Could a handful of stone tools coated with a sticky black substance conceal a vital clue to the mysterious Neanderthals? NOVA's "Decoding Neanderthals" explores a surprising claim that these prehistoric people invented an artificial glue that required a complex manufacturing technique; in effect, that Neanderthals developed the first industrial process. The claim has an important bearing on the heated, century-old debate about the abilities of these Ice Age hunters who occupied Europe and Asia for at least 300,000 years.
Neanderthals died out just as our species—Homo sapiens—spreading from Africa, arrived around 40,000 years ago. If the claim is correct, it helps cast doubt on previous assumptions that Neanderthals lacked the abilities of modern humans to plan ahead, innovate, and communicate through language, art, and symbolism.
There is a growing weight of evidence that we may have underestimated Neanderthal skills and behavior, and that they were not the lumbering, dim-witted cartoon cavemen of popular legend. At the same time, many questions remain contentious—for instance, whether Neanderthals had language, intentionally buried their dead, or regularly used mineral pigments to decorate their bodies.
Ever since the white man claimed to have 5% Neanderthal genes. The whole perspective on Neanderthals changed 180 degrees. The Neanderthal went from dimwited to highly intelligent.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The discussion here is the "racist application". And how the Neanderthal have gone from dimwits to superior beings, ever since the white man claimed to have Neanderthal DNA. It's ironic and amusing at the same time. This amazing transition happened in a relatively short period, within the last decade.
"This is absolutely bonkers, This Neanderthal species has become a religion itself." --Scopps94
"haplogroup r1b1a is westen european neanderthal white x atlantian white hybrids...they are the purest blood on earth today and coveted by the evil reptile x atlantian hybrid 0- elite who rule the world..." --MyBelowme
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Researchers say Neanderthals were not our dimwitted inferiors
quote:
No offense, but your ancestors probably were no brighter than a Neanderthal.
That's the message a pair of researchers delivered on Wednesday after analyzing archaeological evidence detailing the capabilities of Neanderthals, our closest extinct human relative, compared to the early modern humans who first crossed their path about 40,000 years ago.
The researchers said the findings show Neanderthals were anything but the incompetent dimwits that they are often deemed.
These include: complex hunting methods that required a group effort and planning in advance; likely use of spoken language; use of pigments probably for body painting; use of symbolic objects like eagle claws and perforated animal teeth, probably for pendants; and the sophisticated use of fire.
"We found no data in support of the supposed technological, social and cognitive inferiority of Neanderthals compared to their modern human contemporaries," said Wil Roebroeks, an archaeologist at the Leiden University in the Netherlands.
"The vision of primitive club-wielding brutes who in the end vanished when superior modern humans entered their world has been obsolete for a long time already," Roebroeks added.
Neanderthals prospered across Europe and Asia from about 350,000 to about 40,000 years ago, but disappeared after early modern humans trekked into Europe from Africa.
Many scientists had postulated that Neanderthals were too stupid, clumsy and incompetent to survive a competition with the smart and inventive modern humans who invaded their territory.
Paola Villa, a curator at the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History, said the truth is far more complex.
Genetic evidence shows there was inter-breeding between Neanderthals and the early modern humans, Villa noted.
Male offspring resulting from inter-breeding were likely infertile, which may have contributed to a Neanderthal population decline, Villa said. The remnants of the Neanderthal population eventually may have been assimilated into the larger modern human population in a process that unfolded over a period of a few thousands of years, she added.
"In a certain sense, they are not completely extinct because some Neanderthal genes are present in our genome," Villa said.
There were some anatomical differences between the two species: the robust, large-browed Homo neanderthalensis and the sleeker Homo sapiens. For example, the bodies of Neanderthals were shorter and stockier than modern humans, and the middle part of the face was bigger, with a larger nose.
Writing in the scientific journal PLOS ONE, Villa and Roebroeks highlighted some of the capabilities of Neanderthals.
They pointed to archaeological sites in Europe such as one a in southwestern France, where Neanderthals probably herded bison to their deaths by leading them into a sinkhole. At a Channel Islands site, fossil remains of mammoths and woolly rhinos that most likely had been the target of an organized hunt by Neanderthals were found at the base of a ravine.
(Reporting by Will Dunham; editing by Andrew Hay)
Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/30/us-science-neanderthals-idUSKBN0DG1XO20140430#RtsqmXw4kaeYpysr.99
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed Neanderthals were black. To TPs point not sure there were Albino ones but there possibly were Albino Neanderthals but no proof.
However Neanderthals carried ALL ancestral alleles for black skin. The Supplemental has the genetic pigmentation make up of Neanderthals. All were black. Chart is posted somewhere on ESR.
===============
Patterns of coding variation in the complete exomes of three Neandertals Sergi Castellanoa,1, …, and Svante Pääbo Significance We use a hybridization approach to enrich the DNA from the protein-coding fraction of the genomes of two Neandertal individuals from Spain and Croatia. By analyzing these two exomes together with the genome sequence of a Neandertal from Siberia we show that the genetic diversity of Neandertals was lower than that of present-day humans and that the pattern of coding variation suggests that Neandertal populations were small and isolated from one another. We also show that genes involved in skeletal morphology have changed more than expected on the Neandertal evolutionary lineage whereas genes involved in pigmentation and behavior have changed more on the modern human lineage. .
Abstract We present the DNA sequence of 17,367 protein-coding genes in two Neandertals from Spain and Croatia and analyze them together with the genome sequence recently determined from a Neandertal from southern Siberia. Comparisons with present-day humans from Africa, Europe, and Asia reveal that genetic diversity among Neandertals was remarkably low, and that they carried a higher proportion of amino acid-changing (nonsynonymous) alleles inferred to alter protein structure or function than present-day humans. Thus, Neandertals across Eurasia had a smaller long-term effective population than present-day humans. We also identify amino acid substitutions in Neandertals and present-day humans that may underlie phenotypic differences between the two groups. We find that genes involved in skeletal morphology have changed more in the lineage leading to Neandertals than in the ancestral lineage common to archaic and modern humans, whereas genes involved in behavior and pigmentation have changed more on the modern human lineage.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Agreed Neanderthals were black. To TPs point not sure there were Albino ones but there possibly were Albino Neanderthals but no proof.
However Neanderthals carried ALL ancestral alleles for black skin. The Supplemental has the genetic pigmentation make up of Neanderthals. All were black. Chart is posted somewhere on ESR.
Interesting, so originally todays Europeans were racist agianst Neanderthals, thinking they were inferior, dumb white brutes. (they thought they were white of skin but a different lower race of whites)
But when they looked at the neanderthal genome and discovered that the Neanderthals were black and that their own black European human ancestors had mixed with the neanderthal blacks, they stopped being racist against the Neanderthal.
(assuming the chart is somewhere on ESR)
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah I too noticed the trend of trying to place Neanderthals as some superior species than Homo-Sapiens by the extreme Eurocentric camp.
I find it hilarious, especially considering the Neanderthals could not compete with the incoming Homo-Sapiens.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: But back to the topic.......
As you said, back on topic. Thanks.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: Yeah I too noticed the trend of trying to place Neanderthals as some superior species than Homo-Sapiens by the extreme Eurocentric camp.
I find it hilarious, especially considering the Neanderthals could not compete with the incoming Homo-Sapiens.
First time I was notified, was years ago when the is "news got viral". I bumped into a Vloger. A white dude. He started taking about this "discovery". He was the one who addressed white supremacy, on how in the future they would make claims on how Neanderthals were actually highly intelligent. He stated that this is what white supremacy ultimately is about. This was somewhere in 2007, or around that time.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: But back to the topic.......
As you said, back on topic. Thanks.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: Yeah I too noticed the trend of trying to place Neanderthals as some superior species than Homo-Sapiens by the extreme Eurocentric camp.
I find it hilarious, especially considering the Neanderthals could not compete with the incoming Homo-Sapiens.
First time I was notified, was years ago when the is "news got viral". I bumped into a Vloger. A white dude. He started taking about this "discovery". He was the one who addressed white supremacy, on how in the future they would make claims on how Neanderthals were actually highly intelligent. He stated that this is what white supremacy ultimately is about. This was somewhere in 2007, or around that time.
This as an attack on the OoA theory. The OoA event indicates that all mankind are descendants of an African Eve and Adam.
Europeans continue the myth that Neanderthals were white. In claiming a white existence for Neanderthals, Europeans are attempting to resurrect the multiregional theory, i.e., Europeans were homo sapien sapiens that evolved from Neanderthals, not AMH from Africa.
They hope to use the neanderthals to maintain white supremacy.at first they could continue the myth by claiming that Africans did not carry any neanderthal genes. This was fine until Prufer detected Khoisan carried neanderthal genesThe Khoisan share a phylogenic relationship with Altai Neanderthals (Prufer et al., 2014).
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde stop being ridiculous, they said all over the mainstarem media that -Europeans are a mere 1-4% neanderthal
-Yorubas and some other Africans DO have neanderthal have atlower frequencies - One article says East Asians have higher neanderathal ancestry than Europeans -The people with the highest non-AMH ancestry are the Papaua New Guineans 5.5% Denisova hominid, (Denisova the similar to neanderthal species found in Siberia) (Papua Supremacy)
Perhaps the neaderthal came in different colors depending on which region they came from (let's see some article quotes) But if one was dark, the skin color alone would not make them necessarily more similar to a dark skinned human than to a light skinned human
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde stop being ridiculous, they said all over the mainstarem media that -Europeans are a mere 1-4% neanderthal
-Yorubas and some other Africans DO have neanderthal have atlower frequencies - One article says East Asians have higher neanderathal ancestry than Europeans -The people with the highest non-AMH ancestry are the Papaua New Guineans 5.5% Denisova hominid, (Denisova the similar to neanderthal species found in Siberia) (Papua Supremacy)
Perhaps the neaderthal came in different colors depending on which region they came from (let's see some article quotes) But if one was dark, the skin color alone would not make them necessarily more similar to a dark skinned human than to a light skinned human
You white supremacist you are ridiculous to try and claim the Neanderthal people came in different colors.There were probably Neanderthal Albinos, but albinos and whites have different craniometric measurements. Albinos have negroid measurements. And whites have western European measurements.Whites and Blacks have different craniometric measurements.
The Neanderthals were Blacks.
[b] Let's look at the evolution of homo sapiens.
The Eves were also African
The Aurignacian people who replaced the Neanderthal looked like this
Below is the ancestor of Neanderthals
,
. Here is a picture of Neanderthal man
.
By 100kya Neanderthal looked like this
As you can see, there is little difference between the African ancestor of Neanderthals, and the Neanderthals themselves.
posted
The whole idea that Neanderthal man is different from anatomically modern humans (AMH) is a stupid concept. It is stupid because 1) Neanderthal man is suppose to be a descendant of Rhodesian man who originated in Rhodesia, and 2) Neanderthal man looked no different from the average African or Negro.
.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: But back to the topic.......
As you said, back on topic. Thanks.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: Yeah I too noticed the trend of trying to place Neanderthals as some superior species than Homo-Sapiens by the extreme Eurocentric camp.
I find it hilarious, especially considering the Neanderthals could not compete with the incoming Homo-Sapiens.
First time I was notified, was years ago when the is "news got viral". I bumped into a Vloger. A white dude. He started taking about this "discovery". He was the one who addressed white supremacy, on how in the future they would make claims on how Neanderthals were actually highly intelligent. He stated that this is what white supremacy ultimately is about. This was somewhere in 2007, or around that time.
This as an attack on the OoA theory. The OoA event indicates that all mankind are descendants of an African Eve and Adam.
Europeans continue the myth that Neanderthals were white. In claiming a white existence for Neanderthals, Europeans are attempting to resurrect the multiregional theory, i.e., Europeans were homo sapien sapiens that evolved from Neanderthals, not AMH from Africa.
They hope to use the neanderthals to maintain white supremacy.at first they could continue the myth by claiming that Africans did not carry any neanderthal genes. This was fine until Prufer detected Khoisan carried neanderthal genesThe Khoisan share a phylogenic relationship with Altai Neanderthals (Prufer et al., 2014).
This was very well analyzed, the quintessential, thanks for this contribution.
This is also the reason why they fight so hard for a Eurasian basal clade. And then made "multiple returns" into African.
In the upcoming week I will make a thread, and it will be deep. Hopefully I find time and space.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde stop being ridiculous, they said all over the mainstarem media that -Europeans are a mere 1-4% neanderthal
-Yorubas and some other Africans DO have neanderthal have atlower frequencies - One article says East Asians have higher neanderathal ancestry than Europeans -The people with the highest non-AMH ancestry are the Papaua New Guineans 5.5% Denisova hominid, (Denisova the similar to neanderthal species found in Siberia) (Papua Supremacy)
Perhaps the neaderthal came in different colors depending on which region they came from (let's see some article quotes) But if one was dark, the skin color alone would not make them necessarily more similar to a dark skinned human than to a light skinned human
The Chimpanzee has 12% Neanderthal DNA.
But this trait is about whites making the Neanderthal into a super being, while before the Neanderthal was considered a dimwit.
Do you understand what I am talking about, and the purpose of this thread?
It is the latest and most extreme for of white supremacy being displayed.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
this is incorrect. Show me a peer reviewed article that says this - articles written by non-scientists don't count
-and even in that article you have misinterpreted the information
primary source:
Noonan, James P.; et al. (17 November 2006). "Sequencing and Analysis of Neanderthal Genomic DNA"
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
But this trait is about whites making the Neanderthal into a super being, while before the Neanderthal was considered a dimwit.
Do you understand what I am talking about, and the purpose of this thread?
It is the latest and most extreme for of white supremacy being displayed. [/QB]
that is also false
show us an article in any known publication or journal that says neanderthals had intelligence above human or are a "super being" in any way
The thing that may have been false is that people used to have the impression that neanderthals were dimwits
Now they say neanderthals may have been more similar to humans in intelligence and yes getting rid of the old dimwt sterotype of neanderthals is self serving to people that admixted with them But it doesn't matter either it's true or not. Who it helps doesn't matter
Regardless, it has been widely published that Eurasians have only 1-4% neanderthal DNA so it has little relevance If you were 3% Albert Einstein that is not enough to help you
There is no article in a credible publication that says 1-4% neanderthal DNA was an intelligence advantage.
At best one article says it may have helped Eurasians get more immunity to certain diseases
The fact is you have no sources to back upo your claim that anybody is claiming neanderthal admixture in Eurasian is an intelligence advantage -except for a psychotic nobody woman on youtube Thats about as credible as a fake article published in the Onion
Further they have also published neanderthal DNA found in Yorubas and San
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Trevor Underwood Human Origins 1962-65 Clare College, University of Cambridge; MA (Cantab) Natural Sciences; 1966-67 London School of Economics: MSc (Econ) Economics; 1967-68 University of Rochester, New York; Economics; 1968-69 Harvard University; Economics; 1969-71 Bank of England; Economic Intelligence Department; 1971-72 International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC; Special Studies Department; 1972-3 H M Treasury, London; UK advisor on reform of the international monetary system; 1973- Managing Director, Econintel Treasury Systems Ltd; 2008- Independent research in the Natural Sciences; 2009- Volunteer scientific advisor to Darwin Manuscript Project at the American Museum of Natural History, New York
That is a misquote because you did not quote the whole sentence and in this case the full context of the sentence does not result in the cut out part taken on face value. -nor does it result from reading the entire 34 page articel
Again, chimpanzees are NOT 13.6% Neanderthal
I already explained this in another thread
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
That is a misquote because you did not quote the whole sentence and in this case the full context of the sentence does not result in the cut out part taken on face value. -nor does it result from reading the entire 34 page articel
Again, chimpanzees are NOT 13.6% Neanderthal
I already explained this in another thread
I had to reread it. This paper itself has much revelations.
Abstract
"This analysis shows that the relative proportions of derived alleles in the 0.0826% of the European genome that is not shared with the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee are 13.6% Neanderthal, 32.3% sub-Saharan African and 54.2% third archaic ancestor. "
Article
"This paper examines previously unpublished allele counts obtained from the French-San- Neanderthal-Chimpanzee alignment of the high quality DNA sequence of a Neanderthal from the Altai Mountains. This analysis indicates the existence of a third archaic ancestor of present-day Europeans, which diverged from its common ancestor with sub-Saharan Africans around 900 thousand years ago. It also shows that the relative proportions of derived alleles in the 0.0826% of the European genome that is not shared with the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee are 13.6% Neanderthal, 32.3% sub-Saharan African and 54.2% third archaic ancestor. This differs significantly from the currently accepted phylogenetic model of the origins of Europeans based on a recent Out-of Africa dispersal model, followed by a low level of admixture with Neanderthals. If this new model of human dispersal is correct, it has profound implications for the interpretation of the anthropological and archaeological evidence, which has largely been framed within the Out-of-Africa model1."
This part is interesting:
"A major advance in understanding the origins of present-day Homo sapiens was made possible by the first sequencing of the nuclear genome of Neanderthals from three Neanderthal bones from Vindija Cave in Croatia by a group led by Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig (Pääbo 2014). This was published in Green et al (2010) in Nature on May 7, 2010. This sequence was aligned with the sequences of the genomes of various present-day non-Africans, including a French; present-day sub-Saharan Africans who had remained isolated from non-Africans, including a San; and a chimpanzee. The Neanderthal DNA obtained from the Vindija Cave was not of very high quality, resulting in a significant " number or errors when reading the Neanderthal sequence, but a much higher quality sample of DNA was obtained from a 50 Kya Neanderthal proximal pedal phalanx toe bone from Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains in southern Siberia (correspondence with Nick Patterson, February 5, 2014). This was sequenced by the same group and the results were published in Prüfer et al (2014) in Nature on January 2, 2014.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
That is a misquote because you did not quote the whole sentence and in this case the full context of the sentence does not result in the cut out part taken on face value. -nor does it result from reading the entire 34 page articel
Again, chimpanzees are NOT 13.6% Neanderthal
I already explained this in another thread
I had to reread it. This paper itself has much revelations.
Abstract
"This analysis shows that the relative proportions of derived alleles in the 0.0826% of the European genome that is not shared with the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee are 13.6% Neanderthal, 32.3% sub-Saharan African and 54.2% third archaic ancestor. "
So after having reread the above sentence you still do not know it does not mean that chimpanzees are 13.6% neandertal
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
That is a misquote because you did not quote the whole sentence and in this case the full context of the sentence does not result in the cut out part taken on face value. -nor does it result from reading the entire 34 page articel
Again, chimpanzees are NOT 13.6% Neanderthal
I already explained this in another thread
I had to reread it. This paper itself has much revelations.
Abstract
"This analysis shows that the relative proportions of derived alleles in the 0.0826% of the European genome that is not shared with the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee are 13.6% Neanderthal, 32.3% sub-Saharan African and 54.2% third archaic ancestor. "
So after having reread the above sentence you still do not know it does not mean that chimpanzees are 13.6% neandertal
Are you truly this dumb? smh Or are you acting this dumb? And please stop derailing this thread and altering my post. This here has a complete different intend.
As I mentioned before: "This paper itself has much revelations."
quote:
This part is interesting:
"A major advance in understanding the origins of present-day Homo sapiens was made possible by the first sequencing of the nuclear genome of Neanderthals from three Neanderthal bones from Vindija Cave in Croatia by a group led by Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig (Pääbo 2014). This was published in Green et al (2010) in Nature on May 7, 2010. This sequence was aligned with the sequences of the genomes of various present-day non-Africans, including a French; present-day sub-Saharan Africans who had remained isolated from non-Africans, including a San; and a chimpanzee. The Neanderthal DNA obtained from the Vindija Cave was not of very high quality, resulting in a significant " number or errors when reading the Neanderthal sequence, but a much higher quality sample of DNA was obtained from a 50 Kya Neanderthal proximal pedal phalanx toe bone from Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains in southern Siberia (correspondence with Nick Patterson, February 5, 2014). This was sequenced by the same group and the results were published in Prüfer et al (2014) in Nature on January 2, 2014.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
I had to reread it. This paper itself has much revelations.
Abstract
"This analysis shows that the relative proportions of derived alleles in the 0.0826% of the European genome that is not shared with the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee are 13.6% Neanderthal, 32.3% sub-Saharan African and 54.2% third archaic ancestor. "
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
So after having reread the above sentence you still do not know it does not mean that chimpanzees are 13.6% neandertal [/qb]
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Are you truly this dumb? smh Or are you acting this dumb? And please stop derailing this thread. This here has a complete different intend. [/QB]
Again, if you think the above statement means chmpanzees were 13.6% neanderthal you are clearly stupid
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I had to reread it. This paper itself has much revelations.
Abstract
"This analysis shows that the relative proportions of derived alleles in the 0.0826% of the European genome that is not shared with the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee are 13.6% Neanderthal, 32.3% sub-Saharan African and 54.2% third archaic ancestor. "
So after having reread the above sentence you still do not know it does not mean that chimpanzees are 13.6% neandertal
Are you truly this dumb? smh Or are you acting this dumb? And please stop derailing this thread. This here has a complete different intend. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Again, if you think the above statement means chmpanzees were 13.6% neanderthal you are clearly stupid [/QB][/QUOTE]
RETARD! I already have responded to that trash. This thread is about white supremacy and the use of the Neanderthal supremacy. The same Neanderthal who was considered dimwitted, before the proposal of the Neanderthal segregation, i.e. eurasian.
This thread is not about chimpanzees, with or without Neanderthal DNA. This is about modern day nazi like doctrines.
quote:
This part is interesting:
"A major advance in understanding the origins of present-day Homo sapiens was made possible by the first sequencing of the nuclear genome of Neanderthals from three Neanderthal bones from Vindija Cave in Croatia by a group led by Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig (Pääbo 2014). This was published in Green et al (2010) in Nature on May 7, 2010. This sequence was aligned with the sequences of the genomes of various present-day non-Africans, including a French; present-day sub-Saharan Africans who had remained isolated from non-Africans, including a San; and a chimpanzee. The Neanderthal DNA obtained from the Vindija Cave was not of very high quality, resulting in a significant " number or errors when reading the Neanderthal sequence, but a much higher quality sample of DNA was obtained from a 50 Kya Neanderthal proximal pedal phalanx toe bone from Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains in southern Siberia (correspondence with Nick Patterson, February 5, 2014). This was sequenced by the same group and the results were published in Prüfer et al (2014) in Nature on January 2, 2014.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did Neanderthal man die out because he was too smart for his own good?
quote:
By Daily Mail Reporter Updated: 22:35 GMT, 17 November 2011
We like to think our superior brainpower led to their demise.
But it seems the real reason the Neanderthals died out may be because they were too clever for their own good.
Researchers say that rather than being outwitted by the superior intellect of modern man, our caveman cousins were every bit as sophisticated.
Smart move: Early humans used to breed with Neanderthals (pictured) because they were clever, say experts
Their brains and charms led to them being sought as mates by our ancestors, who, due to simple numbers, soon began to rule the roost.
Arizona State University academics came up with the theory after running data about life in Europe and Asia during the last Ice Age through a computer program.
Neanderthals and modern humans lived alongside each other for thousands of years during that time, before the former became extinct 30,000 years ago.
The study suggests that as the two peoples roamed further in the search for food, the Neanderthals were slowly absorbed by the more numerous modern humans, until they disappeared as a recognisable population.
The interbreeding meant that their own line died out, said Professor Julien Riel-Salvatore, of the University of Colorado, adding: ‘In many ways they were simply victims of their own success.
Neanderthal woman: Their line faded out because of interbreeding with modern humans
Professor Michael Barton, of Arizona State University, the lead author of the study, said: ‘We designed theoretical and methodological frameworks that incorporated feedback across three evolutionary systems: biological, cultural and environmental.
‘One scientifically interesting result of this research, which studied culturally and environmentally driven changes in land-use behaviours, is that it shows how Neanderthals could have disappeared not because they were somehow less fit than all other hominins who existed during the last glaciation, but because they were as behaviourally sophisticated as modern humans.’
Prof Riel Salvatore, who co-authored the research, added: ‘It's been long believed that Neanderthals were outcompeted by fitter modern humans and they could not adapt.
Researchers said this could only have happened if Neanderthals were as ‘behaviourally sophisticated’ as modern humans.
The theory, published in the journal Human Ecology, fits in with research which found inter-breeding meant up to 4 per cent of the DNA of people living in some parts of the world comes from the stocky cavemen.
‘We are changing the main narrative. Neanderthals were just as adaptable and in many ways, simply victims of their own success.’
The team used archeological data to track behavioural changes in Western Eurasia and found that human mobility increased over time, probably in response to environmental change.
Prof Riel-Salvatore said: ‘Neanderthals had proven that they could roll with the punches and when they met the more numerous modern humans, they adapted again.
‘But modern humans probably saw the Neanderthals as possible mates. As a result, over time, the Neanderthals died out as a physically recognisable population.’
Prof Barton added: ‘We tested the modelling results against the empirical archaeological record and found that there is evidence that Neanderthals, and moderns, did adapt their behaviours in the way in which we modelled.
‘Moreover, the modelling predicts the kind of low-level genetic admixture of Neanderthal genes that are being found in the newest genetic studies just now being published.
‘In other words, successful behavioural adaptations to severe environmental conditions made Neanderthals, and other non-moderns about whom we know little, vulnerable to biological extinction, but at the same time, ensured they made a genetic contribution to modern populations.’
He added: ‘The kind of modelling we did in this research is very new in paleoanthropology, as is the continental scope of the archaeological analysis we used to test the model results.
‘However, such computational modelling can refine our understanding of long-term human impact on the environment that can help inform land-use decisions for our future.
quote:Ever since the white man claimed to have 5% Neanderthal genes. The whole perspective on Neanderthals changed 180 degrees. The Neanderthal went from dimwited to highly intelligent.
But Europeans necessarily carry some 33% African genes(Carvalli-Sforza) and very possibly much more. After all, all humans were in Africa for 70% of the time they existed. Environmental change is responsible only for their surface phenotypical features but their other genes derive directly from Africa.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ever since the white man claimed to have 5% Neanderthal genes. The whole perspective on Neanderthals changed 180 degrees. The Neanderthal went from dimwited to highly intelligent.
But Europeans necessarily carry some 33% African genes(Carvalli-Sforza) and very possibly much more. After all, all humans were in Africa for 70% of the time they existed. Environmental change is responsible only for their surface phenotypical features but their other genes derive directly from Africa.
Most certainly, but they fight against this with tooth and nail.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
All that empirical evidence is certain about concerning the Neanderthals is their their physical structure including their cranial capacities. In general the cranial capacity of the Neanderthals was greater than that of homo sapiens. The average human has a cranial capacity of 1400cc^3 as opposed to 1600cc^3 for the Neanderthals.
But puzzles abound: the Neanderthals were in Eurasia(Europe is an artificial continent)for some 400,000 years but were not able to multiply in sufficient numbers to absorb the homo sapiens trickles coming in from Africa. They were nomadic rather than agricultural. This transition from nomadism to agriculture usually signifies population size.
The claim is that the average European carries some 4% of Neanderthal genes. But 4% is a trifling, almost trace percentage. So do these genetic inputs truly demonstrate an OOA sharing or a pre-OOA sharing?
And their soft features? There is no real empirical evidence of such. All that's available are the fossil remains. Sure, there are some claims, but they are based mainly on conjecture.
Most likely, the Neanderthals went extinct just as homo habilis and homo erectus did. Many species of flora and fauna go extinct every year for whatever reasons.
Nature's graveyard is full of extinct species such as the impressive-looking dinosaurs and the equally impressive looking sabre-tooth tiger. In the case of humans, the Tasmanians also bit the dust and many human groups are on the "endangered list".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is interesting, I just looked up similar info.
quote:
The southern most Neanderthal in the world (Amud Cave, Israel)
quote:
THE NEANDERTHALS: A HUMAN RACE
To the above can be seen the Homo sapiensne ander thalensis Amud 1 skull, discovered in Israel. It is estimated that the owner of this skull would have stood 1.80 meters (5 feet, 11 inch es) tall. Its brain volume is the largest so far encountered for Neanderthals, at 1,740 cubic centimeters.
quote:"While the largest Homo erectus brains were about 1250 ml (2 imperial pints) and modern brains average about 1200–1500 ml in volume, female Neanderthal brains were about 1300 ml and those of males about 1600 ml, extending to 1740 ml in the Amud man."
Standardized Result - 1200–1500 cm3
Stringer, Christopher & Gamble, Clive. In Search of the Neanderthals. New York: Thames & Hudson, 1993.
posted
^^ The Skhul V skull of Es Skhul Caves in Israel
The remains exhibit a mix of archaic and modern traits. They have been tentatively dated at about 80,000-120,000 years old using electron spin resonance and thermoluminescence dating techniques.[5] The brain case is similar to modern humans, but they possess brow ridges and a projecting facial profile, similar to the Neanderthals. They were initially regarded as transitional from Neanderthals to modern humans, or as hybrids between Neanderthals and modern humans. Neanderthal remains have been found nearby at Kebara Cave that date to 61,000-48,000 years ago,[6] but it has been hypothesised that the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids had died out by 80,000 years ago because of drying conditions,[7] suggesting that the two types of hominids never made contact in the region. A more recent hypothesis is that Skhul/Qafzeh hominids represent the first exodus of modern humans from Africa around 125,000 years ago, probably via the Sinai Peninsula, and that the robust features exhibited by the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids represent archaic sapiens features rather than "Neanderthal features".[7] The discovery of modern human made tools from about 125,000 years ago at Jebel Faya, United Arab Emirates, in the Arabian Peninsula, may be from an even earlier exit of modern humans from Africa.[8] Ian Wallace and John Shea have devised a methodology for examining the various Middle paleolithic core assemblages present at the Levant site in order to test whether the different hominid populations had distinct mobility patterns. They use a ratio of "formal" and "expedient" cores within assemblages to demonstrate either early Homo sapiens or Neanderthal mobility patterns, and thus categorize site occupations.[9] In 2005, a set of 7 teeth from Tabun Cave in Israel were studied and found to most likely belong to a Neanderthal that may have lived around 90,000 years ago,[10] and another Neanderthal (C1) from Tabun was estimated to be ~122,000 years old.[11] If the dates are correct for these individuals, then it is possible that Neanderthals and early moderns did make contact in the region and it may be possible that the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids are partially of Neanderthal descent. DNA analysis has revealed that "non-Africans" contain 1-4% Neanderthal genetic material and it has been postulated that hybridization took place in the Middle East,[12] however it has been suggested that the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids represent an extinct lineage, and that modern humans again exited Africa around 70,000 years ago, crossing a narrow stretch of water, known as the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, between present day Eritrea and the Arabian Peninsula,[7] which is the same route proposed to have been taken by the people who made the modern tools at Jebel Faya.[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skhul_and_Qafzeh_hominidsPosts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^^ The Skhul V skull of Es Skhul Caves in Israel
The remains exhibit a mix of archaic and modern traits. They have been tentatively dated at about 80,000-120,000 years old using electron spin resonance and thermoluminescence dating techniques.[5] The brain case is similar to modern humans, but they possess brow ridges and a projecting facial profile, similar to the Neanderthals. They were initially regarded as transitional from Neanderthals to modern humans, or as hybrids between Neanderthals and modern humans. Neanderthal remains have been found nearby at Kebara Cave that date to 61,000-48,000 years ago,[6] but it has been hypothesised that the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids had died out by 80,000 years ago because of drying conditions,[7] suggesting that the two types of hominids never made contact in the region. A more recent hypothesis is that Skhul/Qafzeh hominids represent the first exodus of modern humans from Africa around 125,000 years ago, probably via the Sinai Peninsula, and that the robust features exhibited by the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids represent archaic sapiens features rather than "Neanderthal features".[7] The discovery of modern human made tools from about 125,000 years ago at Jebel Faya, United Arab Emirates, in the Arabian Peninsula, may be from an even earlier exit of modern humans from Africa.[8] Ian Wallace and John Shea have devised a methodology for examining the various Middle paleolithic core assemblages present at the Levant site in order to test whether the different hominid populations had distinct mobility patterns. They use a ratio of "formal" and "expedient" cores within assemblages to demonstrate either early Homo sapiens or Neanderthal mobility patterns, and thus categorize site occupations.[9] In 2005, a set of 7 teeth from Tabun Cave in Israel were studied and found to most likely belong to a Neanderthal that may have lived around 90,000 years ago,[10] and another Neanderthal (C1) from Tabun was estimated to be ~122,000 years old.[11] If the dates are correct for these individuals, then it is possible that Neanderthals and early moderns did make contact in the region and it may be possible that the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids are partially of Neanderthal descent. DNA analysis has revealed that "non-Africans" contain 1-4% Neanderthal genetic material and it has been postulated that hybridization took place in the Middle East,[12] however it has been suggested that the Skhul/Qafzeh hominids represent an extinct lineage, and that modern humans again exited Africa around 70,000 years ago, crossing a narrow stretch of water, known as the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, between present day Eritrea and the Arabian Peninsula,[7] which is the same route proposed to have been taken by the people who made the modern tools at Jebel Faya.[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skhul_and_Qafzeh_hominids
Chronologically, what they wrote makes no sense.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: For the J, the West (37.5%) and Southeast (25.7%) regions have higher frequencies than the Central (17.6%) and North (16.3%) regions. Heterogeneity in the whole Peninsula is also significant .... being Saudi Arabia (21%) and Qatar (17.8%) the two countries with the highest J frequencies.
However,
This is mainly due to the comparatively high frequency of sub-Saharan lineages in Yemen (38%) compared to Oman-Qatar (16%) and to Saudi Arabia-UAE (10%). Most probably, the higher frequencies shown in southern countries reflect their greater proximity to Africa, separated only by the Bab al Mandab strait. However, when attending to the relative contribution of the different L haplogroups, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Yemen are highly similar for their L3 (34%), L2 (36%) and L0 (21%) frequencies whereas in Oman and UAE the bulk of L lineages belongs to L3 (72%).
Two potential migratory routes followed by modern humans to colonize Eurasia from Africa have been proposed. These are the two natural passageways that connect both continents: the northern route through the Sinai Peninsula and the southern route across the Bab al Mandab strait.
Recent archaeological and genetic evidence have favored a unique southern coastal route. Under this scenario, the study of the population genetic structure of the Arabian Peninsula, the first step out of Africa, to search for primary genetic links between Africa and Eurasia, is crucial.
The haploid and maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) molecule has been the most used genetic marker to identify and to relate lineages with clear geographic origins, as the African Ls and the Eurasian M and N that have a common root with the Africans L3.
"Particularly, Yemen has the largest contribution of L lineages (30). So, most probably, this area was the entrance gate of a portion of these lineages in prehistoric times, which participated in the building of the primitive Arabian population."
Under these suppositions, the Arabian Peninsula, as an obliged step between East Africa and South Asia, has gained crucial importance, and indeed several mtDNA studies have recently been published for this region [30-32]. However, it seems that the bulk of the Arab mtDNA lineages have northern Neolithic or more recent Asian or African origins.
quote: We use high-resolution genetic data to investigate the genetic and linguistic support for hypotheses concerning the population history in the Chad Basin. The mitochondrial L3f3 haplogroup is found almost exclusively in Chadic speaking populations and its TMRCA corresponds well with archaeological and linguistic dates of the proposed migration of Chadic speaking pastoralists from East or North East Africa to the Chad Basin.
Haplogroup L3f is defined by the coding variants
3396-4218-15514-15944del and the control region motif 16209–16519 with a TMRCA of 57,100 ± 9,400 YBP. This haplogroup diversifies into sub-haplogroups L3f1, L3f2 and L3f3. The most geographically widespread sub-haplogroup is L3f1, which is distributed across the African continent [3] and also Arabia [32,33] and has a TMRCA of 48,600 ± 11,500 YBP.
..."The youngest clade, L3f1b2, seems to be more frequent in the Middle East. L3f1a seems to be older (37,700 ± 10,000 YBP) than its sister sub-haplogroup L3f1b and is also less diversified. A few samples from Chad belong to these sub-haplogroups: two to L3f1a and one to L3f1b3."
"We then estimated pairwise FST genetic distances between populations (Additional file 4) and displayed these on a MDS plot (Figure 3). Interesting results are immediately evident – while Chadic populations form a relatively homogeneous group, the Cushitic populations split into two completely different clusters. The first group is composed of Horn of African populations, such as Ethiopian and Somali Cushitic populations, which are close to neighbouring Ethiopian Semitic speaking groups and relatively close also to Chadic people from the Chad Basin. The second Cushitic group is composed by more southern groups from Tanzania, i.e. Burunge and Iraqw, who occupy outlier positions even within the Afro-Asiatic MDS plot. In the MDS plot, geography is more strongly associated with genetic distance than is linguistic affiliation.
Overall, we observe that Chadic speaking populations are intermixed with other populations from Chad Basin, including Niger-Congo, Semitic, and Berber speaking people. In this context, it seems that the linguistic categories play a secondary role in structuring the genetic diversity."
--Viktor Černý1 et al.
Migration of Chadic speaking pastoralists within Africa based on population structure of Chad Basin and phylogeography of mitochondrial L3f haplogroup
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic