3 ms·

You’re right, but you’re being really rude about it. It’s rare (but not impossible) for a people to have been in the same place on Earth for thousands of years

You’re right, but you’re being really rude about it. It’s rare (but not impossible) for a people to have been in the same place on Earth for thousands of years. It’s more like hundreds.

Jensson 1y ago
> It’s rare (but not impossible) for a people to have been in the same place on Earth for thousands of years. It’s more like hundreds. Is it really rare? That seems to be the norm except for America and Africa that got replaced or displaced by colonization. But in Europe and Asia most areas has been populated by steady groups. Rulers come and go, but the people living there stays the same. I think its rare for everyone to have been there for a thousand years, but its not rare for a majority of the genes to have stayed in one place for a thosand years.
- defrost 1y ago
  Genetics strongly suggest Australia was settled by a single broad wave of humans that spread across the continent, finfing their niche, and staying in place whether that be east, west, north south, across desert, coast, rivers, forrest, etc. This contrasts to earlier "literary" arguments in magazines such as Quadrant that native Australians moved about and fought for territories with invaders supplanting original dwellers long before Europeans arrived. - https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-09-22/world-first-study-reveals-rich-history-of-aboriginal-australians/7858376 https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-09-22/world-first-s... is a national press article on some of that, my original references to the hosted papers on this seems to be offline / unavailable ATM (damn bitrot).
- travisjungroth 1y ago
  Thousands as in 2,000+ years? From my understanding that’s rare, at least by geography. I could be wrong. But it’s not like we’re being super precise here. It’s fuzzy enough that lots of takes are correct, depending how you frame it. That’s kind of my point in my other reply. They weren’t wrong but they were being rude about it.
- watwut 1y ago
  [flagged]

You’re right, but you’re being really rude about it. It’s rare (but not impossible) for a people to have been in the same place on Earth for thousands of years. It’s more like hundreds.

Jensson 1y ago

> It’s rare (but not impossible) for a people to have been in the same place on Earth for thousands of years. It’s more like hundreds. Is it really rare? That seems to be the norm except for America and Africa that got replaced or displaced by colonization. But in Europe and Asia most areas has been populated by steady groups. Rulers come and go, but the people living there stays the same. I think its rare for everyone to have been there for a thousand years, but its not rare for a majority of the genes to have stayed in one place for a thosand years.

defrost 1y ago
Genetics strongly suggest Australia was settled by a single broad wave of humans that spread across the continent, finfing their niche, and staying in place whether that be east, west, north south, across desert, coast, rivers, forrest, etc. This contrasts to earlier "literary" arguments in magazines such as Quadrant that native Australians moved about and fought for territories with invaders supplanting original dwellers long before Europeans arrived. - https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-09-22/world-first-study-reveals-rich-history-of-aboriginal-australians/7858376 https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-09-22/world-first-s... is a national press article on some of that, my original references to the hosted papers on this seems to be offline / unavailable ATM (damn bitrot).
travisjungroth 1y ago
Thousands as in 2,000+ years? From my understanding that’s rare, at least by geography. I could be wrong. But it’s not like we’re being super precise here. It’s fuzzy enough that lots of takes are correct, depending how you frame it. That’s kind of my point in my other reply. They weren’t wrong but they were being rude about it.
watwut 1y ago
[flagged]