# All Non-Africans are Part Neanderthal - Genetics Confirm



## Makalakumu (Jul 18, 2011)

http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.html



> If your heritage is non-African, you are part Neanderthal, according to a new study in the July issue of _Molecular Biology and Evolution_. Discovery News has been reporting on human/Neanderthal interbreeding for some time now, so this latest research confirms earlier findings.
> 
> 
> Damian Labuda of the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics  and the CHU Sainte-Justine  Research Center conducted the study with  his colleagues. They determined some of the human X chromosome  originates from Neanderthals, but only in people of non-African heritage.



Wow!  Apparently, the only "true" humans are black!  This might stuff some crow into some people's mouths.


----------



## granfire (Jul 18, 2011)

maunakumu said:


> http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.html
> 
> 
> 
> Wow!  Apparently, the only "true" humans are black!  This might stuff some crow into some people's mouths.



More like 'We are still all cave men'

:angel:


----------



## Ken Morgan (Jul 18, 2011)

owowowowowowwowoowowowowo


----------



## Omar B (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## Ken Morgan (Jul 18, 2011)

Seriously Omar?? You&#8217;ve never ridden down the road with a goat holding onto your back??? Come on!


----------



## JohnEdward (Jul 18, 2011)

Well that completes my family tree, explains allot like that Jay Leno chin I have. Then what about Aborigines, Asians, and Canadians? :uhyeah:


----------



## clfsean (Jul 18, 2011)

No... they're just part Cylon.


----------



## cdunn (Jul 18, 2011)

Captain Kirk, the 100 millenium ideal.


----------



## JohnEdward (Jul 18, 2011)

clfsean said:


> No... they're just part Cylon.


 You mean they are from Wisconsin?


----------



## Omar B (Jul 18, 2011)

Ya know Ken, my whole first 16 years on both sets of grandparents farms in Jamaica and it's never happened once.  Yeah, we did have goats too.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jul 18, 2011)

I read a book called the Genesis Secret and it dealt in just this subject. It points to the believe that the People from the North along with all their Children were the Nephilim from the Bible. It's a goog read anyhow.
Sean


----------



## Carol (Jul 18, 2011)

[yt]wiWu7Csn2HY[/yt]


----------



## mook jong man (Jul 18, 2011)

I'm not ,  I'm full Neanderthal.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 18, 2011)

My prediction?

Calling someone a "neanderthal" will no longer be insulting. It will refer to their sturdiness, or some such.......:lfao:


----------



## granfire (Jul 18, 2011)

elder999 said:


> My prediction?
> 
> Calling someone a "neanderthal" will no longer be insulting. It will refer to their sturdiness, or some such.......:lfao:



LOL, like ....

nah, so not going there.....

:lfao:


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 18, 2011)

Somehow, I always knew that I was part caveman. lol!


----------



## punisher73 (Jul 19, 2011)

Anyone else find it strange that their sample size to declare this was only 5 people?


----------



## crushing (Jul 19, 2011)

**** Geico!


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 19, 2011)

That's not a great sample size, it has to be said.

It is something that has been hypothesised for quite a long time, tho' and it's certainly not something I'd be offended by if it happened to be globally true.  The Neanderthal might not have been the worlds greatest innovators or communicators but they did remarkably well under extreme environmental conditions for a very long time.  It was only when the adventurous homo sapien souls finally made it up into Europe that the Neanderthal got into real trouble.  Homo Sapien missile weapon use and inate aggression out-competed the Neaderthal and our tendency to form interlinked communities across distances squeezed them out of their territory.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 19, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> . Homo Sapien missile weapon use and inate aggression out-competed the Neaderthal and our tendency to form interlinked communities across distances squeezed them out of their territory.



Hmm. Not so sure we can make that assertion with such certainty. Neanderthals fashioned spears as well, and the superiority of spear throwers like the atlatl didn't come about until about 15000-10000 B.C. Neanderthals didn't survive much past about 24000 years ago, so human weaponry wasn't really that superior.

We were probably, however, better endurance runners-which led to the community interconnectivity, as well as making us superior hunters. I'm not so sure that was "the" deciding factor as much as other, more human traits that we're all familiar with today, like our capacity for deception.


----------



## stone_dragone (Jul 19, 2011)

Based on a similar sized sample group, I have assessed that all modern day european descent men are in the military (4 guys sharing my office and one civilian female in the next cubicle). Is that good science or Bad Science(BS for short)? 

However, using that same group I can definitely back up the claim regarding neanderthal ancestry. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cdunn (Jul 19, 2011)

elder999 said:


> Hmm. Not so sure we can make that assertion with such certainty. Neanderthals fashioned spears as well, and the superiority of spear throwers like the atlatl didn't come about until about 15000-10000 B.C. Neanderthals didn't survive much past about 24000 years ago, so human weaponry wasn't really that superior.
> 
> We were probably, however, better endurance runners-which led to the community interconnectivity, as well as making us superior hunters. I'm not so sure that was "the" deciding factor as much as other, more human traits that we're all familiar with today, like our capacity for deception.



My recollection is that there was evidence that we tended to operate in larger immediate groups period, too - A _Homo sapiens sapiens_ band likely tended to outnumber any _Homo sapiens neanderthalensis _it got into violent contact with by 2-4:1.

As for the sample size, there are two studies here: 



> An X-Linked Haplotype of Neandertal Origin Is Present Among All Non-African Populations
> 
> Our analysis of _6,092 X-chromosomes from all inhabited continents_ supports earlier contentions that a mosaic of lineages of different time depths and different geographic provenance could have contributed to the genetic constitution of modern humans.



(Emphasis added)

The 2010 study appears to have used the full genomes of 5 individuals to locate the areas where some subgroups of modern humans displayed better matches to Neandertal DNA than to other subgroups of modern humans. The 2011 study then looked at a very large number of these specific loci; exactly how it should be done, given the expense and time involved in a full genome comparison.


----------



## granfire (Jul 19, 2011)

I think prior to genetic research it was the consencus that the neanderthals went extinct, outmatched by a more successful subspecies of Homo Sapiens...or errectus, or whatever.

my mom just told me how they found a skeleton in some village, and tested all people there, and found out that the school teacher was a decsendent of the person who died there several thousand years ago.

(In redneck terms, that's what you get when the family tree doesn't fork)



I find that immensly interesting (though I do have to wait for the TV special to come out), like the show they had a while back, when they followed the migration of mankind from the East African plains north, to the middle east, then followed the spit routes to Europe and more importantly across Asia to the Bering Straight and further on to the American continent.
They came to the conclusion (aside from being terribly lucky to be able to do this in a relatively short window of opportunity) that the American continents, from the Alaskan Inuit and Eskimos down to the people of Terra de Fuego descended from a group of maybe 24 people who made it over from Asia.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 19, 2011)

This is a pertinent and very interesting programme that is relevant to the topic in general:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0126hn6

[yt]DQKkcbH1ykY[/yt]

Not directly relevant but I can't resist adding a link to my favourite anthropologist, Dr. Alice Roberts:

[yt]9gkiX7m1m_c[/yt]

What can I say ... I've asked if I can have her for Christmas but my missus says no .


----------



## SensibleManiac (Jul 19, 2011)

So apparently 10cc knew something ahead of their time, I think I'm going to go make Neanderthal love...


----------



## Blade96 (Jul 20, 2011)

and what is a neanderthal? cause i'm not even sure what one is.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 20, 2011)

Neanderthal's were a rival species of hominid prevelent throughout Europe that were gradually wiped out by competition with homo sapiens.

Here's a link to a good 'gateway' post that can help guide further investigation.  It's just an 'opinion' post by someone but it touches the basics without muddying the waters too much.


----------



## granfire (Jul 20, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> Neanderthal's were a rival species of hominid prevelent throughout Europe that were gradually wiped out by competition with homo sapiens.
> 
> Here's a link to a good 'gateway' post that can help guide further investigation.  It's just an 'opinion' post by someone but it touches the basics without muddying the waters too much.



Well apparently they did not get wiped out completely, more like assimilated....


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 20, 2011)

:chuckles: Aye - as did my link it appears!

Let me try again:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?24894-Neanderthal-facts-and-myths


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 20, 2011)

Considering the minute differences between the genomes of humans and the difficulty of sequencing, five might actually be a large sample size.  Or at least large to the scientists.


----------



## cdunn (Jul 20, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> Considering the minute differences between the genomes of humans and the difficulty of sequencing, five might actually be a large sample size. Or at least large to the scientists.



Again, they had 6,092 samples over all, not just five. The five were used to check what to look for, the 6100 for overall distribution.


----------

