U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 03-02-2015, 08:14 PM
 
11,780 posts, read 8,207,985 times
Reputation: 3425

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15 View Post
Blacks are the only one without any admixtures with Neanderthals, while Europeans, Asians, Middle Easterners, Native Americans, South Asians, etc. are all mixed with Neanderthals.
The research does not say what you claim it says. For example, most African Americans are black, but are not indigenous sub Saharan Africans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
I remember a time not too long ago when we humans considered Neanderthals to be 'cave men', lacking in intelligence, low-brow, non-verbal, and ignorant.

Suddenly, with the knowledge that everyone except sub-saharan Africans supposedly have some Neanderthal genes, Neanderthals are being touted as intelligent and innovative, and we are supposed to be proud that 'we' have Neanderthal some blood, small as it probably is.

Gee, I wonder why our perceptions have changed?

(it's not the scientists who are promoting this 'pride', either)
Those claims were not based on science though. The scientific theory is that neanderthals had a high IQ, but, IIRC, the remaining genes didn't present any significant advantage outside of adaptability. Interestingly, some neanderthal genes were bred out in areas that they were supposed to be present in. Evolution apparantly decided that the neanderthal genes were of little, no, or negative value in some areas.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-02-2015, 08:24 PM
 
3,975 posts, read 3,138,486 times
Reputation: 2210
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
The research does not say what you claim it says. For example, most African Americans are black, but are not indigenous sub Saharan Africans.
I think virtually all African Americans are mostly sub Saharan Africans mixed with some whites and very little native Americans.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 06:53 PM
 
3,975 posts, read 3,138,486 times
Reputation: 2210
lycos, that's just the reality, you know.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Iowa, USA
6,555 posts, read 3,065,577 times
Reputation: 3791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15 View Post
Through DNA testing, scientists have found that all non Sub-Saharan Africans have 1% to 4% of Neanderthals in them, basically separating blacks from the rest.

Do you think that scientists will find out that Australoids' DNA is heavily mixed with some other pre-historic humans around the South Indian regions/islands? If so, which one?
How does that separate them? What difference does that actually create? Unless they are genetically different, as in not homo sapiens, they are no different.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 07:03 PM
 
3,975 posts, read 3,138,486 times
Reputation: 2210
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty View Post
How does that separate them? What difference does that actually create? Unless they are genetically different, as in not homo sapiens, they are no different.
Neanderthals are not homo sapiens and so are other sapiens.

Some people are 4% Neanderthals.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 07:21 PM
 
Location: Iowa, USA
6,555 posts, read 3,065,577 times
Reputation: 3791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15 View Post
Neanderthals are not homo sapiens and so are other sapiens.

Some people are 4% Neanderthals.
Humans and banana trees share about 55% of DNA. That does not mean every person is actually half banana.

The 4% of DNA is an evolutionary thing. Certainly humans and neanderthals certainly mated. They were similar enough species to be able to reproduce. And that's key. If we can reproduce, the differences between the two are negligible. So being part neanderthal means virtually nothing. Plus saying 4% is misleading. It doesn't mean what the average person will think it means.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 08:57 PM
 
11,780 posts, read 8,207,985 times
Reputation: 3425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15 View Post
lycos, that's just the reality, you know.
What reality? The research regarding neanderthal genomes says that indigenous sub Saharan Africans don't have neanderthal genes, but an African American is not an indigenous sub Saharan African. In other words, pure Africans who never migrated out of Africa, carry no Neanderthal DNA, but African Americans likely do just by being 1/3 European. However, the neanderthal genes are only present in places where there was an evolutionary advantage. In some places the neanderthal genes posed no advantage (or not enough) and were bred out of existence.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 01:07 PM
 
14,375 posts, read 7,085,168 times
Reputation: 7422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15 View Post
I didn't say different races are different species. It is just simply that different races are different. Can you deny that?
Are you speaking of skin color when you say "races" or skin color. There is only one "race" of humans and we vary in skin color.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15 View Post
I think virtually all African Americans are mostly sub Saharan Africans mixed with some whites and very little native Americans.
I am a black American. What you think is wrong. Most black Americans have at least 20-25% of European ancestry and less than 5% of Native American ancestry. I do a log of genealogical research and have found the majority of my family were "mullatoes" and most of my grandparents look like white people. I would not be surprised to find out that ethnically I am more than 40% European like Henry Louis Gates shown below. We are of similar skin color:

Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 04:29 PM
 
3,975 posts, read 3,138,486 times
Reputation: 2210
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007 View Post
Are you speaking of skin color when you say "races" or skin color. There is only one "race" of humans and we vary in skin color.



I am a black American. What you think is wrong. Most black Americans have at least 20-25% of European ancestry and less than 5% of Native American ancestry. I do a log of genealogical research and have found the majority of my family were "mullatoes" and most of my grandparents look like white people. I would not be surprised to find out that ethnically I am more than 40% European like Henry Louis Gates shown below. We are of similar skin color:

I wrote: "I think virtually all African Americans are mostly sub Saharan Africans mixed with some whites and very little native Americans."

Which part of my statement is not true? Do you not understand the definition of the word "mostly?" It means "most" which means more than 50%. Or do you not understand the definition of the word "virtually?"
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 05:53 PM
 
3,975 posts, read 3,138,486 times
Reputation: 2210
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
What reality? The research regarding neanderthal genomes says that indigenous sub Saharan Africans don't have neanderthal genes, but an African American is not an indigenous sub Saharan African. In other words, pure Africans who never migrated out of Africa, carry no Neanderthal DNA, but African Americans likely do just by being 1/3 European.

Yes, black Americans who are mixed with white did get a small dose of Neanderthal genes.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top