Was great-great-great-great gramps Neanderthal? (DNA falls within variation of present-day humans)

Worldnetdaily ^ | 05/20/2010 | Bob Unruh

[SeekAndFind]

A newly released study published in Science magazine raises new questions about ancient life by concluding much of the DNA from Neanderthal specimens is "within the variation of present-day humans for many regions of the genome."

The scientific team that came up with the result, published in a recent issue of Science, included dozens of members of the research community and was led by ancient-DNA expert Svante Paabo, who works at Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.

According to a report in Time magazine, the team reconstructed almost two-thirds of the Neanderthal genome – only some 10 years after the modern human genome first was mapped – by extracting DNA from bone fragments of samples found in the 1970s and 1980s in Croatia.

The resulting comparison of DNA to modern samples from around the globe found: "Neanderthals often share derived single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) alleles with present-day humans."

The study's authors found that the results argue against "the simplest version of an 'out-of-Africa' model for modern human origins" but did support the perspective that "the vast majority of genetic variants that exist at appreciable frequencies outside Africa came from Africa with the spread of anatomically modern human."

David Menton, staff member with Answers in Genesis, told WND that part of the complication of the entire issue is that some scientists believe Neanderthal was a separate creature, while those who follow a biblical understanding of the earth and its residents likely perceive Neanderthal as one among many variations of what God created as "man."

Menton, an expert on anatomy, is a member of the American Association of Anatomists. He was profiled in "American Men and Woman of Science," named "Professor of the Year" in 1998 by the Washington University School of Medicine Class of 2000

[svcw]

I don’t know if my GGGGgranpa was but might be since I have a couple of cousins who certainly are.

[ASA Vet]

Red Haired Ping

[K-oneTexas]

Guess we’re all related somehow.

Monkey and pig (yes, even pig) DNA has been found similar to humans. With thousands of sequences of DNA something must be similar some where.

Neanderthal Man. Cro-Magnon Man. Stone Age Man.

Wonder who or what will be next.

[Riodacat]

Sure, who hasn't heard the old limerick - "There once was an old Neanderthal from Nantucket".
I forget how the rest of it goes.

[SeekAndFind]

I have a couple of cousins who certainly are.

There are lucrative positions with Warren Buffet's GEICO if they're interested :)

[Kolb]

[TexasFreeper2009]

The original report stated that all races except blacks have between 1 and 3% Neanderthal DNA... what they didn't say was which races had 3% and which had only 1%.

I would bet dollars to donuts that red headed whites from western Europe have the 3%, since earlier studies have shown that Neanderthals were red headed.

[SeekAndFind]

That “Neanderthal” named Goerge “The Animal” Steele has a bachelor of science degree from Michigan State University and a master’s degree from Central Michigan University.

He is also a religious Neanderthal who attends the First Baptist Church Merritt Island, and currently lives in Cocoa Beach, Florida with his wife Pat ( not a Neanderthal for sure) whom he married before he entered Michigan State in 1956. Together, he and Pat have two sons, Dennis and Randy, and a daughter, Felicia.

Not bad for a Neanderthal.

[Defiant]

studies have shown that Neanderthals were red headed.

Well, based on the above picture, the hair may have been red, but it wasn't necessarily on their heads.

[BenKenobi]

Sigh.

This is bunk science.

Say you look at samples and find that the overall variation is 3 percent.

Then you look at the mean of neanderthals vs the mean of humans and find that it’s 3 percent.

It doesn’t mean ‘neanderthals fall within normal human variation’. You would have to use standard deviations.

[blam]

My dad’s sister dyed her red-hair her entire life. She was kidded terribly about it in her youth, I’m told.

[brytlea]

Bump for later when some scientific types post something enlightening.

[shibumi]

[Kolb]

So easy a caveman can do it...LOL! George is one of my favorite wrestlers of all time. His wrestling character is the true Neanderthal- that proclivity for snacking on turnbuckles and a green tongue!

[BroJoeK]

BenKenobi: "This is bunk science."

From the article: "The data suggest that between 1 and 4 percent of the genomes of people in Eurasia are derived from Neanderthals," the study said."

Sounds to me like real serious science going on -- human and Neandertal DNA analysis is about as high-tech as anyone can get -- but those statistics they throw out seem, well, questionable.

Here is a previous report:

"The results from the new studies confirm the Neanderthal's humanity, and show that their genomes and ours are more than 99.5 percent identical, differing by only about 3 million bases.

"This is a drop in the bucket if you consider that the human genome is 3 billion bases," said Edward Rubin of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, who led one of the research teams.

"For comparison, the genomes of chimpanzees, our closest living relatives, differ from humans by about 30 million to 50 million base pairs."

Think about those numbers:
3 million different base pairs out of 3 billion total is one-tenth of one percent, which would make human & Neanderthal DNA 99.9% the same.
But they report it as "99.5%".
What is that, a rounding error?

Also note that humans and chimps differ by 30 million to 50 million base pairs. Well, that would be 1% to 1.7%.
But the usual statistics say human & chimp DNA is only 95% the same.

No doubt it all depends on exactly how you count these things.

Here's my point: if human and Neanderthal DNA is 99.9% identical -- only 3 million out of 3 billion base pair differences -- then how can anyone say that one or two or four percent of human DNA comes from Neanderthals?

I'd say it doesn't all add up, and someone probably needs to go back and refigure it.

[TexasFreeper2009]

What I don't get it how can every race but blacks have between 1% and 4% neanderthal DNA... and yet I have heard my entire life that race is a cultural construct and that there is no difference between the races on a DNA level.

Which is it?

Are blacks only 96% the same as other races? I am confused.

Here is another thing, I have heard my entire life that Chimps and humans share 95-96% of their DNA... how can humans differ from chimps by only 4% ... while all races can differ from blacks by up to 4%?

Something is wrong with someones numbers.

[BenKenobi]

How does this address my point?

Total variation!= average variation. If the average neanderthal is 4 percent different, and the total variation is the same, this implies there are significant differences between the two.

[BroJoeK]

TexasFreeper2009: "Something is wrong with someones numbers. "

BenKenobi: "How does this address my point?"

TexasFreeper2009 gets it -- the statistics don't add up.
Someone has a decimal point out of place, or possibly is ignoring simple math in order to make some political point.
I don't know the answers, but don't like what I'm seeing.

We are told the human genome consists of about 3 billion "base pairs" -- those are the chemical building blocks which make up our DNA.
Of the 3 billion, Neanderthals are said to differ in 3 million "base pairs," or one-tenth of one percent.
Chimpanzees differ in 30 million to 50 million "base pairs" -- about one percent to 1.7 percent.

But how much diversity is there within the human population?

"Nucleotide diversity is based on single mutations called single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs).

"The nucleotide diversity between humans is about 0.1%, which is 1 difference per 1,000 base pairs.[4][5][6]

"A difference of 1 in 1,000 nucleotides between two humans chosen at random amounts to approximately 3 million nucleotide differences since the human genome has about 3 billion nucleotides.

"Most of these SNPs are neutral but some are functional and influence phenotypic differences between humans through alleles.

"It is estimated that a total of 10 million SNPs exist in the human population of which at least 1% are functional "

I read this to say that within the overall human population are about 10 million "base pair" differences.
That's still only 1/3 of one percent, and means that normal variations among humans is greater than the supposed variations between humans and Neanderthals.

All I'm saying is that it seems scientists are doing some pretty serious DNA analysis, but the statistics we are reading don't make much sense.

[brytlea]

I am totally not a math person and so even more totally not a statistics person. I try, I really do, because I think math is really important to understand, especially in science (and it’s why physics often leaves me in the dust). I taught biology (yes, I understand the problem with that).
My Dad and 2 of my sons are mathy, so I generally ask them to explain it to me. Anyway, I have been (slowly) reading thru an interesting article in a magazine I get called Science News (an interesting altho sometimes annoying little mag that believes heart and soul in mad made global warming and other liberal causes) that I have subscribed to for years because it has all the most up to date science news generally in short articles.
This particular article talks about the shortcomings of statistics in sciences, and while it’s tough reading for someone like me who is not a statistics person, I was thrilled to see that someone is addressing the subject. If you are interested, it is online here.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/57091/title/Odds_Are,_Its_Wrong

A little off topic, but still, perhaps interesting to you.