Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Earliest Americans Arrived In Waves, DNA Study Finds

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the where-are-you-from? dept.

Earth 131

NotSanguine writes "Nicholas Wade of the New York Times has written an article about a new DNA study that suggests the earliest Americans arrived in three waves, not one. 'North and South America were first populated by three waves of migrants from Siberia rather than just a single migration, say researchers who have studied the whole genomes of Native Americans in South America and Canada. Some scientists assert that the Americas were peopled in one large migration from Siberia that happened about 15,000 years ago, but the new genetic research shows that this central episode was followed by at least two smaller migrations from Siberia, one by people who became the ancestors of today's Eskimos and Aleutians and another by people speaking Na-Dene, whose descendants are confined to North America.' The study, published online (paywalled), investigated geographic, linguistic and genetic diversity in native American populations."

cancel ×

131 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

ahm... (5, Interesting)

jythie (914043) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623111)

Kinda old news. I thought the 'single wave' theory had been abandoned decades ago, though some tribes have been lobbying to rewrite history since their mythology mandates they were the 'first' ones there, so waves conflict with doctrine.

Re:ahm... (2)

SilverJets (131916) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623153)

Yeah. Very old news.

I guess Nicholas Wade was part of the last wave.

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624387)

The important part is that we should all be speaking our native Russian, not Cherokee!

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624565)

Why in the world would you imagine that Russian was the native tongue in Siberia until relatively recently? I mean on the scale of a century or maximum two here.

Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624743)

Earliest Americans arrived in waves?

If they were the earliest, who the fuck were they waving at?

Re:Wait, what? (1)

TheABomb (180342) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624873)

The other spectators at the llamaliztli courts, followed shortly be the ones directly to their left.

Re:ahm... (4, Interesting)

flyneye (84093) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626701)

Then don't forget the "mini-waves" of out-of-towners that the local babes found appealing enough to breed with including: Celts, Vikings, Africans, Minoans, Romans (galley wreck off Florida was tell-tale), Chinese( Anchor stones with carvings along Pacific Coast) and any others that made it here long before Columbus. Yup, Ethnic diversity indicates there is no such thing as just an "American Indian". We all donated some DNA.

Re:ahm... (1)

Haawkeye (2680377) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623161)

Ya where I live you can't mention this because the whole mytho thing. Very annoying science is science.

Blood types (4, Informative)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#40625441)

Ya where I live you can't mention this because the whole mytho thing. Very annoying science is science.

I recall reading (maybe 20-30 years ago) that blood types were significantly different between North American and South American natives. According to these maps [palomar.edu] , South and Central Americans are almost exclusively blood group O, while blood group A exists in North America, especially in arctic and subarctic regions. FYI, native Americans and East Asians often have Diego positive blood, whereas the rest of the world is exclusively Diego negative.

Re:ahm... (4, Informative)

BeanThere (28381) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623173)

The study review, acceptance and publication dates are:
        01 September 2011
        25 May 2012
        11 July 2012
so I don't see how you can say this "old news"?

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623363)

Not all studies are original.

Re:ahm... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623397)

They come in waves.

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623489)

And the OP posted a long list of studies that this one copies from?

Re:ahm... (2)

Omineca (2623253) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623393)

I would say that the study may add new evidence in support of long existing theory. The three wave theory, precisely in the format described in the write up here on slashdot, has been in first year university history textbooks for at least a decade, if not longer.

Re:ahm... (1)

dewatf (209360) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623547)

Yes but you can always quote "some" scientists old theory of 1 wave from decades ago and claim your research is new to get more media attention and funding.

Re:ahm... (3, Insightful)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624871)

Yes but you can always quote "some" scientists old theory of 1 wave from decades ago and claim your research is new to get more media attention and funding.

No you can't. Every scientific paper and grant application, in every subject, includes a literature review section in which you cover the state of current relevant research, and to get the publication or the grant you have to demonstrate how your findings are different from what's currently known.

What you can do, if you're a layman sniping at science from a distance, is mention some garbled memory of something you read once that's kinda sorta related to the subject at hand, and dismiss current research as "old news." Bonus points if you throw in something about how scientists are only in it for the money, fame, and groupies.

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625913)

that's the catch: you get to choose how you represent the current state, so pick and choose.
the guy deciding the grant is supposed to know if you're bullshitting, though technically it's not bullshitting if you just choose articles carefully.

but does he? fuck no.

Re:ahm... (1)

dissy (172727) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626389)

Bonus points if you throw in something about how scientists are only in it for the money, fame, and groupies.

Oblg.:

<Leela> After 14 years of graduate school, Professor Farnsworth settled into the glamorous life of a scientist: Fast cars, trendy nightspots, beautiful women - the Professor designed them all working out of his tiny, one-room apartment.

how long has the Higgs Boson been in textbooks (0)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626273)

this whole situation is like rain on my wedding day.

Re:ahm... (1)

grouchomarxist (127479) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623395)

If you read the nytimes article you see that the genetic evidence appears to confirm the linguistic work done by Joseph Greenberg in 1987. So that is probably what the grandparent is thinking of as the "old news". However, the theories of Joseph Greenberg aren't widely accepted.

Re:ahm... (2)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623523)

If you read the nytimes article you see that the genetic evidence appears to confirm the linguistic work done by Joseph Greenberg in 1987. So that is probably what the grandparent is thinking of as the "old news". However, the theories of Joseph Greenberg aren't widely accepted.

All it vindicates about Greenberg is his specific proposal of three waves of immigration. Most historical linguists utterly reject his "mass comparison" method for identifying languages. I don't think this work is going to change that, no matter how enthusiastic Ruiz is.

From 2009 "Earliest Americans took two paths" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623977)

http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090108/full/news.2009.7.html

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625565)

I'll have to check, but I'm pretty sure that Luigi Cavalli-Sforza argued for a three-migration theory about 20 years ago, based on DNA evidence. It has certainly been largely accepted since then. I'll be curious to find out what this study has to add.

Re:ahm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40626233)

Old...as in I heard about DNA studies showing 4 migration waves years ago.

Windover Bog People (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623167)

Not as old, about 9000 years.. but it seems Caucasian people from Europe made their way to North America long, long before even the Vikings are known to have done so. Genetic material from the burials was sequenced by scientists back in the 1990s. It isn't (as far as I know) thought that any ancestors from this group of people survive today. They died out somewhere along the way.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/americas-bog-people.html
www.thescienceforum.com/history/27178-pre-columbian-american-european-contacts.html

Re:Windover Bog People (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625155)

It isn't (as far as I know) thought that any ancestors from this group of people survive today.

Being ancestors from 9000 years ago, they wouldn't.

Re:Windover Bog People (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625427)

"Not as old, about 9000 years.. but it seems Caucasian people from Europe made their way to North America "

Even younger, Caucasian people from Europe came in waves the last 500 years and fucked over the ones that came 15000 years earlier.

They were Turkic People (0)

rainhill (86347) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623201)

The distant cousins of Turkish, and Turkic peoples of central Asia

Re:They were Turkic People (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626143)

The distant cousins of Turkish, and Turkic peoples of central Asia

Can you please tell us just what you are trying to achieve here?

Racial superiority of the Turks, or something like that??
 

Racial Theory meets Comedy Central. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40626719)

Posting anon...

The distant cousins of Turkish, and Turkic peoples of central Asia

Can you please tell us just what you are trying to achieve here?

Racial superiority of the Turks, or something like that??

^^ This. Ever since these "Turanian Theory" Lunatics discovered the Internet, they have been all over it (youtube, forums, etc) claiming the most inane shit, that everyone with the slightest physical characteristics of the so-called "North Mongoloid" type is a descendant of Turks. Yeniseans, Mongols, Tungus, Siberians, Japanese, Ainu, Native Americas, they all magically descend from the Blue Wolf clan (as if they were some fucking magical mother race that has existed unaltered from the beginning of time.)

It gets worse when they pile up pseudo-science on top of it. It also gets funny when you see Turkic-speaking peoples of Turkey and Greater Iran calling their linguistic northern brethren (Kazakhs or Altay) ugly epithets like "mongol monkeys" (and viceversa with the later calling the former "Turkic speaking Persians/Greeks".)

Racial Theory meets Comedy Central.

Native Americans? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623217)

The fact means that America was settled in waves pretty much blows the "Native" theory out of the water. I'll bet the first people that came over would have a bone to pick with the later waves...if they were still here that is.

First nations (5, Funny)

quenda (644621) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623499)

In a related announcement from Ottawa, Canadian Aboriginals will henceforth be known as "First, Second and Third Nations Peoples".

Re:Native Americans? (2, Interesting)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623657)

The fact means that America was settled in waves pretty much blows the "Native" theory out of the water.

There are people who will continue to believe that Native Americans are one of the lost tribes of Israel.

One of them wants to be President.

Re:Native Americans? (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624115)

Source, please? I know politicians are crazy and all, but that's pretty far out there.

Re:Native Americans? (2)

aevan (903814) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624373)

You're kidding right? It's a poke at the Mormon candidate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamanites [wikipedia.org]

Re:Native Americans? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40626005)

Calm down. He wasn't referring to black jesus.

Re:Native Americans? (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626863)

According to the Book of Mormon, a Lamanite (play /ËleÉ.mÊOEn.aÉt/)[1] is a member of a dark-skinned nation of indigenous Americans that battled with the light-skinned Nephite nation. Although mainstream archaeologists, geneticists, and historians do not recognize the existence of Lamanites, adherents of the Latter Day Saint movement typically believe that the Lamanites comprise some part, if not the entirety, of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and the Polynesian people.

The Book of Mormon describes the Lamanites as descendants of Laman and Lemuel, two rebellious brothers of a family of Israelites who crossed the ocean in a boat around 600 BC. Their brother Nephi founded the Nephite nation. The Lamanites reputedly gained their dark skin as a sign of the curse for their rebelliousness (the curse was the withdrawal of the Spirit of God), and warred with the Nephites over a period of centuries. The book says that Jesus appeared and converted all the Lamanites to Christianity; however, after about two centuries, the Lamanites fell away and eventually exterminated all the Nephites. By the end of the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites were defined less by their skin color than by their lack of Christianity. Many Mormons believe that the Polynesian people originated from the descendents of Hagoth who led his people off on a ship and was never heard from again. Although Hagoth was a Nephite, these Mormons regard Polynesians as Lamanites.

Within the culture of Mormonism, indigenous Americans and Polynesians are sometimes referred to as "Lamanites".

From Wikipedia. Don't tell me Scientology is any wackier.

The best line from the source is,

"There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God."

"...no manner of -ites" And, no -ists or -ishes or -ans, I bet.

I do not know how The Cat in the Hat has not been adopted as holy scripture by some new religion.

Re:Native Americans? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40626623)

The fact means that America was settled in waves pretty much blows the "Native" theory out of the water.

There are people who will continue to believe that Native Americans are one of the lost tribes of Israel.

One of them wants to be President.

Can Romney be President of the 57 states, too?

Even Dan fucking Quayle knew there are 50 states in the US, unlike Obama.

But, but... (1)

msauve (701917) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623305)

if they migrated here from Siberia, they're not native Americans, are they?

Re:But, but... (3, Insightful)

r1348 (2567295) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623399)

It depends on the definition of "native" I guess:
- if it means "first humans to inhabitate a certain territory", then they are.
- if it means "first humans to be born in a territory", then almost no human but a small fraction of Africans is native to anywhere.

Re:But, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624075)

You spelled Thai wrong.

That's shockIng. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623323)

I'm shocked...

You mean they surfed here? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623351)

Cowabunga dude.

Thought that term had faded out (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623379)

The article itself is sort of interesting, not really surprising, but it's cool to have more multi-wave evidence. What did catch me off guard was the use of "Eskimos". I grew up learning that it's an offensive term and shouldn't be used. Saying eskimo is kind of like saying negro. It's old fashioned and inappropriate for a public conversation.

Re:Thought that term had faded out (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623945)

It's a U.S. paper. While Eskimo is offensive in Canada and Greenland it isn't in the U.S. including Alaska.

Re:Thought that term had faded out (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625693)

What term do you propose? Not all Eskimos outside Canada are Inuit, and this very item underlines the need for a term grouping Inuit and Yupik peoples, on genetic and linguistic grounds.

Re:Thought that term had faded out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40626163)

Not all Eskimos outside Canada are Inuit

True, very true !

But then, not all "African Americans" are from Africa either
 

Re:Thought that term had faded out (1)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626859)

That's why I been saying we should call them black fellas. It clears up a whole lotta confusion

Not surprising (5, Interesting)

Grayhand (2610049) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623385)

The only thing I question is they are still sticking by the Clovis dogma and insisting that the two other waves were later. Why this has always been an issue is the oldest bones found were always very far south. It seemed South America and the southern US were populated before the Clovis migration. Even Clovis itself is questionable since Asians never made that type of point the only other place they were made was Europe. They are ignoring the likelihood that there were migrations earlier that have no decendants. Just look at things like native american long houses. They are the same as Viking ones. Odds are there were multiple migrations from Europe that were wiped out. There have been skeletons found that were potentially European but the local indian groups have always fought testing. Look at another one the Mound Builders. That definitely started in the UK and it coincidentally showed up later in the Eastern US. There are simply too many coincidences related to the northeast and Europe.

Re:Not surprising (1)

dewatf (209360) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623617)

The log houses are the same because that is the best way to make a log house out of those type of trees with an axe.

When the Clovis people settled the sea level was lower so the coast areas they may have lived in the North are now on the sea floor. That has always been part of the Clovis theory.

Re:Not surprising (1)

locopuyo (1433631) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624825)

He said long houses not log houses.

Re:Not surprising (2)

nut (19435) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626301)

He said long houses not log houses.

GP's point is still valid though. Given similar materials and tools it's not unreasonable to theorise that two geographically separate cultures simply came up with the same general solution to the same problem.

Re:Not surprising (5, Informative)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623685)

The only thing I question is they are still sticking by the Clovis dogma and insisting that the two other waves were later.

I think the field of anthropology is finally abandoning the Clovis-first model that was believed for so long. There have been too many anomalous findings that challenge it, mostly in the past 15-20 years I think.

There's a pretty good summary of the evidence on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , if you're interested.

Interestingly, a bit further down in that article they mention a publication that firmly established a single-wave model. Looks like there's some reconciliation to be done.

IMO the most interesting thing about settlement of the Americas is the whole haplotype X [wikipedia.org] thing, which strongly suggests a genetic relation between the early peoples of northern North America and Europe or the Middle East. Though that fact is well established, I recommend skepticism when reading interpretations of what it means, because a lot of people take that ball and run a long way with it. However, as best I can tell it can't simply be dismissed as a parallel mutation, because of the way X is embedded down at a specific point in a whole tree of haplotypes.

The problem is that any interpretation of what haplotypes mean tends to get very political very fast, especially with people who want to use it to support crank claims or religious/nationalist primacy fantasies.

Re:Not surprising (1)

dasunt (249686) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624383)

IMO the most interesting thing about settlement of the Americas is the whole haplotype X thing, which strongly suggests a genetic relation between the early peoples of northern North America and Europe or the Middle East. Though that fact is well established, I recommend skepticism when reading interpretations of what it means, because a lot of people take that ball and run a long way with it. However, as best I can tell it can't simply be dismissed as a parallel mutation, because of the way X is embedded down at a specific point in a whole tree of haplotypes.

Have the possibilities of an early European people moving east and then over Bering been ruled out? After all, Caucasians have been found everywhere from western Europe, to southern India, and Xinjiang.

Then again, I suppose movement over the sea ice across the northern Atlantic is more probable.

Could even be that the Europeans weren't as advanced as the Siberians. Say early Europeans went over the sea ice across the north Atlantic, settled in northeast North America. Later came people from Siberia with slightly better technology/organization/whatnot, came in conflict with the Euro-americans, vanquished them and allowed the women to live, while killing the men. (Not an uncommon occurrence in history.) Hence the X-haploid mtDNA survived.

Then again, there are records of native Americans washing up on European shores. Why can't the reverse happen (although the currents don't favor it as much). Or perhaps its contamination from the Viking settlements. Who knows. Perhaps the European traits ended up having some sort of mystical or exotic appeal that made them more likely to be passed on.

Its really interesting what DNA can and cannot tell us. Obviously genetics isn't everything, but it can help us track the flows of people. Combined with archaeological evidence, it also can give us a slightly clearer picture of what happened. Then again, it can open up a lot of unresolved questions.

Re:Not surprising (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624563)

Have the possibilities of an early European people moving east and then over Bering been ruled out?

I don't think so. In fact, the map at the Wikipedia article seems to suggest that.

Then again, I suppose movement over the sea ice across the northern Atlantic is more probable.

I think that's the popular view. I don't know whether there's an established scholarly view. And I try to resist the urge to speculate, since I'm utterly unqualified.

Its really interesting what DNA can and cannot tell us. Obviously genetics isn't everything, but it can help us track the flows of people. Combined with archaeological evidence, it also can give us a slightly clearer picture of what happened. Then again, it can open up a lot of unresolved questions.

Precisely.

haplotypes alone don't suggest geographical origin (2)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626873)

Have the possibilities of an early European people moving east and then over Bering been ruled out? After all, Caucasians have been found everywhere from western Europe, to southern India, and Xinjiang.

It is a possibility, but it is one best confirmed with an archeological/anthropological find, not one via haplotypes. The reason for this, and using haplotype X as an example, is as follows (a pausible theory):

Some population X (called so because they carry haplotype X) at some point migrated somewhere in Asia, and from there split into several groups, of which two survived long enough for their genetic contribution to persist to the present day. One moved Westward and contributed their version of haplotype X into what would constitute the "European" gene pool. The other moved Eastward and contributed their own version of haplotype X into "some" of the Siberian immigrants that would survive and become "some" of the Paleo-Indians.

Other splinter and distinct populations from the original population X might have existed across Eurasia and the Americas, with their generic contribution nixed off the generic pool.

For all we know, haplotype X could have originated from, say, a splinter group of Australoids that went North, separated from the rest who were on their way to South Asia and eventually Australia. And the splinter group developed haplotype X (or haplotype X became extinct among the other Australoids.) The splinter group then became intermixed with some of the Eurasian population that would give birth to the the so-called "Caucasian" and "Mongoloid" populations. I'm pulling this out of my ass, but this would also be possible.

Heck, what if haplotype X is of Neanderthal or Denisovan stock. The former is almost certain to have intermixed with early Eurasians (before the Caucasian-Mongoloid split), or at least with the European/Middle Eastern precursors. The later is known (via DNA analysis) to have left a genetic heritage among the Melanesian people.

Or what if haplotype X were to come from a yet undiscovered hominid (neither Neanderthal or Denisovan)?

So the point of all this speculative soup is that we cannot ascertain a Caucasoid/European origin to haplotype X just by looking at the haplotype alone. You will need:

  1. some archaeological evidence (artifacts known to be, or being closely related to an "European" origin far east in Siberia or the Americas dating on or prior the peopling of the Americas, or
  2. some anthropological evidence, a fossil that is clearly of a "European" stock and with DNA evidence suggesting it being closer to the root of haplotype X (or the fossil being old enough to assume primogeniture... for lack of a better word.)

I for one find the Solutrean hypothesis [wikipedia.org] of Ice Age people migrating from Europe into Eastern North America (by walking/kayaking their way along the North Atlantic Ice Sheet) very tantalizing. Hey, it could be feasible (if people were able to boat their way to Australia 50-60K years ago, why not this?) But it is one that needs archaeological evidence.

Re:Not surprising (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623897)

making mounds and long houses are not unique to vikings and native americans

Re:Not surprising (3, Insightful)

Sperbels (1008585) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624547)

By this same line of reason we could conclude that the Olmecs, Mayans, and Aztecs were Egyptians because they built pyramids.

Re:Not surprising (2)

dwye (1127395) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624883)

Thor Heyerdahl, is that you?

Re:Not surprising (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626205)

By this same line of reason we could conclude that the Olmecs, Mayans, and Aztecs were Egyptians because they built pyramids

 
... and this same line of reason makes the Cambodians Egyptians !

http://whgbetc.com/mind/pyramids-cambodia.html [whgbetc.com]

Waves?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623473)

Sounds more like they arrived in a corpuscular fashion, perhaps in 3 discrete groups of particles. i.e. ships traveling across an ocean and hitting the shore each with a distinct 'thud'.

Re:Waves?? (1)

able1234au (995975) | more than 2 years ago | (#40625585)

maybe they existed in both sides of the ocean at the only time but only appeared in North America when we observed them? I heard they had a cat

Waves, yes. (5, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623527)

The earliest immigrants arrived in waves, more recent immigrants arrived in boats...

Re:Waves, yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624765)

I wonder how much organic matter could a series of really big tsunamis bring on the shores. There is currently a significant amount of drift from Japan at the Alaskan coastline. The sea level was significantly lower during the last ice age, however.

Re:Waves, yes. (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626219)

The earliest immigrants arrived in waves, more recent immigrants arrived in boats...

While the most recent immigrants are arriving in planes
 

Kinda Makes You Wonder... (5, Funny)

IonOtter (629215) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623565)

Animals: What the heck are those thing...OHSHI-*thump* ARRRGH! *dies from rock to head*

First Wave: Who they heck are those gu...OHSHI-*thunk* ARRGH! *dies from fire-hardened spear to the guts*

Second Wave: Who the heck are those gu...OHSHI-*THOCK!* ARRGH! *dies from Clovis point to the chest*

Third Wave: Who the heck are those gu...OHSHI-*BOOM!* ARRGH! *dies from musket ball*

Makes you wonder what the next wave for us is going to look like?

Probably something like: "What's that in the sk*FLASH! sizzle-pop*

Re:Kinda Makes You Wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624899)

An entire armada of extraterrestrials looking to take over the solar system? Like in ID4, never discount the possibility of highly intelligent locusts.

Re:Kinda Makes You Wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625451)

"Makes you wonder what the next wave for us is going to look like?"

Fourth Wave: Who the heck are those gu...OHSHI-*BOOM!* ARRGH! *dies from carpet knife induced plane crash*

sam (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623619)

Hook up with biker enthusiast and friends on bikerwoo.com Our members come from all over the world. Meet up with thousands of local biker singles who ride on a Ducati, Harley, Triumph or BMW etc.

Re:sam (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623769)

Hook up with biker enthusiast and friends on bikerwoo.com Our members come from all over the world. Meet up with thousands of local biker singles who ride on a Ducati, Harley, Triumph or BMW etc.

Did the Triumph and BMW people arrive as a single wave, or are you saying that there were actually four waves of immigration?

Re:sam (3, Funny)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624359)

At least we could hear the Harley people coming from a few continents away.

They may have come in waves... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623639)

...but they also behaved like particles.

Re:They may have come in waves... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624585)

+1 of ACs modpoints...

Of course they came in waves, they where in Ships (1)

Nexusone1984 (1813608) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623707)

I am sure others see the humor in this stories title.

LOL

Sciodiots (-1)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 2 years ago | (#40623895)

I am never ceased to be amazed at seeing Scientists make "amazing discoveries" of what should be COMMON SENSE principals.

Look -- the smaller something is, the more of it will exist, nothing ever happens all at once and no group of creatures have ever acted in a singular manner not repeated by others of their species.

So yes-- people migrate in waves of herds just like any other animal. Assuming that humans are singular and only do something once is completely fucking retarded and there was never any evidence of it. Just look at South American and North American Indians -- they are wholely different ethic groups and most certainly not from the same herd migration.

And yes -- life exists elsewhere in this solar system, maybe not intelligent, by there sure as fuck is bacteria to be found. And yes, there is intelligent life out there, but advanced life is far more rare than simple life like bacteria, and therefore harder to find -- Just as Suns are more rare than Planet -- oh, we DON'T KNOW THAT hurrrr durr, we need to find out if there are more planets than Stars -- durrrp.

Why agree these concepts so damn difficult? Why can't we take these as solid theory instead of wild and insane concepts needing to be proven? We have enough empirical evidence of their likelihood that the questions should be to disprove these things.

Assuming something in Nature is singular and non-repeating borders on the ignorance and close-mindedness of Religion.

Re:Sciodiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40623947)

I am never ceased to be amazed at seeing Scientists make "amazing discoveries" of what should be COMMON SENSE principals.

Look -- the smaller something is, the more of it will exist, nothing ever happens all at once and no group of creatures have ever acted in a singular manner not repeated by others of their species.

So yes-- people migrate in waves of herds just like any other animal. Assuming that humans are singular and only do something once is completely fucking retarded and there was never any evidence of it. Just look at South American and North American Indians -- they are wholely different ethic groups and most certainly not from the same herd migration.

And yes -- life exists elsewhere in this solar system, maybe not intelligent, by there sure as fuck is bacteria to be found. And yes, there is intelligent life out there, but advanced life is far more rare than simple life like bacteria, and therefore harder to find -- Just as Suns are more rare than Planet -- oh, we DON'T KNOW THAT hurrrr durr, we need to find out if there are more planets than Stars -- durrrp.

Why agree these concepts so damn difficult? Why can't we take these as solid theory instead of wild and insane concepts needing to be proven? We have enough empirical evidence of their likelihood that the questions should be to disprove these things.

Assuming something in Nature is singular and non-repeating borders on the ignorance and close-mindedness of Religion.

I don't think you understand how science in general, and science publishing in particular works, really.

It's not that no one thought of it, it's that if you're going to publish it, you'd better have done your homework and have the data and analyses done to accompany your 'wouldn't it be great' or 'COMMON SENSE SUPREMACY!' point. Otherwise it's no better than alien pyramids.

Re:Sciodiots (3, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624165)

I am never ceased to be amazed at seeing Scientists make "amazing discoveries" of what should be COMMON SENSE principals.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." Albert Einstein.

Re:Sciodiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624265)

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

2) Scientists choose what to study based on guesses and hunches. They then investigate it by running experiments. Well investigated ideas with significant supporting evidence are then termed "theories". This doesn't mean everything in it is 100% correct, but that it's more or less our best guess to date. Theories are not often thrown out completely (thought it does happen), but more typically refined like tasty tasty sugar.

3) Recognize yourself from previous eras?

"Of course heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones!"
"Of course the earth is flat!"
"Of course the sun goes around the earth!"
"Of course smoking is good for you!"

etc.

Re:Sciodiots (4, Informative)

jheath314 (916607) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624451)

Actually, there are examples of "one off" events in early human history, such as the migration out of Africa by a subset of the ancestral human population some 50,000 years ago.

According to Nicolas Wade's fascinating book "Before the Dawn" (yes, the same Nicolas Wade from TFA), all the genetic evidence points to a single band of maybe 150 people leaving the rest of the ancestral human population behind in Africa, and populating all the rest of the world. Of course, the natural question is, why didn't other waves follow them in all the millennia since then?

The answer is, in part, that the first migrants already blocked the exits. The original departure from Africa was less a migration than it was an expansion... individuals tended to live in roughly the area they were born, and it was only the ever-growing population numbers that drove the advancing wave of modern humans through Asia and Europe generation after generation. The modern humans had a strong advantage (probably language) over the archaic hominids already occupying the new lands, but the human population in Africa had no such advantage over their brethren once the first wave spread out past the Red Sea. Hence, the migration out of Africa appears to have been a one-time event of the type you so quickly derided as nonsense.

Re:Sciodiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40627073)

populations tend to expand as a balloon, each generation further out from the center, until it meets fence. there it changes to a bubble shape, after all who can make a square balloon, but can generate a odd shaped bubble. So the first generation had its followers, and needed more land to gather on, they moved to the next square. It's no a migration of peoples, but an expansion of peoples. One of the latest ideas is maybe applibicle, the humanoid from china, the humanoid from south america could also have been.
Next, there are many places where we have not looked, covered with permafrost, or ice now, remember it was not always so. It may have started there. and we are seeing the sign of previous expansions. how many expansions have been here?

Re:Sciodiots (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624911)

Every single thing you list in your post as "common sense" was once an amazing discovery that overturned the prevailing wisdom. Every. Single. Thing.

If "hurrr durr durrrp" sums up your attitude toward science and the people who do it, just turn your computer off, throw away all your modern conveniences, go outside, and dig in the dirt for grubs. Try living without the benefits of thousands of years of very smart people working very hard to understand how the world works. We'll be here when you come crawling back.

Who says they weren’t 1 wave of 3 *mixed* gr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624011)

Just saying...

This does no explain Clovis culture. (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624121)

Clovis culture is very European. Perhaps all Clovis people died out so there is no DNA evidence.

Re:This does no explain Clovis culture. (1)

Sperbels (1008585) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624615)

Clovis culture is very European.

You're basing this on what? The shape of some arrowheads, right? I'd hardly call that a basis for such a bold statement.

Re:This does no explain Clovis culture. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624865)

Obviously their Time Machine, duh. When I used mine it was pretty obvious they were European.

Re:This does no explain Clovis culture. (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626543)

What are the odds of them choosing that name by chance? Well, eh?

Charlemagne would have been a dead giveaway.

Obviously impossible (2, Funny)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624163)

A migration from Siberia 15,000 years ago? I'm calling bullshit. If it happened, it would be in the Bible. And as if the Earth even existed 15,000 years ago!

In conclusion, Jesus.

Re:Obviously impossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624297)

Actually it would have been in the Bible, but for the records having been redacted at the Council of Nicea.

It was at the behest of para-temporal travelers who were trying to conceal the activities of an ancestor whose abuse of the proto-Aryan people needed to be concealed for the shame it was.

Unless You Are Mitt Romney (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40624591)

Then they came in submarine like vessels in 3000 BC (Jaredites). Then again from Jerusalem in 600 BC (Lehi), this time in just regular ships. And toting spears and chariots, possibly. Look it up.

I feel compelled to mention these ideas in the context of Mormonism, and the fact that the United States is very close to electing its first Mormon President. I think it is intriguing that a major presidential contender not only strays from science (which isn't that unusual), but also from main stream Christianity. It is sort of a twilight zone where critical thinking is suspended. Making any scientific endeavor investigating the subject sort of, well, lunatic.

If you're new here, welcome to America. Now get out. Oh, I mean... Get out now. While there is still time.

Re:Unless You Are Mitt Romney (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40625481)

" and the fact that the United States is very close to electing its first Mormon President."

This being /. at least it will be good news for NASA, since Mormons believed in extra-solar planets before any other so-called Christians, who also believe in a god who got the god-job only after a narrow vote in the Council of Nicaea, a couple of hundred years after somebody stole his remains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob [wikipedia.org]

Re:Unless You Are Mitt Romney (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626555)

the United States is very close to electing its first Mormon President.

He couldn't be any worse than the Muslim one.

Earliest Americans Arrived In Waves, you say (1)

TheInternetGuy (2006682) | more than 2 years ago | (#40624913)

Earliest Americans Arrived In Waves, DNA Study Finds

I think it would be safe to say that the Earliest Americans, arrived in the first wave. Yes?

Re:Earliest Americans Arrived In Waves, you say (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626561)

Wave zero. They're all Java zealots round here.

Really? (1)

sgunhouse (1050564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40625117)

I thought the summary said "earliest"? We have bones that predate that quite substantially ...

dumbnut's (1)

Kerstyun (832278) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626313)

ON wave's, IN boat's.

Duh! Indians arrived in waves. Well recorded. (0)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626377)

The Indians came to USA in dribs and drabs till 1960s. That was the time the employment based visa rules allowed the first wave of doctors and engineers to immigrate. Once the doctor shortage was declared to be over by AMA, there was a wave of nurses in 1980s. Then engineers were coming in small numbers till 1990s. Then the IT boom and the Y2K scare created a wave of 130,000 H1B visas per year that went mostly to Indians. After it has been reduced to 65000, due to off shoring and local labor market improvements, the Indian immigration has slowed down considerably in recent years. It is so well recorded, why is it even published?

Wait

You talkin' about feathers not dots, right? oops.

Nicholas Wade and trees. (2)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626459)

The author of the article, Nicholas Wade, compares the inheritance and mutation trees of different things to deduce what happened in the prehistory. Actually professional scientists do it, and Wade makes it readable for others.

In hist book, Before the Dawn, he describes the mutations in the parasite body louse (different from head louse) that lives of humans. From it you can build a tree of migration of human bands. You can also look at the mutations in Y chromosome. Or the mito-chondrial DNA. Or the language families and their inheritance traits.

The most significant finding is that, all these lines of evidence agree. They don't contradict each other. And they are not very broad either so the concordance is significant. Other interesting things are, we started wearing clothes 75000 years ago. Body louse can live only in clothing, it split off from head louse 75000 years ago. There was a Y chromosome Adam, last common ancestors to all living humans about 75000 years ago. There was a mitochondrial eve, last common female ancestor who lived in Africa some 130000 years ago.

I think he mentioned that dogs were domesticated in East Asia/Siberia some 20000 years ago. Did Amerindians have domesticated dogs? That would be a very interesting marker.

Re:Nicholas Wade and trees. (1)

C0R1D4N (970153) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626667)

Yes native americans had domesticated dogs, that is not something that couldnt have developed independently though. Dogs and cats probably domesticated themselves as an easy way to get food.Yes

Back in the early 70s.... (1)

MEK (71818) | more than 2 years ago | (#40626843)

... when studying anthropology -- in college and grad school -- the three wave theory seemed to already be commonly accepted. And Eskimos have been recognized as belonging to a separate wave forever (or almost so). This testing may be new and useful because it provides additional confirmation of a long-standing theory -- but it does not amount to any sort of new theory as to the population of the americas from Siberia.

Truly marvelous. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40626887)

The way creation works always astonishes me. We have three waves, but, in six days, God created the earth and the heavens! And people! While this seems like mystery, my faith shows me how it makes perfect sense! This looks just like the Holy Trinity, you know? Where we have the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but still one God, the Lord.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>