Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 21 Jul '11 00:54
    If your heritage is non-African, you are part Neanderthal, according to a new study in the July issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution. Discovery News has been reporting on human/Neanderthal interbreeding for some time now, so this latest research confirms earlier findings.

    Damian Labuda of the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics and the CHU Sainte-Justine Research Center conducted the study with his colleagues. They determined some of the human X chromosome originates from Neanderthals, but only in people of non-African heritage.

    "This confirms recent findings suggesting that the two populations interbred," Labuda was quoted as saying in a press release. His team believes most, if not all, of the interbreeding took place in the Middle East, while modern humans were migrating out of Africa and spreading to other regions.

    The ancestors of Neanderthals left Africa about 400,000 to 800,000 years ago. They evolved over the millennia mostly in what are now France, Spain, Germany and Russia. They went extinct, or were simply absorbed into the modern human population, about 30,000 years ago.

    Neanderthals possessed the gene for language and had sophisticated music, art and tool craftsmanship skills, so they must have not been all that unattractive to modern humans at the time.

    "In addition, because our methods were totally independent of Neanderthal material, we can also conclude that previous results were not influenced by contaminating artifacts," Labuda said.

    This work goes back to nearly a decade ago, when Labuda and his colleagues identified a piece of DNA, called a haplotype, in the human X chromosome that seemed different. They questioned its origins.

    Fast forward to 2010, when the Neanderthal genome was sequenced. The researchers could then compare the haplotype to the Neanderthal genome as well as to the DNA of existing humans. The scientists found that the sequence was present in people across all continents, except for sub-Saharan Africa, and including Australia.

    "There is little doubt that this haplotype is present because of mating with our ancestors and Neanderthals," said Nick Patterson of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard University. Patterson did not participate in the latest research. He added, "This is a very nice result, and further analysis may help determine more details."

    David Reich, a Harvard Medical School geneticist, added, "Dr. Labuda and his colleagues were the first to identify a genetic variation in non-Africans that was likely to have come from an archaic population. This was done entirely without the Neanderthal genome sequence, but in light of the Neanderthal sequence, it is now clear that they were absolutely right!"

    The modern human/Neanderthal combo likely benefitted our species, enabling it to survive in harsh, cold regions that Neanderthals previously had adapted to.

    "Variability is very important for long-term survival of a species," Labuda concluded. "Every addition to the genome can be enriching."

    http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.html

    Honest thoughts on this finding ( leave racism and bigotry at the door please)-Uther
  2. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Jul '11 01:08
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    If your heritage is non-African, you are part Neanderthal, according to a new study in the July issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution. Discovery News has been reporting on human/Neanderthal interbreeding for some time now, so this latest research confirms earlier findings.

    Damian Labuda of the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics an ...[text shortened]... thoughts on this finding ( leave racism and bigotry at the door please)-Uther
    [/b]
    Is there a question or proposal or prediction you'd like us to debate? If not I would have thought this was better placed on the Science Forum.
  3. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    21 Jul '11 01:49 / 1 edit
    Clan of the Cave Bear is really good reading. It's about a human girl raised by Neandertals who has a half Neandertal child.

    There were other human variants in Africa, like habilis and rhodensis.
  4. 21 Jul '11 01:53
    Originally posted by FMF
    Is there a question or proposal or prediction you'd like us to debate? If not I would have thought this was better placed on the Science Forum.
    The political ramifications at least in the states could be like a powder keg. When I first read this I was astounded.
    What I gathered was, there is a significant difference in the races. Genetically speaking. Not just skin tone.

    For My generation and after in the states this sort of topic was always taboo.
    To dabble in these debates equated to "racism".
    Some sort of Nazi ideology. And I use the term Nazi loosely seeing that they took ideas about race and genetics to the extreme in absurdity. Fantasy,actually.
    Do non-Africans have a common bond that is not shared with Africans?
    Do they have a common ancestor not shared with the African?

    So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ? And/or should it?
  5. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Jul '11 02:03
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ? And/or should it?
    Surely a discussion of whether "these findings are truthful" belongs on the Science Forum?
  6. 21 Jul '11 02:11
    Originally posted by FMF
    Surely a discussion of whether "these findings are truthful" belongs on the Science Forum?
    No. Go to a different thread FMF. There are many for you to troll.
  7. 21 Jul '11 02:14
    So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ? And/or should it?
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Jul '11 02:20
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ? And/or should it?
    I don't see how they would have any impact on race relations. Aren't race relations about the power relationships between different groups of humans? Why would something that the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics says have any impact on civics in a country like yours?
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    21 Jul '11 02:21 / 1 edit
    There was a population that left Africa about somewhere between 100,000 years ago and 60,000 years ago and settled the Middle East. These originated from Egyptians who came directly from the first San population and became Semites and Sumerians, the latter of whom invented writing and originated the stories in Genesis later on which the Semitic people adopted.

    The events of Genesis itself are much younger, less than 10k years old. Chinese and Mesoamericans invented writing independently and do not share that culture.

    Eventually (~30-40k years ago) Neandertal populations began to disappear from the Middle East.

    So yes, the people outside of Africa share a heritage that those inside Africa do not; they're all descended from prehistorical Middle Easterners who came from the Egypt/Ethiopia region.

    The following map gives an earlier date for leaving Africa than some other sources I've seen, but it's a good map:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filepreading_homo_sapiens.svg

    It's not important and shouldn't for example lead one to assume that blacks and Khoi people should be treated with disrespect certainly.
  10. 21 Jul '11 02:26
    Originally posted by FMF
    I don't see how they would have any impact on race relations. Aren't race relations about the power relationships between different groups of humans? Why would something that the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics says have any impact on civics in a country like yours?
    Perhaps you are right. I hope so. Folks on both sides of the fence can get pretty touchy on these sort of things.
    Africans and non Africans have a different common ancestor.
  11. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Jul '11 02:30 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    Perhaps you are right.
    Yes. I am also right about a discussion of whether "these findings are truthful" belongings on the Science Forum.
  12. 21 Jul '11 02:33
    Originally posted by FMF
    Yes. I am also right about a discussion of whether "these findings are truthful" belongings on the Science Forum.
    No thats where you are wrong! FOR THE THIRD TIME>>>>>>>>"So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ? And/or should it?"
  13. 21 Jul '11 05:03
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    If your heritage is non-African, you are part Neanderthal, according to a new study in the July issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution. Discovery News has been reporting on human/Neanderthal interbreeding for some time now, so this latest research confirms earlier findings.

    Damian Labuda of the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics an ...[text shortened]... thoughts on this finding ( leave racism and bigotry at the door please)-Uther
    [/b]
    Hu yuu call'in Neandertal?

    Me no lik thread.
  14. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Jul '11 06:07 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    No thats where you are wrong! FOR THE THIRD TIME>>>>>>>>"So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be [b]what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ? And/or should it?"[/b]
    As I said, I don't see how these findings would have any impact on race relations even if they were true. Don't the "race relations" you mention concern the power relationships between different groups of humans? To which you agreed, I think. What kind of debate are you hoping for? You and I agree, as it happens, that what the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics has claimed should have no impact on civics in a country like yours. I wonder what kinds of views on citizens of African origin you are hoping to elicit and see aired on this thread. Why don't you play the devil's advocate and sketch a "race relations" scenario that someone who disagrees with you and me might come up with?
  15. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    21 Jul '11 06:23
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    So the debate would be if these findings are truthful and sound as they appear to be what impact if any will this have on race relations in the U.S. ?
    As to the issue of whether these findings are true, are not true, or "appear to be" true, as you assert, isn't that a question more suited for the Science Forum?

    As to discussion about the issue of race relations in the U.S., can you offer some parameters? What impacts were you hoping to discuss? Legal ones? Human rights ones? Or was it more abstract things like prejudice and hatred that you wanted to discuss? You attach some significance to the claim that Africans and non Africans have a different common ancestor. I don't. So what did you have in mind?