• Oh, you're so wrong...

    From JTEM is my hero@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 4 20:02:20 2023
    #1.

    Our ancestors populate the globe and they have
    for a very long time. Very long. MILLIONS of years.

    That's how far back our ancestors go in Asia... at the
    extreme minimum: Millions of years, plural.

    #2.

    Modern man descends from an Eurasian population.
    Yes, even the African population in whatever "Out of
    Africa" dispersals are themselves descended from an
    Eurasian population.

    No, sorry, this is fact.

    Evidence for this Eurasian origins is preserved in the
    nuclear DNA, chromosome 11, where we find what
    remains of an extremely ancient mtDNA line, far older
    than any supposed "Mitochondrial Eve," and this line is
    Eurasian. The "Out of Africa Mitochondrial Eve" was a
    descendent of this Eurasian line.

    If this is not the case then the way we interpret DNA
    evidence is out the window, it's completely wrong, and
    any hope of using "Molecular dating" is gone forever.
    Sorry, but to argue that this very ancient DNA is not
    very much older than the so called "Mitochondrial Eve,"
    or that it does not originate outside of Africa, is to argue
    that everything you've always believed about DNA is
    wrong.

    #3.

    There's some very inconvenient retrovirus evidence.

    Apparently African apes carry the evidence for a retrovirus
    outbreak that occurred millions of years ago. Asian apes
    and humans do not.

    #4.

    We evolved under conditions where DHA was plentiful.

    Our brains need DHA. It doesn't matter if you can find 6
    thousand species for whom this is not true, because it
    is true for us modern humans. We need DHA and whatever
    adaptation that allows us to synthesize it from ALA just
    plain isn't that old. The "Molecular Dating" crowd says it's
    only 80k years old! So either there were no modern
    humans before 80k years ago, no big brains, or our
    ancestors were getting their DHA elsewhere.

    NOTE: Evolutionarily speaking, the reliance on DHA had to
    come before the adaptation to help synthesize it,
    ESPECIALLY when you consider we're still not great at it.

    #5

    Coastal Dispersal.

    Our ancestors did not take a train, they didn't drive a car
    and they weren't even riding in a horse drawn buggy.

    Nope.

    Our ancestors spread from Australia to southern most
    Africa, and everywhere in between, following the coast.

    Oh. Maybe I should add: This means they were exploiting
    the sea.

    There's no getting around this. None. Coastal Dispersal
    requires "Aquatic Ape." They're one and the same.

    Our ancestors were not in search of a Burger King. They
    weren't on a scavenger hunt. It wasn't a potato sack race
    either. No. They were eating. They were living there, eating.
    They were consuming resources then moving on.



    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716268653482524672

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Harshman@21:1/5 to JTEM is my hero on Thu May 4 20:27:07 2023
    On 5/4/23 8:02 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:

    #1.

    Our ancestors populate the globe and they have
    for a very long time. Very long. MILLIONS of years.

    That's how far back our ancestors go in Asia... at the
    extreme minimum: Millions of years, plural.

    #2.

    Modern man descends from an Eurasian population.
    Yes, even the African population in whatever "Out of
    Africa" dispersals are themselves descended from an
    Eurasian population.

    No, sorry, this is fact.

    Evidence for this Eurasian origins is preserved in the
    nuclear DNA, chromosome 11, where we find what
    remains of an extremely ancient mtDNA line, far older
    than any supposed "Mitochondrial Eve," and this line is
    Eurasian. The "Out of Africa Mitochondrial Eve" was a
    descendent of this Eurasian line.

    Could you cite the publication that shows that this line is Eurasian?

    If this is not the case then the way we interpret DNA
    evidence is out the window, it's completely wrong, and
    any hope of using "Molecular dating" is gone forever.
    Sorry, but to argue that this very ancient DNA is not
    very much older than the so called "Mitochondrial Eve,"
    or that it does not originate outside of Africa, is to argue
    that everything you've always believed about DNA is
    wrong.

    #3.

    There's some very inconvenient retrovirus evidence.

    Apparently African apes carry the evidence for a retrovirus
    outbreak that occurred millions of years ago. Asian apes
    and humans do not.

    #4.

    We evolved under conditions where DHA was plentiful.

    Our brains need DHA. It doesn't matter if you can find 6
    thousand species for whom this is not true, because it
    is true for us modern humans. We need DHA and whatever
    adaptation that allows us to synthesize it from ALA just
    plain isn't that old. The "Molecular Dating" crowd says it's
    only 80k years old! So either there were no modern
    humans before 80k years ago, no big brains, or our
    ancestors were getting their DHA elsewhere.

    NOTE: Evolutionarily speaking, the reliance on DHA had to
    come before the adaptation to help synthesize it,
    ESPECIALLY when you consider we're still not great at it.

    #5

    Coastal Dispersal.

    Our ancestors did not take a train, they didn't drive a car
    and they weren't even riding in a horse drawn buggy.

    Nope.

    Our ancestors spread from Australia to southern most
    Africa, and everywhere in between, following the coast.

    Oh. Maybe I should add: This means they were exploiting
    the sea.

    There's no getting around this. None. Coastal Dispersal
    requires "Aquatic Ape." They're one and the same.

    Our ancestors were not in search of a Burger King. They
    weren't on a scavenger hunt. It wasn't a potato sack race
    either. No. They were eating. They were living there, eating.
    They were consuming resources then moving on.



    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716268653482524672


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Harshman@21:1/5 to JTEM is my hero on Thu May 4 20:47:09 2023
    On 5/4/23 8:02 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:

    #1.

    Our ancestors populate the globe and they have
    for a very long time. Very long. MILLIONS of years.

    That's how far back our ancestors go in Asia... at the
    extreme minimum: Millions of years, plural.

    #2.

    Modern man descends from an Eurasian population.
    Yes, even the African population in whatever "Out of
    Africa" dispersals are themselves descended from an
    Eurasian population.

    No, sorry, this is fact.

    Evidence for this Eurasian origins is preserved in the
    nuclear DNA, chromosome 11, where we find what
    remains of an extremely ancient mtDNA line, far older
    than any supposed "Mitochondrial Eve," and this line is
    Eurasian. The "Out of Africa Mitochondrial Eve" was a
    descendent of this Eurasian line.

    If this is not the case then the way we interpret DNA
    evidence is out the window, it's completely wrong, and
    any hope of using "Molecular dating" is gone forever.
    Sorry, but to argue that this very ancient DNA is not
    very much older than the so called "Mitochondrial Eve,"
    or that it does not originate outside of Africa, is to argue
    that everything you've always believed about DNA is
    wrong.

    #3.

    There's some very inconvenient retrovirus evidence.

    Apparently African apes carry the evidence for a retrovirus
    outbreak that occurred millions of years ago. Asian apes
    and humans do not.

    #4.

    We evolved under conditions where DHA was plentiful.

    Our brains need DHA. It doesn't matter if you can find 6
    thousand species for whom this is not true, because it
    is true for us modern humans. We need DHA and whatever
    adaptation that allows us to synthesize it from ALA just
    plain isn't that old. The "Molecular Dating" crowd says it's
    only 80k years old! So either there were no modern
    humans before 80k years ago, no big brains, or our
    ancestors were getting their DHA elsewhere.

    NOTE: Evolutionarily speaking, the reliance on DHA had to
    come before the adaptation to help synthesize it,
    ESPECIALLY when you consider we're still not great at it.

    #5

    Coastal Dispersal.

    Our ancestors did not take a train, they didn't drive a car
    and they weren't even riding in a horse drawn buggy.

    Nope.

    Our ancestors spread from Australia to southern most
    Africa, and everywhere in between, following the coast.

    Oh. Maybe I should add: This means they were exploiting
    the sea.

    There's no getting around this. None. Coastal Dispersal
    requires "Aquatic Ape." They're one and the same.

    Our ancestors were not in search of a Burger King. They
    weren't on a scavenger hunt. It wasn't a potato sack race
    either. No. They were eating. They were living there, eating.
    They were consuming resources then moving on.

    Here's an interesting paper on Denisovan numts that are polymorphic in
    the current human population. Not the one you're talking about, though.

    https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-019-6392-8

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is my hero@21:1/5 to John Harshman on Fri May 5 12:40:28 2023
    John Harshman wrote:

    Here's an interesting paper on Denisovan numts that are polymorphic in
    the current human population.

    Which one is the one I was talking about, exactly?

    Oh; none of them:

    Not the one you're talking about, though.

    Exactly.

    So you're not making an argument, you're posting random URLs
    again.




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716364343858561024

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is my hero@21:1/5 to John Harshman on Fri May 5 12:36:31 2023
    John Harshman wrote:

    JTEM is my hero wrote:

    #1.

    Our ancestors populate the globe and they have
    for a very long time. Very long. MILLIONS of years.

    That's how far back our ancestors go in Asia... at the
    extreme minimum: Millions of years, plural.

    #2.

    Modern man descends from an Eurasian population.
    Yes, even the African population in whatever "Out of
    Africa" dispersals are themselves descended from an
    Eurasian population.

    No, sorry, this is fact.

    Evidence for this Eurasian origins is preserved in the
    nuclear DNA, chromosome 11, where we find what
    remains of an extremely ancient mtDNA line, far older
    than any supposed "Mitochondrial Eve," and this line is
    Eurasian. The "Out of Africa Mitochondrial Eve" was a
    descendent of this Eurasian line.

    Could you cite the publication that shows that this line is Eurasian?

    Why?

    Are you swearing right this second that you are absolutely ignorant
    as to HOW these things are determined?

    You're ignorant; is this the fact that you are testifying to right now?

    If not, you're obfuscating.




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716364343858561024

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Harshman@21:1/5 to JTEM is my hero on Fri May 5 13:54:07 2023
    On 5/5/23 12:40 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:
    John Harshman wrote:

    Here's an interesting paper on Denisovan numts that are polymorphic in
    the current human population.

    Which one is the one I was talking about, exactly?

    Oh; none of them:

    Not the one you're talking about, though.

    Exactly.

    So you're not making an argument, you're posting random URLs
    again.

    It shows that such things (numts introgressed from Denisovans or
    Neandertals) exist. Can you be sure that your favorite numt is not one
    such? If so, how?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Harshman@21:1/5 to JTEM is my hero on Fri May 5 13:52:20 2023
    On 5/5/23 12:36 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:
    John Harshman wrote:

    JTEM is my hero wrote:

    #1.

    Our ancestors populate the globe and they have
    for a very long time. Very long. MILLIONS of years.

    That's how far back our ancestors go in Asia... at the
    extreme minimum: Millions of years, plural.

    #2.

    Modern man descends from an Eurasian population.
    Yes, even the African population in whatever "Out of
    Africa" dispersals are themselves descended from an
    Eurasian population.

    No, sorry, this is fact.

    Evidence for this Eurasian origins is preserved in the
    nuclear DNA, chromosome 11, where we find what
    remains of an extremely ancient mtDNA line, far older
    than any supposed "Mitochondrial Eve," and this line is
    Eurasian. The "Out of Africa Mitochondrial Eve" was a
    descendent of this Eurasian line.

    Could you cite the publication that shows that this line is Eurasian?

    Why?

    Because I would like to look at it.

    Are you swearing right this second that you are absolutely ignorant
    as to HOW these things are determined?

    No, but I'm absolutely ignorant as to how your source, whatever it is, determined these things. Until I can see it. What is your source?

    You're ignorant; is this the fact that you are testifying to right now?

    If not, you're obfuscating.

    Do you in fact know what your source is? Have you read and understood it?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is my hero@21:1/5 to John Harshman on Fri May 5 15:56:58 2023
    John Harshman wrote:

    Because I

    REMEMBER: You're pretending to be interested in the topic of human
    origins. But if you were, instead of a troll, you'd know that "Out of Asia" favors the region which today demonstrates the highest percentage of
    Denisovan DNA. So you seem to be arguing "Out of Asia" even as you
    try to rationalize an "Out of Africa" position.




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716364343858561024

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is my hero@21:1/5 to John Harshman on Fri May 5 15:54:13 2023
    John Harshman wrote:

    It shows that such things

    So you're "Arguing" that there's a lot of Denisovan DNA in sub Saharan Africans?

    Is that it?

    Wow. That's dumb.




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716364343858561024

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Harshman@21:1/5 to JTEM is my hero on Fri May 5 16:48:26 2023
    On 5/5/23 3:54 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:
    John Harshman wrote:

    It shows that such things

    So you're "Arguing" that there's a lot of Denisovan DNA in sub Saharan Africans?

    Is that it?

    No, that isn't it.

    Wow. That's dumb.

    It certainly would be.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Harshman@21:1/5 to JTEM is my hero on Fri May 5 16:47:27 2023
    On 5/5/23 3:56 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:
    John Harshman wrote:

    Because I

    REMEMBER: You're pretending to be interested in the topic of human
    origins. But if you were, instead of a troll, you'd know that "Out of Asia" favors the region which today demonstrates the highest percentage of Denisovan DNA. So you seem to be arguing "Out of Asia" even as you
    try to rationalize an "Out of Africa" position.

    Having trouble making sense of that argument. All that would seem to
    show is that Denisovans lived in Asia, and modern humans interbred with
    them when they arrived from Africa.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)