Re: Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native American Founders

On Oct 26, 9:58 am, Melodious Thunk <thunk.melodi...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Oct 26, 3:53 am, Tom McDonald <kilt...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Oct 26, 4:44 am, Doug Weller
<dwel...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

" the initial founders of the Americas emerged from a
single source ancestral population that evolved in
isolation, likely in Beringia....the isolation in Beringia
might have lasted up to 15,000 years. Following this isolation, the initial founders of the Americas began
rapidly populating the New World from North to South
America."http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1952074


Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native American
Founders

PLoS ONE. 2007; 2(9): e829. Erika Tamm,1 Toomas
Kivisild,1,2 Maere Reidla,1 Mait Metspalu,1 David Glenn
Smith,3 Connie J. Mulligan,4 Claudio M. Bravi,5 Olga
Rickards,6 Cristina Martinez-Labarga,6 Elsa K.
Khusnutdinova,7 Sardana A. Fedorova,1,8 Maria V.
Golubenko,1,9 Vadim A. Stepanov,9 Marina A. Gubina,1,10
Sergey I. Zhadanov,1,10,11 Ludmila P. Ossipova,10 Larisa Damba,1,10 Mikhail I. Voevoda,10 Jose E. Dipierri,12
Richard Villems,1 and Ripan S. Malhi13*

Now this is interesting. And it makes quite a bit of sense,
when I think about it.

The data doesn't account for the several outlier
archaeological sites older than 15,000 years ago, scattered
throughout the americas. I suppose those might be viewed as
anomalies within a broader diaspora that took place later, as
implied by the mtDNA research.

First, I am not yet convinced about the dating of the purported
outliers. While I haven't paid close attention lately, what I
have read about dating of, say, Meadowcroft or Monte Verde, does
not fill me with confidence.

Second, part of what I find interesting in the mtDNA results is
that they supply more detail, more nuance and complexity to the
'peopling of the Americas' question. If there turn out to be
well-dated 'outliers' south of Beringia earlier than ca. 15,000
ybp, then ISTM that this would add even more detail, nuance and
complexity to the picture.

IOW, more fun, more interest and more questions to be answered!

How do archaeologists view these mitochondrial & y-chromosome
DNA studies? I guess I'm asking, are they held on a par with
oral traditions & mythology, able to give hints but not
considered as solid evidence?

No, the various DNA studies are hard evidence. They are data;
and, while there may be questions about methodology and
applicability, they a great deal more reliable than oral
tradition and mythology.

In fact, often DNA evidence can test tradition and myth; and, in
archaeology, the science either confirms or disconfirms elements
of myth and tradition, not the other way around.


.

Relevant Pages