Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 46

Thread: Cheddar Man near totally debunked (the "blue eyed black skinned" ancient Briton)

  1. #21
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    G-M406
    mtDNA (M)
    M7c1c3

    Quote Originally Posted by Philjames View Post
    You're leaving out the fact that the Minoan women are depicted as pale, bone white.



    Minoans and ancient Greeks aren't the same thing ... There are depictions of blonde and blue eyed ancient Greeks, but not blonde blue-eyed Minoans. According to their DNA a minority of Minoans had blue eyes but their hair seems to have been uniformly dark.
    Even the Northern sample with obvious Steppe genetics had dark skin.
    Blue eye genetics were always there but very weak and recessive.
    I think light blue eye wasn’t that common.
    More likely grey and hazel/green eyes was common among the light eye pigmentations.
    Ancestors of modern Greeks are Minoan-like people. It is very obvious there is continuation of Minoan-like genetics in every modern Greek. Even from the deep North.
    The vast majority of all ancient Greeks were depicted with dark hair and eyes. It also depends on era and region. They were more Islanders/Cypriot-like by phenotypes imo.
    In the Iron Age you might see more lighter hair appear. But just as today it would had been rare to find platinum blonde hair as we think of blonde today: ‘Blonde’ was likely more light brown.

    Bronze Age Greeks were much darker and even shorter than modern Greeks.
    They weren’t Anglo-Saxon-like in the Bronze Age.
    We still see continuation in modern Greeks mostly.

    Minoan women were depicted ghostly white skinned with raven black hair.
    I think this was beauty ideal and maybe they did wear such make up to look ghostly white.
    Such as Japanese geishas…
    You still see these practices in the Balkans in remote mountain area. Ancient ppl had different practices.
    Just think about how Phoenicians thought that purple hair dye was extremely fashionable.

    Such wedding traditions in the remote mountains. Maybe this is a extremely old tradition.
    https://youtu.be/36iwoPWPCfE

    Here such a ghostly white Mycenaean female face with raven black hair and dark eyes from the Bronze Age. Real BA Greek face. She had a special make up.
    What does this look to you?

    Last edited by Ylang-Ylang; 10-18-2021 at 03:00 AM.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ylang-Ylang For This Useful Post:

     Brandon S. Pilcher (10-18-2021),  Luso (10-19-2021),  siberoberingian (10-18-2021)

  3. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    989
    Sex
    Omitted
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2a1

    Since we on the topic of Cheddar Man - has anyone been able to access his full mtDNA results? They reported U5b1 but did not provide a list of mutations. It would be useful to see what additional mutations were found in the full mtDNA sequence.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GailT For This Useful Post:

     Megalophias (10-18-2021),  Shuzam87 (10-18-2021)

  5. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,575
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by Ariel90 View Post
    It's fascinating that evolution didn't gave them pale skin. It's like Darwin failed and left them vitamin D deficient. Or maybe pale skin is not an evolutionary trait but a random mutation? Or maybe social selection? Why EEF had lighter skin? Was diet a factor? Lot of questions...
    Vitamin D can easily be found in HG diet, but less so in farmers'diet (as peas, wheat, barley...). If they got it mainly from exposure to sun, it is not as easy in Central and Northern Europe than in Southern Europe or Anatolia.

    Given that the lack of vitamin D can have consequences on fecondity, this is not a surprise to see that something which is helping to get more vitamin D can be selected in Farmers. A fairer skin makes it easier to synthetize vitamin D, so was selected.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Ariel90 (10-18-2021),  Hando (10-19-2021),  jstephan (10-19-2021),  Ylang-Ylang (10-19-2021)

  7. #24
    The problem I have with the farming hypothesis is that it's well, a hypothesis and people are touting it as fact. The media really gives people a bad impression as well in the way it reports things scientifically as though a popular hypothesis making the rounds at present is a new break through scientific discovery.

    The farming hypothesis is interesting though aggravated by diet control freaks who tend to want to tantalise people saying that they know better than the person themselves what's better for you. This isn't helped by marketing from the food industry. I remember all the bottled water company adverts saying you have to drink five glasses a day and people just believing it or changing because of it. The whole thing is garbage. Humans have survived fine up to now relying on their sense of thirst to maintain proper hydration. We're talking about people really often over vested in that to try to promote their belief in a natural diet or organic diet. It's basically like people who are fanboys or Rebok or Nike, etc. It's just a kind of brand loyalty and sense of superiority in ones tastes that makes they especially attracted to that theory.

    It is true that farming may have such effects, we know of it with scurvy and there are other potential cases in history including it being speculated as being linked to the collapse of civilisation in the Americans. There's also a suspected case of farming destroying the top soil with salt concentrations from the water they irrigated the fields with that then evaporated.

    The problem is, there's a lot of good hypotheses around for lighter skin and they're not mutually exclusive either. A point anyone can raise is that the lower UV levels in various areas means there's simply nothing stopping it getting lighter. When you realise that it's an oh duh moment. Evolution never makes anything from happening. It stops things from happening. You get an albino in the tropics in historic conditions, chances are they get cancer and die, end of albino. In any population you'll have a constant given frequency of out of range events that the environment or evolution culls.

    If the two margins of tolerance widen or shift then the population will sort of vibrate into it. It's a bit more complex than that with lock in effect possible over a very long time particularly if stuck in a single range (particularly extreme long term selection for invariance resulting in extremely laggy adaptation when variance is needed) but basically, just the way DNA works, trying to go in all directions but the environment preventing it means plop a human in another environment without the barrier and they'll inevitably shift to fill the range.

    Code:
      |♡♡|  ♥
     ♥|♡♡|
      |♡ |
      |♡♡|♥
      |♡ |
      |♡ |
      |♡/
      |♡|
      |♡|
     ♥|♡|
      |♡|
    ♥ |♡|
      |♡|  ♥
      |♡|♥
      |♡|
    A bit like that. Or think of it like a ball with constant momentum bouncing of the walls in a zigzag. Imagine an infinitely long bowling ally. What are the chances of bowling it dead straight so it will never bounce of one of the walls. The angle of attack in evolutionary terms is the frequency of mutation. Really it's a more complex geometry, usually a wave trying to stay mostly inside the two lines. The two lines shift though. It's a complex kind of RNG like system and heuristic search system, bit like Monty Carlo.

    If you look at examples around the world, there's also plenty of signs of depigmentation where it likely falls out of scope with farming. It's used to explain hyper depigmentation in Europe but it's not strictly necessary nor have I seen any really good evidence for it. There are other alternatives and you can also have vitamin deficiency without farming.

    The level of saturation of the SLC genes associated with hyper white people in the European peninsula is so extreme that I'm actually not entirely sure if farming would account for it and that would also surely include all kinds of other major deficiencies other than just vitamin D.

    If you look at the prevalence of the novel (more model) rs1426654 allele radiating out from Europe the intensity is so extreme that I find it somewhat implausible that farming and vitamin D deficiency was that wide spread and consistent. I say that explanation is not necessary but I guess it depends how you look at it, it's also massively insufficient. On that level probably just culture would evolve faster. Cultures with a vitamin D diet would be healthier and stronger, being selected for.

    If someone is going to propose farming, they would also need to offer some explanations as it's enormous and seemingly uninterrupted consistency. The result you get is like if absolutely everyone or a massive proportion were farming in very much the same way widespread without much variation or secondary sources and all having serious vitamin D deficiency after probably already being somewhat depigmented and virtually no holdouts.

    The elimination of rs1426654 appears to be so ruthless and extreme, a hyper culling that I suspect something else did it or it had to be a combination of factors. A particular issue is that it's hard for us to account for things such as a virus that wipes out people with a specific gene or something like that. The extinction of rs1426654 in Europe is as puzzling really as that of Homo Erectus or the Neanderthals. Evolution works through extinction or genocide and the elimination of that allele if real is really extensive.

    Unless I'm wrong about its frequencies. If it's really going from <1% to >99% over a massive region merely starting from 7000 years ago (the Y chromosome bottleneck oddly enough) then you'd probably want a better explanation than just vitamin D deficiency due to farming.

    I would start to consider genes it's close to or on the same chromosome including immunity related. Also how the related ones showing a similar pattern are selected for and their locations or surroundings.

    I think disease is under appreciated. Here's a hypothesis. Cow herders get immunity to small pox from cowpox and their dairy activities, done such that most people are involved. That alone you would see one group intensely across Europe though surely not to this extreme of exterminating a single allele. Might not be the case but I don't think we take disease into account enough.
    Last edited by John Baker; 10-18-2021 at 03:49 PM.

  8. #25
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,575
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by John Baker View Post
    Unless I'm wrong about its frequencies. If it's really going from <1% to >99% over a massive region merely starting from 7000 years ago (the Y chromosome bottleneck oddly enough) then you'd probably want a better explanation than just vitamin D deficiency due to farming.
    I tried to follow you, but it is difficult. More clarity would be welcome.

    In any case, WHG were dark skinned (or brown, doesn't matter), and Steppe Eneolithic weren't much lighter.

    It does seem that fair skin in Europe was selected with farmers, and became dominant relatively recently.

    As another example of recent expansion of a specific allele, you should look to lactose tolerance.

    Now, social selection could have played a role.

  9. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Hando (10-19-2021),  JMcB (10-18-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (10-18-2021),  peloponnesian (10-19-2021),  Ruderico (10-18-2021),  siberoberingian (10-18-2021),  thejkhan (10-18-2021)

  10. #26
    What I'm saying is this:

    rs1426654 G seems to be basal. Presumably 50000 years ago, we expect something like ~99.99% of people to have it all over the world when splitting out from Africa. Supposedly, it was present in Europe at a fair frequency 10000 years ago.

    In Europe today it's virtually non-existent. Everyone has T and the cases of G that there are likely consist of a large proportion of imported versions.

    Basically, you could say no one in Europe with that one tiny single piece of DNA survived. That would be close to true. Potentially misleading but only by so much.

    It's not strictly speaking impossible but mathematically and based on the details it's quite tight, especially given how widespread it is as well. It would have had to confer a decent advantage.

    > became dominant

    That's an understatement, it eliminated the competition. Spread by farmers is different. We're not talking about its spread as much as the complete replacement of its counterpart.
    Last edited by John Baker; 10-18-2021 at 10:14 PM.

  11. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,575
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    And? There is a 90% replacement in Britain 4500 years ago, followed by a 50% replacement 2900 years ago and a 40% replacement 1500 years ago, on autosomal level. What did you expect?
    Last edited by ffoucart; 10-19-2021 at 05:22 AM.

  12. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Hando (10-19-2021),  MethCat (10-19-2021),  newbiepunjabi (10-18-2021),  Varun R (10-19-2021),  whynot (11-03-2021),  Ylang-Ylang (10-19-2021),  Yupi (10-19-2021)

  13. #28
    That 90% replacement figure is spurious, we don't even have enough fossils in the UK of that age from what I understand to really say much for certain. That's also not referring to a single allele that's ubiquitous over a massive region.

    One of the reasons for that number being spurious is because it's probably derived from haplotypes which can be misleading. Often males are far more impacted than females by imbalances and also tend to have a much higher selection rate by default. When you look at overall DNA, you get a very different picture. I've seen some cases where Y shows high replacement, similar to 90% but the rest shows it's more like 25% to a third.

    You have still a good proportion of minority Y haplotypes and mt-DNA in Europe. The SLC SNP is on a diploid strand so would have potentially even more redundancy. We're also not talking about just one island either.

    Things like Cheddar man really raise more questions than answers. We still don't know what he looks like and how thoroughly those alleles have been wiped out (~99.999% replacement) raises more questions.
    Last edited by John Baker; 10-19-2021 at 03:45 AM.

  14. #29
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,575
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by John Baker View Post
    That 90% replacement figure is spurious, we don't even have enough fossils in the UK of that age from what I understand to really say much for certain. That's also not referring to a single allele that's ubiquitous over a massive region.

    One of the reasons for that number being spurious is because it's probably derived from haplotypes which can be misleading. Often males are far more impacted than females by imbalances and also tend to have a much higher selection rate by default. When you look at overall DNA, you get a very different picture. I've seen some cases where Y shows high replacement, similar to 90% but the rest shows it's more like 25% to a third.

    You have still a good proportion of minority Y haplotypes and mt-DNA in Europe. The SLC SNP is on a diploid strand so would have potentially even more redundancy. We're also not talking about just one island either.

    Things like Cheddar man really raise more questions than answers. We still don't know what he looks like and how thoroughly those alleles have been wiped out (~99.999% replacement) raises more questions.
    Well, you don’t have understood or read the papers. The 90% replacement is based on ancient samples with analysis of autosomal DNA (hundreds of thousands SNPs). Not of Y or Mt haplogroups (which were also analyzed).

    The picture for Y haplogroup is a bit different: we have a 90/100% replacement by Bell Beakers R1b haplogroups, which could be seen also today, as these haplogroups are the most frequent in Western Europe (60% overall in Spain, France, England,...).
    Last edited by ffoucart; 10-19-2021 at 08:43 AM.

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Hando (10-19-2021),  MethCat (10-19-2021),  Ylang-Ylang (10-19-2021)

  16. #30
    Registered Users
    Posts
    74
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    G-M406
    mtDNA (M)
    M7c1c3

    Quote Originally Posted by Philjames View Post
    Brown skin or as historically described 'copper' or 'dark red' skin, which is quite different both in tone and colour to very dark skinned populations like sub-Saharan Africans and some South Asians, and to some of the Cheddar Man/WHG reconstructions. The claim was that Cheddar Man had skin colour like sub-Saharan Africans, whereas skin colour similar to Native Americans seems much more likely given the DNA and also the more recent common ancestry between Europeans and Native Americans.
    I am not sure what connects the Cheddar man with Native Americans to you.
    Native Americans do not carry WHG genes, not even similar haplogroups, Cheddar man has nothing to do with Native Americans and does not carry Native American ANE and Native American Eastern Eurasian genetics.
    We can not speak of recent admix between Native Americans and English people when we speak of a 8k years old Cheddar man from Britain.
    Cheddar man doesn’t carry Native American depigmentation mutations. Full Native Americans do not carry the Cheddar man blue eye genes.
    We should not get emotional when it comes to predictions of extremely ancient people.
    We do not know how dark Cheddar man really was, but I know he was definitely darker than Native Americans with intermediate to dark skin prediction which is similar to the pigmentation of many East Asian up to South East Asian groups.
    And we can not make ‘wishful’ predictions. I see lots of defense in a sense to defend our modern tribes and modern ancestors…
    The hirisplex tool shows he lacked most of the depigmentation mutations of modern humans worldwide and that’s it.
    Maybe he was dark like the Congolese, maybe dark like the Khoisan. We’ll never be sure as that Harvard study explains too.

    I have to say the Chinese have dark to black skinned ancestors too.
    The people of China were dark to black skinned prior to the existence of the farming culture.

    The oldest Siberian human Ust Ishim man was dark to black skinned.

    So why does skin color matter?
    It is just about skin, an organ to protect all the vital organs in a human body.
    I am interested in how this vital organ evolved and which climate adaptions and lifestyles/diet and change of lifestyles/diet may have had an influence on human skin genetics.
    Last edited by Ylang-Ylang; 10-19-2021 at 11:04 AM.

  17. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ylang-Ylang For This Useful Post:

     John Baker (10-19-2021),  Lenny Nero (10-20-2021),  peloponnesian (10-19-2021),  whynot (11-03-2021)

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Blue-eyed, dark-skinned, earliest modern Briton.
    By JohnHowellsTyrfro in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 717
    Last Post: 02-19-2018, 10:08 PM
  2. "No one could see the color blue until modern times"
    By MikeWhalen in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-30-2017, 08:14 PM
  3. "Black Finns" in MDLP K16
    By Tomenable in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-04-2017, 09:44 PM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 09:51 PM
  5. "Pierce Brosnan gene" - dark hair, blue eyes and freckles
    By avalon in forum Anatomy and Physiology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 01-02-2016, 04:32 AM

Posting Permissions

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