Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Science => Topic started by: TylerDurden on April 30, 2014, 03:42:35 pm
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2616071/Neanderthals-wiped-INTERBREEDING-not-lack-intelligence.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2616071/Neanderthals-wiped-INTERBREEDING-not-lack-intelligence.html)
-
"Today Neanderthal inheritance is estimated to make up between 1% and 4% of the DNA of people outside Africa."
-
"Today Neanderthal inheritance is estimated to make up between 1% and 4% of the DNA of people outside Africa."
Yes, except that other studies have shown a figure of 20%. Plus, since genetics nowadays is extremely flawed and very new, I strongly suspect that the true figure is much higher for some populations.
-
These reconstructions of what Neanderthals looked like are one of the reasons why I think the true figure is so much higher:-
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/10/121012-neanderthals-science-paabo-dna-sex-breeding-humans/ (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/10/121012-neanderthals-science-paabo-dna-sex-breeding-humans/)
http://disinfo.com/2012/10/this-is-what-neanderthals-really-looked-like/ (http://disinfo.com/2012/10/this-is-what-neanderthals-really-looked-like/)
-
Interesting article. That picture at the bottom is creepy :o
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/10/article-2601402-1CF0A34500000578-421_294x249.jpg)
-
http://einsteinagogo.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/red_haired_neanderthal.jpg (http://einsteinagogo.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/red_haired_neanderthal.jpg)
The above reconstructed image of a Neanderthal is so like modern man that I strongly suspect that we have a lot more neanderthal dna in us.
-
What % Neanderthal DNA do you figure that Western Europeans really have?
-
What % Neanderthal DNA do you figure that Western Europeans really have?
There have been only a couple or so Neanderthal genome sequencing projects. All use small samples of bone which has been ingeniously processed to reduce site contamination, and the work is done in clean rooms. There is a lot of educated guesswork in the actual sequencing. There has also been mitochondrial DNA work done. Conclusions vary in the range of 0%, <1%, 20%, and more.
My late husband (from the southern Alps) was 100% Neanderthal in features and characteristics (IMO). He was uncommonly strong, intelligent, and good-looking.
-
Wow! 100%? That's super cool!
-
pics of your neanderthal husband pls. really curious.
-
pics of your neanderthal husband pls. really curious.
I don't do pics online, but here is a forensic artist's rendition of Otzi, the Iceman found in Croatia, in the vicinity of Mr. Eve's long-time ancestral home. If you smooth Otzi's wrinkled, weathered facial skin, this is what Mr. Eve looked like. Otzi, discovered in 1991, was featured in the press at the time. On seeing the reconstructed face and body, everybody recognized the similarities.
My point in making the statement about Mr. Eve's Neanderthal appearance was in keeping with other comments on this thread.
-
So did he have the flared ribcage of the Neanderthals?
(http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/neanderthal%20neandertal%20muscular%20muscle%20apeman%20rickets%20bones%20fossil%203.jpg)
and these other trait tendencies associated/hypothesized with Neanderthals?
• ring finger longer than index finger
• pronounced brow ridge (supraorbital ridge)
• weaker than avg knees and shoulders
• super strong upper right arm
• red hair
• green or blue eyes
-
Perhaps you have missed the point of this whole thread, which is that the Neanderthal were not wiped out, rather they interbred with later branches of the Homo family tree. They are also now not considered to have been stupid and ugly.
As I mentioned in my post, the Neanderthal genome has been mapped (with some controversy concerning various elements). There have been quite a number of sampling studies of modern humans, comparing their DNA sequence to currently-accepted Neanderthal DNA sequences. In fact, no humans have been found with a 100% Neanderthal DNA sequence, which would be unlikely anyway under the interbreeding scenario.
Nevertheless, I stand by my claim that my husband, who was a handsome man, looked exactly like artist renderings of Neanderthal man, as do many modern humans.
-
There was a minor, foolish anti-raw theory going round a few years ago which stated that the Neanderthals died out because they were too stupid to master fire for cooking, the idea being that raw foods are supposedly not very digestible. The following scientific research at least debunks this theory by showing that the Neanderthals did start cooking c.300,000 years ago:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2617836/Even-Neanderthals-boiled-bag-Ancient-cousins-cooked-stews-inside-animal-skins-study-claims.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2617836/Even-Neanderthals-boiled-bag-Ancient-cousins-cooked-stews-inside-animal-skins-study-claims.html)
-
Perhaps you have missed the point of this whole thread, which is that the Neanderthal were not wiped out, rather they interbred with later branches of the Homo family tree.
Is that directed to me? I not only don't believe that Neanderthals were all wiped out, I got my DNA tested and thus know I have Neanderthal DNA, which I reported before, and think it's quite cool. I don't know of anyone who thinks that Neanderthal DNA doesn't exist in some humans today. Please don't try to tie me to that outdated nonsensical notion. I have all of the above noted Neanderthal tendencies to varying degrees (which I also reported before), including a somewhat flared ribcage, so I was a bit surprised that the number wasn't higher, but it was higher than avg for Europeans and I suspect that the real impact of Neanderthal DNA is higher than so far reported.
I also have a brother-in-law who is descended from one of the known Neanderthal valleys and he also has some Neanderthal characteristics, such as the flared ribcage. I certainly do not consider him stupid or ugly.
Neanderthals were not only not stupid, their brains were larger than today's world average and I strongly suspect that they were more intelligent than today's avg, not less. The above Neanderthal traits don't suggest ugliness or stupidness to me (granted, I may be biased on that LOL). Whether they suggest to others is up to them and doesn't constrain my own opinions. I don't have to share the opinions of others and their opinions are not proof. Of course, libtards claim that brainsize has nothing to do with intelligence, but they contradictorily only make that claim about humans, and not other species. Evidence has also been found of Neanderthal culture, which they were previously claimed not to have, which was a foolish assumption.
In fact, no humans have been found with a 100% Neanderthal DNA sequence, which would be unlikely anyway under the interbreeding scenario.
OK, If not 100%, then what rough % would you guess? I'm just curious. It sounds like you and Tyler think the real % is higher than what my test showed, but for some reason you're being coy about what the real figure is. I too think it's actually higher, or at least more impactful, than usually discussed, but almost none of the scientists give higher figures, even those who say they think that the real number or impact is higher. It's as though people are afraid to share their analyses and hypotheses on the topic. I have little idea myself, beyond that the usual figures seem too low to me, so I'm seeking info.
I actually got interested in Neanderthal DNA quite a number of years ago, when I learned that people in a French village were found to share DNA with Neanderthal skeletons that had been excavated in the same valley. I think it was in the days before the World Wide Web was widely available, and I since haven't been able to find a record of that research. If anyone has anything on it, I'd appreciate it if you'd share it. It's strange how all trace of it just seems to have disappeared.
-
There was a minor, foolish anti-raw theory going round a few years ago which stated that the Neanderthals died out because they were too stupid to master fire for cooking, the idea being that raw foods are supposedly not very digestible. The following scientific research at least debunks this theory by showing that the Neanderthals did start cooking c.300,000 years ago.
Who was so foolish as to believe just a few years ago that all Neanderthals died out despite the conclusive DNA evidence to the contrary that has been out since at least May 2010?
A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/710.full#T3 (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/710.full#T3)
-
Well, there was even a claim until very recently that the supposed Neanderthal DNA in modern humans actually originally came from an earlier ancestor of both humans and Neanderthals.
At any rate, I find this evidence re Neanderthal DNA fascinating. I hope DNA analysis speeds up as I suspect that many other so-called "apemen" may form part of our genetic heritage.
-
Yes, I do hope you'll share more info. Please do share your estimate of Neanderthal DNA in humans, for example. I find suggestions of higher numbers interesting. I guess I like the idea that Neanderthals might be more prevalent today, at least in part, than currently expected and I wonder what Neanderthals were like and whether we can get a glimpse of that today.
I learned about a valley people that I may be related to that seem rather Neanderthal-like to me, but I haven't seen any research on that, so it's merely hopeful speculation on my part.
I wish I had saved that research on French Neanderthal DNA those years ago. I had no idea it was going to just disappear. I wonder if there are French-language documents on it. I think I'll ask my French-speaking friend to look for it. It has frustrated me for years to see people claim that there hadn't been evidence yet found of Neanderthal DNA in today's humans or that the 2010 evidence was the first.
-
OK, If not 100%, then what rough % would you guess?
It's too late to apply current research to one long gone. He came from the right area. His people had no history of migration; they probably pre-dated the Roman Empire by thousands of years.
The Neanderthal genome project, directed by Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute has one conclusion that especially interested me. According to that study, a high number of sequence similarities were in the area of the immune system, implying that a migrant population would benefit in terms of long-term survival if they have been able to assimilate local immune factors. I know that I don't sound like a genetic scientist when I paraphrase that study, but my interest comes from the fact that I had always thought of the immune system as something that is a blank slate at birth and develops only according to necessity during one's lifetime. Adding the DNA blueprint to a lifetime of immunity building is a much richer concept.
It sounds like you and Tyler think the real % is higher than what my test showed, but for some reason you're being coy about what the real figure is. I too think it's actually higher, or at least more impactful, than usually discussed, but almost none of the scientists give higher figures, even those who say they think that the real number or impact is higher. It's as though people are afraid to share their analyses and hypotheses on the topic. I have little idea myself, beyond that the usual figures seem too low to me, so I'm seeking info.
No coyness in me! Personally, I think the "real" % is going to vary widely, and that modern man has DNA sequences from other ancestors. Early man migrated by drifting along, not by invasion and conquest. They were following herds, not seeking territory. I think the truth is that many branches of our bi-pedal ancestors interbred along their migrations. The Neanderthal are prominent in research simply because the research was done in their neighborhood.
Who was so foolish as to believe just a few years ago that all Neanderthals died out despite the conclusive DNA evidence to the contrary that has been out since at least May 2010?
Most people don't accumulate knowledge in science after high school. I think that 4-year old scientific knowledge is not within the grasp of most people. Most have been taught a strictly linear ascent of man, with all branches extinguishing themselves as time marched on.
-
I have no idea re any true estimate as modern DNA analysis is so poorly advanced. I realised this when I once came across a news article on James Watson after he had made a remark about Africans. A DNA laboratory had tested him and claimed that he was 16% Sub-Saharan African descent. A subsequent, more honest researcher pointed out the flaws in the claims and stated that if the claims were true then James Watson would also have to be a woman, which is, of course, ridiculous. I only had to look at a photo of him to see that the 16% figure was, mathematically, extraordinarily unlikely, so, clearly, DNA analysis has a very long way to go.
-
No coyness in me! Personally, I think the "real" % is going to vary widely, and that modern man has DNA sequences from other ancestors.
Au contraire, you are still playing the tease. ;D OK, what range then would you guesstimate that the varying figures roughly fit into? I'm trying to get some sense of what the higher numbers might be, as all I ever seem to see are the lowball figures, which are generally hyperconservative.
I have no idea re any true estimate as modern DNA analysis is so poorly advanced.
Ah, too bad. I had hoped you might have more of an inkling. Would it be going too far to guess that you think that the figure may be at least 20%, and probably higher? Do you have any of the studies on the 20% figure? I would be interested in them.
-
Au contraire, you are still playing the tease. ;D OK, what range then would you guesstimate that the varying figures roughly fit into? I'm trying to get some sense of what the higher numbers might be, as all I ever seem to see are the lowball figures, which are generally hyperconservative.
You're the scientist, Phil, so you should know that there is no one number that would apply to modern man. Human genetics has it's basic rules, the two primary ones are sexual reproduction (only one of the two sequence pieces are passed to the offspring) and selective survival (not every offspring matures and reproduces). Add to that concepts of migration - not every ancestor went everywhere - and you will realize that there is no single number. Neanderthal genes mingled unevenly and migrated unevenly. Survival depends on many factors. Add to that uncertainty the paucity and deterioration of Neanderthal DNA evidence, add to that the relative low numbers of modern-man samples, and you might agree that there is a wide range of numbers.
I think we will have to wait patiently for science to catch up with all our questions.
-
http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans (http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans)
All depends on the individual. Some will have more, some less. But there might be a few around with as much as 85% Neanderthal DNA in them.
-
You're the scientist, Phil, so you should know that there is no one number that would apply to modern man. Human genetics has it's basic rules, the two primary ones are sexual reproduction (only one of the two sequence pieces are passed to the offspring) and selective survival (not every offspring matures and reproduces). Add to that concepts of migration - not every ancestor went everywhere - and you will realize that there is no single number. Neanderthal genes mingled unevenly and migrated unevenly. Survival depends on many factors. Add to that uncertainty the paucity and deterioration of Neanderthal DNA evidence, add to that the relative low numbers of modern-man samples, and you might agree that there is a wide range of numbers.
I think we will have to wait patiently for science to catch up with all our questions.
We as a group are mostly impatient and do not wait for "official scientific announcements". We are curious scientists willing to explore and discuss.
We are scientific pioneers.
Eve, your personal experience with a Neanderthal husband sounds like the animated movie The Croods. In that movie, the homo sapien man paired off with a neanderthal woman.
Can I ask a more personal question from your female experience as a Homo Sapien?
What got you attracted to your Neanderthal husband? Explain all dimensions.
How many children did you have with him? Describe how neanderthal your children look.
Attached is a picture of The Croods family in the animated film. The Croods were Neanderthal while the new Guy they met is homo sapien (right most) who is attracted to their neanderthal teenage daughter. Seems the movie guys did their research well.
-
You're the scientist, Phil, so you should know
I'm just an amateur mad scientist. :P
that there is no one number that would apply to modern man. Human genetics has it's basic rules, the two primary ones are sexual reproduction (only one of the two sequence pieces are passed to the offspring) and selective survival (not every offspring matures and reproduces). Add to that concepts of migration - not every ancestor went everywhere - and you will realize that there is no single number.
Yes, I know. I meant a rough average or guesstimated range, rather than a single precise number for all. I didn't imagine anyone would think I meant the latter. As you mentioned, some scientists give a range, and I was just curious what your guess is. It seems like you and Tyler know it is more than the common current estimates. So few are willing to discuss this for some reason. Perhaps the stigma that was ignorantly attached to Neanderthals is still too strong. As more and more evidence indicating their superior intelligence and strength comes out, I think people will come to see them more and more positively, though the cannibalism will be off-putting for many. :P
http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans (http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans)
All depends on the individual. Some will have more, some less. But there might be a few around with as much as 85% Neanderthal DNA in them.
Wow, so some as high as 85% Neanderthal vs. just 15% African Homo sapiens sapiens?
In that movie, the homo sapien man paired off with a neanderthal woman.
Yes, I suspect that that is the most common way it happened. Perhaps the H. sapien sapien men were attracted by rare red-headed females, as sometimes happens even today.
-
As you mentioned, some scientists give a range, and I was just curious what your guess is...
It seems like you and Tyler know it is more than the common current estimates.
I don't even try to arrive at a percentage, but mere common sense tells me that Neanderthal is not the only discrete DNA to be found in modern H. sapiens.
Perhaps the stigma that was ignorantly attached to Neanderthals is still too strong.
I think the stigma came from the idea that we have primate ancestors. Scientists looked for the "missing link" that divided us from the apes. That dividing line was especially important in reconciling science and Christian religions. Many lies have been fabricated in the name of that cause.
Perhaps the H. sapien sapien men were attracted by rare red-headed females, as sometimes happens even today.
Just look at what happened when the Conquistadores entered Mexico. There were women who fell for los ojos azules who were plundering their land, while the invaders fell for whatever females were in the area.
What got you attracted to your Neanderthal husband? Explain all dimensions.
His foreign accent, to be sure. :P
How many children did you have with him? Describe how neanderthal your children look.
I have three children from an early marriage to a non-Neanderthal. His ancestry wasn't even from the Neanderthal zone. Of those three children, they all have a good dose of the ethnic look from my side of the family, with some of their father's side mixed in.
I saw The Croods without ever realizing that the two Homo branches were being depicted. LOL This thread reminds me more of the novel/movie The Clan of the Cave Bear.
-
Oh shucks, you didn't have babies with the Neanderthal?
But how about your Neanderthal husband's siblings? Or his children own children?
Or how about his entire clan?
From which part of the world does his Neanderthal family they trace their roots?
Maybe you can share info about them and their descendants.
-
http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans (http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans)
All depends on the individual. Some will have more, some less. But there might be a few around with as much as 85% Neanderthal DNA in them.
The first ever complete mapping of a Neanderthal genome found that the genomes of people living outside Africa today are composed of some 1 to 4 percent Neanderthal DNA. Now two new studies suggest that, taken collectively, about 20 percent of Neanderthal DNA still lives on in modern humans, influencing the skin, hair, and diseases that people have today. - See more at: http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans#sthash.524Nwzyb.dpuf (http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/new-studies-reveal-20-percent-neanderthal-genome-lives-modern-humans#sthash.524Nwzyb.dpuf)
Ah, crumb. At that link they arrived at the 20% figure by summing ALL the Neanderthal genes estimated to exist in all today's humans, not 20% in a single individual, like I had hoped. For that they gave a 1 to 4 percent figure, which is the sort of measly % estimate I usually see. That would mean that no one has more than 4% Neanderthal DNA, according to them. Quite the disappointment. I still refuse to accept that. LOL
I don't even try to arrive at a percentage, but mere common sense tells me that Neanderthal is not the only discrete DNA to be found in modern H. sapiens.
Quite correct, there were also the Denisovans and the Hobbit people and who knows who else. The Denisovans and Hobbits lived in different regions than Europe, though, so that wouldn't impact estimates of European DNA composition, and I would be plenty happy with your estimate regarding just Neanderthal vs. H. sapiens sapiens. I wasn't requesting estimates on other theoretical species. Would it be going too far for me to say that you think that 20% maximum Neanderthal DNA in a single European individual is too low an estimate?
I think the stigma came from the idea that we have primate ancestors.
Neanderthals have been portrayed much more negatively than H. sapiens sapiens, unfortunately, though that has been improving recently.
-
Sorry, I should have altered my posts once I realised. But, yeah, I am sure there are plenty of other hominids' DNA in modern humans not just the 3 or 4 discovered so far. Weren't the Hobbit people determined to be just genetically deformed modern humans?
-
It hasn't yet been proven conclusively one way or another and there is still significant disagreement, AFAIK. At any rate, there are the Denisovans, so there was at least one other interbreeding species/subspecies beyond Neanderthalensis.
-
It hasn't yet been proven conclusively one way or another and there is still significant disagreement, AFAIK. At any rate, there are the Denisovans, so there was at least one other interbreeding species/subspecies beyond Neanderthalensis.
The 3rd one discovered is an archaic hominid population in Africa which interbred with modern humans:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_human_admixture_with_modern_humans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_human_admixture_with_modern_humans)
-
Ah yes, that's another one, thanks. Peter Frost wrote about it: http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2012/12/years-end.html (http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2012/12/years-end.html)