Interesting thing about Genesis is the number of other ideas it suggests in this line of species. For instance, 40 thousand "days and nights" ago, all other types of humanity disappeared, except for the three "sons," (Ham, Japheth, and Shem), which were the three racial stocks. Then there is the strange idea about "Enoch," (i.e.; Homo habitus), who God had "taken as a person." Taken: But the direct statement that these early hominoids would all disappear is accurate and true supports the idea that Genesis has roots in some powerful source of knowledge called divine for lack of a better terminology.
I don't know what to think about this post...are you being silly?...an attempt at humour?...or serious and blatantly racist...
yeah, I think you be better served starting a new thread in the religious forum...posts like these have no place in the science forum...
We disagree but, for agreement sake in a polite way How about, erectus hybridizing with other archaic humanoids in the area whose hybrids then did it with more modern humanoids. Would that be agreeable ? BTW in my recent search seeking those Chinese anthropologist who point out their later day H. erectus demonstrate Asiatic flattening of the cheek bones, - I found other references of erectus in other areas that anthropologist claim demonstrate racial features of the area. Above you will find a reference to the earliest skull showing Europoid features, was that erectus too or on the Neanderthal line. And - Race, or whatever the Liberal term, remains a means to discuss the origins of Moi. It does coincide with some findings, such as the manner ethanol is metabolized . Moi r > g No
erectus could hybridize with other archaic forms but there is no evidence for it, none....and absolutely no evidence for hybridization with sapiens absolutely none, it's baseless speculation...sapiens weren't even in the region for the estimated date of the erectus finds... I'm sitting 2 meters away from an anthropologist who says morphology is no longer the primary accepted method for determining relationships, DNA is the definitive determinant...60 ys ago before the rise of DNA Polynesians, Micronesians and Maori based on morphology were considered unrelated to Papuans and Melanesians, along comes modern DNA and what do you know, it turns out they are all related after all... polynesian, the old morphological system of the 1960s said they were unrelated to Papuans and that was wrong, DNA trumps morphology 100% of the time... your Chinese anthropologist and their 1960s morphological methods are also wrong.... how would your racist chinese anthropologist classify these pygmies
The human condition is that men's Libido drives them sexually and having children has never been a problem. Not ought it ever be one in the future. But bastards are the one issue about this which requires thinking by individual men and women. If women do NOT intuitively recognize that pregnancy and child rearing is a tough and dangerous job for a single woman, a world of criminal mind authoritative males will appear. The consequences of this will be the destruction of our social Institutions with a collapse of the society itself. We are witness today of a world of sexually prudent Islamic people resisting the Western promiscuity that threatens their societies. It is Matriarchy VS Patriarchy in a war that has long been fought over this one idea about sexual relationships, i.e.; prudence vs promiscuity.
? Why? If Science and the Bible concur, the Truth seems pretty much demanded in both places. When Science opposes the Bible, then the Religious Forum is the place for posting the truth so people can learn what Reality is all about.
A bit too righteous for me...humans are animals and no matter how intelligent we believe we are, sex and mating cannot be controlled by society or dogma or anything. Every individual makes a decision how to approach sex and mating, from voluntary to involuntary, and with the idea of survival in our genes, we will continue sex and mating. In bold above, society has been this way for centuries, and we're doing pretty well so far...
It has been established that brain size differences between Europeans (1347 cm) and East Asians (1364 cm) contribute to a slightly higher IQ average for the latter group (106). East Asians inherited greater proportions of Neanderthal DNA and the cranial capacity of the Neanderthals (1600 cm) was often much larger than that of H. sapiens. The C and D tribes that existed in Asia around 58,000 years ago may have interbred with the Neanderthals which became extinct about 35,000 years ago and they coexisted with the Neanderthals for at least 20,000 years in Asia. Moreover, the majority of Han Chinese belong to Haplogroup O, which is a relatively young haplogroup that split from NO, and its sister haplogroup N is prevalent in Finland (61%). Its three branches called Oα, Oβ, and Oγ may have originated from three persons or clans that existed around 6,500 years ago and most Chinese people are younger than the Indo-Europeans with Haplogroup R in evolutionary terms and all European haplogroups (R, J, I, K, G) originated from the Asian haplogroup CF.
This did not jump out to you? Is it not important to you that this claim is not qualified? What study or information proves East Asians' cranial capacity linked to Neanderthal DNA? Or that Neanderthal DNA is the reason for larger cranial capacity.
none at all, as soon as anyone cites phillipe rushton as an authority on intelligence you can stop reading...
no such link has been established for cranial size/intelligence...and phillipe rushton was not an expert on the workings of the brain his studies were flawed...if you want an expert opinion on brain function and intelligence then you consult an expert on brain function, a neurologist not a psychologist, psychologists study behaviour, not brain function... which is what I have done with a good friend who is also east asian, his expert opinion which is light years superior to Rushtons when it comes to brain function, "cranial capacity is not related to IQ"...intelligence relationships can be made for the number of synaptic connections between neurons, surface area/crenulation(more neurons) and the size of the corpus callosum(connection between two hemispheres) but none of those are dependent on cranial size...cranial size is irrelevant, Einstein's cranial size was at best average....rushtons work is nothing more than phrenology, a psuedoscience. ... 50% of the population are women, who have smaller brains than men but they score as well as men do...and when not held back by cultural restraints exceed men in scholastic pursuits...when 50% of the population destroys rushtons hypothesis you should not be citing his as an authority on brain function/structure...
At the center of the debate on the emergence of modern humans and their spread throughout the globe is the question of whether archaic Homo lineages contributed to the modern human gene pool, and more importantly, whether such contributions impacted the evolutionary adaptation of our species. A major obstacle to answering this question is that low levels of admixture with archaic lineages are not expected to leave extensive traces in the modern human gene pool because of genetic drift. Loci that have undergone strong positive selection, however, offer a unique opportunity to identify low-level admixture with archaic lineages, provided that the introgressed archaic allele has risen to high frequency under positive selection. The gene microcephalin (MCPH1) regulates brain size during development and has experienced positive selection in the lineage leading to Homo sapiens. Within modern humans, a group of closely related haplotypes at this locus, known as haplogroup D, rose from a single copy ≈37,000 years ago and swept to exceptionally high frequency (≈70% worldwide today) because of positive selection. Here, we examine the origin of haplogroup D. By using the interhaplogroup divergence test, we show that haplogroup D likely originated from a lineage separated from modern humans ≈1.1 million years ago and introgressed into humans by ≈37,000 years ago. This finding supports the possibility of admixture between modern humans and archaic Homo populations (Neanderthals being one possibility). Furthermore, it buttresses the important notion that, through such adminture, our species has benefited evolutionarily by gaining new advantageous alleles. The interhaplogroup divergence test developed here may be broadly applicable to the detection of introgression at other loci in the human genome or in genomes of other species. Discussion In this study, we investigate the origin of the microcephalin D allele in modern humans. We show that the D allele is unlikely to have arisen within a panmictic population. Instead, our data are consistent with a model of population subdivision followed by introgression to account for the origin of the D allele. By this model, schematized in Fig. 4 B, the lineage leading to modern humans was split from another Homo lineage, and the two lineages remained in reproductive isolation for ≈1,100,000 years. During this period of reproductive isolation, the modern human lineage was fixed for the non-D allele at the microcephalin locus, whereas the other Homo lineage was fixed for the D allele. These two alleles are differentiated by a large number of sequence differences accumulated during the prolonged isolation of the two populations. At or sometime before ≈37,000 years ago, a (possibly rare) interbreeding event occurred between the two lineages, bringing a copy of the D allele into anatomically modern humans. Whereas the original D-bearing Homo population had since gone extinct, this introgressed copy of the D allele in humans had subsequently spread to exceptionally high frequency throughout much of world because of positive selection. Several studies have reported loci in the human genome that are associated with unusually deep genealogies containing highly divergent clades (15, 16, 23, 24). Although this type of observation can result from the admixture of reproductively isolated populations, the observation is itself insufficient evidence for admixture. In particular, deep divergence can occur if two or more allele classes at a locus are maintained by balancing selection for a prolonged period. So, even for a locus whose genealogy is too deep to be statistically compatible with neutral evolution, it is essential to rule out balancing selection before the admixture model can be adopted. One notable example is the MAPT locus, which has two distinct haplogroups, H1 and H2, that diverged from each other ≈3 million years ago, whereas the coalescence age of H2 is much younger (24). One explanation for this unusual observation is that H2 introgressed into modern humans from an archaic Homo lineage (17). However, because H1 and H2 are inverted relative to each other and thus cannot recombine, deep divergence between them across an extend genomic region and the young age of H2 are also compatible with balancing selection that maintained H2 at low frequencies for extended periods (along with H1) followed by a recent rise in the frequency of H2 (24). For the microcephalin locus, in contrast, we were able to rule out the possibility of balancing selection with a high degree of confidence. As such, microcephalin shows by far the most compelling evidence of admixture among the human loci examined thus far. Speculation about the identity of the archaic Homo population from which the microcephalin D allele introgressed into the modern human gene pool points to the Neanderthal lineage as a potential (although by no means only) candidate. Anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals shared a long period of coexistence, from as early as 130,000 years ago in the Middle East (39) to as late as 35,000 years ago in Europe (40), consistent with the estimated introgression time of the microcephalin D allele at or sometime before ≈37,000 years ago. Furthermore, the worldwide frequency distribution of the D allele, exceptionally high outside of Africa but low in sub-Saharan Africa (29), suggests, but does not necessitate, admixture with an archaic Eurasian population. Finally, our estimate of the separation time between D and non-D alleles (i.e., ≈1,100,000 years with a lower-bound confidence interval of ≈530,000 years) is largely consistent with the divergence time between modern humans and Neanderthals based on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence difference (320,000–740,000 years; refs. 41 and 42) and with the earliest appearance of Neanderthals in the fossil record ≈500,000 years ago (43). It would be of great interest to sequence the microcephalin locus in Neanderthals or other archaic Homo lineages, should it become technically feasible to retrieve and analyze nuclear DNA from ancient hominid remains. Our results not only provide genetic evidence in support of the possibility of admixture between modern humans and an archaic Homo lineage but also support the notion that the biological evolution of modern humans might have benefited from the contribution of adaptive alleles from our archaic relatives. In the case of microcephalin, it is all the more intriguing given the fact that the adaptive allele is associated with an important brain development gene. As anatomically modern humans emerged from Africa and spread across the globe, the “indigenous” Homo populations they encountered had already inhabited their respective regions for long periods of time and were, in all likelihood, better adapted to the local environments than the colonizing humans, at least in some biological domains. It is perhaps not surprising then that modern humans, although likely superior in their own way, could in theory benefit from adopting some adaptive alleles from the populations they replaced. That this might indeed be the case for the brain size-determining gene microcephalin should add an important new perspective to the discussion of human origins and the recent evolution of our species. Furthermore, any admixture between modern humans and archaic populations is likely to affect more than one locus in the genome. Our study thus provides a methodological template for identifying additional loci in the human genome that might harbor alleles from archaic populations through introgression and subsequent positive selection. Evans, Patrick D., et al. "Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103.48 (2006): 18178-18183. http://www.pnas.org/content/103/48/18178.full
Oh yeah,... People do make the decisions about sexual behaviors. Christ said that the Truth was the one thing that would set us free of social problems like bastards now half the national birth rate. The Truth is that fatherless kids, as a group, suffer enormous Child Abuse of every kind. Then they account for 70% of all violent crimes in america. Plus the Welfare Cost of $1 Trillion dollars is more than our entire Defense Budget. If the next generation avoids marriages, has fatherless kids, and continues the trend, patriarchies, like islam or China or N Korea ,will attack the West. War is the only alternative for the immense social problems, unless a dictatorship within appears, a Father over the whole Nation. But you are probably right. America will not change.
"It is very likely that brain expansion was largely driven by the unstable climate of Eurasia, which required constant adaptations from their inhabitants. These unstable climate-selective pressures never existed in Africa. Africa instead acted a lot like a refugee area where larger populations of Euroasian Homo erectus could survive for extended periods of time. Frequent hybridization between advanced Eurasian Homo erectus and the refugee African Homo erectus ensured that Homo evolved larger brains." http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm#Activity
BUT,... Psychologists administer IQ Tests. And,... women are notably weak in mathematics, in comparison to the males.
Recent genetic evidence has shown that about 37,000 years ago, all modern people had one singular father from which the three racial stocks thereafter diverged, (Ham, Shem, Japheth?). It would seem connected to this other incident your text mentioned: "During this period of reproductive isolation, the modern human lineage was fixed for the non-D allele at the microcephalin locus, whereas the other Homo lineage was fixed for the D allele. These two alleles are differentiated by a large number of sequence differences accumulated during the prolonged isolation of the two populations. At or sometime before ≈37,000 years ago, a (possibly rare) interbreeding event occurred between the two lineages, bringing a copy of the D allele into anatomically modern humans. Whereas the original D-bearing Homo population had since gone extinct, this introgressed copy of the D allele in humans had subsequently spread to exceptionally high frequency throughout much of world because of positive selection."
IQ tests are vaiable and often culturally specific and do not account for motivation, they're not an accurate guage of intelligence...women in mathematics is a cultural bias and myth, women have been scoring higher than men in all subjects including math for the last hundred years...culturally society discouraged women from scientific pursuits but that is largely gone in many countries, women are now dominating in medicine and many other fields... read this link of an analysis by the american psychological association http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140429104957.htm According to the big brain crowd none of this should be possible as women have smaller brains than men... Psychogists study behaviour, not brain function and structure...
LOL PSYCHOLOGISTS construct, administer, and GRADE these IQ Tests which you seem to feel are no good.
Genesis 5:30-31 tells us that Noah was the father to three racial stocks, called Ham, Japheth, and Shem. These three racial stocks were all born when the species, Noah, was aged 500 (thousand) years old. They all lived for another 100 (thousand) years, before they 'flooded" out-of-africa over another 40 (thousand) years. So, it seems that this Y-chromosome may be a like to another Cro-magnon man like Noah, himself?
using the Bible story about the flood out-of-Africa as a guide, the Noah species that evolved Modern Homo sapiens in three racial stocks might also have that archaic Modern Homo sapiens, i.e.; Cro-magnon man, to who you refer here.
why the stupid act dave?...I posted a link to an analysis by the American Psychological Association that shows your silly claim about women being scholastically inferior to men is crap.. And dave before I switched majors in uni I was psychology major, so yeah I know a bit about the limitations of IQ tests...
Assuming sex is voluntary, all of those individuals know what they are doing. I always say when the juices flow just get out of the way because sex or mating is going to happen. Makes no difference the age, gender, socio-economic position, education, family, etc. We don't spontaneously dream up the idea of having sex...it's in our DNA. Then we have religions which encourage early mating and lots of kids. On top of all this the divorce rate is above 50% so even with the absolute best intentions of marriage, etc. over 1/2 will split. I don't look at all of this as evil or a problem...I look at it as the reality of our society...
Uncle Ferd wants to find him a fine Scottish lass... Genetic history of modern Europeans a tangled tale, research finds 17 Sept.`14: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The genetic origins of modern Europeans may be more complicated than previously thought.
? You posted an article for this Age when women have the advantage to rise up in various economic positions and do as well as men. That is NOT an IQ Test or the equivalent. in fact, it is a terrible situation where jobs now are beginning gifted to our women who will work well and complain less. They are more desirable employees in many ways. They are less aggressive, will take their places easily. But they have doubled the unskilled Labor market, which has cut wages down so bad people are organizing to demand raises now.
