The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Caveman Mating in the News: Neanderthal and Denisovan Introgressions
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Carl Zimmer in the NYT on a new gene study:

Joshua M. Akey, a geneticist at the University of Washington, and his colleagues analyzed a database of 1,488 genomes from people around the world. The scientists added 35 genomes from people in New Britain and other Melanesian islands in an effort to learn more about Denisovans in particular.

The researchers found that all the non-Africans in their study had Neanderthal DNA, while the Africans had very little or none. That finding supported previous studies.

But when Dr. Akey and his colleagues compared DNA from modern Europeans, East Asians and Melanesians, they found that each population carried its own distinctive mix of Neanderthal genes.

The best explanation for these patterns, the scientists concluded, was that the ancestors of modern humans acquired Neanderthal DNA on three occasions.

The first encounter happened when the common ancestor of all non-Africans interbred with Neanderthals.

The second occurred among the ancestors of East Asians and Europeans, after the ancestors of Melanesians split off. Later, the ancestors of East Asians — but not Europeans — interbred a third time with Neanderthals. …

The Melanesians took a different course. After a single interbreeding with Neanderthals, Dr. Akey found, their ancestors went on to interbreed just once with Denisovans, as well. …

Dr. Akey and his colleagues also identified some regions of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA that became more common in modern humans as the generations passed, suggesting that they provided some kind of a survival advantage.

Back around 2000, Greg Cochran was telling me that he figured anatomically modern humans had picked up useful genes from Neanderthals.

Many of the regions contain immune system genes, Dr. Akey noted.

“As modern humans are spreading out across the world, they’re encountering pathogens they haven’t experienced before,” he said. Neanderthals and Denisovans may have had genes that were adapted to fight those enemies.

“Maybe they really helped us survive and thrive in these new environments,” he said.

Cold weather climates are hard on the health of people from Africa — that’s one reason slavery died out in the northern United States: black slaves tended to die of respiratory tract infections in expensive numbers in places like Boston. So, maybe Out of Africa humans picked up useful genes related to fighting cold weather germs from Neanderthals, who had been evolving in Europe for hundreds of thousands of years before the latest surge out of Africa arrived.

Dr. Akey and his colleagues found that Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA was glaringly absent from four regions of the modern human genome.

That absence may signal that these stretches of the genome are instrumental in making modern humans unique. Intriguingly, one of those regions includes a gene called FOXP2, which is involved in speech.

Scientists suspect that Neanderthals and Denisovans were not the only extinct races our ancestors interbred with.

PingHsun Hsieh, a biologist at the University of Arizona, and his colleagues reported last month that the genomes of African pygmies contain pieces of DNA that came from an unknown source within the last 30,000 years.

In the lumper v. splitter debate, splitters might in the future want to classify pygmies as a slightly separate species.

Update: John Rivers asks: “How key was interbreeding with other hominids in creating the continental scale races?”

Good question.

It might turn out that Neanderthals or Denisovans contributed some important functional genes beyond the immune system, but let’s just assume the big contribution from Neanderthals to Europeans and Asians was for immune system genes that fight cold climate diseases. That in itself, trivial as it sounds, could have had a major effect on the development of modern races.

If Out of Africa anatomically modern humans in Europe or the Middle East or Eurasia picked up Neanderthal genes optimized for surviving cold weather, that might have helped bring the long Out of Africa process to an end.

Over a long time, there appear to have been numerous Out of Africa events in which new African forms of hominins move north into Eurasia. But after the last one in, say, 50,000 BC, there haven’t been many successful ones (which has therefore provided enough time for fairly distinct modern races to appear.

Why no more Out of Africa events? Perhaps because hominins such as the Neanderthals in Europe slowly became optimized for their winters. When anatomically modern humans arrived from Out of Africa and via mating picked up their alleles for surviving winter, our direct ancestors then had the genes to both win the struggle for survival with the Neanderthals and to block or outlast any subsequent Out of Africa movements north during the Ice Ages.

It’s kind of like how South Carolina is 28% black but Massachusetts is only 8% black. It’s not because white people in Massachusetts were abolitionists in the 17th Century. They were happy to partake in the Atlantic slave trade, which was universally agreed to be worse than mere slave owning. But black slaves didn’t pay well in Massachusetts — they’d get sick and die too often — while in South Carolina whites had a hard time making it through the summer without dying of warm weather fevers, so more resistant black slaves were more profitable. (And before modern medicine and public health measures, inland West Africa was a deathtrap of diseases for whites.)

David Hackett Fischer wrote in Albion’s Seed that the cold climate of colonial Massachusetts:

“proved to be exceptionally dangerous to immigrants from tropical Africa, who suffered severely from pulmonary infections in New England winters. Black death rates in colonial Massachusetts were twice as high as whites` – a pattern very different from Virginia where mortality rates for the two races were not so far apart, and still more different from South Carolina where white death rates were higher than those of blacks. So high was mortality among African immigrants in New England that race slavery was not viable on a large scale, despite many attempts to introduce it. Slavery was not impossible in this region, but the human and material costs were higher than many wished to pay. A labor system which was fundamentally hostile to the Puritan ethos of New England was kept at bay partly by the climate.”

So, it’s possible that immune system optimization, which seems to have been facilitated by breeding with other species in Eurasia helped set in motion the big racial divide between sub-Saharan Africa and the rest of the world. That would suggest it wasn’t just the vast Sahara Desert that divided the races (keep in mind that sometimes the Sahara was a grassland rather than a sand waste), but sheer latitude itself and the different kinds of germs that thrive at different latitudes.

 
Hide 105 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    1488 genomes? Basically Hitler.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gruff
    IT'S BOYS FROM BRAZIL ALL OVER AGAIN
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/caveman-mating-in-the-news/#comment-1359587
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. I’m not quite certain how to reconcile the idea of Neanderthal or Denisovan genes conferring greater immunity from diseases, given Africa’s incredibly high disease load in the first place. It does make sense, I suppose, if Neanderthals and Denisovans evolved in place (higher latitudes) and acquired immunities to diseases endemic to those geographical areas. They then passed those on to the arriving homo sapiens. (Maybe they ultimately regretted it?)

    I had never heard the theory that Africans in the northern part of the United States had greater problems with respiratory illnesses than whites. I had always thought that the industrial economy of the North did not lend itself to slave labor as well as did the agrarian economy of the South. I wonder if there is any modern remnant of greater black vulnerability to illnesses more common in northern latitudes, or perhaps modern vaccinations and treatments have largely removed those vulnerabilities.

    The genetic research is fascinating!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Diversity, Slaves were used extensively in the industrial South. They manned the foundries, steel mills, and lumber mills, the South just had less heavy industry than the North .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Pat Casey says:

    HAPPY ST. PADDY’S DAY!

    Today, the closest genetic relatives of the Irish in Europe are to be found in the north of Spain in the region known as the Basque Country. The Irish also share their DNA to a large extent with the people of Britain – especially the Scottish and Welsh.

    DNA testing through the male Y chromosome has shown that Irish males have the highest incidence of the haplogroup 1 gene in Europe. While other parts of Europe have integrated contiuous waves of new settlers from Asia, Ireland’s remote geographical position has meant that the Irish gene-pool has been less susceptible to change. The same genes have been passed down from parents to children for thousands of years.

    http://hubpages.com/education/Irish-Blood-Genetic-Identity

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "HAPPY ST. PADDY’S DAY!"

    Happy Saint Patrick's Day from The House Of Pain.
    https://youtu.be/KZaz7OqyTHQ
    , @Diversity Heretic
    There's an article over at Vdare showing how Ireland is changing, and not for the better.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Pat, A Happy St Patrick's Day to you and all your Hibernian friends and remember March 19th is St. Joseph's Day, a big feast day for Italians, but mostly Sicilians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. ‘Greg Cochran was telling me that he figured anatomically modern humans had picked up useful genes from Neanderthals back around 2000.’

    So that’s who were voting for Buchanan for President then (rimshot).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. I’m biased but it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry. Some people don’t have enough, some have too much but we’re just right. Reminds me of what President de Gaulle said about France and exotic immigration. He used a white wine and blackcurrant liqueur cocktail called a kir to make his point: “to make a kir, you must have white wine and cassis [blackcurrant liqueur]. When you add too much cassis it’s no longer a kir”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Silber
    ...it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry.

    That would explain why Whites are better adapted than Blacks for getting fifteen percent or more off their car insurance.
    , @ben tillman

    I’m biased but it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry.
     
    We Whites don't all have the same amount.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Chiron says:

    Why do the Australian aborigines and Papuans look so primitive?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    You don't want to get into a club fight with an Australian aborigine.
    , @Jefferson
    "Why do the Australian aborigines and Papuans look so primitive?"

    If you see an Aborigne with softer facial features, she or he must have significant Caucasian admixture.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. @Chiron
    Why do the Australian aborigines and Papuans look so primitive?

    You don’t want to get into a club fight with an Australian aborigine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Leftist conservative
    yeah, exactly--primitive man fought with clubs, in warfare, for mating, etc....and you wanna keep the old noodle intact, so you have a heavy brow ridge of protective bone....you can still see it in many aborigines:
    http://i.imgur.com/pxJMrti.jpg
    , @Diversity Heretic
    I'm reminded of what one Southerner is reputed to have said before the Civil War: "We can lick the Yankees with cornstalks." Four years later he said, "Trouble was, the Yankees wouldn't fight with cornstalks."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Jefferson says:

    “Cold weather climates are hard on the health of people from Africa — that’s one reason slavery died out in the northern United States: black slaves tended to die of respiratory tract infections in expensive numbers in places like Boston.”

    Sub Saharan Africans would move to Siberia if they had a generous welfare system and Siberia is even more frigid cold than Boston.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. Jefferson says:
    @Pat Casey
    HAPPY ST. PADDY'S DAY!

    Today, the closest genetic relatives of the Irish in Europe are to be found in the north of Spain in the region known as the Basque Country. The Irish also share their DNA to a large extent with the people of Britain - especially the Scottish and Welsh.

    DNA testing through the male Y chromosome has shown that Irish males have the highest incidence of the haplogroup 1 gene in Europe. While other parts of Europe have integrated contiuous waves of new settlers from Asia, Ireland's remote geographical position has meant that the Irish gene-pool has been less susceptible to change. The same genes have been passed down from parents to children for thousands of years.
     
    http://hubpages.com/education/Irish-Blood-Genetic-Identity

    “HAPPY ST. PADDY’S DAY!”

    Happy Saint Patrick’s Day from The House Of Pain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Got yer pipes right 'ere Limey!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjdt9x1Vaas
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. SPMoore8 says:

    I suppose you could do some mapping about different groups of humans and come to some hypotheses about survival. I mean, if we accept for the nonce the idea that all humanity is the same, and there’s sort of continuum of human types, we could probably break down that continuum into half a dozen groups on a gross basis and a few dozen on a more particular physical basis. Then correlate the half dozen large groups and three dozen small groups by non-physical characteristics, including culture. I’m sure something like this has been done.

    The next step would be to correlate the culture with the environment. I am not envisioning a nature/nurture thing, because we would talking about large inbred small tribes or even extended families over many thousands of years.

    Since Neanderthals had bigger brains that we do and were also (apparently) stronger, then Cro Magnon must have brought something else to the table. And what would that be? (This is way before agriculture BTW) Speech, and the conceptual apparatus (planning, culture) that goes with that? Different types of immunity?

    Remember also that homo erectus left Africa over a million years ago (I think, maybe longer.) Think that our entirely of human civilization is only one percent of that, and the entire record of Cro Magnon (or Modern man, or whatever) is only 5% (tops) of that.

    It follows that maybe the reason there hasn’t been any Out of Africa moments in recent millenia is because in terms of the timeline there’s been no call for it. On the other hand, if demographic projections are accurate, we may have our next big Out of Africa moment this century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Since Neanderthals had bigger brains that we do and were also (apparently) stronger, then Cro Magnon must have brought something else to the table. And what would that be?
     
    Political skills -- the ability to steal things from others through subtlety rather than overt violence.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    The fact that Neanderthals had greater cranial capacity than homo sapiens is interesting. One theory that I've read is that the "wiring" of homo sapiens brains was more intricate, which permitted greater language complexity. So a Neanderthal might have said, "You, me hunt today," while the homo sapiens might have said, "I'll position half our group at the edge of the forest, watching evident game trails. You and the other half start at the other edge of the forest and move through, driving the animals toward us. At the end of the day we'll all share the kills that the group has made."

    The soft tissue of the brain doesn't survive, so the fossil record can't show brain wiring.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Rough sex?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    That movie from the 80s, Quest for Fire has more details on this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Flip says:

    Blacks don’t seem to have any problem multiplying in cold Chicago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jjbees
    Cook county hospital.
    , @Jim Christian
    Yes, but they're killing each other in numbers to help tame the growth, if not the Blacks..
    , @Dave
    The point is that in the days before indoor heat/hot water and antibiotics, Africans had a tough time with winter weather.
    Or did you think Colonial era America had the same level of medical and HVAC that we have today ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @Anonymous
    Rough sex?

    That movie from the 80s, Quest for Fire has more details on this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. jjbees says:
    @Flip
    Blacks don't seem to have any problem multiplying in cold Chicago.

    Cook county hospital.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Flip
    Blacks don't seem to have any problem multiplying in cold Chicago.

    Yes, but they’re killing each other in numbers to help tame the growth, if not the Blacks..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Dave says:
    @Flip
    Blacks don't seem to have any problem multiplying in cold Chicago.

    The point is that in the days before indoor heat/hot water and antibiotics, Africans had a tough time with winter weather.
    Or did you think Colonial era America had the same level of medical and HVAC that we have today ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:

    Can somebody remind me the advertisement from about 10 or 15 years ago:
    “… … … … is so simple, a caveman can do it.”
    What was … … … … ?
    There was even a (mock ?) protest against denigrating cavemen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Flo.....It was for Geico.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Cagey Beast
    I'm biased but it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry. Some people don't have enough, some have too much but we're just right. Reminds me of what President de Gaulle said about France and exotic immigration. He used a white wine and blackcurrant liqueur cocktail called a kir to make his point: "to make a kir, you must have white wine and cassis [blackcurrant liqueur]. When you add too much cassis it's no longer a kir".

    …it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry.

    That would explain why Whites are better adapted than Blacks for getting fifteen percent or more off their car insurance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Maybe poverty among blacks increased the mortality rates in Boston as additional factor or the inequality of tea distribution. Or whatever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. Altai says:

    Variation in regions of the genome dealing with immune cell receptors show the greatest variation by a huge margin between humans no matter if you are looking within or between populations.

    This is for obvious reasons, there are a vast array of pathogens and novel ones evolve rapidly or maybe haven’t been seen in an area in several generations. It pays to have as broad a chance of catching them as possible and that comes from having CD4 cells with as broad a range of receptors as possible. The relevant genes even undergo extensive alternative splicing and other tricks to just amp up as much as possible as many combinations as possible to catch potential pathogens.

    It is hardly surprising that those areas show greatest retention of introgressed Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. When it comes to your MHC receptors, diversity really is good.

    The other question of whole-scale cellular or metabolic adaptation to certain pathogens that are simply endemic to an area, such as malaria or respiratory diseases in general as a result of cold, wet winters. I haven’t read the paper yet, but I assume it doesn’t deal with them much. Mostly because not many of those sites have been properly IDed yet.

    A famous one, IFITM3 isn’t even properly characterised yet. The allele that seems responsible isn’t causative, it’s just linked to whatever is. One variant is present in over 90-95% of Northern Europeans, confers protection against influenza infection. Though in China it is present in a perfectly balanced form, I think the speculation is that may not be beneficial for other endemic pathogens, like malaria, it has the same effect in China though, confers mild protection against influenza infection and confers significant protection from the disease progressing.
    Here is one of the important papers on it.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4196997/

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    diversity really is good

    Heretic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. gruff says:
    @Anonymous
    1488 genomes? Basically Hitler.

    IT’S BOYS FROM BRAZIL ALL OVER AGAIN

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Leftist conservative [AKA "Make Unz.com Great Again"] says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    You don't want to get into a club fight with an Australian aborigine.

    yeah, exactly–primitive man fought with clubs, in warfare, for mating, etc….and you wanna keep the old noodle intact, so you have a heavy brow ridge of protective bone….you can still see it in many aborigines:

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    It looks like the brow ridge was better protection for the eyeballs.
    , @unpc downunder
    Indeed, if I was trying to ward off an angry hyena or short-faced bear circa 40,000 BC I wouldn't say no to a bit of extra face protection. Having a fine-featured face like Brad Pitt would probably be a disadvantage.

    My theory on why the Neanderthals died out, is that they were too introverted rather than too low- tech. They were out-breed by the smooth talking, game savvy newcomers, but were able to pass their introspective DNA onto to those modern humans who reached Europe and Africa.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Little-known facts about the Neanderthals: they had cars made of stone, and restaurants with curb-side service. But the cars, despite their weight, were an unsuccessful adaptation, unable as they were to support a window tray with as little on it as a single order of ribs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    The law of gravity is a harsh mistress.
    , @SPMoore8
    If Wilma and Betty were Neanderthals, no wonder we interbred with them.
    , @TWS
    Those were brontosaurus ribs. Any car would tip with a few tons hanging off one side. And the ribs were worth it too. Delicious, meaty, and well marbled. The only problem was that they had trouble finding apple wood for smoking.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. jay-w says:

    Has anybody looked for correlations between the amount of Neanderthal/Denisovan ancestry that a person (or group) has and their (group-average) IQ ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @neandx
    Regression Equation for PisaMath12:
    PisaMath12 = 317.8 * NeandPct +114.011 ; p=0.02763

    Some sample datapoints:

    Pop NeandPct PisaMath12
    CEU 1.17 481 #US
    FIN 1.20 519 #Finland
    GBR 1.15 494 #UK
    CHB 1.40 613 #Beijing/Shanghai
    CHS 1.37 561 #HK
    JPT 1.38 536 #Japan
    MXL 1.22 413 #Mexico
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. iffen says:
    @Leftist conservative
    yeah, exactly--primitive man fought with clubs, in warfare, for mating, etc....and you wanna keep the old noodle intact, so you have a heavy brow ridge of protective bone....you can still see it in many aborigines:
    http://i.imgur.com/pxJMrti.jpg

    It looks like the brow ridge was better protection for the eyeballs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @granesperanzablanco
    I imagine in a dystopian future where the clubs came back out in Europe you would see heavy browridges back in vogue

    I have virtually no brow ridges and am able to sit at a computer 9-10 hours a day. Coincidence?
    , @Antonymous
    I was thinking the same. The brow-ridge could explain how aboriginals evolved extraordinary eyesight (more so than Europeans, and perhaps the most sensitive of any human group) in an otherwise bright and unsheltered environment --- a built-in visor.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7457480
    https://www.quora.com/Who-has-or-had-the-best-human-eyesight-ever-recorded?share=1

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Jefferson
    "HAPPY ST. PADDY’S DAY!"

    Happy Saint Patrick's Day from The House Of Pain.
    https://youtu.be/KZaz7OqyTHQ

    Got yer pipes right ‘ere Limey!

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman
    My neighbor/friend had some sort of religious conversion circa 1980 and gave me his Powerage and High Voltage albums (devil music). He was a great athlete, and his son was recently drafted in the 2nd round of the MLB draft. The fascinating thing that I just learned recently was that his father, who watched NASCAR religiously on Sundays, had a doctorate in physics.
    , @Jefferson
    "Got yer pipes right ‘ere Limey!"

    Nothing beats Danny Boy when it comes to true Irish classics.
    https://youtu.be/lXQ03XUwe_s
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. I am still not following a splitters argument that pygmies are a sub-species.

    I can’t tell if this is inside HBD self referential sarcasim or this is a real claim.

    They are mostly the same DNA as all other humans with some divergent archaic admixture I believe. Maybe there is something I don’t understand.

    The HBD argument that there may not be a single Pygmy on earth who could learn calculus I do get. But if that was a condition for being human lots of the white people posting here are not humans either

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @TWS
    Thus proving you do not understand HBD. No chihuahua can jump a five foot fence so they are not the same as coyotes. Some coyotes cannot not jump a five foot fence so they must not be coyotes either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @iffen
    It looks like the brow ridge was better protection for the eyeballs.

    I imagine in a dystopian future where the clubs came back out in Europe you would see heavy browridges back in vogue

    I have virtually no brow ridges and am able to sit at a computer 9-10 hours a day. Coincidence?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    Europeans have been pretty keen on wearing helmets on their eggshell skulls in combat for at least 3000 years, starting with pigs' tusk platelets fixed to a leathery hat, moving on to ridiculously solid bronze ones, then the galea and so through to the spangenhelm, close helm, morion and lobstertailed pot to whatever grunts wear today. I'll see your club and monobrow, and raise to a sallet and zweihänder, maybe a pair of steel gauntlets. Technology FTW.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    I stopped reading Carl Zimmer when I found out that he believes in that Global Warming Nonsense (although he might call it one of its more recent names.)

    If he is that dumb then he is not worth reading.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    I stopped reading Carl Zimmer when I found out that he believes in that Global Warming Nonsense (although he might call it one of its more recent names.)

    If he is that dumb then he is not worth reading.
     
    He's not dumb; he's an aggressive Leftist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. wren says:

    What was the human population of Johannesburg before the Europeans arrived?

    I believe it has cold winters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @V Vega

    What was the human population of Johannesburg before the Europeans arrived?

    I believe it has cold winters.
     

    But not the same viruses! So ya'll quit asking how many Africans lived in cold South Africa!

    Btw, Haiti is reportedly warm, but blacks sent there from the United States mostly died immediately. It was warm there, but with new viruses. Eventually, they adapted, but not before a big pile of black bodies were created.

    Because of the practically instant deaths of trial blacks, Lincoln wouldn't consider Haiti when he was trying to figure out how to orchestrate his supposed mass deportation of blacks after the war. He apparently had congressional funds allocated to get the party started, then Booth happened.

    In any case, tons of deported Africans died here after they landed, and even more in central and south america. It wasn't just cold weather. It's a complex of issues, of which cold weather ultimately played a part.

    One last thing, our current Ebola problems might be from some virus buried in the jungles Africans are now razing for charcoal, coffee plantations, and new villages. Viruses right at home, buried for a thousand years, can rear their shitty DNA, and kill Africans not acclimated to it today, right there at home.

    As Africans and Brazilians burrow further into their jungles, expect more shitty viruses appearing to do fascinating things to us that you'll read on the Drudge Report.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Jefferson says:
    @Chiron
    Why do the Australian aborigines and Papuans look so primitive?

    “Why do the Australian aborigines and Papuans look so primitive?”

    If you see an Aborigne with softer facial features, she or he must have significant Caucasian admixture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. wren says:

    Neandertal climate:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @Jonathan Silber
    Little-known facts about the Neanderthals: they had cars made of stone, and restaurants with curb-side service. But the cars, despite their weight, were an unsuccessful adaptation, unable as they were to support a window tray with as little on it as a single order of ribs.

    The law of gravity is a harsh mistress.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @Cagey Beast
    I'm biased but it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry. Some people don't have enough, some have too much but we're just right. Reminds me of what President de Gaulle said about France and exotic immigration. He used a white wine and blackcurrant liqueur cocktail called a kir to make his point: "to make a kir, you must have white wine and cassis [blackcurrant liqueur]. When you add too much cassis it's no longer a kir".

    I’m biased but it sounds like we Whites have just the right amount of Neanderthal ancestry.

    We Whites don’t all have the same amount.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Why no more Out of Africa events? Perhaps because hominins such as the Neanderthals in Europe slowly became optimized for their winters. When anatomically modern humans arrived from Out of Africa and via mating picked up their alleles for surviving winter, our direct ancestors then had the genes to both win the struggle for survival with the Neanderthals and to block or outlast any subsequent Out of Africa movements north during the Ice Ages.

    Doubt it. Immunological optimization should happen really quickly just by itself because selection for it should be extremely strong.

    I think the key factor was differential selection for intelligence. For most of deep history, I suspect it was stronger in Africa than in Eurasia because of the former’s much larger population density, which more than canceled out the advantage of Neanderthals’ higher latitudes/Cold Winters (besides, it’s also worth pointing out Neanderthal environments tended to be more Mediterranean/temperate than tundric anyway).

    But continuing technological progress, and especially the invention of the base camp by the Gravettians, finally allowed the northerners to reach a critical level of population density that allowed them (in conjunction with Cold Winters) to leap beyond the African rate of development of intelligence and social complexity. Which foreclosed any further Out Of Africas.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    I think the key factor was differential selection for intelligence.
     
    Neanderthals were smarter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. If Africans had been better able to survive in New England, American history would have developed very differently. Slavery would have been abolished sooner or later but surely not in a civil war. Would the freed slaves have been repatriated to Africa? Or would we have legal segregation even today? Or perhaps a partition of the country?

    What’s for sure, Americans everywhere would have developed the kind of tough-minded racial attitudes typical today only of the South.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. It’s kind of like how South Carolina is 28% black but Massachusetts is only 8% black.

    28:8 is nothing. In 1860, the ratio was about 60:1.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    In 1860, Slaves made up 57% of the total population of South Carolina:


    http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

    In contrast, slaves never made up more than 2.2% of the population in Massachusetts:

    http://slavenorth.com/massachusetts.htm
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. black sea says:

    Interesting post. I’d never thought before about how the disease load in New England might have affected mortality rates among slaves, and thus the profitability and prevalence of slavery there. I guess Jimmy Buffett had it right all along:

    “Changes in lattitudes, changes in attitudes . . . “

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    http://www.vdare.com/posts/conspicuous-assumption
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. syonredux says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    It’s kind of like how South Carolina is 28% black but Massachusetts is only 8% black.
     
    28:8 is nothing. In 1860, the ratio was about 60:1.

    In 1860, Slaves made up 57% of the total population of South Carolina:

    http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

    In contrast, slaves never made up more than 2.2% of the population in Massachusetts:

    http://slavenorth.com/massachusetts.htm

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Syonredux, But according to TNC and the BLM, America was built on the backs of slaves. So, the northern slaves must have been more efficient and productive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @black sea
    Interesting post. I'd never thought before about how the disease load in New England might have affected mortality rates among slaves, and thus the profitability and prevalence of slavery there. I guess Jimmy Buffett had it right all along:

    "Changes in lattitudes, changes in attitudes . . . "
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I thought this post was going to be about the Hulk Hogan trial…..

    “Hulk Hogan jury to be spared watching full 30 minute sex tape”

    http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/17/media/hulk-hogan-gawker-trial/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. neandx says:
    @jay-w
    Has anybody looked for correlations between the amount of Neanderthal/Denisovan ancestry that a person (or group) has and their (group-average) IQ ?

    Regression Equation for PisaMath12:
    PisaMath12 = 317.8 * NeandPct +114.011 ; p=0.02763

    Some sample datapoints:

    Pop NeandPct PisaMath12
    CEU 1.17 481 #US
    FIN 1.20 519 #Finland
    GBR 1.15 494 #UK
    CHB 1.40 613 #Beijing/Shanghai
    CHS 1.37 561 #HK
    JPT 1.38 536 #Japan
    MXL 1.22 413 #Mexico

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    Regression Equation for PisaMath12:
    PisaMath12 = 317.8 * NeandPct +114.011 ; p=0.02763
     
    Reference? Were any other variables included and what was the R^2? The examples given have a very small range. Were African data points included?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @SPMoore8
    I suppose you could do some mapping about different groups of humans and come to some hypotheses about survival. I mean, if we accept for the nonce the idea that all humanity is the same, and there's sort of continuum of human types, we could probably break down that continuum into half a dozen groups on a gross basis and a few dozen on a more particular physical basis. Then correlate the half dozen large groups and three dozen small groups by non-physical characteristics, including culture. I'm sure something like this has been done.

    The next step would be to correlate the culture with the environment. I am not envisioning a nature/nurture thing, because we would talking about large inbred small tribes or even extended families over many thousands of years.

    Since Neanderthals had bigger brains that we do and were also (apparently) stronger, then Cro Magnon must have brought something else to the table. And what would that be? (This is way before agriculture BTW) Speech, and the conceptual apparatus (planning, culture) that goes with that? Different types of immunity?

    Remember also that homo erectus left Africa over a million years ago (I think, maybe longer.) Think that our entirely of human civilization is only one percent of that, and the entire record of Cro Magnon (or Modern man, or whatever) is only 5% (tops) of that.

    It follows that maybe the reason there hasn't been any Out of Africa moments in recent millenia is because in terms of the timeline there's been no call for it. On the other hand, if demographic projections are accurate, we may have our next big Out of Africa moment this century.

    Since Neanderthals had bigger brains that we do and were also (apparently) stronger, then Cro Magnon must have brought something else to the table. And what would that be?

    Political skills — the ability to steal things from others through subtlety rather than overt violence.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    ‘Cold weather is harsh on the health of people from Africa’.

    Perhaps – but it seems to have little effect, these days, on the multitudes of sub Saharan Africans who are doing their utmost damndest to move in on such places as Sweden, Finland, Canada, Minnesota and even dreary old England.
    Cold weather doesn’t even seem to act like any sort of a deterrent!
    I guess in the scheme of things, welfare states are the ultimate attractant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave
    My God, some of the commenters are dense. As I stated above, colonial era America did not have the same level of medical care or anything remotely resembling indoor heating/hot water that we have today. Or did you think George Washington had a hot tub and the local doctor handed out antibiotics like candy ?
    How some of you can't make that connection is stunning.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    That’s ‘John Rivers’ and not ‘Joan Rivers’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. @Desiderius
    Got yer pipes right 'ere Limey!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjdt9x1Vaas

    My neighbor/friend had some sort of religious conversion circa 1980 and gave me his Powerage and High Voltage albums (devil music). He was a great athlete, and his son was recently drafted in the 2nd round of the MLB draft. The fascinating thing that I just learned recently was that his father, who watched NASCAR religiously on Sundays, had a doctorate in physics.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Actually, Steve, blacks brought these ‘deadly warm weather fevers’ with them – in their bodies – to such places as Carolina and the Carribean, if we are talking about yellow fever, malaria etc. If Africans were not brought there in the first place, then those regions would have been hot and uncomfortable, but not deadly, and therefore inhabitable by whites.
    A kind of ‘rough justice, if you will.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    ‘Our direct ancestors’.

    Hmmmm, Steve.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. @The most deplorable one
    I stopped reading Carl Zimmer when I found out that he believes in that Global Warming Nonsense (although he might call it one of its more recent names.)

    If he is that dumb then he is not worth reading.

    I stopped reading Carl Zimmer when I found out that he believes in that Global Warming Nonsense (although he might call it one of its more recent names.)

    If he is that dumb then he is not worth reading.

    He’s not dumb; he’s an aggressive Leftist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. V Vega says:
    @wren
    What was the human population of Johannesburg before the Europeans arrived?

    I believe it has cold winters.

    What was the human population of Johannesburg before the Europeans arrived?

    I believe it has cold winters.

    But not the same viruses! So ya’ll quit asking how many Africans lived in cold South Africa!

    Btw, Haiti is reportedly warm, but blacks sent there from the United States mostly died immediately. It was warm there, but with new viruses. Eventually, they adapted, but not before a big pile of black bodies were created.

    Because of the practically instant deaths of trial blacks, Lincoln wouldn’t consider Haiti when he was trying to figure out how to orchestrate his supposed mass deportation of blacks after the war. He apparently had congressional funds allocated to get the party started, then Booth happened.

    In any case, tons of deported Africans died here after they landed, and even more in central and south america. It wasn’t just cold weather. It’s a complex of issues, of which cold weather ultimately played a part.

    One last thing, our current Ebola problems might be from some virus buried in the jungles Africans are now razing for charcoal, coffee plantations, and new villages. Viruses right at home, buried for a thousand years, can rear their shitty DNA, and kill Africans not acclimated to it today, right there at home.

    As Africans and Brazilians burrow further into their jungles, expect more shitty viruses appearing to do fascinating things to us that you’ll read on the Drudge Report.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    "As Africans and Brazilians burrow further into their jungles, expect more shitty viruses appearing to do fascinating things to us" to say nothing of East Asians huddled in their hootches with their pigs, chickens and rats, busily clearfelling the obscurer islands and mountain areas. I wonder what diseases orangs and fruitbats will unleash on their persecutors?
    Ban air travel now!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Anatoly Karlin

    Why no more Out of Africa events? Perhaps because hominins such as the Neanderthals in Europe slowly became optimized for their winters. When anatomically modern humans arrived from Out of Africa and via mating picked up their alleles for surviving winter, our direct ancestors then had the genes to both win the struggle for survival with the Neanderthals and to block or outlast any subsequent Out of Africa movements north during the Ice Ages.
     
    Doubt it. Immunological optimization should happen really quickly just by itself because selection for it should be extremely strong.

    I think the key factor was differential selection for intelligence. For most of deep history, I suspect it was stronger in Africa than in Eurasia because of the former's much larger population density, which more than canceled out the advantage of Neanderthals' higher latitudes/Cold Winters (besides, it's also worth pointing out Neanderthal environments tended to be more Mediterranean/temperate than tundric anyway).

    But continuing technological progress, and especially the invention of the base camp by the Gravettians, finally allowed the northerners to reach a critical level of population density that allowed them (in conjunction with Cold Winters) to leap beyond the African rate of development of intelligence and social complexity. Which foreclosed any further Out Of Africas.

    I think the key factor was differential selection for intelligence.

    Neanderthals were smarter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    There's no evidence of that.

    They did have slightly bigger skulls but that says nothing about the efficiency of internal wiring. Homo sapiens were ahead on virtually all artistic and technological branches (with the possible exception of making pitch from tree bark). Though admittedly humans did have the major advantage of requiring fewer calories thus enabling larger population density (all else equal) and thus more complex material culture.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    I will give you that Neanderthals might have been in the same ballpark as the Aurignacians with whom they interbred in Europe, but almost certainly considerably lower relative to the Gravettians who leveled up their IQ points on the tundric Pontic plains and ended up wiping them out completely.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Leftist conservative
    yeah, exactly--primitive man fought with clubs, in warfare, for mating, etc....and you wanna keep the old noodle intact, so you have a heavy brow ridge of protective bone....you can still see it in many aborigines:
    http://i.imgur.com/pxJMrti.jpg

    Indeed, if I was trying to ward off an angry hyena or short-faced bear circa 40,000 BC I wouldn’t say no to a bit of extra face protection. Having a fine-featured face like Brad Pitt would probably be a disadvantage.

    My theory on why the Neanderthals died out, is that they were too introverted rather than too low- tech. They were out-breed by the smooth talking, game savvy newcomers, but were able to pass their introspective DNA onto to those modern humans who reached Europe and Africa.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. 5371 says:

    It was always a terrible idea to name the “Denisovans” based on genetic evidence alone from fragmentary fossils. They should have been classified provisionally, from their age and location, as a subset of Neanderthals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  54. Well, in Boston, cold or not, they simply aren’t part of the population in numbers like most other places. They’re bottled up (by design of TPTB and not tolerated well by Boston PD) into three towns, Dorchester, Roxbury, Jamaica Plains. The entire region is remarkably and blessedly bereft of Blacks. Hell, go out to the North Shore of Boston, even the ditch diggers are Irish, few Hispanics, even. Still, here, North of Boston, the Hispanics have occupied the Catholic churches left behind by the Irish and Italians that didn’t need them anymore. The kids go to school, they’re off the streets at night, the parents work, everyone friendly. Makes me wonder where THEIR gene came from, it wasn’t Africa.

    A major factor of my move to Boston from Washington DC’s Northern Virginia region was to get away from all the diversity in and around DC. It isn’t my country there anymore and the diversity celebrates it. Liberals love their White cities and towns here, they can AFFORD to celebrate the diversity they help impose on the rest of the country. Love that cold weather.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Which "North of Boston" are you talking about, Lynnfield or Lynn? Because they're two entirely different places.

    Jamaica PLAIN (singular) has historically been mostly Hispanic and lesbian, as named by the popular JP ice cream emporium, JP Licks, but urban gentrification is strong there, and JP is whitening up apace. Both Hyde Park and Roslindale have higher percentages of blacks.

    http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/jamaica_plain/2011/04/census_data_jps_hispaniclatino.html

    Funny how the black migration out of the city followed the Jews southwest ( formerly Jewish Mattapan is #1 in the commonwealth, 84.18% black, formerly Jewish Randolph #6 at 20.75% and Jewish Sharon, 0.00% 10 years ago, now 4.5%).

    Even funnier is how the South Shore, where the oh-so-racist Boston Irish relocated from Southie and Dot, is far blacker than the North Shore, where the Italians from the North End and East Boston migrated to. Seems that the Boston Irish coexist with blacks better than the Italians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Pat Casey
    HAPPY ST. PADDY'S DAY!

    Today, the closest genetic relatives of the Irish in Europe are to be found in the north of Spain in the region known as the Basque Country. The Irish also share their DNA to a large extent with the people of Britain - especially the Scottish and Welsh.

    DNA testing through the male Y chromosome has shown that Irish males have the highest incidence of the haplogroup 1 gene in Europe. While other parts of Europe have integrated contiuous waves of new settlers from Asia, Ireland's remote geographical position has meant that the Irish gene-pool has been less susceptible to change. The same genes have been passed down from parents to children for thousands of years.
     
    http://hubpages.com/education/Irish-Blood-Genetic-Identity

    There’s an article over at Vdare showing how Ireland is changing, and not for the better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Jefferson says:
    @Desiderius
    Got yer pipes right 'ere Limey!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjdt9x1Vaas

    “Got yer pipes right ‘ere Limey!”

    Nothing beats Danny Boy when it comes to true Irish classics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Nothing beats Danny Boy when it comes to true Irish classics.
     
    Aye, but best sung by the boys themselves:

    https://youtu.be/_mjW8rSgdDY

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Steve Sailer
    You don't want to get into a club fight with an Australian aborigine.

    I’m reminded of what one Southerner is reputed to have said before the Civil War: “We can lick the Yankees with cornstalks.” Four years later he said, “Trouble was, the Yankees wouldn’t fight with cornstalks.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @SPMoore8
    I suppose you could do some mapping about different groups of humans and come to some hypotheses about survival. I mean, if we accept for the nonce the idea that all humanity is the same, and there's sort of continuum of human types, we could probably break down that continuum into half a dozen groups on a gross basis and a few dozen on a more particular physical basis. Then correlate the half dozen large groups and three dozen small groups by non-physical characteristics, including culture. I'm sure something like this has been done.

    The next step would be to correlate the culture with the environment. I am not envisioning a nature/nurture thing, because we would talking about large inbred small tribes or even extended families over many thousands of years.

    Since Neanderthals had bigger brains that we do and were also (apparently) stronger, then Cro Magnon must have brought something else to the table. And what would that be? (This is way before agriculture BTW) Speech, and the conceptual apparatus (planning, culture) that goes with that? Different types of immunity?

    Remember also that homo erectus left Africa over a million years ago (I think, maybe longer.) Think that our entirely of human civilization is only one percent of that, and the entire record of Cro Magnon (or Modern man, or whatever) is only 5% (tops) of that.

    It follows that maybe the reason there hasn't been any Out of Africa moments in recent millenia is because in terms of the timeline there's been no call for it. On the other hand, if demographic projections are accurate, we may have our next big Out of Africa moment this century.

    The fact that Neanderthals had greater cranial capacity than homo sapiens is interesting. One theory that I’ve read is that the “wiring” of homo sapiens brains was more intricate, which permitted greater language complexity. So a Neanderthal might have said, “You, me hunt today,” while the homo sapiens might have said, “I’ll position half our group at the edge of the forest, watching evident game trails. You and the other half start at the other edge of the forest and move through, driving the animals toward us. At the end of the day we’ll all share the kills that the group has made.”

    The soft tissue of the brain doesn’t survive, so the fossil record can’t show brain wiring.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I don't know, and I am skeptical of anyone who claims they know for sure. However, I am inclined to think that Neanderthals were absorbed more or less peacefully by Moderns for a variety of reasons.

    I think a major factor was that Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH) were more efficient breeders. Also that Neander populations were small. Further, that AMH culture was more efficient.

    I am very skeptical that Neanders had a measurable IQ in our sense of the word, or that it was "about 70". However, I cannot access the article that makes this claim. Typically, while researching this I came across an African-American site that claimed that Neanderthals were "dummies" and that since White People have Neander Blood, that means that Whites are Dummies compared to Black People, and any IQ test that say different is culturally loaded.

    However, setting that aside, there are a number of tantalizing possibilities concerning exactly what we got from Neanderthals, whether they had speech and culture, where there's any continuity to any of this, and so on.

    I will concur with Tillman that Neanders were probably smarter, or at least as smart, as we are. Their cultural shortfall -- if there was a cultural shortfall and not simply the fact that they were a much smaller and less efficient breeding pop -- probably, I think, had to do with language. But I don't know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @ben tillman

    I think the key factor was differential selection for intelligence.
     
    Neanderthals were smarter.

    There’s no evidence of that.

    They did have slightly bigger skulls but that says nothing about the efficiency of internal wiring. Homo sapiens were ahead on virtually all artistic and technological branches (with the possible exception of making pitch from tree bark). Though admittedly humans did have the major advantage of requiring fewer calories thus enabling larger population density (all else equal) and thus more complex material culture.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    I will give you that Neanderthals might have been in the same ballpark as the Aurignacians with whom they interbred in Europe, but almost certainly considerably lower relative to the Gravettians who leveled up their IQ points on the tundric Pontic plains and ended up wiping them out completely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Supposedly, Neanderthal brains were wired for superior visual processing (Neanderthals had much larger eyes than modern humans) and control of their larger, bulkier bodies. The parts of the brain involving executive functioning (planning and organizing) and social cognition were less developed in Neanderthals than in homo sapiens.

    This makes sense, given that - as you stated - Neanderthal greater need for caloric intake limited population size, which limited social interactions to small family units rather than more complex larger extended social groups. This furthermore meant that any innovations made by particularly intelligent individuals were more likely to stay in the small family group than to spread, and to die out if the group died out.

    Visual-processing underlies math ability and the ability to read/manipulate symbols such as letters (I wonder if higher Neanderthal percentage in Asians is somehow linked to their languages using many more symbols). Someone above ran correlation stats on percentage of Neanderthal percentage and PISA math scores by countries; greater Neanderthal % seems correlated with higher math performance. It would be great, but not politically feasible, for 23andme to look at Neanderthal percentage and IQ of its customers. These are anecdotes, but it seems a lot of modern people with high IQs also have high percentages of Neanderthal ancestry. It seems plausible that Neanderthal ancestry contributed to greater math and nonverbal reasoning prowess in mixed populations relative to unmixed ones.

    There have also been links between Neanderthal DNA and autism, and autistic problems seem to mirror Neanderthal impairments (people with autism have markedly impaired social and linguistic skills). On the Wechsler intelligence test, people with Autism do best on Block Design, a visuospatial subtest, and worst on Comprehension. They do not do well on Arithmetic but that subtest involves word problems. People with autism are also more sensitive to touch but less sensitive to pain (Neanderthals, big game hunters, had to cope with more physical injuries by may have been less intimate in terms of physical contact?). Interesting fact: on an online quiz people with Asperger's liked Neanderthal faces more than did normal people:

    http://www.rdos.net/eng/aspeval/#456
    , @Santoculto
    Comparatively low today but in the past they don't had the necessity to be "smarter" "with" a IQ with three digits.

    The idea that IQ are very universally important seems wrong because we are looking for modern contexts where "higher-IQ" people born predestined to occupy safe social positions. In other words, they don't need conquers literally the "right" to occupy/work in certain job because the system select them.

    You can have a efficiently perceptive-smart individual with average IQ scores and a dumb-perceptive higher iq. I have the impression that this situation is very common.
    , @AP
    Trying again due to long in moderation:

    Supposedly, Neanderthal brains were wired for superior visual processing (Neanderthals had much larger eyes than modern humans) and control of their larger, bulkier bodies. The parts of the brain involving executive functioning (planning and organizing) and social cognition were less developed in Neanderthals than in homo sapiens.

    This makes sense, given that – as you stated – Neanderthal greater need for caloric intake limited population size, which limited social interactions to small family units rather than more complex larger extended social groups. This furthermore meant that any innovations made by particularly intelligent individuals were more likely to stay in the small family group than to spread, and to die out if the group died out.

    Visual-processing underlies math ability and the ability to read/manipulate symbols such as letters (I wonder if higher Neanderthal percentage in Asians is somehow linked to their languages using many more symbols). Someone above ran correlation stats on percentage of Neanderthal percentage and PISA math scores by countries; greater Neanderthal % seems correlated with higher math performance. It would be great, but not politically feasible, for 23andme to look at Neanderthal percentage and IQ of its customers. These are anecdotes, but it seems a lot of modern people with high IQs also have high percentages of Neanderthal ancestry. It seems plausible that Neanderthal ancestry contributed to greater math and nonverbal reasoning prowess in mixed populations relative to unmixed ones.

    There have also been links between Neanderthal DNA and autism, and autistic problems seem to mirror Neanderthal impairments (people with autism have markedly impaired social and linguistic skills). On the Wechsler intelligence test, people with Autism do best on Block Design, a visuospatial subtest, and worst on Comprehension. They do not do well on Arithmetic but that subtest involves word problems. People with autism are also more sensitive to touch but less sensitive to pain (Neanderthals, big game hunters, had to cope with more physical injuries by may have been less intimate in terms of physical contact?).
    , @ben tillman

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.
     
    Other evidence indicates the contrary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Dave says:
    @Anonymous
    'Cold weather is harsh on the health of people from Africa'.

    Perhaps - but it seems to have little effect, these days, on the multitudes of sub Saharan Africans who are doing their utmost damndest to move in on such places as Sweden, Finland, Canada, Minnesota and even dreary old England.
    Cold weather doesn't even seem to act like any sort of a deterrent!
    I guess in the scheme of things, welfare states are the ultimate attractant.

    My God, some of the commenters are dense. As I stated above, colonial era America did not have the same level of medical care or anything remotely resembling indoor heating/hot water that we have today. Or did you think George Washington had a hot tub and the local doctor handed out antibiotics like candy ?
    How some of you can’t make that connection is stunning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I doubt that if central heating, running hot water or indeed antibiotics make any significant impact on morbidity in cold climates.
    Perhaps TB inoculations did, though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. AP says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    There's no evidence of that.

    They did have slightly bigger skulls but that says nothing about the efficiency of internal wiring. Homo sapiens were ahead on virtually all artistic and technological branches (with the possible exception of making pitch from tree bark). Though admittedly humans did have the major advantage of requiring fewer calories thus enabling larger population density (all else equal) and thus more complex material culture.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    I will give you that Neanderthals might have been in the same ballpark as the Aurignacians with whom they interbred in Europe, but almost certainly considerably lower relative to the Gravettians who leveled up their IQ points on the tundric Pontic plains and ended up wiping them out completely.

    Supposedly, Neanderthal brains were wired for superior visual processing (Neanderthals had much larger eyes than modern humans) and control of their larger, bulkier bodies. The parts of the brain involving executive functioning (planning and organizing) and social cognition were less developed in Neanderthals than in homo sapiens.

    This makes sense, given that – as you stated – Neanderthal greater need for caloric intake limited population size, which limited social interactions to small family units rather than more complex larger extended social groups. This furthermore meant that any innovations made by particularly intelligent individuals were more likely to stay in the small family group than to spread, and to die out if the group died out.

    Visual-processing underlies math ability and the ability to read/manipulate symbols such as letters (I wonder if higher Neanderthal percentage in Asians is somehow linked to their languages using many more symbols). Someone above ran correlation stats on percentage of Neanderthal percentage and PISA math scores by countries; greater Neanderthal % seems correlated with higher math performance. It would be great, but not politically feasible, for 23andme to look at Neanderthal percentage and IQ of its customers. These are anecdotes, but it seems a lot of modern people with high IQs also have high percentages of Neanderthal ancestry. It seems plausible that Neanderthal ancestry contributed to greater math and nonverbal reasoning prowess in mixed populations relative to unmixed ones.

    There have also been links between Neanderthal DNA and autism, and autistic problems seem to mirror Neanderthal impairments (people with autism have markedly impaired social and linguistic skills). On the Wechsler intelligence test, people with Autism do best on Block Design, a visuospatial subtest, and worst on Comprehension. They do not do well on Arithmetic but that subtest involves word problems. People with autism are also more sensitive to touch but less sensitive to pain (Neanderthals, big game hunters, had to cope with more physical injuries by may have been less intimate in terms of physical contact?). Interesting fact: on an online quiz people with Asperger’s liked Neanderthal faces more than did normal people:

    http://www.rdos.net/eng/aspeval/#456

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Nothing is known about any peculiarities Neanderthal vision might have had, innovation was conspicuously lacking in Neanderthal communities, the percentages of Neanderthal ancestry spat out by money-making devices have no validity, Neanderthal faces are a product of the artist's imagination, and most diagnoses of autism or Asperger's syndrome are arbitrary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @Jefferson
    "Got yer pipes right ‘ere Limey!"

    Nothing beats Danny Boy when it comes to true Irish classics.
    https://youtu.be/lXQ03XUwe_s

    Nothing beats Danny Boy when it comes to true Irish classics.

    Aye, but best sung by the boys themselves:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. iffen says:
    @Altai
    Variation in regions of the genome dealing with immune cell receptors show the greatest variation by a huge margin between humans no matter if you are looking within or between populations.

    This is for obvious reasons, there are a vast array of pathogens and novel ones evolve rapidly or maybe haven't been seen in an area in several generations. It pays to have as broad a chance of catching them as possible and that comes from having CD4 cells with as broad a range of receptors as possible. The relevant genes even undergo extensive alternative splicing and other tricks to just amp up as much as possible as many combinations as possible to catch potential pathogens.

    It is hardly surprising that those areas show greatest retention of introgressed Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. When it comes to your MHC receptors, diversity really is good.

    The other question of whole-scale cellular or metabolic adaptation to certain pathogens that are simply endemic to an area, such as malaria or respiratory diseases in general as a result of cold, wet winters. I haven't read the paper yet, but I assume it doesn't deal with them much. Mostly because not many of those sites have been properly IDed yet.

    A famous one, IFITM3 isn't even properly characterised yet. The allele that seems responsible isn't causative, it's just linked to whatever is. One variant is present in over 90-95% of Northern Europeans, confers protection against influenza infection. Though in China it is present in a perfectly balanced form, I think the speculation is that may not be beneficial for other endemic pathogens, like malaria, it has the same effect in China though, confers mild protection against influenza infection and confers significant protection from the disease progressing.
    Here is one of the important papers on it.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4196997/

    diversity really is good

    Heretic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Anatoly Karlin
    There's no evidence of that.

    They did have slightly bigger skulls but that says nothing about the efficiency of internal wiring. Homo sapiens were ahead on virtually all artistic and technological branches (with the possible exception of making pitch from tree bark). Though admittedly humans did have the major advantage of requiring fewer calories thus enabling larger population density (all else equal) and thus more complex material culture.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    I will give you that Neanderthals might have been in the same ballpark as the Aurignacians with whom they interbred in Europe, but almost certainly considerably lower relative to the Gravettians who leveled up their IQ points on the tundric Pontic plains and ended up wiping them out completely.

    Comparatively low today but in the past they don’t had the necessity to be “smarter” “with” a IQ with three digits.

    The idea that IQ are very universally important seems wrong because we are looking for modern contexts where “higher-IQ” people born predestined to occupy safe social positions. In other words, they don’t need conquers literally the “right” to occupy/work in certain job because the system select them.

    You can have a efficiently perceptive-smart individual with average IQ scores and a dumb-perceptive higher iq. I have the impression that this situation is very common.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. SPMoore8 says:
    @Jonathan Silber
    Little-known facts about the Neanderthals: they had cars made of stone, and restaurants with curb-side service. But the cars, despite their weight, were an unsuccessful adaptation, unable as they were to support a window tray with as little on it as a single order of ribs.

    If Wilma and Betty were Neanderthals, no wonder we interbred with them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. SPMoore8 says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    The fact that Neanderthals had greater cranial capacity than homo sapiens is interesting. One theory that I've read is that the "wiring" of homo sapiens brains was more intricate, which permitted greater language complexity. So a Neanderthal might have said, "You, me hunt today," while the homo sapiens might have said, "I'll position half our group at the edge of the forest, watching evident game trails. You and the other half start at the other edge of the forest and move through, driving the animals toward us. At the end of the day we'll all share the kills that the group has made."

    The soft tissue of the brain doesn't survive, so the fossil record can't show brain wiring.

    I don’t know, and I am skeptical of anyone who claims they know for sure. However, I am inclined to think that Neanderthals were absorbed more or less peacefully by Moderns for a variety of reasons.

    I think a major factor was that Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH) were more efficient breeders. Also that Neander populations were small. Further, that AMH culture was more efficient.

    I am very skeptical that Neanders had a measurable IQ in our sense of the word, or that it was “about 70″. However, I cannot access the article that makes this claim. Typically, while researching this I came across an African-American site that claimed that Neanderthals were “dummies” and that since White People have Neander Blood, that means that Whites are Dummies compared to Black People, and any IQ test that say different is culturally loaded.

    However, setting that aside, there are a number of tantalizing possibilities concerning exactly what we got from Neanderthals, whether they had speech and culture, where there’s any continuity to any of this, and so on.

    I will concur with Tillman that Neanders were probably smarter, or at least as smart, as we are. Their cultural shortfall — if there was a cultural shortfall and not simply the fact that they were a much smaller and less efficient breeding pop — probably, I think, had to do with language. But I don’t know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @V Vega
    "Typically, while researching this I came across an African-American site that claimed that Neanderthals were “dummies” and that since White People have Neander Blood, that means that Whites are Dummies compared to Black People, and any IQ test that say different is culturally loaded."

    Thanks to Worldstar Hip Hop, and other venues that provide far more diverse "tests" that would qualify a man's I.Q., it's an easily refuted claim...

    http://youtu.be/f99J7HwkYMI

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. res says:
    @neandx
    Regression Equation for PisaMath12:
    PisaMath12 = 317.8 * NeandPct +114.011 ; p=0.02763

    Some sample datapoints:

    Pop NeandPct PisaMath12
    CEU 1.17 481 #US
    FIN 1.20 519 #Finland
    GBR 1.15 494 #UK
    CHB 1.40 613 #Beijing/Shanghai
    CHS 1.37 561 #HK
    JPT 1.38 536 #Japan
    MXL 1.22 413 #Mexico

    Regression Equation for PisaMath12:
    PisaMath12 = 317.8 * NeandPct +114.011 ; p=0.02763

    Reference? Were any other variables included and what was the R^2? The examples given have a very small range. Were African data points included?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dixie
    Raw NeandPct data from http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2014/01/neandertal-admixture-in-modern-humans.html

    Because of the small dataset, no point including other variable. PISA has no African data. So go and cook up your own regression.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. TWS says:
    @Jonathan Silber
    Little-known facts about the Neanderthals: they had cars made of stone, and restaurants with curb-side service. But the cars, despite their weight, were an unsuccessful adaptation, unable as they were to support a window tray with as little on it as a single order of ribs.

    Those were brontosaurus ribs. Any car would tip with a few tons hanging off one side. And the ribs were worth it too. Delicious, meaty, and well marbled. The only problem was that they had trouble finding apple wood for smoking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. TWS says:
    @granesperanzablanco
    I am still not following a splitters argument that pygmies are a sub-species.

    I can't tell if this is inside HBD self referential sarcasim or this is a real claim.

    They are mostly the same DNA as all other humans with some divergent archaic admixture I believe. Maybe there is something I don't understand.

    The HBD argument that there may not be a single Pygmy on earth who could learn calculus I do get. But if that was a condition for being human lots of the white people posting here are not humans either

    Thus proving you do not understand HBD. No chihuahua can jump a five foot fence so they are not the same as coyotes. Some coyotes cannot not jump a five foot fence so they must not be coyotes either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Dee says:

    In ’93 an anthropologist told me the conventional wisdom in the profession was the atrocious winter weather in northern Europe and Asia did a superior job of eliminating the lazy, stupid, ones not able to defer immediate gratification, and people without a future time orientation; without those characteristics, you and yours starved in February, March, into April because you hadn’t stored enough food the previous fall.

    Do that for a couple of hundred thousand years and you get todays ass kickers from those areas. Tropical or sub-tropical areas didn’t have the weather cleaning out the lesser lights. There it was insect born diseases that were as likely to kill a dim bulb as the best and the brightest, so no climatological eugenics; Zika anyone?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    " the atrocious winter weather in northern Europe and Asia did a superior job of eliminating" anyone whose fleshy extremities were slightly more prone to frostbite.
    Come April, us modestly endowed and uncircumcised East Asian and Northern Euro chaps were the only game in town. Come at me, ladies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Sean says:

    It is hardly surprising that those areas show greatest retention of introgressed Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. When it comes to your MHC receptors, diversity really is good.

    The added MCR diversity from Neanderthals was apparently good for the diseases that early modern humans got from humping or devouring undercooked Neanderthals in the same way that the Duffy anti-malarial adaptation of Africans gave them an advantage, maybe only once the Africans had brought malaria to America. I think much of the east Asian appearance is due to amped up EDAR conferring parasitic worm resistance (excrement having being widely used as fertiliser in rice agriculture).

    As regards climate adaptation, Cochran and company now have fled from the vitamin D explanation for white skin genes. He now suggests white skin genes (some or all?) are a marker for something else like disease resistance (similar to the colour coded ants in Phase IV, or these ones). Many people assume Africans’ differences from Europeans must be mainly due to drift, them having different ancestry, and/or adaptions to climate, and/or disease. Darwin didn’t.

    Darwin’s insistence that all organisms are kin and from common stock. [...] The authors set out to establish… in Darwin’s investigations … he formed the concept of sexual selection much earlier than is often thought and that it owes much to these racial controversies. The Descent of Man thus becomes all about sexual selection rather than this idea being loosely added at the end

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. @Diversity Heretic
    I'm not quite certain how to reconcile the idea of Neanderthal or Denisovan genes conferring greater immunity from diseases, given Africa's incredibly high disease load in the first place. It does make sense, I suppose, if Neanderthals and Denisovans evolved in place (higher latitudes) and acquired immunities to diseases endemic to those geographical areas. They then passed those on to the arriving homo sapiens. (Maybe they ultimately regretted it?)

    I had never heard the theory that Africans in the northern part of the United States had greater problems with respiratory illnesses than whites. I had always thought that the industrial economy of the North did not lend itself to slave labor as well as did the agrarian economy of the South. I wonder if there is any modern remnant of greater black vulnerability to illnesses more common in northern latitudes, or perhaps modern vaccinations and treatments have largely removed those vulnerabilities.

    The genetic research is fascinating!

    Diversity, Slaves were used extensively in the industrial South. They manned the foundries, steel mills, and lumber mills, the South just had less heavy industry than the North .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Pat Casey
    HAPPY ST. PADDY'S DAY!

    Today, the closest genetic relatives of the Irish in Europe are to be found in the north of Spain in the region known as the Basque Country. The Irish also share their DNA to a large extent with the people of Britain - especially the Scottish and Welsh.

    DNA testing through the male Y chromosome has shown that Irish males have the highest incidence of the haplogroup 1 gene in Europe. While other parts of Europe have integrated contiuous waves of new settlers from Asia, Ireland's remote geographical position has meant that the Irish gene-pool has been less susceptible to change. The same genes have been passed down from parents to children for thousands of years.
     
    http://hubpages.com/education/Irish-Blood-Genetic-Identity

    Pat, A Happy St Patrick’s Day to you and all your Hibernian friends and remember March 19th is St. Joseph’s Day, a big feast day for Italians, but mostly Sicilians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Immigrant from former USSR
    Can somebody remind me the advertisement from about 10 or 15 years ago:
    "... ... ... ... is so simple, a caveman can do it."
    What was ... ... ... ... ?
    There was even a (mock ?) protest against denigrating cavemen.

    Flo…..It was for Geico.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Immigrant from former USSR
    Indeed !
    Thank you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @syonredux
    In 1860, Slaves made up 57% of the total population of South Carolina:


    http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

    In contrast, slaves never made up more than 2.2% of the population in Massachusetts:

    http://slavenorth.com/massachusetts.htm

    Syonredux, But according to TNC and the BLM, America was built on the backs of slaves. So, the northern slaves must have been more efficient and productive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Reaching out to someone with knowledge about the evolution of those people we refer to as Indians or Native Americans. Many tribes survived in the harsh winter weather of the north/northeast, all the way up through sub artic Canada. Other tribes lived in the hot, humid southeast and across the Gulf coast. Then there were the tribes that lived on the sometime arid, sometimes parched plains. And, of course, the Indians, quite advanced by native standards, that inhabited the Northwest. Are these all the descendants of the same ancestors or totally different groups. You can usually tell if someone is a Native American simply by looking at them. They seem to share similar facial features, and certainly the thick black hair.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. @iffen
    It looks like the brow ridge was better protection for the eyeballs.

    I was thinking the same. The brow-ridge could explain how aboriginals evolved extraordinary eyesight (more so than Europeans, and perhaps the most sensitive of any human group) in an otherwise bright and unsheltered environment — a built-in visor.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7457480

    https://www.quora.com/Who-has-or-had-the-best-human-eyesight-ever-recorded?share=1

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Thanks. I didn't know about the better eyesight information. I was just thinking about the eyeball surviving more club hits more often. Over a very long time more prominent brow ridge equals more surviving eyeballs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. V Vega says:
    @SPMoore8
    I don't know, and I am skeptical of anyone who claims they know for sure. However, I am inclined to think that Neanderthals were absorbed more or less peacefully by Moderns for a variety of reasons.

    I think a major factor was that Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH) were more efficient breeders. Also that Neander populations were small. Further, that AMH culture was more efficient.

    I am very skeptical that Neanders had a measurable IQ in our sense of the word, or that it was "about 70". However, I cannot access the article that makes this claim. Typically, while researching this I came across an African-American site that claimed that Neanderthals were "dummies" and that since White People have Neander Blood, that means that Whites are Dummies compared to Black People, and any IQ test that say different is culturally loaded.

    However, setting that aside, there are a number of tantalizing possibilities concerning exactly what we got from Neanderthals, whether they had speech and culture, where there's any continuity to any of this, and so on.

    I will concur with Tillman that Neanders were probably smarter, or at least as smart, as we are. Their cultural shortfall -- if there was a cultural shortfall and not simply the fact that they were a much smaller and less efficient breeding pop -- probably, I think, had to do with language. But I don't know.

    “Typically, while researching this I came across an African-American site that claimed that Neanderthals were “dummies” and that since White People have Neander Blood, that means that Whites are Dummies compared to Black People, and any IQ test that say different is culturally loaded.”

    Thanks to Worldstar Hip Hop, and other venues that provide far more diverse “tests” that would qualify a man’s I.Q., it’s an easily refuted claim…

    http://youtu.be/f99J7HwkYMI

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @granesperanzablanco
    I imagine in a dystopian future where the clubs came back out in Europe you would see heavy browridges back in vogue

    I have virtually no brow ridges and am able to sit at a computer 9-10 hours a day. Coincidence?

    Europeans have been pretty keen on wearing helmets on their eggshell skulls in combat for at least 3000 years, starting with pigs’ tusk platelets fixed to a leathery hat, moving on to ridiculously solid bronze ones, then the galea and so through to the spangenhelm, close helm, morion and lobstertailed pot to whatever grunts wear today. I’ll see your club and monobrow, and raise to a sallet and zweihänder, maybe a pair of steel gauntlets. Technology FTW.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Dee
    In '93 an anthropologist told me the conventional wisdom in the profession was the atrocious winter weather in northern Europe and Asia did a superior job of eliminating the lazy, stupid, ones not able to defer immediate gratification, and people without a future time orientation; without those characteristics, you and yours starved in February, March, into April because you hadn't stored enough food the previous fall.

    Do that for a couple of hundred thousand years and you get todays ass kickers from those areas. Tropical or sub-tropical areas didn't have the weather cleaning out the lesser lights. There it was insect born diseases that were as likely to kill a dim bulb as the best and the brightest, so no climatological eugenics; Zika anyone?

    ” the atrocious winter weather in northern Europe and Asia did a superior job of eliminating” anyone whose fleshy extremities were slightly more prone to frostbite.
    Come April, us modestly endowed and uncircumcised East Asian and Northern Euro chaps were the only game in town. Come at me, ladies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @V Vega

    What was the human population of Johannesburg before the Europeans arrived?

    I believe it has cold winters.
     

    But not the same viruses! So ya'll quit asking how many Africans lived in cold South Africa!

    Btw, Haiti is reportedly warm, but blacks sent there from the United States mostly died immediately. It was warm there, but with new viruses. Eventually, they adapted, but not before a big pile of black bodies were created.

    Because of the practically instant deaths of trial blacks, Lincoln wouldn't consider Haiti when he was trying to figure out how to orchestrate his supposed mass deportation of blacks after the war. He apparently had congressional funds allocated to get the party started, then Booth happened.

    In any case, tons of deported Africans died here after they landed, and even more in central and south america. It wasn't just cold weather. It's a complex of issues, of which cold weather ultimately played a part.

    One last thing, our current Ebola problems might be from some virus buried in the jungles Africans are now razing for charcoal, coffee plantations, and new villages. Viruses right at home, buried for a thousand years, can rear their shitty DNA, and kill Africans not acclimated to it today, right there at home.

    As Africans and Brazilians burrow further into their jungles, expect more shitty viruses appearing to do fascinating things to us that you'll read on the Drudge Report.

    “As Africans and Brazilians burrow further into their jungles, expect more shitty viruses appearing to do fascinating things to us” to say nothing of East Asians huddled in their hootches with their pigs, chickens and rats, busily clearfelling the obscurer islands and mountain areas. I wonder what diseases orangs and fruitbats will unleash on their persecutors?
    Ban air travel now!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:
    @Buffalo Joe
    Flo.....It was for Geico.

    Indeed !
    Thank you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. dixie says:
    @res

    Regression Equation for PisaMath12:
    PisaMath12 = 317.8 * NeandPct +114.011 ; p=0.02763
     
    Reference? Were any other variables included and what was the R^2? The examples given have a very small range. Were African data points included?

    Raw NeandPct data from http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2014/01/neandertal-admixture-in-modern-humans.html

    Because of the small dataset, no point including other variable. PISA has no African data. So go and cook up your own regression.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks for the reply. The results are interesting, but they'd be a lot more compelling with the African data with ~0% Neandertal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. AP says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    There's no evidence of that.

    They did have slightly bigger skulls but that says nothing about the efficiency of internal wiring. Homo sapiens were ahead on virtually all artistic and technological branches (with the possible exception of making pitch from tree bark). Though admittedly humans did have the major advantage of requiring fewer calories thus enabling larger population density (all else equal) and thus more complex material culture.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    I will give you that Neanderthals might have been in the same ballpark as the Aurignacians with whom they interbred in Europe, but almost certainly considerably lower relative to the Gravettians who leveled up their IQ points on the tundric Pontic plains and ended up wiping them out completely.

    Trying again due to long in moderation:

    Supposedly, Neanderthal brains were wired for superior visual processing (Neanderthals had much larger eyes than modern humans) and control of their larger, bulkier bodies. The parts of the brain involving executive functioning (planning and organizing) and social cognition were less developed in Neanderthals than in homo sapiens.

    This makes sense, given that – as you stated – Neanderthal greater need for caloric intake limited population size, which limited social interactions to small family units rather than more complex larger extended social groups. This furthermore meant that any innovations made by particularly intelligent individuals were more likely to stay in the small family group than to spread, and to die out if the group died out.

    Visual-processing underlies math ability and the ability to read/manipulate symbols such as letters (I wonder if higher Neanderthal percentage in Asians is somehow linked to their languages using many more symbols). Someone above ran correlation stats on percentage of Neanderthal percentage and PISA math scores by countries; greater Neanderthal % seems correlated with higher math performance. It would be great, but not politically feasible, for 23andme to look at Neanderthal percentage and IQ of its customers. These are anecdotes, but it seems a lot of modern people with high IQs also have high percentages of Neanderthal ancestry. It seems plausible that Neanderthal ancestry contributed to greater math and nonverbal reasoning prowess in mixed populations relative to unmixed ones.

    There have also been links between Neanderthal DNA and autism, and autistic problems seem to mirror Neanderthal impairments (people with autism have markedly impaired social and linguistic skills). On the Wechsler intelligence test, people with Autism do best on Block Design, a visuospatial subtest, and worst on Comprehension. They do not do well on Arithmetic but that subtest involves word problems. People with autism are also more sensitive to touch but less sensitive to pain (Neanderthals, big game hunters, had to cope with more physical injuries by may have been less intimate in terms of physical contact?).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. res says:
    @dixie
    Raw NeandPct data from http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2014/01/neandertal-admixture-in-modern-humans.html

    Because of the small dataset, no point including other variable. PISA has no African data. So go and cook up your own regression.

    Thanks for the reply. The results are interesting, but they’d be a lot more compelling with the African data with ~0% Neandertal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dixie
    I did the regression when the neandpct data were out. Only later that I learned that a certain well known geneticist had made that assertion before the neaderthal dna data were known and he was really ran out of town by the SJWs. So treat the African data with caution.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Dave
    My God, some of the commenters are dense. As I stated above, colonial era America did not have the same level of medical care or anything remotely resembling indoor heating/hot water that we have today. Or did you think George Washington had a hot tub and the local doctor handed out antibiotics like candy ?
    How some of you can't make that connection is stunning.

    I doubt that if central heating, running hot water or indeed antibiotics make any significant impact on morbidity in cold climates.
    Perhaps TB inoculations did, though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. 5371 says:
    @AP
    Supposedly, Neanderthal brains were wired for superior visual processing (Neanderthals had much larger eyes than modern humans) and control of their larger, bulkier bodies. The parts of the brain involving executive functioning (planning and organizing) and social cognition were less developed in Neanderthals than in homo sapiens.

    This makes sense, given that - as you stated - Neanderthal greater need for caloric intake limited population size, which limited social interactions to small family units rather than more complex larger extended social groups. This furthermore meant that any innovations made by particularly intelligent individuals were more likely to stay in the small family group than to spread, and to die out if the group died out.

    Visual-processing underlies math ability and the ability to read/manipulate symbols such as letters (I wonder if higher Neanderthal percentage in Asians is somehow linked to their languages using many more symbols). Someone above ran correlation stats on percentage of Neanderthal percentage and PISA math scores by countries; greater Neanderthal % seems correlated with higher math performance. It would be great, but not politically feasible, for 23andme to look at Neanderthal percentage and IQ of its customers. These are anecdotes, but it seems a lot of modern people with high IQs also have high percentages of Neanderthal ancestry. It seems plausible that Neanderthal ancestry contributed to greater math and nonverbal reasoning prowess in mixed populations relative to unmixed ones.

    There have also been links between Neanderthal DNA and autism, and autistic problems seem to mirror Neanderthal impairments (people with autism have markedly impaired social and linguistic skills). On the Wechsler intelligence test, people with Autism do best on Block Design, a visuospatial subtest, and worst on Comprehension. They do not do well on Arithmetic but that subtest involves word problems. People with autism are also more sensitive to touch but less sensitive to pain (Neanderthals, big game hunters, had to cope with more physical injuries by may have been less intimate in terms of physical contact?). Interesting fact: on an online quiz people with Asperger's liked Neanderthal faces more than did normal people:

    http://www.rdos.net/eng/aspeval/#456

    Nothing is known about any peculiarities Neanderthal vision might have had, innovation was conspicuously lacking in Neanderthal communities, the percentages of Neanderthal ancestry spat out by money-making devices have no validity, Neanderthal faces are a product of the artist’s imagination, and most diagnoses of autism or Asperger’s syndrome are arbitrary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Nothing is known about any peculiarities Neanderthal vision might have had
     
    It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans, and that in primates eye size correlates to % of the brain devoted to visual processing. Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.

    innovation was conspicuously lacking in Neanderthal communities
     
    In comparison to that of modern humans, sure. But not completely lacking:

    http://www.ibtimes.com/innovative-neanderthals-unique-bone-tools-use-today-may-have-been-creations-ancient-humans-1382477

    Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement. It doesn't necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.

    I suspect that in addition to immunological advantages, Neanderthal admixture probably improved visuospatial processing and thereby contributed slightly to higher intelligence.

    the percentages of Neanderthal ancestry spat out by money-making devices have no validity
     
    So you don't believe in the results of genetic testing. Okay.

    Neanderthal faces are a product of the artist’s imagination
     
    Nonsense. Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.

    most diagnoses of autism or Asperger’s syndrome are arbitrary.
     
    More nonsense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. iffen says:
    @Antonymous
    I was thinking the same. The brow-ridge could explain how aboriginals evolved extraordinary eyesight (more so than Europeans, and perhaps the most sensitive of any human group) in an otherwise bright and unsheltered environment --- a built-in visor.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7457480
    https://www.quora.com/Who-has-or-had-the-best-human-eyesight-ever-recorded?share=1

    Thanks. I didn’t know about the better eyesight information. I was just thinking about the eyeball surviving more club hits more often. Over a very long time more prominent brow ridge equals more surviving eyeballs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. AP says:
    @5371
    Nothing is known about any peculiarities Neanderthal vision might have had, innovation was conspicuously lacking in Neanderthal communities, the percentages of Neanderthal ancestry spat out by money-making devices have no validity, Neanderthal faces are a product of the artist's imagination, and most diagnoses of autism or Asperger's syndrome are arbitrary.

    Nothing is known about any peculiarities Neanderthal vision might have had

    It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans, and that in primates eye size correlates to % of the brain devoted to visual processing. Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.

    innovation was conspicuously lacking in Neanderthal communities

    In comparison to that of modern humans, sure. But not completely lacking:

    http://www.ibtimes.com/innovative-neanderthals-unique-bone-tools-use-today-may-have-been-creations-ancient-humans-1382477

    Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement. It doesn’t necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.

    I suspect that in addition to immunological advantages, Neanderthal admixture probably improved visuospatial processing and thereby contributed slightly to higher intelligence.

    the percentages of Neanderthal ancestry spat out by money-making devices have no validity

    So you don’t believe in the results of genetic testing. Okay.

    Neanderthal faces are a product of the artist’s imagination

    Nonsense. Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.

    most diagnoses of autism or Asperger’s syndrome are arbitrary.

    More nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.

    [It doesn’t necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.]

    By the same argument your dog, if you have one, might well be more intellectually capable than you. Neither of you has been observed "individually" outside of all social context.

    [So you don’t believe in the results of genetic testing.]

    Educate yourself on the fraudulence of this particular commercial enterprise.

    [Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.]

    Then different artists' versions would resemble each other far more closely than they do.

    Clearly your credulity and lack of intelligence are not limited to the context in which I first discovered them.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Brutusale says:
    @Jim Christian
    Well, in Boston, cold or not, they simply aren't part of the population in numbers like most other places. They're bottled up (by design of TPTB and not tolerated well by Boston PD) into three towns, Dorchester, Roxbury, Jamaica Plains. The entire region is remarkably and blessedly bereft of Blacks. Hell, go out to the North Shore of Boston, even the ditch diggers are Irish, few Hispanics, even. Still, here, North of Boston, the Hispanics have occupied the Catholic churches left behind by the Irish and Italians that didn't need them anymore. The kids go to school, they're off the streets at night, the parents work, everyone friendly. Makes me wonder where THEIR gene came from, it wasn't Africa.

    A major factor of my move to Boston from Washington DC's Northern Virginia region was to get away from all the diversity in and around DC. It isn't my country there anymore and the diversity celebrates it. Liberals love their White cities and towns here, they can AFFORD to celebrate the diversity they help impose on the rest of the country. Love that cold weather.

    Which “North of Boston” are you talking about, Lynnfield or Lynn? Because they’re two entirely different places.

    Jamaica PLAIN (singular) has historically been mostly Hispanic and lesbian, as named by the popular JP ice cream emporium, JP Licks, but urban gentrification is strong there, and JP is whitening up apace. Both Hyde Park and Roslindale have higher percentages of blacks.

    http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/jamaica_plain/2011/04/census_data_jps_hispaniclatino.html

    Funny how the black migration out of the city followed the Jews southwest ( formerly Jewish Mattapan is #1 in the commonwealth, 84.18% black, formerly Jewish Randolph #6 at 20.75% and Jewish Sharon, 0.00% 10 years ago, now 4.5%).

    Even funnier is how the South Shore, where the oh-so-racist Boston Irish relocated from Southie and Dot, is far blacker than the North Shore, where the Italians from the North End and East Boston migrated to. Seems that the Boston Irish coexist with blacks better than the Italians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. dixie says:
    @res
    Thanks for the reply. The results are interesting, but they'd be a lot more compelling with the African data with ~0% Neandertal.

    I did the regression when the neandpct data were out. Only later that I learned that a certain well known geneticist had made that assertion before the neaderthal dna data were known and he was really ran out of town by the SJWs. So treat the African data with caution.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. dixie says:

    Something that can only appear as a story in a scientific journal.

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7194/full/453562a.html

    “The Neanderthal correlation”

    There’s a gene cluster linked to advanced mathematics skills, information processing, logic, analytical intelligence, concentration skills, obsession–compulsion and Asperger’s syndrome. That cluster correlates very strongly. I can trace some genes back to the interglacial around 450,000 years ago, and others back to another burst of evolutionary innovation during the Eemian interglacial about 130,000 years ago.” She rambled on with endless details.

    Something wasn’t right. She was linking genes for advanced mental skills to Neanderthals. “I’m confused,” I said when she paused for a breath. “You’re correlating genes linked to modern human intelligence with Neanderthal populations. What am I missing?”

    “Advanced mathematical processing? Shouldn’t that have been missing from the Neanderthal genome?”

    “No, I found that Neanderthals lacked genes linked to successful socialization and management skills. They could count perfectly well, but they couldn’t deal with groups. Socialization genes came from Sapiens”

    “You’re trying to tell me …” I said, but my mental censor blocked the idea.

    “That human mathematical intelligence came from Neanderthals? That’s what the data say. The Cro-Magnons had the social skills. But that isn’t all.”

    I stared at her. I couldn’t tell that to the research council.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Maybe Neanderthals should be re-named Nerdanderthals if these various assertions about their uniquely non-social intelligence is true. That would also explain their lack of procreative success.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. 5371 says:
    @AP

    Nothing is known about any peculiarities Neanderthal vision might have had
     
    It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans, and that in primates eye size correlates to % of the brain devoted to visual processing. Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.

    innovation was conspicuously lacking in Neanderthal communities
     
    In comparison to that of modern humans, sure. But not completely lacking:

    http://www.ibtimes.com/innovative-neanderthals-unique-bone-tools-use-today-may-have-been-creations-ancient-humans-1382477

    Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement. It doesn't necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.

    I suspect that in addition to immunological advantages, Neanderthal admixture probably improved visuospatial processing and thereby contributed slightly to higher intelligence.

    the percentages of Neanderthal ancestry spat out by money-making devices have no validity
     
    So you don't believe in the results of genetic testing. Okay.

    Neanderthal faces are a product of the artist’s imagination
     
    Nonsense. Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.

    most diagnoses of autism or Asperger’s syndrome are arbitrary.
     
    More nonsense.

    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.

    [It doesn’t necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.]

    By the same argument your dog, if you have one, might well be more intellectually capable than you. Neither of you has been observed “individually” outside of all social context.

    [So you don’t believe in the results of genetic testing.]

    Educate yourself on the fraudulence of this particular commercial enterprise.

    [Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.]

    Then different artists’ versions would resemble each other far more closely than they do.

    Clearly your credulity and lack of intelligence are not limited to the context in which I first discovered them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    ~ You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.

    ~ Locating particular mental skills in various parts of the skull is not phrenology. Phrenology involves taking known science and extending it to extremes.

    ~ The Finn who was involved in establishing the % of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans was not working for 23 and Me or whatever other enterprise you had in mind.

    ~ The difference in facial reconstructions among different artists has to do with generational fundamental assumptions about Neanderthals which have nothing to do with the bones remaining behind. If anything, modern Neanderthal reconstructions that are not attempting to prove that Neanders were inferior to Moderns are far more objective and thus accurate.

    ~ You can repeat the comment about autism and Asperger diagnoses being arbitrary.
    , @dixie
    | [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]
    |
    | Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/13/from-neanderthal-skull-to-neanderthal-brain/

    "Comparing the endocasts made from 21 skulls of Neanderthals and 38 skulls of our ancestors, the researchers found that Neanderthals had larger orbits (after controlling for body size). That suggests that they also had larger eyes and visual cortices."
    , @AP

    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.
     
    As SPMoore8 correctly stated, "You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained." Orbital provided a link for you.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.
     
    Nonsense. Phrenology was focused on a nonscientific extrapolation of personality or character from skull shape.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.
     
    Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans), which would have greatly limited population size and density.

    Smaller, more scattered populations meant that more complex social reasoning and communication skills were unnecessary. This could explain Neanderthals' inferiority in this domain. OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.

    ----------------

    As we have seen, actual facts (above and previously, such as in response to your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything) contradict your statements, so all you have are insults.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. SPMoore8 says:
    @dixie
    Something that can only appear as a story in a scientific journal.

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7194/full/453562a.html

    "The Neanderthal correlation"

    There's a gene cluster linked to advanced mathematics skills, information processing, logic, analytical intelligence, concentration skills, obsession–compulsion and Asperger's syndrome. That cluster correlates very strongly. I can trace some genes back to the interglacial around 450,000 years ago, and others back to another burst of evolutionary innovation during the Eemian interglacial about 130,000 years ago." She rambled on with endless details.

    Something wasn't right. She was linking genes for advanced mental skills to Neanderthals. "I'm confused," I said when she paused for a breath. "You're correlating genes linked to modern human intelligence with Neanderthal populations. What am I missing?"

    ...

    "Advanced mathematical processing? Shouldn't that have been missing from the Neanderthal genome?"

    "No, I found that Neanderthals lacked genes linked to successful socialization and management skills. They could count perfectly well, but they couldn't deal with groups. Socialization genes came from Sapiens"

    "You're trying to tell me ..." I said, but my mental censor blocked the idea.

    "That human mathematical intelligence came from Neanderthals? That's what the data say. The Cro-Magnons had the social skills. But that isn't all."

    I stared at her. I couldn't tell that to the research council.
     

    Maybe Neanderthals should be re-named Nerdanderthals if these various assertions about their uniquely non-social intelligence is true. That would also explain their lack of procreative success.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. SPMoore8 says:
    @5371
    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.

    [It doesn’t necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.]

    By the same argument your dog, if you have one, might well be more intellectually capable than you. Neither of you has been observed "individually" outside of all social context.

    [So you don’t believe in the results of genetic testing.]

    Educate yourself on the fraudulence of this particular commercial enterprise.

    [Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.]

    Then different artists' versions would resemble each other far more closely than they do.

    Clearly your credulity and lack of intelligence are not limited to the context in which I first discovered them.

    ~ You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.

    ~ Locating particular mental skills in various parts of the skull is not phrenology. Phrenology involves taking known science and extending it to extremes.

    ~ The Finn who was involved in establishing the % of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans was not working for 23 and Me or whatever other enterprise you had in mind.

    ~ The difference in facial reconstructions among different artists has to do with generational fundamental assumptions about Neanderthals which have nothing to do with the bones remaining behind. If anything, modern Neanderthal reconstructions that are not attempting to prove that Neanders were inferior to Moderns are far more objective and thus accurate.

    ~ You can repeat the comment about autism and Asperger diagnoses being arbitrary.

    Read More
    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @5371
    [You can repeat the comment about autism and Asperger diagnoses being arbitrary.]

    I repeat my comment. So?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. KArt says:

    Non-Africans are red wolves

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  97. dixie says:
    @5371
    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.

    [It doesn’t necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.]

    By the same argument your dog, if you have one, might well be more intellectually capable than you. Neither of you has been observed "individually" outside of all social context.

    [So you don’t believe in the results of genetic testing.]

    Educate yourself on the fraudulence of this particular commercial enterprise.

    [Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.]

    Then different artists' versions would resemble each other far more closely than they do.

    Clearly your credulity and lack of intelligence are not limited to the context in which I first discovered them.

    | [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]
    |
    | Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/13/from-neanderthal-skull-to-neanderthal-brain/

    “Comparing the endocasts made from 21 skulls of Neanderthals and 38 skulls of our ancestors, the researchers found that Neanderthals had larger orbits (after controlling for body size). That suggests that they also had larger eyes and visual cortices.”

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. AP says:
    @5371
    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.

    [It doesn’t necessarily mean that modern humans were individually more intellectually capable than Neanderthals.]

    By the same argument your dog, if you have one, might well be more intellectually capable than you. Neither of you has been observed "individually" outside of all social context.

    [So you don’t believe in the results of genetic testing.]

    Educate yourself on the fraudulence of this particular commercial enterprise.

    [Faces can be reconstructed, reasonably accurately, based on skulls.]

    Then different artists' versions would resemble each other far more closely than they do.

    Clearly your credulity and lack of intelligence are not limited to the context in which I first discovered them.

    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.

    As SPMoore8 correctly stated, “You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.” Orbital provided a link for you.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.

    Nonsense. Phrenology was focused on a nonscientific extrapolation of personality or character from skull shape.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.

    Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans), which would have greatly limited population size and density.

    Smaller, more scattered populations meant that more complex social reasoning and communication skills were unnecessary. This could explain Neanderthals’ inferiority in this domain. OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.

    —————-

    As we have seen, actual facts (above and previously, such as in response to your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything) contradict your statements, so all you have are insults.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.]

    The difference between populations will be drowned in the error bars, and in any case there is no tight correlation between one and the other, any more than between eyeball size and visual acuity or peculiarities, among human races or species of mammal.

    [Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans]

    It could suggest any number of other things as well, or none of them.

    [Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans)]

    They most certainly did not demand twice the caloric intake of Homo sapiens sapiens who lived at the same time and in the same environment.

    [OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.]

    Visual reasoning. ROFLMAO. You gave them a battery of standardised tests?

    [your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything]

    My claim is in triumphant agreement with the overwhelming majority of the evidence collected over more than a century and a half. Yours, on the other hand, are tabloid-level blather concocted from a few weak and misconceived studies to entertain the idle, clueless and undemanding.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. 5371 says:
    @AP

    [It is known that their eyes were significantly larger than those of modern humans]

    Rubbish, no soft tissue has survived.
     
    As SPMoore8 correctly stated, "You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained." Orbital provided a link for you.

    [Moreover, we also know that Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans.]

    Hand-waving phrenology.
     
    Nonsense. Phrenology was focused on a nonscientific extrapolation of personality or character from skull shape.

    [Modern humans had a much larger population and more extensive social networks, which would have led to faster rate of technological transmission and advancement.]

    Since Neanderthals had hundreds of thousands of years to develop such population density and social networks themselves, and failed to do so, the fault, if it be one, was intrinsic to them.
     
    Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans), which would have greatly limited population size and density.

    Smaller, more scattered populations meant that more complex social reasoning and communication skills were unnecessary. This could explain Neanderthals' inferiority in this domain. OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.

    ----------------

    As we have seen, actual facts (above and previously, such as in response to your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything) contradict your statements, so all you have are insults.

    [You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.]

    The difference between populations will be drowned in the error bars, and in any case there is no tight correlation between one and the other, any more than between eyeball size and visual acuity or peculiarities, among human races or species of mammal.

    [Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans]

    It could suggest any number of other things as well, or none of them.

    [Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans)]

    They most certainly did not demand twice the caloric intake of Homo sapiens sapiens who lived at the same time and in the same environment.

    [OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.]

    Visual reasoning. ROFLMAO. You gave them a battery of standardised tests?

    [your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything]

    My claim is in triumphant agreement with the overwhelming majority of the evidence collected over more than a century and a half. Yours, on the other hand, are tabloid-level blather concocted from a few weak and misconceived studies to entertain the idle, clueless and undemanding.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    [You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.]

    The difference between populations will be drowned in the error bars, and in any case there is no tight correlation between one and the other, any more than between eyeball size and visual acuity or peculiarities, among human races or species of mammal
     
    Just one of many examples:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836230/

    " These findings indicate that orbit volume can index eye and visual cortex volume in humans"

    [Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans]

    It could suggest any number of other things as well, or none of them.
     
    Given that the elongated area of the Neanderthal skull corresponds to the region of the visual cortex, it is most likely that the visual cortex was more developed.

    [Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans)]

    They most certainly did not demand twice the caloric intake of Homo sapiens sapiens who lived at the same time and in the same environment.
     
    Becaaue Neanderthals had much larger body mass than did modern humans, necessary caloric intake was much greater.

    [OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.]

    Visual reasoning. ROFLMAO. You gave them a battery of standardised tests?
     
    This can be reasonably inferred from their larger visual cortex. Similarly, their slightly smaller frontal lobe suggests inferior social functioning (corroborated by smaller trade networks, etc.).

    [your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything]

    My claim is in triumphant agreement with the overwhelming majority of the evidence collected over more than a century and a half.
     
    Evidence from this century is more compelling than claims made in the 1860s.

    Good to see you double-down with respect to ignorant claims about Neanderthals not inventing anything.

    Neanderthal invention of Mousterian technology has been known for a long time. More recent evidence shows that Neanderthals were also inventing more modern technology:

    http://www.evoanth.net/2013/08/20/neanderthals-invented-specialised-bone-tools/

    "Advanced bone tools have recently been found in France that can be both reliably associated with Neanderthals and predate the invention of these tools by modern humans. This provides some of the strongest evidence yet that Neanderthals were independently inventing some of the “modern” technologies.

    The tools in question are 4 lissoirs from the Dordogne region. A lissoir is a specialised bone tool, typically used for preparing hides to make them more waterproof. The finds were dated by 3 different methods (just to be on the safe side) to between 41 – 51,000 years old (Soressi, 2013). Meanwhile modern humans weren’t making lissoirs until around 38,000 years ago and we continue to do to this day (Higham et al., 2010).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. 5371 says:
    @SPMoore8
    ~ You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.

    ~ Locating particular mental skills in various parts of the skull is not phrenology. Phrenology involves taking known science and extending it to extremes.

    ~ The Finn who was involved in establishing the % of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans was not working for 23 and Me or whatever other enterprise you had in mind.

    ~ The difference in facial reconstructions among different artists has to do with generational fundamental assumptions about Neanderthals which have nothing to do with the bones remaining behind. If anything, modern Neanderthal reconstructions that are not attempting to prove that Neanders were inferior to Moderns are far more objective and thus accurate.

    ~ You can repeat the comment about autism and Asperger diagnoses being arbitrary.

    [You can repeat the comment about autism and Asperger diagnoses being arbitrary.]

    I repeat my comment. So?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. AP says:
    @5371
    [You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.]

    The difference between populations will be drowned in the error bars, and in any case there is no tight correlation between one and the other, any more than between eyeball size and visual acuity or peculiarities, among human races or species of mammal.

    [Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans]

    It could suggest any number of other things as well, or none of them.

    [Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans)]

    They most certainly did not demand twice the caloric intake of Homo sapiens sapiens who lived at the same time and in the same environment.

    [OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.]

    Visual reasoning. ROFLMAO. You gave them a battery of standardised tests?

    [your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything]

    My claim is in triumphant agreement with the overwhelming majority of the evidence collected over more than a century and a half. Yours, on the other hand, are tabloid-level blather concocted from a few weak and misconceived studies to entertain the idle, clueless and undemanding.

    [You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.]

    The difference between populations will be drowned in the error bars, and in any case there is no tight correlation between one and the other, any more than between eyeball size and visual acuity or peculiarities, among human races or species of mammal

    Just one of many examples:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836230/

    ” These findings indicate that orbit volume can index eye and visual cortex volume in humans”

    [Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans]

    It could suggest any number of other things as well, or none of them.

    Given that the elongated area of the Neanderthal skull corresponds to the region of the visual cortex, it is most likely that the visual cortex was more developed.

    [Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans)]

    They most certainly did not demand twice the caloric intake of Homo sapiens sapiens who lived at the same time and in the same environment.

    Becaaue Neanderthals had much larger body mass than did modern humans, necessary caloric intake was much greater.

    [OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.]

    Visual reasoning. ROFLMAO. You gave them a battery of standardised tests?

    This can be reasonably inferred from their larger visual cortex. Similarly, their slightly smaller frontal lobe suggests inferior social functioning (corroborated by smaller trade networks, etc.).

    [your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything]

    My claim is in triumphant agreement with the overwhelming majority of the evidence collected over more than a century and a half.

    Evidence from this century is more compelling than claims made in the 1860s.

    Good to see you double-down with respect to ignorant claims about Neanderthals not inventing anything.

    Neanderthal invention of Mousterian technology has been known for a long time. More recent evidence shows that Neanderthals were also inventing more modern technology:

    http://www.evoanth.net/2013/08/20/neanderthals-invented-specialised-bone-tools/

    “Advanced bone tools have recently been found in France that can be both reliably associated with Neanderthals and predate the invention of these tools by modern humans. This provides some of the strongest evidence yet that Neanderthals were independently inventing some of the “modern” technologies.

    The tools in question are 4 lissoirs from the Dordogne region. A lissoir is a specialised bone tool, typically used for preparing hides to make them more waterproof. The finds were dated by 3 different methods (just to be on the safe side) to between 41 – 51,000 years old (Soressi, 2013). Meanwhile modern humans weren’t making lissoirs until around 38,000 years ago and we continue to do to this day (Higham et al., 2010).

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @5371
    Because you only read new stuff as it appears on the internet, and are entirely devoid of background knowledge or critical sense, you could not distinguish settled results from speculation, strained extrapolation and junk science, even in the unlikely event that you wanted to.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Anatoly Karlin
    There's no evidence of that.

    They did have slightly bigger skulls but that says nothing about the efficiency of internal wiring. Homo sapiens were ahead on virtually all artistic and technological branches (with the possible exception of making pitch from tree bark). Though admittedly humans did have the major advantage of requiring fewer calories thus enabling larger population density (all else equal) and thus more complex material culture.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    I will give you that Neanderthals might have been in the same ballpark as the Aurignacians with whom they interbred in Europe, but almost certainly considerably lower relative to the Gravettians who leveled up their IQ points on the tundric Pontic plains and ended up wiping them out completely.

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.

    Other evidence indicates the contrary.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @5371
    The idea of assigning an IQ to Neanderthals on any basis, least of all on genetic non-evidence, is ridiculous. I do not understand this new fan-boy attitude to that subspecies. It's as if an American patriot were to decide that Amerindians must have been by far the most accomplished human race, and every good quality possessed by white Americans must derive from their tiny proportion of Amerindian ancestry, just because they occupied the same geographical area as he does, but far, far sillier even than that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. 5371 says:
    @AP

    [You can make a fair estimate of eyeball size by the size of the bony orbit in which it is contained.]

    The difference between populations will be drowned in the error bars, and in any case there is no tight correlation between one and the other, any more than between eyeball size and visual acuity or peculiarities, among human races or species of mammal
     
    Just one of many examples:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836230/

    " These findings indicate that orbit volume can index eye and visual cortex volume in humans"

    [Neanderthal skulls were elongated in the back, corresponding to the location of the visual cortex, strongly suggesting that this region was much more developed in comparison to that of modern humans]

    It could suggest any number of other things as well, or none of them.
     
    Given that the elongated area of the Neanderthal skull corresponds to the region of the visual cortex, it is most likely that the visual cortex was more developed.

    [Neanderthal bodies required greater caloric intake (estimated as being at least twice that of modern humans)]

    They most certainly did not demand twice the caloric intake of Homo sapiens sapiens who lived at the same time and in the same environment.
     
    Becaaue Neanderthals had much larger body mass than did modern humans, necessary caloric intake was much greater.

    [OTOH, their non-verbal, visual reasoning appears to have been superior.]

    Visual reasoning. ROFLMAO. You gave them a battery of standardised tests?
     
    This can be reasonably inferred from their larger visual cortex. Similarly, their slightly smaller frontal lobe suggests inferior social functioning (corroborated by smaller trade networks, etc.).

    [your ignorant claim that Neanderthals never invented anything]

    My claim is in triumphant agreement with the overwhelming majority of the evidence collected over more than a century and a half.
     
    Evidence from this century is more compelling than claims made in the 1860s.

    Good to see you double-down with respect to ignorant claims about Neanderthals not inventing anything.

    Neanderthal invention of Mousterian technology has been known for a long time. More recent evidence shows that Neanderthals were also inventing more modern technology:

    http://www.evoanth.net/2013/08/20/neanderthals-invented-specialised-bone-tools/

    "Advanced bone tools have recently been found in France that can be both reliably associated with Neanderthals and predate the invention of these tools by modern humans. This provides some of the strongest evidence yet that Neanderthals were independently inventing some of the “modern” technologies.

    The tools in question are 4 lissoirs from the Dordogne region. A lissoir is a specialised bone tool, typically used for preparing hides to make them more waterproof. The finds were dated by 3 different methods (just to be on the safe side) to between 41 – 51,000 years old (Soressi, 2013). Meanwhile modern humans weren’t making lissoirs until around 38,000 years ago and we continue to do to this day (Higham et al., 2010).

    Because you only read new stuff as it appears on the internet, and are entirely devoid of background knowledge or critical sense, you could not distinguish settled results from speculation, strained extrapolation and junk science, even in the unlikely event that you wanted to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. 5371 says:
    @ben tillman

    Preliminary genetic evidence (via Steve Hsu) indicates that Neanderthals had a very low IQ of no more than 70.
     
    Other evidence indicates the contrary.

    The idea of assigning an IQ to Neanderthals on any basis, least of all on genetic non-evidence, is ridiculous. I do not understand this new fan-boy attitude to that subspecies. It’s as if an American patriot were to decide that Amerindians must have been by far the most accomplished human race, and every good quality possessed by white Americans must derive from their tiny proportion of Amerindian ancestry, just because they occupied the same geographical area as he does, but far, far sillier even than that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. I do not understand this new fan-boy attitude to that subspecies. It’s as if . . . .

    I haven’t seen any fan-boy attitude, and I can’t see how the study of Neanderthals is in any way like your counterfactual hypothetical.

    What’s going on is (1) scientists are catching to the fact that Neanderthals and the other strains of ancestors of today’s hominids interbred and (2) some people are figuring out that they have an unusual amount of Neanderthal ancestry, and they notice that they and their relatives are much smarter than other hominids.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation