Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Topic: & god created Neanderthal in his image Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 22:22 |
BBC News: Neanderthals 'mated with modern humans'
A hybrid skeleton showing features of both Neanderthal and early modern humans has been discovered, challenging the theory that our ancestors drove Neanderthals to extinction.
The skeleton of a young boy was found in Portugal.
Scientists say it shows for the first time that Neanderthals, who became extinct tens of thousands of years ago, mated with early members of our own species.
The scientists believe that the offspring of the interbreeding could be ancestors of modern man.
"This skeleton, which has some characteristics of Neanderthals and others of early modern humans, demonstrates that early modern humans and Neanderthals are not all that different. They intermixed, interbred and produced offspring," said Erik Trinkaus of Washington University.
But Joao Zilhao of the Portuguese Archaeological Institute said more research was needed to back up the controversial theory.
And Dr Robert Foley of Cambridge University told the BBC: "The fossil evidence as we currently understand it doesn't show the signs of hybrids between Neanderthals and modern humans, so it would be a novel and unusual find."
Child skeleton found in rabbit hole
The skeleton, thought to be that of a four-year-old boy, was found when an archaeologist explored a rabbit hole near the coast north of Lisbon.
The child had been given a ritual burial, with red ochre and pierced shells.
He had the pronounced chin and teeth of modern humans, but his sturdy limbs were more characteristic of the Neanderthals.
The Neanderthals were a powerfully-built species who evolved to cope with the challenging climate of Ice Age Europe.
While their brains were bigger than our own, Neanderthals never developed the sophisticated culture and technology that became the hallmark of their modern human contemporaries.
'Out of Africa' theory challenged
Most anthropologists believe that modern humans evolved in Africa by about 100,000 years ago. They eventually spread across the world - the so-called "Out of Africa" theory.
By 20,000 years ago, the Neanderthals were extinct. But it was not known whether modern humans destroyed them, or whether their distinctive characteristics disappeared through interbreeding.
Dr Trinkaus says the Portuguese skeleton provides powerful evidence for the interbreeding theory.
"This find refutes strict replacement models of modern human origins - that early modern humans all emerged from Africa and wiped out the Neanderthal population," said Dr Trinkaus.
The scientists believe that raises the possibility that people alive today could have some genes inherited from Neanderthal ancestors.
"A major contribution"
Chris Stringer, an expert on Neanderthal man at the Museum of Natural History in London, said he expected the find to make a "major contribution" to the debate on how the Neanderthals died out.
The hybridisation theory has been difficult to prove because only fragments of skeletons have previously been found, Dr Stringer said.
"The Iberian peninsula is an area where there was a significant overlap in time and space between Neanderthal and modern man. They could have coexisted for as long as 10,000 years," he said.
Longer Article
http://www.athenapub.com/8zilhao1.htm
|
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 23:37 |
Err, these hybrid skeletons are nothing new, but the question is, did
this process contribute dramaticly towards modern Western Eurasians, or
did these couplings produce a sort of homo equivilent of mules.
Whilst the existence of the skeletons suggest they could have had an
influence, some genetic studies suggest the opposite, but thats the
out-of-africa vs multiple origins AFAIK, skeletons vs genetics.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 00:18 |
Totally agree with Cywr: occasional Sapiens-Neanderthal breeding could
have happened but it doesn't seem anywhere that their genetics is still
among us. Quite conclusive was the study of MtDNA of Neanderthals which
shows that there are no unbroken female lineages originated among the
neanderthals among us and that they are genetically very distant
overall.
Also the fact that all "hybrid" skeletons found are of short age may
mean that the hybrid wasn't very viable and tended to die very young.
Edited by Maju
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 10:37 |
Just throwing out an idea for discussion...
Could the appearance of Caucasoids be down to interbreeding with Neanderthals?
Looking at the most direct descendants of our ancestors, the San Bushmen, the Mongoloid look seems to be an exaggeration and direct adaptation from San Bushmen as do those of Aborigines and Bantus. I am saying that they avoided the intermixing with Neanderthals whereas Caucasoid ancestors did not.
I am aware that genetic evidence thus far does not support this theory.
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 13:26 |
Originally posted by Zagros
Just throwing out an idea for discussion...
Could the appearance of Caucasoids be down to interbreeding with Neanderthals?
Looking at the most direct descendants of our ancestors, the San Bushmen, the Mongoloid look seems to be an exaggeration and direct adaptation from San Bushmen as do those of Aborigines and Bantus. I am saying that they avoided the intermixing with Neanderthals whereas Caucasoid ancestors did not.
I am aware that genetic evidence thus far does not support this theory.
|
Standard evolutionary theory believes all the races were fully formed before they left Africa, I believe.
However not all Paleontologists are convinced humans evolved in Africa, there are also theories humans evolved in multiple locations including the Middle East, India and Europe. If so it would advance the case for Caucasians being such. Though this is a less fashionable theory.
Edited by Paul
|
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 14:01 |
The articles I linked to are pretty old, can't find anything newer on the net.
A couple of additions found in the last 5 years of research.
Several sites have revealed humans and neaderthals co-habiting in the same area. That they co-existed peacefully isn't in real dispute. It's whether they mated.
The girl is not believed to be the child of a Neaderthal and Human, she is closer to 70% human. She is believed to be the descendant of parents who themselves were mixed race to varying degrees.
Neaderthal skulls fund in the surrounding area show quite different traits to neanderthals commonly found in other areas. Showing human traits to varying degrees. Along with this unique lithic technology is found amongst the bodies usually only associated with humans. Neaderthal lithic technology is more primitive and quite different to human, the kind of material found amongst Neanderthal bones was a type synonymous of humans.
As for the genetic argument, so far this is inconclusive because not enough is known about Neanderthal DNA to conduct a test.
As we know humans across the world when they first meet don't do the same thing. Sometimes one wipes out the other, sometimes they live in isolation of each other and sometimes they intermix. The Neaderthal/Human theory doesn't say all humans and neaderthals mated, but a mixture of three happened across Europe. When the English and Spanish travelled across the glode, met Indians, Africans, Aboriginies, they mated with them. Neanderthals weren't the hairy apes of Hollywood movies. And they were only seperated from man by 500,000 years evolution, less than 1/3 of lions and tigers who mate with no problem.
Forensic reconstruction of Neanderthal skull by crime lab
Edited by Paul
|
|
|
Afghanan
Chieftain
Durr e Durran
Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1098
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 22:53 |
This actor hear resembles a neanderthal:
Ron Pearlman
|
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 23:45 |
Originally posted by Zagros
Just throwing out an idea for discussion...
Could the appearance of Caucasoids be down to interbreeding with Neanderthals? |
According to Cavalli-Sforza (1996), Caucasoids are a hybrid of the
two main branches of Homo sapiens: Asian and African. But no
Neanderthal around that I know of: only specualtions and sufficient
indications that seem to prove the opposite.
What would Neanderthal blood mean to a hybrid:
- head shaped differently (less forehead more occipital region)
- strong constitution (hybrids would be a lot more stocky and strong than common humans)
- short height (neanderthals were pretty short, while Cro-Magnons were rather high)
None of these features characterize Caucasoid people. Instead Caucasoids have:
- a normal head
- a normal constitution
- are rather high, if anything
Caucasoid characteristics, when compared to other humans (Asian-Amerindians on one side and Africans on the other) are:
- high variability of color (skin, hair and eyes): from very dark to very pale
- high variability of hair texture: from very curly to to very straight
- big noses
- relative (but not total) lack of eyelid fold
- rather aboundant body hair
- higher than most East Asians and shorter than many Black Africans (excluded Pygmies and Bushmen)
Some of these characteristics fit well with a mixture of Asian and
African blood (height, hair texture, partial eyelid fold in some
groups), while others seem more local adapatation to climatic needs
(skin color, body hair, big noses maybe too), though all of them could
be largely accidents of genetic drift as well.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 23:52 |
Originally posted by Paul
Standard evolutionary theory believes all the races were fully formed before they left Africa, I believe. |
Not really. They kept evolving as they marched. And there's not
really a conclussive "standard evolutionary theory" for such issues.
Just it's quite clear that African-only lineages are the oldest ones of
the genetic trees. That's about all the conclussive it can be about
African origin of humankind, specially as it is coincident with the
oldest findings of H. sapiens skulls, which aren't found outside of
Africa but since 90,000 BCE.
However not all Paleontologists are convinced humans evolved
in Africa, there are also theories humans evolved in multiple
locations including the Middle East, India and Europe. If so it would
advance the case for Caucasians being such. Though this is a less
fashionable theory. |
There are many speculations but for them to become theories there
should be some solid evidence. So far those speculations, which I
believe have an ideological premise of racist or nationalist nature in
most cases, are totally unproven but rather falsified by more and more
data that supports the out-of-Africa paradigm.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 00:00 |
Originally posted by Paul
As for the genetic argument, so far this is inconclusive because not
enough is known about Neanderthal DNA to conduct a test. |
It is really?
I don't think so. It would be nice to have more data than just MtDNA
but that's pretty conclussive about Neanderthals being out of the way:
And a zillion of other links to articles on Neanderthal DNA and that of modern humans: HERE.
Edited by Maju
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 00:32 |
Originally posted by Maju
What would Neanderthal blood mean to a hybrid:
- head shaped differently (less forehead more occipital region)
- strong constitution (hybrids would be a lot more stocky and strong than common humans)
- short height (neanderthals were pretty short, while Cro-Magnons were rather high)
|
No it wouldn't. In early generations 20-30,000 years ago but nowadays all traces would have been watered down they would have vanished.
The DNA link you provides puts the difference between Neanderthals and humans on average 25.6 points. Humans vary 8 to a maximum of 24 points from each other. Neanderthals at the lower end of their average dropping maybe to 20-21 are more human than some humans then.
Still this is probably much smaller than the difference between the DNA of other species that mate together, such as the cat family.
Edited by Paul
|
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 00:35 |
Originally posted by Afghanan
This actor hear resembles a neanderthal:
Ron Pearlman
|
theory proven
|
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 01:58 |
Originally posted by Paul
Originally posted by Maju
What would Neanderthal blood mean to a hybrid:
- head shaped differently (less forehead more occipital region)
- strong constitution (hybrids would be a lot more stocky and strong than common humans)
- short height (neanderthals were pretty short, while Cro-Magnons were rather high)
|
No it wouldn't. In early generations 20-30,000 years ago but
nowadays all traces would have been watered down they would have
vanished. |
Why? We know that most modern European blood was here 30,000 years
back: there hasn't been any major migration into the continent since
then (even Neolithic and IE apportations seem small nowadays). So why
would the hybrids aspect get dissolved in itself?
If you have a mixed population isolated for 30,000 it will still be
mixed at the end of the period. And Europeans have been for the most
part isolated genetically in such a long period. Also, all remains
found are modern Cro-Magnoids, not Neanderthals or hybrid, who are only
found in scarce and disputable cases. Finally the fact that no
Neanderthal MtDNA has been found in modern humans, discards almost
totally that we could have Neander ancenstry.
The DNA link you provides puts the difference between
Neanderthals and humans on average 25.6 points. Humans vary 8 to a
maximum of 24 points from each other. Neanderthals at the lower end of
their average dropping maybe to 20-21 are more human than some humans
then.
Still this is probably much smaller than the difference between the
DNA of other species that mate together, such as the cat family.
|
Which link? I gave you a zillion links so you educate yourself and stop
making silly claims and whinning about your links being obsolete.But I haven't read all them.
The first link says (Archaeology magazine): They identified 27 differences between the Neandertal DNA and a modern
reference DNA sample over the replicated sequence. By contrast, DNA
from a random sample of a modern population might vary from the
reference DNA in five to eight places.
The second link approximates better what you say: The resulting sequence was compared with 986 distinct
sequences from living humans. The sequence differed from these in an
average of 25.6 positions. Living humans differ in this region in an
average of 8 positions, but the maximum difference is 24 positions.
But the pattern of mutations in the Neanderthal sequence was different
than in modern humans. For comparison, in this region, there are 55
differences between humans and chimpanzees.
But notice that you are comparing apples and oranges: modern human sequences differ from the reference sequence in an average 8 positions, while Neanderthal ones has an average difference of 26 positions. The maximum diference
in humans is 24 loci but this is not the average and the maximum
diference of Neanderthal samples is not mentioned at all.
This means that the average Neanderthal is out of the maximum Human variation for the studied DNA. Is it clear now? Graphically:
|.........|.........|.........|
1 2 . 3 N
1: Standard Human
2: Average Human
3: Limit Human
N: Average Neanderthal
So the average Neanderthal is not even human at the extreme.
Also, and most important is the sentence: but the pattern of mutations in the Neanderthal sequence was different
than in modern humans.
This means that not a single modern human has that sequence, what
mostly discards Neanderthal ancestry, at least via our grandmothers.
The simmilitude can explain why there seem to be some hybrids but the
diference of pattern means that Neanderthal MtDNA is totally diferent
from ours, what leaves their ascendancy, at least from the mothers'
side, out of any serious consideration.
Edited by Maju
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 03:31 |
Tsk, tsk... you maju are a very strongly opiniated one, aren't you?
I say, neanderthals not only intermixed with sapiens, but they still live among us... I mean, there are people resembling a neanderthal (in appearance and in what would be perceived as neanderthalian intellect and conduct) among us, not true?
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 05:22 |
Yes, I am sometimes.
But anyhow, how do you know that this or that trait is "Neanderthal".
I've taken a fast look at the known data about Neanders compared with
us and it doesn't seem to be the slightest relation.
A curious thing that you probably don't know is that now seems pretty
clear that Neanderthal people didn't use fire at all. The scholars
working at Atapuerca (Lpez de Arsuaga et al.) have determined that
there's not a single case of association of fire remains and any human
type that isn't H. sapiens (not in Atapuerca, nor anywhere else).
Therefore it's likely (this is my opinon) that the Neanderthal, having
evolved in the relatively harsh conditions of Europe (unlike us that
have been here only the last 40-35,000 years, not the 600,000 of local
evolution that culminated in Neaderthal men and women), was much better
equipped for cold climate: they were probably much more hairy and fatty
than us, I suspect.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 13:35 |
Originally posted by Maju
Which link? I gave you a zillion links so you educate yourself and stop making silly claims and whinning about your links being obsolete.But I haven't read all them. |
As usual with Maju after about 3 post he degegerates to the level of an 8 years old. And this post is mild compared to others.
Edited by Paul
|
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 14:00 |
Originally posted by Paul
Originally posted by Maju
Which link? I gave you a zillion
links so you educate yourself and stop making silly claims and whinning
about your links being obsolete.But I haven't read all them. |
As usual with Maju after about 3 post he degegerates to the level of an 8 years old. And this post is mild compared to others. |
Maybe I degenerate but you often make pseudo-scientific claims with a
very poor base. So guess that I can say that you directly start with
the 8 y.o. attitude, can't I?
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1314
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 22:55 |
As far as the rest of us are concerned, this whole thread has "degenerated". On the other hand, it is quite all right for the rest of us, that the two of you are "degenerates". Now, can we cut it out with name calling and continue with an interesting conversation or debate.........please.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Jan-2006 at 03:06 |
Yes, please. And my apologies.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|