Yet Another Type Of Ancient Human?

lordmongrove

Justified & Ancient
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
3,660
Reaction score
3,787
Points
174

ramonmercado

CyberPunk
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
53,450
Reaction score
30,963
Points
314
Location
Eblana
http://www.livescience.com/41679-ol...=10152925168941761&adbpl=fb&adbpr=30478646760

The oldest known human DNA found yet reveals human evolution was even more confusing than before thought, researchers say. The genetic material came from the bone of a hominin living in what is now the Sima de los Huesos in Northern Spain approximately 400,000 years ago during the Middle Pleistocene.

That article is from 2013. News was previously posted here:
forum.forteantimes.com/index.php?threads/neandertals-new-findings-theories.27837/page-4#post-1374853
Link is obsolete. The current link is:
https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/neanderthals-new-findings-theories.27837/post-1374853
 
Last edited by a moderator:

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
4,017
Reaction score
1,525
Points
174
It might. If it wasn't so obvious that Genesis tells us everything we need to know.
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,161
Reaction score
9,212
Points
284
It might. If it wasn't so obvious that Genesis tells us everything we need to know.
Yeah, right! :rolleyes:

Genesis doesn't even tell us whether God created man or animals first. It just fudges two contradictory stories together. :mad:
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
4,017
Reaction score
1,525
Points
174
Yeah, but your meant to use your imagination a bit aren't you.
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,161
Reaction score
9,212
Points
284
Yeah, but your meant to use your imagination a bit aren't you.
Maybe the word Imagination hadn't been invented back in Old Testament times. ;)
It was all the Word of God back then - accept it or be damned!
 

Trevp666

It was like that when I got here.........honest!!!
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
6,074
Reaction score
16,899
Points
299
Location
Welwyn Garden City (but oddly, not an actual city)

Bullseye

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
925
Reaction score
305
Points
99

blessmycottonsocks

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
6,403
Reaction score
12,000
Points
289
Location
Wessex and Mercia
And another Homo species https://www.trtworld.com/life/drago...w-human-species-is-our-closest-ancestor-47841

I think that there about 20 species of Homo now, it's really getting messy (fnar fnar), but no seriously, I think it's time taxonamists started thinking that our ancestors shagged just about anything vaguely similar to themselves. Would explain some peoples sexlives !.

Given the biological definition i.e. that species are reproductively isolated entities meaning they breed within themselves but not with other species, that would appear to be the wrong term here.
The evidence for extensive interbreeding surely confirms that modern humans, Neanderthals, Denisovans and this latest discovery are all variants of one species - Homo.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
4,749
Reaction score
5,500
Points
214
Biology doesn't tend to feel restricted by our definitions.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
6,403
Reaction score
12,000
Points
289
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Biology doesn't tend to feel restricted by our definitions.
Exactly and the rather imprecise word "species" is an invention of .... humans.

Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neanderthalensis could clearly interbreed and ought therefore to be considered the same species.

A Pug and an Irish Wolfhound on the other hand...
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
24,786
Reaction score
37,895
Points
314
Location
Out of Bounds
Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neanderthalensis could clearly interbreed and ought therefore to be considered the same species.
They are - at least by folks who use the three-part nomenclature you cited. This labeling connotes two subspecies under the species Homo sapiens.

There's an additional obstacle to simply concluding once and for all that Neanderthals and modern humans represent a single species. Recent genomic research suggests there would have been significant reproductive deficiencies among male offspring born of interbreeding. See, for example:

Sankararaman S, Mallick S, Dannemann M, et al.
The genomic landscape of Neanderthal ancestry in present-day humans.
Nature. 2014;507(7492):354-357.
doi:10.1038/nature12961
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4072735/

This would mean the offspring would be more accurately construed as hybrid crosses rather than descendants within a single species.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
6,403
Reaction score
12,000
Points
289
Location
Wessex and Mercia
That's interesting re: birth defects.

When such defects occur amongst modern populations it can be due to inbreeding of (presumably) genetically very similar parents, whereas parents from genetically different backgrounds - say Greenlandic Inuit and Equitorial African, would produce perfectly healthy offspring.
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
24,786
Reaction score
37,895
Points
314
Location
Out of Bounds
That's interesting re: birth defects.
When such defects occur amongst modern populations it can be due to inbreeding of (presumably) genetically very similar parents, whereas parents from genetically different backgrounds - say Greenlandic Inuit and Equitorial African, would produce perfectly healthy offspring.
The reproductive deficiencies mentioned above aren't 'birth defects' in the colloquial sense of the label. A birth defect refers to an anomaly specific to a given birth, which may result from corruption or mutation in the genes received from one or both parents (or even some other cause).

The deficiencies cited above are suspected to be uniform / universal outcomes from interbreeding modern humans and Neanderthals - i.e., unavoidably resultant child genomes (at least for males) that would impair reproductive viability.
 
Top