Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

sci-news.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 176 posts

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#151

Post by est31 »

camelNotation wrote: post #123
hashberry wrote: post #55

"Homo sapiens" is Latin for "wise man," but there were many Hominin species who possessed comparative culture, art, and intelligence. Neanderthals actually had larger brains compared to modern humans[0]. There are many theories on why Neanderthals became extinct[1]; my favorite is that we simply outbred them because of our sex appeal. What is Latin for "sexy human?" [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Anato…

It is understandable why we are eager to find capacities for language and culture in similar species, but the thing that gives homo sapiens the ability to survive is not just language or art, but our ability to organize large numbers of people under trans-familial identities (i.e. advanced political states and culture-defining religion). If they weren't politically (high level behavior control) and religiously (low l…

Civilizations started around 12ka ago. Neanderthals went extinct around 37ka ago.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#152

Post by rjf72 »

lkrubner wrote: post #144
rjf72 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking for the monoliths? Jokes aside, probably not much. Biological classifications don't imply sameness. You don't get anatomically modern humans until 30,000-50,000 years ago. Even that doesn't tell you much about cognitive ability. Think about something like the Flynn Effect [1]. In the past century real IQ scores rose by more than a standard deviation throughout most of the world. That means a person of perfect…

This is a bizarre thing to write: " You don't get anatomically modern humans until 30,000-50,000 years ago. " And this is wild speculation without any basis: " And so the only justifiable explanation is that we probably didn't have that much going on upstairs until relatively recently. " Economic development is complex, it depends on a lot more than IQ. As a point of comparison, we could ask why did the Industrial Re…

The period I'm referencing with 30,000-50,000 years ago is known as the Upper Paleolithic Revolution. This is where a very large number of things happened nearly simultaneously. Homo sapien began to interbreed with various other species, and they took on the anatomical form we mostly have today. In specimens prior to this period you generally find substantial anatomical differences such as thicker bones, larger canines, etc.

But most importantly of all this is where you find the first clear evidence of intelligence which rapidly expand outward: art, ceremonial burials, clear evidence of fishing, and much more. Some time after that you start to see the beginning of modern civilization with bladed weapons, pottery, agriculture, and so on. This is also one of the most likely time periods for the development of language, though that is something that is hotly debated.

I'm going to dodge the second part of your post for the sake of trying to keep the conversation on the up and up. If you have some clear message you'd like to convey, I'd be happy to get into that. It's a fun topic. However, please do drop the ad hominem.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#153

Post by runarberg »

peter_retief wrote: post #67
runarberg wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, what most people refer to as races of humans are a set of traits that are surprisingly shared across populations, albeit in different quantities. The traits that we’ve inherited from our archaic ancestors aren’t really the types of traits people use a distinguishing features between populations.

Question is would the Neanderthals have also shared traits with other hominids? I find that religion and politics kind of muddies the science with human evolution

I am not an expert. But it seems less likely since the Neanderthals existed for a shorter timespan over shorter distances then modern humans, so they must have encountered fewer hominin along their way.

If anything it is more likely that the deninsovans aquired genes from the decedents of the groups of Homo Erectus that migrated throughout south east asia and quite probably remained in small quantities in remote areas (like Homo Floresiensis did) when the denisovans arrived.

---

Edit: Then it is the question of: Say that the Denisovans acquired genes from other hominin through interbreeding, would these genes then be passed on to us when our homo sapien ancestors interbreed with the Denisovans? That is a question I have no confidence in answering and should probably be deferred to geneticist or a genetic statistician.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#154

Post by cambaceres »

hashberry wrote: post #55

"Homo sapiens" is Latin for "wise man," but there were many Hominin species who possessed comparative culture, art, and intelligence. Neanderthals actually had larger brains compared to modern humans[0]. There are many theories on why Neanderthals became extinct[1]; my favorite is that we simply outbred them because of our sex appeal. What is Latin for "sexy human?" [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Anato…

I think we just killed them all, considering that racism is omnipresent, as well as human cruelty.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#155

Post by cambaceres »

fsloth wrote: post #133
laretluval wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the evidence for this claim?

I think the fact that we can organize billion souls under the flag of a nation state speaks volumes enough. Did neanderthals have this capacity? I don't know. But if their psychology did not facilitate large scale collaboration, a violent human tribe killing a bunch of them now and again would explain some part why they disappeared. I'm not saying a human tribe hunted them - just that a violent human tribe would atta…

Is there some evidence that neanderthals did not organize themselves in tribes? I think we were just more aggressive and killed them all.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#156

Post by danieltillett »

whenanother wrote: post #137
danieltillett wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly what they did - all the Neanderthal genes in the current populations has come down via Neanderthal males and sapien female matings. Personally I blame Tinder, but it could have something to do with Haldane's Rule [0]. 0 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haldane%27s_rule

is this from analyzing dna outside of europe? if this information only came from analyzing european dna then during the bronze age all males in europe were effectively eliminated. this would imply that the eurasian steppe men who replaced them were the source for the neanderthal dna. this implies that the prior to this event europe was populated with people with no neanderthal dna.

I don't understand what you are trying to ask? The level of Neanderthal genes in east Asia is higher than in Europe.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#157

Post by danieltillett »

sterkekoffie wrote: post #138
danieltillett wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly what they did - all the Neanderthal genes in the current populations has come down via Neanderthal males and sapien female matings. Personally I blame Tinder, but it could have something to do with Haldane's Rule [0]. 0 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haldane%27s_rule

If a human male and a neanderthal female mated and produced female offspring, who then also reproduced, etc., how could you later tell that it was a human female and a neanderthal male? As far as I can understand, all we can speculate about is the sex of the offspring who reproduced, not the original pairings, correct?

I answered this in a post just above yours. You look at the X chromosome.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#159

Post by orange8 »

Juliate wrote: post #105
orange8 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe all animals definitely have some sort of language, and that the complexity of a language depends on its utility in facilitating everyday interactions and activities. What are the most complex activities you've seen elephants get up to?

I never had the chance to meet elephants. Now, from what I've learned/read about their behaviours, I have no doubt on the depth of their lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_cognition#Elephant_so... And I wouldn't call that "some sort of language". That's language. Species-specific. Not "human" language. Even language that another species can grasp more or less perfectly. You can get that with minimal observ…

I would call it some sort of language, or substitute "sort" with "type" if the word seems too casual for your tastes.

I agree that there may be a lot happening in this world we're unable to perceive, and then your whole argument can be summarized as "anything is possible, we don't really know for sure".

Which I now see is why scientists insist on sticking to things that can be measured, proven and quantified. Anything else is drifting into the territory of religion, superstition and imagination. Humans have been known to worship certain animals as supreme gods after all.

Re: Humans Interbred with Four Extinct Hominin Species, Research Finds

#160

Post by keiru »

joe_the_user wrote: post #4
c3534l wrote: post #3

If we interbred with them, how are they actually species? It seems more to me you're talking more about racial or breed differences akin to breeds of dogs if two species actually successfuly had viable offspring in the wild.

Yeah, seems more logical to say ancient human experienced a number genetic divergences which were then folded into the mainline of the genetic stream.

>mainline of the genetic stream

This is a tricky concept. Could it be said over 50,000 years ago that Homo Sapiens' ancestors were the mainline? I wouldn't retroactively call it that because it presumes that it was clear at the time that it would be the definitive dominant subspecies.

I think a better phrasing would be "genetic divergences, some of which were preserved by the cross-merging with the only surviving genetic stream", or something of the sort.

Post reply on HN