Looks like Mel Brooks doing his "2000 Year Old Man" bit
Posted on 06/03/2010 7:32:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I prefer to check the barcodes myself, and so far it looks like the Neanderthals have the right kind of barcodes to be considered Europeans!
Both the mitochondrial and nucleic DNA evidence agree that they are clearly not human, not nestled into that chart somewhere.
The chart is based on genetic analysis, it is not wrong in representing what it is, a measure of genetic distance.
It agrees with other studies on DNA genetic distance between human populations and that distance will hold true independent of what neutral DNA markers are used.
The effort for some 200 years is to find the stepping stones from a piece of ape to us. Very smart people want to believe they came from monkeys. I would rather believe we came from dirt or from a space man than to believe it was an ape.
Where is the DNA results? It is the same vault as Obama’s birth certificate. Lost forever.
However, the Sumarians have dynasties dating back 350,000 years ago. So, 400,000 years ago, very intelligent People were on the earth. Oops!
This cannot be true, We came from stupid apes that ate a balance diet and did not smoke. Thus, we now have humans who smoke, drink and mess around. I can see the connection.
They may find that some of our people begat the Neanderthals and they are really “throwbacks”, the ones civilization sends away less they pollute the population.
Can’t have that. We cannot have a population that is too stupid to be in th UN.
Or can we?
Enough already.
Paul
ROFLMAO! Great picture...needed the laugh!
Looks like Mel Brooks doing his "2000 Year Old Man" bit
GGG ping?
Actually, according to the article, she and other Africans would be among the people who do not have any Neanderthal genes in them. The mixing occurred among those who left Africa.
This does not rule out her relationship to Sasquatch, however.
Red hair, you say?
Do you have a reference for that? I've never heard such a claim. Thanks.
If neanderthals are not human, what are they?
"By comparing this composite Neandertal genome with the complete genomes of five living humans from different parts of the world, the researchers found that both Europeans and Asians share 1% to 4% of their nuclear DNA with Neandertals. But Africans do not.This suggests that early modern humans interbred with Neandertals after moderns left Africa, but before they spread into Asia and Europe.
The evidence showing interbreeding is "incontrovertible," says paleoanthropologist John Hawks of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, who was not involved in the work. "There's no other way you can explain this."
This suggestion that humans and Neanderthals "share 1% to 4% of their nuclear DNA," is necessarily false, and one has to wonder if it's not just someone's political agenda masquerading as science.
Humans and Neanderthals do not share 1% to 4% of their nuclear DNA. We share about 99.9% with Neanderthals, the same as shared amongst other humans.
The nuclear DNA differences between humans and Neanderthals is not 1% or 4%, it's one-tenth of one percent. In terms of actual numbers, 3 million "base pairs" out of 3 billion total are different. And that's the same number as differences amongst various modern humans.
If there are some identical DNA base pairs shared by Neanderthals, Europeans and Asians, but not Africans, that number must be much smaller than one-tenth of one percent.
None of which is intended to deny that our horny-goat ancestors were just as likely to hanky-pank indiscriminately as we are. It's just that the results were not as significant as those 1% to 4% numbers suggest.
Why is everything about Teh Ghey?
A wolf and a coyote may be some 97% or so identical to a wolf in genetic DNA, but that doesn't mean that one cannot find genetic evidence of wolf ancestry within some coyote populations by way of crossbreeding, and be able to estimate that coyote population as having 1 to 4% wolf ancestry.
Similarly, a human and a neanderthal may be some 99% or so identical in genetic DNA, that doesn't mean that one cannot find genetic evidence of neanderthal ancestry within some human populations by way of crossbreeding, and be able to estimate that human population as having 1 to 4% neanderthal ancestry.
Neanderthals are distinctly non human.
The amount of difference you would expect to see in neutral genetic markers between human populations is AT MOST one third of what you would see when comparing a human population and the NON human neanderthal.
The evidence suggests that while the most distantly related humans shared a common ancestor within the last 100,000 years, humans and neanderthals were different populations some 250,000 years ago.
In morphology and DNA, neanderthals are distinctly not human.
They were most certainly not from a “normal” population of European humans that had rickets and were put in the Stone Age equivalent of a leper colony.
I think they are presuming the rest of the genome is pretty much identical.
Wait until they get into epigenetics ~ that's where you'll find the Neanderthal materials all over the place. After all, a mere 20,000 years of contact with life in the midst of an Ice Age is really not enough to elicit the sort of cold climate adaptations modern Northern hemispheric humans exhibit. On the other hand, a full 400,000 years of such contact, as Neanderthals, ought to explain it all quite readily.
Neanderthals are distinctly non human."
Your explanation here may well be correct, but that's not what the report says. And this is not the only place I've seen those numbers.
The report says:
"the researchers found that both Europeans and Asians share 1% to 4% of their nuclear DNA with Neandertals. But Africans do not."
That is clearly bogus, and someone needs to send whoever wrote it back to remedial math class -- or maybe "scientific ethics" class.
Useing the coyote-wolf example again, it would be like if you identified 100 uniquely wolf genetic markers, and some coyote populations had none of them, but other coyote populations had 1 to 4% of them. That would indicated that the second coyote population had 1 to 4% wolf ancestry.
The same techniques could be used to estimate the amount of “Moor” ancestry in your average Sicilian, or the amount of Amerindian ancestry in your average American of European descent.
“If one were to read Young Earth sites like Answers In Genesis and Institute for Creation Research, one would learn that have been saying for decades that Neanderthals were normal human beings with Rickets disease and existed as separate colonies from humans, much like leper colonies.”
—If the standard Neanderthal physique is from rickets, than I need to stop drinking milk.
One of the most easily identifiable differences between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens is how incredibly massive their bones are and how powerfully built they are. The very opposite of rickets. The vast majority of the Neanderthal diet was meat; in other words they hunted for almost all their food, a lifestyle next to impossible for people with rickets.
It’s a rather odd idea to have people who have a disease that’s completely non-contagious, and makes it very difficult to walk, travel hundreds or thousands of miles north – to a land with relatively little sunlight. Of course, lack of sunlight is a main cause of rickets. It would be like sending people suffering from scurvy to the Island of No Fruit, when all they need to get better is to eat an orange.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.