The black death killing such a large chunk of humanity through out prehistory just makes me think that damn dogs and cats have REALLY been our best friends. Helping us take out pests and hunt for food and keep our livestock safe. We really wouldn't be who and what we are today with out cats and dogs.
Sure, but the populations he is speaking about existed far deeper into prehistory, before we domesticated wolves. That is a relatively recent occurrence, around 11,000 years ago.
Just started listening and interested to learn more. Dawkins would be an excellent guest as well. I'm interested Dawkins perspective of AI, functional self-awareness, etc.
David is great, but mate, you really didnt prepare enough for this interview, it felt like you were floundering and not really asking the right questions, or following what he was saying...bit of a wasted opportunity...
It is nice to get a break from the AI. You are doing god's work there. Important subject. But so nice to get some biology. And this guy was just the right kind of guest. Underexposed on youtube before.
@@arthurmair8901yeah, but how would you prepare? I like to think I can follow most anything, but what 3 books plus eigenvector math? To prepare I would need months. He deserves a series not just a.podcast.
The way David Reich speaks, his manner of phrasing possibilities rather than certainties, is a great credit to his intellectual standing. He does not think in terms of simple certainties, leaping from broad postulations of fact to far reaching conclusions. Rather, he is more interested in comparing possible alternatives, and questions popular models by always examining them against different models. One would be extremely fortunate to work with him, or be a student learning from him.
When a brilliant person says "I don't know" so many times, it gives me hope for humankind. ...and that he is a fellow N.American...wow. I didn't think we did that anymore. Thank you both for this interview.
I'm glad he admits this because we really don't know a lot about our past. We're learning. but we're not there yet (and I doubt we ever will get there since so much has been lost).
I have found that “I don’t know” is very difficult to say, but it is very important. It informs others, but more importantly reminds yourself that you have limitations. Of course everyone else already knows you have limitations but you sometimes delude yourself.
There's something so wonderfully haunting and wonderful about being able to capture parts of these ancient stories and journeys that people went on so, so long ago. TOTALLY love this - really exciting to be alive when this kind of revolution is happening :)
Incredible talk! Brilliant contribution from Dr. David Reich, simply riveting and mind-blowing to realize as an adult that the out of Africa only genesis for 'modern humans' is not totally correct. To think that Eurasians for example are possibly more admixture of Neanderthals and Denisovans than strictly modern humans out of Africa with a touch of those other sub groups is wild. This honestly makes much more sense when you think about all the other patterns of evidence and diversity that we see today.
I come from Eurasia region and I remember we studied about these Kurgans and early people in history lessons in schools. There are plenty of them in my country. Thankfully now DNA testing makes it easier. Anyways, I never heard my history teachers mention that we all come from Africa. We have people in this region since Stone Age. There are very early burials and sights. I only started hearing we all come from Africa past 2015 in US media and I always wondered why I never heard it before. We did study all existing early human remains found on Earth, not just our region, bc our course in the world history was extensive to say the least (when it comes to the earliest humans, there aren’t too many of those found). So different people and caves found in different parts of the world, and approximate dates. Ofc after so many years I no longer remember the details of what I studied in the secondary school. But never even once I heard that we all come from Africa. I did recently hear US historians say those Early Eurasians who lived in Central Asia and Southern Siberia had dark skin bc light skin wasn’t developed yet. I don’t know if it’s a theory or they found something in their DNA to suggest that, cause at this point all we see from them is very old bones and some remains of their objects.
I had to slow the video down to 0.75. This, undoubted brilliant man speaks far too quickly for this 81 year old. 😳 Excellent, thought provoking content!
I use a playback speed of .75 for mist YT videos involving normal human speech. I have no doubt that the option to speed up the playback is available and most producers (is that the right word?) choose it. I have been doing most of my reading with audiobooks for about 15 years now. I almost always slow down playback.
I am thrilled at your humility. So many "experts" talk like everything is known, like common assumptions & conclusions with little to no supporting facts are incontovertible. Fascitating presentation on important & interesting topic. Thank you.
He’s suggesting a truth when the established model is resistant to that.(Nazi ideology kinda hampered a lot of science and social science models because no one wants to be associated with it) He knows what likely happened because we have examples for the historic record and human behavior all across the world. Men from a culture killed the men from another culture and took their women. That’s how you get a dramatic demographic shift. Disease can contribute but stuff like that happens a lot. The Men winning wars lend their DNA to future generations. This even happened in the modern era to an extent. Some of it could be female mate selection where they leave their family. The human profile tends towards male expansion but females have an adventurous risk accepting type at a lower frequency. If you think of the male/female behavior, it kinda paints a picture. Men are more accepting of risk with some proportion being more risk adverse. Some portion stay behind, and some portion goes out. You need both. We also have a set up where younger men take more risk and older men less risk. All these things are biological. If you want a wife, you have to go win one from an enemy.
@@jeremymullens7167From my understanding, evidence show that the spread of Y dna of a group over another cannot all the time be attributed to the males of the first killing off all the males of the other and procreating with all the females. He suggests that interactions of humans with Neanderthal is not that. It seems over a long period, some human males will procreate within a group of neanderthals. This happened all over. Until such tine many of the Neanderthal groups have a significant human DNA. It might be the Neanderthals realized they needed more genetic diversity and since maybe because of their lesser developed vocal tracts they were less able to merge with other groups. So they might have captured human males who wandered into their territory. The group of farmers in Britain is also probably a different scenario. It would be unlikely that the invading Y dna group killed off the males and continued the farming culture of the invaded group. Same with the Austronesians. It would be unlikely for a sea nomadic group to simply wipe out the males of the population of every group they encounter. The case for this scenario might apply to the Beaker people discussed and the prior culture. The culture was wiped out as well as the Dna. So this might be that all the males were killed by the invading group. But again it seems the models and evidence show that that is not the only way Y dna spreads and dominates a population.
Now this is a real scientist. He is precise and is able to confidently say "I don't know". Unlike many egotists in science nowadays making ridiculous claims.
Their models are always out of date. The constant updates are handy, but the standard dogma seems to exclude any form of intervention by more advanced species from or located on either this planet or other planets. According to Theosophy (Secret Doctrine by Helena Blavatsky), the spark of mind was implanted in animal man around 21 million years ago. Modern science will catch up eventually, at least they're not pandering to Darwin and the fundamentalist Christians anymore.
David Reich is brilliant on Ancient DNA as much as Svante Pääbo who won the Nobel Prize in 2022. Reich’s 2019 book “Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past” lays a lucid foundation. I remember thinking years ago about how civilization expanded and Ancient DNA along with archaeology give lots of clues. Another was the book by David Anthony: “The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World”. That’s when we find out about the Yamnaya culture in the Pontic-Caspian Eurasian Steppe (West) region and then the Sintashta. Horse domestication for riding occurred in the same region.
Im surprised that no mention was made of the Himalayan Gene that gives increased immunity to disease. Also the so called Warrier Gene. I dont know if that gene has a specific area of increased incidence, but the profile is like the Klingons in Star Treck. I think they were the space version of the steppe horsemen!
I need like an animated map showing all the known human species’ evolution, migrations, meetings/mating with other human species, where they went once they left, how many migrations happened and just all of it lol it’s so hard to get even a broad picture in my head… granted, I guess that’s also how science feels right now lol but I wish I could just have a better basic understanding of how we got where we are. I try reading but I’m dyslexic, so, challenging at times haha
29 дней назад
The new simplified human tree starts with erectus who branches off denisovan a million years ago and then branched off sapiens 250,000 years ago. These are the only three species of homo. All other variants of homo were offshoots of erectus that died off before they created successor lineages,.. or they bred back into the direct lineal descent of erectus. Neanderthal is of direct lineal descent from erectus and not a branch. He is a regional variant of erectus just like all the heidleberginsis, habilis, tang, Damasili, dragon skull, rodiesan, flores, naledi skulls etc... all of them are variants of erectus, denisovan or sapiens. This is not the dyslexic version, it's the results of research into the African ghost population in Nigeria where there exists people with a 19% autosomal genetic match to erectus. Within this 19% archaic dna is super-archaic dna going back to australopichicene and dna we share with the bonobo. However, the results are so extreme that it will take a couple generations to integrate it into society.
Love the comment, thank you, but… to be fair, everything in writing is a “dyslexic version” for me 😉 lol Thanks though, I appreciate you kinda breaking it down for me
One of the most fascinating interviews I've seen or heard. Really impressive is that his willingness to admit what he DOESN'T know and that he remains open to other perspectivess.
This is great! I had you pigeonholed as strongly focused on AI, which is a mistake. Paleoanthropology is fascinating, and It’s great to hear your questioning, which shows a clear understanding of the field, drawing out all sorts of insights from your guest.
It really is fascinating. I admit that I sometimes feel like I’m looking at a 10,000 piece puzzle and don’t have the picture on the box lol I get so amazed by how humans evolved, how many species of humans evolved and all separately migrated, how so many mated and made little hybrid babies that became other lines of humans and… see? Puzzle pieces lol it’s like the more evidence and research that comes in, the harder it gets for me to conceive given how complex it all is This guy does a great job conveying the science though
About Yamnaya, its interesting that the old norse mythology written down by Snorre Sturlason at ca 1200 AD, "Ynglingesagen", describes the main God/chief, "Odin", comming from an area east of the river Don by the Black Sea: "The country east of Tanakvisl (Don) in Asia was called Åsaland or Åsaheim, and the main castle in the country they called Åsgård. One named Odin was chief of the castle".
I'm feeling particularly slow today, so just to be clear I'm understanding: If the story holds water, the fundamental implication here is that the gods of Norse mythology were, in fact, simply proto-Kazakhs who rode in one day and did/said something cool? Neat!
@@zillakamikaze5551that's because it's ancestor worship. But they are far from the only ones who are guilty of this. Caananites Babylonians, Egyptians, and all the little tribes absorbed by the hindi peoples added them to their roster. The Chinese still worship their ancestors, Native Americans retained some version of a supreme ancient diety but they were heavily into ancestor worship. The tragedy of this whole thing is that he needs to check out Neil Jeansons work, in 2022ish published a book called Traced. It's very technical and very dry but he does a good job of walking the readers through various events that have left clear echoes in the genetic record. There's definitely a bottleneck event near the Time of the Yamnaya, but I'm going to let y'all figure it out...
I believe in the 'Stoned Ape Theory' of Terence McKenna for how Humans developed. In our search for new foods, we came upon the psilocybin mushrooms growing in the dung of the animals we followed. We experimented with that and it caused a surge in brain development and consciousness. Very interesting theory.
Atun shai has a great video on him that kind of debunks the stoned ape theory. Give it a watch man you'd be thrilled to learn more about Terrence and his brother on thier journey.
Terence is one of the most interesting minds in human history, and I have read a lot of his work, but the Stoned Ape Theory is basically just wrong, and it’s not hard to disprove it genetically, archaeologically, etc
Mr. Patel, I am enjoying your videos. I appreciate. your efforts. I personally would enjoy your interview style more if you were more selective in what you choose to share. I think if you contributed less often, you might feel more freedom to slow down and more fully explain your. thoughts. Because the interview is not about you, I think you feel you have to rush through your thoughts and cut them short. This is totally understandable. I know I would benefit more from your contributions if you practiced a quality over quantity approach. Thanks again for providing a place to learn.
Great discussion. As we learn more, the history of human origins is a truly amazing story. 33:07 There is no evidence Tasmanian aboriginal people lost fire. From an official history of Aboriginal Tasmanians "Tasmanian Aboriginal people made fire using flints and fire drills. The flint created sparks when it was struck against another stone. Fire drills were pieces of hardwood that were rubbed or spun on a piece of softwood. The rapid rubbing or turning heated the softwood until it was hot enough to light some grass laid on the wood. For convenience Aboriginal people carried fire sticks especially when hunting - so they did not need to create fire everyday. The dry grasslands provided excellent fuel for fire, creating flames and smoke that flushed wallaby, wombat, bandicoot, bettongs, potoroos, possums, echidna, blue tongue lizards, and emu out of cover where they could be easily speared or clubbed." As an aside before European contact the Aboriginal people of Tasmania numbered in the tens of thousands. The story goes they knew they had once been part of a larger world but believed that it had been lost in the flood. They consequently thought they were the last surviving people on earth.
Its funny that the devil has cloven hooves though- not horses hooves! One driver of people north and west may have been the cool summer seasons and the abundance of grass. The Middle East went through some extreme drought periods. The sheep and goat herding wasnt great for fragile hotter climate soils. Its easy for organic matter to burn out rapidly. Maybe the sheep and goats came with the horsemen. In tbe Danube River valley, trade would have been fairly easy. Maybe we need to trace animal ancestry! Otherwise, you drive your sheep south over fall and winter to reach the markets. When drought hits, food becomes worth a fortune! Some people are tracing precious metal signatures too. You can tell where peoples trade extended to.
I need some diagrams and timelines to understand the older and newer models of human evolution.... A good bit of this is going in one ear and out the other
@@skoto8219 I wonder if there are old power systems in place which are blocking the research necessary to develop those new models... much like the Physics world.
This guy is great, I love to hear a scientist say he/she doesn't know something. If all of the total knowledge in the world was compressed into one 300 page book , there would still be an encyclopedia Britannica sized book to write about what we don't yet know. Rather than slap gap filler terms like dark matter to make the numbers fit our theories, we should acknowledge the shortcomings of current understanding. Too many people believe theories of current models are settled science (even scientists) and this impedes forward progress when large amounts of energy are wasted arguing with people about the things they think they know.
Precisely. There's no such thing as a righteous scientist. If 'scientists' are convinced of their certitude they are more priest than scientist. All theories and models should be consistently tentative no matter how convincing. There is a dichotomy between progress and standards, institutions like standards but standards stifle progress. Nobody enjoys having their entire life's work refuted but pure science doesn't care about your feelings.
this talk is amazing. I'm tempted to read his book but 6 years ago already seems old for this field--incredible how fast we are updating the details of the still quite fuzzy picture
He gets right to the meat of the issue, unlike most hand-wringing scientists who tip-toe around their "expertise", dreading the day their pet theory gets overturned.
15:17 interesting despite explaining there was a large swath of flora and fauna that extended from africa to arabia which posits “not really out of africa and your model of africa needs to include geography beyond the continent” and still uses the term “sub-saharan africa” what is this distinction? is there a latitude line everyone agrees on is sub saharan africa? is there a distinction between such a line south of western africa vs eastern africa? or is everything below the sahara what he identifies as sub-saharan?
56:45 This ia a perfect example of Equalism. Namely the claim that human cognition and behaviour is not affected by genetic adaptation to local environment - We all know it's worng. Life proves that to us, sooner or later; it bellies a strong bias.... I dont agree with Nick Fuentes about much....But on Havard, he's right.
Read John L Brooke’s ‘Climate Change and the Course of Global History.’ Climate has absolutely shaped all facets of human biology, archaeology, and history.
If Yersinia pestis was responsible for plagues in the bronze age in Europe has anyone thought that this might be also the cause of the bronze age collapse in the Near East?
The reference to Aboriginal Tasmanians is ahistorical. Like the indigenous groups on the mainland, there is enormous weight of evidence of Tasmanian Aboriginals using fire stick farming. The Bay of Fires was named by English navigator Tobias Furneaux in 1773 when he saw fires burning along the coast, lit by Tasmanian Aboriginal people. There are contemporary reports of use of flints and fire drills.
Can you put up curtains or blinds to block the glass doors behind the speaker? It's distracting watching people walk in the background. Just my opinion. Otherwise fascinating conversation! Thanks.
This makes me think of that joke: men think of important questions, like where humanity comes from and whether we'll land on Mars, while women ask the unimportant ones like "where do we get the food to feed the kids" lol. Her presence kind of highlights that the entire thing they do is pointless.
I honestly believe that different groups of humans existed all over the earth. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the people in each continent look different from those of other continents. Africa: Sub- Saharan African, Some White and brown races. Asia: Mongoloids, Indo-Ayans. Europe: Whites The Caribbean and Americas: Amerindians Australia: Aboriginals
Aren’t the Patels traditionally the merchant caste of India? The guys running caravans between cities, moving goods from faraway places to bazaars and markets all up and down the subcontinent? That could be a likely explanation for their relative genetic variability, yes?
This whole topic is so fascinating. It’s hard to wrap my head around the reality of different human species intermingling, migrating and evolving both separately but also not separately… 🤷🏻♂️
So summary for the first 15 minutes I've watched so far, "So, where did humans come from? Answer: Shrug. You'd think Africa, but maybe it's actually Africa. Maybe Middle East later on."
Damn I thought they were just classists. But they’ve also created a racial separation within the castes. We all see the racism hiding in there. Crazy how the caste system is as alive as ever. I have a couple of Indian friends, here in the states that came over from different parts of India, and they know each other’s caste and it’s real. 🤯
A logical follow up would have been to ask “can you speculate on what might have caused the changes in the methylation signature that led to the changes in the vocal tract of modern humans that is absent in Neanderthal and Denisovans?”
In the pre DNA 60s one theory of the origin of human nations traced common linguistic traits. This led to astonishing revelation that Hungarian and Finnish were from the same roots, part of which went back to Turkic and Mongolian languages. Indo European with roots in Sanskrit was thought to be the mother of European languages. The picture is now so much more interesting with genetics and anthropological research.
There is no clear evidence that Hungarian and Finnish (which are related, i.e. Finno-Ugric) are related to Turkic or Mongolian languagages; they share certain typological features, being for example agglutinative in terms of morphology but many languages are and there is no clear genetic relationship between these groups.
Saying Indo-European has roots in Sanskrit is oxymoronic. It is the other way around. Sanskrit is the oldest extant language, though it's not really a live language, it's more like Latin. Also, linguistic theory has evolved dramatically in the last 60 years.
@@mattsch21 David Anthony's theory regarding the Kurgans still has plenty of evidence to back it up....I have no idea where you're getting this perspective from
@@twinblessings2125 Because Indo-European languages don't come from Sanskrit. Sanskrit is a type of Indo-European language, like English or Latin or Persian. They all descend from a common tongue, including Sanskrit, so Sanskrit can't be what it descends from.
I am puzzled by the use of the word ‘species.’ I took a bio course in college in the 80’s where I was taught that if two individuals could breed and create a fertile offspring, they must be from the same species. Given that definition, all of the dna evidence that shows successful between breeding Neanderthals and modern humans indicates that they are the same species. Has the basic definition changed?
Neanderthals and Denisovans are the same species as modern living humans. Most genealogists classify them as a subspecies of modern humans. But they are more closely related to us then Erectus, or Habilus. To my understanding I think of them as different breeds to the same species. Like a pit bull and a Rottweiler are two breeds that descended from a wolf. If that makes sense.
A lot has changed since the 80s. Certain inter-species hybrids were able to produce fertile offspring, like Grizzly and polar bears. Still contrast-different ecology and behaviors of both species. On the other hand, Ring species became a thing (google it up). All that rendered the old offspring-based approach outdated.
i think it's weirder that we don't discuss the actual differences in intelligence that we see today. To suggest that there was a wave of intellect, when today i see people with such a wide range of intellectual differences that at some point people are actually too intellectually weak to understand intellect and the idea that there are ranges of it.
Intellect is the source of “humanness” as we know it. Its presence looms over every corner of our psychology, our actions, our identity. Of course, that means openly admitting to these immutable qualities or attempting to make progress in any sort of meaningful scientific discourse would mean no less than complete existential upheaval and outrage for the vast majority of people. That’s why the higher ups are willing to viciously ostracize scientists and shamelessly lie all in the name of maintaining that facade of inborn equality.
My family has autosomal or whatever it is called..dominant issues. How teh hell did we live? Could it just be a recent mutation in my lines mitochondria? Mitochondrial issues suck
An important point is because of the nature of DNA survival there may be regions of the world where we never will find archaic human DNA of the residents there, so we may never get a complete and accuracy picture of human. In addition there is a big political movement which extends to academics in the social scientists, almost exclusively in the US, to not allow study of ancient DNA. It is a very powerful movement in the US.
I loathe these people. There is no bigger sin than trying to erase or change someone else's history, I don't care how uncomfortable it makes you. The US is a very religious nation that was started by multiple extremist groups of Protestants, that is not stained by an orthodoxy in accordance with the Constitution. Because Jefferson and Madison really had an issue with the Church of England. This makes Americans really prone to radicalization. It is a new Puritanism. That doesn't mean other countries can't take up the mantle.
indeed, there is so much biais about what DNA we have access and what DNA we will never access that I have a hard time Reich and his collegues would be able to "trace" the reality of human lineage...
@@indyzaga It's usually with regards to "Native Americans," who fight DNA testing, because it would show they're not that related to Clovis peoples and the people buried near where they live, since they were largely nomadic, and didn't traditionally live where they live now. It kinda hurts the "this land is our land for generations" thing when it's shown that's not the case. That's my understanding of it. 🤷🏼♂️
Important to remember that genetics is just one part of humanitys development. It says just who married and got children with each others. Culture and intellectual developed not only in families, but in society as a whole, where a lot of people where not relatives.
Thank you for bringing us the esteemed scientist to RU-vid. Very stimulating. One observation I had was this. You really should concentrate on your prep more. It's unclear if you were just starstruck, but your dialog meandered between unrelated and off-the-cuff style until you landed a question. It appears you are knowledgeable and somewhat versed in your subject matter, but the interview took an inordinate amount of time to get to the to the point of your podcast's title.
This seemed like a very jumbled and abstracted discussion of topics without the introduction required to understand what's being talked about. You both repeatedly say that models are being rewritten, but it's hard to understand what exactly his revision is. I need a documentary film to explain it all.
Regarding Islamic history and the few surviving bits from pre Islamic arabia being repeatedly affirming it was a strongly feminist society; lol It isn't following forward or backward. It only follows who is best at using force to impose their beliefs on others.
My adhd fast talking brain can follow him well..I like fast speakers...I usually need to speed up videos to keep my attention and focus...to each their own ^^ I don't think him talking fast means he is dishonest ..just another way of existing.
This jnformation gives us more 'wiggle' room to make the theory work of modern humans leaving Africa 70,000 years ago and arriving in Australia a mere 5,000 years later. including a sea crossing. With successive groups potentially arriving from southern Asia instead of all the way from Africa this theory seems much more plausible.
Ideally in a couple different books. It says the earth is older than this universe. Feels like the time span of events are rushed to seem less significant in some ways. 70,000 could have roughly been closer to 100,000. Genetics change based off the inner structure of the individual, and the environment and conditions that they face
By "modern humans", does Reich mean Eurasians, or is he referring to Sub-Saharan Africans? Edit - OK, Reich seems to clarify the issue here: (1:21:15) "It's not even obvious that non-Africans today are modern humans, maybe they're Neanderthals who became modernized by waves & waves of admixture." So "modern humans" means SSA, & "Neanderthals" means Eurasian precursors who became successively de-Africanized & differentiated from SSA through interbreeding over at least 300,000 years. Additionally, the significant gene flow of Neanderthals around 50,000 years ago Reich referenced into whatever the "early Eurasians" were looking like at the time was probably very important, coinciding as it did with the explosion of material culture that marked the transition into the Upper Paleolithic. Thanks DP for this interesting interview! o/
Modern humans are characterized by light skeletons, long limbs, globular skulls, flat face and chin. Neanderthals are characterized by heavy and robust skeletons, short limbs, elongated skulls, face with great facial projection, a giant nose base, hyperdeveloped superciliary arch in males, without chin development. The first Neanderthal skulls were found 400 thousand years ago in Europe but were little different from the last Neanderthals of 40 thousand years ago, the first skulls of Homo Sapiens were found in the Horn of Africa or East Africa, 225 thousand years ago. However, the first skull of a modern human in Eurasia was found in Southeast Asia, with an age of 80 thousand years.
@@user-yt3xd2jl6d Thanks for the correction & additional info - I was off in my characterisation of the 'Thals. o/ It's neat what Reich was saying about some significant modern human - 'Thal gene flow ~300kya: the 'Thals are thought to have diverged sufficiently from _H. heidelbergensis_ to be considered their own thing somewhere inside of a rather broad window of 800kya to 300kya. Could this significant gene flow from modern humans into 'Thals ~300kya be the period during which they most quickly & sharply diverged from _heidelbergensis?_ Seems like it could be.
No, there were many different populations evolving separately in different regions of Africa. It’s way more complicated than that. Even SSA are a recent population. The Bantu Expansion is the reason we think that Africa looks one way. 4k years ago it didn’t look that way.
No, there were many different populations evolving separately in different regions of Africa. It’s way more complicated than that. Even SSA are a recent population. The Bantu Expansion is the reason we think that Africa looks one way. 4k years ago it didn’t look that way.
Read his book when it came out and he changed everything I was taught about humans in college. There are very few interviews with him like this, usually he is lecturing. Great job. Thanks.
The most striking thing I've learned from researching family history is that small numbers of immigrants swamped indigenous populations very quickly. And those small numbers ballooned over the last 100 years or so. The population in my home town grew from about 762,000 to 2.5 million during my life time. For my mother it was less than 500,000 to 2.5 million. Most people alive today are indeed cousins.
Why do you say "small numbers" and then talk about millions of people? Population grows through birth has clear upper limits, impossible to get from less than 300.000 to over a million in your life time. What you are talking about are large numbers of migration, not a tiny minority suddenly out booming the rest.
I agree with a lot was being said and with the Yamnaya male nomads they would’ve had to live off and take the resources of the local people in order to sustain themselves, and it was often done violently However, let’s look at the British. Let’s look at the Spanish, the French and the Portuguese. They were looking for resources to exploit to take back to their home countries in Europe, and they needed labor. They had to convince the local indigenous population to cooperate with them and trade with them or supplant their culture in order to vocalize and specialize in production of certain commodities, or they needed to import labor. The British and the French initially had surplus population they could rely on to send overseas. The Spanish did not have surplus and especially the Portuguese did not have surplus population if you look at the quality of their land. So they had to enslaved labor from West Africa In the case of the British with India, they had a large amount of population to exploit so they just simply created an administration to specialize these people into productive activities that benefit in the 1800s In the case of the Spanish and the Portuguese, they were interested in converting people to their religious beliefs and we’re done quite successfully
