Modern Humans, Not Neanderthals, May Be Evolution's 'Odd Man Out'

EurekAlert ^ | 9-8-2006 | Neil Schoenherr - University Of Washington

[patton]

My comment was regarding this particular article - no mention of DNA at all. For completeness, one would think at least some passing reference to ongoing DNA analysis would be made.

[M-cubed]

One thing we know.....WHoops..let me correct that...my silly beliefs... maybe...but GOD...breathed life into "MORDERN MAN"

[Humbug]

That was very interesting to read and think about. Thanks.

[patton]

Don't lets get confused about who said what, here.

[M-cubed]

LMAO!!!!!!!...Thats only funny to those that saw Katrina man..or what ever his scientific name is...

[ASA Vet]

I didn't. Notice the post number responded to, not the addressee.

[expatpat]

If they don't have any Neanderthal DNA, it has to be bones.

[patton]

Neanderthal DNA has been sucessfully recovered from teeth.

[Coyoteman]

If they don't have any Neanderthal DNA, it has to be bones.

They have Neanderthal DNA. There have been several threads in the past few years on the subject.

With new techniques, they are likely to have even more in the near future.

[Inyo-Mono]

I remember studying the human characteristics of neotony in college back in the early 70s, the theory being that 'childlike' facial features made us more attractive to potential mates but you have a different take on it that rings true.

[blam]

"It's a nice story. "

Agreed. I've seen the dog example used numerous times.

[expatpat]

I'm being picky, but what chimp with a rock is going to be able to take on a lion? The cats are killing machines, and a chip with a rock wouldn't stand a chance, no matter how big the rock or smart the chimp. "If your pet cat was as big as your dog, you would be lunch", as someone pointed out

[M-cubed]

Hey!..It aint science..but it does give a lil Twinge to us less evolved species...THANKS!

[expatpat]

OK -- it's a good thing that I said "If".

[Physicist]

I'll stipulate to the fact that Neanderthals were morphologically more similar to Homo erectus than are modern humans, but that doesn't mean that the main population of Homo erectus evolved into Neanderthals with modern humans passing through some genetic bottleneck to end up as they did.

For one thing, modern human fossils are far more common and widespread than Neanderthal fossils. Moreover, Homo erectus fossils are far more widespread than Neanderthal fossils.

My guess is that both Neanderthals and modern humans were side branches, passing through genetic bottlenecks from the root stock, with the former outcompeting the descendants of the root stock in Europe, and latter outcompeting the root stock (and more recently the Neanderthals) throughout the range, and subsequently expanding the range worldwide.

[M-cubed]

Ill take that bet and raise ya five!...U ever been in a good fight?

[ASA Vet]

They aren't INFINITELY trainable

I think you'll enjoy this Dog

[M-cubed]

Whoops...Never mind...*W*..if u had been u wouldnt be here..

[Alter Kaker]

My comment was regarding this particular article - no mention of DNA at all.

If you want to take issue with this article, fine. But it's downright dishonest of you to pretend that this article indicates a failure by the anthropological profession to consider genetics. Nothing could be further from the truth.