Neanderthals Not Totally Extinct

[earth_as_one]

It makes sense that our ancestors mixed genes with all/most of our nearest relatives until they became extinct, merged into our common gene pool or became too different to reproduce.

One of our distant cousins is lot like our distant direct ancestors except they can also play video games as well as make stone tools and control fire:

Bonobos
Susan Savage-Rumbaugh on apes | Video on TED.com

 

[petros]

This doesn't make any sense. We share 96% of our genome with chimps, which traces back over 6 million years to our common ancestor. So we retained much of the same code, but selected gene mutations have evolved and account for the differences between species.

You can't make such a comparison to humans and neanderthals. Again, it's back to Africa. Those mutations the researchers have found and tracked are single-nucleotide changes, and are common to neanderthals, are not common to all humans. It's missing in African DNA.

Common ancestor. Just like the neanderthal gene project states and then goes on to ridicule the entire hypothosis. of the Leipzig scientists. Did you read the part of the article that said the samples were contaminated? I hope you realize your treading in creationist waters. Good luck with that Tonnington.

 

[AnnaG]

Common ancestor. Just like the neanderthal gene project states and then goes on to ridicule the entire hypothosis. of the Leipzig scientists. Did you read the part of the article that said the samples were contaminated? I hope you realize your treading in creationist waters. Good luck with that Tonnington.

Contaminated with what? Do you understand the meaning of contamination?
If I have a zebra on one side and a donkey on the other side, the two make whoopee and create a zonkey, the resulting beast will have one dominant species' genes and a contaminant set of genes. :roll:

 

[Tonington]

Common ancestor.

Right, common ancestor. We share a significant portion of our genome with chimps, but for many of the parts that matter, we do not. Many gene mutations which separate man and chimp are known. If we found a novel gene in humans or chimps, and it was hypothesized that it came from interbreeding, we could test for that. Now we're finding functional genes shared between specifc haplo groups of modern humans and neanderthals, and we find that the same functional changes are not found in Africans.

There is nothing creationist about this. It's solid molecular biology.

 

[Johnnny]

we didnt evolve from apes, we evolved along side them

 

[The Old Medic]

Now there is pretty good evidence that Homo Erectus was still around as recently as 18,000 years ago. There is absolute evidence that Homo Erectus (which is what the famous "Lucy" was) was not confined to Africa as previously believed, but was in what is now present day Georgia (the country, not the US state) by 1.7 million years ago.

I suspect that as the decades go by, we will discover that mankind evolved in fits and spurts, all over the world, and that various species of our remote ancestors lived alongside later, more evolved versions, for millenia.

 

[Tonington]

Now there is pretty good evidence that Homo Erectus was still around as recently as 18,000 years ago.

Such as? A link or two would be helpful.

 

[earth_as_one]

Such as? A link or two would be helpful.

Sure
Homo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Check the date on this close relative:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis#Recent_survival

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I suspect that as the decades go by, we will discover that mankind evolved in fits and spurts, all over the world,...

Are you suggesting that various widely scattered ancestral species evolved separately into homo sapiens?

 

[Tonington]

Sure
Homo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Places Homo erectus on the extinct list 200,000 years ago.

Check the date on this close relative:
Homo floresiensis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A hominin that evolved from H. erectus into a distinct new species via isolation on an island is not the same thing as H. erectus walking the earth 18,000 years ago.

 

[petros]

Right, common ancestor.

Exactly what I've said right from day one. At current a common ancestor is the only evidence of neandertal and sapien being related. As for the creationists, poke a round a little and you find yahoos claiming this false theory is evidence of the Nephilim.

This whole story ranks right up there with nordic grey aliens and shapeshifting jews and that is why I've used ridiculous comparisons just like the creationists do. They will swear up down and sideways that because Noah took two "kinds" of animals that all eveolution just miraculously re-happened in the past 5500 years.

What is a "kind" of animal?

 

[Tonington]

So then you think Africans are not humans? Strange...

 

[Dexter Sinister]

So then you think Africans are not humans? Strange...

Yes, that is the only possible conclusion from that argument, isn't it. Petros, the evidence is in the form of alleles that are present in Neanderthals and modern Europeans but not in Africans, interbreeding is the simplest explanation for it, and as far as I know the only one. It means everybody with those alleles had a common ancestor that post dates the migration of homo sapiens out of Africa.

 

[Tonington]

The same techniques have been used to trace gene movement in modern humans. A mutation in the gene which controls CD4 grants resistance against HIV, and is found in very specific groups of humans. If you carry the mutation, there is a surface protein (gp120) on the HIV virus that will not be able to bond, and then can't direct host cells to synthesize/assemble viral parts.

If you have the gene, you may not get AIDS. If you're homozygous, the chances are better. But to have this gene, you must have European or central Asian ancestry in your family tree. Scandinavian appears to have the highest proportion of this mutation.

 

[Johnnny]

Yes, that is the only possible conclusion from that argument, isn't it. Petros, the evidence is in the form of alleles that are present in Neanderthals and modern Europeans but not in Africans, interbreeding is the simplest explanation for it, and as far as I know the only one. It means everybody with those alleles had a common ancestor that post dates the migration of homo sapiens out of Africa.

are you a teacher? or just read alot?

im curious

 

[AnnaG]

Now there is pretty good evidence that Homo Erectus was still around as recently as 18,000 years ago. There is absolute evidence that Homo Erectus (which is what the famous "Lucy" was) was not confined to Africa as previously believed, but was in what is now present day Georgia (the country, not the US state) by 1.7 million years ago.

I suspect that as the decades go by, we will discover that mankind evolved in fits and spurts, all over the world, and that various species of our remote ancestors lived alongside later, more evolved versions, for millenia.

Um, http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm

 

[Dexter Sinister]

are you a teacher? or just read alot?

im curious

I'm an engineer by trade, now retired, and I've read omnivorously all my life.

 

[AnnaG]

I'm an engineer by trade, now retired, and I've read omnivorously all my life.

So you read veggies and meat, both? Cool. Whatta my tea leaves say?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Whatta my tea leaves say?

They say you're a hot and sensible mature woman with lots of smarts and good sense and Les is a blessed man to be partnered with you, and you are equally blessed to be partnered with him, 'cause he's a pretty sharp one too. Or did you want a frivolous answer? You have a great future behind you...

 

[Johnnny]

what about me dex what does your crystal ball say about me?