Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) were a kind of early man that lived in West Eurasia between 350,000 and 24,000 years ago.
Note: In this post, “we”, “us”, “human” and “people” will mean just our subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens, also known as “anatomically modern humans”.
Appearance: Compared to us they were shorter, stronger, had a broader chest and less of a forehead. They stood up straight and walked the same way we do. They had pale skin and at least some had red hair and freckles. That does not mean that white people came from them – just that both lived in a part of the world that favours light hair and skin. The Neanderthal gene for red hair, for example, is not the same as the human one.
Behaviour: They made fire and stone tools. They cooked, played music, painted themselves, wore necklaces, took care of the old and buried their dead with flowers and stuff they would need in the afterlife. Both men and women hunted.
Intelligence: Their brain was slightly bigger than ours on average, but it was differently shaped – more in the back, less in the front. Some say that means they had less foresight. Judging from their stone tools their level of intelligence was not markedly higher or lower than ours, but they might have seemed somewhat autistic compared to us.
Speech: It seems likely they could talk. Their brain was certainly large enough and they had the human form of at least one of genes needed for speech, FOXP4. If they did speak, most of them would have had voices deeper than Barry White and would not have used the same set of sounds we do. For example, they could not say k or g or make “beat” sound different than “bit”.
Range: Of the more than 400 Neanderthals found so far most are from Europe, but some have been found as far east as Uzbekistan and as far south as Israel. None so far from Africa, not even Egypt.
Extinction: No one is sure why they died out. Jared Diamond says humans wiped them out. The likeliest cause seems to be the ending of the ice age: starting 80,000 years ago they gained and lost ground to humans in step with the back-and-forth changes in climate. They were good at hunting in the woods but not in the advancing grasslands.
Genetics: Neanderthal DNA is 99.5% the same as ours. Some genes that are different in humans: RPTN, SPAG17, CAN15, TTF1 and PCD16.
Humans from outside Africa have a few more genes in common with Neanderthals than do Africans. So it seems likely that when people left Africa, they mated with Neanderthals in the Middle East before spreading to the rest of the world. If so, then Neanderthals are not a separate species but a separate subspecies of Homo sapiens, a true race in the biological sense.
See also:
“Humans from outside Africa have a few more genes in common with Neanderthals than do Africans. So it seems likely that when people left Africa, they mated with Neanderthals in the Middle East before spreading to the rest of the world. If so, then Neanderthals are not a separate species but a separate subspecies of Homo sapiens, a true race in the biological sense.”
There’s no consensus on the meaning of “species.” So it’s not more taxonomically correct to classify Neanderthals as a subspecies than a species. For a nice discussion of species concepts refer to:
Kevin de Queiroz, 2005. Ernst Mayr and the modern concept of species
“Despite the wide acceptance of Mayr’s proposed species definition (and perhaps partly because of it), this definition stimulated critiques as well as the proposal of alternatives. An early critique, including an alternative definition, was published by George Gaylord Simpson (13, 14), another leader of the Modern Synthesis (15). However, alternative species concepts did not really begin to proliferate until the 1970s, starting with a paper by Sokal and Crovello (16), which proposed a phenetic species concept. By the late 1990s, literally dozens of alternatives had been proposed. Mayden (17), for example, identified 24 named species concepts, including the now-familiar biological, phenetic, evolutionary, ecological, and phylogenetic (three versions) concepts and 16 others….
LikeLike
a true race in the biological sense
Yes! This is exactly correct. However, it is unlikely that Neanderthals would be considered subspecies since they did indeed mate with humans in the wild. Subspecies requires that the two groups NEVER mate under natural conditions, due to geographic isolation. (Another missing requirement.)
However, the definition for species is much broader and, contrary to Chuck, actually quite agreed upon: “a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring”. Neanderthals would clearly be the same species as humans, and since they did mate in the wild, they couldn’t be subspecies.
But they are an excellent case for race as a taxonomic classification among Homo, since they exhibit all the necessary genetic, phenotypic, and archaeological data to justify it.
That said, what’s really interesting is that European populations may share up to 4% of their DNA ancestry with Neanderthals, indicating interbreeding, a change in human migration out of Africa, along with other scenarios.
Also, I disagree slightly with Jarred Diamond on his belief that humans wiped out Neanderthals, especially in light of evidence that many groups coexisted with one another. However, friction between the groups probably did occur, as well as competition for food, territory, etc., and this probably further drove down Neanderthal populations.
Ultimately though, it’s all best guess when dealing with situations so far in the past. Even the DNA evidence is shaky at best.
LikeLike
To Zek:
However, it is unlikely that Neanderthals would be considered subspecies since they did indeed mate with humans in the wild. Subspecies requires that the two groups NEVER mate under natural conditions, due to geographic isolation.
Did you mean species? My understanding is that two subspecies can interbreed and generally produce fertile offspring. Two animals of the same genus but different species on occasion can interbreed but generally produce infertile offspring. For example a donkey (Equus asinus) and horse (Equus caballus) can produce a mule. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule
Other hybrids:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebroid
Ahhh found an example of a hybrid whose ancestry is not even of the same genus yet they are fertile:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beefalo
Taxonomy is fuzzy.
LikeLike
“However, the definition for species is much broader and, contrary to Chuck, actually quite agreed upon: “a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring”. Neanderthals would clearly be the same species as humans, and since they did mate in the wild, they couldn’t be subspecies.”
zek j evets,
Your ignorance is breathtaking. Obviously, you’re also not familiar with the philosophy of biology either. Virtually everyone agrees that a species is “a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring” — that’s not the issue. The issue is: are all groups of organism that are capable of … species. Coyotes and wolves can produce viable offspring, so can numerous “species” of plants — are they one species or not?
Here’s a list of species concepts:
Click to access summary_of_26_species_concepts.pdf
LikeLike
That guy looks like one of my class mates… WTF? Maybe that ukranian scientist was right: present day finns used to live along the continental glacier and that is why we ended up in these woods up here 😀
Seriously, neaderthal population was so small that a little inbreeding with homo sapiens and couple of unknown viruses could have wiped out the whole nations of them, just like they did in Americas when whites showed up on those shores.
Some researchers argue that the folk stories of the wood trolls and cave trolls are echos from the times when homo sapiens and neaderthals lived side by side. Could be.
Maybe the seeds of racism can be tracked here? You know, “lets get those stubby hairy guys, they are not like us! They are not human, they are animals”.
LikeLike
@ sam
“Seriously, neaderthal population was so small that a little inbreeding with homo sapiens and couple of unknown viruses could have wiped out the whole nations of them, just like they did in Americas when whites showed up on those shores.”
excuse me? what an outrageous comparison.
pretty sure what happened in the americas was not “just like” a bit of inbreeding and a couple of viruses.
LikeLike
There’s no consensus on this matter (whether they’re a separate species or a race… But we are sure they did mate with each other, so I am not sure if it’s possible for them to be a separate species… Maybe subspecies).
In short, we don’t know whether to classify them as Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.
There was this misconception about Neanderthals being unable to walk on two legs, but that was because one of the first skeletons found was of an old individual with arthritis.
LikeLike
@ok: Maybe the same happened to neaderthals. You do know that the diseases that the whites brought to the new world killed millions?
And, just before we start argue here, I have attented even some AIM meetings etc. back in the day so I have some info on the history of Native Americans from themselves. 😀
And of course, I did not say anywhere that there were not wars between homo sapiens and neanderthals. There propably were, but those wars had to be very minor since there were only few thousand neanderthals. In Americas there were a whole lot more, but the main killer of native americans were the diseases.
Just look at what happened to the indians of Hispaniola. Few hundred spanish wiped out as much as hudreds of thousands of natives in just few years. Not just by killing them off, but by diseases. Never under estimate the power of diseases.
Ok, the whites had this biological weapon at their disposal which they did not use untill late 1890’s tentionally. In those early days of the biggest carnage in the Caribbean they did not know what was killing the natives like flyes. It was the germs they had brought over.
LikeLike
I found this report to be interesting regarding this post:
LikeLike
Is it ever appropriate to pronounce Neanderthal using the ‘th’ sound? I hate pronouncing neader(TAHL). I grew up thinking the ‘th’ with the tongue/teeth combo was the correct way to say the word. I have difficulty switching over, especially when I hardly use the word Neanderthal.
This is an interesting part of series about the Out of Africa theory. I’d skip to 1:50 when she starts talking about Neanderthals.
European early modern humans 1_4
LikeLike
The diet of Neanderthals in Gibraltar.
Neanderthal diet like early modern human’s
LikeLike
@sam
“Seriously, neaderthal population was so small that a little inbreeding with homo sapiens and couple of unknown viruses could have wiped out the whole nations of them, just like they did in Americas when whites showed up on those shores.”
Sam, the objection was not to whether or not inbreeding and viral pandemic occured in both examples. The objection was to the glib, minimalising tone with which you compared an UNAMBIGUOUS European Campaign of Rape, Genocide and Biological Warfare against Indigenous Peoples to “a little inbreeding…and couple of unknown viruses.”
FWIW, Homo Sapiens may indeed have waged a similar genocide against Neanderthals. Or the extinction may have been entirely coincidental and unintentional. We don’t know and we can’t know.
But what we definitely DO know is that the European conquest of The Americas was anything BUT coincidental or unintentional. It was deliberate, planned and sustained over the course of centuries. And unlike whatever happened with Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens, it was HEAVILY DOCUMENTED. So to reduce these appalling facts to the very simplest, most blameless aspects of Europe’s migration to the Americas (ie. the incidental inbreeding and sharing of viruses) directly contributes to the racist, minimalising erasure that Indigenous People still suffer to this day.
Your personal knowledge of AIM functions and conversations with actual American Indians notwithstanding, the glib way you stated all that was definitely offensive. Just sayin’.
LikeLike
Uncle Milton,
The requirement for subspecies is that they don’t mate naturally in the wild. Also, subspecies are never just one. You can have two or more, or none at all. Which is why I say that Neanderthals would be more likely classified as race (as they often are in my anthropological field) because they are both genetically, physiologically, and culturally capable of mixing with humans, and mating with them. As Abagond said, a true race in the biological (and may I add cultural) sense.
But you are right, taxonomy is fuzzy. And there are so many contradictions and exceptions that it does make another good case for categories like “race” to be more of a cultural/personal construction than a scientific interpretation of variation.
Chuck,
Please, go build me a chair and wrist-rest so I can relax while you attempt to understand that these two statements prove you have no idea what you’re talking about:
There’s no consensus on the meaning of “species.”
Virtually everyone agrees that a species is “a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring”
So… yeah. This is awkward. I guess you just contradicted yourself in some extremely embarrassing mental gymnastics.
Stick to your day job, noob.
LikeLike
@Milton:
LikeLike
How do you know that they believed in an afterlife?
LikeLike
@janeplain: I think regular posters here know what is my stand on the genocide of the native americans and I also assume they can read between the lines what I am trying to say. I understand that you and OK got a bit offended for those words but rest assured, I don’t take these things lightly.
What you should do is try to think what you just read in the context what I have said about the racism, native americans and other such subjects here before. And also, I recommend, that do not try to be too sure of your stance before you know who you are talking to.
Did it occur to you that what I meant by saying: “Seriously, neaderthal population was so small that a little inbreeding with homo sapiens and couple of unknown viruses could have wiped out the whole nations of them, just like they did in Americas when whites showed up on those shores.”?
Maybe I was comparing these two, maybe it was my some what clumsy attempt to say: look what whites did in Americas and think what homo sapiens could have done to the neanderthals. And just maybe, you did not understand this and got all excited because you do not know me… Maybe?
LikeLike
@lmwriter: They have found flower remains and such from the graves of neaderthals, also neaderthals were the first to really bury their dead, at least on one region. If I remember correctly.
LikeLike
@sam
so you are saying it is my job to make the extra effort to read between the lines of your clumsy, insensitive way of phrasing things because 1) you are a well known commenter here and regular readers should just “get” you and 2) i must be some excitable newbie to this blog who just didn’t take the time to understand to read back thru your eleventy thousand comments and grasp your long invested history in the welfare of native peoples?
Sam, it is not at all a hard or shameful thing to simply say: “oh hey, i CAN totally see how that might have come off insensitive. sorry for not being more careful!”
But instead you ask me to re-read and ponder deeply your authorial intent in the context of your so called reputation here?
I seeeeee… that’s not at all condescending or self-serving. And it totally undoes the racist erasure of your clumsy comparison!! Thanx!! I’ve been schooled now! 😀
LikeLike
I can’t wait until the racists and/or HBD’ers get a hold of this! We’ll be hearing how the DNA from their Neanderthal ancestors does IN FACT make them superior and how the LACK of Neanderthal DNA can explain the “failure of Africa and Africans”; and finally the Neanderthal is going to get a long awaited makeover.
Instead of being viewed as, and associated with, a mindless brute, we’ll start seeing Neanderthals depicted in ascots, effortlessly painting masterpieces while sipping fine wines and doing Sudoku. (I’m not being literal here, I’m joking so please no comments about when wine making actually began or the fact that there was no Sudoku at that time etc). You know what I’m trying to say.
Pretty soon all the science about how less advanced Neanderthals were, will change and will be replaced by all kinds of re-interpretations of past archeological findings concerning their newly deemed super advanced culture. All half joking aside. You know some racist is going to latch onto it. Okay, don’t say I didn’t warn you all…it’s coming…just wait for it.
Anyway, I don’t know why people are so surprised that Neanderthals and Humans mated. Human beings have historically mated with ANYTHING that didn’t run away from them. Thank God they couldn’t make babies with these other animals, the term “sheeple” would be a literal one and would take on a very different meaning!!!! Humans also historically mate with other humans that they hate, despise and economically and socially oppress, ALL OVER THE GLOBE!!!!
Seriously, I’ve always had a feeling it was just a matter of time before scientists figured out a way to prove genetic intermingling between Humans and Neanderthals. There was no way Human beings were going to kill off that many perfectly good sex partners.
On a final note, who says Neanderthals died out? Their numbers may have been small enough so that they were eventually totally absorbed by the Human population.
LikeLike
@ zek:
“The requirement for subspecies is that they don’t mate naturally in the wild.”
My impression is that subspecies don’t mate naturally in the wild because they are usually separated by geography. The separation is what has caused the genetic split into subspecies in the first place. Thus the opportunity to mate is not there under normal circumstances. If one subspecies expands its range and the two subspecies come into contact, that would allow mating… that’s my interpretation anyway.
LikeLike
My impression is that subspecies don’t mate naturally in the wild because they are usually separated by geography.
Eurasian,
Yep, geography is a typical example of the barriers that prevent subspecies from interbreeding, thus allowing them to develop as subspecies. However, there was no geographic barrier that prevented the interbreeding of Neanderthals and humans. Both groups shared an overlap of territories.
Also, subspecies tend to be evolving towards becoming different species. We don’t have much indication in which direction of closeness both Neanderthals and humans were evolving in prior to the extinction of Neanderthals, but judging from the amount of genes in Euro-populations that are shared by Neanderthals, the answer seems plain to me.
LikeLike
Zek said:
Stick to your day job, noob.
Mating between subspecies does not cancel out their subspecies categorization. Subspecies are close enough genetically that interbreeding is possible and to be expected if there aren’t behavioral differences or geographic barriers that prevent them from doing do.
There are species that can and do mate in the wild. The rule for species is not that they can’t mate, but that they normally don’t. It’s accepted that if two members of the same genus aren’t capable of interbreeding then they definitely belong to different species.
But the fact that two members of the different species can mate in the wild does not all of the sudden make them the same species. Wolves and coyotes successfully mate with regular occurrence. They are still considered two separate species, canis lupus and canis latrans.
Zek, considering how much you love to boast about your superior knowledge, it’s funny that you don’t know these basic facts.
LikeLike
@jane: Well, do as you please, I don’t mind. But when you start to call me a racist I get offended. Of course, you can call anybody you like a racist.
LikeLike
It is a common misconception that Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon were the forerunners of modern man. Actually Modern man is much older then both of them.
Orginally Neanderthal & Cro-Magon were not classed as sapien (wises). This designation was reserved for “us” Modern man. However, subsequent re-thinking by – perhaps with other than scientific agendas, causes these two early Humanoids to be reclassed as Sapien. Thus they became Homo-Sapien neanderthalensis, and Homom -Sapien Cro-Magnonensis,that leaves Modern Man with the really screwy name “Homo-sapien-sapien” (Man the wise wise?). Though we do understand that the elevation of Cro-magnon and neanderthal to sapien status, does solve a great many problems- none related to science though. However, the currnet move to place Cro-magnon with modern man as “homo–sapien-sapien” , is really taking it to far, and it is piontless as science proves, caucasians did NOT evolve from Cro-Magnons in Euprope.
LikeLike
That picture of the Neanderthal child is a LIE. That is not how a REAL neanderthal would look like. I wish I could put a picture up here to show U.
Whites have sought to make thier own version of history, and in the thier history, thjey are the origanl humans, and the creators of the subsequent civilizations.
This of course, a blatant lie. But whites control most major centers of knowledge, and the media too, these lies have become de facto truth.
LikeLike
Denise,
caucasians did NOT evolve from Cro-Magnons in Euprope.
Cro-Magnons are simply a type of early European human. They’ve always been considered to be homo sapiens. Though they were more robust and with larger brains on average, they fall within the range of modern humans. Cro-Magnons no longer exist as a distinct group, but there are still individuals that have the Cro-Magnon phenotype.
Neanderthals are sometimes classified as homo sapien neanderthalensis, but have generally been classified as their own species, homo neanderthalensis. With the recent evidence of introgression into homo sapiens, the debate about their classification has grown stronger, with more now in favor of the sub-species classification.
LikeLike
@Sam
Sam. I didn’t call you a racist. I called what you said racist erasure.
That said, you are free to be offended by being called a racist just like I am free to be offended whenever I hear or see racist things. We cool?
LikeLike
jada
I can’t wait until the racists and/or HBD’ers get a hold of this! We’ll be hearing how the DNA from their Neanderthal ancestors does IN FACT make them superior and how the LACK of Neanderthal DNA can explain the “failure of Africa and Africans”; and finally the Neanderthal is going to get a long awaited makeover.
You’re absolutely correct. Lol!
Instead of being viewed as, and associated with, a mindless brute, we’ll start seeing Neanderthals depicted in ascots, effortlessly painting masterpieces while sipping fine wines and doing Sudoku. (I’m not being literal here, I’m joking so please no comments about when wine making actually began or the fact that there was no Sudoku at that time etc). You know what I’m trying to say.
Hasn’t this been done? It’s called the GEICO caveman commercials.
LikeLike
Sagat,
Chuck made two conflicting statements regarding the definition of species, and I called him out on it. The confusing part is where do you come into that dialectic??
Anyhoo, you need to reread my original comments because I’ve stated quite plainly what the facts regarding species and subspecies are. If two subspecies mate regularly then that does negate their classification as subspecies, since the definition requires that they do not mate naturally in the wild. Since Neanderthals apparently mated with humans enough to instill up to 4% of their genome into the Euro population, I’d say that’s indicative that they’re not subspecies.
Your example of wolves and coyote is actually flawed. Any basic intro class will tell you that when coyotes and wolves meet in the wild, what typically happens is that the wolf eats the coyote, even if it’s a male coyote and a female wolf. And one reason that this is even more likely is because the only time a coyote would ever cross paths with a wolf is during a time when food is short and both parties tend to compete for prey more closely. So since wolves and coyotes do not produce fertile offspring, they are considered different species, as opposed to subspecies.
So again, please, by all means attempt to disprove what is commonly accepted taxonomic nomenclature by inserting yourself into a discussion that wasn’t really about you ; )
LikeLike
@ Sam
I know it easy to get defensive when someone points out that you have done or said something racist. I try to keep in mind that really, nobody is immune to the effects of racism in any society and even those who are victims of racism do and say things to reinforce it. It’s going to get the better of us at times. So I think the best thing one can do when singled out is to remain calm and not take it personally. Take the criticism seriously and use it as a learning experience. And of course, apologize for the offense in a sincere manner.
Of course, that’s easier said than done.
As for your original comment, Native Americans were absolutely dehumanized in this country. In that way it was no different from the holocaust or American Chattel slavery. So it makes sense that someone would respond negatively to someone minimizing that aspect of it with something akin to “ah well it was just the flu, nothing to be done about that”
LikeLike
@jason: sure, it is ok say if and when I am out of the line, perhaps some lingual difficulties here, I don’t know, but as far as the native americans go, I kind of feel touchy there since years ago I got a taste of US racisim in practice when some federal law enforcement decided to check out the car where I was travelling with some native americans. Since I have almost black hair and had it long at that time, dressed like my mates, the federals thoughed that I was one too. Only after seen my passport they changed the attutide and did no longer point their rifles at me. Kind of sobering incident but made few things very clear to me very fast.
@jane: sure, we’re cool. I get heathed up fast but also cool down fast too. No problem.
LikeLike
Zek said:
You need to reread the definition of subspecies. Subspecies are capable of interbreeding, only they normally don’t because of geographic barriers. If the barriers are removed and they breed freely, then they are two different subspecies as opposed to being separate species. It’s expected that they would breed when their ranges overlap.
Wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf
Wolves and coyotes can produce fertile offspring. Though they typically don’t mate in the wild, they mate with enough frequency that some populations of coyotes have significant wolf ancestry and vice versa.
This is the distinction between species and subspecies. Members of different subspecies will readily mate without significant issues. Some members of different species of the same genus can mate, though that is not the norm.
The genetic evidence so far shows that humans and Neanderthals only mated at one point, most likely in the Levant, when homo sapiens left Africa. That there was no further interbreeding between Neanderthals and humans, even though they shared the same range for tens of thousand of years, suggests that they are not members of the same species. The introgression of Neanderthal genes into the homo sapien gene pool was most likely a fluke.
LikeLike
Sagat,
Did you really just use Wikipedia as a source?? Haha, okay, someone needs to create a corollary to Godwin’s Law whereby the first person to use Wikipedia as a credible source immediately must concede the discussion.
Also, your wiki article itself states that coyote-wolf hybrids exhibit low fertility rates, along with a high increase in genetic abnormalities and heritable diseases. This further heightens their classification as different species.
And again, you need to reread my comment. The point isn’t that subspecies aren’t CAPABLE of interbreeding. It’s that they DON’T. And by don’t I mean that they don’t in the wild. In a test-tube or a zoo or lab is not the same. Reintroduced hybrids are also not the same.
The introgression of Neanderthal genes into the homo sapien gene pool was most likely a fluke.
And this statement shows you are obviously talking from VAST knowledge and expertise, correct? Haha, oy vey… A fluke doesn’t propagate over hundreds of generations. Evolutionary forces don’t work like that. Also, Neanderthals and humans interbred over the entire course of their coexistence, not merely during a single period in time. The archaeological evidence supports this.
So, yeah… Since I seem to be repeating myself, if you have any further comments I suggest you reread everything I’ve already written. There’s only so many times I want to tell you that you’re objectively wrong.
LikeLike
I thought it was the aliens who created the white race, hence their superiority:
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRiD176TdjytB0yzctQxdCyz41Ic9GfBH5_aoEhIFFf-M8FY7TA
Here’s a few particularly hideous aliens:
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQeOEV0DU_wquEcxvU2GPFrPo21Lu7lZbAgIw7kXnuojWZnDROXiw
This may explain the white man’s humungous brains and by extension, his superior abilities. Unfortunately though, these aliens had small genitalia, something they passed onto their ‘experiments’! Henceforth and hitherto, there is a correlation between high IQ and small genitalia! The deductions to be made from such findings? You can’t have everything, it’s either or!
Here’s an alien woman playing with her hybrid half human infant:
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTCiEBo9Hyz63RHSrhfFBB2nuptcjyZEdp8oVpLYadcD0Tt2iE-XQ
This my friends is where the Neanderthal came from. When their work was done, they returned to the stars! They did not die out. One day the will return!
LikeLike
Zek said:
Don’t be dumb. I used Wiki as a source for your convenience because it summed up the known information. I could have used other sources, but I would’ve have had to post multiple links. The point is, you were wrong in you assertion that wolves and coyotes can’t produce fertile offspring. I’ll use another source if it makes you feel better.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=wylie-coywolf-the-coyote-wolf-hybri-2009-09-23
I already stated that coyotes and wolves are still considered different species, so you are just reiterating what I wrote. And nice of you to use the wiki page that I cited for your source.
I already pointed to the definition of subspecies up above. That came from Merriam-Webster’s Medical Dictionary, 2007 edition. I can cite other sources as well. You haven’t cited any. Subspecies can and do mate in the wild. It’s expected that they will readily mate if there are no barriers to prevent them from doing so. This is what makes them subspecies, as opposed to separate species.
I’m aware of fossil evidence that shows human/Neanderthal hybrids in Europe, but as I already stated, the genetic evidence so far doesn’t show interbreeding over the entire course of their coexistence. The Neanderthal alleles found in Eurasians are not significantly higher in Europeans than in East Asians, which would be expected if there was further and continual introgression. Not only that, East Asians and Europeans have different Neanderthal alleles.
This points to a limited period of mating with Neanderthals before early Eurasians diverged and then genetic drift. If Neanderthals and homo sapiens were the same species, then mating would’ve been common, especially when we know that their ranges overlapped for such a long period. Neanderthals and humans were probably genetically and behaviorally distant to the point that mating was rare. And it appears to have happened only during one time period in human pre-history. Maybe when the Neanderthal genome is fully sequenced and compared to global populations, a different picture will unfold, but that is not what the data shows so far.
LikeLike
Oh please, consider that population density at the time was VERY low, there can have been quite some happy inbreeding, but those bloodlines may have well gone extinct, it was a harsh world out here, lions, mammoths, sabretoothed cats (big ones), rhinoes, malaria, hyenas, harsh winters, war… Survival was not and is not guaranteed
Question is, to what degree are the “old African-Americans” free from Neanderthaler influence, änd this pure modern humans.
Oh, sapiens is singular. Believe me, the taught me Latin for 8 years.
The “th” in “neanderthalensis” should be pronounced “t”,it is German, the Neander part is (adapted Greek).
LikeLike
One proposed definition of two populations being different species is a
2 1/2 percent decrease in the fertility of hybrid offspring. That is, if there
were 200 matings between two populations, they would be considered
different species if the offspring of 5 of those matings were sterile. But
the offspring of the 200 matings could still be fertile.
LikeLike
Seriously? Talking about Neanderthal skull shape to determine their intelligence in regards to modern humans? “More in the back, less in the front”? Gee, that sounds like something a Dutch colonial anthropologist would’ve said about my great-uncle in law after he took some head-measurements for the white invasion squadron to mull over and feel giddy about. What’s next? More sloped foreheads? Jutting brows? I’ve got both – must mean I’m dumb as bricks!
Honestly, I was under the impression that this craniometry garbage had died hard centuries ago. I thought the consensus that Neanderthals were genuinely intelligent and capable of speech had already been passed.
Also, It’s actually not completely true that people who are historically from Sub-Saharan Africa do not share any Neanderthal in their genome. African populations that have had old or modern backflow from Eurasia have a Neanderthal component to their genome, examples being people from Hausa and Yoruba populations in Nigeria and Niger. I wouldn’t be surprised if most people who are African-American are similar in that respect.
Interestingly enough, back in the heyday of early human exploration, recent findings in the Altai mountains’ “Denisova cave” has revealed that there were far more species of advanced hominids than just Humans and Neanderthals. I remember one person coining the term “A Tolkienesque world of elves and dwarves” to describe it. It’s a little bit of a shame that we humans are the only ones left, in my opinion.
LikeLike
“Researchers say there is no evidence that modern humans’ cognitive superiority led to demise of Neanderthals”
“studies show that Neanderthals lived in small, fragmented groups, and interbred to some extent with modern humans. Some of their inbred male offspring were infertile. The arrival of modern humans may simply have swamped and assimilated them.”
“Stereotypes help people to order their world, but the stereotype of the primitive Neanderthal is now gradually eroding, at least in scientific circles,” said Roebroecks.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/apr/30/neanderthals-not-less-intelligent-humans-scientists
Another achievement for science!
What will science tell us next year?
LikeLike
That is very interesting, jefe. It seems when humans try to make it look like we are superior, we often fail.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
Maybe it is just a coincidence, but I find it odd that this rehabilitation comes on the heels of whites discovering they have Neanderthal genes.
LikeLike
That is a good point, @abagond and I definitely think that has something to do with it. But the Neanderthals may not actually have been as dumb as we think.
They tried to do the same for Florensis(sp?) in the Philippines, but they realized that couldn’t have been the case when they had tools as good as any human and communicated with one another complexly. I also wonder about the Denisovans.
LikeLike
Yeah, it is hard to say if it is a coincidence of not. Let “Science” tell us.
LikeLike
Highlight what Abagond said on the Darwin thread:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/darwin-the-races-of-man/#comment-230630
LikeLike
Who the heck would want to mate with a Neanderthal????? I can not imagine seeing a creature like the one depicted and wanting to have children with it. Ugh.
LikeLike
Whose depiction were you looking at? I have seen depictions of Neanderthals
that made them look like chimpanzees, and other depictions that made them
look like normal, but somewhat heavy featured modern humans. My own
mental image of them leans towards the latter.
LikeLike
All Africans also have Neanderthal DNA.
All modern humans have Neanderthal DNA, new research finds
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/30/africa/africa-neanderthal-dna-scn/index.html
LikeLike