While Western physical Anthropology held one sort of "proto human" won a violent confrontation such as & Native(s) Chinese physical anthropologists advocated continuity through continuous hybridization. Witness https://news.yahoo.com/ancient-tooth-found-cave-proves-111202239.html An ancient tooth found in a cave proves an extinct species of archaic humans lived in southeast Asia over 130,000 years ago Remains of a now-extinct ancient human species called Denisovans were found in southeast Asia for the first time. Denisovans were defined from that first tooth's analysis that demonstrates / records hybridization. now referenced as unique as Neanderathal when those genes are evidenced in Denisovans from the initiation demonstrate NOT A SEPARATE . Not A Species! GREAT spreader of the genome their hybridization leaves traces. Another, SCIENCE Got It Wrong! Look To a H. Erectus genome! For a good time, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmanisi_hominins If those skulls has not been found as a family / tribe group they would have gained at least 3 species definitions voiding that A Species Can Mate With Another Of Their Kind And Produce A Fertile Offspring. Not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology Errors & Scientists & "us" REMEMBER Denisovans are just a successful hybridization The "reason" why all of Eurasia shares Neanderthal Genome void below the Sahara. H. erectus, so ignored as "archaic" Yet presumed to carry a high altitude tolerance to Tibet. Labeled as "archaic human" WELL here you have it What part is disagreeable ? Continuity Through Continuous Hybridization confused with a separate lineage Moi Continuity Through Continuous Hybridization
I tried to plow through most of this, and gave up. But that, I had to laugh at. "Archaic" has nothing to do with a single thing, other than the fact it is older and predates other forms that evolved afterwards. That it may or may not be evolved to handle altitudes is completely irrelevant to that word as a descriptive. Of course, most at this time are largely "ignoring" Denisovan impacts simply because there is damned little actual evidence of them. We literally have fragments from just 8 individuals, the largest piece is part of a jawbone. That is it. Everything "believed" is purely through looking at DNA from a single specimen. And that is "Denisova 3", which is only a single fingerbone. Anything about their evolution or anything else is purely a WAG. Other than they likely evolved along with or prior to H. Neanderthal, both coming from H. Heidelbergensis.
