Skip to comments.Neandertal: The Answer Is Epigenetics Not Evolution
Posted on 05/05/2014 10:46:06 AM PDT by fishtank
Neandertal: The Answer Is Epigenetics Not Evolution
by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. *
Recent genome reports show that the Neandertals are essentially fully human, causing scientists to reclassify them as "archaic humans."1,2 But what about the apparent subtle differences in anatomy that first caused scientists to claim that Neandertals were a completely different species? It turns out that the answer can be found in epigenetics, according to newly published research.3
Epigenetics, in the more modern sense, refers to the heritable chemical changes performed by cellular machines to DNA that alter gene function without actually changing the DNA nucleotide code. In the field of genomics, it is more accurately referred to as chromatin modification. Chromatin is the stuff chromosomes are made of which consists of the DNA molecule packaged around proteins called histones. Both the DNA and the histone proteins can be chemically modified to control how genes function and are regulated along the chromosome.
...more at link.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
ICR article image.
“Recent genome reports show that the Neandertals are essentially fully human, causing scientists to reclassify them as “archaic humans.”
When did this reclassification take place? I’ve read articles that classify them as such for years or is ICR taking liberties again?
What ever the hell he said.
Were they Democrats or Republicans?
I would like to know how genes control body plan. Such as shape and size. I think this is a big problem for conventional evolutionary theory.
Hard science leads where few want to tread. The evidence that Neanderthal and Homo Sapien are genetically identical is remarkable research. Stick that in your evolution pipe.
I'm thinking reading up on this and speculating might be fun.
Democrat Politics + Epigenetics = Graft, Corruption, and Incompetence on a global scale
Hmmm, fits into my hypothesis that evolution is biologically directed, not random mutation.
They were almost entirely Republicans. Democrats died off quickly back then because welfare, foodstamps, and cushy government gigs hadn't been invented yet.
I don't know of any changes and I do notice these things.
The question: How can we drive more knowledgeable people away from religion with our clever misinterpretations and ignorance?
All the physical features used to define Neanderthals can be found today in modern humans. For example, the Australian Aborigines have higher, more defined eye brows than did Neanderthals.
You might be talking about convergent evolution, as opposed to divergent evolution.
Different species will converge on a shape.
One species of Lemurs, one species of marsupials, and cats have converged on the cat shape.
Birds(Penguins), mammals(seals, etc), and fish have converged on a fish shape
Sharks and dolphins have converged on a shape
Epigenetics is the latest DNA buzzword and since current science seems driven by trendiness beware of new “results” incorporating it. Also be suspicious of new results that seem politically correct such as there are no differences between Neanderthals and modern humans, interbreeding, etc. IMO the results reported by younger scientists are more likely to verify their preconceptions rather than be driven by objectivity. This is based on my 35 years as a research geneticist.
I understand your words of caution about current research, but do you believe that epigenetics isn’t legitimate, at least in the sense that it appears that genetic expression depends in some measure on environmental factors?
Fill the pipe with empty space? I don’t believe anyone ever said that modern humans evolved from neanderthals. Neanderthals have always been seen as existing along side of modern man, but as a dead end genetic variant in the tree. They were a physical variant of modern man that before modern genetic research were thought to be a genetically different line of modern humans. They are not and never have been; more along the lines of a racial variation of modern man.
The ability to talk about archaic humans and suggesting that we are one species, means that you are making progress. A lot of scientists are wondering if Homo Erectus, with their smaller brain, Neanderthals and us are different versions of each other. At least talking about archaic humans takes you back 400,000 + years. Now, we share 99.7 % of our genes to begin with s there is less to define another species.
Viewing an advanced ape as your brother is not progress, it's stupidity. This is what a Neanderthal looked like:
That's with and without the 6" ice-age fur coat. Cro Magnon (human) needles are common while nobody has ever found the first Neanderthal needle. That's because a creature with a 6" long ice-age fur coat does not NEED needles.
Granted I do not buy the notion of Neanderthal predation driving gracile hominids into any sort of a fast process of evolution into Cro Magnon man... but his Neanderthal reconstructions are totally believable.
There is no evidence of a hyper violent ape as Neanderthal. In fact they didn’t eat their own instead often burying them. They had a brutal time with large game and ice age climate. Homo Erectus had the running ability we had and both used fire. They did cooperate in hunting so they communicated.
In fact they DID eat their own and the evidence of that is overwhelming. Try doing a bit of research and then get back to me.
How do you know it wasn’t modern humans that dined on Neanderthals in Spain. 51,000 years isn’t beyond the time the two groups would have met.
Humm. Looks like a mythical “Yeti” or “Sasquatch.” And in Beowulf there was a creature, Grendal, who could be conceived of as looking like your Neanderthal example, a Troll? Modern day sightings of Neanderthal? (Modern being a relative term.)
Perhaps our ancestors were not always making up imaginary creatures to explain their fear of the dark as some superior moderns suggest. Not something you would want to run into in the dark.
Why the snarl, though? Looks like a threat is perceived or being made.
So much money could have been saved by simply asking Jean Auel.
What makes you believe this guy’s theory is correct and the regular scientific world is wrong?
He said Pluto is not a planet.
I’m watching the video now, and the guy bizarrely claims that the other animals in their region had fur, so the Neanderthals must have had fur too. Then he shifts to Africa, where supposedly humans didn’t have fur—but all the other animals their do too.
And then there’s this:
Humans are quasi-aquatic creatures, and never needed a fur coat. ANYTHING walking around in the European ice age needed a fur coat and, again, nobody's ever found a neanderthal needle.
The basic mindset of a Neanderthal was the same as that of a lion, i.e. they viewed the living world as being neatly divided into two categories, their own family group - and meat. Rob Gargett notes that if you put the skulls of a human, a Neanderthal, and a lion together, the two which have anything in common are the Neanderthal and the lion. You'd expect behavior to follow morphology, and it does.
I kind of like this one. Lloyd Pye - Everything you know is wrong.
Ha ha—two hours of crackpot theory on UFOs? I don’t think so!
The idea with Pye is to watch up to the point at which he starts talking about Sitchin and the Annunaki, and then turn it off. What he is saying about humans being ill adapted for this planet is basiclaly right, we live here only by dint of technology.
Interesting. If you search for "neanderthal needle," you find a bunch of anti-evolution sites claiming that one was found. (They're using it to try and show that Neanderthals weren't as primitive as they used to be depicted.) I can't find a reference to it on a straight science site, though.
and the two at the top left certainly look like they could have been used as awls. And this place is offering for sale what they claim is a Neanderthal awl. Tools like this certainly could have been used to poke holes in hides through which hide strips could have been drawn--you don't really need a needle as such to sew to that extent.
You mean we’re all aliens? Of the legal or undocumented variety?
If Neanderthals hadn't had fur coats, there would be Neanderthal equivalents of those. There aren't any.
You keep saying that, but you're ignoring the fact that needles like that aren't necessary to lace hides together. Awls will do. Here's an image of the Neanderthal awl for sale I mentioned above:
That'd do for poking holes in hide.
The product of genes is proteins—molecules floating in cytoplasm. But there is nothing in genes which produces the overall shape.
This is a big problem for evolutionary theory.