North Africans Carry Neanderthal DNA

[Tomk80]

It is similar to that when you say "fossil".

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Can you please actually answer the question I asked?

 

[Tomk80]

May be a good answer. But not a friendly one.
Thanks anyway.

 

[juvenissun]

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Can you please actually answer the question I asked?

I don't know the answer.

 

[Tomk80]

I don't know the answer.

So you wrote something, and then subsequently have no clue about what you yourself wrote? That's ... interesting.

 

[juvenissun]

So you wrote something, and then subsequently have no clue about what you yourself wrote? That's ... interesting.

I wrote a question.

I know what I don't know. You don't.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

So you wrote something, and then subsequently have no clue about what you yourself wrote? That's ... interesting.

Lol, well, apart from English being his second language, which sometimes means he's floundering around in a sea of misunderstood nuances, Juve's also not the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

 

[Tomk80]

I wrote a question.

I asked you to clarify your question, so I could possibly answer it. I am assuming that you know what your own question was?

 

[juvenissun]

I asked you to clarify your question, so I could possibly answer it. I am assuming that you know what your own question was?

If you don't understand my question, I may not understand it either. It is a real question, not a pretended one.

When my student asked a question with minor mistake or uncertainty, I can always know what is he really asking about. Instead of giving him hard time on the mistake, I simply give the answer to the question.

 

[Tomk80]

If you don't understand my question, I may not understand it either. It is a real question, not a pretended one.

When my student asked a question with minor mistake or uncertainty, I can always know what is he really asking about. Instead of giving him hard time on the mistake, I simply give the answer to the question.

Or the question might not make sense. In which case you ask the student to explain what he or she is reaally asking.

Also, the student generally can explain what he or she meant with the words used, even if they did not use the right words.

 

[Loudmouth]

Bone disfigurations will certainly do.

The interesting part is that these bones were identified as neanderthal before the DNA sequencing was done. Even more, we have remains of anatomically modern humans from that same time period, and DNA has been sequenced from those individuals as well. So we have two sets of samples from the same time period that are sorted by morphology into modern humans and neanderthals after which DNA sequencing was done. What did they find? The samples from anatomically modern humans 30,000 years ago are nearly identical to humans today while those determined to be neanderthals were different from humans found today.

Do you think this is just a coincidence? If these differences in morphology were do to malnutrition or rickets, how do you explain the correlation with the DNA sequencing?

 

[juvenissun]

The interesting part is that these bones were identified as neanderthal before the DNA sequencing was done. Even more, we have remains of anatomically modern humans from that same time period, and DNA has been sequenced from those individuals as well. So we have two sets of samples from the same time period that are sorted by morphology into modern humans and neanderthals after which DNA sequencing was done. What did they find? The samples from anatomically modern humans 30,000 years ago are nearly identical to humans today while those determined to be neanderthals were different from humans found today.

Do you think this is just a coincidence? If these differences in morphology were do to malnutrition or rickets, how do you explain the correlation with the DNA sequencing?

What you said sounds to me like: Neanderthals are not human (so, they are apes. Humans are not apes).

But some of us have chunks of DNA which belongs to Neanderthals? (And some of us don't?). This is confusing (much much harder than geology).

 

[Tomk80]

What you said sounds to me like: Neanderthals are not human (so, they are apes. Humans are not apes).

But some of us have chunks of DNA which belongs to Neanderthals? (And some of us don't?). This is confusing (much much harder than geology).

Neanderthals were not modern humans. But they were possibly close enough to humans that they could interbreed. Think of it as horses and zebras for example. Not the same species, but very much alike.

In parts of the world where modern humans (i.e. we) and Neanderthals lived close together, they may have interbreeded. This was in Europe and Asia. That way Neanderthals contributed genetic material to Europeans and Asians and possibly north-Africans. They did not contribute genetic matieral to Sub-Saharan Africans (for example), because Neanderthals did not live there.

 

[juvenissun]

Neanderthals were not modern humans. But they were possibly close enough to humans that they could interbreed. Think of it as horses and zebras for example. Not the same species, but very much alike.

In parts of the world where modern humans (i.e. we) and Neanderthals lived close together, they may have interbreeded. This was in Europe and Asia. That way Neanderthals contributed genetic material to Europeans and Asians and possibly north-Africans. They did not contribute genetic matieral to Sub-Saharan Africans (for example), because Neanderthals did not live there.

But human interbred. Should then the Neanderthals DNA spread to all humans?

And the OP reported that Africans DO have Neanderthals DNA.

 

[Tomk80]

But human interbred. Should then the Neanderthals DNA spread to all humans?

Up to relatively recently interbreeding between different groups of humans in different continents happened rarely, purely because of the distances involved. So the spread of these genes to populations further away happened more slowly.

And the OP reported that Africans DO have Neanderthals DNA.

Northern Africans, as I stated in my post, not all Africans.

 

[Loudmouth]

What you said sounds to me like: Neanderthals are not human (so, they are apes. Humans are not apes).

They are not anatomically modern humans. They are humans, as are all species in the genus Homo, but they are not H. sapiens. They were a separate species.

But some of us have chunks of DNA which belongs to Neanderthals? (And some of us don't?). This is confusing (much much harder than geology).

I think we all carry neanderthal DNA due to some hybridization between the species and it comprises a few percent (~5% if memory serves) of our genome with some populations carrying more than others. Hybridization happens all of the time in nature between species that share a recent common ancestor. I don't understand why this is confusing.

 

[juvenissun]

Up to relatively recently interbreeding between different groups of humans in different continents happened rarely, purely because of the distances involved. So the spread of these genes to populations further away happened more slowly.



Northern Africans, as I stated in my post, not all Africans.

sfs told me that gene among all humans could be homogenized (?) in a few tens of thousands of years. (Right? sfs?)

If so, what are you saying?

 

[juvenissun]

They are not anatomically modern humans. They are humans, as are all species in the genus Homo, but they are not H. sapiens. They were a separate species.

I think we all carry neanderthal DNA due to some hybridization between the species and it comprises a few percent (~5% if memory serves) of our genome with some populations carrying more than others. Hybridization happens all of the time in nature between species that share a recent common ancestor. I don't understand why this is confusing.

But they may not intelligently be modern humans. If so, they are NOT humans.

 

[juvenissun]

They are not anatomically modern humans. They are humans, as are all species in the genus Homo, but they are not H. sapiens. They were a separate species.



I think we all carry neanderthal DNA due to some hybridization between the species and it comprises a few percent (~5% if memory serves) of our genome with some populations carrying more than others. Hybridization happens all of the time in nature between species that share a recent common ancestor. I don't understand why this is confusing.

If so, why not, for example, southern Africans also carry the DNA of Neanderthals?

 

[46AND2]

sfs told me that gene among all humans could be homogenized (?) in a few tens of thousands of years. (Right? sfs?)

If so, what are you saying?

Could be is not the same thing as will be. Not all genes will be spread among the entire population. Some won't be spread at all, some will only spread among certain smaller populations which are separated from others (geographically, for example), and some will spread among the entire population.

 

[sfs]

sfs told me that gene among all humans could be homogenized (?) in a few tens of thousands of years. (Right? sfs?)

I'm afraid I don't remember exactly what I said. Ask a specific question and I'll answer it to the best of my ability.