It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oldest DNA ever found sheds light on humans' global trek.. Or how to pick a Neanderthal hottie !

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 05:55 AM
link   
So they figured this person's relatives we doing more than just sitting around the camp fire 60,000 years ago.. I sometimes wonder who was doing the deed...Was it some female captured by a tribe of Neanderthals or the other way around and the female Neanderthal was captured by the Homo Sapiens ? Either way her off spring survived so "way to go girl"!

Since they could interbreed it means they came from a common ancestor but due to generations of isolation in different environments both evolved different body structure and probably brain power (although the brain power part still has the jury out in some people's minds)..



France - Scientists said Wednesday they had unravelled the oldest DNA ever retrieved from a Homo sapiens bone, a feat that sheds light on modern humans' colonisation of the planet.

www.centnews.com...


Using this method, Paabo's team estimate interbreeding between Neanderthals and H. sapiens occurred 7,000 to 13,000 years before the Siberian individual lived -- thus no more than 60,000 years ago.




posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

Heh...HIHYCM
How I humped your cave mom.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 06:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: 727Sky

Since they could interbreed it means they came from a common ancestor but due to generations of isolation in different environments both evolved different body structure and probably brain power (although the brain power part still has the jury out in some people's minds)..



We are all Homo Sapiens with Homo Neanderthal genes to varying degrees in our genetic makeup. So, although there are differences, Homo Neanderthal are partially our ancestors and in my opinion should be viewed as such. We absorbed their genes into our line. Their characteristics were aggregated down with more and more H sapiens breeding and the diminishing H Neanderthal genetic contributions.

When and how that happened is important but since it DID happen we must now expand our understanding that we have two or three lines [Not just H Neanderthal] in our makeup. As far as brain capacity of H Neanderthal, theirs were BIGGER by a good many CC. Theirs 1550CC vs our average 1350CC. Does this mean they were smarter?

Does Human brain size really matter? I ask because fairly recently the Hobbit [H Floresiensis] which shown all the hallmark signs of Human intelligence had only roughly 400 CC brain size. Yet, they were tool users etc.

Back to the point.

H Neanderthal should no longer be viewed by some as simply being another prehistoric line but as our contributing ancestors, since the vast majority of Modern H sapiens carries to varying degrees their genes.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 08:05 AM
link   
i dont think tool using indicates "higher thought". It does show abstract thought processes...but did the hobbit have a sense of self? Where they aware?

I suspect Neandertals were aware. But have no idea about the hobbit, probably because of so few finds.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
On the subject of tool use:

It's not the size of the brain that matters--it's how you use it. H. Erectus was also a tool user and quite possibly constructed rafts. H. Ergaster was a tool user as well, using less primitive tools than H. Erectus. Both appeared long before H. Neanderthalis or H. Sapiens. Both H. Neanderthalis and H. Floresiensis (Hobbit people) were tool users. Fairly confident that the latter was, at least as they tended to cook their food (fire is a tool). Homonids actually have a long and glorious history of using tools. It's not something that only came about when we did.

H. Neanderthalis is one of those species of human that suffers a lot from an ignorant caveman rep. They actually made advanced tools. Some of their stone tools (spear points) have been found on islands not reachable by swimming so the presumption also is that they were likely boat builders as well. They wore clothing, had burial practices, made ornamental objects and really didn't look that much different from us. Just a little more deep set in the eyes really.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: WhiteAlice

Small humans in modern times (like Charles Sherwood Stratton) was 2 feet 8.5 inches (82.6 cm) and had normal intelligence.

Little people



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:08 AM
link   
So are there examples of pure H. Sapiens without Neanderthal genes to compare against?



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: nOraKat
So are there examples of pure H. Sapiens without Neanderthal genes to compare against?


It is my understanding some Africans do not have any Neanderthal genes.. They were the ones who stayed back and did not travel in search of greener pastures way back when..

Many Europeans types have about 2% of the what is considered Neanderthal genes..

A time machine would really be a handy gizmo for all kinds of stuff.. time paradoxes be damned !



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 08:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: 727Sky


originally posted by: nOraKat

So are there examples of pure H. Sapiens without Neanderthal genes to compare against?



It is my understanding some Africans do not have any Neanderthal genes.. They were the ones who stayed back and did not travel in search of greener pastures way back when.. 


Many Europeans types have about 2% of the what is considered Neanderthal genes..


A time machine would really be a handy gizmo for all kinds of stuff.. time paradoxes be damned !




 Eastern sub Saharan africans have a small percentage of HSN DNA, and the san have an extremely small percentage of denisovan DNA, both from introgression by a Eurasian population.


 The most important thing about this study is that it is re enforcing work from the last couple of years, that show that certain groups of native Americans are the most closely related to these ancient people.

 Modern Eurasian peoples and some native north Americans have a common ancestry, that is up stream of modern east Asians.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

Hey would you have a link to the San with HSD?



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: punkinworks10

Hey would you have a link to the San with HSD?

Hans.
I'll try to dig that up after work



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: punkinworks10

Hey would you have a link to the San with HSD?

Hans.
I'll try to dig that up after work


Thanks I did some googling but failed to find anything specifically on that.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: punkinworks10

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: punkinworks10

Hey would you have a link to the San with HSD?

Hans.
I'll try to dig that up after work


Thanks I did some googling but failed to find anything specifically on that.

Evidently I was smoking academic crack, the article I read said that the san, native Americans and denisovans have similar population structure.
And the Eurasian/ Neanderthal admixture in sub Saharan africans happened very recently 2k-3k years ago via east Africa.




top topics



 
8

log in

join