tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post8743874518098060717..comments2024-03-28T16:22:14.888-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: NYT: "The Little Bit of Neanderthal in All of Us" -- Who you calling "us," white man?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-80875976431466878032014-01-31T19:32:40.190-08:002014-01-31T19:32:40.190-08:00"...in some places, such as the DNA related t...<i>"...in some places, such as the DNA related to the skin, <b>the genetic instructions are as much as 70 percent Neanderthal</b> ...<br /><br />... "We're more Neanderthal than not in those genes,"..."</i><br /><br />One naturally speculates that maybe Neanderthal races existed and that modern humans, after they left Africa, "married into" these existing Neanderthal racial types (as reflected in the genetic traits mentioned above), and soon mostly swamped the Neanderthal genetically, except for genes particularly effective in the new environment.<br /><br />The Neanderthal may have been outside Africa for as much as 600,000 years, existing in small, isolated groups. Would it have been natural for "races" to have developed in this half-million years?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69974099795173205032014-01-31T03:14:04.837-08:002014-01-31T03:14:04.837-08:00I was reading about the fact that albinos in Afric...I was reading about the fact that albinos in Africa seem to be more intelligent than Africans with pigmentation. I read in '' Erektus amongst us '' that blacks have melanin even in the brain . Albinism mutations could be a reduction in melanin in the past can have the same effect , the immediate increase of intelligence. If the body has no more need to produce a huge amount of melanin so he will be able to concentrate or to divide into new tasks . Of course , based on the theory out of africa more precisely . Or, as albinism and changes in pigmentation is achieved everywhere in nature, in all cases, result in decreased pigmentation less aggressive ( as postulated Rushton ) and is the way to increase intelligence , since most people smarter , are less violent . Albinism is part of a natural variation of multiple mutations and combination of mutations with non - mutations . He would like for all classic autism spectrum , autism is an extreme variation.<br />As my curiosity never tire , I decided to read the forum Albinos some personal stories about their academic achievements .<br />Of course the selection of comments can make us have an exaggerated idea about the albino intellect, but I have the impression that albinos tend to be introverts, not only because of its rare nature (which causes conflicts with others) but also because the very low production of melanin results in a soft and shy personality. The lack of big names of albinos in science and Western culture, could be the result, first, the difficulty in getting them to lead a normal life without prejudice and second, that they are more timid, the first factor would contribute significantly to their great difficulties in gaining positions of great social relevance, psychoticism missing in these people.<br /><br />http://akinokure.blogspot.com.br/2013/07/where-is-blond-accomplishment.html#links<br /><br />As this link, blondes people seem to be more shy and conscientious. Two traits that can make perfect societies but tend to work negatively, not necessarily for the emergence of genius, but to their self exposure to the public and to the media. <br />I find it interesting to speculate where Neanderthals emerged??Gottliebnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10241834756710245462014-01-30T21:25:41.639-08:002014-01-30T21:25:41.639-08:00Also buried in "Modern humans more Neandertha...Also buried in <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/modern-humans-more-neanderthal-than-once-thought-studies-suggest/" rel="nofollow">"Modern humans more Neanderthal than once thought, studies suggest"</a> is what sounds like a plausible theory about what happened to the Neanderthals:<br /><br /><i>"...the male hybrids of Neanderthals and humans weren't very fertile. Scientists figured that out because the genes associated with the testicles in humans and the X chromosome were unusually empty of Neanderthal influence."</i>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79255277555644766862014-01-30T20:37:57.237-08:002014-01-30T20:37:57.237-08:00Related: "Modern humans more Neanderthal than...Related: <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/modern-humans-more-neanderthal-than-once-thought-studies-suggest/" rel="nofollow">"Modern humans more Neanderthal than once thought, studies suggest"</a>, CBS News, January 29, 2014.<br /><br /><i>"Many of the genes that help determine most people's skin and hair are more Neanderthal than not, according to two new studies that look at the DNA fossils hidden in the modern human genome.<br /><br />...parts of the modern human genetic blueprint ... still contain Neanderthal remnants. Overall, it's barely more than 1 percent, said two studies ...<br /><br />... However, in some places, such as the DNA related to the skin, the genetic instructions are as much as 70 percent Neanderthal ...<br /><br />... "We're more Neanderthal than not in those genes," Akey said. ...<br /><br />... Another area where we have more Neanderthal DNA is parts of genetic codes that have to do with certain immune system functions...<br /><br />... Neanderthal genes seem connected to certain diseases, such as type 2 diabetes and Crohn's disease and lupus...<br /><br />... people of more East Asian descent had slightly more Neanderthal than Europeans... Han Chinese ancestors had the highest Neanderthal DNA rate: 1.4 percent... In Europe, Finns had the highest Neanderthal DNA rate with 1.2 percent..."</i>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-56320498553835616752014-01-30T20:29:42.074-08:002014-01-30T20:29:42.074-08:00Goddamn geneticists. So Europeans are a different...Goddamn geneticists. So Europeans are a different subspecies than Africans? Jeebus. Dannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-36770530357159048442014-01-30T18:46:50.936-08:002014-01-30T18:46:50.936-08:00@ ben tillman
I was of the understanding that Nea...@ ben tillman<br /><br />I was of the understanding that Neandertal skulls were generally brachycephalic. I may be in error. If so, I am willing to be schooled on the matter. Thanks,<br /><br />Neil Templeton Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-59640731425230600922014-01-30T18:00:06.087-08:002014-01-30T18:00:06.087-08:00The idea of Neanderthal DNA impacting IQ is really...The idea of Neanderthal DNA impacting IQ is really not so far fetched.<br /><br />There is of course the fact that populations of humans with Neanderthal DNA tend to have higher IQs than those without.<br /><br />But another point I was thinking of when it was mentioned that hair and skin color were found to be impacted was that these are both derived from the same germ layer as the brain and CNS. So maybe it is something happening in early development which in turn could be affecting the brain as well. Like certain gene(s) being turned on, or overexpressed, or silenced, etc.<br /><br />The evidence so far suggests that many genes factor into IQ, and it seems reasonable that genetic changes to early development that could impact this germ layer could very well lead also to changes in the brain. What differs between Africans and Non-Africans? I know brain case volume for one. But there may be other things as well.Derb's Mossbergnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-4529320571377114602014-01-30T11:02:25.004-08:002014-01-30T11:02:25.004-08:00little bit of neanderthal in all of us.
little b...little bit of neanderthal in all of us. <br /><br />little bit me, little bit you. <br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnMuwzm7kw4<br /><br />Monkees find out they have something in common with blonde neanderthal. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-39230240651756355102014-01-30T06:48:04.304-08:002014-01-30T06:48:04.304-08:00People with mental illness could be like the hybri...People with mental illness could be like the hybrid sapiens-neanderthal, exaggerated behavior adaptative of both, less sexually selected by ''normal'' ones... Gottliebnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50364606603975954472014-01-30T06:45:39.412-08:002014-01-30T06:45:39.412-08:00I think Veblen fairly described the descendants of...<i>I think Veblen fairly described the descendants of the brachiocephalic neandertals in "The Theory of the Leisure Class."</i><br /><br />I've read the book, but I still don't follow you. Nenaderthals were extremely dolichocephalic.<br />ben tillmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-20010894502893326472014-01-30T04:36:44.801-08:002014-01-30T04:36:44.801-08:00Sharks have looked the same and lived in the same ...<i><br />Sharks have looked the same and lived in the same - is environment for hundreds of millions of years. But surely genetic drift has changed them at the level of DNA,</i><br /><br />No doubt, but the DNA difference must be pretty trivial if they look the same and are still sharks, hence the terms junk DNA and neutral DNA<br /><br /><i> But I wonder if there are subtle and yet very important differences between ancient and modern sharks. Same goes for chimps and gorillas. The basic way their brains processes information may be vastly different.</i><br /><br /><br />If there are no important differences in what we can see, why assume there are important differences in what we can't see? That violates occam's razor.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Bottledwaternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-17088790236514656132014-01-30T04:17:55.731-08:002014-01-30T04:17:55.731-08:00Behold the Liger:
http://youtu.be/1zOWYj59BXIBehold the Liger:<br /><br />http://youtu.be/1zOWYj59BXIAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28393223349570304682014-01-30T03:56:16.048-08:002014-01-30T03:56:16.048-08:00"I thought whites and Asians evolved light sk..."I thought whites and Asians evolved light skin in completely different ways."<br /><br />Two ways.<br /><br />First way was the same for Euros and *North* Asians: red hair, light skin, freckles.<br /><br />Second way was different genes. In both cases the second way overwrote the first way over time.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-68850244325807309692014-01-29T22:29:46.363-08:002014-01-29T22:29:46.363-08:00http://youtu.be/KAhq-l0LUiohttp://youtu.be/KAhq-l0LUioAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21379386927840339502014-01-29T22:15:32.157-08:002014-01-29T22:15:32.157-08:00The influx of genes from the Neanderthals was quit...<i>The influx of genes from the Neanderthals was quite small.</i><br /><br /><br />Yes, but:<br /><br /><br /><br />"Living humans do not have a lot of Neanderthal DNA, Dr. Reich and his colleagues found, but <b>some Neanderthal genes have become very common.</b> That’s because, with natural selection, useful genes survive..."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79319458717881511612014-01-29T21:59:27.353-08:002014-01-29T21:59:27.353-08:00"But that's the point. Chimps stayed in t..."But that's the point. Chimps stayed in the ancestral environment so they remained monkeys. Humans came down from the trees, moved to open savanaghs and even left Africa and the tropics, hence we evolved."<br /><br />Sharks have looked the same and lived in the same - is environment for hundreds of millions of years. But surely genetic drift has changed them at the level of DNA, while a convergent - evolution - like -process has kept them morphological the same. But I wonder if there are subtle and yet very important differences between ancient and modern sharks. Same goes for chimps and gorillas. The basic way their brains processes information may be vastly different. ichabodcranenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2652516980149154632014-01-29T21:57:47.934-08:002014-01-29T21:57:47.934-08:00I think Veblen fairly described the descendants of...I think Veblen fairly described the descendants of the brachiocephalic neandertals in "The Theory of the Leisure Class."<br /><br />Neil TempletonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-56749338999639914572014-01-29T20:23:32.301-08:002014-01-29T20:23:32.301-08:00Scientists at Harvard Medical School and the Max P...<i>Scientists at Harvard Medical School and the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany compared this high-quality Neanderthal genome to the genomes of 1,004 living people. They were able to identify specific segments of Neanderthal DNA from each person’s genome. <br /><br />“It’s a personal map of Neanderthal ancestry,” said David Reich of Harvard Medical School, who led the research team.</i><br /><br />Tell us -- what's the range from lowest to highest amount of Neanderthal DNA in this sample?ben tillmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-87864498437348826212014-01-29T20:17:47.514-08:002014-01-29T20:17:47.514-08:00Not necessarily. The influx of genes from the Nean...<i>Not necessarily. The influx of genes from the Neanderthals was quite small.</i><br /><br />You mean few instances of interbreeding? Or what? And how would you know?ben tillmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-35794707283365598142014-01-29T20:12:14.001-08:002014-01-29T20:12:14.001-08:00I'm no scientist, but I suspect nobody knows h...<i>I'm no scientist, but I suspect nobody knows how strongly the rate of change in gross phenotype correlates with the rate of mutation in coding sections of DNA. Your conclusion may be right (that human DNA changed fastest), but you are definitely wrong to base your hypothesis on gross phenotypic similarity. Look up 'convergent evolution' and you will see that similar morphologies for animals living in similar habitats can have little to do with shared DNA structure. (All the apes' habitats are more similar to those of other apes than they are to humans habitats going back to the very distant past.)</i><br /><br />But that's the point. Chimps stayed in the ancestral environment so they remained monkeys. Humans came down from the trees, moved to open savanaghs and even left Africa and the tropics, hence we evolved.Bottledwaternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-83645137805773561002014-01-29T20:08:16.488-08:002014-01-29T20:08:16.488-08:00Carl Zimmer is an associate of Razib Khan, Daniel ...<i>Carl Zimmer is an associate of Razib Khan, Daniel MacArthur, Kevin Mitchell, and Neuroskeptic. Zimmer has commented on Razib’s blog that he opposes what he would probably call “scientific racism.” </i><br /><br />I read his otherwise good book on parasites, and it includes three or four pages of profoundly stupid PC lies regarding the possibility that humans could act as parasites.ben tillmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71547051611777225552014-01-29T19:07:02.581-08:002014-01-29T19:07:02.581-08:00"Chimps are obviously as chronologically dist..."Chimps are obviously as chronologically distant from the common ancestor as humans are, and are more generations removed, however unlike humans, they have genetically preserved the common monkey phenotype, unlike humans who became a wildly different big brained bipedal talking meta-tool making creature."<br />--Bottledwater<br /><br />I'm no scientist, but I suspect nobody knows how strongly the rate of change in gross phenotype correlates with the rate of mutation in coding sections of DNA. Your conclusion may be right (that human DNA changed fastest), but you are definitely wrong to base your hypothesis on gross phenotypic similarity. Look up 'convergent evolution' and you will see that similar morphologies for animals living in similar habitats can have little to do with shared DNA structure. (All the apes' habitats are more similar to those of other apes than they are to humans habitats going back to the very distant past.)Ichabod Cranenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-56804536021129360362014-01-29T18:59:47.568-08:002014-01-29T18:59:47.568-08:00Humans and Neanderthals had a common ancestor. So ...<i>Humans and Neanderthals had a common ancestor. So maybe neither was closer to apes.</i><br /><br />Humans are genetically closer to cats than apes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-8258524323102522512014-01-29T18:35:32.770-08:002014-01-29T18:35:32.770-08:00Shouldn't the one drop rule apply to non-Afric...Shouldn't the <i>one drop rule</i> apply to non-Africans with Neanderthal ancestry?Mark Caplanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15157338755022593966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-19054986555974459852014-01-29T18:11:55.763-08:002014-01-29T18:11:55.763-08:00>Who are closer to the apes and other monkeys? ...>Who are closer to the apes and other monkeys? Neanderthals or humans? Which were more primitive?<br /><br />Humans and Neanderthals had a common ancestor. So maybe neither was closer to apes. Also, today's apes and other monkeys may have undergone just as much genetic transformation as humans in the time since we all shared a common ancestor. Actually, apes and monkeys have shorter lifespans, so there have been more ape generations than human generations since we had a common ancestor. This makes it quite possible that humans are closer genetically to the common primate ancestor of apes and humans.<br /><br />First they tell you that you came from a monkey. And now they I'm telling you that you are likely more similar to the monkey you came from than are monkeys! (Actually, the ape phenotype may have been more stable than the hominoid phenotype. This seems like it implies -- but it might not, for all I know -- that the ape genotype was also more stable.)<br /><br />Here's a question I wrestle with: which is more physically similar, chimps and gorillas, or chimps and humans? Chimps and humans should look more alike, because they are much closer phylogenetically. Sure, chimps and gorillas share similar environments, so they share similar gross morphology: upper/lower body strength proportions and limb proportions. But I'd love to see a side-by-side comparison among humans and apes of features like: hair diameter, eye shape, and other things like location of cranial nerves and nuclei in the brainstem, etc.Ichabod Cranenoreply@blogger.com