Analyses of the Anzick 1 genome

Below are the results of globe4, globe13, MDLP World-22, and Old World 26 analyses of the Anzick 1 genome.

The Old World 26 analysis identifies the Negroid admixture appearing in the other analyses as being primarily archaic.

The largest Mongoloid components for pure Amerindians in the K = 26 analysis, in decreasing order, were the Yakut, Naxi, Japanese, and She components. These components appear in the same order in the Anzick 1 results.

The largest Caucasoid or Veddoid components for pure Amerindians in the K = 26 analysis, in decreasing order, were the Finnish, Burusho, and Gujarati components. These components appear in the same order in the Anzick 1 results.

The Anzick 1 genome was of course seized upon by the ideologues and propagandists of the corrupt “scientific community” as conclusive proof that the Solutrean hypothesis is false, and it is of course no such thing.

The Y Q and mt A, B, C, and D Mongoloid-Caucasoid hybrid ancestors of Amerindians probably entered the Americas around 15,000 years ago, so it’s not surprising to find one of these people in Montana 12,785 years ago.

Below is a map of the density of Clovis points in North America. It shows that there are far more Clovis points in the eastern United States than in the western United States, and hardly any in Montana.

clovis

The oldest sites of human habitation in the United States are in the eastern United States. The Cactus Hill site in Virginia dates to 20,000 to 18,000 years ago. The Meadowcroft Rockshelter site in Pennsylvania dates to 19,000 to 16,000 years ago.

The oldest stone tools in the United States were found in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, and also in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Virginia. These tools date to 26,000 to 19,000 years ago, and they show similarities to both Solutrean tools and Clovis tools.

I recommend this video for an introduction to the Solutrean hypothesis.

The mitochondrial haplogroup X found in Amerindians is of Caucasoid origin, in spite of the asinine denials of this fact by the “scientific community”. X was found in 700-year-old remains from Illinois, and it was also found in 1,340-year-old remains from Washington. Vikings arrived in the Americas around 1000 AD, so X was in the Americas before the Vikings.

Two of the mutations that characterize haplogroup X were found in some of the skeletons from Windover Pond in Florida, which date to 7,000 to 8,000 years ago. None of the Windover Pond skeletons showed mutations characterizing Mongoloid haplogroups.

In his post on the Anzick 1 paper, Dienekes lumps the Solutrean hypothesis, the White Gods, and the Olmec colossal heads together with nonsense like Atlantis and lost Israelite tribes as being “in the realm of alernative [sic] history”.

The distinction between mainstream history and alternative history is only of sociological interest. The only distinction that matters is the distinction between true history and false history.

The mainstream history that says that the Americas were first peopled by people from Asia who moved down the Pacific coast 15,000 years ago is false history.

The mainstream history that denies that ancient human remains in Peru and Chile are Caucasoid is false history.

The mainstream history that denies that the Olmec colossal heads are Negroid is false history.

In this embarrassing post from last year Dienekes linked to my White Gods post, so he’s certainly aware of all of the photographs of ancient Caucasoid remains from Peru and Chile that I included in that post.

I included numerous photographs of the Olmec colossal heads in this post from last year, in connection with the Negroid admixture in Maya Indians.

If Dienekes thinks that there’s some doubt about the earliest sites in the US being in the eastern US, or about ancient human remains in Peru and Chile being Caucasoid, or about the Olmec colossal heads being Negroid, then I invite him to make a fool out of himself again, and say so explicitly, instead of just insinuating it.

Finally, a word about priority.

In November of last year Eske Willerslev and his associates falsely took credit for “revealing” that Amerindians are Mongoloid-Caucasoid hybrids, a fact which I had been revealing over the preceding 8 months. The idea that the “scientific community” was unaware that I had been revealing this fact is not plausible, as my revelation of it involved the public humiliation of the world’s most widely read anthropology blogger. Among the members of the “scientific community” that read Dienekes’ blog is Nick Patterson, one of David Reich’s closest associates. Dienekes’ posts about my refutation of one of Reich’s major claims certainly would have been of interest to Patterson.

My K = 26 admixture analysis of Amerindians and Mestizos showed that Maya and Peruvians have Caucasoid admixture which cannot possibly be from the post-Columbian Spanish. This is a scientific discovery of the greatest importance. I’m putting the “scientific community” on notice right now that if any of them attempt to take credit for this discovery, I will do everything in my power to expose the falsity of their claims.

globe4

  • 87.29% Indianid (“Amerindian”)
  • 4.73% Mongoloid (“Asian”)
  • 4.29% Caucasoid (“European”)
  • 3.69% Negroid (“African”)

globe13

  • 81.86% Indianid (“Amerindian”)
  • 6.70% Eskimid (“Arctic”)
  • 2.63% Paleo-Negrid (“West_African”)
  • 2.47% Nordic (“North_European”)
  • 1.94% Mediterranean (“Mediterranean”)
  • 1.58% Sinid (“East_Asian”)
  • 0.86% Tungid (“Siberian”)
  • 0.52% Melanesid (“Australasian”)
  • 0.49% Alpine (“West_Asian”)
  • 0.43% Nilotid (“East_African”)
  • 0.30% Veddoid (“South_Asian”)
  • 0.12% Capoid (“Palaeo_African”)
  • 0.09% Orientalid (“Southwest_Asian”)

MDLP World-22

  • 42.95% Centralid (“Mesoamerican”)
  • 31.75% Pacifid (“North-Amerind”)
  • 14.45% Brazilid (“South-America_Amerind”)
  • 2.29% Negroid (“Sub-Saharian”)
  • 1.69% Sinid (“East-South-Asian”)
  • 1.54% Aryan Nordic (“North-East-European”)
  • 1.23% Uralid (“Samoedic”)
  • 1.07% Mediterranean (“Atlantic_Mediterranean_Neolithic”)
  • 0.82% Eskimid (“Arctic-Amerind”)
  • 0.75% Melanesid (“Austronesian”)
  • 0.64% Cro-Magnon Nordic (“North-European-Mesolithic”)
  • 0.30% North-Indid (“Indo-Iranian”)
  • 0.23% Alpine (“West-Asian”)
  • 0.13% Bambutid (“Pygmy”)
  • 0.11% Capoid (“South-African”)
  • 0.05% Tungid (“East-Siberean”)
  • 0.00% Australid (“Melanesian”)
  • 0.00% East-Sibirid (“Paleo-Siberian”)
  • 0.00% Orientalid (“Near_East”)
  • 0.00% Qiangid (“Indo-Tibetan”)
  • 0.00% Veddoid (“Indian”)
  • 0.00% West-Sibirid (“North-Siberean”)

Old World 26

  • 24.40% Yakut
  • 16.78% Naxi
  • 12.11% Finnish
  • 11.26% Japanese
  • 6.61% Burusho
  • 4.31% She
  • 3.17% Gujarati
  • 3.15% Dai
  • 2.36% Archaic
  • 2.12% San
  • 1.98% Yoruba
  • 1.66% Papuan
  • 1.54% Basque
  • 1.28% Sardinian
  • 1.12% Biaka Pygmy
  • 1.10% Kalash
  • 1.04% Kenya Bantu
  • 0.74% Mbuti Pygmy
  • 0.73% Mandenka
  • 0.69% Lahu
  • 0.67% Brahui
  • 0.52% Melanesian
  • 0.42% Palestinian
  • 0.15% Mozabite
  • 0.09% Druze
  • 0.00% Bedouin
About these ads
Posted in Uncategorized
One comment on “Analyses of the Anzick 1 genome
  1. genetiker says:

    The 45-minute video that I linked to is an edited version of this 90-minute video that I found later.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: