Ust’-Ishim man created the Denisova bracelet
after having genetically met the Denisovans. May be this particular individual was still archaic. Klevius hasn't seen the full paper yet.
By 'archaic' Klevius of course means modern like sapiens that roamed Eurasia before they got the better packed brain.
Nature 514, 445–449 (23 October 2014): The 45,000 year old Ust’-Ishim genome
shares more alleles with non-Africans than with sub-Saharan Africans.
When an ~8,000-year-old genome from western Europe (La Braña)9 or a
24,000-year-old genome from Siberia (Mal’ta 1)10 were analysed, there is
no evidence that the Ust’-Ishim genome shares more derived alleles with
present-day East Asians than with these prehistoric individuals (|Z|
< 2). This suggests that the population to which the Ust’-Ishim
individual belonged diverged from the ancestors of present-day West
Eurasian and East Eurasian populations before—or simultaneously
with—their divergence from each other. The finding that the Ust’-Ishim
individual is equally closely related to present-day Asians and to
8,000- to 24,000-year-old individuals from western Eurasia, but not to
present-day Europeans, is compatible with the hypothesis that
present-day Europeans derive some of their ancestry from a population
that did not participate in the initial dispersals of modern humans into
Europe and Asia.
Peter Klevius comment: This is perfectly in line with a dispersal
of the truly modern intelligent human out of Siberia and hybridizing
with pre-existing (but dumb) archaic sapiens closer to Africa (on the
map below the gray "bastard belt" as Klevius uses to put it). The other
extreme (Australia, Papua N-G, Melanesia etc) was the starting point for
Denisovan - not the end point as most erroneously still seem to think.
What Klevius wrote
Klevius Out-of-Siberia theory again gets strong support - while news media misinform and confuse
Yes, there was no big difference in intelligence between Homo sapiens
and Homo neanderthalensis - until something big happened in cold
Siberia/Altai
Here's a blatantly false and misleading "news" story
And here's a more accurate one
Klevius explanation: The keyword is 'early' in 'early modern
humans'. This 'early' was missing from Guardian's reporting which then
gives the impression that Neanderthals were equally clever as we. They
were not, and this is extremely clear from what we know so far about
their material culture. However, from the perspective of Klevius' theory
(see below) this is really the crucial point that Klevius has
challenged since he published his book
Demand for Resources - on the right to be poor
in 1992 (admittedly not a big hit) where he questioned why big brained
Homos (e.g. the 1,400cc female Jinnuishan skull) living in China more
than 260,000 bp didn't manage to leave more and better cultural traits
than they actually did.
The simple reason why the Eurasian art track goes first to the west has to do
with the more favorable climatological and faunal situation on this part
of the Eurasian steppe. Sadly, it then encountered what is now called
Europe and therefore became "racist" in the minds of biased
"scientists". But luckily, at least it didn't start in Europe if we have
to believe Klevius.
The Neanderthal inhabitants of El Sidrón (Spain) 49,000 years ago
possessed a modern FOXP2 gene compared to the one in chimpanzee. It is
then likely that Floresiensis/Denisovan got the same gene before their
jungle dwarfing somewhere between SE Asian mainland and Australia. FOXP2
differs from that of the chimpanzee in two positions (911 and 977 of
exon 7). Morphologically it should be noted that the shape of the human
trapezoid bone indicates a derived feature from some 7-800,000 years ago
and is a synapomorphy of H. sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis. The Homo
floresiensis type specimen (LB1) includes a trapezoid, scaphoid, and
capitate which display none of the derived features of H. sapiens and H.
neanderthalensis but are morphologically identical to all African apes
and Australopithecus afarensis. A possible explanation to both these
facts is that a Pan/Homo hybrid in Africa got the modern FOXP2 more than
800,000 bp, and subsequently transferred it to the predecessor of
Neanderthal and Denisovan. However, this hypothetical hybrid lacked the
morphological features above, so in SE Asia it was more like an ape than
a Homo except for that it possessed the crucial FOXP2 gene.
According to Peter Klevius theory - which is the only one yet that fits
all physical known facts - a small but better structured Floresiensis
like brain developed in a tropical climate as a result of so called
jungle dwarfing and later on spread (while also growing in size) to the
cold north where it eventually encountered and mixed with the biggest
(normal) Homo skulls ever found. The Denisova cave and its surroundings
in Siberia/Altai has not only proven to be the only known region
inhabited by all known varieties of human lineages, but also the very
place where the oldest truly sophisticated artifact made by truly modern
humans has been found, the >40,000 bp so called Denisova bracelet.
From the media: The Neanderthals are believed to have lived
between roughly 350,000 and 40,000 years ago, their populations
spreading from Portugal in the west to the Altai mountains in central
Asia in the east. They vanished from the fossil record when modern
humans arrived in Europe.
The reasons for the demise of the Neanderthals have long been debated in
the scientific community, but many explanations assume that modern
humans had a cognitive edge that manifested itself in more cooperative
hunting, better weaponry and innovation, a broader diet, or other major
advantages.
Roebroeks and his colleague, Dr Paola Villa at the University of
Colorado Museum in Boulder, trawled through the archaeological records
to look for evidence of modern human superiority that underpinned nearly
a dozen theories about the Neanderthals' demise and found that none of
them stood up.
"We found no data in support of the supposed technological, social and
cognitive inferiority of Neanderthals compared to their modern human
contemporaries," said Wil Roebroeks, an archaeologist at the Leiden
University in the Netherlands.
"The explanations make good stories, but the only problem is that there is no archaeology to back them up,"
"The evidence for cognitive inferiority is simply not there," said
Villa. "What we are saying is that the conventional view of Neanderthals
is not true."
Klevius comment: No not at all, it's the conventional view on the
modern human that isn't true! And the reason for that is the fanatic
push for the unfounded "out-of-Africa" myth which has been kept alive by
squeezing in non-human fossils under the laughable title "anatomically
modern human". And the only reason seems to be racist African-centrism
aided by a "let's call the most backward continent the origin of
humanity". In fact, it was Arabic islam that made Africa backward for
1400 years with its racist/sexist "infidel" slave raiding/trading!
A brief summary of Klevius' theory with some remarks on racial etc bias
For some twenty years Klevius has proposed the view that modern humans
got a small but more efficient brain in the south (jungle?) but that
they peaked culturally in the cold and challenging but also rewarding
north where they got a bigger brain by mixing with pre-existing Homos.
Neanderthals contributed with big skulls and erectus with mongoloid
traits. We do know that Floresiensis possessed a brain that was much
smaller than erectus' brain yet managed to produce similar culture. What
is today called Indonesia happened to have the perfect breeding
environment for the brain experiment that produced both Floresiensis and
Denisovan: Jungles which, due to sea level changes, altered between
islands and mainland. When mainland Floresiensis/Denisovans mixed with
erectus (Red Deer Cave people might have been such a hybrid) they
improved the brain qualities of erectus while getting erectus' mongoloid
traits for cold adaptation (assuming erectus got it in their initial
expansion to the north as well) and later on brought it south).
Somewhere in the Altai region they also encountered northern
Neanderthals which further enlarged their heads and produced a very
smart modern human (compare the Denisova bracelet) which then started a
successful back migration in all directions which strengthened the
mongoloid traits in the already mongoloid east while mongoloid traits
were diluted when mixing with non-mongoloids in the west and southwest
(Neanderthal and archaic sapiens hybrids) and later on by the neolithic
expansion. This explains the general racial pattern and also why we have
"skinny" mongoloids both in the south and north although the original
northern mongoloid were presumably "fatty" for the cold (compare Venus
figurines, steatopygia etc).
Klevius personal note: It's extremely important to distinguish
between PC cultural "race" terms and evolutionary traits. I call myself
as belonging to the "bastard race", i.e. not a Saami, Scandinavian, Finn
or Swede, but with a lot of mongoloid genetic traits in common with
them or their predecessors. With a dad born in Gothenburg and a Finnish
mother born in Helsinki who delivered me in Stockholm, and with a
bilingual upbringing in Finland to a culturally ethnic Atheist
Finland-Swede working in both Finland and Sweden, I rather emphasize my
ethnicity under the 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration. Which fact
effectively keeps my logic out of sexist and racist ranting about my
ethnicity/race that would otherwise make it more difficult to produce
scientific theories in this field.
Funny, but somehow I never even reflected over other "races" as being
"inferior" or "different" as human beings or anything before these
self-declared cultural "races" themselves started implying that I also
possessed a "race" and that that "white" "race" was a "racist" "race".
Had no idea really and in the 1990s while living in Finland and after
visiting some "black" and "colored" Swedes in Stockholm our child
thought Swedes were black in general.
Higher ape/hominid evolution in continental Africa vs. island SE Asia
Already before the discovery of Homo floresiensis Klevius thought a good
"pygmy" brain slowly traveled to the protein rich but cold north while
increasing in size and capabilities. After the discovery (2004) of the
apelike and extremely small brained but smart Homo floresiensis in
southern Indonesia nothing except M130 connected anything to Africa
anymore. And when the Denisovan was discovered in Siberia at the same
place as the hitherto most sophisticated early artifact ever found
(Denisova bracelet - see above) the picture seemed quite clear. There
are only two possible places for equatorial evolution of hominids,
either Africa or SE Asia. And because SE Asian archipelago offers the by
far best combination of jungle isolation and changing barriers it seems
that floresiensis (and similar populations) should have been equally
expected as the dwarfed elephants they hunted.
So when a floresiensis like population managed to escape to mainland
Asia they started mixing with local Homo erectus all the way up until
they met with the northern Neanderthals and there created what became
the truly modern humans - overwhelmingly proven through stunning skills revealed in unprecedented art and behavior.
M130
Sima de los Huesos, Floresiensis and Denisovan
may have all originated in Eurasia
Genetic evidence reveals that the Sima de los Huesos hominin (400,000
bp) shared a common ancestor with Denisovan some 7-800,000 bp rather
than with Neanderthal although its skeletal remains carry
Neanderthal-derived features.
Do note the lack of chin in these as well as in the 26,000 bp Venus of
Brassempouy. Also note that we don't know the shape of Floresiensis'
nose.
The Sima sample exhibits a number of features that are shared with
Neanderthals but not African fossil humans, and are rare in recent
humans.
Later Neanderthals do not have the same diversity as earlier
Neanderthals in western Europe, while central Asian Neanderthals have
more diversity than those from Europe. This may indicate that
Neanderthals were more numerous in western or central Asia.
The Denisovan nuclear DNA is also closer to Neanderthals than the Denisovan mtDNA.
Sima de los Huesos is closely related to the lineage leading to mitochondrial genomes of Denisovans.
The Denisovan-heidelbergensis clade split about 800kya-900 kya (around
the time of the oldest stone tools on the island of Flores where
floresiensis was found) is older than the modern human-Neanderthal
split. Non-African Homo has an Erectus connection, a
Denisovan-heidelbergensis connection, as well as a Neanderthal
connection.
For a background to Klevius' theory see previous postings and
Out of Africa as Ape/Homo hybrids and back as global Mongooids
First and third from the left are Red Deer Cave people 14,300-11,500
years ago. Second and fourth the so called Venus from Brassempuoy in
France 25-26,000 years ago. The last pic is a reconstruction of a 1.9
Million year old Homo rudolfiensis skull. They all had flat broad
cheeks, no chin and rounded forehead.
From the left: Red Deer Cave, Sami, Cro-Magnon
Was the sculptural portrait of Venus of Brassempuoy made because she
looked so different from Cro Magnon? Was she kept as a pet or something
by her Cro Magnon captors?
There were certainly completely different looking modern humans living
in Eurasia side by side some 26,000 years ago. And the only way to make
sense of these enormous differences is Klevius hybridization theory,
i.e. that the modern brain came from small ape-like creatures (compare
the "scientists" who didn't believe that the small Homo floresiensis
brain could be capable of tool-making, fire-making etc..
Debbie Martyr (an Orang Pendek* researcher): "the mouth is small and
neat, the eyes are set wide apart and the nose is distinctly humanoid"
* Orange Pendek is the most common
name given to a small but broad shouldered cryptid ceature that
reportedly inhabits remote, mountainous forests on Sumatra.
Venus of Brassempuoy, one of the world's oldest real portrait
(this one slightly retouched by Klevius)
The
Red Deer Cave people, discovered in southern China and who lived some
14,300-11,500 years ago had long, broad and tall frontal lobes behind
the forehead, which are associated with personality and behavior.
However, they also express prominent brow ridges, thick skull bones,
flat upper face with a broad nose, jutting jaws and lack a humanlike
chin. Their brains were smaller than modern humans and they had large
molar teeth (just like Denisovan), and short parietal lobes at the top
of the head (associated with sensory data). According to Curnoe, "These
are primitive features seen in our ancestors hundreds of thousands of
years ago".
Unique features of the Red Deer Cave people include a strongly curved
forehead bone, broad nose and broad eye sockets, flat and wide cheeks
and wide and deep lower jaw joint to the skull base.
Klevius comment: Compare this description to Venus of Brassempouy
on the pic, one of the world’s oldest portrait/sculpture of a human
made some 25-26,000 years ago in what is now France.
This Cro Magnon could have been the captor of Venus of Brassempouy.
Compare e.g. his protruding chin with the retracting one on Venus of
Brassempouy. And keep in mind that the human chin has been an elusive
and quite recent feature in human evolution. The delicate features we
used to attribute to anatomically modern human while simultaneously
attributing high intelligence may, in fact, not be connected at all.
Slender and delicate skeletal features are not always connected with
high cultural achievement. Quite the opposite when looking at skeletal
remains outside the Aurignacian area..
In Dolní Věstonice, Eastern Europe a portrait of an almost modern Cro
Magnon is now scientifically dated to at least 29,000 BP. The
performance of its creator is on an extremely high cultural level when
considering it predates Mideastern civilizations with some23,000 years,
and that it evolved in a cultural tradition that has never been found in
Africa or Mideast.
.
.jpg/220px-Neanderthal_Engraving_(Gorham%27s_Cave_Gibraltar).jpg)
