"great Surprise"—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins

[Sevenbak]

This just in from National Geographic.

 

Nearly one-third of Native American genes come from west Eurasian people linked to the Middle East and Europe, rather than entirely from East Asians as previously thought, according to a newly sequenced genome.

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131120-science-native-american-people-migration-siberia-genetics/

 

As the accepted "science" is constantly shifting and evolving, It will be interesting to watch where this one goes.  It's also kind fun to read the comments at the end of the NG article, lots of pro and anti Mormons getting worked up.

[mfbukowski]

More like common sense.  You've got millions of people with millions of boats floating around the Atlantic and Pacific for thousands of years- surely a substantial number must have made it.

 

And personally, if I lived through a few months drifting around at sea, I would head inland as quick as I could and never go back near the ocean

[readstoomuch]

Even though BOM places, names and people have not been perfectly traced in the New World, the patterns the BOM alludes to keep showing up in the science like this one,

[katherine the great]

That is "just in?"  I read this last year.  It means that before one of the groups crossed the Bering Strait, their ggggggg+grandparents' people from further west met and married in to a group of East Asian people.

[katherine the great]

More like common sense.  You've got millions of people with millions of boats floating around the Atlantic and Pacific for thousands of years- surely a substantial number must have made it.

 

And personally, if I lived through a few months drifting around at sea, I would head inland as quick as I could and never go back near the ocean

This article has nothing to do with boats.

[Robert F. Smith]

That is "just in?"  I read this last year.  It means that before one of the groups crossed the Bering Strait, their ggggggg+grandparents' people from further west met and married in to a group of East Asian people.

Yes, this article, and the one in Nature upon which it is based, both appeared Nov 20, 2013, and they don't say what everyone thinks they do -- as you point out.

Edited December 1, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Darren10]

Kathrine and Robert;

I agree it's not as telling as many would like to think it is but this discovery is extremely compatible with the Book of Mormon narrative, is it not?

[katherine the great]

Kathrine and Robert;

I agree it's not as telling as many would like to think it is but this discovery is extremely compatible with the Book of Mormon narrative, is it not?

Is it?  The skeletons were 24,000 and 17,000 years old--many thousands of years before any Book of Mormon events.  

[strappinglad]

All hail the great Bering Strait land bridge over which every human to walk on North ,Central ,and South America prior to 1000AD had to pass. What were the immense pressures that drove countless thousands to cross over one of the most forbidding and desolate areas on the planet and then keep pushing south and east passed many excellent living areas and through dense jungles and unforgiving deserts to eventually inhabit all of the Americas? When the consensus has spoken, the thinking is done.

Edited November 30, 2014 by strappinglad

[katherine the great]

All hail the great Bering Strait land bridge over which every human to walk on North ,Central ,and South America prior to 1000AD had to pass. What were the immense pressures that drove countless thousands to cross over one of the most forbidding and desolate areas on the planet and then keep pushing south and east passed many excellent living areas and through dense jungles and unforgiving deserts to eventually inhabit all of the Americas? When the consensus has spoken, the thinking is done.

Resources, of course.  That is almost always the cause of migration.  This was an expansion that took place over thousands of years and was not much different than the expansion of people in Europe, China or anywhere else.  Humans are incredibly adaptable and Pleistocene humans were incredibly mobile.  They weren't farmers who settled down for generations, they were hunter gatherers.  

[canard78]

That is "just in?" I read this last year. It means that before one of the groups crossed the Bering Strait, their ggggggg+grandparents' people from further west met and married in to a group of East Asian people.

Thanks. I was about to say something similar. This article is a red herring on the "Lamanite DNA" question.

[canard78]

Is it? The skeletons were 24,000 and 17,000 years old--many thousands of years before any Book of Mormon events.

Don't confuse them with facts!

[LinuxGal]

That is "just in?"  I read this last year.  It means that before one of the groups crossed the Bering Strait, their ggggggg+grandparents' people from further west met and married in to a group of East Asian people.

 

And if you want to get technical, all humans have African origins.

[Darren10]

Kathrine;

Yes, it does fit extremely well with the Book of Mormon narrative. The best we have had so far. I realize the dates are way off but having a "significant minority" of ancient Native Americans with Eurasian DNA to me fits the narrative and helps to curb the argument that all DNA is from east Asia.

[Darren10]

I don't remember if it was on this site or a facebook friend, I think it was the latter, which made a post on challeging the Beiring Strait theory based upon linguistic evidence but I find its arguments compelling.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/03/19/how-linguists-are-pulling-apart-bering-strait-theory-154063

[Darren10]

Don't confuse them with facts!

Umm, that it runs contrary to the biblical narrative too. It does not bother me though and do note that I aknowledge that the Eurasian DNA is not the be all end all for ancient America and the Book of Mormon. In fact that was my opening sentence in my first post.

[omni]

That is "just in?" I read this last year. It means that before one of the groups crossed the Bering Strait, their ggggggg+grandparents' people from further west met and married in to a group of East Asian people.

I believe this is the third thread created based off this article since it's publication last year. Interesting enough I saw it pop up on my FB news feed today - must be catching it's second wind.

[SmileyMcGee]

Yes, it does fit extremely well with the Book of Mormon narrative.

Please explain how it fits the BOM narrative.

[katherine the great]

I don't remember if it was on this site or a facebook friend, I think it was the latter, which made a post on challeging the Beiring Strait theory based upon linguistic evidence but I find its arguments compelling.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/03/19/how-linguists-are-pulling-apart-bering-strait-theory-154063

It's arguments might be compelling if it knew what it was arguing against.  The Clovis first theory has been out of favor for some time now--certainly among the archaeological community because numerous pre-Clovis sites have been discovered in the last 20 years.  People were here much earlier than 10,000 ya.  There is limited evidence (physical--not linguistic) that a small group of people from Australia migrated to the Americas as long ago as 50,000, but that has nothing to do with the primary migration from Asia.  None of this even begins to challenge the fact that people migrated across the Bering land bridge when it existed. Linguistic evidence shows the great antiquity of Native Americans, yes.  We already know that.  My hat is off to Edward Sapir (I'm a fan.  Boas, not so much...)  I am mystified that so many people think that no scientist ever allows for other preColombian routes to the Americas.  When we address the Beringia migration, we are talking about a major migration of peoples who settled the Americas at the end of the Pleistocene--not a theory that excludes possibilities of other, smaller migrations of people at various times.  As far as I'm concerned, Native Americans descended from East Asians primarily and that their ancestors crossed the Bering Strait.  DNA supports it, their shovel-shaped incisors support it, the mongolian blue spot in their infants support it, archaeology and linguistics support it, heck, even their dogs' DNA supports it!  Why people go off on these fringe theories and say that we must now "rethink everything we think we know" is a mystery to me because these fringe things, at best--when well supported, can expand our knowledge--not replace it.  These Asian ancestry people were here when Lehi arrived.  Lots of them.  Millions of them.  Lehi and Sariah's DNA were a drop in the bucket.  Those are my thoughts anyway.  

[katherine the great]

And if you want to get technical, all humans have African origins.

Of course.  But by 24 kya, we were all over the place. 

[katherine the great]

Thanks. I was about to say something similar. This article is a red herring on the "Lamanite DNA" question.

Just to clarify, I am an active, believing LDS person. I just like to look at things with as much data as I find reasonable. I find it reasonable to believe that Native American ancestry predates the Book of Mormon timeline by many thousands of years.

[Darren10]

It's arguments might be compelling if it knew what it was arguing against. The Clovis first theory has been out of favor for some time now--certainly among the archaeological community because numerous pre-Clovis sites have been discovered in the last 20 years. People were here much earlier than 10,000 ya. There is limited evidence (physical--not linguistic) that a small group of people from Australia migrated to the Americas as long ago as 50,000, but that has nothing to do with the primary migration from Asia. None of this even begins to challenge the fact that people migrated across the Bering land bridge when it existed. Linguistic evidence shows the great antiquity of Native Americans, yes. We already know that. My hat is off to Edward Sapir (I'm a fan. Boas, not so much...) I am mystified that so many people think that no scientist ever allows for other preColombian routes to the Americas. When we address the Beringia migration, we are talking about a major migration of peoples who settled the Americas at the end of the Pleistocene--not a theory that excludes possibilities of other, smaller migrations of people at various times. As far as I'm concerned, Native Americans descended from East Asians primarily and that their ancestors crossed the Bering Strait. DNA supports it, their shovel-shaped incisors support it, the mongolian blue spot in their infants support it, archaeology and linguistics support it, heck, even their dogs' DNA supports it! Why people go off on these fringe theories and say that we must now "rethink everything we think we know" is a mystery to me because these fringe things, at best--when well supported, can expand our knowledge--not replace it. These Asian ancestry people were here when Lehi arrived. Lots of them. Millions of them. Lehi and Sariah's DNA were a drop in the bucket. Those are my thoughts anyway.

An interesting tidbit: There was a family in our ward in Illinois when I was very young who converted from Judaism. Their youngest son was born with that blue spot and thus they knew they had Mongolian ancestry.

Yes, Lehi and Sarah's DNA was a drop in the bucket but the idea of there being a "significant minority" of Eurasian DNA in Native American DNA seems novel. I know that scientists are open to many migrations. Linguistic evidence alone shows a vast amount of diverse peoples inhabiting the Americas but hasn't the Bering Strait been the dominant theory perpetuated for decades? What of trans oceanic voyages?

Edited November 30, 2014 by Darren10

[Darren10]

Just to clarify, I am an active, believing LDS person. I just like to look at things with as much data as I find reasonable. I find it reasonable to believe that Native American ancestry predates the Book of Mormon timeline by many thousands of years.

I don't know of anyone who would idsagree with that.

[carbon dioxide]

The dating does not prove anything about the BOM but it may be used at least to quite down the narrative that all native Americans came from Asia and are Asian.  Perhaps most of them did but not all of them.

[LinuxGal]

The dating does not prove anything about the BOM but it may be used at least to quite down the narrative that all native Americans came from Asia and are Asian.  Perhaps most of them did but not all of them.

 

2 Nephi 1:6 Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.