Do you consider Neanderthals human?
No. I would've considered them people though.
We could breed with them brah. One race the human race
>>65890
Neanderthal hybrids in Europe didn't pass on their genes though. East Asians have more Neanderthal admixture.
>>65855
Yes, everything since Homo erectus could be considered a human (in the sense of a person, not Homo sapiens). We already know about Homo erectus-made art, so ascribing them humanity seems legit.
Seems like Caucasians are half Neanderthal
so according to /pol/ that kinda makes them the most human.
>>66007
>3%
>half
>>66007
The interbreeding happened in the Middle East before the rest of Eurasia was settled so all non-Africans have roughly the same amount of Neanderthal admixture. Since East Asia has the least African influence they have the most Neanderthal too but it's a small difference.
>>66007
>According to /pol/
Actually /pol/ takes the actual unbiased scientific point of view.
Whites are partially neanderthal, and niggers are full homo sapiens. Neanderthals were more intelligent and advanced than homo sapiens. Homo sapiens were violent an unintelligent.
Remains the same to this day.
yes
>>66020
At some point there would have been people who were half and half.
>>66104
Yes that anon was more than slightly biased.
But
>Europeans are partially neanderthal, and africans are full homo sapiens.
is true.
And there is little doubt those with more neanderthal genes are more intelligent.
>>66063
/pol/ is the unscientific cancer killing the quality of this board desu
If Abos are considered human then Neanderthals should be too.
>>66063
Except east asians have way more Neanderthal genetics you dip
>>66188
>Implying Nazi science isnt the best science
>>66063
>Neanderthals were more intelligent and advanced
>>66272
Fucking seriously, the reason they died out was because they were too stupid to figure out trade
>>65855
If they were around now they would be classed as humans. They could breed with us and have fertile offspring, so they would just be seen as another race.
>>66052
>tfw been /pol/ thinks people from the Middle East aren't Caucasian.
>tfw when they were Caucasian before the Europeans
>tfw I'm Middle Eastern
>>66385
/pol/
>>66052
East Asians are up to 20% Neanderthal with an average in the teens. Caucasians are about 4% Neanderthal.
>>66385
Do you have /pol/eo? There's a vaccine for that, unless of course you think you'll get autism.
>>66385
/pol/ please stop shitposting.
>>66385
Wow maybe you are a Neanderthal, considering how goddamn retarded you are
They weren't homo saipan sapian, but they were homo. And sapian. Anatomically modern humans just love the sapian business so much we decided to be it twice.
>>65855
Well yes, they're a different branch of the human family tree. Same difference as between wolves and domesticated dogs. A species is not human anymore if we can't breed with them.
>>66446
>the current middle east is literally Somalia tier
"I know nothing about the middle east but let me tell you about the middle east"
>>66238
Hello /pol/!
Aborigines are Homo sapiens because they, despite being morphologically dissimilar from other human populations, are genetically very close to other people (more precisely, they stem from the same very quick migration out of Africa as Europeans and Asians). Africans are far more divided genetically from each other than Aborigines are from Europeans (while the case where there is small genetic variation and yet extremely different phenotype in nature is rare, it happens to exist in humans).
Neanderthals, on the other hand, are genetically different species.
Look at the chart on picrel, it's pretty interesting
>>66463
/pol/
>>66463
You need actual proof and facts for anything you say to be an argument
>>66463
You offered no argument. You just gave a long list of insults and generalisations.
>>65931
They did though. Just because East Asians have more doesnt mean Europeans have none.
Besides, we still only have one Denisovan tested. Who knows whether east asians show higher admixture because Denisovans had already mixed with Neanderthals and Asians have more denisovan admixture.
>>66446
> but the current middle east is literally Somalia tier.
Outside of warzones the Middle East is not that bad as a place to live in.
>>66464
You could breed with Neanderthals though, hence why non-African humans have Neanderthal admixture.
>>66476
>Google.com
Look at that i found out china is a communist country that kills baby children and eats domestic animals. Well who would of thought that
>>66518
That's what I'm saying, I consider them humans.
>>66409
Easy asians are up to 20% Neandertal, Source? seems like bs to me
>>66463
>CHINKS ARE STINKY LITTLE MANLETS! TINY PEPE LOL
>WHY IS NOBODY LISTENING TO ME STOP INSULTING ME
literally u rn
I'd fuck a cutie neanderthal girl with wide hips and sparce clothing
>>66372
>hurr durr I know what /pol/ thinks
No everyone knows that Middle Easterners, North Africans, and Ethiopians are Caucasian but we all acknowledge that they aren't white. White has become synonymous with European culture, ideas, race and religion. Europeans are a subrace of the larger Caucasoid race just like Bantus are a subrace of the larger Negroid race.
>tfw I'm Middle Eastern
Great, identify with your culture and your people . I don't have any animosity towards different people, we just want our own lands and peoples to be secure. Which is upset by current immigration laws.
>>66409
And East Asians do extremely well in intelligence tests. Neanderthal admixture wasn't a negative in the slightest, the people with significant admixture tend to be more intelligent than others (Europeans, East Asians vs Africans/Abos)
>>66385
Yeah, Japan is so much worse than Moldova. It must be because white people are so special.
>>66532
This is where I post reaction images in hopes that your teenage ass grows up
>>66532
pigs, cows, and chickens are domestic animals you dumb sack of shit
>>66518
You could, but most of those breeding attempts are likely to have ended in an abortion.
>>66534
If they were still around I think they would be classed as humans.
>>66535
http://materiais.dbio.uevora.pt/MA/Artigos/Neanderthal_Genetics_Slatkin.pdf
http://www.genetics.org/content/early/2013/02/04/genetics.112.148213
https://www.genomeweb.com/genetic-research/papers-support-possibility-second-wave-neanderthal-admixture-east-asian-ancestors
The current hypothesis is that is that there was a second "round" of interbreeding with a Neanderthal population in East Asia which increased the Neanderthal admixture.
>>66553
>Moldova
>Implying eastern european gypsy shitholes are white, or share anything in common with actual white europe and its culture.
>>66409
No they fucking arent, how stupid can a person be?
I bet you read the article with your shit filled eyes wrong. It says East Asians are 15-30% MORE neanderthal than Europeans. Not 15-30% Neanderthal.
You should. They were recently classified as a subspecies of human being.
The only thing stopping people classifying the major races of human beings as 'subspecies' is political correctness. People don't want to think that Africans or East Asians are different from Europeans on a biological level.
>>66601
>Implying butchering cows is as bad as skinning and boiling someones dog alive
>>65855
Yes. They could breed with Homo sapiens, had their own culture. Why not?
>>66620
Well the Baltic people (Lithuanians and Latvians) speak one of the most conservative indo-european languages and are genetically the most European.
So, which nations do better, Japan or the Baltics?
>>65855
They were humans in a different evolutionary stage, no?
>>66670
Looks like your average scots.
>>66694
No. Homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthals coexisted and shared a common ancestor. But one didn't evolve into the other.
>>66730
Ah nevermind then
>>66694
No, they weren't. Only 0.12% of their genome was different from their homo sapiens counterparts. By comparing the DNA of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, we can conclude that they diverged from a common ancestor between 350,000 and 400,000 years ago. This ancestor was probably Homo heidelbergensis. Heidelbergensis originated between 800,000 and 1,300,000 years ago, and continued until about 200,000 years ago. It ranged over Eastern and South Africa, Europe and Western Asia. Between 350,000 and 400,000 years ago the African branch is thought to have started evolving towards modern humans and the Eurasian branch towards Neanderthals. Scientists do not agree when Neanderthals can first be recognised in the fossil record, with dates ranging between 200,000 and 300,000 years BP.
>>66497
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v512/n7513/full/nature13408.html
Everything starting with homo erectus is human. That's when human culture begins, symbolism, language, early ritual based society. And if you saw a homo erectus in the street today, you might think he looks kind of ugly, but you wouldn't give it a second thought.
Homo habilis is traditionally classified as human already (hence homo), but I don't think that's accurate, and the scientific consensus is also shifting in the direction of considering it a type of australopithecus instead.
>>66718
edgy
>>66626
lollllll
>>66795
>Poland and Russia
>God-tier
Nigga I am Polish and you a dumb motherfucker
>>66795
>Poland and russia are god tier, savior of europe countries
Have you been to either of these countries?
>>66857
Ignore him lad, he thinks that the amount of brown people in a country trumps every other aspect of said country.
>>66467
what do those letters represent, lineages in what kind? because they don't correspond to haplogroups at all
Hominin are humans by definition
>>65855
> Do you consider homo (sapiens) neanderthalensis human?
Homo = human, so yes
>>65855
whites are humans , so yes
I fucking love this board, /pol/ always gets BTFO
Also no, Neanderthals weren't human, they were hominids who went extinct, no long after some of them mixed with homo sapiens in the middle east.
>>68451
that's cool but more importantly were they white and christian or were they muslim shitskins?
>>68451
If they could mix with humans they were likely a subspecies of human.
I know I'm being "edgy" here, but fuck it: I consider Neanderthals to be a hell of a lot more "human" than most people who are alive today.
>>66626
Yeah, that seems more accurate considering on the highest end it would only place East Asians as .4% Neanderthal.
>>68530
>mules and donkeys are a subspecies of horses
>ligers are a subspecies of lions and tigers
>black and white horses are different
>chihuahuas and great danes are different species
>ignoring the fact that term species and subspecies don't really have a universal meaning
>>68702
Mules and ligers aren't really fertile as a rule. Neanderthals and humans were viable.
>chihuahuas and great danes are different species
Wat? They're subspecies or breeds of dog.
>>68741
>what is greentext
>>66670
Looks like a slav
>>65855
They remind me of some people that also have X linked genes, are from the middle east, have prognathis, sloping forehead, defined brow ridges and a big nose...
>>66297
So, they weren't so intelligent then
>>65855
I believe this thread belongs to /sci/
>>68846
Their brain cases were larger, it's entirely possible that they were smarter but were fucked by the Toba eruption and the ensuing homo sapiens migration from Africa.
>>66795
>god tier
Anyone who uses this term is a member of the double digit club. Making it bannable would be a simple hygiene measure.
>>68911
That means nothing, whales or elephants have bigger brain cases than us, that doesn't make them smarter
>>68985
Forgot my image
>>68985
When adjusted for body size, neanderthals still have larger brain cases and it's actually even more impressive. Yes, the amount of brain matter you have compared to your body size actually does relate to how much brain power you have.
>>66297
>more intelligent, less violent than homo sapiens
>too stupid to figure out trade, a non violent means of acquiring goods
>>69028
It's quite inaccurate though.
I mean, You wouldn't consider tree shrews the pinnacle of intelligence?
>>68813
rude
>>68911
>it's entirely possible that they were smarter
I don't know about smarter, but they were far from stupid. They had skillful knowledge of tool-making, created art, probably had a language, etc.
>>69122
buried their dead too
Homo neanderthalensis and homo sapiens are different species. Homo sapiens are what's defined as human. Modern humans (homo sapiens sapiens) are a subspecies of homo sapiens and its only other subpecies was homo sapiens idaltu, now extinct.
The understanding of taxonomy in this thread is poor.
>>66188
This board is part of chink moot's plan to redditize his new asset and make it appear more politically correct and appealing so he can Jew more out of advertisers.
You're literally contributing to making 4chan more like Reddit, tumblr and deviantart just to spite a few boards like /pol/
Please leave and as long as you're taking suggestions drink some bleach and ammonia
>>69074
dude they were still a homo species, not an entire different species with an extremely different brain wiring
I think it's accepted that they most likely had much better vision for instance
>>69131
Neanderthals being a subspecies of Home sapiens (Home sapiens neanderthalensis) is actually a theory that has gained a lot of weight lately.
>>69185
I wish I was an Eagle man
>>69110
Sorry Ivan, I thought I was in pol, It won't happen again
>>69185
I'm just saying that it is too rash to say that they were smarter than modern humans on the basis that their brain were marginally larger.
Did they even have higher brain to body ratio? I know their brains were heavier than humans' of course, but despite being shorter they were also heavier than modern humans.
>>69131
Your understanding of what conclusions to draw from a small pool of evidence is poor.
>>69122
>I don't know about smarter, but they were far from stupid
This.
>>69332
>Skull shape is Phrenology now
Are you fucking retarded, or just pretending to be?
>>69332
This thread belongs to the science board, not pol
>>69290
I agree it's not a certainty, but the comparison with other species body/brain size is a bit off tbqh, just that.
Indeed, I think they didn't have a prefrontal cortex as big as we do.
>>69311
Current scientific standards are how we define species. The majority of relevant experts currently accept that neanderthals aren't a subspecies of homo sapiens. This isn't something you can argue against, it's a simple fact. If and when there's enough material to justifiably review neanderthals' classification, then we can call them human. Until then, they're not human.
I don't want to add fuel to the fire, but is this theory attracting white nationalists who would want to differentiate themselves from blacks as much as possible? And if so, how they do justify Asians having more Neanderthal admixture?
>>68895
I put it here in case somebody wanted to discuss what it means to be human on a philosophical level and not just taxonomical.
>>69354
Stop being racist outside /pol/.
There's one race, the human race.
>>69428
I'm not arguing about that, I'm saying that we can't claim that the only other subspecies of H. sapiens was idaltu because we can't rule out the existence of others because we haven't found them yet.
>>66467
>Africans are far more divided genetically from each other than Aborigines are from Europeans
Calling bullshit, unless we consider North Africans in the same category as Sub-Saharans.
On a PCA, all Africans are definitely clustering closer to each other than Europeans are to Australian Aborigines.
Haplogroup diversity isn't the only thing to measure "diversity", you know.
>>69473
It's the only known subspecies aside from us. I know we might find others, obviously, but that's not relevant to whether or not neanderthals are considered human.
>>69466
I cannot even tell if this is sarcastic or not.
Believing that there are no differences between races is literally creationism-tier.
>>65855
They are humans by definition
baka...
>>66468
>calls you out on your bullshit
Yep. Definitely /pol/, you fucking faggot.
>>69734
>Believing that there are no differences between races is literally creationism-tier
Or what modern academical consensus believes. /pol/ is where you can talk about your favorite pseudoscience, be it racism or psychic abilities.
>>69924
>Or what modern academical consensus believes.
Most medieval scholars also happened to unanimously agree with the Church lest they get persecuted :^).
>>66123
He is not bad-looking, tbqh.
>>69924
>humans are immune to evolution
father plz
>>69263
>crystals
Everyone knows ammonia and bleach, when mixed, creates vapors that cure asthma. Mix in sink, inhale vapors, and enjoy being asthma free.
>>69466
>backtoreddit.png
>>69957
he is my neander-husbando tbqh
no homo tho
>>70074
He looks like a robust and unusually large Neolithic European to me.
>>68911
>Their brain cases were larger, it's entirely possible that they were smarter
>BIG BRAIN =SMART
I can't believe I just read that, when will you faggot learn it isn't about the size but the connections between neurones, the shape and the blood circulation inside it?
Homo sapiens outclassed homo neanderthalensis in all of those. Sapiens had more advanced tools too.
>>68985
They also have a lot lower neuron density. Humans and neanderthals had a much closer density of neurons so relative size of the brains could have had considerable difference.
I mean isnt the main point why humans are smarter than our simian ancestors because of our larger brain?
>>70205
Memeing aside, yeah he really does.
Reminds me of Franco Columbu, but with an even more prominent face.
>>68741
Dogs and wolves are viable too but they are still different species.
>>70074
Does he have such a solid beard to hide the characteristic receding jaw?
>>70390
Grey wolves and dogs are the same species, Canis lupus.
>>70311
Why do you give the Neanderthals so little credit? After all they had already spread all over Eurasia up to 600 000 years before modern humans did. Their technology was almost equally impressive to humans right until the cro-magnon times.
>>70442
eh, looks alright tbqh
>>69465
Well, you should have said that in the title. Still, as an evolutionary biologist I like your thread.
>>69466
This thread is not about black or asian people if that's you are afraid of.
>>69028
>>70311
There is a direct correlation between high intelligence and large brain size. If you could get the same brain power in a smaller brain, evolution would have done that. Extra brain mass is doing something and evolved for some reason. Extra mass doesn't necessarily mean it's allocated to intellectual functions, but it is very likely.
>>70473
That's Lapedo child, he was part neanderthal part human.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapedo_child
>>70074
Looks like your average cro-magnon
>>70484
They aren't, they have 2% genetic difference from Grey wolves. And that genetic difference is that big in this small period of time because it was guided evolution (eugenics for dogs if you like).
>>70074
Robust Europeans, and especially people with acromegaly, can have pseudo-neanderthal features.
>>70486
Speaking about the Cro-magnon (EEMH), did the Neanderthals ever dicked them?
>>70633
It's an inaccurate and outdated term a lot of the time.
>>70484
Different subspecies tho, dogs are Canis lupus familiaris.
>>70620
Who else in Europe would have if not them?
>>70580
>average cro-magnon
I don't agree. They would look closer to something like this, where as Chabal given he's French is more similar to the farmer Europeans.
>>70591
I'm only familiar with the studies from 1993 when the difference was .2% and not 2%. Which was the reason dogs was classified as a subspecies in the first place. As far as I know this is the most widely accepted classification, although regarding dogs as their own species is somewhat acceptable too.
>>70667
Yeah I know. But it's important to differ between species and subspecies. Especially since the discussion started with if neanderthals are their own species or just a sapiens subspecies.
>>70732
What's the difference between cro-magnon and modern human anyway? They don't have significant taxonomic difference from what I've read. Of course I know absolutely nothing about this subject so can someone actually enlighten me?
>>70836
Cro-Magnons were just aboriginal European hunter gatherers. They were completely modern. The difference is mostly in size and robustness.
>>70732
Really? The image I have of them is like the books say, have to research more
>>69185
Yeah but could they see above 30fps
>>70871
>The difference is mostly in size and robustness.
And a 50+% of their genes are now gone, except in the East Baltic.
>>71038
That's where I'm from so it's ok by me.
But anyway, I wouldnt say half their genes are gone, just that there arent any pure cro-magnons anymore. But that said, there arent any pure neolithic farmers either.
>>70205
Err... neolithic farmers probably looked as modern day south europeans since they are genetically similar, especially Sardinians.
Neanderthals seems to have had a ridiculous voice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6ixCAjj9K8
>>71448
Deutsch is pretty normal language , tbqh m8
>>66134
Not all Africans are full Homo sapiens. Some West and East African groups have Neanderthal, as do the Khoisan.
>>66549
>Ethiopians
So being part white makes you white? Then nearly all blacks in the Americas are white people.
Hey guys, I'm white now! Share your cheese and women with me!
>>72270
>implying
http://idibon.com/the-weirdest-languages/
Neanderthals had a bigger brain, and in some areas of the brain, they had an advantage (visually they were our superiors), but in others it was slightly less advanced.
Doesn't mean they were completely superior to us in intelligence, doesn't mean they were completely inferior. Is it that hard to grasp?
>>65855
I personally believe that we were always humans and that other creatures that walked on two feet lived alongside us
>>65855
No, I consider them hominids.
>>73068
That documentary is retarded
>>71448
I don't know why you wouldn't post the original
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o589CAu73UM
>>66782
>believing Chinese superiority myths
Neanderthals did, in fact, pass their genes on so that just about everyone who isn't a black African has some of their genetics.
The Chinese are very keen to promote this bizarre myth that they are somehow a different species of human, but it's utter hogwash.
>>73068
>implying that's not complete bullshit
>>66409
no they aren't, they're single digit % Denisovan
Anyone see this? It was a two part series (needed more parts in my opinion) about Homo sapiens leaving Africa for Asia and Europe, meeting Homo erectus and Neanderthals.
>>69428
humans are the homos with culture, human meaning something more like "person" than an actual biological classification
>>70591
eugenics is a social philosophy about humans specifically, not just a word you can use to sound smart
you want: selective breeding, artificial selection, or even domestication
also "2%" genetic difference doesn't necessarily make a discrete species, especially when that 2% most likely does not refer to 2% of their entire genome
>>72515
well they didn't have more developed structures, but just larger sections that could be little more than cold adaptation
of course that increase in size because of cod adaptation could mean certain increases in things like visual acuity, yeah
>>74127
Your picture is.
>>74352
>humans are the homo with culture
Homo erectus made art some 700,000 years ago. And they're considered the first true (from the neck down that is, their brains were too small) humans. Neanderthals certainly had culture too, as did Denisovans with their jade art (pic related). If those species were to live to the current day, they would at least be on par with us with art (except maybe Erectus).
>>74505
So this is pure fact, huh?
>>70732
>they would more like something like this
No, his features are ridicolously exaggerated even for the cro magnons who were robust on average, also I doubt they had enough food to inflate like that fucking sack of shit in your pic.
>>65855
What is human? They were certainly of the Homo genus, and could breed with "modern" humans.
Also the reason they disappeared was because Homo sapiens breeds like fucking rabbits and just overwhelmed them.
The dangers of racemixing.
>>74974
>getting new genes to stop inbreeding is bad
>even if it's from an actual species that survived in the cold for hundreds of thousands of years
Look at these pure blooded Afrikaaners.
>>75062
you know a separated population is genetically viable at or around 120 persons, right? Do you think island peoples are all mouth breathing retards or something?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_population
The human bottleneck was once as low as 1000 individuals. That's the entire population.
>>75099
That is a half human, half Neanderthal child.
And how the fuck is a gorilla-human hybrid with red eyes more truthful than actual, DNA evidence of what Neanderthals looked like?
>>75119
I know about the bottleneck, thanks to the Toba catastrophe. However, island people do move around in search of new DNA (really, pussy) to put inside their people. And doesn't the 120 people situation apply for small populations? You'll need some more to support the entire species in case the world goes to shit without genetic diseases.
You know, even though humans are fairly inbred, Neanderthals were even more so. They were isolated from each other way worse than we were.
>>75241
Just look at the skulls man. This is a hominid.
Is there any archeological evidence that they wore clothes. Sewing needles have been found in homophobes sapien habitats but has anything been found with Neanderthals?
I have a sneaking suspicion we were dealing with something that looked completely different than what has been advertised.
>>65855
What's a human anyways?
>>75276
Yes, and by technical definition, so is this. I think you're looking for hominin, which includes the genus Homo and other proto-human species like Kenyanthropus, Australopithecus, and Paranthropus.
>>75441
>living in the cold ass Ice Age Eurasia
>no clothes
It's not like they were too much hairier than we are. I mean, Europeans are hairy, but not as much as you'd might think.
>>75508
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo
>Homo is the genus that comprises the species Homo sapiens, which includes modern humans, as well as several extinct species classified as ancestral to or closely related to modern humans—as for examples Homo habilis and Homo neanderthalensis. The genus is about 2.8 million years old; it first appeared as its earliest species Homo habilis, which emerged from the genus Australopithecus, which itself had previously split from the lineage of the genus Pan, the chimpanzees. Homo is the only genus assigned to the subtribe Hominina which, with the subtribes Australopithecina and Panina, comprise the tribe Hominini (see evolutionary tree below). All species of the genus Homo plus those species of the australopithecines that arose after the split from Pan are called hominins.
Was that so hard?
>>75276
>Homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis
>sapiens
>implying they were a subspecies
Might as well make Heidelbergensis a subspecies too, if you think about it.
Is Varg's thesis that Nordic people mixed with Neanderthal true?
>>75680
I'm saying they weren't human.
Do you think infants should have the right to vote?
>>75735
All non-Africans mixed with Neanderthals
>>74440
What he was saying was that guided evolution is a similar concept to eugenics, except instead of humans, applied to dogs. You pedantic ass.
>>75799
Or devonians.
>>65855
>Do you consider Neanderthals human?
More than some I see around these days.
>>75988
but the dogs aren't doing eugenics on themselves, it's just weird to bring up eugenics just because you're talking about domestication
it's a pretty clear /pol/ indicator
>pedantic
>an insult on /his/
yeah, having high standards for accuracy is fucking awful
>>75738
They weren't Homo sapiens, but they were humans. That's like saying a tiger and a lion aren't roaring cats (also called panthers or big cats) just because one looks different. They're a part of the same genus.
>>75799
>All non-Africans mixed with Neanderthals
Not really.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/04/news/la-ol-neanderthals-africa-dna-20140204
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_human_admixture_with_modern_humans
>Neanderthal contribution has been very scarcely but significantly found in the Maasai, an East African people. After identifying African and non-African ancestry among the Maasai, it can be concluded that recent non-African modern human (post-Neanderthal) gene flow was the source of the contribution as about an estimated 30% of the Maasai genome can be traced to non-Africans from about 100 generations ago.
Not to mention some West African ethnic groups having Neanderthal DNA thanks to mixing with North Africans. Long story short, only the pure-blooded Africans don't have Neanderthal.
>>76176
>commonly referred to
>using scientific terms like haplotype
pick a side, either you're using common speech and should get out or use the scientific terms and stop talking about races within homo sapiens sapiens
>>66670
Looks like an uncle of mine.
>>76148
>high standards
>nitpicking
Eugenics is a similar concept to guided evolution. If you're honestly too dense to understand what he was trying to communicate, perhaps /b/ is more your speed.
>>76176
The definition of race used to be the same as species, but now it's the same as subspecies. There is only one remaining subspecies of Homo sapiens, H. sapiens sapiens. The other, H. sapiens idaltu, died out in Africa some 160,000 years ago. Those would be a true race.
The best thing is, no one could tell at first glance if this fucker suddenly came back to life.
>>76308
It's not that I don't understand, it's that I understand all too well faggot
Really, when you explain guided evolution or artificial selection bringing up eugenics is weird and /pol/ shit anon
That anon just assumes that guided evolution is too hard to understand, but everyone understands eugenics
How is that not /pol/ shit?
>>66297
No, it was low birth rates that killed them off.
In fact, being introverted in a sense killed them off.
>>76230
>pick a side, either you're using common speech and should get out or use the scientific terms and stop talking about races within homo sapiens sapiens
There is a mix of terms being used in the thread, and the entirety of my post was in English. If you have problems with that, go back to pol.
>>72318
No, North East Africans are Caucasoid although they're black skinned.
>>76159
Imo they are not human.
They were primitive primates. They had low, sloped foreheads, extremely wide nasal bridges, the proganthism, etc.
>>76364
>bringing up eugenics is weird and /pol/ shit
Sorry you got triggered, you mental midget.
>>74531
Apparently, homo Neanderthalensis may have figured out how to sail 50 000 years before homo Sapiens did.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2108651/Neanderthals-beat-modern-humans-seas-50-000-years-say-scientists.html
http://www.livescience.com/24810-neanderthals-sailed-mediterranean.html
Keep in mind these are sources used by wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Behavior
>>76159
Which is logical by looking at the facial features of the populations of the African horn compared to Central Africa and further South.
Can't speak for West Africa though. I'd argue that it wasn't direct interbreeding with Neanderthals, but interbreeding with North Africans who had been interbreeding earlier with Neanderthals.
>>76523
>North East Africans are Caucasoid
Once again, just because Africans and Caucasians fucked in a population doesn't mean EVERY SINGLE PERSON there is that race. There are Ethiopians black as night and Ethiopians that look like Arabs. Doesn't mean they're all Caucasoid, they're mainly mixed with both. That's like saying Indians are Caucasoid just because of North India.
>>76536
>low, sloped foreheads, extremely wide nasal bridges, the proganthism
Modern humans can have this too, but not to the same degree. We're more baby-faced than any other ape. Pic related.
But that's besides the point anon. Neanderthals were our sister species, evolving from Heidelbergensis. That doesn't mean they were primitive primates. Sure, they had some archaic features, but if they're primitive primates because of that, then the vast, vast majority of humans who aren't Asian and Khoisan should be too.
>>76951
You're the one who can't stop talking about it.
>>76783
It's not too obvious for the Khoisan though. Some left Africa and came back, bringing new DNA with them.
>>76647
It's also theorized that Erectus might have built primitive boats before us too. If that turns out to be true, the differences between us and them (them being other species of humans) shrinks even more.
>>76951
>I'm not pol, you are!
You're quibbling over insignificant details, and complaining about grammar, then accusing people of "false flag" shit. Just like pol.
Yeah, sure, you're not a poltard at all....
>>76934
>Once again, just because Africans and Caucasians fucked in a population doesn't mean EVERY SINGLE PERSON there is that race. There are Ethiopians black as night and Ethiopians that look like Arabs. Doesn't mean they're all Caucasoid, they're mainly mixed with both. That's like saying Indians are Caucasoid just because of North India.
You're absolutely right and thanks for correcting me.
>>77165
No problem man.
>>77002
Does the difference between crows and humans shrink because they know how to fish with bred or use tools?
>>77493
Humans and Neanderthals are between 99.5 and 99.7% similar. where did you get the crow thing from? Intelligence isn't just found among apes.
>>77662
Yes but those tiny percentages make a world of difference because it replicates of trillions of times
>the crow thing from?
Crows are the smartest birds in the world m8.
https://youtu.be/y_8hPcnGeCI
https://youtu.be/DDmCxUncIyc
>>65855
In the same way a dog is a wolf or a cat is a lion.
>>76934
>Modern humans can have this too
Not even close to what is found in a neanderthal and in other primitive primates like it.
>>65855
YES; AN OVERLY PRIMITIVE HUMAN RACE/SUBSPECIES; ONE OF THE PRIME THREE HUMAN "ROOT RACES" —NEANDERTHAL, CROMAGNON, ARYAN.
>>66694
Evolution doesn't work in stages. This isn't Pokemon.
>>68741
>Mules and ligers aren't really fertile as a rule. Neanderthals and humans were viable.
No, many of them were mules as well.
>>77493
>can't tell the difference between homology and homoplasy
lol
>>77890
>b8
>everything i don't agree with is bait!! :bbbd
>>66297
No you idiot it was because the expanding ice sheets killed off the forests they relied on to hunt in. Their bodies were short and stout like the feckin rhyme and they were incapable of catching fast prey in the open tundra unlike their homo cousins.
The populations gradually became cut off from one another and they eventually died, unable to reproduce effectively enough.
>>77975
>calling ayrian a race or subspecies of homo sapiens contemporaneous with neanderthals
>not b8
This is where I occasion you to present some evidence, cause that is far from the popular explanation in the field of physical anthropology today.
>>68741
Female ligers are definitely fertile, its uncertain if males are too. Its not known since the male ligers have little to no sexual drive. They have been mesured to have sufficient testosterone levels to support semen production though.
http://www.ligerworld.com/are-the-ligers-sterile.html
>>78059
DID I CLAIM THAT THE ARYAN RACE, AND THE NEANDERTHAL RACE, WERE MUTUALLY CONTEMPORANEOUS? I DID NOT.
IMPROVE YOUR "READING COMPREHENSION".
>>72366
>Kongo
>Kikongo
DA KIKONGO STRAIN!
DINE!
>>78367
But m-muh hyperborea
Wotan was a myth, then Hitler happened
>>66670
looks like bukowski
>>78367
>The Aryan race is a myth.
1. NO, IT IS NOT.
2. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT A MYTH IS.
>>78555
YOU DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT THE ARYAN RACE WAS.
>>73301
>just about everyone who isn't a black African has some of their genetics.
Old information, they've found ancient Eurasian admixture in sub-saharans and they're now known to have about 1% neanderthal ancestry from it. Also everyone's else's neanderthal ancestry is something like half a percent higher than previously thought thanks to the new finding.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2015/10/07/science.aad2879.full
