'Neanderthals Among Us' review
historytoday.com
historytoday.com
I thought this was an interesting detail in the article, and trying to find out more about a possible reason for this discrepancy, I found a recent paper concluding that this was possibly due to mate preference [1]. Neanderthal dudes were smoking hot!
[1]: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.aea6774
Bigger issue seems to be that Neanderthal inbreeding between themselves as they were living without access to other pools of dna of humans and that most probably was a cause why they did not bounce back.
I find it more likely the admixture is from girls our ancestors went to take back who were already pregnant.
Still humans.
HS are sometimes called "modern humans" to differentiate.
Even then, Rh disease usually only causes symptoms in the baby in subsequent pregnancies with the same bloodtype incompatibilities, when the antibodies already exist in the mother.
I'm not sure what exactly it means that Neanderthal women's uterus wouldn't be able to host HS babies, but that sounds different to me.
Unless you know more about this Neanderthal uterine incompatibility.
We don't really talk like this about other animals or evolutionary sociology.
If we killed all the wolves to stop our sheep from getting killed we would not say "oh it's not that bad, they're still around, look at that chihuahua" even tho those are to my knowledge closer to eachother genetically. The loss of the dodos is not made up for by chickens to pick something further appart. Similarly we don't say certain cultures are still around because some difficult to define small part of them passed on.
Wait, what's that Futurama, robot women and... OH NO!
If that is the case, it may also be that male homo sapiens weren't strong enough to subdue neanderthal females.
Prejudice is natural, being able to fight the first hunch & against instinct, await & study more information is really hard. At least for me, it requires active effort.
It still happens today in armed conflict, so I don't know why you would think it would be less common amongst early humans operating without a moral framework.
All your active effort to study seems to be misleading you. Perhaps you are studying the wrong things?
I lean your way of course, it’s not totally arbitrary, but where we draw a line tends to be a bit arbitrary.
Yes? If that's how we see it for other groups animals, cultures, peoples, neandertals then why not for HNdrathals or so?
Funnily enough, stopping this 'race mixing' is one of the explicit goals of some pretty horrible people and they have historically tried all sorts of things from eugenics to genocide.
I'd not put it past someone in the future to try and end modern industrial civilization to this end.
I will grant that by some historic definitions you could consider many people mixed race as neighboring cultures combine. But there are still very large and distinctly separate ethnic groups like black, white, asian, etc.
(I am not mixed race by my wife and son are)
https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/35749414-who-we-are-a...
What makes a "race" is basically just total nonsense. Arguably there should be many "races" in Africa given the genetic diversity.
> We all are the same species, but we also all are mixed races.
We're also all mixed-species.
The fact is - you are being racist here, because you seem them as looking the same...
>>>We're also all mixed-species.
No, Not by modern definition of what species are. Even those swamp frogs, that are mixing with pond frogs(or maybe vice versa - look just read about species yourself - I am not explaining to you what species are!) are different species, that just steal DNA, so no inter-species mixing.
Listen, I am definitely more bored than anyone else, but sadly theory about Atlantis civilization and their descendants mixing with people, or even Biblical races of giants, or even proposal of common boar-chimpanzee sexual intercourse from which humans evolved is just not true... I'm kinda disappointed and not about that it is illegal to have sex with other species - including animals, but that it is more boring in that we are nothing else than just one species. We are not mixed-species - nothing backs that. There also are issues with inter-species development possibilities, so impossible to get results naturally without some gene editing first. So, no kawaii girls with natural cat ears - they all are fake.
[1] https://ewanbirney.com/2019/10/race-genetics-and-pseudoscien...
Isn't this exactly what you'd expect? Historically travel between the more obvious-by-skin-color-and-features ethnically-different groups has been slow and hard with some exceptions.
So you'd expect to see the lines get erased first among groups that started out closest together, and that seems to match with Europe some and especially the US where the English/Irish/Italian/German/Spanish/etc flavors of "white" all frequently ended up in the same cities. You also see more broader mixes in the US since it's historically been more open for, and attractive to, the sort of immigration that would produce it than the "home" countries for many of those ethnicities.
Even when you have a diverse total population like in the US, you only get a few shots per generation for a person of background A to have kids with one of background B, so it's gonna be really really slow, even before factoring in cultural/political factors that have generally actively discouraged it (or made it illegal in living memory!). Even the mixing of white-European ethnicities was often quite controversial. But as it became more common most Americans lost the ability to even recognize the differences, since they were more subtle than "skin color."
Give it 400 years of affordable air travel and it could look very different in countries with historical or future high levels of in-migration.
By appearance admixture is the one that defines looks and that includes racial look and it is question of mere 3 generations for descendants to look like anyone else around them, as that is where admixture differences are washed out. USA has a lot of issues in this matter, like with "one blood drop rule" that is still used in definitions of races and also cultural war issue, which is affecting rest of the world in these matters not to mention taboo subject of races.
[0] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Principal_component_...
Not even. No 'races' as commonly understood are defined based on a snapshot of genetic clusters. The concept predates modern genetics or knowledge of DNA. Races are complex social constructions based on appearance, language, ethnicity, etc. etc.
Here in Belgium my grandma was first to go work 2 municipalities away. Her parents were farmers. She cried when she came back and swore she would not go back the next day. Such a distant place was traveling to the end of the world to her i guess. Later they traveled to the south of france by bus and such but they never went beyond a neighbouring country. Still it's a thing her parents could only have dreamed of.
I think people have a bias by which they forget the massive technological advancements of recent years on one hand. And see the stories of travelers of the distant past on the norm on the other hand rather than things written about because they were so rare and interesting.
Most people stayed put untill you could pinpoint their location based on their genome and it influenced who you can get donor organs from. They repeatedly developed local cultures, languages and dialects in doing so.
>But there are still very large and distinctly separate ethnic groups like black, white, asian, etc.
Those are not ethnic groups. The Flemish, the Vilamovians, the Germans, the Basques, the irish are examples of ethnic groups.
Idk if it's intentional but there seems to be this progressive shift/push that pushed nation to mean state and now makes it so some start using ethnicity instead of racial categorisation (which is a vague often even more arbitrary thing)
It feels like it for you because you are used to man-made definitions of "race". US is for some historical reason a very race-aware culture.
Skin color for example is mostly related to exposure to the sun. When you go south in Northern hemisphere people become darker. But you call them "black" or "brown" for some reason. Or Africa is a giant continent. You call all the different people on it "black". They are just darker because they've adapted to the sun through generations.
US historically has people that have migrated from different continents. I live in a country (Turkey) where everyone is historically "mixed". There are blonde people, dark people, people with small eyes and large eyes. But they are all the same group of people. We're practically blind to superficial differences you call "race" or even ethnicity.
Also "mixed" doesn't mean the average color between black and white. They can have a dominant phenotype.
Races has nothing to do with any of that - Neanderthals themselves seems to had different looks, depending on region they were living and had contacts with other humans - and we all were the same species.
China's 1.0ish fertility rate means that they will be gone in 14 generations or so. India's not that far behind them. It's strange hearing people talk about the "erasure of races"... a meme that goes back 70 or more years at this point, when the only race that will be erased is the human race.
When fertility rates are 1.0, every subsequent human generation is half the size of the previous. Rapid population will become impossible to ignore in just a few decades. Human extinction looms.
Of course they'll change with time. They'll go down further. Not what you mean, you somehow believe they'll go back up... but without bothering to come up with an explanation for why they'd do that. Maybe because it's emotionally comfortable to imagine it so, or convenient to your argument.
In reality, low fertility rates cause economic stagnation that most believe to be the cause of even lower fertility rates. It will spiral.
Also he's a pretty good actor.
A more popular example seems to be giant Russian boxer Nikolai Valuev, who sports some serious brow ridges and a lower forehead, but still has too much chin.
- We are more likely to be morning people.
- We have greater risk of sunburn.
- Higher likelihood of balding.
- Greater mechanical pain sensitivity.
- (Sometimes significant) effects on immune and antiviral responses.
- Some variants have increased risk of allergy.
- Some variants linked to larger lung capacity.
- Some associations with bone density.
- Neanderthal variants influence nose height and shape.
- Some variants linked to fewer miscarriages.
- Some variants associated with younger menopause.
- Strong statistical associations with smoking behaviour (more likely).
"While 20% of the Neanderthal genome survives today, most people only carry about a few percentage points of Neanderthal DNA, and most Neanderthal-derived DNA is non-coding. Neanderthals maintained a low genetic diversity and suffered from inbreeding depression; consequently most Neanderthal genes were probably selected out of the gene pool...
"Various estimates exist for the proportion, such as 1–4% or 3.4–7.9% in modern Eurasians, or 1.8–2.4% in modern Europeans and 2.3–2.6% in modern East Asians...
"Neanderthal [mitochondrial] DNA (which is passed on from mother to child) is absent in modern humans. This is evidence that interbreeding occurred mainly between Neanderthal males and modern human females.
"There is considerably less Neanderthal ancestry on the X-chromosome... The lack of Neanderthal-derived Y-chromosomes in modern humans (which is passed on from father to son), has also inspired the suggestions that the hybrids that contributed ancestry to modern populations were predominantly females, or that the Neanderthal Y-chromosome was not compatible with modern humans and became extinct."
I think I read this book in the 90s and yes, there's a rape (maybe more?) but it's an exception as the neanderthals are generally shown as relatively "civilized", not as brutes. : the raped sapiens was actually saved as a child by the neanderthals. And there's no hair dragging scene I remember.
But it's been so long ago, I may misremember.
Did they actually have telepathic abilities in the book? Did I mentally erase that?
Likewise the sex scenes struck me as very frequent and drawn out. Odd to pivot that series to caveman themed romance novels!
Therefore a useless comment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clan_of_the_Cave_Bear
> Ayla's main antagonist in the novel is Broud, son of the leader Brun, who feels that she takes credit and attention away from him. As the two mature, the hatred in Broud's heart festers. When they are young adults, he brutally rapes Ayla in a bid to demonstrate his total control over her; he continues to sexually assault her multiple times a day.
No hair dragging, but something worse.
Stone Age Economics will change your life if you’re new to anthropology and think the modern society is representative of our social lineage….rather than us living in an extremely new, completely alien context, for a 250,000 year old animal
I’m happy for him that his son continued in his footsteps
"Hypothesis: A modern human range expansion ~300,000 years ago explains Neandertal origins", an alternatate take by David Reich, who has done a lot of work in this area. He notes that Neanderthal haplotypes appears largely replaced by Sapiens.
This would make them our siblings rather than our cousins.