In the September Journal of Field Archaeology, LeBlanc and several co-authors report that they have recovered DNA from 2000-year-old quids, as well as from aprons worn by Native Americans. The quids and aprons belonged to a vanished tribe that archaeologists call the Western Basketmakers. Between about 500 B.C.E. and 500 C.E., they lived in caves and rock shelters in what is now southern Utah and northern Arizona. Dry conditions are ideal for preserving DNA, and researchers have previously extracted ancient DNA from skeletons and feces of both humans and animals (ScienceNOW, 16 July 1998).
After getting the idea to test quids, LeBlanc teamed up with Thomas Benjamin, a cancer biologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, and other researchers. They pulled mitochondrial DNA from 48 quids and from 18 aprons that had been stained with what was likely menstrual blood. Then they scanned the DNA for various molecular markers called haplogroups, which appear in different frequencies in different parts of the world.
LeBlanc and his colleagues found that about 14% of these samples contained haplogroup A. This haplogroup is extremely rare in the Southwest, but it occurs in about half of the population of Central America. The intermediate frequency in the sample of Western Basketmakers fits with the idea that they migrated from somewhere in central Mexico, bringing agriculture into the turf of foragers. The results were confirmed by a second laboratory, and LeBlanc says the absence of European haplogroups rules out the possibility of contamination.
6 comments:
Writerfella here --
Ah, a bit of the old "Jurassic Park' thinking on the feet! writerfella wishes them good spirits and good wishes on their perspicacity. BUT --
At the same time, writerfella yesterday witnessed a documentary on ANIMAL PLANET that purported to study the Pacific Box Jellyfish and whether or not it has rudimentary intelligence. The 'primitive' animal seems to possess volition and purpose, though it also seemingly lacks a brain and thus any mechanism for causation. The film did reveal that the Box Jellyfish was discovered to have a system of 24 fairly-well-developed eyes, a first among such a 'lowly' class of invertebrates. But ostensibly the Box Jellyfish's response to stimuli and even varying environments defies the scientists' understanding, since it lacks an extensive nervous system.
THE FOOLS!! The answer is "looking" them right in the face and they cannot see it! The system of 24 networked and interconnected eyes IS THE BRAIN! And it uses its own DNA as the storage facility for memory and experience! writerfella postulated this in his 1973 sci-fi story, "Legion," wherein anyone or anything's DNA is the repository of what have become known as 'genetic memories.' Thus it is that any race's physical existence and even state of mind definitely can be passed along by reproduction and heredity. Native American consciousness, therefore, is inherited and so even EuroMan's craftiness and pettiness and perfidy thus can be explained...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Postulating a theory doesn't make it fact.
If your theory were true, anyone with some Native DNA would have access to "racial memories" and the like. That would include Pequots, Chickahominies, and Chickasaws such as John Herrington. Oops.
How much Indian DNA does one have to have to be an Indian, anyway? And how is this different from the blood quantum standard? You sound just like the Great White Father, asserting you can detect Indians by race.
In short, your theory is unproven and illogical to boot. Which is why tribal membership is a political decision, not a biological one. That is and will always be true regardless of your fictional fantasizing.
Writerfella here --
What you have missed, as always, is the point. EVERYTHING is theory, even the ostensible existence of 'intelligent design.' EVERYTHING about human existence is THEORY. On that note, then, all that we know is unproven and illogical, unless 'opinion' decides otherwise. Prove your 'opinion,' young sir, and writerfella will listen avidly if only because you will have leapt beyond what we as humans know and what we do not know. It hardly seems to be the case...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Writerfella here --
POSTSCRIPTUM: Rob, you have proven writerfella's point. Genetic memory totally would depend upon percentages of genetics. Just as blood quanta is based upon percentages of Native blood heritage, so would genetic memoriesw. The lesser Native blood one inherits, the lesser would be the the level of genetic memories. The more Native blood one inherits, the higher would be the level of genetic memories. YOU have zero Native blood; therefore, you have no Native genetic memories at all. Consequently, does not the logical circumstance make any impression at all? Therefore, it is a matter of degree, as is blood quanta among Native American tribes. Get yourself out of that painted corner, and writerfella will give you a cookie...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Opinions don't exist to be proved. They're subjective by definition. In contrast, theories do exist to be proved. Until someone does prove them, or at least provides evidence to support them, they remain fictional fantasizing.
I didn't offer a theory of my own. I questioned the logic of your theory. As usual, you couldn't answer most of my questions. That's because you're illogical.
But you did answer one question with your claim that "genetic memories" are proportional to blood quantum. Great, but I asked you that question at least once or twice before. Are you so slow that it takes you this long to answer?
So you think being Indian is proportional to one's Indian DNA or blood quantum. Now let's examine your assertion that author John Fusco has some special insight into Indians. Since he has no Indian DNA or blood, he must've gained his knowledge through learning. That means anyone who emulates his effort to study and absorb Indian culture can do the same.
Either that or your claim that it takes Indian DNA to know Indians is false. So which is it, Russ? From where I'm sitting, you're the only one who's painted into a corner. Good luck with your answer...you'll need it.
Incidentally, a comment on your jellyfish scenario, namely:
"The system of 24 networked and interconnected eyes IS THE BRAIN! And it uses its own DNA as the storage facility for memory and experience!"
The first assertion could be true, but the second assertion doesn't necessarily follow. Memories and experiences could be stored as chemicals or structures much larger than the DNA molecule. So your presumption that a "brain" of networked eyes implies the storage of memories in DNA is false. It doesn't imply that at all.
Post a Comment