Neandertal trait in early human skull suggests that modern humans...

"Apparent variation in Neanderthal admixture among African populations is consistent with gene flow from Non-African populations.

oh did scientists say Nean DNA is found in all africans but to different degrees and foolshly explained it as gene flow from out of africa humans?

yes they did. yes they did

a reply to: Starbucks

oh did scientists say Nean DNA is found in all africans but to different degrees and foolshly explained it as gene flow from out of africa humans?

Did you even read the paper, or did you just see a title that you liked and quoted it? Here's the last line from the abstract from the paper you just cited:

Further analyses suggest that these differences are likely due to recent non-African admixture in these populations. After accounting for recent non-African admixture, our results do not support the alternative model of older (e.g., >100 kya) admixture between modern human and Neanderthal-like hominid within Africa.

yes they did. yes they did

No, they didn't. No, they didn't.

a reply to: iterationzero


I applaud your valiant effort but I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree, or rather the wrong bridge housing the troll. I've responded to Starbucks multiple times with well documented citations and essentially the poster sticks their fingers in their ears, yells nanny nanny boo boo and then goes right back to it. Sometimes in a different thread with the same exact BS copy and pasted into the new thread. It's an excercise in both futility and frustration and the more you prove the individual wrong, the more insane the responses become.

a reply to: peter vlar

I guess I just miss itsthetooth. He was at least entertaining. I was hoping Starbucks would show the same kind of promise, but it's a hollow shell of isthetooth's former glory.

a reply to: iterationzero

Oh I totally know what you mean. There were a couple of glimmers that gave me some hope but they just haven't lived up to expectations. Perhaps our expectations for entertainment are too stringent these days? I was genuinely hopeful but sadly it just never panned out despite some of the posts looking like multiple personality disorder or multiple people posting from the same account.

originally posted by: iterationzero
a reply to: Starbucks

oh did scientists say Nean DNA is found in all africans but to different degrees and foolshly explained it as gene flow from out of africa humans?

Did you even read the paper, or did you just see a title that you liked and quoted it? Here's the last line from the abstract from the paper you just cited:

Further analyses suggest that these differences are likely due to recent non-African admixture in these populations. After accounting for recent non-African admixture, our results do not support the alternative model of older (e.g., >100 kya) admixture between modern human and Neanderthal-like hominid within Africa.

yes they did. yes they did

No, they didn't. No, they didn't.

yes they did yes they did, say that all africans have neanderthal dna

a reply to: Starbucks

NO THEY DO NOT. the only person saying that is you. A small percentage of Khoisan have it but the vast majority of them do NOT. The information and citations have been provided in multiplicity. You simply don't read the info or just pretend it doesn't exist. I'm not sure which is worth. Don't you get wifi under your bridge?

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: Starbucks

NO THEY DO NOT. the only person saying that is you. A small percentage of Khoisan have it but the vast majority of them do NOT. The information and citations have been provided in multiplicity. You simply don't read the info or just pretend it doesn't exist. I'm not sure which is worth. Don't you get wifi under your bridge?

i can bring all the evolutionists studies that state africans have nean dna , don't embaress your self.

by the way what out of africa humans did the Khoisan admixed?? (it has to be in ancient times to be symmetrical across the khoisan!
so pick upi and choose.
I am ready for you

a reply to: Starbucks

Your reading comprehension skills are appalling. Either that or you're being intentionally obtuse and just trolling.

a reply to: iterationzero

If anything, the very existence of Starbucks refutes the notion of an intelligent designer. Either that or he's trolling to make creationists look dumb and ignorant.

so my question was never answered : with what out of africa homosapiens did Khoisan admix?

why all evolutionists hardwork make them prove their antithesis that Neanderthal are a branch of Homosapiens of MRCA Adam?
how did neanderthal dna is highest in haplogroup k ( frensh, Melanesians, Chinese Han) .
Both Neanderthal and Frensh and blond melanesians share red hare mutation. Neanderthal and europpeans share Lactose intolerance mutation. finally blue eyes mutations?

the fact thousands of apes remains found in any given pit a million year ago while ancient humans only a finger for dinosivan, a skeleton for Peking man, etc.

why advanced species like genus homo died out after living 7 million years leaving only one man Adam as a bottle neck in recent history. while current chimps have branches of most recent common ancestors dating back millions of years.

All these evidence elimiate Evolution leaving Creationism (proven existant in GM genetic modification by intelligent design of humans) as the only explanation for the origin of species.

a reply to: Starbucks

Figure 3: Relationships among Khoisan and eastern Africans after removing non-Khoisan admixture.

Maybe a nice simple chart will help you.

Researchers find signs of western Eurasian genes in southern African Khoisan tribes

Scientists believe humans evolved from ancestral primates in Africa several hundred thousand years ago, but it wasn't until approximately 65,000 years ago that they made their way out of Africa and into the Middle East and eventually the rest of the world. Until recently, that migration has been viewed by most scientists as a one-way trip. Gene studies over the past several years has turned that thinking around, however, as its been found that many people in several parts of Africa have European or Asian gene segments in their DNA. In this latest study, the researchers have found evidence of Eurasian genes in tribespeople who were thought to have a purely African ancestry.

Homo Neanderthalensis

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Both fossil and genetic evidence indicate that Neanderthals and modern humans (Homo sapiens) evolved from a common ancestor between 500,000 and 200,000 years ago. Neandertals and modern humans belong to the same genus (Homo) and inhabited the same geographic areas in Asia for 30,000–50,000 years; genetic evidence indicate while they may have interbred with non-African modern humans, they are separate branches of the human family tree (separate species).

In fact, Neandertals and modern humans may have had little direct interaction for tens of thousands of years until during one very cold period, modern humans spread across Europe. Their presence may have prevented Neanderthals from expanding back into areas they once favored and served as a catalyst for the Neanderthal’s impending extinction. Over just a few thousand years after modern humans moved into Europe, Neanderthal numbers dwindled to the point of extinction. All traces of Neanderthals disappeared by about 28,000 years ago. The most recently dated Neanderthal fossils come from western Europe, which was likely where the last population of this early human species existed.

Neanderthals, humans may have coexisted for thousands of years

Humans and Neanderthals may have coexisted in Europe for more than 5,000 years, providing ample time for the two species to meet and mix, according to new research.

Using new carbon dating techniques and mathematical models, researchers examined about 200 samples found at 40 sites from Spain to Russia, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature. They concluded with a high probability that pockets of Neanderthal culture survived until between 41,030 and 39,260 years ago.

Although this puts the disappearance of Neanderthals earlier than some scientists previously thought, the findings support the idea that they lived alongside humans, who arrived in Europe about 45,000-43,000 years ago.

"We believe we now have the first robust timeline that sheds new light on some of the key questions around the possible interactions between Neanderthals and modern humans," said Thomas Higham, an archaeologist at the University of Oxford who led the study.

The fact thousands of apes remains found in any given pit a million year ago while ancient humans only a finger for dinosivan, a skeleton for Peking man, etc.

What does that have to do with anything? Bugs have been found in any given pit a million years ago too. Just because one species of monkey evolved into something different, doesn't mean that all Anthropoidea had to evolve into the same thing.

The following is the listing of the various simian families, and their placement in the order Primates:[1][2]

Order Primates
Suborder Strepsirrhini: non-tarsier prosimians
Suborder Haplorhini: tarsiers, monkeys and apes
Infraorder Tarsiiformes
Infraorder Simiiformes
Parvorder Platyrrhini: New World monkeys
Family Callitrichidae: marmosets and tamarins
Family Cebidae: capuchins and squirrel monkeys
Family Aotidae: night or owl monkeys (douroucoulis)
Family Pitheciidae: titis, sakis and uakaris
Family Atelidae: howler, spider and woolly monkeys
Parvorder Catarrhini
Superfamily Cercopithecoidea
Family Cercopithecidae: Old World monkeys
Superfamily Hominoidea
Family Hylobatidae: gibbons
Family Hominidae: great apes, including humans

Simian

leaving only one man Adam as bottle neck in recent history

Sorry that's a creationist/young earth person's way of thinking. Evolutionists don't believe that there was only one man left remaining to repopulate the world. If it was just Adam & Eve, how the heck does incest not cause mass deformities & death back then, when it always has that effect?

You can see evolution all over, you just choose to ignore it. There are cave dwelling species that have evolved to not have eyes but the ones not living in caves still have eyes.

Watch BBC: Planet Earth. ((All of them)) Then tell me evolution still doesn't exist when it was just laid out right in front of you.

Just because people believe in evolution doesn't mean that they don't believe in a higher being. A higher being created life & evolution is the natural process that has taken place since then.

10 popular fallacies and misconceptions about evolution -by user: Krazysh0t

Evolution starts with the premise that life already exists. The scientific process used to describe how life began is called Abiogenesis and that is still only a hypothesis. Evolution could be the answer to how and god could very well be the answer to why since evolution doesn't address god in the slightest.

Abiogenesis & Evolution

The important thing to remember is that evolutionary theory is a scientific theory about how life has developed — this means that it begins with the premise that life already exists. It makes no claims as to how that life got here. It could have developed naturally through abiogenesis. It could have been started by a divine power. It could have been started by aliens. Whatever the explanation, evolutionary explanations begin to apply once life appears and begins to reproduce.

All the evidence for evolution, leaving nothing but scared creationists clutching their bibles & shaking their heads no.
“They won't listen. Do you know why? Because they have certain fixed notions about the past. Any change would be blasphemy in their eyes, even if it were the truth. They don't want the truth; they want their traditions.”
― Isaac Asimov

p.s GMO is evil