Search results

And now some other "heresy", attempting to put all the pieces together.. What we know: * blue or light eyes are selectively disadvantaged in regions where the landscape is covered with snow and ice for most of the year, due to the phenomenon of albedo which, without protection, can lead to...

Uhm, are you referring to the photo of "lady of Zagunluq" I've posted? In that case, maybe it can be appropriate to make the following clarification. No photoshop. It is taken from the web: https://www.dandebat.dk/images/529p.jpg But it is identical to the photo appearing in the book "In search...

An old photo (< 1999) of the "lady of Zagunluq".

Ah. A further note: the size of the mummies' noses can be misleading due to the mummification process which has removed most of the soft parts. I think it is more meaningful to consider the bony part of the bridge of the nose.

It must be said that most of the available photos represent female mummies. However another famous photo ( I hope to retrieve it...) shows a female mummy with large bizygomatic breadth (?-la-Cromagnon)

Suvvia , non e' il caso di arrabbiarsi!

Regarding broad face, a comparison between Cherchen man and Cro-magnon (artistical reconstruction) can be interesting. As well known, similar characteristics were largely diffused during Paleolithic from Aurignacian to Magdalenian.

It is interesting to remember an old work of a linguist C.C. Uhlenbeck, interpreting the protoindouropean as a creole language of two components: * (dene) caucasian (ket? vasconic?) * uralic languages IMHO the ideal place where this mix could have occurred is the ANE areal.

I myself am not too convinced by this proposal... But what I am proposing has the purpose to show that conclusions of controversial paper of 2021 are too hasty, because they exclude other possible models of indoeuropean expansion.

I am sorry, I'll try to explain myself better. I think that people in that area (ANE) always had a contribution from Baykal area (northeast eurasians). I think it was unavoidable. So "pure ANE" in this context must be understood as "free from (recent) western genetic contributions". But in...

Well, I find diffcult to accept that R1b and R1a haplogroups, which were present in mummies, have been misteriosuly disappeared. But if R1b is still there, then the conclusions of abovementioned paper of 2021 are wrong.

- persona (from etruscan): person - antenna (from estruscan *antithemna ): pole, antenna - istrione (from estrucan *istrio ): actor - arena (from estruscan) : arena - vernacolo (from etruscan) : idiom, dialect

I think we could define them depigmented cromagnoids.

Let's suppose to accept the controversial results of the paper (2021) which claims "pure ANE" ancestry (whatever that means) for ALL the earliest Tarim mummies (I think it is laughable, because of the sure presence of kentum, and very probably also satem, speakers at that time in the area...

Hair color is clearly not compatible, but even if we pretend that the difference is given by lights, IMHO at more careful analysis face features are not identical: nose, chin, cheekbones, eye sockets, skin defects... About pigmentation of europeans (and related mentioned paper "The Arrival of...

| Ok, maybe no R1a, so maybe no indo-aryan tarim mummy. But what about R1b? For example, at Xiaohe at least two mummies where R1b, and I want to stress that R1b is often related to kentum speakers, i.e. tocharian in this case ... Therefore, tocharians are not yet ruled out.

Another provocation... An old photo of "Xiaohe princess": A recent photo of same (?) mummy. Seriously, are these the same mummy?

By the way, have you noticed that conclusions are clearly in contradiction with another paper: "Evidence that a West-East admixed population lived in the Tarim Basin as early as the early Bronze Age" by Chunxiang Li, Hongjie Li, Yinqiu Cui, Chengzhi Xie, Dawei Cai, Wenying Li, Victor H Mair...

And now a provocation: can we exclude that ancient eurasians spoke the proto-indoeuropean language? Or to put it in another way: can we exclude that the real indoeuropean urheimat was the Ancient North Eurasian areal?

How do you explain the obvious contradiction with results from paper: "Evidence that a West-East admixed population lived in the Tarim Basin as early as the early Bronze Age" on Bmc Biology" (2010) ? Anyway, it's not a question of being obsessed. The question is to establish the truth, even if...