The human family tree just got another — mysterious — branch

Originally posted by pheonix358
So possibly black, white, yellow and red, are actually different, not better or worse, but different.

I wish we could celebrate our differences rather than be mofos about it.

P

Humans actually are one of the least genetically diverse species on Earth. Our entire species was reduced to probably no more than 5,000 or so members around 70,000-75,000 years ago, probably due to some sort of major catastrophe. The leading theory is that the Toba superuption in Indonesia is the culprit since it happened around the same time. Since there were so few of us in existence so recently in our history, it means that we were reduced to very little genetic diversity. Compared to most other species on Earth, we are remarkably alike on the genetic level, despite our superficial physical differences.

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
There could well have been other groups we haven't found fossils for yet (if we ever do), and genetic traces that we also haven't yet detected. It will be interesting to see as these sciences progress what will be discovered. The use of genetics to research our own ancestry is still very new and I'm sure there's still tons to learn.

They recently discovered that some people (ancestors of Melanesians) interbred with Denisovans, which was most likely a sister lineage of Neanderthals.

Yes, the Denisovans, I was trying to remember what they were called but couldn't so left it out. But yeah, so that now makes three groups or sub-species we inter-bred with in three different areas. It wouldn't surprise me if in coming years we find four, five and six elsewhere.

Originally posted by LifeInDeath

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
There could well have been other groups we haven't found fossils for yet (if we ever do), and genetic traces that we also haven't yet detected. It will be interesting to see as these sciences progress what will be discovered. The use of genetics to research our own ancestry is still very new and I'm sure there's still tons to learn.

They recently discovered that some people (ancestors of Melanesians) interbred with Denisovans, which was most likely a sister lineage of Neanderthals.

Yes, the Denisovans, I was trying to remember what they were called but couldn't so left it out. But yeah, so that now makes three groups or sub-species we inter-bred with in three different areas. It wouldn't surprise me if in coming years we find four, five and six elsewhere.

The most fascinating part of the Denisovan article was that they concluded that their population must have been much larger than that of Neanderthals, yet, so far the remains of Denisovans discovered are limited to a few fractured finger bones..

reply to post by swan001

there may have not been any sex, but i'm sure there was some probing involved. 2nd line lol bad aaliens

reply to post by Kantzveldt


All humans have snippets of foreign DNA. When the human genome project completed mapping the human DNA strand, they found DNA that they couldn't identify from any known species on earth. They hypothesized that the DNA must have been acquired by contact with foreign bacteria but they cannot say when or how.

Originally posted by Sinny
Aliens did it

I second that!

Once we substitute 'alien' intervention into just about all our unresolved mysterious, things start coming together leaving us with the 'why' part instead of the 'how' or 'who'

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by Sinny
Aliens did it

I second that!

Once we substitute 'alien' intervention into just about all our unresolved mysterious, things start coming together leaving us with the 'why' part instead of the 'how' or 'who'

reply to post by adept333




Yes i don't actualy think the singular species identification for Homo-Sapiens is going to be qualified any time soon, but if one sub-group interbreeds with a very large hominid such as the Neanderthal, and another sub-group with that of a smaller, in the case of the pygmies, that increases the extent to which they are cousins twice removed....as it were.

reply to post by adept333



No, i said some Africans appeared to be PARTLY descended, from an unknown species.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000



I guess they have to refine and narrow the paramaters of the unknown sequances to specific sub-groups in trying to establish who, what, when, where, created the variations.

Originally posted by Kantzveldt
reply to post by adept333

 

No, i said some Africans appeared to be PARTLY descended, from an unknown species.

No you said "human origins get more complex with certain Africans being partly descended from a species yet unknown". So you read the article and you thought it supported your apparent previously held belief that Africans are genetically different than Europeans. The irony is that the article supports the very idea you think the article is debunking.

Can you explain more of why you believe Africans "appear" partly descended from an unknown species? Wouldnt modern Europeans also be partly descended from your supposed unknown species since they are so genetically similar to Africans and actually are the same species Homo Sapien Sapien??

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Perfect. It could confirm the "engineering theory", if you get my drift .
Do you have a source I can copy/paste to my folder please.

reply to post by Kantzveldt


My answer to ALL this is: No matter what information is accurately gathered - We (you & I - the common man) can still be told anything by these 'People' and we are suppose to drink it in as it is from the mouth of the Ra or whoever? How are we to TRULY know that what is being presented is the truth? This SHOULD go for all information - think of it this way - we really only know what 'They' tell us in their academic books of knowledge anyway right?
this brings me to my Mantra = QUESTION EVERYTHING =

reply to post by adept333

No you said "human origins get more complex with certain Africans being partly descended from a species yet unknown". So you read the article and you thought it supported your apparent previously held belief that Africans are genetically different than Europeans. The irony is that the article supports the very idea you think the article is debunking.

There are differences therefore different...

Can you explain more of why you believe Africans "appear" partly descended from an unknown species? Wouldnt modern Europeans also be partly descended from your supposed unknown species since they are so genetically similar to Africans and actually are the same species Homo Sapien Sapien??

Wasn't it the point of the article to suggest only certain African gruops are partly descended from this unknown species...!?!

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

Perfect. It could confirm the "engineering theory", if you get my drift

.
Do you have a source I can copy/paste to my folder please.

I read up on it on Wikipedia when i was researching mtEve but i didn't save it

I am convinced science was put here only to strew chaos and confusion into the mix. Meanwhile the common cold begs to be cured.


reply to post by Kantzveldt

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
When the human genome project completed mapping the human DNA strand, they found DNA that they couldn't identify from any known species on earth. They hypothesized that the DNA must have been acquired by contact with foreign bacteria but they cannot say when or how.

I'm sure you can find credible references to back this claim up.

reply to post by rootbranch2012


...that's because the "common cold" is in fact a catch-all term for all manner of mild infections.

Originally posted by patmac573
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

My answer to ALL this is: No matter what information is accurately gathered - We (you & I - the common man) can still be told anything by these 'People' and we are suppose to drink it in as it is from the mouth of the Ra or whoever? How are we to TRULY know that what is being presented is the truth? This SHOULD go for all information - think of it this way - we really only know what 'They' tell us in their academic books of knowledge anyway right?
this brings me to my Mantra = QUESTION EVERYTHING =

Translation: I dont understand what the article is saying. I dont understand how conclusions are are arrived at by skeletal remains and genetic testing. I dont like these facts because they dont allow me to make stuff up as I see fit. Which brings me to my mantra I am ignorant and proud and I explain things I dont know by just going with my gut feeling.

I would like to know what these unique snippets control? Are they the genes for brain development or just physical traits. Are any of the traits dominant?

How in the world could none of these bones be found? We found bones much, much older.