Amiga.org
Coffee House => Coffee House Boards => CH / General => Topic started by: Speelgoedmannetje on February 25, 2004, 05:43:59 PM
-
according to them (http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm).
-
Very interesting theory, but the theory that modern man had mixed Neanderthal-human ancestry has since been disproven. In other words, we don't have any Neanderthal blood. At all. They are a cousin offshoot race that never made it.
-
KennyR wrote:
Very interesting theory, but the theory that modern man had mixed Neanderthal-human ancestry has since been disproven.
Can you give me your source? :-)
-
Sure. Clickety click. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3431609.stm)
I actually started a thread about this when it first came out.
-
KennyR wrote:
Very interesting theory, but the theory that modern man had mixed Neanderthal-human ancestry has since been disproven. In other words, we don't have any Neanderthal blood. At all. They are a cousin offshoot race that never made it.
Well, we probably have so much common DNA that we'd never be able to tell the difference anyway. AFAIK, the World's neanderthal population was never very big.
Anyway, I have blue eyes and red beard, does that make me a neandethal? :-)
-
KennyR wrote:
Sure. Clickety click. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3431609.stm)
It's not yet really disproven, according to other scientists:But some researchers believe this does not exclude the possibility that interbreeding occurred.
-
Still, it puts serious doubt on the Neanderthal theory.
People are getting to pseudo-scientific about something with too little supporting evidence. That guy has a round head - must come from neanderthals. Blue eyes, red hair - must come from Neaderthals (even when there's nothing to say Neanderthals had these attributes!). Stocky body shape - neanderthal.
How can people say these things when all they have to look at are fossilised bones?
-
Well, hair doesn't rot really, just like bones. So they probably have found red hair aside Neanderthal bones.
About the blue eyes I don't know how they assume that. Probably genes in hair wich were still intact?
and btw this site explains a helluva lot for me :-)
-
Yea,
i think the jury's still out, on if we have any Neanderthal genes in us...
(i personally believe that we have).
The statistical techniques that we use on the bones are usually good indication (but, which may be wrong!), but they are not proof...
-
KennyR wrote:
Still, it puts serious doubt on the Neanderthal theory.
People are getting to pseudo-scientific about something with too little supporting evidence. That guy has a round head - must come from neanderthals. Blue eyes, red hair - must come from Neaderthals (even when there's nothing to say Neanderthals had these attributes!). Stocky body shape - neanderthal.
How can people say these things when all they have to look at are fossilised bones?
Although evidence suggests that we as modern humans have no Neanderthal DNA, it is hard to over look the fact that we share a lot of physical characteristics with them.
Either cromagnon man evolved similar characteristics to the Neanderthals, due to the two human species competing the European Environment... or we are infact a hybrid of the two.
Given the Human desire to stick it's genitals into any thing that moves (or stick things into it's genitals depending upon sex)... I would bet that we are a cross breed.
-Edit- Does this look like a Neanderthal brain to you? :-D
-Edit2- From the link below I have found that The "DNA Evidence" taken from the Neanderthal man was Mitochondrial, this is passed down the Female line only. Which means that A Male Neanderthal could have mated with a Female Cromagnon, to produce a Hybrid with not Neanderthal Mitochondrial DNA... it's possible...
Nice Human species link for those interested (http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/nov99/942782998.Ev.r.html)
-
Hmm, speaking as a complete layman, I think given the fact that we've had the time to turn wolves into spaniels during our existance, our genes are probably so different now that we'll never know.
Besides, all the red haired/blue eyed people I know are really tall and skiny.
-
that_punk_guy wrote:
Hmm, speaking as a complete layman, I think given the fact that we've had the time to turn wolves into spaniels during our existance, our genes are probably so different now that we'll never know.
Besides, all the red haired/blue eyed people I know are really tall and skiny.
Ahhh, but Wolves and spaniels are genetically identical :-) You could obtain viable offspring if you mated them.
-
For those that are intersted in DNA from early Humans (http://www.archaeology.org/9709/newsbriefs/dna.html)
-
Hum,
That site offers only an opinion.
It doesn`t back it up with any science....
For example there are two types of DNA. The first is y-chromosome DNA (y-DNA) which is found in the nuclear DNA of the cells. Y-DNA testing follows the paternal line back in time.
The second DNA type is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) which is in the portion of the cell that does not contain nuclear DNA. MtDNA testing follows the maternal line back in time.
You can have hair analysed for y-DNA and mitochondrial mtDNA. For mtDNA analysis, you can just use the hair itself. However, for y-DNA you must get the "root" or "bulb" of the hair. The root contains the nuclear DNA which includes y-DNA. The "shaft." is the hair without the root or bulb, and thus without the nuclear y-DNA.
The colour of the hair changes over time, take a woolly mammoth for example...they are always depicted as having red hair, when in reality they may have been completely black.
And the sites notion that Neanderthals were somehow less evolved seems a bit disturbing. it is quite plain that they were highly adapted to live in a cold europe, and they did so successfully for thousands of years, until climate change, (and encounters with companion). They just thought differently to us...
(do we have any evidence of Neanderthal aggression?)
-
blobrana wrote:
Hum,
That site offers only an opinion.
It doesn`t back it up with any science....
For example there are two types of DNA. The first is y-chromosome DNA (y-DNA) which is found in the nuclear DNA of the cells. Y-DNA testing follows the paternal line back in time.
The second DNA type is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) which is in the portion of the cell that does not contain nuclear DNA. MtDNA testing follows the maternal line back in time.
You can have hair analysed for y-DNA and mitochondrial mtDNA. For mtDNA analysis, you can just use the hair itself. However, for y-DNA you must get the "root" or "bulb" of the hair. The root contains the nuclear DNA which includes y-DNA. The "shaft." is the hair without the root or bulb, and thus without the nuclear y-DNA.
The colour of the hair changes over time, take a woolly mammoth for example...they are always depicted as having red hair, when in reality they may have been completely black.
And the sites notion that Neanderthals were somehow less evolved seems a bit disturbing. it is quite plain that they were highly adapted to live in a cold europe, and they did so successfully for thousands of years, until climate change, (and encounters with companion). They just thought differently to us...
(do we have any evidence of Neanderthal aggression?)
My point exactly (read my earlier post), but the has a nice line:
"While this does not rule out the possibility of Neandertal and modern human mixing, it suggests that the Neandertal genetic contribution to modern gene pools, if any, was small. "
Which is probably the most accurate description of the situation. IMHO
-
bloodline wrote:
"While this does not rule out the possibility of Neandertal and modern human mixing, it suggests that the Neandertal genetic contribution to modern gene pools, if any, was small. "
Well, did you know that people who have a negro ancestor can but is white him/herself and has a white partner CAN get a purely black child?
btw, I think this thread is rather scientific, ah well :-)
-
"Shaft", "homo-erectus"...
I had a bit of a Beavis & Butthead moment and had to go sit in the corner. ;-)
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
bloodline wrote:
"While this does not rule out the possibility of Neandertal and modern human mixing, it suggests that the Neandertal genetic contribution to modern gene pools, if any, was small. "
Well, did you know that people who have a negro ancestor can but is white him/herself and has a white partner CAN get a purely black child?
btw, I think this thread is rather scientific, ah well :-)
Indeed I refer you to Martin Gore from Depeche Mode, Black Father, White Mother... He is white.
Genetics are a funny things.
-
that_punk_guy wrote:
"Shaft", "homo-erectus"...
I had a bit of a Beavis & Butthead moment and had to go sit in the corner. ;-)
/me slaps Punkie on a scientifically basis.
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
that_punk_guy wrote:
"Shaft", "homo-erectus"...
I had a bit of a Beavis & Butthead moment and had to go sit in the corner. ;-)
/me slaps Punkie on a scientifically basis.
:lol:
hahaha, he said penis... haahaha :-D
-
bloodline wrote:
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
that_punk_guy wrote:
"Shaft", "homo-erectus"...
I had a bit of a Beavis & Butthead moment and had to go sit in the corner. ;-)
/me slaps Punkie on a scientifically basis.
:lol:
hahaha, he said penis... haahaha :-D
Maybe there should be a CH love&health
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
that_punk_guy wrote:
"Shaft", "homo-erectus"...
I had a bit of a Beavis & Butthead moment and had to go sit in the corner. ;-)
/me slaps Punkie on a scientifically basis.
:lol:
hahaha, he said penis... haahaha :-D
Maybe there should be a CH love&health
:lol: