1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    13 Feb '09 11:17
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16587-first-draft-of-neanderthal-genome-is-unveiled.html?full=true
  2. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    14 Feb '09 13:08
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16587-first-draft-of-neanderthal-genome-is-unveiled.html?full=true
    =========================================
    Though evidence for or against human-Neanderthal fraternisation may draw all the popular attention, evolutionary biologists are eager to apply the data to less prurient projects. First among those will be understanding what makes humans human.
    =============================================


    One step forward and two backwards for proving Evolution of man from primates ?

    My question has been, how do you know that these Neanderthals were not degenerated humans rather than evolving primates ?
  3. Joined
    26 May '08
    Moves
    2120
    14 Feb '09 13:482 edits
    Originally posted by jaywill
    [b]=========================================
    Though evidence for or against human-Neanderthal fraternisation may draw all the popular attention, evolutionary biologists are eager to apply the data to less prurient projects. First among those will be understanding what makes humans human.
    =============================================


    One step forwa ...[text shortened]... do you know that these Neanderthals were not degenerated humans rather than evolving primates ?[/b]
    ….One step forward and two backwards for proving Evolution of man from primates ?
    .…


    That is totally irrelevant to the subject matter of the web link.
    The web link is CLEARLY nothing to do with “proving Evolution of man from primates” but was rather is about the Neanderthal genome and the lack of evidence for human-Neanderthal fraternisation.

    ….My question has been, how do you know that these Neanderthals were not degenerated humans rather than evolving primates ?
    ..…


    What premise is there to believe they were “degenerated humans”?
    This would be a rather absurd hypotheses because it would beg the questions of what made them become “degenerated” and, if they where indeed “degenerated”, why didn’t natural selection almost immediately eliminate them in favour of modern humans? After all, the evidence suggests that Neanderthals and humans lived side by side for many thousands of years.

    Also, it is quite absurd to suggest that Neanderthals were simply “degenerated” because they may have actually had larger brains than us!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

    “….Neanderthal cranial capacity is thought to have been as large or larger than modern humans, indicating that their brain size may have been the same or greater….”

    Also, in the
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16587-first-draft-of-neanderthal-genome-is-unveiled.html?full=true
    link, it clearly says:

    “…The new sequences suggest that the Vindija Neanderthal lacked the ability to digest milk sugar in adulthood – a trait that became common among northern Europeans and Africans only in the last 10,000 years.
    Two gene mutations cast further doubt on widespread sexual relations with humans. The Vindija Neanderthal lacks a version of a brain development gene, microcephalin-1, that some researchers had hypothesised humans picked up from Neanderthals. The same goes for a mutation in a gene linked to brain ageing and Alzheimer's called Tau
    …”

    This clearly indicates that there are significant genetic differences between Neanderthals and modern humans thus this is good evidence that they are NOT a type of modern human let alone a “degenerated form“ of human.

    isn’t the idea of “degenerated forms“ of human ( or so called “sub-humans" ) one that was propagated by the nazis?

    the
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16587-first-draft-of-neanderthal-genome-is-unveiled.html?full=true
    link is interesting because it shows the best evidence yet that humans and Neanderthal probably didn’t ever successfully cross-bread although, of course, this possibility is by no means ruled out.
  4. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    15 Feb '09 12:162 edits
    Originally posted by jaywill
    [b]=========================================
    Though evidence for or against human-Neanderthal fraternisation may draw all the popular attention, evolutionary biologists are eager to apply the data to less prurient projects. First among those will be understanding what makes humans human.
    =============================================


    One step forwa ...[text shortened]... do you know that these Neanderthals were not degenerated humans rather than evolving primates ?[/b]
    You seem to be obsessed with this degenerated version of evolution, we were all much better in the past but now we are in this terrible state. But in the case of Neandertal's, we branched off from a common ancestor millions of years or thereabouts before that, from some more ape like creature maybe Homo Habilis. The analysis of the genetic structure proves that, there are genes just the same as modern humans but there are also genes that are not in modern humans but among the ones that are seems to be the ability to talk, or have language, common to both. They were certainly not brutes but very intelligent beings who may have lost out because of several reasons, one new one being put forth that they were built for cold climates and at the end of the last ice age were forced to the savanna's where modern humans could run a heck of a lot faster and longer and were more successful at tracking down the same game Neandertal's were competing for. The last of them seems to have been living off the southern coast of Spain in the caves on the beach, eating fish and crabs and such, Archeologists found their remains and the food they ate all fossilized, about 13,000 years old, something like that.
    Someone could write a really dramatic tale of the last Neandertal whose family was the very last and one little kid survives but has nobody to reproduce with, sad tale indeed.
  5. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    78641
    16 Feb '09 03:421 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    But in the case of Neandertal's, we branched off from a common ancestor millions of years or thereabouts before that, from some more ape like creature maybe Homo Habilis.
    Neanderthals appear around 250,000 years ago. The last common ancestor was almost certainly H. Ergaster. H. Habilis became extinct around 2 million years ago.

    Edit: the stuff about genetics isn´t resolved yet, scientists are still arguing. The media have a habit of publishing the latest findings uncritically. Bear in mind they have sequenced one Neanderthal individual (and only completely sequenced a handful of H. Sapiens). This provides evidence, but it is not the end of the story.
  6. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    16 Feb '09 05:18
    Originally posted by jaywill
    My question has been, how do you know that these Neanderthals were not degenerated humans rather than evolving primates ?
    As noted by others there is no reason to use the word 'degenerated' - that was probably just a product of your ego.

    As for the question of which direction the family tree is going, that should be resolvable. A thorough analysis of the DNA should reveal sequences that are found in other primate but not in humans. Such sequences would be strong evidence (though not conclusive) that Neanderthals are not descended from humans.
  7. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    78641
    16 Feb '09 16:34
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    As noted by others there is no reason to use the word 'degenerated' - that was probably just a product of your ego.

    As for the question of which direction the family tree is going, that should be resolvable. A thorough analysis of the DNA should reveal sequences that are found in other primate but not in humans. Such sequences would be strong evidence (though not conclusive) that Neanderthals are not descended from humans.
    The fact the they appear in the fossil record before modern humans should rule that out. I think you meant that humans are not descended from Neanderthals. 😉
  8. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    17 Feb '09 11:50
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    Neanderthals appear around 250,000 years ago. The last common ancestor was almost certainly H. Ergaster. H. Habilis became extinct around 2 million years ago.

    Edit: the stuff about genetics isn´t resolved yet, scientists are still arguing. The media have a habit of publishing the latest findings uncritically. Bear in mind they have sequenced one N ...[text shortened]... sequenced a handful of H. Sapiens). This provides evidence, but it is not the end of the story.
    No, indeed not the end, just the beginning of the story. There was a time when there was also only one modern human genomed, so more will come for sure. There are lots of differnt neantertals to pick from. Not as many as modern humans for sure but enough to satisfy the pickiest scientist, eventually!
  9. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    17 Feb '09 12:16
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    The fact the they appear in the fossil record before modern humans should rule that out. I think you meant that humans are not descended from Neanderthals. 😉
    I think I got my post right. I was replying to jaywill who suggests that Neanderthals might be descended from humans. I simply think that even if we put the fossil record aside, there should be genetic evidence as to who is descended from whom when it comes to the various apes, and that if Neanderthals share genes with chimpanzees that humans do not have then it is strong evidence that Neanderthals are not descended from humans.
  10. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    78641
    17 Feb '09 15:572 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I think I got my post right. I was replying to jaywill who suggests that Neanderthals might be descended from humans. I simply think that even if we put the fossil record aside, there should be genetic evidence as to who is descended from whom when it comes to the various apes, and that if Neanderthals share genes with chimpanzees that humans do not have then it is strong evidence that Neanderthals are not descended from humans.
    Apologies, with you now - I read it and assumed a sort of typo.

    Although I´d point out that modern humans could have interbred with Neanderthals (which is the possibility they are most interested in) with only a partial Neanderthal genetic legacy passed on to the modern population. The presence of genes in the Neanderthal genome not in the Human genome does not rule interbreeding out - especially given the small number of individuals sequenced in the two (sub?) species.
Back to Top