No one has yet framed a falsifiable hypothesis for this question, so there is no evidence either way. Some (myself included) suspect that they looked like Ethiopians or Khoisan today, since these are the sole existing samples of the source population of the band that left Africa. (Long before the agriculture-driven Bantu expansion.) Others (such as Jaime) suspect that they had much darker complexion, since the Andaman Islanders are almost as ancient and are very dark. Lacking evidence supporting a falsifiable hypothesis, I would not bet money either way.
I have claimed no such thing. I have no suspicion whatsoever as to their skin color except to note that there where lighter populations in Tanzania like the Sandawe and darker populations like the Hadza. Both show ancient lineages.
As far as facial structure goes thevidence found as of today shows no evidence that the features where anywhere close to Ethiopians or KhoiSan as the level of robusticity and broad features are quite clear. No human alive has those features, but the ones that come the closest are Australian Aborigines.
Andamanese are no where near as close to the age of the KhoiSan.
That is an ancient human skull.
That is a modern KhoiSan skull
The skull on the left is a modern australian skull.
Posted: Wed 07 May 2008 16:48 Post subject: Re: Frank, please correct your quote with false information.
Okay, how about this?
Quote:
No one has yet framed a falsifiable hypothesis for this question, so there is no evidence either way. Some (myself included) suspect that they looked like Ethiopians or Khoisan today, since these are the sole existing samples of the source population of the band that left Africa. (Long before the agriculture-driven Bantu expansion.) Others (such as Jaime) suggest that it is possible that they had much darker complexion, since Andaman Islanders are among the oldest post-diaspora populations and are very dark. Lacking evidence supporting a falsifiable hypothesis, I would not bet money either way.
Alternatively, if you prefer, I could just leave your name out of it: "Others suggest that..."
Posted: Wed 07 May 2008 17:26 Post subject: Re: Frank, please correct your quote with false information.
fwsweet wrote:
Okay, how about this?
Quote:
No one has yet framed a falsifiable hypothesis for this question, so there is no evidence either way. Some (myself included) suspect that they looked like Ethiopians or Khoisan today, since these are the sole existing samples of the source population of the band that left Africa. (Long before the agriculture-driven Bantu expansion.) Others (such as Jaime) suggest that it is possible that they had much darker complexion, since Andaman Islanders are among the oldest post-diaspora populations and are very dark. Lacking evidence supporting a falsifiable hypothesis, I would not bet money either way.
Alternatively, if you prefer, I could just leave your name out of it: "Others suggest that..."
As I never mentioned the Andamanese, nor claimed that they were dark to begin with. The best bet would be leaving me out of it. I was actually the one that argued against claiming that the ancient peoples were dark skinned stated as fact. As far as the evidence goes they could have been as light as the San or as dark as the Dinka. What I do know is that their features were definitely not close to modern San or Ethiopians. Both populations lack the robusticity that existed during the period in which Africans migrated out of Africa.
Again, closest are Australians, although they aren't that close either.
Skin tone, Frank. And that post directly contradicts your statement that I beleived The original Africans were dark skinned.
Obviously the San are not (I already learned that conflating the Khoi and the San is a gross innacuracy as the Khoi show a much heavier Bantu admixture presence than the San).
The Andamanese just point to the fact that dark skin among early populations migrationg out if Africa can ALSO be a possibility.
In other words, Neither KhoiSan or Dinka, Andamanese or fairer skinned indigenous populations are indication that their skin color came first. There is evidence of both. But as to facial structure (not skin tone) the Australian Aborigines still have the biggest robusticity of features in modern populations.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
