There is a tribe in Central China, who raise Raindeer, sing throat chants, and wear traditional "native" clothing, complete with drums of similar curious workmanship.

One such native of this ethnicity has produced a orchestra play about one of the last remaining elders, (who is still alive I think), called Alugulia.

Your response Mormonism?

There was a good movie awhile back called "as far as my feet wil carry me" about a German POW who escapes a soviet prison camp. Anyways he stays with some siberian natives they actually had so
e real ones play those parts. They looked like distant cousins of my family

"So weit die Fuesse tragen" was an excellent movie.


Who did not sympathize with Forrell.

Are these links about it?

http://www.mongolia-travel-guide.com/reindeer-people.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cED2Bz5vRIM&feature=player_embedded#

I noticed in the video lodges very much like the tipi. Were these used at all in Arabia or Jerusalem in ancient times?

The tipi is ancient. You can see its form in Mongolia and match it with DNA studies.

I'm curious about ancient dwellings because the BofM says they lived in tents.

We know that ancient Americans brought dogs with them, and that will doubtless offer further illumination.

I like the inclusion of dogs because of my view that the reindeer was a huge factor in these people's migrations. And dogs' herding insticts would've solified their relationship with these people...

or get the book from National Geographic. This tells the whole story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journey_of_Man#Bibliography
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html

Rather than China... There's significant linguistic evidence linking the ancestral form of the language used by the Kets with that of the Na-Dene family in North America...

The principal researcher on the linguistic front is Edward Vajda, and here's a link... His work has been reviewed favorably by many linguists... This represents the first likely solid linguistic link between Siberian and North American native languages.

http://www.adn.com/2010/07/05/1354714/new-language-research-supports.html

Here's some Wiki stuff on the Ket people. Probably only around 100 people, all over the age of 55 still speak it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ket_people

And now, while we can't find any remnants of Nephite civilizations in the New World, and Mormon apologists cling to three inconclusive "letters" (NHM) found in Yemen, well, there is this picture...

http://www.wunderground.com/wximage/viewsingleimage.html?mode=singleimage&orig_handle=habataku&orig_number=916&handle=habataku&number=916&album_id=291#slideanchor

And this one...

http://www.wunderground.com/wximage/viewsingleimage.html?mode=singleimage&orig_handle=habataku&orig_number=916&handle=habataku&number=943&album_id=291

There's no broad consensus currently among archaeologists and anthropologists (particularly any that is solidified by the DNA evidence) regarding the exact route and timetable that was used--probably across the Bering Land bridge beween around 22,000 to 12,000 years ago. I know, I've been trying to unscramble that stuff for several years now, and in between cussing irreconcilable data, I've swapped a lot of e-mails with Simon Southerton (who's in the process of putting out a piece on this subject).

Simon agrees the Ket information is quite credible... The issue is the timing, and the number of migrations to the New World. Linguistic claims for "Amerinds," all of the Native Americans other than than those for the NaDene/Athabaskan family of speakers, are used to support the hypothesis of an early migration, with a second migration, the NaDene speakers, following considerably later...

I've reviewed as much of the DNA findings as I can (and consulted with Simon and Jesus Smith, whose undergrad is in microbiology), and as I said it's still contradictory and doesn't lend itself to easy synthesis and analysis. For example, the "X" haplogroup is found in the Northeast and Eastern Canada (among the Algonquin tribes), but it's also found among the Navaho, but not the closely related Apache. Sampling problems may account for that one, or it may be admixture from later tribal "blending." Of course the "X-haplogroup" was briefly used to support the silly hyper-diffusionist claims of European contact, the so-called "Solutrean Hypothesis."

And it appears one haplogroup actually went extinct on this continent, a conclusion which, to my way of thinking, renders any nuanced statisitical models as perhaps hopelessly quixotic. Haplogroup "M," which is a very old hg of mitochondrial DNA and found in much of Asia, was uncovered and sequenced in some 5,000 year old bones unearthed in Northern Canada. Its presence among modern Indians has never been confirmed.

All this and no Middle Eastern DNA markers either with mitochondrial or Y-Chromosome findings...

No metallurgy, wheat, honeybees, horses, or other items as well...

And it's likely to get worse for the apologetic crowd. Recent advances in analyzing DNA within the nucleus, so-called "autosomal DNA" whose sequences are far more complex. much longer, and numerous than mtDNA or y-Chromosome sequences are now yielding more conclusions that support Asian ancestry.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/03/2011 02:21AM by SL Cabbie.

thought they came from new guinee north of australia but
interesting however all replieys, point taken...levite.

And then decided I shouldn't criticize what is probably a simple cultural idiom...

But yes, the more generally understood meaning of "aboriginals" relates to the original inhabitants of Australia who were probably on that contintent before white folks were in Europe...

"Native Americans" would've been better, and even most Indians I know--and I know a lot--don't mind being called Indians. Of course if one were to ask me to do otherwise, I would certainly do so...

Anyway, thanks for giving me the opportunity to elaborate on that little point...

The oldest human artifacts in the Americas are found in western Alaska. These are Siberian in design. The artifacts are thought to be about 15,000 years old. A Bering Strait immigration is suggested by the facts.

Because I haven't found any, and I've been perusing an archaeology newsgroup for two years...

If you've got 'em, I'm all ears... The earliest I could come up with (using "Archaeological Finds Alaska Pleistocene") was some tenative stuff linking mammoth C-14 dating to possible charcoal remains dating back 11,500-12,000 years ago... The dates on the alleged human-worked mammoth bone at Bluefish Caves (Yukon) are so old as to be problematic (28,000 years BP) and are extremly controversial...

http://dnr.alaska.gov/parks/oha/mammoth/mammoth5.htm

The oldest human remains found in Alaska, in On Your Knees Cave, date back only 10,300 years...

http://www.adn.com/2008/12/28/636254/dna-tracks-ancient-alaskans-descendants.html

I haven't read this book, but the review offers a useful summary of the state of our knowledge about the subject as it exists...

http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/pleistocene-pioneers

>"First Peoples in a New World," although cognizant of Native American perspectives, is primarily about the events and processes of the late Pleistocene and early Holocene occupation of the Americas as archaeologists have come to understand them. Sometime before 12,500 years ago, not long before agriculture was developed in the Near East, some of the people who had inhabited the other half of the world for well over 100,000 years made their way to a new hemisphere, where they found themselves in an unprecedented situation. The first Homo sapiens to appear in Africa had faced a world already inhabited by other hominins. But these Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers from Siberia now found stretching before them two continents encompassing arctic, temperate and equatorial regions, with no other humans in sight. They were commencing the greatest experiment ever in human adaptation.