RSS
One of the more striking discoveries of recent years has been the revelation that most modern non-sub-Saharan African human beings typically have inherited a small but not insignificant part of their genome from otherwise extinct Neanderthals.
At the end of the 20th Century, scientific orthodoxy was that modern humans were 100% descended from the anatomically modern species that arose in Africa and spread all over the world, with Neanderthals going extinct. This not unreasonable “Out-of-Africa” orthodoxy soon metastasized, probably starting with 2000 speeches in the White House Rose Garden by Bill Clinton, Craig Venter, and Francis Collins celebrating the Human Genome Project into the current anti-science “Race Does Not Exist” dogma.
WD Hamilton was known as “Caveman” to his rugby teammates
The new understanding of the role of Neanderthals, however, was largely forecast back in the late 20th Century by Gregory Cochran, who argued that, having spent several hundred thousand years evolving at higher latitudes in Europe, Neanderthals would have evolved certain more sophisticated adaptations to local conditions (such as cold winters) that the invading out-of-Africa peoples would have acquired through a limited amount of interbreeding.
If I recall correctly, Cochran, however, didn’t forecast that modern sub-Saharan Africans would turn out to be almost completely lacking in Neanderthal genes. That’s one of the striking racial differences between the two main races on earth: sub-Saharans and everybody else.
The current scientific understanding is that the two fundamental racial groups are the Out-of-Africa people and the Not-Out-of-Africa people (i.e., Sub-Saharans). (Interestingly, the old Multiregionalist Carleton Coon failed to anticipate that. He figured from looking at bones that African blacks and European whites were more closely related to each other than whites were to East Asians. Coon figured the mountains of Central Asia were humanity’s fundamental division, but it turned out to be the Sahara.)
You could break a 2×4 across Darwin’s brow
Now, you might think that it’s pretty interesting that Greg Cochran underestimated the amount of genetic racial difference between blacks and everybody else when otherwise correctly forecasting results about a decade before they became technologically feasible to discover.
But here are bits of a very long article in the New York Times Magazine that skips over the disturbing parts about racial differences among modern humans to put the Neanderthal story in a more comfortable setting in which the bad guys are old-fashioned white racist scientists and their deplorable descendants who voted for Brexit.
It’s a pretty good example of how to reframe and spin a bunch of unsettling facts to make NYT subscribers feel even smugger about themselves.
New research shows they shared many behaviors that we long believed to be uniquely human. Why did science get them so wrong?
By JON MOOALLEM
JAN. 11, 2017Joachim Neander was a 17th-century Calvinist theologian who often hiked through a valley outside Düsseldorf, Germany, writing hymns. Neander understood everything around him as a manifestation of the Lord’s will and work. There was no room in his worldview for randomness, only purpose and praise. “See how God this rolling globe/swathes with beauty as a robe,” one of his verses goes. “Forests, fields, and living things/each its Master’s glory sings.” He wrote dozens of hymns like this — awe-struck and simple-minded. Then he caught tuberculosis and died at 30.
Almost two centuries later, in the summer of 1856, workers quarrying limestone in that valley dug up an unusual skull. …
One British geologist, William King, suspected something more radical. Instead of being the remains of an atypical human, they might have belonged to a typical member of an alternate humanity. In 1864, he published a paper introducing it as such — an extinct human species, the first ever discovered. King named this species after the valley where it was found, which itself had been named for the ecstatic poet who once wandered it. He called it Homo neanderthalensis: Neanderthal Man.
Who was Neanderthal Man? King felt obligated to describe him. But with no established techniques for interpreting archaeological material like the skull, he fell back on racism and phrenology. He focused on the peculiarities of the Neanderthal’s skull, including the “enormously projecting brow.” No living humans had skeletal features remotely like these, but King was under the impression that the skulls of contemporary African and Australian aboriginals resembled the Neanderthals’ more than “ordinary” white-people skulls. So extrapolating from his low opinion of what he called these “savage” races, he explained that the Neanderthal’s skull alone was proof of its moral “darkness” and stupidity. “The thoughts and desires which once dwelt within it never soared beyond those of a brute,” he wrote. Other scientists piled on. So did the popular press. We knew almost nothing about Neanderthals, but already we assumed they were ogres and losers.
The genesis of this idea, the historian Paige Madison notes, largely comes down to flukes of “timing and luck.” While King was working, another British scientist, George Busk, had the same suspicions about the Neander skull. He had received a comparable one, too, from the tiny British territory of Gibraltar. The Gibraltar skull was dug up long before the Neander Valley specimen surfaced, but local hobbyists simply labeled it “human skull” and forgot about it for the next 16 years. Its brow ridge wasn’t as prominent as the Neander skull’s, and its features were less imposing; it was a woman’s skull, it turns out. Busk dashed off a quick report but stopped short of naming the new creature. He hoped to study additional fossils and learn more. Privately, he considered calling it Homo calpicus, or Gibraltar Man.
So, what if Busk — “a conscientious naturalist too cautious to make premature claims,” as Madison describes him — had beaten King to publication? Consider how different our first impressions of a Gibraltar Woman might have been from those of Neanderthal Man: what feelings of sympathy, or even kinship, this other skull might have stirred.
There is a worldview, the opposite of Joachim Neander’s, that sees our planet as a product of only tumult and indifference. In such a world, it’s possible for an entire species to be ground into extinction by forces beyond its control and then, 40,000 years later, be dug up and made to endure an additional century and a half of bad luck and abuse.
That’s what happened to the Neanderthals. And it’s what we did to them. But recently, after we’d snickered over their skulls for so long, it stopped being clear who the boneheads were.
I’ll start with a confession, an embarrassing but relevant one, because I would come to see our history with Neanderthals as continually distorted by an unfortunate human tendency to believe in ideas that are, in reality, incorrect — and then to leverage that conviction into a feeling of superiority over other people. And in retrospect, I realize I demonstrated that same tendency myself at the beginning of this project. Because I don’t want to come off as self-righteous, or as pointing fingers, here goes:
… I happened to arrive in Gibraltar the week of the Brexit vote. Up in England, people were thundering about the working class versus elites, sovereignty and immigration, warning that British identity was being fouled by the European project. But in Gibraltar — a far-flung, fully detached nib of Britain, flanked by water on two sides and Spain on the third — the question was less philosophical: If the United Kingdom left the European Union, Spain might seize the opportunity to isolate Gibraltar, leaving the territory to shrivel up, like a flap of dead skin. The Gibraltarian government had already called on the House of Commons for help. There was concern that Spain would jam up the border again and that it might happen right away.
Around town, “Remain” signs hung everywhere. The atmosphere was edgy, as though everyone was holding hands, waiting to see whether a meteor would hit. It was like the hairline cracks between so many self-designated Us-es and Thems seemed to be widening, and some corrosive, molten goop was seeping out: mutual dependence curdled with contempt. Clearly it was happening back home in America too.
All in all, it was a good week to spend in a cave.
… What is clearer is that roughly 40,000 years ago, just as our own lineage expanded from Africa and took over Eurasia, the Neanderthals disappeared. Scientists have always assumed that the timing wasn’t coincidental. Maybe we used our superior intellects to outcompete the Neanderthals for resources; maybe we clubbed them all to death. Whatever the mechanism of this so-called replacement, it seemed to imply that our kind was somehow better than their kind. We’re still here, after all, and their path ended as soon as we crossed paths.
But Neanderthals weren’t the slow-witted louts we’ve imagined them to be — not just a bunch of Neanderthals. As a review of findings published last year put it, they were actually “very similar” to their contemporary Homo sapiens in Africa, in terms of “standard markers of modern cognitive and behavioral capacities.” … The real surprise of these discoveries may not be the competence of Neanderthals but how obnoxiously low our expectations for them have been — the bias with which too many scientists approached that other Us. One archaeologist called these researchers “modern human supremacists.” …
One of the earliest authorities on Neanderthals was a Frenchman named Marcellin Boule. A lot of what he said was wrong.
In 1911, Boule began publishing his analysis of the first nearly complete Neanderthal skeleton ever discovered, which he named Old Man of La Chapelle, after the limestone cave where it was found. Laboring to reconstruct the Old Man’s anatomy, he deduced that its head must have been slouched forward, its spine hunched and its toes spread like an ape’s. Then, having reassembled the Neanderthal this way, Boule insulted it. This “brutish” and “clumsy” posture, he wrote, clearly indicated a lack of morals and a lifestyle dominated by “functions of a purely vegetative or bestial kind.” A colleague of Boule’s went further, claiming that Neanderthals usually walked on all fours and never laughed: “Man-ape had no smile.” Boule was part of a movement trying to reconcile natural selection with religion; by portraying Neanderthals as closer to animals than to us, he could protect the ideal of a separate, immaculate human lineage. When he consulted with an artist to make a rendering of the Neanderthal, it came out looking like a furry, mean gorilla. …
Still, Boule’s influence was long-lasting. Over the years, his ideologically tainted image of Neanderthals was often refracted through the lens of other ideologies, occasionally racist ones. In 1930, the prominent British anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith, writing in The New York Times, channeled Boule’s work to justify colonialism. For Keith, the replacement of an ancient, inferior species like Neanderthals by newer, heartier Homo sapiens proved that Britain’s actions in Australia — “The white man … replacing the most ancient type of brown man known to us” — was part of a natural order that had been operating for millenniums.
It’s easy to get snooty about all this unenlightened paleoanthropology of the past. But all sciences operate by trying to fit new data into existing theories. And this particular science, for which the “data” has always consisted of scant and somewhat inscrutable bits of rock and fossil, often has to lean on those meta-narratives even more heavily. “Assumptions, theories, expectations,” the University of Barcelona archaeologist João Zilhão says, “all must come into play a lot, because you are interpreting data that do not speak for themselves.”
… The Washington University anthropologist Erik Trinkaus, who began his career in the early ’70s, told me, “When I started working on Neanderthals, nobody really cared about them.” The liveliest question about Neanderthals was still the first one: Were they our direct ancestors or the endpoint of a separate evolutionary track? Scientists called this question “the Neanderthal Problem.” Some of the theories worked up to answer it encouraged different visions of Neanderthal intelligence and behavior. The “Multiregional Model,” for example, which had us descending from Neanderthals, was more inclined to see them as capable, sympathetic and fundamentally human; the opposing “Out of Africa” hypothesis, which held that we moved in and replaced them, cast them as comparatively inferior.
The Multiregional Model of Carleton Coon and other mid-20th Century anthropologists was widely denounced as racist, while the “Out of Africa” model was celebrated as anti-racist for showing that we are all descended from Africans who overwhelmed and wiped out Europeans.
For decades, when evidence of a more advanced Neanderthal way of life turned up, it was often explained away, or mobbed by enough contrary or undermining interpretations that, over time, it never found real purchase. …
“To me,” says Zilhão, the University of Barcelona archaeologist, “there was a logical shock: If the paradigm forces you to say something like this, there must be something wrong with the paradigm.” Zilhão published a stinging critique challenging the field to shake off its “anti-Neanderthal prejudice.” Papers were fired back and forth, igniting what Zilhão calls “a 20-year war” and counting. Then, in the middle of that war, geneticists shook up the paradigm completely.
A group at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, led by Svante Paabo, had been assembling a draft sequence of a Neanderthal genome, using DNA recovered from bones. Their findings were published in 2010. It had already become clear by then that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals appeared in Eurasia separately — “Out of Africa was essentially right” — but Paabo’s work revealed that before the Neanderthals disappeared, the two groups mated. Even today, 40,000 years after our gene pools stopped mixing, most living humans still carry Neanderthal DNA, making up roughly 1 to 2 percent of our total genomes.
In this sentence “most living humans” doesn’t include sub-Saharan Africans.
The data shows that we also apparently bred with other hominids, like the Denisovans, about which very little is known.
It was staggering; even Paabo couldn’t bring himself to believe it at first. But the results were the results, and they carried a sort of empirical magnetism that archaeological evidence lacks. “Geneticists are much more powerful, numerous and incomparably better funded than anyone else dealing with this stuff,” Zilhão said. He joked: “Their aura is kind of miraculous. It’s a bit like receiving the Ten Commandments from God.” Paabo’s work, and a continuing wave of genomic research, has provided clarity but also complexity, recasting our oppositional, zero-sum relationship into something more communal and collaborative — and perhaps not just on the genetic level. The extent of the interbreeding supported previous speculation, by a minority of paleoanthropologists, that there might have been cases of Neanderthals and modern humans living alongside each other, intermeshed, for centuries, and that generations of their offspring had found places in those communities, too. Then again, it’s also possible that some of the interbreeding was forced.
I.e., rape.
One possibility is African immigrants raped European women. Or it might have been the hulking Europeans raping the more gracile Africans. Or maybe it was all romantic or arranged by elders. Nobody knows.
Paabo now recommends against imagining separate species of human evolution altogether: not an Us and a Them, but one enormous “metapopulation” composed of shifting clusters of essentially human-ish things that periodically coincided in time and space and, when they happened to bump into one another, occasionally had sex.
… What would it have been like to look out over a grassy plain and watch parallel humanity pass by? Scientists often turn to historical first contacts as frames of reference, like the arrival of Europeans among Native Americans, or Captain Cook landing in Australia — largely histories of violence and subjugation. But as Zilhão points out, typically one of those two cultures set out to conquer the other. “Those people were conscious that they’d come from somewhere else,” he told me. “They were a product of a civilization that had books, that had studied their past.” Homo sapiens encountering Neanderthals would have been different: They met uncoupled from politics and history; neither identified as part of a network of millions of supposedly more advanced people. And so, as Finlayson put it to me: “Each valley could have told a different story. In one, they may have hit each other over the head. In another, they may have made love. In another, they ignored each other.”
It’s a kind of coexistence that our modern imaginations may no longer be sensitive enough to envision. So much of our identity as a species is tied up in our anomalousness, in our dominion over others. …
Some paleoanthropologists are starting to reimagine the extinction of Neanderthals as equally prosaic: not the culmination of some epic clash of civilizations but an aggregate result of a long, ecological muddle. Strictly speaking, extinction is what happens after a species fails to maintain a higher proportion of births to deaths — it’s a numbers game. And so the real competition between Neanderthals and early modern humans wasn’t localized quarrels for food or territory but a quiet, millenniums-long demographic marathon: each species repopulating itself, until one fell so far behind that it vanished. …
… (Across all of Eurasia, at any point in history, says John Hawks, an anthropologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, “there probably weren’t enough of them to fill an N.F.L. stadium.”) With the demographics so skewed, Stringer went on, even the slightest modern human advantage would be amplified tremendously: a single innovation, something like sewing needles, might protect just enough babies from the elements to lower the infant mortality rate and allow modern humans to conclusively overtake the Neanderthals. And yet Stringer is careful not to conflate innovation with superior intelligence. Innovation, too, can be a function of population size. “We live in an age where information, where good ideas, spread like wildfire, and we build on them,” Stringer told me. “But it wasn’t like that 50,000 years ago.” The more members your species has, the more likely one member will stumble on a useful new technology — and that, once stumbled upon, the innovation will spread; you need sufficient human tinder for those sparks of culture to catch.
And the larger your number, the more likely you are to benefit from a favorable genetic mutation.
Not in this article
“There was nothing inevitable about modern human success,” Stringer says. “It was luck.” We didn’t defeat the Neanderthals; we just swamped them.
Showing me around the Gibraltar Museum one morning, Finlayson described the petering out of Neanderthals on the Rock with unnerving pathos. Gibraltar, with its comparatively stable climate, would have been one of their last refuges, he explained, and he likened the population there to critically endangered species today, like snow leopards or imperiled butterflies: living relics carrying on in small, fragmented populations long after they’ve passed a genetic point of no return. “They became a ghost species,” Finlayson said.
It was the day of the Brexit vote. … I won’t describe the scenes I saw that morning — the blankness on people’s faces at the airport, phone calls I overheard — except to say that when I woke up on Nov. 9, after our own election, I felt equipped with at least a faint frame of reference. Reality seemed heightened and a little dangerous, because for so many people, including me, it had broken away from our expectations. We had misunderstood the present in the same way archaeologists can misunderstand the past. What was possible was suddenly exposed as grossly insufficient, because, to borrow Finlayson’s metaphor, we never imagined that the few jigsaw puzzle pieces we based it on constituted such a tiny part of the whole.
Even some on the winning sides seemed similarly stunned and adrift. Many, though, just felt vindicated. Later that summer, I came across an essay for a British weekly by the actress Elizabeth Hurley, a fervent Leave supporter, who was now doubling down. “Knock yourselves out calling us ill-educated Neanderthals,” she wrote, “and spit a bit more venom and vitriol our way. You are showing yourselves in all your meanspirited, round-headed elitist glory.”
When I read that, I took genuine umbrage — but on the Neanderthals’ behalf. And while I hate to admit it, I also felt a cheap but delicious tingle of smugness, because I now knew that “Neanderthal” wasn’t the insult Hurley thought it was — though this, I simultaneously realized, also closed a certain self-reinforcing loop and promoted, in me, the very round-headed elitist glory Hurley was incensed by, thus deepening the divide. It was dizzying and sad and maybe inevitably human, but still no help to us at all.
Jon Mooallem is a writer at large for the magazine. He is also a contributor to “This American Life” and the author of the book “Wild Ones.”
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
It is hard to believe that people get paid to write such twaddle. Just WTF do Neanderthals have to do with Brexit?
the media start with the desired conclusion and work backwards
But NYT is fighting to preserve the leftist narrative.
Any weapon at all may be used (all's fair in love and war). This is definitely a kind of civil war.
“That’s one of the striking racial differences between the two main races on earth: sub-Saharans and everybody else.”
In Left Wing identity politics the two main races on earth are Europeans and everybody else, meaning a pan-Nonwhite identity where Leslie Jones and George Takei are both part of the same race.
That view leads us on the left to pretend that South Africa or Afghanistan is just as able to construct and run a socialist democracy as Switzerland or Denmark (considering only the historical populations of those countries). That's pretty obviously wrong. But so is the view that Pakistan is just as capable of running a lassiez-faire capitalist economy as the USA.
I don’t know why anyone takes Darwin seriously. Darwin was no scientist he was a beekeeper. Darwin’s book has zero scientific data in it. Its about as scientific as the Hollow Earth Theory. Piltdown man was a fraud, and all these skulls of “apemen” are found in pieces and glued together. The fact all these skulls are “found” in places that man and ape co-exist is more than suspicious. The fact that none of these skulls has even a single skeleton to go with them seems like fraud to me. Neadertal is obviously a real skeleton, but what they don’t tell you is they don’t actually have a whole skeleton. That “specimen” they show you is made from several different individuals. Also, half the bones are actually human bones used to fill the gaps! No really. This is more P.T. Barnum than science here.
The only reason Darwin is “accepted science” is because its the only scientific theory that obviously disagrees with the Bible Creation Story. The fact that almost all Darwinists are Atheists should show the obvious prejudice here. Whenever I hear “accepted science”, its never science. Real scientists never accept anything. Skepticism is the basis for science. This whole scam is a preconceived crackpot idea from a beekeeper’s book. They have been trying to “prove” it for decades. Science is supposed to have evidence BEFORE a hypothesis is made.
Right. But the genetics say otherwise. The two big divisions are Out of Africa people and Not Out of Africa people.
http://imgur.com/a/SVK6VReplies: @tamako, @415 reasons
Here they are:
http://i.imgur.com/vsk0i.jpgReplies: @anon
How about paleo-Africans vs everyone else?
It looks like the interbreeding with Neanderthals happened primarily in the middle east very early in the out-of-Africa history of modern humans:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2952418/Neanderthals-interbred-longer-modern-humans-east-Asia-DNA-reveals.html
Did the Neanderthals in the prehistoric Middle East really have serious cold weather adaptions?
Something else interesting I read is that it looks there was strong overall selection in hybrid populations against functional Neanderthal genes.
Another point against this theory is that cold weather adaptions can happen pretty quickly on their own without an external source of genes. Black Africans themselves have a lot of natural variation in skin color and body hair for example. Maine Coon cats evolved long hair and larger body size in ~300 years. There is also little variation in Neanderthal genes between non-African populations, not the cold-warm gradient you’d expect to see.
http://imgur.com/gallery/gxPvIk4
I’m not saying GC is wrong, just pointing out some potential holes to the theory.
Not so in tropical regions. There, one can run about naked all year in comfort.
So the adaptations would perhaps begin where winter begins; that onset is truly a difference of type; colder winters further north more a difference of degree.
I'm no geneticist, but isn't the initial mutation hardest to maintain, but enhancements of it easier to pass on once it has provided the advantage to that first generation...? That would support the big leap being in the lower, milder (but still seasonal!) latitudes, no?
Also, the Neanderthals we encountered in the Mid East very well could have shared the cold-weather adaptations other Neanderthals. They might have moved down recently due to advancing ice - who knows.
But of course we have no idea what kind of cold-weather trait we might have picked up from the Neanderthals, if we picked up any at all - I'll grant you that. It could have been a behavior like sewing hides together - who knows?
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/feb/17/oldest-known-case-of-neanderthal-human-sex-revealed-by-dna-test
i imagine the eventual full story will be pretty complicated
“Right. But the genetics say otherwise. The two big divisions are Out of Africa people and Not Out of Africa people.”
I am talking race from a political social construct standpoint. According to the Left Wing megaphone the 2 races are White and Nonwhite, so there for George Takei is racially closer to Leslie Jones than to Donald J. Trump.
Here’s a good graphic with the big four races and two admixed archaic races:
So, "French" is white; "African" is sub-Saharan African; "Melanesian" is brown people from South/South-East Asia and more or less native Americans; "Han Chinese" is Chinese?Replies: @Chrisnonymous
Liz Hurley was a Leave supporter? Damn, I knew I liked her!
https://twitter.com/elizabethhurley/status/745605008012546048
I have a feeling that even if Denisovans and Neanderthals had never existed, the European race and Asian race would have ended up more or less like they became.
It’s possible that Europeans got some advantageous traits from Neaderthals. But even if cross-mating had never happened, it’s also possible Europeans would have developed those traits via evolution.
After all, Neanderthals also originated in Africa, migrated to Europe, and evolved certain new traits. Neanderthals developed those traits on their own, so it’s possible that later arrivals would also have developed those traits on their own. The flora, fauna, and climate of the North was very different.
Also, there are many ways to bunch together different races. Based on Neanderthal DNA, we can make a distinction between black Africans and everyone else.
But based on IQ, East Asians and whites seem to have more in common even though East Asians are closer to American Indians and Europeans are closer to Arabs.
Mongoloid east Asians are not closer to American Indians. Don't let the straight black hair and the epicanthic fold fool ya.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
What does that last paragraph of pure gibberish even mean?
Even if Neanderthals were not so primitive and ugh-ish, it doesn’t invalidate race-ism, by which I mean the fact of existence of different races with different racial differences.
Crude racism may have depicted Neanderthals as ugh-ish primitives. But rational race-ism can appreciate their intelligence and abilities while still theorizing that they were deficient in other areas.
It’s like comparing Jews and blacks. Yes, both have all the basic human abilities and traits. But they have more of certain abilities than the other group does, and these differences make for huge difference in school, business, science, sports, crime, and etc. I mean there are more people like Einstein among Jews and more people like Michael Jordan and Usain Bolt among blacks. Yes, there are fast Jews, and there are smart blacks. But there are general group differences.
The writer seems to think race-ism, the noticing of racial differences, is just a crude and bigoted practice of valuing some races as the BEST while denigrating other races as total retards.
But in fact, race-ism, when properly applied, notices that different human groups evolved under different conditions and developed different traits that made them superior in some ways and inferior in some ways. It’s like dogs. Greyhounds are superior at running, bloodhounds are superior at tracking.
But so much of Proggism is about virtue-signaling. They cannot consider any topic without turning it into some self-righteous exercise of how they are sooooo good and morally superior to the DEPLORABLE NEO-NEANDERTHAL patriots who want to preserve their own land, heritage, and identity.
UGH. ME WANT TO PRESERVE HOMELAND. UGH, THAT REALLY DUMB AND UGLY. UGH, ME WANT TO PRESERVE LINE OF MY PEOPLE. UGH, THAT SO RETARDED BUT ME DEPLORABLE. UGH, ME WANT TO SAVE MY CULTURE FROM HORDES OF FOREIGNERS. UGH, ME NO HAVE SOPHISTICATE LIKE GLOBO-COSMO ELITES. ME STUPID. ME SUBHUMAN. ME BLOODY DEPLORABLE. MUST GET WITH SOROS PROGRAM. OTHERWISE, ME JUST LOWLIFE SUBHUMAN NEO-NEANDERTHAL MORON..
By the way, if the writers really appreciates Neanderthals, he should support Neaderxit. It was the inability of the Neans to stop the Out-of-Afrikaners that led to the extinction of Neanderthal culture.
Thought the same think.
This is an interesting piece of writing, a view into the very confused psyche of a leftist who has just come face to face with good evidence that Bad Things existed on the earth prior to 1492.
Honestly, in my years as an academic getting to know the leftist psyche, it does seem to broil down to this one simple belief. White Western Europeans are uniquely at fault for Bad Things because prior to colonialism, there was no such thing as massive population movement and certainly none of the conflict or assymetrical power relations that such movements entail.
Once that belief is leveled, the leftist psyche breaks down very quickly.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2952418/Neanderthals-interbred-longer-modern-humans-east-Asia-DNA-reveals.htmlDid the Neanderthals in the prehistoric Middle East really have serious cold weather adaptions?
Something else interesting I read is that it looks there was strong overall selection in hybrid populations against functional Neanderthal genes.
Another point against this theory is that cold weather adaptions can happen pretty quickly on their own without an external source of genes. Black Africans themselves have a lot of natural variation in skin color and body hair for example. Maine Coon cats evolved long hair and larger body size in ~300 years. There is also little variation in Neanderthal genes between non-African populations, not the cold-warm gradient you'd expect to see.
http://imgur.com/gallery/gxPvIk4
I'm not saying GC is wrong, just pointing out some potential holes to the theory.Replies: @cynthia, @Autochthon, @ziel, @AP, @anon
Neanderthals were pushed south by the ice age. Even the middle east was very cold during the ice age.
“…he likened the population there to critically endangered species today, like snow leopards or imperiled butterflies…”
Or us Europeans being destroyed by our own evil, suicidal and homicidal numbers even as they accelerate the reproduction of competing Africans.
A piece about the tragedy of an extinct creature that celebrates the final extinction of even that creature’s surviving DNA.
There are no words.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2952418/Neanderthals-interbred-longer-modern-humans-east-Asia-DNA-reveals.htmlDid the Neanderthals in the prehistoric Middle East really have serious cold weather adaptions?
Something else interesting I read is that it looks there was strong overall selection in hybrid populations against functional Neanderthal genes.
Another point against this theory is that cold weather adaptions can happen pretty quickly on their own without an external source of genes. Black Africans themselves have a lot of natural variation in skin color and body hair for example. Maine Coon cats evolved long hair and larger body size in ~300 years. There is also little variation in Neanderthal genes between non-African populations, not the cold-warm gradient you'd expect to see.
http://imgur.com/gallery/gxPvIk4
I'm not saying GC is wrong, just pointing out some potential holes to the theory.Replies: @cynthia, @Autochthon, @ziel, @AP, @anon
It gets cold in the Middle East; winter (albeit mild most places) is a Thing there, as Steve might say.
Not so in tropical regions. There, one can run about naked all year in comfort.
So the adaptations would perhaps begin where winter begins; that onset is truly a difference of type; colder winters further north more a difference of degree.
I’m no geneticist, but isn’t the initial mutation hardest to maintain, but enhancements of it easier to pass on once it has provided the advantage to that first generation…? That would support the big leap being in the lower, milder (but still seasonal!) latitudes, no?
It is my understanding that Brexit is defensive. It is not about the Brits invading another people or telling them what to do. Brits quit that invasion-business long ago. The Age of Empire came tumbling down after WWII. The natives of the Third World told the Brits to GO HOME. The nativist patriots stood for Asian identity, African identity, and Middle Eastern identity. And they told the white man to go home. So, the white man came home. That should have been End of Story. But globalism opened up EU to massive Third World invasion. And Globo-US kept asking the UK to join in globalist ventures like Iraq War, which most Brits opposed.
If nativism resisted and ended imperialism in the Third World by driving out British invasivism, then it only makes sense for European nativists to reject and repel the invasivism of globalism. Defensive race-ism is the noblest thing. It is the will of people to own and rule over their own homeland. UK is just a nation among many nations of the world. It is not the world, and it should NOT try to be a miniature version of the world. Other peoples have their own nations, and they have NO moral claim to UK.
A Pakistani had the right to tell Brits to leave Pakistan/India. But he has NO right to demand that the UK accept him and make him citizen.
Worldwide travel and trade are good, but mass immigration is invasivism, a demographic imperialism. Look what mass immigration did to native Hawaiians. They are minority in their own ancient homeland. They are minorities to both whites and Asians. Hawaiians didn’t ask to be invaded by whites. And they certainly didn’t ask whites to bring in whole bunch of Asians. Now, Hawaiians lost their homeland to not just one race but whole bunch of alien races. Today, EU is turning into globo-hell. Brussels is said to be 1/3 Muslim. In the future, it could easily be 2/3 Muslim.
One could say imperialist racism had to go because it was about Europeans going to other parts of the world, colonizing, and displacing the native population. But defensive race-ism is most justified. After all, it was the force that led to end of European imperialism as each Third World folks struggled to reclaim their own territory. They had every right to do so.
Brits have no right to force its rule over others, but they have every right to preserve their own homeland. And that is what Brexit is about. It is about British ownership and control over their small island nation, no less and no more.
But invasivist-globalists demand that all nations be opened to endless invasions of foreign peoples.
Globalists are radical speciests. Instead of appreciating the various races and their own homelands and cultures, they insist that all humans must dispense with awareness of racial differences and just think in terms of ‘one human species’. But that is like saying polar bears and brown bears must both think only as ‘bears’, not as different kinds of bears. Polar bears and brown bears are like human races in that they can interbreed and create fertile offsprings. But they are different ‘racially’ and developed different traits. So, even though both are bears, they are different races of bears, and this bearacial diversity makes for interesting richness of nature.
Same goes for humans. While all races belong to the same species, racial differences are real in looks, temperament, intelligence, agility, strength, and etc. Jews in general are more renown for certain traits while blacks for others. To tell both groups to dispense with the notion of ‘race’ and just regard themselves as part of human species would be reject the richness of bio-diversity created by evolution.
If by speciesm, one means that all human races are part of the same species, I agree.
But radical speciesm says we must disregard all the differences(by race) created by human evolution in the past 100,000 yrs.
We can have both sane speciesm and sane race-ism. We can accept the fact that all races are part of the same species, but we can also acknowledge the differences that developed along racial lines, esp since ‘out of africa’ 60,000 yrs ago.
As for Neanderthals, it seems they left Africa much earlier. Maybe 100,000 yrs ago or even earlier. Even if they were not as dumb as early anthropologists may have thought, they were clearly different.
But radical speciesm says just emphasize that all humans are part of one species and suppress all facts about racial differences that are so obvious and real.
Just look at crime stats. Why is interracial violence so overwhelmingly black-on-non-black? It is because blacks are more aggressive and impulsive and more muscular. I mean African immigrants from Sudan in Australia are attacking whites, Asians, and even native aborigines. There is a racial reason for this.
Honestly, in my years as an academic getting to know the leftist psyche, it does seem to broil down to this one simple belief. White Western Europeans are uniquely at fault for Bad Things because prior to colonialism, there was no such thing as massive population movement and certainly none of the conflict or assymetrical power relations that such movements entail.
Once that belief is leveled, the leftist psyche breaks down very quickly.Replies: @Desiderius
It’s the last refuge of white supremacism.
The only cure for this is defeat. Utter, repeated defeat. Nemesis has much work to do.
I have maintained for almost 50 years now that the Neanderthals interbred with Cro Magnons, but not for any scientific reason, just because it seemed logical to me.
One problem we have is the issue of time scales. Neanders were around for half a million years. That is a 100 times longer than all of recorded history. And they probably spent thousands of years, if not tens of thousands of years (call it 10x all of recorded history) interacting with something like modern homo sapiens. That’s a long time for races to interact, and spread seed. Not to mention Neander developments as the recent discovery of the age of the Bruniquel Cave at 176 K BPE, which provides further evidence of Neanderthal skills. (If true, quite astonishing.: that’s a hundred thousand years since the first “person” set foot out of Africa.)
I remain of the opinion that the Neanders and Denisovans (and possibly others) helped develop the different groups of humans that we have come to know.
As Lot notes above, clearly the selection was largely for homo sapiens. If we use Africans as a “control” (no Neander or Denisovan or other), then we are bound to conclude a heavy selection towards African homo sapien traits. But not in all areas; just on a gross level there is pale skin for Europeans and neoteny among East Asians.
Neanders had large heads. This may signify high intelligence, but there’s a long standing debate on whether Neanders had speech. But I think that one implication is that such huge skulls would be hard to deliver at birth; which may have helped keep their numbers artificially low, and put them at a deficit with rabbit style homo sapiens breeding habits (compare even toed antelopes and deer to odd toed pachyderms.)
Whether this inbreeding occurred versus prehistoric sexual assault or via some “Alley Oop and Juliet” scenario I do not know, but it’s always interesting to project modern mating game rituals onto the past — “Baby, It’s Cold Outside My Cave”
One thing that does seem clear is that speech must have been a homo sapiens development, since obviously Africans have this.
The idea of portraying Neanders as brutish savages with hunched backs and dragging knuckles was then science, and it’s possible that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. The same could be said for scientific perceptions of dinosaurs, who were throughout my childhood perceived as monochromatic lizards but nowadays are often depicted as essentially gigantic feathered turkeys or else as kaleidoscopically colored lizards who have escaped from the Galapagos. We should be clear about how much variation in interpretation, based on what evidence, we actually have here.
Of course the article is PC nonsense, designed to make us embrace people who are not like us in their multitudes.
Sounds like the scientific worldview to me…..
https://youtu.be/kPPZSJ4vC3U?t=19
If true, that makes her 50% hotter…..
Liz Hurley is now my favorite living Englishwoman:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/elizabeth-hurley-cant-stand-post-brexit-whingers/
In your opinion who are the top 10 most attractive English actresses in Hollywood?Replies: @Autochthon, @syonredux
“Vote tomorrow-whatever your persuasion. I’m for #Brexit & promise to neither gloat nor whinge. But VOTE!”
It's possible that Europeans got some advantageous traits from Neaderthals. But even if cross-mating had never happened, it's also possible Europeans would have developed those traits via evolution.
After all, Neanderthals also originated in Africa, migrated to Europe, and evolved certain new traits. Neanderthals developed those traits on their own, so it's possible that later arrivals would also have developed those traits on their own. The flora, fauna, and climate of the North was very different.
Also, there are many ways to bunch together different races. Based on Neanderthal DNA, we can make a distinction between black Africans and everyone else.
But based on IQ, East Asians and whites seem to have more in common even though East Asians are closer to American Indians and Europeans are closer to Arabs.Replies: @Jack D, @Thirdeye
IQ doesn’t seem to give you much of an advantage in Stone Age type societies. Probably at the time when the races spread between the continents IQs were all pretty similar (and probably low – similar to modern African/Amerindian/Aborigine levels). Later IQ rose rapidly in those places where being smarter created an advantage (and remained the same or maybe even regressed where it didn’t). The Ashkenazi IQ advantage was created in a period of probably less than a thousand years and possibly much less.
It’s like a goddamn Mobius strip…no matter where you start, you wind up at the same place: The Narrative.
The NYT has been saying that Neanderthal genes are in Europeans and Asians but not Africans for quite a while now.
I am sure that they have been trying to figure out how to spin it for just as long.
BTW, I vote for consensual.
Soon: Inspired by a similar essay, physicists will discover that the neutron actually has a charge and that this was only missed because they formerly considered the neutron dull and boring.
Right, and the middle eastern Neanderthals evolved in Pleistocene Europe.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2952418/Neanderthals-interbred-longer-modern-humans-east-Asia-DNA-reveals.htmlDid the Neanderthals in the prehistoric Middle East really have serious cold weather adaptions?
Something else interesting I read is that it looks there was strong overall selection in hybrid populations against functional Neanderthal genes.
Another point against this theory is that cold weather adaptions can happen pretty quickly on their own without an external source of genes. Black Africans themselves have a lot of natural variation in skin color and body hair for example. Maine Coon cats evolved long hair and larger body size in ~300 years. There is also little variation in Neanderthal genes between non-African populations, not the cold-warm gradient you'd expect to see.
http://imgur.com/gallery/gxPvIk4
I'm not saying GC is wrong, just pointing out some potential holes to the theory.Replies: @cynthia, @Autochthon, @ziel, @AP, @anon
A few things to keep in mind – it’s a lot easier to just pick up a trait directly than having to select for it yourself – even better when that trait you’re picking up has itself been selected for over a few hundred thousand years. E.g. Maine Coon cat – the long hair is a nice, quick solution, but no match for, say a double or triple layer of fur that would take a lot longer to evolve.
Also, the Neanderthals we encountered in the Mid East very well could have shared the cold-weather adaptations other Neanderthals. They might have moved down recently due to advancing ice – who knows.
But of course we have no idea what kind of cold-weather trait we might have picked up from the Neanderthals, if we picked up any at all – I’ll grant you that. It could have been a behavior like sewing hides together – who knows?
“New research shows they shared many behaviors that we long believed to be uniquely human. Why did science get them so wrong?”
Ugh… maybe same reason white Prog-Magnon man in NY and SF look down on white working class man as Deplorable sub-human whose only role is to obey and do as told.
Populism bad. Mass dumb. Elitism good. Mandarins & Brahmins know much.
Me Deplorathal.
It is like High Rise Man and Bungalow Man.
https://books.google.com/books?id=WUMjZaxfpwEC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=mike+royko+high+rise+man&source=bl&ots=_E4neKI9n5&sig=mpwGXGXSAF-VOQbYIqkPcKXrTlk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjm3tTe0bvRAhVM6oMKHZnLAX8Q6AEIGjAA#v=onepage&q=mike%20royko%20high%20rise%20man&f=false
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-10-09/news/8503080759_1_condo-man-bike-nike-shoes
Steve, I feel that it’s your duty to post a picture to add to your narrative how deeply weird Jon Mooallem looks, and how his feelings of alienation probably help him to identify with the fringe.
It’s hilarious how unaware he is that he has come full circle in his feelings of superiority over others.
You are to be commended, Steve. I couldn’t even get halfway through the first quote, with all the meandering leftist bullshit.
If the last White on Earth is a leftist, count on him not to speak as sympathetically about Whites, and as harshly about those who live on, as this one does about Neanderthals and modern humans (well, Whites anyway).
I can kind of understand the thinking here: all you knuckle-dragging White racists are descended from Black people.
But it’s really stupid: Whites and Yellows evolved from Blacks; humans evolved from single-celled prokaryotes.
This takes about 1 and a half seconds to explain to people, and they’re like, oh, yeah.
But, say, blacks singing “Ah bin workin on de railroad” in a chain-gang weren’t simple-minded. They were earthy and sanctified.
Perhaps it’s just that I’m The Last Real Calvinist, but I found the the first paragraph of that article to be an especially egregious and gratuitous hit job on a stale pale male. Calvinist theology has some weaknesses, but simple-mindedness is manifestly not one of them. And the sneering ‘Then he caught TB and died at 30’, just to show that Neander’s loser God couldn’t have had much of a plan, is petty and jejune.
Overall, the article is a stew of rotting progressive bromides and half-truths.
Well you see, the guy went to Gibraltar to research Neanderthals, and while there the Brexit vote stirred his feelings to such a powerful, irresistible extent that he felt compelled to weave the story into the narrative. Truly, all the great science writing is not just about science, but also about the emotional author’s hopes, fears, and other feelings about mundane worldly events as they learned about the science.
So that would mean that the there is (at least) a 1-2% difference in “average DNA” between “out of Africa” and “other”. Correct? An ignorant question: how does that compare to interspecies (e.g. primates) differences?
“Me Deplorathal.”
You being a Gay guy who is into Black dudes makes you significantly less deplorable than Donald J. Trump.
“Liz Hurley is now my favorite living Englishwoman:”
In your opinion who are the top 10 most attractive English actresses in Hollywood?
(Then again, she's not properly "in Hollywood.")
Caroline Munro
http://ilarge.lisimg.com/image/5708065/1118full-caroline-munro.jpg
Rachel Ward
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/D1HJBH/gegen-jede-chance-against-all-odds-rachel-ward-james-woods-jessie-D1HJBH.jpg
Vivien Leigh
Veronica Carlson
https://www.google.com/search?q=Veronica+Carlson&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAONgFuLUz9U3MEsvyMtTgjFzs7V4fPPLMlND8h2TS_KLANq4OTYmAAAA&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj55-GsgbzRAhVLj1QKHau9AAoQ_AUICCgB
The divine Jenny Agutter
https://www.google.com/search?q=jenny+agutter+logan%27s+run&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjRw77lgbzRAhXHzlQKHaMEBa0Q_AUICCgB#imgrc=dr2z2JfwAaRSMM%3A
Liz Hurley
Lena Headey
Dana Wynter (only half-English, though)
Jacqueline Bisset
Natascha McElhone (half-Irish)
https://www.google.com/search?q=natascha+mcelhone&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiT56bug7zRAhXLrVQKHfTgD9QQ_AUIBigBReplies: @Stebbing Heuer
http://imgur.com/a/SVK6VReplies: @tamako, @415 reasons
I have to ask, how did Han Chinese (and Mongols and other Central Asians) get so far from the Melanesians? It would be entirely possible that it was just a matter of geography, though.
So, “French” is white; “African” is sub-Saharan African; “Melanesian” is brown people from South/South-East Asia and more or less native Americans; “Han Chinese” is Chinese?
Crude racism may have depicted Neanderthals as ugh-ish primitives. But rational race-ism can appreciate their intelligence and abilities while still theorizing that they were deficient in other areas.
It's like comparing Jews and blacks. Yes, both have all the basic human abilities and traits. But they have more of certain abilities than the other group does, and these differences make for huge difference in school, business, science, sports, crime, and etc. I mean there are more people like Einstein among Jews and more people like Michael Jordan and Usain Bolt among blacks. Yes, there are fast Jews, and there are smart blacks. But there are general group differences.
The writer seems to think race-ism, the noticing of racial differences, is just a crude and bigoted practice of valuing some races as the BEST while denigrating other races as total retards.
But in fact, race-ism, when properly applied, notices that different human groups evolved under different conditions and developed different traits that made them superior in some ways and inferior in some ways. It's like dogs. Greyhounds are superior at running, bloodhounds are superior at tracking.
But so much of Proggism is about virtue-signaling. They cannot consider any topic without turning it into some self-righteous exercise of how they are sooooo good and morally superior to the DEPLORABLE NEO-NEANDERTHAL patriots who want to preserve their own land, heritage, and identity.
UGH. ME WANT TO PRESERVE HOMELAND. UGH, THAT REALLY DUMB AND UGLY. UGH, ME WANT TO PRESERVE LINE OF MY PEOPLE. UGH, THAT SO RETARDED BUT ME DEPLORABLE. UGH, ME WANT TO SAVE MY CULTURE FROM HORDES OF FOREIGNERS. UGH, ME NO HAVE SOPHISTICATE LIKE GLOBO-COSMO ELITES. ME STUPID. ME SUBHUMAN. ME BLOODY DEPLORABLE. MUST GET WITH SOROS PROGRAM. OTHERWISE, ME JUST LOWLIFE SUBHUMAN NEO-NEANDERTHAL MORON..
By the way, if the writers really appreciates Neanderthals, he should support Neaderxit. It was the inability of the Neans to stop the Out-of-Afrikaners that led to the extinction of Neanderthal culture.Replies: @utu
“By the way, if the writers really appreciates Neanderthals, he should support Neaderxit. It was the inability of the Neans to stop the Out-of-Afrikaners that led to the extinction of Neanderthal culture.”
Thought the same think.
I had to stop reading when I saw the word “mansplain”.
The word arsehole springs to mind.
The others, of course, are Why did I spend my time reading this trash? And, how quickly can we give Gibraltar to Spain
So, "French" is white; "African" is sub-Saharan African; "Melanesian" is brown people from South/South-East Asia and more or less native Americans; "Han Chinese" is Chinese?Replies: @Chrisnonymous
I think Melanesian is Melanesian. Han Chinese is East Asian. Maybe they have no representative for South Asians.
Overall, the article is a stew of rotting progressive bromides and half-truths.Replies: @Chrisnonymous
To be fair, he’s talking about the hymns, not Calvinist theology.
They are a little simple-minded.
The author could have just called it "simple." Which also means retarded in some contexts, but less so.Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
His face looks Daliesque. Like a smirking Camembert melting in the sun.
Well…don’t forget the Denisovians. Certain groups (the people of Papua New Guinea) are, in addition to 2% Neanderthal like all other non-sub-Saharans, also 4-6% Denisovian.
Here they are:
He presumably suffered an accident at some point in his life.
Somewhere out there, Elias Koteas chews on a toothpick.
I now like Elizabeth Hurley more too. She seems awfully articulate. I wonder only if her reference to “round heads,” is an indirect reference to the Protestant side of the English Civil War. They were generally known that way because of the helmets that they wore. The Royalist side was generally known as the Cavaliers, still the mascot of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. In context, it doesn’t seem that way since she equates round head with elitist, which wasn’t how they were thought of in the 1640s.
Does prog-logic make any sense?
If white progs really love diversity and the prospect of whites becoming minorities, what are they waiting for?
They can have it right away by moving to Latin America, Middle East, Asia, or Africa.
They don’t have to wait for the West to darken. Most of the world is already dark or of another color.
So, if they think a majority non-white society is wonderful and ideal, they should leave right away and live in Kenya, Burma, or Bolivia. No one is stopping them. Why don’t they leave?
But then, they will say, “well, those non-white nations are pretty backward and dangerous.” So, they wanna stay in the West. They want diversity but under rule of law and ‘western values’. And since only the West has real rule of law, it’s preferable to have diversity in the West. So, have non-whites come to the West and adopt rule of law than have whites go to non-white nations with no or weak rule of law.
But what does that imply? It means that whites are able to maintain rule-of-law societies whereas non-whites aren’t. So, even though non-whites will participate in the rule of law of white societies, there is a good chance that too many of them will turn white societies into barbarous or savage places where rule of law falls apart(not least because the virtue-signaling proggy elites educate white natives to feel at a moral disadvantage while encouraging anti-white self-righteous rage among the non-whites). Maybe there is a genetic reason why non-whites societies are less adept at rule of law. More aggression, less intelligence, and other problems due to genetic factors. So, if more non-whites arrive in the West, the result is less likely to be diversity under rule of law than the fraying of rule of law by diversity.
The fact that non-whites must come to white nations for a better life means that white people run things better than non-whites do. So, naturally, more non-whites in white nations means that things will get worse as the population darkens.
Don’t progs fail to see that it’s a losing proposition either way?
The only real difference between whites going to non-white nations and non-whites coming to white nations is that the former will lead to immediate white immersion in degradation, whereas the latter will result in the gradual degradation of the European homeland.
In their bizarro world the non-white world is effed up because of white people (colonialism, etc.) and they must set the white man's world to rights before the rest of the world can return to its Edenic pre-white-man existence.
Kind of like ridding the world of original sin and just as probable.Replies: @guest
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2952418/Neanderthals-interbred-longer-modern-humans-east-Asia-DNA-reveals.htmlDid the Neanderthals in the prehistoric Middle East really have serious cold weather adaptions?
Something else interesting I read is that it looks there was strong overall selection in hybrid populations against functional Neanderthal genes.
Another point against this theory is that cold weather adaptions can happen pretty quickly on their own without an external source of genes. Black Africans themselves have a lot of natural variation in skin color and body hair for example. Maine Coon cats evolved long hair and larger body size in ~300 years. There is also little variation in Neanderthal genes between non-African populations, not the cold-warm gradient you'd expect to see.
http://imgur.com/gallery/gxPvIk4
I'm not saying GC is wrong, just pointing out some potential holes to the theory.Replies: @cynthia, @Autochthon, @ziel, @AP, @anon
Of modern humans alive today, yes.
I recall reading somewhere that the original modern humans of Europe were about 8% Neanderthal, being the product of significant mixture in Europe. These people were not, however, ancestors of modern Europeans. They were conquered and wiped out by the ancestors of modern Europeans whose ancestors had only mixed with Neanderthals soon after leaving Africa and who had much less Neanderthal descent.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33226416
Translation: “Wow, just wow, I’m really butt-hurt! I can’t even!”
Hell, the middle east is cold now! A couple of SAS troopers (the Bravo 20 guys) died of hypothermia/exposure while SCUD hunting in 91 during Desert Storm.
Could be. If not, your assessment sounds even harsher than mine.
Somewhere out there, Elias Koteas chews on a toothpick.
In the SF Chronicle article about him, he says his jaw just “grew off center.”
This is wrong. Human DNA and Neanderthal DNA are nearly identical. So even Euros have 2% of their DNA that we can infer came from Neanderthals, and Africans have none of that, most of that 2% of the human genome is still nearly identical between Africans and Europeans. That is why Africans and Europeans can still be 99.9% genetically identical (because Neanderthal DNA and African human DNA are themselves >99% identical).
http://imgur.com/a/SVK6VReplies: @tamako, @415 reasons
Still not quite complete though. The San Bushman/rest of Africa split seems to be older than anything depicted on that timeline
Besides the crazy leftie ranting, the Neanderthal discussion is decent. I was happy to see Hawks and Zilhao interviewed.
It’s worth noting that the moderns who replaced Neanderthals were quite a different breed than other moderns, who by then had been around for over 100,000 years. There was a cognitive revolution some time after 70,000 years ago, and it’s not clear where this occurred. Maybe North Africa, maybe the Arabian Penninsula, or maybe Eastern Europe.
For example, there were anatomically modern humans living in the Levant 100,000 years ago, who were behaving no differently than Neanderthals, showing none of the technological sophistication or elaborate artwork of the ‘new breed’ moderns. In fact, they were replaced by Neanderthals at 60,000 years ago. Early Upper Paleolithic human remains are rare in the Levant, but new evidence suggests that moderns moved back and replaced the Neanderthals around 50,000 years ago. Did Neanderthals here mix with the old or new moderns?
The timing and location of the cognitive revolution are important. E.g, were the ancestors of Australian Aboriginies, who crossed the Wallace Straight 50,000 years ago, part of the old or new stock? And how far and extensively did those new genes spread after they arose? Was enhanced cognition even advantageous everywhere?
I don’t know about No Such Thing As Race, but that article and author photograph kill stone dead the theory that there is No Such Thing As A Gay Face.
There is an easily-testable hypothesis implicit in the NYT article: why does 23andme or other DNA testing or post-processing site not do a survey of political preferences, and calculate the correlation between Neanderthal content and votes for Trump? And, there must be other developments of this easy DNA knowledge that are currently unfolding. How long will it be before high-Neanderthal dating clubs spring up? And high-Neanderthal heraldic societies? Speaking as a genealogical hobbyist, I was greatly disappointed when the web link I discovered connecting me to Adam (through the ancient kings of Munster) went dead before I could explore it. Mark Twain certainly was proud to claim descent from the highest ranking member of human nobility, as would be I. Now, armed with my 23andme results (putting me on the 94th percentile of Neanderthal content), I can explain and justify my annoying air of condescension, based as it is on membership in the Earth’s true Ancient Aristocracy. It easily outweighs the inconvenience of finding pants cut in proper proportion and hats of large enough size. I have to give the cannibalism thing a pass, though.
Whoah! What the Hell is up with his rubbery jaw?!
Not real bright here, so bear with me. Could the fact that sub-saharans (aka blacks) DO NOT SHARE Neandrathal traces (genomes? DNA? little squiggily things, whatever) be significant in that generally they do not share the burdens of high IQ? In other words, is it possible to argue that the Neandrathal “stuff” was magic ingrediant X that caused the certain folks to invent civilation and separate shoes for each foot and others. lacking it, not to get much further than mud huts (and no shoes)? Can someone smart ‘splain it up to me? Thanks in advance, OtheP
Supposedly, there is a brain growth allele picked up from Neanderthals circa 36,000 years ago that boosted the brain size of The Human Group Formerly Known As Cro-Magnon, who had crania of around 1500 cc, some 200 cc larger than we "modern" humans. "Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage," by Patrick D. Evans, Nitzan Mekel-Bobrov, Eric J. Vallender, Richard R. Hudson, and Bruce T. Lahn; University of Chicago, edited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, and approved October 5, 2006 (received for review August 10, 2006). Seldom if ever see mention of this outside "white nationalist" sites; the researchers supposedly stopped pursuing it because it was "too controversial."Replies: @Bill B.
In your opinion who are the top 10 most attractive English actresses in Hollywood?Replies: @Autochthon, @syonredux
I realise you’re not asking me, but may I suggest to syonredux Anna Popplewell for all ten slots?
(Then again, she’s not properly “in Hollywood.”)
Steve, I think you would love this (very) short story published in Nature back in 2008, inspired (presumably) by GC’s hypothesis, as it was 2 years before Paabo published the Neanderthal genome:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7194/full/453562a.html
I’m curious. Is there any archaeological evidence that Neanderthal individuals demanded to be addressed as ‘they’?
That would be smoking gun proof that they were more advanced than we sapiens could ever be.
I wouldn’t say pure gibberish. The first sentence and a half makes sense, and part of the rest is decipherable. He’s offended on behalf of Neanderthals, who according to Science are undeservedly the butt of jokes. Liz Hurley’s use of “Neanderthal” is out of date, though it’s perfectly in line with common usage. That gives him umbrage and makes him smug.
The next part is exceptionally poorly written, but the gist is he’s being elitist and condescending, just like Hurley said he would be. That keeps them divided.
The last sentence is nonsense.
Your gay-dar is malfunctioning. Too much to drink tonight?
His wife’s name is Wandee and they have a daughter Rose.
Would you care to guess his ethnicity?
It threw me, too, but she’s right even if she doesn’t know it. Roundheads were boring and middle-class, but their side won. The old aristocracy is irrelevant. The ruling elite of England nowadays ain’t Cavaliers.
The intellectual descendants of the Puritans all but rule the world. (Not Russia, China, the Middle-East, Japan, and so forth, but give them time. They’ve got plans. [They will have to share with the Jews, though.])
This guy wasn't in the poorhouse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hampden . And the struggle among the people actually broke down somewhat like Brexit: London and the urbanites more for the Parliament and the lower classes mostly for the King. Exceptions and degrees, of course, but actually strikingly similar.
Even more similar, of course, if you accept the Chesterbellocqian school of history.
Call a doctor! It’s been more than four hours!
@ Otto the P
Supposedly, there is a brain growth allele picked up from Neanderthals circa 36,000 years ago that boosted the brain size of The Human Group Formerly Known As Cro-Magnon, who had crania of around 1500 cc, some 200 cc larger than we “modern” humans. “Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage,” by Patrick D. Evans, Nitzan Mekel-Bobrov, Eric J. Vallender, Richard R. Hudson, and Bruce T. Lahn; University of Chicago, edited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, and approved October 5, 2006 (received for review August 10, 2006). Seldom if ever see mention of this outside “white nationalist” sites; the researchers supposedly stopped pursuing it because it was “too controversial.”
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/jan/10/u2-delay-new-album-donald-trump-election
Notice how shallow is his insight, as well. People will believe false things if they make them feel good. Feeling superior makes you feel good, therefore superiority is false? I may be overcomplicating the argument.
Starting over: people believe things that aren’t so, and use those beliefs to feel superior. And–get this–he’s a people. Psychological breakthrough!
As well they should be. People are simple. This is why internet memes have won more power for the right than a dozen Bill Buckleys.
Along with WD Hamilton, these power-athletes also look unusually robust:
http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/heavyweight-champion-nikolai-valuev-of-russia-lands-a-left-before-picture-id92884888
Late Pleistocene mating behavior:
I lately heard a catchphrase to go along with Race Is Real: Physiology Is Real.
Physiognomy: the art of judging character from facial characteristics.Replies: @guest
In your opinion who are the top 10 most attractive English actresses in Hollywood?Replies: @Autochthon, @syonredux
If we are talking all time (in no particular order):
Caroline Munro
Rachel Ward
Vivien Leigh
Veronica Carlson
https://www.google.com/search?q=Veronica+Carlson&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAONgFuLUz9U3MEsvyMtTgjFzs7V4fPPLMlND8h2TS_KLANq4OTYmAAAA&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj55-GsgbzRAhVLj1QKHau9AAoQ_AUICCgB
The divine Jenny Agutter
https://www.google.com/search?q=jenny+agutter+logan%27s+run&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjRw77lgbzRAhXHzlQKHaMEBa0Q_AUICCgB#imgrc=dr2z2JfwAaRSMM%3A
Liz Hurley
Lena Headey
Dana Wynter (only half-English, though)
Jacqueline Bisset
Natascha McElhone (half-Irish)
https://www.google.com/search?q=natascha+mcelhone&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiT56bug7zRAhXLrVQKHfTgD9QQ_AUIBigB
And then some.
So were Ramones lyrics. The power is in the singing.
We shook Princeton Chapel with that one.
http://religiouslife.princeton.edu/chapel/chapel
Simple-minded, by the way, is a euphemism for retarded (or mentally challenged, if you insist). That may be the Last Real Calvinist’s hang-up.
The author could have just called it “simple.” Which also means retarded in some contexts, but less so.
Neanderthals weren’t all that. Hopefully more SJW gushing like this about how great they were will shake some people out of their Neandermania.
The author could have just called it "simple." Which also means retarded in some contexts, but less so.Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
Yes: simple ≠ simple-minded.
The cinder-block-simple foundation of Calvinist theology (and hence Neander’s hymnody) is that God is omnipotent and truly sovereign. Few other Christian theologies take the latter quite so seriously; they can get mired in anthropocentic swamps, while the Calvinist steps back and says, well, God’s in charge, and there’s ultimately jack all I can do about it, but He loves me and grants me the free gift of His grace, so what is there for me to do but accept that gift, and praise God in all that He requires of me?
Hence the straightforward — and joyful — simplicity of Neander’s ‘Praise to the Lord, the Almighty’.
“Or it might have been the hulking Europeans raping the more gracile Africans”
It seems very unlikely this would have left descendants in modern populations though – it would have required African (Cro-Magnon) women to have been raped by the losing Neanderthals, and their half-Neanderthal children then brought up by the victorious Cro-Magnons. Something that is just about possible on a very rare occasion, perhaps.
Looking at how modern humans actually behave, it seems much more likely that Cro Magnon men at the advance of the colonisation wave generally took Neanderthal wives, one way or another, and so had a stake in the survival of their women’s half-breed offspring.
I also thought of Europeans in the Americas with their Indian wives. The Europeans had a stake in the survival of their children, and the tribe was okay with it as long as they were provided with trinkets/guns/blankets and spared from destruction. Jack London wrote about these relationships at a time when they still existed up in Canada and Alaska (I have no reason to doubt him) and suggests that both sides could be okay with it. He also wrote explicitly about the mindset of the natives feeling like their women were being stolen and about the pain of realizing your race was disappearing, with the women being willing to leave with the invaders. He was an Anglo-Saxon fan though.
Maybe my view is colored by my 3+% Neadertal DNA, and I prefer to think of a love story. Maybe we could get a minority identity movement going.
Here they are:
http://i.imgur.com/vsk0i.jpgReplies: @anon
Cool hair. Especially the guy on the right.
Just a quibble, but even though “the larger your number, the more likely you are to benefit from a favorable genetic mutation,” the larger your number the more slowly that mutation will sweep the population, or even a substantial fraction.
The role of Jon Mooallem at the New York Times science section is like that of the propagandists at Pravda and Red Army News who were allowed to travel abroad and/or read foreign press and report on it to the masses. Since these were the reporters most likely to realize that the propaganda the publications were espousing was entirely bogus, only the most obviously and fanatically devout communists would be selected for this role. After Nicholas Wade (the former NYTimes science editor now retired) let the cat out of the bag that Human Biodiversity is real and obvious, the powers at NYT became militant about suppressing any more public airing of the evidence. So they have chosen a reporter who is a fanatically committed leftist, someone who loves the Narrative more than he loves life itself. He would rather die than admit that the evidence supports race realism. He is the perfect choice to provide an “objective” filter for NY Times readers regarding the growing scientific evidence on human evolution, human genetic differences, and related topics.
The Polish national communist press employed a really cool guy as a foreign correspondent in the 1970s-80s. What was his name? Witold Something?
He’d go to third world countries that the Soviets were promoting and report back that they sucked, but in such a polished style that nobody could quite convict him of heresy.
Ryszard Kapuściński?Replies: @Lord of Wombats
It seems very unlikely this would have left descendants in modern populations though - it would have required African (Cro-Magnon) women to have been raped by the losing Neanderthals, and their half-Neanderthal children then brought up by the victorious Cro-Magnons. Something that is just about possible on a very rare occasion, perhaps.
Looking at how modern humans actually behave, it seems much more likely that Cro Magnon men at the advance of the colonisation wave generally took Neanderthal wives, one way or another, and so had a stake in the survival of their women's half-breed offspring.Replies: @william munny
You beat me to it. I could not imagine that enough of the conquerors would willingly raise half-breeds resulting from rape to turn up in our genes today. Of course, their concept of rape might be different. I have not yet seen any written and signed “consent to sexual activity” forms, so I guess all of it was rape.
I also thought of Europeans in the Americas with their Indian wives. The Europeans had a stake in the survival of their children, and the tribe was okay with it as long as they were provided with trinkets/guns/blankets and spared from destruction. Jack London wrote about these relationships at a time when they still existed up in Canada and Alaska (I have no reason to doubt him) and suggests that both sides could be okay with it. He also wrote explicitly about the mindset of the natives feeling like their women were being stolen and about the pain of realizing your race was disappearing, with the women being willing to leave with the invaders. He was an Anglo-Saxon fan though.
Maybe my view is colored by my 3+% Neadertal DNA, and I prefer to think of a love story. Maybe we could get a minority identity movement going.
Caroline Munro
http://ilarge.lisimg.com/image/5708065/1118full-caroline-munro.jpg
Rachel Ward
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/D1HJBH/gegen-jede-chance-against-all-odds-rachel-ward-james-woods-jessie-D1HJBH.jpg
Vivien Leigh
Veronica Carlson
https://www.google.com/search?q=Veronica+Carlson&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAONgFuLUz9U3MEsvyMtTgjFzs7V4fPPLMlND8h2TS_KLANq4OTYmAAAA&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj55-GsgbzRAhVLj1QKHau9AAoQ_AUICCgB
The divine Jenny Agutter
https://www.google.com/search?q=jenny+agutter+logan%27s+run&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjRw77lgbzRAhXHzlQKHaMEBa0Q_AUICCgB#imgrc=dr2z2JfwAaRSMM%3A
Liz Hurley
Lena Headey
Dana Wynter (only half-English, though)
Jacqueline Bisset
Natascha McElhone (half-Irish)
https://www.google.com/search?q=natascha+mcelhone&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiT56bug7zRAhXLrVQKHfTgD9QQ_AUIBigBReplies: @Stebbing Heuer
Natascha McElhone for all ten spots, please.
And then some.
Both sides in the Civil War were elite, at least at the top where it counted.
This guy wasn’t in the poorhouse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hampden . And the struggle among the people actually broke down somewhat like Brexit: London and the urbanites more for the Parliament and the lower classes mostly for the King. Exceptions and degrees, of course, but actually strikingly similar.
Even more similar, of course, if you accept the Chesterbellocqian school of history.
“Jon Mooallem is a writer at large for the magazine.” He’s an ugly bugger, and accordingly feels a keen kinship for the Neanderthals.
It’s really remarkable that an obvious Liberal is using one of the last vestiges of British Imperialism–the Gibraltar Colony–to argue against British Nationalism. Oh, irony of ironies!
Likewise, I remember how, before the Brexit vote, the Remainers would constantly taunt the Leavers for being ‘Little Englanders’, seemingly unaware that the original Little Englanders were those who opposed British Imperialism in the 18th and 19th centuries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Englander#History
What I take away from this is that the NWO is just Liberal Imperialism.
“That is why Africans and Europeans can still be 99.9% genetically identical”: but they are not. You need to update your “99.9%”.
It would be wonderful if some HBD-aware people could infiltrate the NYTimes reporter pool (probably there are some hidden there already, keeping their heads down) and write knowingly HBD-laden articles hidden behind the usual orthodox Narrative cliches. The editors and PC police would probably not notice, if it were done cleverly enough.
Melanesian?
If you were somehow serious after all these years of living near new york city you have to be crazy, man.
You can be confident that ’roundheads’ is an allusion to the Civil War. I suspect her meaning is ‘control freaks’, more especially ‘constipated control freaks’ or even ‘joy-hating, destructive, constipated control freaks’. It’s not always the winners who write history.
The Narrative
the media start with the desired conclusion and work backwards
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2952418/Neanderthals-interbred-longer-modern-humans-east-Asia-DNA-reveals.htmlDid the Neanderthals in the prehistoric Middle East really have serious cold weather adaptions?
Something else interesting I read is that it looks there was strong overall selection in hybrid populations against functional Neanderthal genes.
Another point against this theory is that cold weather adaptions can happen pretty quickly on their own without an external source of genes. Black Africans themselves have a lot of natural variation in skin color and body hair for example. Maine Coon cats evolved long hair and larger body size in ~300 years. There is also little variation in Neanderthal genes between non-African populations, not the cold-warm gradient you'd expect to see.
http://imgur.com/gallery/gxPvIk4
I'm not saying GC is wrong, just pointing out some potential holes to the theory.Replies: @cynthia, @Autochthon, @ziel, @AP, @anon
that’s been modified – traces of amh-neanderthal mixture in the Altai mountains from 100,000 years ago
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/feb/17/oldest-known-case-of-neanderthal-human-sex-revealed-by-dna-test
i imagine the eventual full story will be pretty complicated
He’s saying “Brexit voters are evil white racists yah boo sucks” but disguising it with a completely invented guilt by association with other evil white racists from the past.
I think you mean “Physiognomy Is Real.”
Physiognomy: the art of judging character from facial characteristics.
I am sure that they have been trying to figure out how to spin it for just as long.
BTW, I vote for consensual.
https://youtu.be/UFBIf-agNtkReplies: @Buffalo Joe
Wren, “He don’t write, he don’t call.”
Witold Rybczynski.
This guy? He seems to have written mostly about architecture than politics according to Wiki.
I found it interesting that in Neal Stephenson’s book Seveneves, one of the Eves has her offspring, and thus her descendants, genetically engineered with Neanderthal “super-strength”.
Or Werner Herzog’s worldview, as expressed in a favorite voiceover:
Supposedly, there is a brain growth allele picked up from Neanderthals circa 36,000 years ago that boosted the brain size of The Human Group Formerly Known As Cro-Magnon, who had crania of around 1500 cc, some 200 cc larger than we "modern" humans. "Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage," by Patrick D. Evans, Nitzan Mekel-Bobrov, Eric J. Vallender, Richard R. Hudson, and Bruce T. Lahn; University of Chicago, edited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, and approved October 5, 2006 (received for review August 10, 2006). Seldom if ever see mention of this outside "white nationalist" sites; the researchers supposedly stopped pursuing it because it was "too controversial."Replies: @Bill B.
There is evidence coming in of another, even bigger, surge in brain growth allele recently in Ireland which has produced tremendous advances in wisdom and perspicacity. It is not even clear if the identified subjects can usefully be described as merely human any more…
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/jan/10/u2-delay-new-album-donald-trump-election
I’ve noticed on social media that “woke” blacks make fun of Whites for being ‘descended’ from Neanderthals. Back when they wuz kangz, we wuz just cave men.
Perhaps the story posted by O'Really here:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7194/full/453562a.html
should be considered by Whites as a line of argument.
I am just wondering whether research on what Neanderthal DNA is responsible for is going to be underfunded if the results would undermine the official narrative.
Physiognomy: the art of judging character from facial characteristics.Replies: @guest
Yes, that is what I meant.
Extreme dolichocephaly is a feature of Neanderthals. It’s fitting Hurley would have issued the contrasting insult “round-headed”.
Why is the stuff that is not inferred to have come from Neanderthals presumed to have come from “modern humans” rather than Neanderthals?
Imagine that you have a book that gets copied by hand over and over, and therefore it accumulates typos in the long words. Then imagine that there are some very divergent versions of this book floating around (analogous to different species). You could infer if 2 or 3 pages in a row came from a different version of the book than the bulk of the rest of it because the words that would have typos would be different. Yet you could still tell which version of the book this one was descended from because 99% of the typos would match one version.
Nothing.
But NYT is fighting to preserve the leftist narrative.
Any weapon at all may be used (all’s fair in love and war). This is definitely a kind of civil war.
“The Polish national communist press employed a really cool guy as a foreign correspondent in the 1970s-80s. ”
Ryszard Kapuściński?
I read nearly all of his books. Very good story-teller. But there's been controversy about his reporting. It seems he made up a whole bunch of stuff. But no one did it better.
“Who was Neanderthal Man? King felt obligated to describe him. But with no established techniques for interpreting archaeological material like the skull, he fell back on racism and phrenology. ”
So racism and phrenology were settled science back in the day?
It’s probably an editor saying, “I love this Neanderthal draft, but let’s work in a peg to something in the news, so that it’ll seem of the moment.” Then the writer says okay and does his best.
The only reason Darwin is "accepted science" is because its the only scientific theory that obviously disagrees with the Bible Creation Story. The fact that almost all Darwinists are Atheists should show the obvious prejudice here. Whenever I hear "accepted science", its never science. Real scientists never accept anything. Skepticism is the basis for science. This whole scam is a preconceived crackpot idea from a beekeeper's book. They have been trying to "prove" it for decades. Science is supposed to have evidence BEFORE a hypothesis is made.Replies: @rob
Are you really a doctor? Also, if Darwin don’t do it for you, may I suggest reading Wallace?
A lot of people have assumed that the special appearance of Europeans was explicable by such adaptations. But Inuit don’t look like Europeans, and Neanderthals didn’t look like any modern human. So it seems the Boule Hurley, theorem is correct.
What Neanderthals really looked like
I was wondering what this Neanderthal business would mean for We Wuz Kangz, because Out of Africa is very dear to them. And even if they all but wiped out the stupid, European subhuman, they didn’t get them all. Some Kangz had babies with those cavemen. Eww.
John, you have to be joking. He’s very obviously jewish, and when I looked it up indeed his dad was Iraqi jewish, not ashkenazi but nonetheless my instinct was right. I myself am very proud of my jewish ancestry
If you were somehow serious after all these years of living near new york city you have to be crazy, man.
Inuit and other Eskimos arrived at their current location practically last week, in evolutionary terms. Might as well cite the Boers, for not looking typically African.
Charles Darwin looked like Terry Bradshaw.
For the same reasons it’s not assumed to come from Chimpanzees… it has a different nucleotide sequence and it’s the most parsimonious explanation.
Imagine that you have a book that gets copied by hand over and over, and therefore it accumulates typos in the long words. Then imagine that there are some very divergent versions of this book floating around (analogous to different species). You could infer if 2 or 3 pages in a row came from a different version of the book than the bulk of the rest of it because the words that would have typos would be different. Yet you could still tell which version of the book this one was descended from because 99% of the typos would match one version.
The shrieks of ” ‘snot fair!” are music to the ears.
https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/paris-jacksons-fury-over-joseph-fiennes-playing-her-dad-michael-091111699.html
The most aristocratically English-sounding man on the planet apart from Jeremy Irons gets to impersonate/culturally-appropriate a fat black American kid impersonating a thin white woman, or something.
Hey, c’mon, race is a social construct, right? Quit yer whining.
[ed.] frankly, he looks like Marwood (Withnail and I]; or Eric Idle.
I had a conversation with somewhat educated Black man who threw at me this argument that Whites are part Neanderthals and Neanderthals were really primitive and disgusting…
Perhaps the story posted by O’Really here:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7194/full/453562a.html
should be considered by Whites as a line of argument.
I am just wondering whether research on what Neanderthal DNA is responsible for is going to be underfunded if the results would undermine the official narrative.
So what is the status of “race is a social construct” given that European, Asian and Africans represent populations with distinct gene pools based on admixtures with other hominoids?
It is hard to argue that the genes that were retained in the gene pool weren’t adaptive, as evolution is sure to make it so.
Isn’t it obvious that this evidence supports the basic HBD hypothesis? How do you demagogue it away, people aren’t as stupid as the MSM thinks they are.
Rushton’s Cold Weather Theory for the evolution of homo sapiens into different races is now in the dustbin. And people believed it for thirty years
Sounds about right. The neanderthal DNA sure did the drop-dead gorgeous, brilliant scientist Australian aborigines good.
Twaddle is apparently in great demand in some circles. It is the sophisticated version of sticking one’s fingers in one’s ears and saying, “NaNaNaNaNaNa, I can’t hear you” to the world.
Nice straw man there. Nobody believes this. It is true that the mainstream left, along with the mainstream right, believes some unsound nonsense about race. But what most leftists believe about race is not that the white race is a bunch of devils, it’s that “we’re all the same”, “race is a social construct”, etc.
That view leads us on the left to pretend that South Africa or Afghanistan is just as able to construct and run a socialist democracy as Switzerland or Denmark (considering only the historical populations of those countries). That’s pretty obviously wrong. But so is the view that Pakistan is just as capable of running a lassiez-faire capitalist economy as the USA.
Ryszard Kapuściński?Replies: @Lord of Wombats
“Ryszard Kapuściński”
I read nearly all of his books. Very good story-teller. But there’s been controversy about his reporting. It seems he made up a whole bunch of stuff. But no one did it better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witold_Rybczynski
This guy? He seems to have written mostly about architecture than politics according to Wiki.
This Jon Mooallem article is a classic of its type: florid verbiage designed to twist scientific evidence to make it fit the Narrative. We should run an annual award contest.
Announcing The Steve Sailer’s Evil Twin Award. This award is in recognition of Steve Sailer’s devoted work to reveal the growing body of evidence of human biodiversity, and the mainstream media’s massive effort to hide that evidence. The award is given annually to the journalist or science writer who provides the most ridiculous, but politically correct, explanation for evidence in support of human biodiversity.
Competition for the award is likely to be a hard fought contest in its first year, 2017. The first nominee is JON MOOALLEM. He reports on new scientific evidence that a population explosion in Africa and a migration out of Africa led to extinction of ethnic Europeans and their culture (Neandarthals). He uses politically correct twists of logic and non sequiturs to reach the conclusion that this shows why Europeans should welcome and encourage a new migration out of Africa.
Will Jon Mooallem win the award this year as Steve Sailer’s evil twin, or will an even stronger candidate emerge in coming months?
If white progs really love diversity and the prospect of whites becoming minorities, what are they waiting for?
They can have it right away by moving to Latin America, Middle East, Asia, or Africa.
They don't have to wait for the West to darken. Most of the world is already dark or of another color.
So, if they think a majority non-white society is wonderful and ideal, they should leave right away and live in Kenya, Burma, or Bolivia. No one is stopping them. Why don't they leave?
But then, they will say, "well, those non-white nations are pretty backward and dangerous." So, they wanna stay in the West. They want diversity but under rule of law and 'western values'. And since only the West has real rule of law, it's preferable to have diversity in the West. So, have non-whites come to the West and adopt rule of law than have whites go to non-white nations with no or weak rule of law.
But what does that imply? It means that whites are able to maintain rule-of-law societies whereas non-whites aren't. So, even though non-whites will participate in the rule of law of white societies, there is a good chance that too many of them will turn white societies into barbarous or savage places where rule of law falls apart(not least because the virtue-signaling proggy elites educate white natives to feel at a moral disadvantage while encouraging anti-white self-righteous rage among the non-whites). Maybe there is a genetic reason why non-whites societies are less adept at rule of law. More aggression, less intelligence, and other problems due to genetic factors. So, if more non-whites arrive in the West, the result is less likely to be diversity under rule of law than the fraying of rule of law by diversity.
The fact that non-whites must come to white nations for a better life means that white people run things better than non-whites do. So, naturally, more non-whites in white nations means that things will get worse as the population darkens.
Don't progs fail to see that it's a losing proposition either way?
The only real difference between whites going to non-white nations and non-whites coming to white nations is that the former will lead to immediate white immersion in degradation, whereas the latter will result in the gradual degradation of the European homeland.Replies: @another fred
You missed a step.
In their bizarro world the non-white world is effed up because of white people (colonialism, etc.) and they must set the white man’s world to rights before the rest of the world can return to its Edenic pre-white-man existence.
Kind of like ridding the world of original sin and just as probable.
Jon Mooallem is a writer at large for the magazine. He is also a contributor to “This American Life”
—–
They mean “this jewish life” ?
At some pointI just couldn’t listen to that show anymore. Too many stories from micah about hannah’s bubby telling stories in yiddish about growing up in kichinev.
After many years of hiatus,I listened to it for an hour the other day and they managed to cram in a story about a guy who came out as gay to his mom and then she came out as gay to him. “This american life” ? No thanks.
Not sure that is the only way to look at it.
How about paleo-Africans vs everyone else?
It's possible that Europeans got some advantageous traits from Neaderthals. But even if cross-mating had never happened, it's also possible Europeans would have developed those traits via evolution.
After all, Neanderthals also originated in Africa, migrated to Europe, and evolved certain new traits. Neanderthals developed those traits on their own, so it's possible that later arrivals would also have developed those traits on their own. The flora, fauna, and climate of the North was very different.
Also, there are many ways to bunch together different races. Based on Neanderthal DNA, we can make a distinction between black Africans and everyone else.
But based on IQ, East Asians and whites seem to have more in common even though East Asians are closer to American Indians and Europeans are closer to Arabs.Replies: @Jack D, @Thirdeye
Might as well include the Nigerian Igbos in the white – east Asian “race”if IQ is the criterion.
Mongoloid east Asians are not closer to American Indians. Don’t let the straight black hair and the epicanthic fold fool ya.
One problem we have is the issue of time scales. Neanders were around for half a million years. That is a 100 times longer than all of recorded history. And they probably spent thousands of years, if not tens of thousands of years (call it 10x all of recorded history) interacting with something like modern homo sapiens. That's a long time for races to interact, and spread seed. Not to mention Neander developments as the recent discovery of the age of the Bruniquel Cave at 176 K BPE, which provides further evidence of Neanderthal skills. (If true, quite astonishing.: that's a hundred thousand years since the first "person" set foot out of Africa.)
I remain of the opinion that the Neanders and Denisovans (and possibly others) helped develop the different groups of humans that we have come to know.
As Lot notes above, clearly the selection was largely for homo sapiens. If we use Africans as a "control" (no Neander or Denisovan or other), then we are bound to conclude a heavy selection towards African homo sapien traits. But not in all areas; just on a gross level there is pale skin for Europeans and neoteny among East Asians.
Neanders had large heads. This may signify high intelligence, but there's a long standing debate on whether Neanders had speech. But I think that one implication is that such huge skulls would be hard to deliver at birth; which may have helped keep their numbers artificially low, and put them at a deficit with rabbit style homo sapiens breeding habits (compare even toed antelopes and deer to odd toed pachyderms.)
Whether this inbreeding occurred versus prehistoric sexual assault or via some "Alley Oop and Juliet" scenario I do not know, but it's always interesting to project modern mating game rituals onto the past -- "Baby, It's Cold Outside My Cave"
One thing that does seem clear is that speech must have been a homo sapiens development, since obviously Africans have this.
The idea of portraying Neanders as brutish savages with hunched backs and dragging knuckles was then science, and it's possible that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. The same could be said for scientific perceptions of dinosaurs, who were throughout my childhood perceived as monochromatic lizards but nowadays are often depicted as essentially gigantic feathered turkeys or else as kaleidoscopically colored lizards who have escaped from the Galapagos. We should be clear about how much variation in interpretation, based on what evidence, we actually have here.
Of course the article is PC nonsense, designed to make us embrace people who are not like us in their multitudes.Replies: @Thirdeye
Neanderthals reached reproductive maturity quicker than Homo sapiens does. Earlier adulthood means that the brain had to develop differently. Things had to be either done by instinct or by quicker learning. Quicker learning doesn’t necessarily imply the ability to develop sophisticated reasoning; it could in essence be simple trainability.
In their bizarro world the non-white world is effed up because of white people (colonialism, etc.) and they must set the white man's world to rights before the rest of the world can return to its Edenic pre-white-man existence.
Kind of like ridding the world of original sin and just as probable.Replies: @guest
Yeah, sorta like how the one ring can only be destroyed by the fire in mount doom. They have to journey into the heart of Whiteland to slay the White Devil, so that the wastes of planet earth may be fertile once again.
Author Danny Vendramini believes neanderthals predated on modern humans. Some interbreeding happened because of rape of modern human females by Neanderthals. Gradually a hybrid race developed who were strong and cunning enough to wipe out the pure neanderthals.
Where’s that at? I’d guess .. South Armagh, maybe?
Good luck with that.
Let’s face it. Blacks are the TRUE humans. When white people realized they’re literally part ape, they all of a sudden try to humanize their ape-like grandparents with mia leading pics. The neanderApe skull clearly resembles the skull of a chimp. Lol.
Studies show IQ tests are flawed but of course you neanderapes (white people) insist on believing anything that makes you feel superior including the NEW misleading neanderape pics. The truth is, your grandparents are upright walking apes. Unlike blacks, you literally have ape blook running through your veins.
Mongoloid east Asians are not closer to American Indians. Don't let the straight black hair and the epicanthic fold fool ya.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
Why?
Unlikely that it was anything like that, Neanderthal males would have been brought up to flee modern humans on sight, and view individual as always part of a nearby band. Neanderthal males would be far too slow to catch a modern human female. Neanderthal females went out on the hunt and might have been winged and captured, but you would need several strong men to hold a Neanderthal female down.
Modern human bands killing and eating the Neanderthal adults (or just killing them for sport) but bringing home the Neanderthal young as pets and keeping them till sexual maturity would be the most likely way for Neanderthals genes to end up in the human population
I’m just curious as a layperson – given that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals interbred and produced fertile offspring is there any scientific justification for regarding them as separate species?
Do they have any neanderthal DNA?
There is unknown inferred archaic admixture in Africans as well I believe but no reference to compare to.
All humans who are not sub-Saharan African have Neanderthal admixture
There is unknown inferred archaic admixture in Africans as well I believe but no reference to compare to.