Mungo Man Comes Home

[icyfroth]

Mungo Man returned to ancestral home where he died 40,000 years ago

Traditional owners say the return of the remains of the historic Mungo Man, who was removed by scientists from his resting place more than 40 years ago, will provide closure and is a step toward reconciliation.

More than four decades ago anthropologists removed the ancient skeleton of an Aboriginal man, the discovery of which rewrote Australian history.

Now he has been returned home to his descendants, travelling for days in a hearse from Canberra.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-17/mungo-man-returned-to-ancestral-home/9159840

Can Australia's mordern Indiginous ppl really lay claim to him as an ancestor though?

An article from ABC science in 2001 says the following:

 "In a technical tour de force, a team led by Thorne has extracted and analysed parts of a single gene from Mungo Man. More stunning still, the researchers claim that what they discovered is that the man's DNA is unlike anything they have ever seen. While Mungo Man was undoubtedly fully modern anatomically, he came from a genetic lineage that is now extinct."

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2001/01/01/2813404.htm

So if his lineage is now extinct, how can today's aborigines be his descendants?

[the_great_she_elephant]

An "absent friend" has asked me to post the following:

EVEN IF mungo man's DNA cannot be verified totally, it STILL DOESN'T PROVE THAT MODERN ABORIGINALS WERE FIRST. There could be an even more ancient race whose skeletal remains have not yet been found.
You quote:"The big problem with ancient DNA work is that it's very easy to make copies and amplify sequences that don't belong to the sample itself, for example to someone who's been handling the bone," he said.

1. So, it's been handled by 'modern' humans? They should be able to isolate the 'modern' stuff from the ancient stuff. After all, the 'modern' stuff is not extinct, is it? Only the part that ISN'T modern.

2. Also, what about the race of pigmies that were still around in 'modern history'? Were they here before the modern Aboriginals? No-one can say, can they!

I'm not sure what my friend means by the race of pigmies. I have never heard of any pygmies in Australia.  I wonder if he/she was thinking of the 'hobbits' (homo florienensis) that were found in Indonesia.

I agree that it is not and will never be possible to prove beyond any shadow of doubt  that Aborigines were the first Australians, but until compelling evidence to the contrary is found, I think it is reasonable to assume that they were.

[not_for_sale2025]

Most DNA examinations that eventually make the Journals have been carried out by experts who I am sure know about handling concerns LOL. But who knows what the continents were like 40,000 years ago and what the ice age did to tectonic plates. People may have walked over the land onto what is now another country!  I agree that until other reputable evidence is found, we should accept the current evidence that Aboriginals were the first Australians.

[icyfroth]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

I agree that it is not and will never be possible to prove beyond any shadow of doubt  that Aborigines were the first Australians, but until compelling evidence to the contrary is found, I think it is reasonable to assume that they were.

---

You know what they say about "assume" don't you?