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.

 

40,000 Year-old Remains Found To Be More Than 10 Percent Neanderthal

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Results of DNA analysis show that up to 11% of the man's DNA is Neanderthal in origin, suggesting that the Neanderthal contribution could have been as little as four generations up his family tree.

The jawbone of the man known as "Oase 1" was discovered in 2002, in a Romanian cave system called Peștera cu Oase and has been carbon dated to 37,000-42,000 years ago.



Eureka Alert:


Neanderthals lived in Europe until about 35,000 years ago, disappearing at the same time modern humans were spreading across the continent. The new study, co-led by Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) investigator David Reich at Harvard Medical School and Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, provides the first genetic evidence that humans interbred with Neanderthals in Europe. The scientists reported their findings in the June 22, 2015, issue of the journal Nature.

That suggested the Oase individual's ancestry was recent. As DNA is passed on from generation to generation, segments are broken up and recombined, so that the DNA inherited from any one individual becomes interspersed with the DNA of other ancestors. Reich found segments of intact Neanderthal DNA in the fossil that were large enough to indicate that the Oase individual had a Neanderthal ancestor just four to six generations back. That suggests that modern humans interbred with Neanderthals after they had arrived in Europe.


Researchers have concluded that the man was part of group of people who died out without contributing much to what would become the European gene pool but the find is significant because it's the first genetic evidence of interbreeding with Neanderthals occurring in Europe tens of thousands of years later than popular estimates.

Additional sources:

Discovery News
The Archaeology News Network
Guardian UK




posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian
Thanks for posting this!

This would extend the time that Neanderthals were known to be in existence too, would it not?



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: theantediluvian
Thanks for posting this!

This would extend the time that Neanderthals were known to be in existence too, would it not?



That's what I think it's saying, Anatomically modern humans evolved from archaic Homo sapiens in the Middle Paleolithic, about 200,000 years ago. So that's modern man, and if this jawbone has Neanderthal material in it then they are well into the era of modern man. I guess many thought that anyway even if there was no proof.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian
Interesting stuff.

One of the more startling facts of ancient religion is the theme of humans breeding with a larger race, who are seen as Gods or Sons of Gods. They are also spoken of having died out to something that the humans survived.

Science has shown us conclusively that we interbred with a significantly larger humanoid (neanderthals were 7 foot tall on average if I'm not mistaken) and that this race did not survive a period that we did.

Huge coincidence? Who knows.

Were the Neanderthals the first to teach us about higher concepts such as giving attachment to the stars? We know our communication was limited however (in terms of linguistic sophistication) so it is questionable as to how this would have happened.

I believe we've also concluded from ancient Neanderthal burial sites that they did exhibit 'religious' or spiritual beliefs before we did - so perhaps there is some merit to that possibility.

Are our religious stories a remnant of ancient oral traditions from a time when we actively walked and bred with other humanoids on Earth? An interesting notion indeed.

Another fascinating point about the Neanderthals is the fact that they had mostly red hair - correct me if I'm mistaken. There are numerous legends linked to red-haired giants, if one wishes to do his research.

These are especially prevalent amongst Native Americans, of which tribes have claimed that the red-haired giants visited the inland long before modern man.

Some have theorised that these were the Vikings. Is there an ancient link between the Celts, the Vikings and Neanderthals?

In fact, there seem to be three key groups of modernly anatomical humans that constitute the modern European populace - the Native African People, the Nordic people and the people of the Tibetan/Asian region. These are the areas from which we seem to see movement incur into Europe from.

Were the Neanderthals the Native Europeans? What sealed their fate? Did we continue moving north because Europe was already settled land in the routes we took?

This is all actually very puzzling. Why were humans segregated in this manner in the first place? How do the Mesopotamians fit into this? Are they strictly an off-shoot of Africans who had travelled north?

If we assume the Out of Africa theory, we have to ask why would one band of humans end up inhabiting the Nordic region? Every destination on the way there would've been more suitable for settlement, even in the past. Yet, this land was occupied during the stone age and earlier.

Even more puzzling is the fact that we found out this year that the white skin pigment must've appeared in Europe only around 7,000 years ago.

This breaks our convention of assuming the white skin pigment was triggered by UV radiation. We would've expected to find the white skin pigment prevalent but this specimen's bloodline had been in Europe for up to 35,000 years and yet he was still brown-skinned.

Interestingly, the specimen had blue eyes and was genetically most related to the modern people of Sweden or Finland.

What the hell is going on? Can someone please provide me a clear explanation of what the modernly accepted time line and sequencing of events is for all of this?

If you pay close attention, some of these questions may have been the most important during our history - literally deciding who rules and which bloodlines hold status.

Sorry for going off on a tangent but it's all food for thought.
edit on 22-6-2015 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

One should never forget 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder'.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: DazDaKing

Neanderthals were about the same height as me .. 5'6" short.... (on average), they were stockier than homo-sapiens though.

Given that they were thought to have died out about 40,000 years ago, it doesn't surprise me that this guy had 11% DNA.

It is fascinating though, I would love to know how much, if any, of their DNA I have in me (2% is the usual figure given for non-African folks)



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: DazDaKing
a reply to: theantediluvian
Interesting stuff.

One of the more startling facts of ancient religion is the theme of humans breeding with a larger race, who are seen as Gods or Sons of Gods. They are also spoken of having died out to something that the humans survived.

Science has shown us conclusively that we interbred with a significantly larger humanoid (neanderthals were 7 foot tall on average if I'm not mistaken) and that this race did not survive a period that we did.


Neandertal males typically maxed out at 5'6" +/- so nowhere near 7 feet tall




Were the Neanderthals the first to teach us about higher concepts such as giving attachment to the stars? We know our communication was limited however (in terms of linguistic sophistication) so it is questionable as to how this would have happened.

It's entirely possible. There just isn't any corpus of evidence to say one way or the other. Neandertal likely knew how to use the stars for seafaring navigation as there were many places they reached that were inaccessible without a boat and that were far enough beyond the horizon to require some sort of navigation skills as well as planning for food, water etc...


I believe we've also concluded from ancient Neanderthal burial sites that they did exhibit 'religious' or spiritual beliefs before we did - so perhaps there is some merit to that possibility.

Yes, religious concepts likely evolved independently in HN and HSS

Are our religious stories a remnant of ancient oral traditions from a time when we actively walked and bred with other humanoids on Earth? An interesting notion indeed.

Certainly an interesting notion but again, there is no evidence to indicate one way or the other.


Another fascinating point about the Neanderthals is the fact that they had mostly red hair - correct me if I'm mistaken. There are numerous legends linked to red-haired giants, if one wishes to do his research.


Some had red hair but not most of them. An interesting side note is that the gene that coded for red hair in HN is not the same gene that codes for red hair in us.


These are especially prevalent amongst Native Americans, of which tribes have claimed that the red-haired giants visited the inland long before modern man.

Prevalent might be a bit of a misnomer. There are stories yes and there are remains found in the past 100 years or so that had red hair when discovered but this was because of a chemical reaction resultant from burial conditions as opposed to actually having red hair in life.

Some have theorised that these were the Vikings. Is there an ancient link between the Celts, the Vikings and Neanderthals?

no more so than to other European people.

In fact, there seem to be three key groups of modernly anatomical humans that constitute the modern European populace - the Native African People, the Nordic people and the people of the Tibetan/Asian region. These are the areas from which we seem to see movement incur into Europe from.

The populating of Europe is a bit more complex than that. Europe has had many migrations from Africa, the ME, North Africa, Western Asia, Siberia and back and forth for thousands of years. There is no stable or easy migration pattern into Europe once we begin looking at the genetics.

Were the Neanderthals the Native Europeans? What sealed their fate? Did we continue moving north because Europe was already settled land in the routes we took?

Neandertal were the descendants of H. Hedelbergensis which is in all likelihood simply a European variety of H. Erectus, but yes... Neanderetal were specifically a European hominid never making it much farther than Central Asia, Siberia and the ME and Morocco.

This is all actually very puzzling. Why were humans segregated in this manner in the first place? How do the Mesopotamians fit into this? Are they strictly an off-shoot of Africans who had travelled north?



If we assume the Out of Africa theory, we have to ask why would one band of humans end up inhabiting the Nordic region? Every destination on the way there would've been more suitable for settlement, even in the past. Yet, this land was occupied during the stone age and earlier.



Even more puzzling is the fact that we found out this year that the white skin pigment must've appeared in Europe only around 7,000 years ago.

This breaks our convention of assuming the white skin pigment was triggered by UV radiation. We would've expected to find the white skin pigment prevalent but this specimen's bloodline had been in Europe for up to 35,000 years and yet he was still brown-skinned.

Not really. Natural selection doesn't happen over the course of a generation or 2


Interestingly, the specimen had blue eyes and was genetically most related to the modern people of Sweden or Finland.

do you have a citation for that?

What the hell is going on? Can someone please provide me a clear explanation of what the modernly accepted time line and sequencing of events is for all of this?


Modern humans developed out of archaic human populations in East Africa 195,000 years ago +/-
70KA the Toba volcano erupted wiping out Flora and Fauna across the globe and creating genetic bottlenecks in many, many species. HSS among them. Current estimates place total human populations from around 10,000 to as few as 100 breeding pair of HSS worldwide. It is likely the catalyst for completely wiping out the remaining H. Erectus. This caused climatological disruptions world wide and prompted the remaining HSS in Africa to seek out new ecological niches in order to survive with some heading all the way to Australia.
By ~60KA HSS met their first HN in the Levant(modern day Israel, Lebanon and Syria) where they found that the HN had superior lithic technologies. The 2 species or subspecies, lived in the same areas, sometimes the same "villages", learned and shared different technologies amongst each other, worked together, mated and buried their dead together with similar grave goods. As HSS and HSS/Hybrid populations began to expand again they moved farther north into Turkey, Western Asia and eventually Europe by ~45-40KA. Within 10 KA or so HSS and hybrid populations began to overtake pure HN populations with some of the last holdouts being in Gibraltar around 28 KA

Add into all of that the newly discovered Homo Altaiensis (Denisovan) and another as yet unidentified hominid in Northern Africa. By as yet unidentified, that means there have been no physical remains found but we know they were there, somewhere, based on population genetics and the results of the Human Genome Project and the Neanderthal Genome Project. The more we learn about our recent past, the more we realize we still have a lot to learn and things just aren't as cut and dry as they looked a couple of decades ago.
HSS continued to mate with HN when the occasion presented itself and by then, they had expanded on the Mousterian toolkit they picked up in the Levant and had better tools and strategies than their older cousins



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar


An interesting side note is that the gene that coded for red hair in HN is not the same gene that codes for red hair in us.


I did not know that!



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: peter vlar


An interesting side note is that the gene that coded for red hair in HN is not the same gene that codes for red hair in us.


I did not know that!

Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. G.I. Joe...



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: DazDaKing

Neanderthals were not "7 foot tall". They were 5'6" on average. So no, this has nothing to do with ancient myths which are just that: myths.

Edit: beaten to the punch
edit on 23-6-2015 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   
do you think HSS could understand that they are domesticated by HN or would that be to far?



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Interesting and thank you.

Do you think that with recombination the ah... admixture event could have been even closer, or is four generations back the absolute limit with that percentage?

I'm just curious about your opinion. I am always trying to learn when it comes to DNA.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

Liger



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

this part here interested me:


...By ~60KA HSS met their first HN in the Levant(modern day Israel, Lebanon and Syria) where they found that the HN had superior lithic technologies. The 2 species or subspecies, lived in the same areas, sometimes the same "villages", learned and shared different technologies amongst each other, worked together, mated and buried their dead together with similar grave goods. As HSS and HSS/Hybrid populations began to expand again they moved farther north into Turkey, Western Asia and eventually Europe by ~45-40KA...



this is the basis for the Genesis tale of Cain (the HSS, farmer/civilization bringer) killing Able (the HN, shepherd, animist)

the true Neanderthals got bred out of existence , the poetic death of Abel...is what I read between-the-lines



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

Why give me a sarcy reply? I understand and appreciate the correction of my mistake but putting '7 foot tall' in quotations (you're trying to point out that I didn't use the correct unit indication or plural) is just rude.

I simply wrote it how we say it in the UK. We wouldn't say '7 feet' tall. Neither do I feel the need to use dimensional symbols on ATS.

And then the patronising 'are just that: myths' comment... seriously? This isn't some battle where I'm trying to prove myths true... It was just an observation.

Sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick. The Internet is not good for conveying people's emotional intent.

Thanks for the correction. I realised I was misled by the fact that certain Cro-Magnon men were known to have grown to a range of 6 foot 5 to 7 foot tall.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: DazDaKing


I understand and appreciate the correction of my mistake but putting '7 foot tall' in quotations (you're trying to point out that I didn't use the correct unit indication or plural) is just rude

Because I was quoting you.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: St Udio


this is the basis for the Genesis tale of Cain (the HSS, farmer/civilization bringer) killing Able (the HN, shepherd, animist)

I'm not sure how you are drawing a parallel to Hebrew narratives when the attributions you are placing on each of the two above mentioned parties is accurate. When the 2 differing people met in the Levant, was neither Shepherd nor Animist or at least not Animists based on the collective evidence presently held. Nor were HSS at that time farmers or bringers of civilization. The HN had the more complex civilization at the time the two met and taught many of their tool making techniques for example, to the HSS. Both were, at the time they met, hunter gatherer societies with more similarities than differences.

the true Neanderthals got bred out of existence , the poetic death of Abel...is what I read between-the-lines


You can read all you like between the lines but there are entire books on various hypothesis for what was the eventual undoing of HN. I wouldn't stake my mortgage on a short blurb someone wrote on a conspiracy website. What led to their eventual demise is far more complex than being bred out of existence and began tens of thousands of years prior to HSS entering Europe. Much closer to when the HSS first left Africa.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Thanks for the informative reply man!

I've realised I got the 7 foot tall association from the fact that Cro-Magnon men were said to have been able to reach ranges of 6 foot 5 to 7 foot tall. This wasn't the average height however.

My honest mistake. What was the average human height from 40,000-200,000 years ago? I've read figures from 4'10" to 5'2".

I don't understand your natural selection point. Read what I said again. The specimen's bloodline had been in Europe (and hence exposed to European UV levels) for approximately 35,000 years, and yet the skin pigment had still shown practically no sign of changing from brown.

Here's a quote and source to the study:


"It was assumed that the lighter skin was something needed in high latitudes, to synthesize vitamin D in places where UV light is lower than in the tropics," Lalueza-Fox told LiveScience.

Scientists had assumed this was true because people need vitamin D for healthy bones, and can synthesize it in the skin with energy from the sun's UV rays, but darker skin, like that of the hunter-gatherer man, prevents UV-ray absorption.

But the new discovery shows that latitude alone didn't drive the evolution of Europeans' light skin. If it had, light skin would have become widespread in Europeans millennia earlier, Lalueza-Fox said.


m.livescience.com...

The team itself has proposed an alternative theory to UV radiation, stating that it was in fact an agricultural revolution that led to the relatively quick and recent development of the light-skin gene.

It's strange actually because there's a clear correlation of UV radiation exposure and the skin pigment of the local populace - so we can deduce to an extent that UV radiation is definitely playing a part here.

But here's a question for you... how can skin pigment influence natural selection?

Natural selection works on the principle that a mutation provides a beneficial advantage to survival and thus over time it spreads through reproduction more so than the other variants - in its most simple form.

Skin pigment definitely doesn't provide a survival advantage in terms of gaining lighter skin. What it does provide is increased efficiency.

Vitamin D levels are not going to make the difference between the race surviving or not. I refuse to believe this. It was not like all the dark-skinned males started dying in the sudden drop of UV radiation/Vitamin D absorption, leaving the lucky few lighter skinned mutants to continue breeding - that is absurdity.

If UV radiation can't affect the survival rate of a dark-skinned man within his singular lifetime, it cannot be the driving force of a change over multiple generations due to decreased reproduction.

That is to say, the UV radiation did not cause change through the alteration of pigment distributions due to survival rates.

We also know that two dark-skinned, or one light and one dark-skinned person are as likely to have a healthy baby as two light-skinned people.

The difference in Vitamin D could be argued to have affected the hunting capacity of different males for example, hence over many generations becoming the more prevalent gene. However, this is really stretching it.

The only other way to explain it logically from a strictly classical Darwinistic approach is to assume that the lighter skin increased the sexual attractiveness to the opposite sex. That is a controversial statement in itself.

Personally, I feel more like we are witnessing the product of epigenetics rather than classical natural selection. Science has come a LONG way since the days of Darwin.

In the first 4 or 5 years of a humans life, the DNA-Body complex is gathering all relevant environmental information. This data, including factors such as temperature/EM radiation, is not only used to make changes to the 'planned' body but it is also passed down generation to generation.

Essentially, DNA comprises an open feedback loop system. This is actually startling knowledge but I believe it to be scientifically sound now.

Perhaps skin pigment is ultimately a product of this? Either that or these scientists hit the nail on the head and that it was really diet that caused the change - or at least the jump from dark to light.

Back on topic however - I find it absolutely fascinating that we are basically accepting that Neanderthals were boat sailors. This takes a tremendous amount of intelligence and awareness.

Any humanoid that has the capacity to do this must also inherently have the capacity to achieve what we have achieved today. It means the fundamental basis is there.

It also makes me think back to the red haired visitors in America and even the early human obsession with a previous and different civilization.

It's crazy to think that there were 4 humanoids roaming the Earth at one time, all apparently equipped with at least the fundamental basis for learning and understanding.

The more I think about it, the defining feature that resulted in us being here right now, with me using a device in my hand to relay a message to you god knows where, is the utilization of language.

Only once a proper system of language is established can any other form of human progression occur, from the spiritual to the technological.

I believe it is our specific anatomy that allows us to express the full range of frequency that we do. A Neanderthal could not have produced the entire range that we can. Is our fluke simply down to this?

Then again, as you said, modernly anatomical humans arose approx. 200,000 years ago. Why did it take us approx.195,000 of those years to actually start using a system of writing, which ultimately reflects the achievement of advanced language itself?

Though, technically and unfortunately, it's impossible to trace the origin of language - advanced or not.

Also, before I forget, what's your opinion on what drove humans to migrate all the way to the Nordic lands from Africa, ignoring all the potential areas to settle in between - which are also unarguably more hospitable for life?

Was this a by product of a tribe crossing a frozen portion of the sea and realising they could not afford to risk moving further, and being forced to settle in an otherwise unfavourable area? Any light would be welcome.

By the way - I am aware that the Earth has gone through various environmental changes over the last 200,000 years, but the general rule of the equator will still hold due to the geometry of our solar system.

The closer we get to the poles, the colder and harder life becomes - 200,000 years ago or today.
edit on 23-6-2015 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

Oh, you meant it literally lol. My bad.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: DazDaKing

Pineal gland determines skin color.



new topics




 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join