New Denisovan mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences

[RonO]

They sequenced the fossil DNA from two teeth that were different from
Neandertal and modern human teeth, and they seem to be Denisovan. Their
mitochondrial DNA is most similar to the known Denisovan and the Nuclear
DNA (what they have of it at this time) seems to be more related to the
Denisovan genome than Neandertal or Modern Humans. The paper seems to
be free to download at this time.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/11/11/1519905112.full.pdf?sid=07d192d5-b2f5-49b9-b336-9c3942527905

One thing that messed me up in the paper was their talk about percent
difference when they throw around numbers like 11%. They aren't talking
about percent nucleotide differences between the genomic sequences they
are talking about the sequence changes that have occurred since chimps
and humans separated and how much of that change is reflected in the
differences between the genomes.

So it is a percentage of the ~1% sequence difference that has occurred
along the human lineage. If we start hearing creationist talking about
the new Denisovans being 12% different from modern humans they are going
to be full of it as usual.

Denisovans seem to be more genetically diverse than Neandertals. Some
interesting story is likely going to come from sequencing more
individuals. I'd like to see more than some teeth and a finger bone.
It sort of looks like the ancestors of Denisovans migrated out of Africa
before the ancestors of Neandertals. Their mitochondrial sequence
indicates that they have a more ancient maternal lineage.

Ron Okimoto

[John Vreeland]

My understanding of Neandertal evolution was that they evolved in situ
from H. heidelbergensis, which implies that the Denisovans did as
well. This would imply that they are sister species that appeared at
the exact same time, or about the same time they separated from early
H. sapiens. I am not understanding a separate Denisovan emigration
from Africa.

But okay! The article makes it pretty clear. Damn, you can see it in
the teeth alone. I guess Heidelberg was a sister species to the
Denisovans, and they were as far apart when Heidelberg split into
Neandertal and Sapien as we and the Neadertals were at the latter's
end.
__
Church of the FSM: "I believe _because_ it is ridiculous."

[RonO]

Within the last decade there is evidence that homo may have left Africa
at least twice before Modern humans left. The first wave is now
estimated to have occurred over 900,000 years ago. There was a second
group half a million years ago. The initial data comparing nuclear
genomic sequence indicates that Denisovans and Neandertal may have
separated around 300,000 years ago, and those two half a million years
ago from modern humans, but the Denisovans sequenced so far have a
mitochondrial type that could be a million years separated from modern
humans. You can check out the phylogenetic tree in the paper. The
three Denisovans group together and are very different from Neandertal
and modern humans.

It was thought that the Densiovans may have interbred with the earlier
Homo and acquired the mitochondrial haplotype distinct from Neandertal.
We now know that Densiovans separated in time had the same basic
mitochondrial type, so it was either something common to the area, or
the past hybridization with the more archaic Homo may be a major part of
being Denisovan. The paper notes that the Denisovan mitochonddrial type
existed in the population long enough to diversify significantly by the
time these individuals died.

Ron Okimoto

[RSNorman]

A silly question -- why would people believe that there were
specifically two separate and isolated migrations from Africa to
Europe and West Asia? No doubt we can, by genetic analysis, detect
two differen periods of migration of people of different origin, even
different species or subspecies. But wouldn't there more likely be a
stream or at least a dribble of people migrating throughout a long
period of time?

I can understand an icea age barrier across the Bering Strait which
opened for only a brief time before being inundated by rising sea
level. That would produce one evolutionarily "brief" period of
migration. But out of Africa?

[John Vreeland]

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 20:22:59 -0700, RSNorman <r_s_n...@comcast.net>

This is why I was assuming H. heidelbergensis was one species from
which Neandertals and Sapiens evolved. Dimitra Papagianni wrote as
much in "Neanderthals Rediscovered" this year. Of course, they could
not separate into species unless the gene flow trickled to something
insignificant.

[RonO]

I started a thread on it a while ago. Beats me why a couple hundred
miles of desert would prevent migration, but that seemed to be the pinch
point. Maybe the guys on the other side had God on their side and kept
all the other migrants out.;-)

Really, there were Neandertals in Israel, but Modern humans didn't leave
Africa.

When I took anthro in the mid 1970's they were claiming that there was
evidence of Homo in Europe and Asia around 500,000 to 800,000 years ago.
I think it settled down to around 500,000. But recently there have
been finds that indicate that Homo may have existed outside of Africa on
the order of 1 million years ago.

The Neandertal-Modern Human molecular comparison is consistent with the
500,000 year separation, but the mitochondria of the Denisovans is on
the order of 1 million years.

So it may be that there were remnant Homo outside of Africa when the
ancestors of the Neandertals and Denisovans left Africa. the Denisovans
may have interbred with the more archaic Homo. Some of the Denisovan
nuclear genome also shows evidence of interbreeding with a more archaic
Homo and some modern humans in Indonesia seem to have inherited some of
this archaic Homo DNA by interbreeding with Denisovans. There was a
review paper that I put up a while ago where some of the genes from
various Homo were described that are now found in modern humans. These
are the Neandertal and Denisovan alleles that were inherited by
interbreeding.

Ron Okimoto

[John Vreeland]

Current thinking seems to be that Sapiens got to asia before
Neanderthals did, but then died out there. Only certain sub-groups of
moderns carry Denisovan DNA; not Europeans, for example.

Inter-breeding notwithstanding, the greatest puzzle seems to be why
they died out in the first place. In almost every location Neandertals
seem to have disappeared long before modern got there. In one case a
Neandertal woman seems to have been born from half-siblings,
suggesting an extremely low population density with no ability to find
mates.

Perhaps this low pop density was why they interbred with humans in the
first place. I'm thinking of coywolves now.

[RonO]

The initial migration out of Africa for modern humans seems to have gone
into asia first. For some reason they did not enter Europe until 40 to
50,000 years ago. Modern humans first seem to have run along the coast
to Australia (my guess is that it was a lot warmer).

>
> Inter-breeding notwithstanding, the greatest puzzle seems to be why
> they died out in the first place. In almost every location Neandertals
> seem to have disappeared long before modern got there. In one case a
> Neandertal woman seems to have been born from half-siblings,
> suggesting an extremely low population density with no ability to find
> mates.
>
> Perhaps this low pop density was why they interbred with humans in the
> first place. I'm thinking of coywolves now.

The interbreeding seems to have been sporadic. There was one event
likely when modern humans first left Africa and we took that couple
percent out to the rest of Europe and Asia. There is evidence for other
interbreeding events, but some of them like the one documented in Europe
may not have left descendants. That Neandertal hybrid was less than 10
generations from the hybridzation event, but he still had parts of the
Neandertal genome that are not found in Europeans or Asians. So that
hybridization event population may have died out. Most of us that made
it out of Africa just have a couple percent Neandertal, but it is about
the same couple percent. Only around 20% of the Neandertal genome is
represented today. It is as if we are all descended from a single grand
child of the Neandertal hybrid. There were likely more than one
hybridization event because you expect a lot of the genome to be lost in
any hybridization event. Just think if the hybrid only had one
surviving child in a backcross to Modern humans then only half of the
Neandertal genome would be represented in the next generation. Before
someone says only 25% the thing is that the hybrid has (except possibly
for the Y chromosome) a full 1N Neandertal genome. It is 1N modern
human and 1N Neandertal (2N total). So segregation will parse up half
of 1N, but only 25% of the total.

Ron Okimoto

[Peter Nyikos]

On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 7:04:06 PM UTC-5, Ron O wrote:

> The initial migration out of Africa for modern humans seems to have gone
> into asia first. For some reason they did not enter Europe until 40 to
> 50,000 years ago. Modern humans first seem to have run along the coast
> to Australia (my guess is that it was a lot warmer).

...until they ran into deep ocean which marks Wallace's Line.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_Line

The ocean barrier between even the enlarged Australia (Sahul) and the enlarged SE Asia (Sunda) of the ice age maximum was formidable enough
that I would not want to try to negotiate in the best rowboat with an
experienced crew.

When it was a lot warmer, it was a lot worse. So it's impressive that
modern humans got to Australia even before they got to the Americas.

An ironic twist is that when the ocean rose and Tasmania got cut
off from the mainland, the aborigines who had made it to Tasmania
were stranded, having lost the seafaring skills that had served
their ancestors so well; ditto the ones on the mainland near
Tasmania. There seems never to have been any contact between
the two kinds of aborigines until the arrival of Europeans in
modern times.

Those times weren't modern enough, alas. The Tasmanians were
exterminated in what may be the most complete genocide of
which we know.

Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos/

[RonO]

Nyikos, go bug someone else. You know that you are the last person that
I would ever want to start a discussion with. Should I repost the
dreaded post?

Ron Okimoto

[John Harshman]

This seems uncalled for. He wasn't even talking to you.

[RonO]

You should check that again unless you are referring to the fact that
Nyikos mostly write to himself. Unfortunately he was responding to part
of my post. He just Snipped out most of it as usual.

Ron Okimoto

[John Harshman]

That's odd. My news reader doesn't show your post. It shows Peter's post
as a response to John Vreeland. Yet the quoted text does not appear in
that post.

[jillery]

That's odd. My newsreader shows Ron O's post. It also shows Peter's
post as a direct response to Ron O's post. It also shows the quoted
text in Peter's post to be from Ron O's post.

Ron O's post to which Peter replied is:
<n2lnpo$5mo$1...@dont-email.me>

which is among the references in the headers of your post.

Just sayin'.
--
This space is intentionally not blank.

[Peter Nyikos]

So who's making you have one?

> Should I repost the
> dreaded post?

"dreaded"?? Don't be silly. You ran away from numerous demonstrations that
you are a liar and hypocrite many times over, and tried to play
the petty tyrant with a demand that I deal with a post almost
five years old, as a precondition for you dealing with the
true charges that I leveled against you.

And what will you do if I do deal with it? Why, you'll just
continue slapping crud on and demanding that I deal with that,
and so on *ad infinitum*. You've done that often enough in the past.

I think you will be relieved to know that I plan to ignore
whatever reply you make to this post, and so you will get
in the last word a lot sooner than you usually do. Unlike
Ray Martinez, who seems to take great delight in lying and
flaunting his hypocrisy, you come across as angry and compelled
to keep lashing out until you get the last word, and then
you can rejoice in your adversary having "run away" again.

But say...doesn't it bother you to have run away from Martinez
repeatedly? Your excuse that he is insane is hardly adequate,
since you are equally insane -- or equally not insane. You
just have different styles, that's all. He's got this crazy
idea about species immutability, you've got this crazy idea
about a bait and switch whose "bait" has been nonexistent since
Dover 2005 for all you've been able to demonstrate.

Peter Nyikos

[eridanus]

> I can understand an ice age barrier across the Bering Strait which

> opened for only a brief time before being inundated by rising sea
> level. That would produce one evolutionarily "brief" period of
> migration. But out of Africa?

I have not any problems to imagine several migrations long ago, before
the more recent one of modern "homo sapiens". But Neanderthals and
Denisovans are not known to have migrated other than to Eurasia. They
probably evolved from H. heidelbergensis but this much is not yet
sure. We had not found, we probably cannot extract any genome of this
ancient scarce fossils.
The older homos found in Northern Spain are dated some 800,000 years.
They had been declared heidelbergensis by some paleoanthropologist.
It is difficult to settle these questions.
Eri

[eridanus]

I had been lately interested in the questions of climate change. But just
before this, I speculated with the idea that, in times of glacial age in
Northern Europe, the regime of rains and snow went farther south. It has been
observed that too cold winters in the north of Europe gave more rains
farther south in some cases.
I had been watching some proxy data on dendrocronology in Morocco for some
thousand years. I was presenting the temp. of GISP2 as something closer to
the temperature of northern Europe and contrasting this with the maximum
growth of trees in Morocco. It seems that NAO is playing this trick from
time to time. When it is very cold winter in north Europe the low pressures
are more abundant on the south of Europe. This includes Morocco and north Africa.

[RonO]

Here is the link and you can snip and run or just run like you usually do.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/b4eNYHIncSY/Zw0DAKbDvGEJ

Repost for the benefit of Nyikos:
It looks like Nyikos has started to run again and there is no doubt that
�tomorrow� has not come in terms of the posts that Nyikos claimed that
he would relentlessly pursue. The pattern has been the same for years,
and it has been stupid and ridiculous for years. Nyikos has some weird
insane notion that he has never lied on the internet and that he has
never lost an exchange on the internet. These stupid lies seem to drive
him to keep going back to his old stupidity where he has lied or just
been plain wrong so that he can continue some weird type of denial of
reality. Nyikos has a personal definition of running that includes not
answering a post for over two months, so he has to keep pestering me
every couple of months in order for him to continue his insane denial of
reality. This is the boob who early on (years ago) accused me of
running from a post for two whole weeks when there was no reason that I
should have even known that the post existed because he had posted it to
someone else. This is the type of projection of his own stupidity that
Nyikos has to indulge in, in order to continue his senseless denial.

I have decided that instead of having to deal with the same old, same
old over and over that I will just take advantage of the latest Nykosian
denial to put together a post that I can just repost when Nyikos starts
posting to me again. I have had to look up and link to some of the
first material that Nyikos had to run from and deny so instead of
continuing to have to look the junk up just to have Nyikos run again, I
will just start reposting this post.

Nyikos started to harass me again after months of running in this thread:
Why do the ID perps run the bait and switch scam on their own
creationist (9/10/14)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/38nQm79NC94/VLf_vGDImnIJ

He had to start lying about the past as usual, so I demonstrated that he
was lying and he decided to run, but as is also usually the case he had
to pretend to be addressing the posts so he lied to Glenn that he would
address the material that he is still running from �tomorrow,� but
tomorrow obviously has not come. It is like his ploy where he claims
that he will "continue" but runs from the material that he has deleted.

One of the posts Nyikos had run from (9/13/14):
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/38nQm79NC94/00GyMLoAhDcJ

It is obvious that Nyikos had to run from this post because when the
same evidence has been put up in other posts he has snipped it out and
run or just run. He has failed to address this evidence multiple times.

The Nyikosian lie to Glenn about tomorrow (9/16/14):
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/38nQm79NC94/vOPLiVKsp4kJ

QUOTE:
Ron O has really ramped up his campaign of deceit against me on this
thread. I won't have time for it until tomorrow, Glenn, but I will
relentlessly pursue him on this thread. One thing I should explain
now, though. Back at a time when Hemidactylus gave the appearance of
sincerity, I promised him I would only reply to Ron O very sparingly
from that point on.

But Hemidactylus has gone off the deep end, and he now is completely
on Ron O's side despite having tried to look above it all in the past.

So I consider myself released from my promise: it is quite possible
that he only held off revealing what a toady he is of Ron O because
I kept to my promise, but his irrational hatred for me caused him to cast
caution to the winds.

Peter Nyikos
END QUOTE:

Poor Hemi. Nyikos harassed him for years with his claims that his
knockdowns were still coming, and Nyikos will not even tell me what the
last knockdown was supposed to be and give me a link to the post. Now
Glenn will have to deal with the tomorrow that never came.

Instead of address the posts that Nyikos claimed that he would
relentlessly pursue Nyikos started to lie about the issues in new posts
even after I noted his claim above, so I took some time and looked up
the old evidence that Nyikos had run from years ago.

Wells on the Ohio Bait and Switch in 2002 (9/21/14)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/H2Sw6NFIi4s/c7cRQzCvA2YJ

It wasn�t a futile exercise because I learned something that I had not
known before. I found a report that Wells had written (likely for the
other ID perps at the Discovery Institute) where he admits that Meyer
and he in consultation with others had decided to run the bait and
switch on the Ohio rubes before they went to Ohio. Their presentation
on the science of intelligent design was just for show, and Wells�
comment to the Ohio board that there was enough scientific support for
ID that it could be required to be taught in the Ohio public schools was
just bogus propaganda because they had no intention of providing the ID
science for the creationist rubes to teach. The ID perps sold the rubes
the ID scam and then only gave them a stupid obfuscation switch scam
that did not even mention that ID had ever existed. I will also note
that the addition to the Discovery Institute�s education policy
qualifier, that they did not want ID required to be taught in the public
schools, was not added until after the Ohio bait and switch. I noticed
that they had added it sometime around the Dover fiasco. The copy of
their education policy that was in their 2007 Dover propaganda pamphlet
definitely had the �required� qualification.

This is a post where I link to the old posts where Nyikos was running in
denial about being wrong about the Ohio bait and switch and the
Discovery Institute�s involvement from 2011.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/H2Sw6NFIi4s/IfNy4J5a4pEJ

Dover propaganda pamphlet on why intelligent design science could still
be taught in the public schools:
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453


Trying to find new issues to misdirect the argument to, Nyikos started
making bogus claims about another old thread even after he had snipped
and ran from the obvious explanation twice.

Unnoted change in policy at the Discovery Institute. (9/1/13)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/_UKCQLy_THM/LS3yPcug9t8J

The issue was what I believed that Glenn was arguing in this thread. I
at first thought that Glenn was adding to the evidence that the
education policy had changed from what it was. The pamphlet that he put
up had the old education policy in it and contained the paragraph about
teaching the scientific theory of intelligent design that the Discovery
Institute had removed. It was the perfect example of how the education
policy had changed. When he started some weird negative campaign I
thought that he was claiming that the education policy had not changed
and he was using the Dover pamphlet to do it. I informed him that he
could not use a document that had been updated in 2009 to deny something
that the Discovery Institute had recently done, but he kept up his
nonsensical argument. Glenn now claims that he was not talking about
the education policy shift, but was only trying to claim that the ID
perps were still selling the ID is science scam. How could he use a 4
year old document to claim that? It also makes no sense to me because I
would have agreed with Glenn that the ID scam was going to continue.
There would have been no reason for us to argue if Glenn had been
clearer on what he was doing. It doesn�t matter for Nyikos because
Nyikos denies that the ID perps claim to have the ID science in that
pamphlet, so he is wrong no matter what Glenn was arguing.

Nyikos Snipping and running from this reality:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/38nQm79NC94/FawHtAIHPFoJ

Nyikos removing what he cannot deal with again in a post manipulation
that you have to compare to the above post to understand the stupidity
of what Nyikos does. This post really is a monument to the stupidity
that Nyikos indulges in.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/38nQm79NC94/TeXllwSwW0MJ

Nyikos has not addressed this post in the original policy change thread:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/_UKCQLy_THM/NLk50v_IujsJ

Nyikos claims that I did not respond to his post, but I gave him the link:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/38nQm79NC94/mR2PtcMGS_8J

It has been a vacation of sorts for me, but likely hell for other
posters in the months that Nyikos was running and just lying about his
escapades to other posters. I will just note the last instance of
harassment that Nyikos should try to deal with instead of running like
he did.

Nyikos� previous harassment thread:
By their Fruits May 2014 (5/22/14)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/ttHhTTke_zE/3eaOhuIMGm8J

Nyikos started the above thread to harass me, but it backfired on him
because of his own stupid dishonesty, and he had to delete his post that
he started the thread with from my responses in order to keep lying. He
removed his original post twice from the discussion because he could not
defend his bogus tactics. Nyikos is that sad. Nyikos really has the
toddler mentality that if he pulls the blanket over his head no one can
see him. It is a weird delusional quirk that drives him to remove the
evidence from a post so that he can continue to deny reality.

By their Fruits March 2014
The thread that spawned the harassment thread.
Giving Nyikos some advice that he should have taken:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/1MGKcHaFVtI/6fiXahJH9fMJ

My response to what Nyikos did:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/1MGKcHaFVtI/vKg4Lu0kxB0J

Nyikos ran and started the harassment thread.

I realize that Nyikos is likely going to run and just harass other
posters with his stupid denial of reality, but I can�t do anything about
Nyikos except to expose the liar when he posts to me and get him to
leave me alone for a few weeks or months. Just imagine what a hell it
would be if I followed Nyikos around TO with a pooper scooper and set
him straight whenever he started lying about me to some other posters.
I am going to save this document onto my desktop for the next time
Nyikos can�t keep himself from his stupid sadistic harassment. I plan
to just repost it and tell the loon that he can address what he has
already run from before starting something else or lying about the past
some other way.

Ron Okimoto
END Repost:

Ron Okimoto

[RonO]

My take is that you need paleontological evidence of the climate in the
region because it is so unpredictable. Inland North Africa may have
been wetter, but the coast may have been dry. The Nile delta would have
been a decent place to live, but just east of it may have been no mans
land until you hit Israel.

It is weird that such a short stretch of land could be so much of a
barrier. I would expect that the Nile delta would have been heavily
populated, but there was no expansion to the east.

Ron Okimoto

[RonO]

Eternal September has Nyikos responding to one of my posts and the post
that I responded to had part of my post with most of it deleted, as usual.

Ron Okimoto

[John Harshman]

Out of curiosity, was your post a reply to John Vreeland.

[jillery]

Objection your honor; irrelevant and immaterial.

[RonO]

Yes.

[John Harshman]

Still hasn't appeared on my server.

[RonO]

An internet snafu. It is on Google and Eternal September.

[jillery]

And Albasani.

[eridanus]

you are presenting two different questions.
the water of the Nile is the result of some monsoon rains in the mountains
of Ethiopia. And this monsoon rains come out directly from the humid
equatorial belt that moves towards the Ethiopian mountains where it rains
at more or less heavily.
The case of Morocco is quite different, for the rains come up from the
Atlantic. The jet stream can go sometimes farther south, and it rains
abundantly in the south of Europe in Autumn or Spring. But when the
jet stream is high up near the north pole, it gave abundant rains or
snows and mild winters in the north of Europe but scarce rains in the
south.

This can be attested by the numerous studies on lake cores not only on
land but also from some bored holes in the bottom of most seas of the
planet. Boreholes in the Adriatic, in the Tyrrhenian, in in the east and
the west of Mediterranean sea. Most of those boreholes I know of were dig
in the northern Hemisphere. But I am just a beginner.

About the interior of north Africa, both the Sahara and the Sahel,
there exist a number of lakes, some of them dried from long ago, that
can tell with proper dating, if there was any rain and when it was.
In general, there is a period of rain in both the Sahara end the Sahel
in which the rains were relatively abundant, that could sustain a Savanna
till the year 6.000 BP.
I had not made any notes, but I was watching a video about the history of
the Sahara. It started to become more or less a desert since 2 million years
ago. I was not interested in the details but the rains were coming and going
for periods of hundred thousand of years, sometimes getting wetter, sometimes
getting drier. It is all in many boreholes made both in the east and the
west coast or north Africa.

But coming back to my date of the year 6,000 BP there was an abrupt drop
in rains related probably to a drop in the global temperatures. But I do
not see this reflected in the Greenland cores. If there is some correlation
in the ice cores of GISP2 it presents some delay of 600 years. I see a big
drop in temp, for the year 5,400 BP
There is a drop in temperatures on the Asian monsoon for the year 4.200 BP
in which time, the monsoon rains in Ethiopia almost ceased for a couple of decades. I have a graph from the Gulf of Aden, some boreholes that tell
the surface temperature of water for the period that shows a drop of several
grades. Not sure but it could be some 5 C degrees.
This had been documented in some excavations in Egypt and even in some
scripts that were written in stones about a great famine lasting several
decades. The Nile become nearly a miserable river, quite different to their
normal case. In some boreholes in a great lake in Sudan, for this period
of the year 4170 BP the lake become totally dry for several decades. I do
not remember exactly how long lasted this drought. But this is not unique. DeMenocal was extracting marine boreholes in the Gulf of Aden, and he made a graphic extending till so far as 40,000 years ago. They were measuring the temperature of the water in the surface of the sea for this long period.
It shows perfectly a high drop of temperature 5 C degrees for several decades around the year 4200 BP that seems I had mentioned.
The drop in temperatures was too high if I want to see it in the graphic
of Greenland. I do not see any clear drop of this magnitude. I seen one more
modest drop of nearly 1 degree in the year 3,900 BP this means a delay of 300
years.
But the drop of the Gulf of Aden for the year 5,400 can be seen clearly in
inverted in the GISP2 for the same year (5,400).
In the graphic known as GISP2 I can see a large drop of 2 degrees for the
year 4,750 BP And it shows in the Gulf of Aden graphs a drop of 1.7 degrees
for the same year. I do not see any delay in that.
The Chinese graph presents a serious drop in the power of the monsoon that lasted from the year 4,000 to the year 4300 BP.
But in the GISP2 graph it shows a high for this period. One has to suppose
a direction of heat moving towards the Arctic. If Asia or the norther
Hemisphere cools, it would take some time to show in Greenland. Then a lower
temperature would migrate towards Greenland with some delay. I see a low some years later in GISP2, it is in the year 3,900 BP. This is a delay of 100
years only. Then, I do not see much consistence in the delays.
But in the Gulf of Aden, the temperatures are consistent with the Chinese
graphic and the data from the Nile.

Many parts of the puzzle are showing up and can be seen.
Then a drop in temperature in the Golf of Aden must have some significance,
for it is a secluded sea. Out of any close influences from cold polar
currents from the Pacific, that is far off.
I would like to see some graphics from the monsoon in India that also present
some delay respect of south China.

Another significant event occurred around the year 1,200 BP that was the
lowest drop in temperature since the fall of Roman Empire and the invasions.
The graphic GISP2 shows a drop of temperature of some 2 degrees in 300 years.
But in this point, around 1,200 BP it caused a severe drought in the middle
east causing famines, and even the Muslim invasions towards northern lands.

I have here a graphic of GISP2 and I had been writing the main historical
events as dated. It exist a clear contingency between the ups and downs of
temperature in Greenland (GISP2) with well known historical events as well
as some events we know from archeology. Each time the temperatures seen
in the GISP2 graphic falls, some historical event occurred in Europe.
Like the collapse of Mycenae confederation, the fall of Minoan civilization,
it was a part of Mycenae empire, the fall of the Hittite empire,
the Peoples of the Sea invasions that are not easy to explain who they
were or from where they came. It took some 400 years for the Ancient
Greece to start anew after the bronze age collapse. It comes out at
the same time the Roman Kingdom starts up.

With some abrupt drops in temperature as small as 0.7 degrees, The Roman
Republic awakes one day with a lot of young that is unable to feed properly
and are causing troubles. It is a temperatures drop of 0.7 degrees in the
graph of GISP2 but this could probably mean a higher drop in Rome.
Or it was simple a combination of both variables triggered the First
Punic war. I mean overpopulation and some failure of the harvest for two
consecutive years. These contingencies serves well to start the First
Punic war. An important part of young people is killed in those wars.

Around the year 2,000 there is a maximum of temperature some people had
been called the Roman Warming. This period of climatic prosperity had
caused a great population growth and it probably causes a number of civil
wars that ends with the Roman Republic. It is the start of the emperors,
but the temperatures keep dropping steadily for some 200 years. It is
a drop of only 2.1 degrees. Does this drop can be seen in the
graphs of temperature on the Gulf of Aden? It does show the start of a
dropping, something like a degree, then it goes up again.
The collapse of the Roman Empire can be traced to some abnormal cold temperatures, not so significant in the ice cores of Greenland, but
it was probably more significant for southern Europe and even worse for
the steppes of Europe in Russia or to the east of Black Sea.
Some droughts would had occurred in the European steppes that were pushing
people to the west, towards the frontiers of Roman Empire. A drop in
temperature of just 1.5 degrees, could mean some droughts on the European
steppes. I only need to find the data of some boreholes in some lake east
of the Black Sea, in latitudes of 40 to 50 degrees north to see my
hypothesis justified.

I have some graphs on some lake of Chinese Tibet. It shows the events of
the monsoons in Asia. It is a high resolution graph. It shows a steadily decline of temperatures since the year 6,250 BP with a serious drop in
temperature that is not visible in the GISP2 but it was visible in the
temperature graph of the Gulp of Aden and in the drop of rains in Ethiopia.
The shrinking of the waters of the Nile, etc. But it can be seen the drop
of the year 4,700 in GISP2 correlated a drop in the monsoon in Tibet a
little later, 4,600 BP. The year 4000 to 4450 BP that was catastrophic
in Asia does not show in GISP2, but some 300 years before, between 4,400
and 4.700 BP. In the year 1500 BP in the Tibet record, it shows in the
GISP2 dated as 1200 BP, a severe drop in temperature. I see some correlation
but often is delayed for Asia in respect to Greenland.
The collapse of the Bronze age, and the collapse of Mycenae and the Hittites
is dated a little farther than 3,200 BP. Has this any correlation for the
Monsoon in Asia? There is seen a little blip down for this period... but the real drama is around 2,700 BP A very important drop of the monsoon with rather an extended duration of 300 years with a little improvement in the middle.

I can see in the year 1.500 BP in the graph of the monsoon a significant drop
that do not lasted more than some 100 years with ups and downs. Where do I
can see this drop in the GISP2 graph? In the year 1,200 but is an acute drop
that lasted more than 200 years. It is like the relative cool of 1,500 Asia
would take 300 years to arrive to Greenland. So, it is not clear how it
correlates.

Then, the drop of 6,200 BP that shows a drop in the monsoon in Asia, can I
watch it in cores of Aden? Yeah. Perfect correlation. Does it shows in
Greenland? No. But from 6,900 the temperatures dropped 2C degrees till
6,700; a rather fast drop. In this case the delay of the drop was 500
years. But the peak of the year 7,000 BP correlates perfectly in GISP2
and the paper of Asia.
I can see a drop of GISP2 for the year 8,100 to 8,400 BP, this can be
seen in the Asian graph for the years 8,100 to 8,400. A perfect coincide.
Then there is something hidden in those data and it would require a more
sharp mind than mine. I am too old for this work.

Eri


It is not clear how it correlates.











But in other graphics that have not high resolution it shows
a serious drop in water, not not the sort period that was so dramatic.
The case is the Nile had been loosing its power since 1500 BP to the present
days. This is result of some cooling in of the global climate. For this rains in Ethiopia comes from some humid hot air on equatorial Africa.

[John Vreeland]

Well, _I_ appreciated your point.

I believe they also forgot how to fish, which strikes me as even
stranger, but may be related.

[John Vreeland]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:42:55 -0500, jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Eternal September was a screamcore Swedish metal band that formed
right about the time AOL opened up Usenet to everyone. There should
really be a connection there, but apparently not.

[jillery]

My impression is the connection is on a spiritual plane.

[eridanus]

I read also they had lost the knowledge to make a fire.
Eri

[John Vreeland]

I don't think that is true.
--

[eridanus]

well, I cannot swear it on the bible. I just read this argument.
Where? I am not sure, I probably read it in Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs and
Steel. He was talking about the collapse of some civilizations or even
cultures. If a group of humans find an isolated island, difficult to arrive
and difficult to fled off, an island that is too wet perhaps, and you are
under stress to make a fire, for most materials are rather humid or soggy,
eventually you can end forgetting how to make a fire after a few decades;
perhaps you would forget the damn thing in just ten years or so.

I consulted the wikipedia to see this matter and I copy the following

Some have claimed that because of the ocean divide, and unlike other populations around the world, the small population of Tasmania was not able to share any of the new technological advances being made by mainland groups such as barbed spears, bone tools of any kind, boomerangs, hooks, sewing, and the ability to start a fire thus making Aboriginal Tasmanians the simplest people on Earth (along with the Andamanese people).
It is claimed that they only possessed lit fires with the men entrusted in carrying embers from camp to camp for cooking and which could also be used to clear land and herd animals to aid in hunting practices. However, other scholars dispute that the Aboriginal Tasmanians did not have fire; and, indeed, a document from 1887 clearly describes fire-lighting techniques used among Tasmanians. Another school of thought holds that because food was so abundant compared to mainland Australia the Aboriginal people had no need for a better technology, pointing out that they did in fact originally possess bone tools which dropped out of use as the effort to make them began to exceed the benefit they provided.

Then, some people say yes, some people say no. I am not sure.

[eridanus]

you can read this.
a blog about different aspects of the problem looking at other cultures as well

<http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/08/08/why-did-the-tasmanians-stop-ea/>

[eridanus]

another link
the theory of the "lord of the flies" applied to the Tasmanian case

<http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?52407-Sociology-Tasmanian-Aborigines-Lord-of-the-Flies-Theory>

[John Vreeland]

On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 03:29:29 -0800 (PST), eridanus

Excellent links; thank you.

As a Total War player I was amused to see that posted there.