>want to know about the neanderthals, what happened to them, with whom they mixed, where humanity started and how we reached this point of evolution
>liberals and afrocentrists IMMEDIATELY start pointing out about how humanity started on africa, how we are all africans and how africans are the real humans
>conspiracy nuts and stormweenies say bullshit like the neanderthals mixed with humans which resulted in a superior human species (caucasians) while the humans that didn't mix resulted in an inferior human species (negroes)
look buddies. i do not care about africans. i do not care about superiority. i am who i am and i am not going to change. i will also not change my ideals since i chose them by being objective.
all i want is the ONE, TRUE, UNBIASED, unrelated with agendas and ABSOLUTE truth about the origin of humanity. can i have it?
if such a thing even exists that is. as far as i know, perhaps all this bullshit are just baseless theories of failed scientists...
>all i want is the ONE, TRUE, UNBIASED, unrelated with agendas and ABSOLUTE truth about the origin of humanity. can i have it?
No
>>73750088
i demand it
>>73750088
we are all come from corn
http://www.aztec-history.com/aztec-creation-story.html
>>73750237
we demand you pay your debts
>>73750443
i don't have any
>>73750004
>looking for intelligent conversation on /pol/
>>73750004
>how africans are the real humans
>neanderthals mixed with humans which resulted in a superior human species (caucasians) while the humans that didn't mix resulted in an inferior human species (negroes)
Wow, you just answered your own question.
>we're all africans!
This shit triggers the hell out of me. It's equivalent to saying that we're all tadpoles because humans, mammals, and all tetrapods evolved from some amphibian common ancestor hundreds of millions of years ago. It implies that just because you stem from the same root means that nothing has changed since then. And we've very clearly had major evolutionary changes since then separate from blacks.
The thing about high IQs resulting from human populations that mixed with neanderthals is true. Sub-saharan Africans have 0% Neanderthal DNA. 1-4% Neanderthal DNA results in a very significant difference in average IQ.
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/
Man why don't you go to the library and get a book on that.
>>73752461
I was waiting for this day, /pol/ discovers the benefits of race-mixing
>>73752949
Hello snake man, how is snake land?
>>73750004
african homo sapiens, or archaic man (cro magnon), at the time of the neanderthals mixed with a different species of hominin that existed at the same time as neanderthals (there was a whole bunch of random hominins at one time.)
Homo sapiens that ventured north into europe did meet and mix with neanderthals, who had music and art and could speak although their vocal cords didn't allow them the range of expression we had.
What resulted were two different offshoots of humanity. Whether you want to call one superior to the other is up to you.
Basically both sides were mating with a more "primitive" version of hominin (although no archealogist will ever use that word, it's considered racist or some shit.)
For all intensive purposes though, it is generally agreed that the hominin the homo sapiens in africa were breeding with were even more "primitive" than the neanderthals.
Although there is definite exceptions- sub saharan africans have no prognathism (snout like skulls) and other primitive skull features like a vaulted forehead and prominent brow. So you have some blacks that might not have mated with this primitive form of hominin.
Really though, we don't know a lot, whether there is actually holes in the fossil record or whether there is being information that is being supressed, who knows
>>73752949
RARE FLAG
A
R
E
F
L
A
G
>>73753900
>For all intensive purposes
Leaf education, ladies and gentlemen
>>73752949
Fuck off mullat
>>73755072
>thejoke(you).gif
>>73753900
How does mixing with a "primitive" species (Neanderthals) result in higher IQ? Why was a more primitive species (Neanderthals) capable of music, art, and speech? Were Homo sapiens not as advanced as Neanderthals? More advanced? I have so many questions...
>>73757185
How is it that Neanderthal "died out" 30,000 years ago yet 4.2% of my dna is Neanderthal?
>>73750004
>the neanderthals mixed with humans which resulted in a superior human species (caucasians) while the humans that didn't mix resulted in an inferior human species (negroes)
its true and not even to do with white supremacism, since asians/hispanics/arabs/ect have neanderthal ancestors too, its just africans and australian abos who dont, which is why they have sub 85 IQs
>>73758395
>4.2% of my dna
that's on the high end of the range. are you jewish by any chance?
>>73757185
Perhaps 'primitive' and 'advanced' aren't sufficient words to describe what it is that has happened.
Our earliest known ancestor lived in Africa. They were called Australopithecus africanus, if I recall correctly. Modern Homo sapiens evolved during a global ice age in sub-Saharan Africa. From there they migrated North and settled around the world. Where ever they settled they outcompeted the other, similar humans (Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis) and also mixed a bit with them.
Most of this theory is based on the location of the oldest found bones, genetic differences and similarities.
>>73758395
Human DNA is 98% identical to that of a chimpanzee.
>>73750004
well thankfully the faggot ass narrative of we're all africans is changing in archaeology. Wait 20-30 years and I bet we'll figure it out, as long as muslims don't eradicate the middle east and europe.
>>73753900
>all intensive purposes
You had me going until then bro.
>>73752657
By this logic, neanderthals are geniuses compared to the cro magnons how come they went extinct?
>>73758644
0.1% Ashkenazi according to the same dna test
99.8% "Broadly Northern European"
0.1% Undesignated
>so close, yet so far....
>>73753900
why are you spreading falsity? sub saharan africans have the most prognathism and a bunch of other features which are in between chimpanzees and eurasians
>>73759024
Neanderthals were incredibly specialized compared to Homo sapiens. They were solely adapted to survive during ice age europe and when the world exited the ice age they couldn't compete with the Homo sapiens.
>>73759102
i only asked because a jewish friend had high neathderthal dna (about 3%) and I thought it was perhaps because he was a shapeshifting jew. I guess not.
>>73753900
Next time partner, say intensive porpoises.
They'll get the joke.
Otherwise, well said.
>mfw 84% more neanderthal DNA than the rest of the customers
Anybody else here wish that the Neanderthals, Cro Magnons, Homo-Erectus, and whatnot were still around today? I think it would be pretty cool
>>73750004
>genetics doesn't real
>>73759811
No. They would be like retarded niggers. Sure you'd have the novelty of having them alive, but they would all be sub-100 IQ. Maybe if we kept them in zoos.
>>73759892
And even if we kept them in zoos, I assure you some retarded SJW movement would eventually demand that "They're human too" and we'd release them and every single one of them would be on the benefit.
>>73759811
>>73759892
Yeah. Pretty sure homo-erectus lives primarily in Detroit
>>73760089
kek
>>73760058
But weren't Neanderthals supposedly smarter than Homo-sapiens?
>>73760089
But imagine being able to observe them side by side and compare/contast. How different would they be? Would the difference be large or little? What if they were better/smarter than Homosapien Africans?
IDK, shit seems like i'd be cool to see
>>73759811
gosh, liberals would import them and give them free education.
>>73760330
>But weren't Neanderthals supposedly smarter than Homo-sapiens?
No. They had larger brains, certainly, but they lacked any development of the frontal lobe, which is where Homo sapiens intelligence comes from. They did however, have much higher pain tolerance, reflexes and coordination.
>>73760330
Just from living in Atlanta, I'm pretty sure the differences can't be that different.
>>73760436
>>73760573
But what if because of their existence, it changes our timeline? Like, what if we enslaved Homo-Erectus's instead of African Homosapiens because of the Erectus's superior strength and easier to train like a dog(I mean, I'm just assuming that because they'd think less like humans and more like animals). The possibilities could be endless
>>73760485
Interesting. But imagine if we had them in sports, watching a UFC fight between a Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon or Homosapien.
>>73758535
abos actually do have neanderthal
>>73760699
You can still enslave niggas and use them as dogs.
Who's awesome?
I am.
>>73750004
Following Out Of Africa (which is still trash), you could still make the case for populations of Homo Sapiens interbreeding with other hominids as they migrated.
Caucasoids (european whites and slavs) have a relatively high admixture of neanderthalensis and lesser degree of denisovan dna. It's believe that Neanderthals bred into Sapiens, and carried over Neanderthalensis advances (tool use, construction, social specialisation, the development of religion etc).
Mongoloids (asians and american indigenous tribes) have a higher degree of denisovan dna comparatively, though the degree to which the Denisovan hominids played into mongoloid growth and development isn't greatly known
Africoids (there are distinctions between western, southern and eastern populations, where there are significant different admixtures of haplogroups - eastern and northern populations have comparatively high proportions of typically caucasoid haplogroups for example) stayed in Africa, and there's suggestion that western and southern populations overtook and absorbed older populations of homo erectus before they became extinct.
Aboriginal populations seem to fit an earlier inbetween stage of homo erectus and that didn't breed with (or find) other populations, getting dispersed over the further flung regions. Some populations of the polynesian and oceanian regions suggest generational mixing of mongoloid and aborigine populations.
However, forensic anthropology tends to get kneecapped because it is almost openly forbidden to publish about anything that would reasonably discern """Race"""
>>73750004
GODAMN IT MARCO!
>>73759811
There is a movie called "The man from earth" about something like that, you should check it out
>>73750543
I think you might be gay anon
>>73752949
Race mixing with neanderthals, who had larger cranial capacity and greater resiliency to injury, along with the capacity for spirituality
>>73752949
Serious question is Martinique nice?
>>73761959
I'll check it out, thanks
>>73750443
>>73752949
More like species-mixing at that point, one can argue the differences between say europeans and asians to be slight, but neanderthals were distinct enough to be considered a different species, like abbos.
>>73750004
There were several "waves" of out of Africa.
The first waves created things like Neanderthals and the asiatic proto humans which we still know extremely little about. Most of these adapted with lighter skin to get their vitamin D from diff weather.
Then there was a more recent "out of africa" and those people did in fact interbreed with both the neanderthals and asiatic proto humans. This created the "Cro Magnons", very archaic modern humans.
It is a fact that caucasoids were interbred with neanderthals, its in the DNA. There's stuff we keep detecting but cant identify which is in asiatic races and oceanic ones, as said, we are still struggling to understand human history there. It seems the keys to the answers of oceania/asia lie in "Sundaland" which is now below water level, genetic spread in the east seems related to that location, which was one rolling grassy plains for hundreds of miles.
Africans lack the mixed DNA of all other races. When people start to look into the bell curve and begin discussing race and intelligence the fact everyone but africans are mixed with neanderthals and other protos eventually comes up.
Neanderthals were not less advanced than humans, they were simply a different species of human. They had their own checks and balances too, being neither superior nor inferior. What we were able to identify is that it seemed like the "new" humans could breed faster than them and adapt tools at lightning pace, including ones they copied from neanderthals. Somehow they edged them out, outbred them, or interbred them.
For a little bit of fun OP you should look up Homo Florienses
>>73760742
oh, thats even more embarrassing for africa
>>73750004
>ABSOLUTE truth about the origin of humanity
This world is a world of deceit.
Fat chance mate. First conquer lies, then the truth will come to the surface.
>>73758856
And 50% of a banana. What's your point?
>>73750004
>all i want is the ONE, TRUE, UNBIASED, unrelated with agendas and ABSOLUTE truth about the origin of humanity. can i have it?
Yeah, look at some research papers that aren't written by cultural anthropologists.
>>73764517
>Homo Florienses
That entire fucking island and all the wacky remains on it weird me the fuck out, tiny people and elephants and huge lizards, it's like a '50s movie that really happened, "Isle of the Pygmies! In Stereo-vision!"
>>73752949
Yeah, it's good for the inferior race. That's what humans going into Europe and Asia were, the inferior race. They weren't adapted for it until they interbred which also coincided with climate change.
>>73764517
Actually I'm pretty sure that they recently discovered that sub saharan Africans DO have some neanderthal DNA.
The percentage of DNA from other species of Human varies depending on the geography of your ancestors, Caucasians, East Asians and Native Americans have a lot of Neanderthal DNA admixture (although mostly relegated to junk DNA now) and South Asians, Southern Indians, Papua New Guineans and Australian Aborigines have higher admixture from Denisovans who were another progenitor around the time of the Neanderthals.
It's important to note that the differences between Homo neanderthalensis, Homo Sapiens and Homo Denisovan aren't as big as people might claim but they were definitely present.
>>73758856
>misunderstand what that 4.2% number means
Weew
>>73760742
They have much more denisovan DNA though and very little neaderthal
>>73765249
The amount of DNA present from Neanderthals is fairly negligible and is mostly relegated to junk
DNA. I think that most likely what people gained from interbreeding with them was better tolerance for the environmental conditions outside of Africa. Considering that the Neanderthals were living in Europe for a while they most likely adapted to the environment physiologically.
>>73765402
>I think that most likely what people gained from interbreeding with them was better tolerance for the environmental conditions outside of Africa.
100% this. There a bunch of studies and most of it genes commonly found are related to the immune system and the proteins that build hair/nails/skin. Really interesting actually.
>>73759451
Pleb. Also it's not 84% more than, it's that you have more than 84% of costumers.
>>73750004
Nobody knows exactly what happened, obviously. There's no such thing as the unbiased truth when it comes to history.
Everything is filtered through human interpretation, and human writings.
>>73765402
Ay, I'd believe it.
I can happily snowboard shirtless, while my negroid friend constantly takes chip damage while wearing 3 layers of thermal clothes
>>73760931
thx famalam
>>73764517
>they were simply a different species of human
Neanderthals are a meme.
They clearly can breed with homo sapiens.
Why?
Because they are a sub-species, not a different species.
They are human.
Fucking hell why do people still think they are a different species when this is not possible. They look different, but that's it.
>>73757185
Whites/Europeans didn't aquire their higher IQ from mixing with neanderthals. They acquired it later during the ice age and living in the harsh climate of Europe (you needed to be fairly smart to survive).
A fair amount of evolution in intelligence, especially between the different races, didn't happen until fairly recently. The way the ashkenazi Jews are thought to have developed their superior intelligence was from being a part of the only religion allowing usury (moneylending) for profit. So in the middle ages Jews worked almost excursively in finance and other cognitively demanding occupations.
>>73766164
Eh, it may not have been the sole factor but the neaderthal intermixing did contribute a bit.
>>73766254
>>73750004
>all i want is the ONE, TRUE, UNBIASED, unrelated with agendas and ABSOLUTE truth about the origin of humanity. can i have it?
To quote ken hamm "Well, Bill, you know there's a book you can read.."
>>73750004
we all come from the same 2 people, friendo
we all niggas
>>73750004
Look up haplogroups, geographic distributions and hypothesized migration patterns. That's about as objective and unbiased as it gets.
If you're interested in particular about when and where neanderthal interbreeding occurred, Ust’-Ishim Man may be of particular interest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ust%27-Ishim_man#Relationship_with_Neanderthals
>>73750004
Of all of the great apes resembling modern humans, ours is the only one that survived the last 100,000 years. In that time there were at least four others, one of which were the neanderthals which we bred out of existence.
They were stouter, had stronger muscles, had larger brains, and they had the "white" skin, hair, and facial features we are used to now. They needed more calories to survive and their larger heads made childbirth more difficult. Although they would have been smarter and stronger than modern humans there was no way for them to amass our numbers and they probably had much simpler spoken languages owing to a narrower vocal range. They could not have communicated information between individuals or generations as effectively as our "niggers."
The H. s. sapiens we know as niggers are just ancient H. s. sapiens that did not interbreed with neanderthals. As far as we know they mostly occupied Africa and the neanderthals mostly occupied Eurasia. Which is to say "humans" as we know them probably came from Africa but whites are natively European. The European mix has an altered musculature and skeletal structure as well as different brain chemistry, hormones, blood composition, etc. Possibly the most obvious difference is the neanderthal-like skull shape, but whites also have slightly denser muscles.
"Superiority" is hard to gauge but the main benefit of Europeans is that they were slightly smarter, had somewhat augmented behavior, and they acquired the wider modern human vocal range. Cooperation and communication made it possible to pass on vast knowledge and technology across generations and between communities. The most important difference from niggers is that they do not TRY to advance their way of life, they just wallow in mediocrity forever and occasionally get help from outsiders.
>>73765897
>why do people still think they are a different species when this is not possible
How is it not possible? Explain yourself.
>>73765620
>Thinks history and human writings even begin to explain the origin of humanity
Kek
>>73767503
>tfw l1 master race
WEW
>>73765080
Island dwarfism is fucking Satan mang
>>73752949
>One type of mixing worked well. Therefore, ALL types of mixing produce good results.
>>73767572
>How is it not possible? Explain yourself.
Simple. They can breed.
Unless you suggest they somehow had the same DNA through other means?
Then in that case we are not part Neanderthal, we just have their genes.
>>73768051
That does not explain anything. Explain how that means we are the same species.
>>73752949
It's not race-mixing, it's species mixing like between coyotes and wolves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf
Sometimes these crossbreeds are a better fit for their current environment. As far as I know this is usually a matter of making the larger parents smaller and dumber when they were previously stronger/smarter than they needed to be. The coywolf population is currently exploding just like the human population did in Europe and Asia.
In other words it produces an inferior race that is more efficient for their environment.
>>73759024
This >>73759194
And also the fact that homo sapiens formed larger social groups than neanderthals. Neanderthals lived in groups of 10-20, whereas homo sapiens migrated in groups of around 100.
It was a matter of outbreeding them, outdoing them in adaptation to new environments, and outdoing them in cooperation.
>>73767572
>they do not TRY to advance their way of life
To be fair, Africa is bountiful all year long, so there is no real need to advance beyond hunter gatherers.
>>73768941
>inferior race
>more efficient
I don't think you understand evolution, bucko. There is no "superior" or "inferior", there is only survivability. "for their environment" is fucking intrinsic to the process.
>>73769852
I do understand and I chose those particular terms for a reason.
>>73750004
Humanity evolved in Africa. The fossil evidence is overwhelming. That was about 200,000 years ago. DNA evidence proves that European humans mixed with Neanderthals. Fossil evidence suggests this was about 30,000 years ago.
Seeing as how the Neanderthals died out, and humans without neanderthal genes did not, I'll leave it to you to decide which species was superior.
>>73768303
>Explain how that means we are the same species.
Literally the definition of species mate.
If they breed.
They are the same species.
Enough said.
But if we happen to have genes from our common ancestor and not through breeding - then it means they branched from homo sapiens, or non sub-saharans and neanderthals branched from a common ancestor that branched from sub saharan Africans.
Personally, I think we have to be the same species then - as we can breed with sub saharan africans.
Therefore, we are all homo sapiens, just with certain different genes.
Subspecies of homosapiens because we were geographically isolated.
>>73750004
read a book, gyro
and pay debnts
>>73770523
Your premise is wrong because that is not the definition of a species.
