Re: more pointless bickering about trivia

On Nov 1, 6:57 pm, Daryl Krupa <icycal...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 31, 5:38 am, Jack Linthicum <jacklinthi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



On Oct 31, 6:44 am, Daryl Krupa <icycal...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:12 am, Jack Linthicum <jacklinthi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

I believe the illustration is labeled a "schematic", the green color
coding indicating the path 4 is later than 10,000 years ago

The object of the study was to explain and/or predict Path 3,
which was supposedly the path followed by the the earliest
Beringian emigrants to the Americas beyond the ice that had
kept them in Beringia for 15,000 years.
The map was intended to illustrate the study.
The maps shows a Path 3 that was impossible to follow
15,000 years ago, without airborne resupply support flights.
The map also fails to show the ice that determined the timing of the
following of that supposed path.
Those are the worst faults of the map, but there are more.

The map is not labelled as a "schematic",
it is labelled as a map, despite what you might
believe about the "map" that you recommended to us
(_your_ words in quotaton marks).
The time of "path 4" is after the the time of
the subject of the study which the map
(_not_"schematic") was supposed to illustrate, and
it was known to have been used in modern times, so
yes, it was "later than 10,000 years ago" but then
so was the Internet, so what's that got to do with
anything interesting?
Jack, if you're going to recommend something
just because it has pretty colours, then
defend it from criticism of its shoddy construction
with a specious reference to its pretty colours, then
you belong on the Home Shopping Channel,
not in sci.archaeology.

The maps pretty and colourful, but it's also
stupid, twisted, and useless,
just like several youngish tabloid jourmalism subjects
within the last 10,000 years.

Please, resist the glamour of the pretty images.
It will put you into disrepute.

Disappointed by the shortage of intellectual content,
Daryl Krupa

"Map" in the popular
versionhttp://www.archaeologynews.org/story.asp?ID=237190&Title=New%20Ideas%...

"Figure 2 Schematic illustration of maternal geneflow in and out of
Beringia." in the scholarly version.http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1952074

If you prefer the popular text, so be it, I would have expected the
scholarly text to be of more interest to an archaeological forum.
Of course, if even light exposure to popular versions of
a story about archaeology is damaging to your sensitive eyes
I would recommend not reading any.

A schematic is not a map, it was designed to show
their ideas not some precision measurement of
some precise event.
What someone else does to
that schematic is worth a comment but not a denunciation of the entire
theory.

The arrows don't seem to be anything more than indications of the
direction the authors seem to believe the DNA flowed.

I hadn't seen the schematic in the original so
I went with the Science Daily nomenclature that it was
a map. My error.


So I am at fault because you read the Science Daily text?


No.
Not an error.
It is a map.
You
did not point us to a "schematic",
it is not labelled as a "schematic", and
its description as a "schematic illustration"
is just a way of describing a cartographic illustration, i.e.
a map.
So,
your
assertion that "A schematic is not a map", is
another non-sequitur.

Your implication that
I preferred the "Science Daily" version is also in error, because
you
are the one who drew our attention to it, and it was
you
who recommended the "nice color map".

This bit of advice is beside the point:
"... if even light exposure to popular versions of
a story about archaeology
is damaging to your sensitive eyes
I would recommend not reading any."
I was criticising the object that
you
pointed to, and not the text, but rather
the graphic element that
you
recommended to us, and in any case,
the story is not about archaeology.

Sad, really a 20th century answer. Seven years too late and stuck in a
bad loop.

"Our phylogeographic analysis of a new mitochondrial genome dataset
allows us to draw several conclusions. First, before spreading across
the Americas, the ancestral population paused in Beringia long enough
for specific mutations to accumulate that separate the New World
founder lineages from their Asian sister-clades (Figure 2) [4],[24],
[28]-[29]. Second, founding haplotypes are uniformly distributed
across North and South America instead of exhibiting a nested
structure from north to south (Figure 1). Thus, after the Beringian
standstill, the initial North to South migration was likely a swift
pioneering process, not a gradual diffusion. This scenario matches the
pattern of distribution of the first archaeological sites in Northeast
Asia and the Americas [22],[23]. Third, the largely autochthonous
pattern of variation seen in Native American mtDNAs suggests that the
swift migration was followed by long-term isolation of local
populations accompanied with the development of regional haplotypes
within continental founder haplogroups [1].
Figure 2 Figure 2
Schematic illustration of maternal geneflow in and out of Beringia.
10.1371/journal.pone.0000829.g002

In addition to illuminating the peopling process during the pioneering
phase, the new dataset allows identification of more-recent genetic
exchanges around and across Beringia (Figure 2). Specifically,
haplogroup D2 consists of two sister clades, one found only in Siberia
(D2b) and the other found in northernmost Eskimos, Chukchi, Aleut, and
Athapaskans (D2a). While sub-haplogroup D2a is shared between ethno-
historically close related Beringian Aleuts and Eskimos, (Figure S1)
its sister clade D2b is spread among populations from distantly
related linguistic groups (Tungusic, Turkic, Mongolic) (Table S2). A
close relationship of matrilineal ancestry between individuals from
different linguistic groups may be due to an overlap of geographic
range of their ancestors approximately at the time of the Pleistocene-
Holocene boundary. Alternatively, some populations may have received
the D2b variant through more recent gene flow. It is also worthwhile
to note the absence of D2 in all other Native American populations,
suggesting that D2 diversified in Beringia after the initial migration
into the Americas had occurred. Haplogroup D3 may have also reached
America through more recent genetic exchange. It is spread in
Nganasans, Mansi, Evenks, Ulchi, Tuvas, Chukchi and Siberian Eskimos
[26],[30] and recently reported in Greenland and Canadian Inuit
populations [31], but absent in other Native Americans. Additional
investigatios of these populations may provide insight into the cause
of the phylogenetic connections."

[Footnotes, tables and the schematic at the cite]

I would suggest that you are stuck in some past year where everything
is Clovis and after, where a mythical corridor opens up in a glacier
system, where genetics plays no part in archaeology and the only REAL
archaeology is digging and sorting and keeping materials so long that
your paper, when and if it comes out, has been overtaken by multiple
events.



You
might be correct in this assertion (though
I think not),
"A schematic is not a map", but
I see that it is not labelled as simply a "schematic"
but rather as a "schematic illustration", which
a fairly-synonymous with "map",
methinks.

Your
contention that
"it was designed to show their ideas not
some precision measurement of
some precise event."
is perhaps technically correct, because
the map was designed to show
several measurements of
several events.

It isn't a map, it's a schematic, and is so labeled.

Your
observation that "The arrows don't seem to be
anything more than indications of
the direction the authors seem to believe the DNA flowed."
supports my point, that certain intrinsically-relevant features
were omitted, which omissions allowed the map design to
become misleading, vague, and erroneous.


What intrinsically-relevant features are missing? It isn't a map, you
know it's a schematic.


You
should choose more-carefully which sources
you recommend to us. The "Science Daily" article is flawed,
not just because it includes a bad [schematic/cartographic]
illustration commonly referred to as "a map".

- Daryl Krupa

P.S.:
You
still haven't explained how
the dating and directions and location of Path 4
are related to my cartographic criticisms of Path 3
and the omission of certain important physical features.

What is confusing about "back migration of A2a"? It is explained in
the text and the schematic is only an illustration.

Work harder at understanding other people's work, it may come up in a
casual conversation about ice hockey. Oh, and see if you can get some
contacts with the people in the field in your area, it will help you
understand where things are now.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Bibliography for path 3
    ... On Oct 31, 7:38 am, Jack Linthicum ... coding indicating the path 4 is later than 10,000 years ago ... kept them in Beringia for 15,000 years. ... The map was intended to illustrate the study. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Beringian non-glacial non-refugium
    ... the Americas; the other, that Native American ancestors were isolated ... A "new set of ideas" from Ripan Mahli ... that map has people entering the Americas by ... What kind of graphic illustrator makes up a map ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: You People are Beginning to Bore Me...
    ... the first map depicting North American. ... Piri Reis' inscription in the corner of the map says ... It is a map of the world, not just the Americas. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: Southern American accent?
    ... tony cooper wrote ... I really have no idea how you can look at it and start counting Americas on it, and stop when you get to two. ... Show me a map of land from Mexico to Tierra del Fuego, ... Mike Lyle in his usual manner, but is written in all earnestness by ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Beringian non-glacial non-refugium
    ... Map showing migration of humans from Asia to the Americas. ... A "new set of ideas" from Ripan Mahli ...
    (sci.archaeology)