Did Indians introduce dingoes to Australia?

[nanoboy]

I think the article's title is misleading, given that the researchers specifically said:

“We don’t claim the dingo and changes in stone tool technologies came with these migrants. We suggest that maybe they accompanied the people.”

That whole "maybe" word is something that I use casually on this forum when talking about aliens and Antarctic colonies, but if I were a serious scientist I would never use it so flippantly like these guys. Still, it is an intriguing theory, if not a new one.

Study links ancient Indian visitors to Australia's first dingoes

 

[zooboy28]

I think the article's title is misleading, given that the researchers specifically said:

“We don’t claim the dingo and changes in stone tool technologies came with these migrants. We suggest that maybe they accompanied the people.”

That whole "maybe" word is something that I use casually on this forum when talking about aliens and Antarctic colonies, but if I were a serious scientist I would never use it so flippantly like these guys. Still, it is an intriguing theory, if not a new one.

Study links ancient Indian visitors to Australia's first dingoes

I don't really see a difference between the first part of the quoted sentence and the second; doesn't "came with" mean essentially the same thing as "accompanied"? Or are they emphasising the difference between "claim" and "suggest that maybe"?

 

[Chlidonias]

I don't really see a difference between the first part of the quoted sentence and the second; doesn't "came with" mean essentially the same thing as "accompanied"? Or are they emphasising the difference between "claim" and "suggest that maybe"?

in the article the "maybe" is italicised: "We don’t claim the dingo and changes in stone tool technologies came with these migrants. We suggest that maybe they accompanied the people."

The whole article is badly-written. I think anyone with only a casual interest would understand the article to be saying that until this particular study nobody thought pre-European Aborigines had had any contact with other cultures, when in fact it has been well-known for a long time that foreign traders (e.g. from Indonesia) had been coming to Australia for thousands of years before Europeans ever turned up.

 

[nanoboy]

I don't really see a difference between the first part of the quoted sentence and the second; doesn't "came with" mean essentially the same thing as "accompanied"? Or are they emphasising the difference between "claim" and "suggest that maybe"?

I'll go with that.

 

[zooboy28]

in the article the "maybe" is italicised: "We don’t claim the dingo and changes in stone tool technologies came with these migrants. We suggest that maybe they accompanied the people."

The whole article is badly-written. I think anyone with only a casual interest would understand the article to be saying that until this particular study nobody thought pre-European Aborigines had had any contact with other cultures, when in fact it has been well-known for a long time that foreign traders (e.g. from Indonesia) had been coming to Australia for thousands of years before Europeans ever turned up.

I'll go with that.

Right, so a better way to write it would have been:
"We don’t claim the dingo and changes in stone tool technologies came with these migrants. But we suggest that it may be a possibility."

And by making such a suggestion, they are implying that Indian Wolves are the direct ancestor of the Dingo?

 

[Chlidonias]

the article says "Although dingo mtDNA appears to have a Southeast Asian origin, morphologically, the dingo most closely resembles Indian dogs". Basically they appear to be saying "we are disregarding the genetic evidence because physically they resemble dogs found in India today."

 

[zooboy28]

the article says "Although dingo mtDNA appears to have a Southeast Asian origin, morphologically, the dingo most closely resembles Indian dogs". Basically they appear to be saying "we are disregarding the genetic evidence because physically they resemble dogs found in India today."

Yes, I read that, and thought it was weird. What do they mean by "Indian dog" then, wolves or domestic dogs?

I could easily believe that a dog introduced to Australia from South-east Asia would change to resemble an Indian dog in some ways, as the environment is probably much more similar to India's (hot and dry) than South-east Asia's (hot and wet). Thus it would have the genetics of the South-east Asian dog, but more closely resemble an Indian dog's morphology. However, what morphological resemblance it has (dental, skull shape, body size, shape, etc) is not specified.

 

[Chlidonias]

Yes, I read that, and thought it was weird. What do they mean by "Indian dog" then, wolves or domestic dogs?

they are referring to domestic dogs

 

[nanoboy]

Here is another article on it. Aboriginal genetic study suggests Indian migration - Australian Geographic