If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Humans stopped having sex with Neanderthals after discovering Eurasia, yellow fever   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 72
    More: Interesting, Eurasia, Neanderthals, PLoS Genetics, genetic variants, Eurasian, genetic recombination, egg cells, stone tools  
•       •       •

4228 clicks; posted to Geek » on 05 Oct 2012 at 11:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-05 08:01:27 PM

DerAppie: /attractive Asians are either mixed race or flukes of nature
//There are 3 billion asians so they can't all be ugly


I have a Filipino friend and a Black friend. Both of them prefer white girls. I myself married a Hispanic who sometimes gets mistaken for Korean (by Koreans... I don't know either).
The Filipino said that he thought that White women were generally prettier, but the most beautiful women he'd ever seen weren't White. He also had really hot sisters, if that helps the story along. We went on about this a little more and also concluded that the ugliest women we'd ever seen were also not White. I put it to him that it wasn't that White women were prettier, just that they generally didn't get as ugly as the ugliest non-Whites, and the trade-off was that they didn't get as pretty either.

We were very multicultural.
 
2012-10-05 08:24:52 PM
Chicks dig neanderfarks.
 
2012-10-05 09:11:52 PM

Irregardless: The more interesting question is how much chicken DNA is in any given Farkers DNA?


You seem to have gotten that backwards. How much Farker DNA is in any given chicken?

/been lurking the politics tab.
 
2012-10-05 09:15:44 PM
Too few pictures of Eurasia, but I like how she says she'd like to try everything.
 
2012-10-05 09:42:56 PM
Good to know that modern humans were smart enough to evade and procreate amongst themselves. Still not sure if the "pure modern human" wins in this race.
 
2012-10-05 09:56:26 PM
Men will have sex with their hand, with animals, with fruit, with mud. I think it's a given that they interbred with Neanderthals.
 
2012-10-05 10:14:01 PM

pottie: The last sex between Neanderthals and modern humans likely occurred as recently as 47,000 years ago


They don't know about last Saturday night my ex

 
2012-10-05 10:22:38 PM

cgraves67: Yes. All that is pretty much the common theory. What I find surprising is that the NAs apparently have MORE Neanderthal DNA than the rest of us that came out of Africa. I would've expected it to be the same amount as all the other European and Asia groups. The implications are surprising. I had thought that the Native Americans were just a subdivision of the normal East Asia group, "Mongoloids", if that term is still applicable.


Asia is huge, and the way it makes the most sense to me is to suppose that most ancient humans didn't stray too far from known large bodies of water -- coastlines, mostly -- until much later in human history. That would easily explain -- at least, in my mostly ignorant grasp of prehistoric humanity -- how heavily Neanderthal-salted H. Sapiens would make their way across northern Europe and Asia to Siberia and then to North America, with minimal contact with southern-travelling humans who'd had a lot less contact with Neanderthals.
 
2012-10-05 10:47:50 PM
So...dumb question: is it pronounced "neander-tall" or with the traditional "th" sound? I've heard it both ways.
 
2012-10-05 10:50:24 PM

garandman1a: Sybarite: The last sex between Neanderthals and modern humans likely occurred as recently as 47,000 years ago

So you're saying that's when they got married.

I thought Eurasia was another word for marriage.


No, that's euthanasia. Or is it anaesthesia? Dammit, I always get these mixed up. (I believe that's aphasia.)
 
2012-10-05 10:51:24 PM

johnny_stingray: Hah! Try telling that to Melanie Haber!



\ you may remember her as Audrey Farber


Nnooo.. do you mean Susan Underhill?
 
2012-10-05 10:58:36 PM

Suede head: Men will have sex with their hand, with animals, with fruit, with mud. I think it's a given that they interbred with Neanderthals.


You left out gas pumps.
 
2012-10-05 11:13:24 PM

no talent ass clown: So...dumb question: is it pronounced "neander-tall" or with the traditional "th" sound? I've heard it both ways.


This is kind of like the 'Theramin' debate. Léon Theremin, who invented and named the instrument, pronounced his own name with an UNaspirated dental fricative: "TAIR-(e)-m(e)n" The common name given to H. neanderthalensis is taken from the name of the German valley where remains of the species were first identified, Neander. In German and many related languages, variations on "thal" mean "valley;" thus, Neander Valley = Neanderthal. (Our word "dollar" is derived from the same word: The first 'modern' coins of uniform weight were minted in the silver-rich valley of Joachimsthal in Bohemia, and known orginally as 'Joachimsthalers,' later just as 'thalers'.) "Thal" is also pronounced with the same sound as the beginning of Mr. Theramin's last name, as "Tal". Thus, "NeanderTal" (not "NeaderTHal") is the *proper* pronunciation in all cases. If you're an academic working in a field that would use this word, you'd sound foolish pronouncing it "NeaderTHal".

As for which is 'correct' for everyone else, that takes us back to the Theramin question for comparison. "THeramin" is so ubiquitous now, it's probably hopeless to try to set people right on it. It's also probably arguable that the word for the instrument is no longer the same as the man's name, and it's not unreasonable to accept the different pronunciation. In the same way, I won't get down on anyone for saying "NeanderTHal," since it's been so common for so long, though I always say "NeaderTal" myself. And it's perhaps arguable that at least in common parlance, the popular pronunciation for the lost human species is not strictly incorrect, so long as it's only used for that. Modern humans from the Neander Valley are still "NeanderTals". (It's perhaps worth noting that modern German has updated these spellings, eliminating the 'h' from them.)

So go ahead and say "NeanderTHal" if you like, and don't feel bad about it. Nearly everyone else does, has for a long time, and probably always will. Just avoid using it when talking about anything other than prehistoric humans, or when speaking to experts in that field, and you'll be fine.
 
2012-10-05 11:34:17 PM
That is a lie. I'm not above banging Conservative women. I just don't like talking to them.
 
2012-10-06 07:14:17 AM
The important thing to realize here is that during the period 135,000 to 10,000 years ago there were periods off ice age expansion and contraction. People (all kinds) have generally lived near the coast as that is the place where you find the most opportunistic food discoveries. Human types have mostly always been scavengers. What we find (since the ocean levels have risen quite a bit) is that most of our history is about 200 or so feet under water near the continental shelves. The stuff we find is like discovering Appalachia, and determining that all modern 20th century men are farking hillybillies. We can't, and will never, know what our ancient history is. Even our discoveries about hominids in Africa has to be colored by the fact that the more advanced critters were hanging out on the coast lines finding the dead stuff that washes up everyday on the shore and eating the tasty stuff that lives in the little tidal pools. Only the "loser, lower types" would have been trying to make it it the middle lands of any particular continent. We've also been migrating all over the place a lot longer than folks realize.
 
2012-10-06 10:04:23 AM

Sergeant Grumbles: DerAppie: /attractive Asians are either mixed race or flukes of nature
//There are 3 billion asians so they can't all be ugly

I have a Filipino friend and a Black friend. Both of them prefer white girls. I myself married a Hispanic who sometimes gets mistaken for Korean (by Koreans... I don't know either).
The Filipino said that he thought that White women were generally prettier, but the most beautiful women he'd ever seen weren't White. He also had really hot sisters, if that helps the story along. We went on about this a little more and also concluded that the ugliest women we'd ever seen were also not White. I put it to him that it wasn't that White women were prettier, just that they generally didn't get as ugly as the ugliest non-Whites, and the trade-off was that they didn't get as pretty either.

We were very multicultural.


It is a basic biological fact, and one with an obvious survival advantage, that humans are hardwired to equate "exotic" with "attractive" Hybrid vigor FTW
 
2012-10-06 10:38:42 AM

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: no talent ass clown: So...dumb question: is it pronounced "neander-tall" or with the traditional "th" sound? I've heard it both ways.

This is kind of like the 'Theramin' debate. Léon Theremin, who invented and named the instrument, pronounced his own name with an UNaspirated dental fricative: "TAIR-(e)-m(e)n" The common name given to H. neanderthalensis is taken from the name of the German valley where remains of the species were first identified, Neander...


Wow! Thanks, my fruminous friend
 
2012-10-06 11:26:00 AM

no talent ass clown: Sylvia_Bandersnatch: no talent ass clown: So...dumb question: is it pronounced "neander-tall" or with the traditional "th" sound? I've heard it both ways.

This is kind of like the 'Theramin' debate. Léon Theremin, who invented and named the instrument, pronounced his own name with an UNaspirated dental fricative: "TAIR-(e)-m(e)n" The common name given to H. neanderthalensis is taken from the name of the German valley where remains of the species were first identified, Neander...

Wow! Thanks, my fruminous friend


Thanks, but I did make one notable error. I should have noted that modern humans from Neander Valley are 'Neandertalers' -- persons of Neanderthal -- not 'Neandertals,' which would mean 'Neander valleys,' same as calling people from New York 'New Yorks' instead of 'New Yorkers'.

As for the T/TH thing, I expect Germans themselves are used to it. The 'TH/DH' sound does not occur in a lot of European continental languages. French doesn't have it, for example. Since the French do not grow up learning this sound, they find it difficult to pronounce (much as we do some of their sounds that are unfamiliar to us), which is why you're likely to hear francophones pronouncing 'theater,' for example, with a "T" sound instead. Historically, the "th" in these languages represents a stressed or 'extra hard' "T" sound, then, not the TH/DH dipthong anglophiles mean to represent by that spelling. (Most of the time. We're talking about English spelling here, after all.) The "Ll" in 'Lloyds of London' represents a similar (now all but lost) distinction in English (which has often been represented as 'LH' by classical linguists and philologists -- Tolkien, for example.) But in converse, the French may be surprised to hear anglophiles using the TH/DH dipthong where they would not, in words that are actually French. But this perhaps just sounds like a strong accent to them, the same as their use of "T" in 'theatre' does to us. German being more closely related to English (even though a LOT of our modern vocabulary derives from Old French, via the Norman Conquest of 1066), I expect they're not as dismayed. But I also suspect that in classic German style, they quietly consider that we just don't know any better, and I suppose that's true.

/snicker-snack
 
2012-10-06 11:04:24 PM
img.gawkerassets.com

"Battalion A, smash things! Battalion B, smash different things!"
 
2012-10-07 08:48:18 AM

Rev. Skarekroe: In 2010, scientists completed the first sequence of the Neanderthal genome using DNA extracted from fossils, and an examination of the genetic material suggested that modern humans' ancestors occasionally successfully interbred with Neanderthals. Recent estimates reveal that Neanderthal DNA makes up 1 percent to 4 percent of modern Eurasian genomes, perhaps endowing some people with the robust immune systems they enjoy today.

I could've sworn I've read studies that say modern humans have 0% neanderthal in them. Can we get some consensus here?


The new numbers are the consensus outside of that small number of anthropologists who inexplicably continue to insist that Neanderthals were barely intelligent sub-humans who our ancestors refused to interact with outside of killing. I mean honestly; even if Neanderthals were really, really stupid (and the evidence doesn't support that notion) why would that stop us from farking them? Humans will fark anything! Sheep, cows, sacks, trees, wet rocks; what could possibly stop us from sexing up remarkably similar fellow humanoids?
 
2012-10-07 09:19:07 AM

cgraves67: Yes. All that is pretty much the common theory. What I find surprising is that the NAs apparently have MORE Neanderthal DNA than the rest of us that came out of Africa. I would've expected it to be the same amount as all the other European and Asia groups. The implications are surprising. I had thought that the Native Americans were just a subdivision of the normal East Asia group, "Mongoloids", if that term is still applicable.

The ancestors of the Native Americans must've come out of Africa in their own wave, bred with Neanderthals to a greater extent than others, then went on to East Asia without interbreeding much with the groups that would remain in Eurasia then crossing the land bridge into the Americas, carrying the Neanderthal DNA and becoming isolated when the land bridge flooded. Either that, or Neanderthals existed in East Asia and the ancestors of Native Americans interbred with them for a longer time period than Eurasian groups before crossing into the Americas.



No, "Mongoloid" is not applicable and hasn't been since at least the 60s, though obviously it still gets thrown around, most often by those with an agenda I think all us internetians are familiar with.

The greater prevalence of Neanderthal DNA in American Natives is not a result of them "breeding more" with Neanderthals; it's a result of them being a smaller, more isolated population for a longer period. Eurasians have been plugged in to the rest of humanity non-stop since the end of the last Ice-Age; via trade, migration, slavery and war the inhabitants of Eurasia have been mixing DNA for thousands upon thousands of years, with Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean being the most "cosmopolitan" zones due to the relatively lower barriers of travel around the western peninsula (Europe). African pops were part of this too, but to a much lesser extent due to the difficult geography south of the Sahara and the rough seas along its coast.

American Natives, on the other hand, have been isolated from the rest of humanity since the end of the Ice-Age. Once the land-bridge broke up migrations into the American land-mass, for the most part, shrank down to that insignificant, xenophobic set of polar hunter-gatherers and fishermen pops that continually migrate around the higher latitudes. Being more isolated, they had much less "new" genetic material coming in, so that DNA already present wasn't "deluded" percentage-wise by new additions. American Native pops also tended to be more isolated from each other that Eurasian ones were, due to their small numbers, the vastness of the Super-continent, and the difficult East-West and Central American terrain, which led to still more genetic concentration.

While European and Central-Asian and East-Asian and Mesopotamia and North African DNA were getting exchanged back and forth willy-nilly for the last 15k-10k years, the American Natives have been working with the same genetic pool that crossed over the land-bridge during that same time, and often in small population clusters geographically isolated from one another. As such, your modern Euro-descended human would be more "Asian" than them due to continual exposure to Asian genetic material, and your average Asian would be more "European" due to the same. We're mutts, and they weren't, at least not until we showed up on the continent, killed >90% of them, interbred with them, and smashed all their cultures together in tiny reservations, leading to greater interbreeding among the survivors.
 
2012-10-07 09:28:44 AM

StoneColdAtheist: Karac: cgraves67: The article also indicates that Native Americans are now believed to have more Neanderthal DNA remnants than Eurasians. That's pretty crazy considering Neanderthals were European/Mid East located. The Native American anscestors must've hooked up with the Neanderthals and then hotfooted it across Asia without interbreeding with any other groups, or Neanderthals were spread much farther afield than we know.

I could see it happening like this:
The first group out of Africa finds neanderthals, starts doing the nasty in the pasty.
Some of their descendants start walking towards Alaska, and not finding any other baseline homo sapiens in their path, keep the % of neanderthal DNA high.
Some of their descendants stop along the way, in Europe or Asia, and breed with later waves out of Africa, lowering their percentage.
The land bridge sinks, isolating the native american population from further breeding with more 'pure' human stock.

Essentially...THIS. ^^^

But with two refinements. First, from the relative lack of genetic diversity and limited number of major language groups of modern Native Americans we know that the earliest Americans came here in very small numbers. The first waves may have been as few as several dozen to as many as a few hundred. What is for sure is that to carry that Neanderthal gene record here those handfuls of peoples were bonking Neanderthals within a relative few generations before crossing Beringia into NA.

Second, they HAD to have come here a lot earlier than Clovis time (~13kybp). After all, Clovis technology erupted out the clear blue sky as a fully mature, megafauna-hunting-optimized technology all over the southern half of North America in the blink of a geological eye. Moreover, just because Clovis is the first indisputable and sizable collection of Americans doesn't imply that it was the first...by any means. Furthermore, the Clovis technology had to have been maturing in situ here in NA for thousands of years, maybe 20 ...


Yes, exactly. Talking about pre-Clovis pops is also made difficult by the fact that the earliest evidence would be concentrated in the migration area, Beringia, and that has necessarily changed significantly since the end of the Ice Age. Most of the sites that would be potentially edifying are currently under water, and only now are we starting to develop the technology needed to identify and investigate them.
 
Displayed 22 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report