Re: really dumb DNA question


aganunitsi <ssyke...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Subspecies is the definition in question.

Oh, there are *So* *Many* questions...

One of the more important questions I can think of: How
it is that Elephants survived so long in north Africa and
even the middle east, when Mammoths were wiped out?

To me it's the ultimate piece of evidence AGAINST the
argument that man hunted the Mammoth to extinction,
a position which I myself have always supported.

See, I'd look at the miniature or "Dwarf" Mammoths which
survived IN ISOLATION to historic times, and conclude
that if isolation saved them then not being isolated (from
us humans) is what killed the rest. But if that's true for
the Mammoths, why isn't that true for the Elephants?

North Africa has been inhabited by humans since... well...
since before modern humans existed. Most of the people
of North Africa -- despite any "Arab" identification -- actually
trace their genetic lineage to the Berbers, who many
claim are related to/last of the "Cromagnon". That's west
of the Nile. Head east of the Nile and before you get out of
what was originally "The Levant" -- ancient Canaan or
Phoenicia -- you hit Syria, alleged home of the "Syrian
Elephant," a very large elephant which did not go extinct
until well into historic times.

...then there's the African Elephant itself.

So the more we learn about these (FSVO) "Recently"
extinct Elephants, the better we get at speculating about
Mammoths, and the role that man and the environment
played in their extinction.

Human migration is another area of interest. I mean, if
African elephants could spread of deepest Africa to north
Africa, so couldn't humans? But that doesn't seem to have
happened, or at least not by the evidence that I've seen,
No, it looks more like man crossed from Africa into Asia,
via the Red Sea maybe, and then looped back into
north Africa via the middle east or Europe.

And in the event I missed any recent smoking-gun evidence,
though trusting that everyone will ignores this, I must point
out that, in general, north Africa seems more closely associated
with europe and the middle east than sub-Saharan Africa. Yet,
it would be the exception to the Elephant rule where all the
populations from Europe through the middle east and into
Asia seem to be more closely related to each other than the
African Elephant.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Proper elephant guns for bicycle touring
    ... toward Egypt, ... They wrote up their trip in "Through the Heart of Africa: ... The difference between an elephant rifle and the lighter ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: Why are they still fighting with sticks in Africa?
    ... bones through their nostrils? ... I'm sure all the problems in Africa can and should be blamed on ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Sneck Lifter
    ... Tell.Did you ride an elephant, ... > coast, mountains, bush etc. Saw lions, elephant, (you don't ride African ... > leopard disappearing into the bush, duiker, loads of birds including black ... > Came back to a scorching Lake District (hotter than Africa). ...
    (uk.local.cumbria)
  • Re: Why are they still fighting with sticks in Africa?
    ... They are still fighting one another with sticks and putting elephant ... bones through their nostrils? ... I'm sure all the problems in Africa can and should be blamed on middle-aged ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Australopithecus afarensis vs. chimps
    ... Australopithecus afarensis by John Gurche. ... much as modern humans, but their hands are *much* stronger than human hands. ... KWing doesn't contradict tool use & manufacture, see chimps. ... Why in Africa? ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)