer tomography. There is little doubt that Africa is the cradle of humanity and this is where the most ancient of the remains were unearthed. But clues to other pre-human species have been found in the Middle East and Far East.

    Only a few thousand fossils of pre-human species have ever been discovered and entire sub-species are sometimes known only from a single jaw or fragmentary skull.



    This skull was fashioned from a skull and jaw found in the remains of 17 pre-humans (nine adults, three youths and five children) which were discovered in the Afar Region of Ethiopia in 1975. They are believed to have lived 3.2million years ago





    Meet 'Mrs Ples' who was unearthed in Sterkfontein, South Africa in 1947. Her whole skull was found and it is believed she lived 2.5million years ago. Sediment traces found on the inside of her skull indicate to scientists that she died by falling into a chalk pit
    .




    The skull of this male adult was found on the western shore of Lake Turkana in Kenya in 1985. He is believed to have lived in 2.5million years ago. The shape of the mouth indicates that he had a strong bite and that he could chew sinewy plants
    .




    This species of sub-human - Homo rudolfensis - was found in Koobi Fora, Kenya, in 1972. The adult male is believed to have lived about 1.8million years ago. He used stone axes ate meat and plants and lived on the wooded edge of Lake Turkana in Eastern Africa.




    Researchers shaped this skull on the basis of this discovery of 'Zinj' in 1959. The adult male lived 1.8million years ago in the Olduvai Gorge of Tanzania. He would have fed himself on seeds, plants and roots which he dug out with bones




    The near-complete skeleton of 'Turkana Boy', a male adolescent aged about 13, was found in Nariokotome, Kenya, in 1984. He lived 1.6million years ago. His teeth and skull bear a close resemblance to discoveries in Asia of homo erectus
    . Experts are often forced to resort to educated guesswork to fill in the gaps in research to come up with images of human ancestors.

    Each new discovery means paleoanthropologists have to rethink the origins of man's ancestors. The previously held concept of primitive man - characterised by a large brain and the ability to manufacture tools - has had to be changed by researchers. European natives of primitive man, homo heidelbergensis, are believed to have been able to make perfect javelins from wood 400,000 years ago and are also thought to have had the ability to plan for the future.

    Neanderthals are also now thought to have had far more culture and craft skills than earlier research indicated.



    Discovered in Java, Indonesea, this skull belonging to 'Sangiran 17' is believed to have belonged to an adult male who probably lived around 800,000 years ago. He was found by an Indonesian farmer hacking away in a field. Sangiran is believed to have used fire




    The discovery of this adult male in Sima de los Huesos, Spain, in 1993 points to an early stage in the evolution of neanderthal man due to the shape of his face. 'Miquelon' was around 1.75m tall and lived about 500,000 to 350,000 years ago. His remains were found with that of 31 others which led researchers to believe this was a burial site
    .



    The skull and jaw of this female 'hobbit' was found in Liang Bua, Flores, Indonesia, in 2003. She was about 1m tall and lived about 18,000 years ago. The discovery brought into question the belief that Homo sapiens was the only form of mankind for the past 30,000 years. Homo sapiens are the primate species to which modern humans belong
    .



    The 'Old man of La Chapelle' was recreated from the skull and jaw of a male found near La Chapelle-aux-Saints, in France in 1908. He lived 56,000 years ago. His skeleton indicated he suffered a number of illness including arthritis and had numerous broken bones. This was not noticed when he was first discovered and gave rise to the mistaken belief that neanderthal man was a hunched individual. His relatively old age of between 40 to 50 indicates he was looked after by a clan
    Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1260294/X-Woman-Species-ancient-human-Siberia.html

    One of the comments:
    Columbia University archaeologist, Ralph Solecki, PhD, who grew up in Queens, NY, with another archaeologist, Carlyle Smith, a friend of Thor Heyerdahl's, discovered in Iraq, a number of Neanderthal burials, in a cave called Shanidar Cave. Mixed up at the time with the "times a' changing" they were referred to as Nature's "first flower children" on account of the flower pollen found with the burials in Iraq. I often wonder why they're overlooked, though Solecki was thanked by the author of "Clan of the Cave Bear" in her introduction, Jean M. Auel. I worked on some modern historical materials from a wooden chair factory in his lab, Coopers Dam, NJ, before he moved to Texas. I just thought to have the forensic reconstruction add them, such an "auspicious" find in recent and ancient human world history.

    - George Myers

    "Make strong old dreams lest our world lose heart." -Ezra Pound



    Support Skadi forum



  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Wulfram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    21 Minutes Ago @ 11:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Mostly German/Some English/Some Irish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    State
    Texas Texas
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Gender
    Occupation
    Demolition
    Politics
    Far Right
    Posts
    2,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    67
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    90
    Thanked in
    70 Posts


    The first one is based on a jawbone and teeth they found?
    So how did they come to the conclusion that this alleged ancestor had the distinguishing features of a primate?
    Like that baby mastodon they recently found, unless they have a specimen whose flesh also survived through time then there is simply no way for a complete facial reconstruction based on a few dubious fragments.
    These evolutionists remind me of that Victorian archaeologist who accidentally mounted the head of a dinosaur on the tail and not the neck. They will refuse to accept the possibility that our earliest Gentile ancestors looked exactly the way we do now.
    Like the dinosaur, they seem obsessed with placing negroid features on these skeletons in an attempt to further their multi-cult, "we are all the same" BS.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,468
    Thanked in
    665 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronan
    Like that baby mastodon they recently found, unless they have a specimen who flesh also survived through time then there is simply no way for a complete facial reconstruction based on a few dubious fragments.
    Suprises me time and again too, hehe. And what I find even more weird is that they are indeed able today to reconstruct a face in criminal research (to identify long time ago died people found somewhere) which resemble the actual individual quite good. I wonder why archaeologists are allowed to work in this unprofessional way or why they dont (wanna) learn from criminal research. Specially when they dont have whole skulls, the reconstructions seem indeed a little ventured.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  4. #4
    Progressive Collectivist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    16
    Thanked in
    16 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronan View Post
    The first one is based on a jawbone and teeth they found? So how did they come to the conclusion that this alleged ancestor had the distinguishing features of a primate?
    Of course there is always speculation at work too, but a lot of things can be determined even from fragments and a good reconstruction is still no perfect one, but better than none.

    Even the Australopithecines are more Primate like, except for their biped walk. Ever saw those skeletons yourself? Thats a clear case and its how evolution worked. You can't really compare the workmanship of Victorian times with the modern methods, even though both can be flawed, their is a huuuuge gap in between those.

    They will refuse to accept the possibility that our earliest Gentile ancestors looked exactly the way we do now.
    "Earlist ancestor" - whats that? It all depends on how long you go back in time.

    2 million years ago, they still looked more primate like, thats the primitive ancestral status.

    Like the dinosaur, they seem obsessed with placing negroid features on these skeletons in an attempt to further their multi-cult, "we are all the same" BS.
    Do you really think that does them a favour?

    Thats like a black nationalist saying, "earlist humans" were black - well, the earlist Hominids had a small brain, still quite simple tools and were finally inferior to the new waves of Homo sapiens.

    Evolution goes on and being more primitive is no advantage, I dont want to be more like a primitive ancestor 1,5 million years ago, because if considering the biodynamic processes happening, that would be mean you are an outdated version so to say.

    The most progressive features and trends are in many regions quite young in an evolutionary sense, at least not older than 30.000 years and often younger than 15.000 ones. The biodynamic centres produced more advanced, capable and well organised people.

    In fact, Australids and Sanids are closer to the ancestral human form than Negrids, because Negrids themselves had an evolution and are comparatively more progressive. The primitive strains mostly survived in rather isolated parts of the world, where the new racial-biological and cultural developments couldnt reach them - before the European discoveries or other people's expansions (like that of the Bantu in Africa, the Mongoloids in South East Asia etc.).

    Also compare for the whole topic:
    Racially progressive tendencies in Homo sapiens


    If you compare a very archemorphic/primitive Australid skull variant with that of a progressive Europid, you still see who's closer to the ancestral Homo erectus form:



    http://www.canovan.com/HumanOrigin/PINTUBI-1/PINTUBI-1.htm

    So its just reasonable to make the reconstructions more like those people which resemble them still more - even more so if you can get clues from the bones which point in the same direction (muscle markers etc.).

    Nasal shape in detail is hard to verify, but nasal width and projection is clearly visible if the nasal bones are still intact. So you can hardly make a reconstruction very wide, flat nosed if the nasal opening and aperture dont look like that - such big mistakes would surely be pointed out by others.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,468
    Thanked in
    665 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa
    Do you really think that does them a favour?

    If you compare a very archemorphic/primitive Australid skull variant with that of a progressive Europid, you still see who's closer to the ancestral Homo erectus form:


    So its just reasonable to make the reconstructions more like those people which resemble them still more - even more so if you can get clues from the bones which point in the same direction (muscle markers etc.).

    Nasal shape in detail is hard to verify, but nasal width and projection is clearly visible if the nasal bones are still intact. So you can hardly make a reconstruction very wide, flat nosed if the nasal opening and aperture dont look like that - such big mistakes would surely be pointed out by others.
    Dont want to interrupt the discussion about the magical appearance of Germanics , but these mistakes are pointed out. Problem is that noone listens.

    You maybe remember this example of a recent "reconstruction" of a 35.000 year old individual from Carpathian mountains:



    Article

    They do a reconstruction from a single jaw bone of which isnt even clear whether it is male or female and with all their energy they clay together an androgyn ancient and black European. Please

    Compare to this representation of a hunter-gatherer people of the same time in the same area:



    More on the Pavlovian people


    You cant tell me that behind the first isnt some sort of weird agenda to depict them this way.

    It is the same problem with the differencies in reconstruction in Neanderthals, some might make them look more primitive than they have been, just compare the much better reconstructions from other areas.

    A relatively old reconstruction by a Swiss professor:


    and one "according to newest modern standards":


    There is nothing in the Mettmann - Neanderthals that justifies this vast difference to other Neanderthals.


    Does anyone else notice that newer reconstructions show much more primitive and indeed apelike-looking humans (from bones when modern human was around already for a million years or so and erectus was long gone), than reconstructions of like 20 years ago?

    Most modern blacks dont look THAT primitive.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  6. #6
    Progressive Collectivist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    16
    Thanked in
    16 Posts
    There were more primitive traits among Europeans even 5000 years ago actually - less infantile ones and more highly progressive, which pushed the rest away at that time, exactly at that time, but still.

    You are right that they often try to make individuals looking more exotic and obviously it depends on the material whether the reconstruction makes more or less sense.

    As for the two Neandertals, one is a child, the other an old man and Neandertals were very primitive, much below the standard of most even archaic Homo sapiens forms, at least if talking about the "classic Neandertals" from Europe and surrounding areas, the intermediate forms from the Near East too, but the difference is not as huge.

    Talking about 35.000 years ago, there were many rather exotic variants around in Europe actually, but they were (thankfully) bred out later, as the primitive tendencies became drastically reduced, especially during the Meso-Neolithic-Metal Age period.

    I might remind you on Grimaldi:

    Infantilisation happened later, it was step back from the standards reached in the best time and best groups, usually among rather mobile-warlike, well fed and well organised clanspeople - which seems to produce just the best human variants or better group averages. At least thats how it was among Europids, from the respective starting point.

    Most modern blacks dont look THAT primitive.
    Because they are more progressive.

    There were progressive variants around at that time too though, especially Cro Magnon was a peak type at its time and is still competitive and much more progressive than many modern human racial forms.

    I'd say thats quite an achievement, considering the age.

    Compe Capelle and Bruenn, the other Proto-Europoid forms, where still rather primitive and more Australiform, yet more progressive again than various modern forms, including skulls like that of Pintubi.

    So we have to look at the details too. Combe Capelle is particularly open to speculative elements in the reconstruction, its quite interesting which approaches were used - still most give a picture of a still rather primitie, Australiform, but at the same time already Proto-Europoid specimen.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,468
    Thanked in
    665 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa
    There were more primitive traits among Europeans even 5000 years ago actually - less infantile ones and more highly progressive, which pushed the rest away at that time, exactly at that time, but still.

    You are right that they often try to make individuals looking more exotic and obviously it depends on the material whether the reconstruction makes more or less sense.
    I doubt that the result depends on the material. Because honestly, to reconstruct an entire face out of a jawbone is pure fantasy, always, no matter how "learned" the reconstructionist is. You dont have any muscle markers, no nose, no eyes, basically you have nothing. There is no way to make educated guesswork on "nothing".

    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa
    As for the two Neandertals, one is a child, the other an old man and Neandertals were very primitive, much below the standard of most even archaic Homo sapiens forms, at least if talking about the "classic Neandertals" from Europe and surrounding areas, the intermediate forms from the Near East too, but the difference is not as huge.
    Okay, a blue eyed, white skinned child with rather fragile facial traits doesnt become a dark skinned ape when grown up or old.

    And it is exactly what I try to say, I doubt the "commonly accepted" way in which the inner European Neanderthals are depicted. They were first unearthed in the 19th century, and the reconstructions were first done in the 19th century. Since then there has been huge steps in scientific research and a lot of the "history of humans" has been corrected and rewritten. Nothing of this was ever applied to the Neanderthal finds in Germany. They still depict the apes that were "reconstructed" in the 19th century. And the above "reconstruction" done in 2009 is even more ridiculous than those of the 19th century.

    And why would so vastly different looking specimen be considered one and the same sub branch of the human family tree? Scientists are always fast to establish something new, it doesnt make sense to me that they'd stick to the same term when the individuals are so vastly different from each other, those from here and those from French, Siberian, Middle East regions. I just say, they are not that different, what differs is the way in which they are reconstructed.



    What do you mean by "progressive", btw? Or by "rather exotic Europids" for that matter? Can you give some examples please?
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  8. #8
    Progressive Collectivist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    16
    Thanked in
    16 Posts
    I doubt that the result depends on the material. Because honestly, to reconstruct an entire face out of a jawbone is pure fantasy, always, no matter how "learned" the reconstructionist is. You dont have any muscle markers, no nose, no eyes, basically you have nothing. There is no way to make educated guesswork on "nothing".
    With material I meant fossil material in general, so whether a complete skull is present, many fragments or just a jawbone - or even worse just some teeth.

    We can say some basic things about the skull structure from the jawbones, but I wouldnt trust any complete reconstruction - unless we've found the very same variant in a more complete form and exactly the same jaw, yet even then its doubtful.

    So I can just agree with you, though I know that a lot of things can be determined from the jawbone alone - rather not enough for a complete reconstruction...

    As for the Neandertaloids, they are primtive and archaic, some reconstructions were rather "friendly", others "unfriendly" for the judging eye of the average person, yet that doesnt change what they were.

    The greatest differences can be obviously seen between classic European Neandertals and those Neandertaloids from the Near East, of which some look more progressive and almost intermediate between classic Neandertals and archaic Homo sapiens.

    Like I said in another thread longer time ago, I dont think that any lasting and significant admixture happened, but if minor admixture took place, then it happened in the Near East with the more progressive variants and rather not in Europe.

    I made a thread about progressive traits in modern mankind:
    Racially progressive tendencies in Homo sapiens


    Additional threads of importance, the three basic tendencies in modern mankind beside regional adaptation:
    Comparing archemorphic, paedomorphic and neomorphic types

    Racially progressive tendencies as active and passive adaptation:
    On "Progressiveness" - Active and Passive Adaptation


    Exotic Europids are protomorphic, Mongoliform, very reduced-infantile or somewhat Negriform-protomorphic.

    The finds of Grimaldi f.e. were rather exotic.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

Similar Threads

  1. 2, 4, 8, 16 ... How Can You Always Have MORE Ancestors As You Go Back in Time?
    By BeornWulfWer in forum Genealogy & Ancestry DNA
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Monday, December 29th, 2008, 09:18 PM
  2. The Time of the Tollund Man: Life in Early Iron Age Germania
    By Theudiskaz in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Wednesday, May 17th, 2006, 05:19 AM
  3. The Dutch Find There's a Time for Tolerance -- and a Time to Get Tough
    By Mac Seafraidh in forum Netherlands & Flanders
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Sunday, January 30th, 2005, 03:49 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •