Re: OT: Malhi, Eshleman, haplogroup A, language, time, and direction.....

From: G Horvat (g-horvat_at_shaw.ca)
Date: 03/28/05 

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:18:19 GMT

On 27 Mar 2005 08:54:07 -0800, "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>G Horvat wrote:
[...]
>First, thank you for the data, now all I have to do is figure out where
>Poverty Point and Cahokia are in relation to your data (and see if
>haplogroup A is involved to any great extent).

You should be able to answer your own question now. ("Would these
[harborers of haplogroup A sequences] be considered 'coastal' people
or 'inland' people?")

[...]
>> How would you describe the distribution of microblades in the
>> Americas?

>One can look at it two ways. In total volume, the number of
>microblades produced in the Americas probably out numbers the total
>number made in the Old World by a million to one. If one takes the
>total number of individual sites where microblades have been found, or
>separate groups of people, bands, tribes etc., who used microblades,
>then just the opposite pattern is true, the Old World wins hands down.

If this is true, then it requires an explanation. If more Old World
populations made microblades than New World, why is the volume greater
in the Americas?

When I inquire about distributions, I'm usually referring to
geographic ones. How widespread are they (in frequencies worth
mentioning)?

Another question comes to mind. Since, to my knowledge, most
archaeologists think microblade technology was dropped in NW Canada,
how do they explain the presence of microblades elsewhere in the New
World?

Gisele

Relevant Pages