All non-Africans part Neanderthal, genetics confirm

shan

ODI Debutant
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Runs
8,563
All Non-Africans Part Neanderthal, Genetics Confirm

If your heritage is non-African, you are part Neanderthal, according to a new study in the July issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution. Discovery News has been reporting on human/Neanderthal interbreeding for some time now, so this latest research confirms earlier findings.

Damian Labuda of the University of Montreal's Department of Pediatrics and the CHU Sainte-Justine Research Center conducted the study with his colleagues. They determined some of the human X chromosome originates from Neanderthals, but only in people of non-African heritage.

"This confirms recent findings suggesting that the two populations interbred," Labuda was quoted as saying in a press release. His team believes most, if not all, of the interbreeding took place in the Middle East, while modern humans were migrating out of Africa and spreading to other regions.

The ancestors of Neanderthals left Africa about 400,000 to 800,000 years ago. They evolved over the millennia mostly in what are now France, Spain, Germany and Russia. They went extinct, or were simply absorbed into the modern human population, about 30,000 years ago.

Neanderthals possessed the gene for language and had sophisticated music, art and tool craftsmanship skills, so they must have not been all that unattractive to modern humans at the time.

"In addition, because our methods were totally independent of Neanderthal material, we can also conclude that previous results were not influenced by contaminating artifacts," Labuda said.

This work goes back to nearly a decade ago, when Labuda and his colleagues identified a piece of DNA, called a haplotype, in the human X chromosome that seemed different. They questioned its origins.

Fast forward to 2010, when the Neanderthal genome was sequenced. The researchers could then compare the haplotype to the Neanderthal genome as well as to the DNA of existing humans. The scientists found that the sequence was present in people across all continents, except for sub-Saharan Africa, and including Australia.

"There is little doubt that this haplotype is present because of mating with our ancestors and Neanderthals," said Nick Patterson of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard University. Patterson did not participate in the latest research. He added, "This is a very nice result, and further analysis may help determine more details."

David Reich, a Harvard Medical School geneticist, added, "Dr. Labuda and his colleagues were the first to identify a genetic variation in non-Africans that was likely to have come from an archaic population. This was done entirely without the Neanderthal genome sequence, but in light of the Neanderthal sequence, it is now clear that they were absolutely right!"

The modern human/Neanderthal combo likely benefitted our species, enabling it to survive in harsh, cold regions that Neanderthals previously had adapted to.

"Variability is very important for long-term survival of a species," Labuda concluded. "Every addition to the genome can be enriching."


http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.html
 
Oh, okay. Thanks for the link Eagle_Eye. I just needed the name of the article in order to access it. Did you look through it already?
 
Title : An X-Linked Haplotype of Neandertal Origin Is Present Among All Non-African Populations

Not yet - Its a day off, cricket to be watched and bacha to entertain :) Will have a read in the evening.
 
A prehistoric 13-year-old girl who lived 50,000 years ago was the love child of two separate species of ancient human ancestor, according to a new DNA analysis of her remains.

A study of a tiny bone fragment found in a cave in shows the teenager had a Neanderthal mother and a Denisovan father, giving fresh insight into how the now-extinct species interacted.

The find suggests that our ape-like cousins mated far more frequently than researchers thought, according to archaeologists.

Neanderthals and Denisovans share a common ancestor with humans, and roamed Eurasia as far back as 400,000 years ago having migrated from Africa.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...derthal-Denisovan-unearthed-Russian-cave.html
 
Man 400,000 years is nothing when you think about it as crazy as it is to say. It’s minuscule compared to the Earth’s history and how long other species have been here.

I don’t even know if humans will be around a few thousand years later the way we are sabotaging the planet and our own selves, but i wonder how much we’d change. Curious to see what our life spans will be like.
 
Neanderthals have always intrigued me. A lot of people dream of seeing a walking Dinosaur or a Mammoth again, but to me, a second coming of Neanderthals would be something else! :ishant
 
Neanderthals have always intrigued me. A lot of people dream of seeing a walking Dinosaur or a Mammoth again, but to me, a second coming of Neanderthals would be something else! :ishant

They won't. Us being superior in almost every everything absorbed them within us thus extinguishing the line.
I remember watching a movie 13th warrior where they depicted hordes of Neanderthals. Crazy stuff.
 
They won't. Us being superior in almost every everything absorbed them within us thus extinguishing the line.
I remember watching a movie 13th warrior where they depicted hordes of Neanderthals. Crazy stuff.

I know, said it in a hypothetical way. Also, it will sound like a cliche, but everyone is special in their own way. A species that got wiped out against our more savage ancestors may flourish and even outperform us in many ways if they coexisted with modern humans. To me, extinction doesn't represent an overall inferiority, it just means that your strengths didn't workout for the surroundings you interact with.

Many great men in our history would struggle to find relevance if we played by the rules from millions of years ago, so I really want to give Neanderthals that benefit of doubt. Besides, physiological evidence does suggest a potential for Neanderthals to outperform our ancestors in mental abilities and that's exciting.
 
Neanderthals have always intrigued me. A lot of people dream of seeing a walking Dinosaur or a Mammoth again, but to me, a second coming of Neanderthals would be something else! :ishant

In such a scenario,the Neanderthals won’t survive for long.Nether will mammoths unless they live in Alaska or something.Humans will kill any Neanderthals that exist.

Anyhow,Dinosaurs and other prehistoric species could have survived with conservation initiatives,if they existed that is.
 
I know, said it in a hypothetical way. Also, it will sound like a cliche, but everyone is special in their own way. A species that got wiped out against our more savage ancestors may flourish and even outperform us in many ways if they coexisted with modern humans. To me, extinction doesn't represent an overall inferiority, it just means that your strengths didn't workout for the surroundings you interact with.

Many great men in our history would struggle to find relevance if we played by the rules from millions of years ago, so I really want to give Neanderthals that benefit of doubt. Besides, physiological evidence does suggest a potential for Neanderthals to outperform our ancestors in mental abilities and that's exciting.

we are better at one thing is killing compared to Neanderthals/
Homo erectus
 
Neanderthals have always intrigued me. A lot of people dream of seeing a walking Dinosaur or a Mammoth again, but to me, a second coming of Neanderthals would be something else! :ishant

You must have been living under a rock he was chairman of the PCB for a good few years. :ibutt
 
Adam Rutherford in his book “A brief history of Everyone Who Ever Lived” have written briefly about it. He talked about the receding genetical markers of Neanderthal DNA within the body of modern day humans. It’s a very interesting book.
 
Im sure if they continuing researching they will find the devils gene in middle eastern people.
 
Im sure if they continuing researching they will find the devils gene in middle eastern people.

Perhaps that is why Allah revealed the Quran to the Arabs, to smooth and tenderise the twisted genetic disposition of the middle eastern people?
 
How do we reconcile this information with faith/islam?

sorry but whats the problem? Islam doesn't talk about evolution in the sense that it is ultimately irrelevant in the scheme of things. We only need to know that we had a common ancestor knows as Adam (as) which does not contradict anything science has said. He was placed on this earth and humanity comes from this common ancestor. Now remember we live in linear time. God swt does not. He took Adam (as) from a place where the law of physics do not apply and placed him somewhere where they do. Therefore it is entirely possible for us to assume Adam AS had to "evolve". And at the same time it is perfectly fine for a aMuslim to believe that he simply was and therefore he was.
 
So was Adam a human or Neanderthal?

If God created Adam, when did he create Neanderthal man?
 
So was Adam a human or Neanderthal?

If God created Adam, when did he create Neanderthal man?

Neanderthals were people like us, and there have been other people that lived simultaneously including modern man kind and there were people that lived before the Neanderthals.
 
sorry but whats the problem? Islam doesn't talk about evolution in the sense that it is ultimately irrelevant in the scheme of things. We only need to know that we had a common ancestor knows as Adam (as) which does not contradict anything science has said. He was placed on this earth and humanity comes from this common ancestor. Now remember we live in linear time. God swt does not. He took Adam (as) from a place where the law of physics do not apply and placed him somewhere where they do. Therefore it is entirely possible for us to assume Adam AS had to "evolve". And at the same time it is perfectly fine for a aMuslim to believe that he simply was and therefore he was.

Adam is meant to be the first human according to religion. However evolution doesn't work like that where all of a sudden there was one guy and he was a fully formed human. Evolution takes millions of years and groups evolve together step by step. SO yes there is a problem if you delve a tiny bit deeper.

P.S your whole analysis sounds like something my 8 year old niece would dream up.
 
Adam is meant to be the first human according to religion. However evolution doesn't work like that where all of a sudden there was one guy and he was a fully formed human. Evolution takes millions of years and groups evolve together step by step. SO yes there is a problem if you delve a tiny bit deeper.

P.S your whole analysis sounds like something my 8 year old niece would dream up.

Please study the theology before making 5 year old statements yourself. Adam(pbuh) was sent down as the first human, this does not mean there werent already human like creatures on Earth.

This finding is perfectly in line with the religion.
 
Please study the theology before making 5 year old statements yourself. Adam(pbuh) was sent down as the first human, this does not mean there werent already human like creatures on Earth.

This finding is perfectly in line with the religion.

If he was sent down as the first human then how can their already be humans?? And where does it say there was already human like creatures on earth. please provide reference.
 
If he was sent down as the first human then how can their already be humans?? And where does it say there was already human like creatures on earth. please provide reference.

I wrote human like creatures, not what we are , often described as the modern man. Him & his wife were the first humans & they did not land on a baron Earth but one already filled millions of creatures.

Im not here to justfy my point or educate you . If you really care you can find out yourself , makes no difference to me what people believe. My point was, as Ive said to you before , please try not to debate a subject such as theology without research & knowing the basics
 
I wrote human like creatures, not what we are , often described as the modern man. Him & his wife were the first humans & they did not land on a baron Earth but one already filled millions of creatures.

Im not here to justfy my point or educate you . If you really care you can find out yourself , makes no difference to me what people believe. My point was, as Ive said to you before , please try not to debate a subject such as theology without research & knowing the basics

Awesome you did exactly what I expected from someone who isn't able to give a clear and concise answer. Not able to provide proof. And using "not caring" as a way to get out of providing it.

Isn't that a major part of the religion btw? To educate the uneducated on islam?
 
I wrote human like creatures, not what we are , often described as the modern man. Him & his wife were the first humans & they did not land on a baron Earth but one already filled millions of creatures.

Im not here to justfy my point or educate you . If you really care you can find out yourself , makes no difference to me what people believe. My point was, as Ive said to you before , please try not to debate a subject such as theology without research & knowing the basics

There are only two types of humans:
1. Those who believe in scientific and their own findings.
2. Those who go by words written hundred or thousands of years ago.

In between these two types lie the cowards.
 
Awesome you did exactly what I expected from someone who isn't able to give a clear and concise answer. Not able to provide proof. And using "not caring" as a way to get out of providing it.

Isn't that a major part of the religion btw? To educate the uneducated on islam?

I think these questions need to be answered to make it clear for you

1) were there creatures on earth before Adam was sent down?

2) Is it possible that there were Human-like (not the modern man) creatures like homo habilis on earth before Adam was sent down which were constantly evolving?

Now if you demand proof for a modern man (Adam) being sent down among the evolving creatures, i am sorry nobody can provide that because lets not beat around the bush and admit that parts of religion and faith are blind.
 
I think these questions need to be answered to make it clear for you

1) were there creatures on earth before Adam was sent down?

2) Is it possible that there were Human-like (not the modern man) creatures like homo habilis on earth before Adam was sent down which were constantly evolving?

Now if you demand proof for a modern man (Adam) being sent down among the evolving creatures, i am sorry nobody can provide that because lets not beat around the bush and admit that parts of religion and faith are blind.

Thats my whole point. All of the answers above are conjectures and possibilities. It's also possible that aliens created humans but I am not going to go ahead and believe it just because there is a possibility.
 
Awesome you did exactly what I expected from someone who isn't able to give a clear and concise answer. Not able to provide proof. And using "not caring" as a way to get out of providing it.

Isn't that a major part of the religion btw? To educate the uneducated on islam?

Nothing to get out of . Its a very simple explanation which i have given according to my opinion & basic knowledge . If youre genuinely interested you will find out further details yourself . This doesnt prove or disprove anything & it has little interest to me.
 
Can the Adam & Eve story also be read as a metaphor? The first man and the first woman, lived in paradise until they were cast out for sinning and then their lives unravelled - this is how human history plays out in the private sphere over and over again.
 
Can the Adam & Eve story also be read as a metaphor? The first man and the first woman, lived in paradise until they were cast out for sinning and then their lives unravelled - this is how human history plays out in the private sphere over and over again.

No in Islam it’s agreed by all its literal . The main moral of their story is , you will do wrongs being created with free will but the key is accepting you’ve done wrong & then it’s possible you will flourish even more so than before, which is exactly what has happened. Interestingly humans were in conflict with the Neanderthals who were physically much stronger but defeated them into extinction .
 
Maybe Adam was Atom and Eve was electron which separated to create life, maybe Adam means just man or humanity, actully i even read it can mean zero as in start, lots of theories but no guy fell out of the sky and landed here as a 90ft giant as stated by maulana tariq jameel
 
Thats my whole point. All of the answers above are conjectures and possibilities. It's also possible that aliens created humans but I am not going to go ahead and believe it just because there is a possibility.

Yes i agree that for a scientific non-religious person it would simply sound like conjecture or at best an unproven possibility if she is open minded. Like i said, it would be dishonesty if someome claims that parts of faith are not blind. Even massive portions of science are just theories with no proof.

Some people believe that human brain has the capacity to understand how the universe works while sitting inside it without knowing how it looks from the outside (if there is an outside). I sometimes ask whether we over estimate overselves (a trait which is natural to humans) given how puny we are in the huge universe. Whether we have the senses to understand the various dimensions of the universe.

Personally, as long as i or someone else who practices my faith can reconcile such scientific things with the faith, i will be satisfied. For some other people, nothing short of clear cut proof would be enough. But then you have to decide what things are so important to you that you cannot give up on them.
 
Adam is meant to be the first human according to religion. However evolution doesn't work like that where all of a sudden there was one guy and he was a fully formed human. Evolution takes millions of years and groups evolve together step by step. SO yes there is a problem if you delve a tiny bit deeper.

P.S your whole analysis sounds like something my 8 year old niece would dream up.


This is why I avoid debating with people on PP anymore especially about Islam. You people just dont have the manners or decency to know how to actually show some respect. Im not going to engage further even though I had alot more to say about your comment above..
 
Yes i agree that for a scientific non-religious person it would simply sound like conjecture or at best an unproven possibility if she is open minded. Like i said, it would be dishonesty if someome claims that parts of faith are not blind. Even massive portions of science are just theories with no proof.

Some people believe that human brain has the capacity to understand how the universe works while sitting inside it without knowing how it looks from the outside (if there is an outside). I sometimes ask whether we over estimate overselves (a trait which is natural to humans) given how puny we are in the huge universe. Whether we have the senses to understand the various dimensions of the universe.

Personally, as long as i or someone else who practices my faith can reconcile such scientific things with the faith, i will be satisfied. For some other people, nothing short of clear cut proof would be enough. But then you have to decide what things are so important to you that you cannot give up on them.

Well said. I can agree with it all. I guess when I said its irreconcilable I was coming from my perspective, which is focused on logic and reasoning rather then faith.
 
Yes i agree that for a scientific non-religious person it would simply sound like conjecture or at best an unproven possibility if she is open minded. Like i said, it would be dishonesty if someome claims that parts of faith are not blind. Even massive portions of science are just theories with no proof.

Some people believe that human brain has the capacity to understand how the universe works while sitting inside it without knowing how it looks from the outside (if there is an outside). I sometimes ask whether we over estimate overselves (a trait which is natural to humans) given how puny we are in the huge universe. Whether we have the senses to understand the various dimensions of the universe.

Personally, as long as i or someone else who practices my faith can reconcile such scientific things with the faith, i will be satisfied. For some other people, nothing short of clear cut proof would be enough. But then you have to decide what things are so important to you that you cannot give up on them.

The difference is in science where a theory is just a theory and there is no proof, science admits to it, whereas in religon you blindly call anything a fact based on religous scriptures, no matter how absurd it can sound.
 
Back
Top