Asian Ancestors Had Sex with Mysterious Human Cousins

[M.D. Holloway]

Grab'n a lil strange...

Asian Ancestors Had Sex with Mysterious Human Cousins | Early Human Interbreeding | Genetics of Archaic Human Populations | Neanderthals & Denisovans | LiveScience

Neanderthals weren't the only ancient cousins that humans frequently mated with, according to a new study that finds that East Asian populations share genes with a mysterious archaic hominin species that lived in Siberia 40,000 years ago....

[pwd72s]

I try not to concern myself with the sex lives of others...

[azasadny]

So THAT explains some of the PARF posters...!!!

[Mark Henry]

Modern men can have sex with sheep, etc. so is it really hard to imagine doing your cousin.

[jyl]

This explains my attraction to white women. A mysterious and archaic species indeed.

[kach22i]

Some say Denisovans were hot looking.

SciNewsBlog: Study: Sex With Cavemen Gave Humans an Immune Boost

Crossbreeding with Neanderthals and the Denisovans gave early man a much needed immune boost as he moved into new environments. It is unclear is the sex was consensual or violent.

[krystar]

shieeeeet. my ancestors got raped by you white ppl. i demand 40,000 years of restitution.

[jluetjen]

How come every time they find a couple new bones it's a new "Species".

This group, the Denisovans, is known only by a few bone fragments: A finger bone, a tooth and possibly a toe bone,

They don't even know what they have for bones, but yet they can say that it's a new "Species". In a few hundred-thousand years, are going to define a species based on these folks?

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by LubeMaster77

Grab'n a lil strange...

and yet you did not mention breast milk at all

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by jyl

This explains my attraction to white women. A mysterious and archaic species indeed.

just dump them before the veins start showing thru the paper thin skin

[imcarthur]

I actually find the subject fascinating. DNA analysis is really adding to our knowledge. Or should I say our 'alleged' knowledge.



Note that Nature labels all early Europeans as French.

Ian

[RPKESQ]

[QUOTE=jluetjen;6351174]How come every time they find a couple new bones it's a new "Species".

They don't even know what they have for bones, but yet they can say that it's a new "Species". In a few hundred-thousand years, are going to define a species based on these folks?

[QUOTE]

It is by the genetics. Which has been the chief source of evidence for evolution since about 1980. Darwin had no idea that his work would be reinforced at every major point, over and over again by DNA studies.

I know the uninformed like to think scientist just make this stuff up so as to have something to say, but they actually have a review process that weeds out the bad data and ideas.

Sadly, the popular press does not have such a process and passes off conjecture and musings as factual to a uneducated public.

(John, this was not intended as any criticism or insult to you)

[jyl]

I prefer the olive skinned ones for that reason. Keep better, don't need refrigeration.

Quote de jyl

This explains my attraction to white women. A mysterious and archaic species indeed.

just dump them before the veins start showing thru the paper thin skin

[masraum]

Originally Posted by jluetjen

How come every time they find a couple new bones it's a new "Species".

They don't even know what they have for bones, but yet they can say that it's a new "Species".

I wonder the same thing, but then I think that part of it is the shape of the bones being radically different at key locations, not just that the bones are longer or shorter, but otherwise shaped the same.

What really gets me is when they get a couple of bones or parts of bones and build an entire creature from that.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

I know the uninformed like to think scientist just make this stuff up so as to have something to say, but they actually have a review process that weeds out the bad data and ideas.

Sadly, the popular press does not have such a process and passes off conjecture and musings as factual to a uneducated public.

(John, this was not intended as any criticism or insult to you)

And despite the review process there are often huge groups that disagree.

I understand that we have lots of really smart folks thinking about this stuff, and there are even some really cool tools at our disposal these days to use to reinforce ideas. But it is still hard for me to believe any scientist that tries to present their idea of how things were a long time ago (before written or spoken history) as fact. It's my opinion that most of what is presented as fact is still just a highly educated guess.

It was once a fact that the world was flat. Assuming that we have some sort of absolute knowledge now seems foolish to me. I have to think that the smartest scientists must realize that a healthy appreciation for what they don't know and an open mind to the fact that any "fact" could be completely wrong is important to being a scientist.

[944Larry]

Originally Posted by azasadny

So THAT explains some of the PARF posters...!!!

Good one!!!

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by jyl

I prefer the olive skinned ones for that reason. Keep better, don't need refrigeration.

don't rule out the Blonde Snow Goddesses entirely

it is really a shelf life issue

[RPKESQ]

Originally Posted by masraum

And despite the review process there are often huge groups that disagree.

I understand that we have lots of really smart folks thinking about this stuff, and there are even some really cool tools at our disposal these days to use to reinforce ideas. But it is still hard for me to believe any scientist that tries to present their idea of how things were a long time ago (before written or spoken history) as fact. It's my opinion that most of what is presented as fact is still just a highly educated guess.

It was once a fact that the world was flat. Assuming that we have some sort of absolute knowledge now seems foolish to me. I have to think that the smartest scientists must realize that a healthy appreciation for what they don't know and an open mind to the fact that any "fact" could be completely wrong is important to being a scientist.

You are not alone.

Human knowledge doubles every 5 years currently. How up are you on all that? Even college graduates are out of date by the time they leave school.

In science a Theory is what explains the evidence most completely. It doesn't mean we have every scrap of evidence. It means that of all the evidence we do have falls within the Theory. It has always been so in science for at least the last 200 years. Using the Scientific Method (really just Critical Thinking) has brought you every advance in every field. No other method of thought has accomplished so much.

So, evidence is accumulated, premises and postulating will offer up Models, Models are tested against two main criteria (existing data inclusion and the ability to predict outcomes), if a Model passes these criteria (which may take a long time and much division among scientists) it can become a Scientific Theory.

Theories stand until new evidence doesn't fit or discovery that past evidence was incorrect. Then corrections are made.

Many people think this system is inefficient or full of errors. Yet it is the very best that mankind has be able to create. Again, every single technological advance since the Enlightenment (and many made before) have used this system of collecting empirical data and finding a natural process Model to test. There are no exceptions.

Much of what is presented in the popular media is either an outright fabrication presented as science or an incorrect paraphrase of the actual material to the point of being completely misleading (much of the Discovery Channel, History Channel, newspapers, mass market magazines, TV, etc.).

So, it is no wonder that you and much of the population might be confused. Are eggs bad or now good? Is it getting warmer or cooling? Is evolution a fact or all just guesses?

Without doing at least some of the hard work to seek out the sources, you leave yourself vulnerable to the latest mass communication error being promoted.




But let me finish with a critique of your last thought. "It was once a fact that the world was flat".

It was never a fact (meaning that someone had evidence that it was so), it was just a widely believed assumption.

Many educated people in several different cultures spread across the globe knew the Earth was not flat over 2500 years ago.

Much of what is commonly known or considered self-evident is flatly incorrect. That has been true for a very long time.

[Gogar]

Jesus is gonna be pissed about this.

[Mark Henry]

Originally Posted by Gogar

Jesus is gonna be pissed about this.

I'll ask him when he's cutting my lawn next week.