[SunkenCiv]

Thanks for that link, I finally got around to it. :^)

As always, the problems facing drawing conclusions of this kind include the fact that we only get half our parents' genetic information, which means we really have 46 family trees (23 chromosome pairs), and that where people live today and where their ancestors lived can't be ascertained without a physical trail of recoverable DNA of known ancestors. So when someone says (as happens at the end of the article) that most human varieties don't have living descendants, they're just making an unsubstantiated claim.

Everyone has 64 great-great-great-great-grandparents (give or take some consanguinuity) but only carries a genetic heritage from at most 46 of them (again, give or take...). Claiming that the disappearance of at least 18 of them from our DNA means that they're not our ancestors is to engage in foolishness.

46 is about 2.17 percent of our genome (remembering however that the chromosome pairs are of varied lengths), and that's about the same as the average amount of all living humans. For that to have endured through the millennia given the 50% loss in each generation suggests that Neanderthals are the core population of our ancestors.

Also take into account that the low number of prehistoric DNA specimens can't help but skew the results.

[Red Badger]

Well, yeah..........................

[adorno]

The Neanderthal influence is very evident today, with the lack of a fully functioning brain in democrats, who lack common sense and lack of understanding economics, and shamelessly talk about the right to kill babies in the womb and even later.