Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ancient Migration-Coming to America

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Bill wrote:

    Actually it was my response but I'll take that as a compliment B)  B)
      Oh dear, Bill. You've done a naughty thing haven't you?        I'm sure you know what! The server won't let me post more than a couple of lines at the moment for some reason but I will point out the error of your ways as soon as I am able.
    I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

    Comment


    • #62
      Bill wrote:

      Actually it was my response but I'll take that as a compliment B)  B)
        Woops, asleep at the switch I guess...
      Rhode Island

      Comment


      • #63
        Bill wrote:

        Thanks CMD, I saw those when I was getting the Mitochondrial DNA article that you posted earlier. Thanks for posting those, I'll check em out and get back to ya.
        The problem with the DNA data is that it has always been inconclusive. DNA is fragle and is only well preserved only under special circumstances. Because of this fact there are, have been, and always may be gaps in recovered DNA that are wide enough to drive a huge truck through and this causes it have simply miss or leave out quite a bit.
        It is looking some parts and trying to reconstruct a picture from those parts. It just may inaccurate and not look like the original!
          Bill, I didn't post the mitochondrial DNA abstract. It was posted by Roger. BTW, please don't feel obligated to get back to me regarding the video. This thread developed much more then I perhaps should have anticipated and I posted those with everyone in mind, and to make it part of the "permanent" record for this thread. In other words, don't shoot the messanger.
        I don't expect you to agree with any of the criticisms leveled in that presentation.
        Rhode Island

        Comment


        • #64
          Aww, don’t you guys read what you write or what anyone else writes? Actually I was referring to a site I found when I was looking for the paper Pain posted excerpts from. I found it and on the way I saw what you just posted for me to read. I will click on the videos and let you know what I thought about them. 
          I posted an excerpt Pain forgot to post (imagine that!) from that paper in which the authors admitted there were limitations to their data because they looked at Haplogroups in modern indigenous DNA. Therefore there may be haplotypes that had been lost anciently that didn’t show up in their data.
          In other words, their Biological data probably (very likely!) does not tell the complete story.
          Therefore I believe it was disingenuous for them to include a speculation that their findings ruled out an Atlantic migration. That statement, by the authors own admission, was not supported by their incomplete data.   
          The only conclusive and reliable DNA study would one in which only ancient DNA would be analyzed. This would be a study that would really tell the story of who the First Americans were and I would love to see those results.
          I have been trained as a research scientist therefore I enjoy criticism. It is part of the profession and what makes all of us better..

          Comment


          • #65
            Bill wrote:

            Aww, don’t you guys read what you write or what anyone else writes? Actually I was referring to a site I found when I was looking for the paper Pain posted excerpts from. I found it and on the way I saw what you just posted for me to read. I will click on the videos and let you know what I thought about them. 
            I posted an excerpt Pain forgot to post (imagine that!) from that paper in which the authors admitted there were limitations to their data because they looked at Haplogroups in modern indigenous DNA. Therefore there may be haplotypes that had been lost anciently that didn’t show up in their data.
            In other words, their Biological data probably (very likely!) does not tell the complete story.
            Therefore I believe it was disingenuous for them to include a speculation that their findings ruled out an Atlantic migration. That statement, by the authors own admission, was not supported by their incomplete data.   
            The only conclusive and reliable DNA study would one in which only ancient DNA would be analyzed. This would be a study that would really tell the story of who the First Americans were and I would love to see those results.
            I have been trained as a research scientist therefore I enjoy criticism. It is part of the profession and what makes all of us better..
              [Server still won't let me post much text... so Word doc attached]
            What utter, nonsense!
              WhatUtterNonsense.doc
            I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

            Comment


            • #66
              Bill, I had replied to Roger's posting of the mitochondrial DNA article abstract by wondering how Stanford/Bradley would reply. When you then replied to me, saying you had the answer to what I was asking, I assumed you were quoting what Stanford/Bradley had said in response to the article. I made the mistake of assuming the bold type was straight out of Stanford's mouth. After all, I had wondered how Stanford would reply, not how Bill would. I did wonder why there was no reference cited, other then the article referenced by Roger, but I was asleep at the switch as I said. You do ask if we read what others write. But if you did so yourself, you would know the abstract was posted by Roger, not me.
              Roger, I hope you overcome the server problem as I am so far unable to open the Word doc, but that's probably my computer illeteracy. I most certainly want to read "What Utter Nonsense."
              Rhode Island

              Comment


              • #67
                Pain, stop the drama and stop playing the outrage card because pure and simple, I busted your game with the authors own admission.
                If you actually read my post, all I did was post the proof and their admission that their data and therefore their entire study was based upon incomplete data.
                Therefore the author’s statement about their data having ruled out the likelihood of an Atlantic (i.e. Solutrean) migration was in reality not supported by their data at all.
                I briefly discussed why that was a bogus conclusion drawn and was totally unwarranted. Why did I say that?
                Because and just let me say, you just aren’t getting it are you? Their study looked at modern indigenous mtDNA and I will interpret that statement for you. They sampled DNA from Modern native groups that have been living in areas around the word for a long time. 
                That means because they were looked at modern indigenous mtDNA, they were attempted to infer that what they found was the same as they would have found if they had studied ancient DNA. Therefore the authors are guilty of crossing the line by drawing unwarranted conclusions from what they found.
                Why was and is this a problem? Because in a time span of many dozens centuries, Haplotypes and even Haplogroups may have been dropped, eliminated, or bred out of the modern DNA they sampled because of events that happened anciently. In fact some ancient Haplogroups that existed way back then, may not have been in the local Haplogroups that ensued at all.
                There are many reasons why this was likely to have happened which I won’t go into now but will be happy to if asked.
                So, in conclusion, let me say let’s stop the sophomoric humour and discuss the subject of the peopling of the Americas like adults. You and several others seem to have an irrational fear of the Clovis from Solutrean hypothesis.
                My advice to you is come on; it is a theory for goodness sakes. Whether it turns out to be true or false, the world won’t skip any rotations on its axis because of it.

                Comment


                • #68
                  I have yet to find anyone contributing to the recent Solutrean discussions who demonstrate an irrational fear of the Clovis from Solutrean hypothesis. In my own case, when the theory first made its' most recent incarnation on the scene, it attracted my attention immediately. Anything that presents the possibility of turning American archaeology on its' head is going to get my attention. I read all I could, listened to Stanford's lecture, and that is dissected in the video I posted, bought and read the book, etc. I believe much more evidence of Solutreans on this side of the pond must be forthcoming if this is ever going to be more then a theory. Lately, as a result of these threads and considering everything, I have begun to wonder if Stanford/Bradley are engaged in an intellectual con game. I find myself asking "does Stanford even believe any of this, or is it all part of an academic game?". At any rate, and whatever the truth, I certainly don't fear the theory. I can't imagine why I would be afraid of it since in general I've always been attracted to ideas that challenge old paradigms, as that is often where the action is, and that's where I want to be. At this point in time, I just find the theory to be extraordinarily weak in evidence.
                  Start finding indisputable Solutrean artifacts in many locations on this side of the pond and their idea will gain favor I'm sure. But as for me, at this point, I find myself wondering if Stanford isn't cherry picking to the hilt and trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes.
                  Rhode Island

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    If anyone is able to open Roger's word doc, and perhaps copy and paste it(?) here, that would be great.
                    I've been trying to no avail, and I'm sure it's because of my lack of computer skills.
                    Rhode Island

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      It IS dramatic when you claim title to someone else's words other than your own.    You screwed yourself, Bill.  Roger just pointed it out.  Then...you proceed to attempt to twist it all up by accusing Roger to be in error for calling you on it.  The only thing I'm learning from you at this point  Bill, is "the art of deception!"

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        roustabout149, I am convinced that many of the people who love creating drama don’t take time to read and understand the posts they attempt to answer. Don’t be one of those people. Before answering, please be sure you understand exactly what was posted.
                        I have never (and I said NEVER!) made post in which I attempted to personally take credit for something someone else wrote or said. I always place excerpts from source material in direct quotes and/or post the tile, authors, and source from where it was taken.
                        This is why I say that no one who has taken the time to read or understand my post will have the idea that I personally, took credit for the quoted material which I placed in quotation marks and listed the source too.
                        Roger or whatever his name is because he goes by the nom de plume of “Painshill” (I love it) loves to spent his time creating and posting humorous anecdotes (and what a funny fellow he is too). When his humor has become unnecessarily harsh, cutting, or disrespectful then he has earned the right to be called to account. This is something he has chosen.
                        I hope that now you can feel assured that it’s all good!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          here is the latest attemt to paste Painshills text:
                            WhatUtterNonsense.txt

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Bill wrote:

                            Actually it was my response but I'll take that as a compliment B)  B)
                              Can't blame me for being confused.  I certainly read the comments.  If you don't use the quote option, then it's rather difficult to tell what is being referenced.  What are you saying here to help me understand?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              I managed to open Roger's doc. Well put, Roger and I quite agree. I do hope you can post it here in text form when the server allows as everyone should read it as it does indeed point out the error of Bill's ways, just as you said it would.
                              Rhode Island

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Butch Wilson wrote:

                                here is the latest attemt to paste Painshills text:
                                  WhatUtterNonsense.txt
                                  Thank you so much, Butch. I couldn't get that far. Way to go!!
                                Rhode Island

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X