Humans and neanderthals: Getting it on, after all? Maggie Koerth-Baker at 4:40 PM April 23, 2010 New genetic data suggests that, at at least two points in history, Homo sapiens were interbreeding with other species, most likely Homo neanderthalensis or heidelbergensis. This is pretty damn interesting, because it's a reversal on previous research. A couple of years ago, I got a chance to see Svante Pääbo, an evolutionary anthropologist with the Max Planck Institute, and kind of a big deal in the world of ancient hominid genetics, talk about this very topic. He and his team studied bits and pieces of the neanderthal genome and came to the conclusion that hanky panky hadn't happened between that species and ours. And, because it was Svante Pääbo (again, kind of a big deal) everybody trusted his results. So much so, in fact, the the University of New Mexico researchers who did this new study were surprised that their data said differently. This is a really fun moment in science, when accepted information gets legitimately challenged. And now the ball is back in Pääbo's court. Remember, his previous neanderthal analysis was based on bits and pieces of the genome. Recently, he wrapped up a rough draft sequence of the entire genome, and, as Nature points out, what he finds there will probably be the first test of this new theory. Of course, it's also possible that both groups are right, and it's really H. heidelbergensis who was knocking boots with ancient sapiens. We'll just have to wait and find out.[/IMG] http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/23/humans-and-neanderth.html
I thought Homo sapiens were believed to have descended from Heidelbergensis? Sapiens and Neanderthals existed contemporaneously for tens of thousands of years in Europe, so that wouldn't be a shock. It would suggest that Neanderthals were maybe more advanced socially and in terms of language than previously thought. With Homo sapiens migrating into Europe, it may have driven Neanderthals to evolve more rapidly in their ability to relate socially to them as a matter of survival.
Maybe there was an element of rape? I mean the Mongols were raping and pillaging in the 1200s. I imagine that the Sapiens and Neanderthals were far more barbaric and territorial in nature.
I can deal with that. I just threw it out there and don't know much about evolution and what not. Why was that such a foolish guess?
The rape part wasn't. The comparison to the Mongols, who came about 30,000 years after the youngest known Neanderthal was perplexing. On top of that, making a specific association with Mongol barbarity when rape and barbarism has been a staple of warfare and group interaction from the Greeks and Romans through the Japanese and Serbs and Hutus and countless others before and after left the impression that these actions are outside the norm of human interactions when they are quite common. We are a barbaric species.
But dude. Genetic evidence shows that a single Mongolian ancestor spread more of his seed than any human ever, and than includes Wilt Chamberlain. Truth! I support Brooksball making that oddball but not crazy post.
I see what your saying. My logic was that since durvasa's post suggested a sort of civilized interaction between the two groups, I picked a much more recent example of group interaction that highlighted the barbaric nature of one of those groups, not that I needed to do that since it's pretty much just stating the obvious. I could have used any of the groups you listed above but the Mongols were the first to come to mind. The only thing I would say is that while our barbaric nature always has and always will exist, it also becomes more repressed as we evolve into more civilized and intelligent people. As you go back in time, the opposite is true so because of how long ago Sapiens and Neanderthals were inhabiting the same general territory, I would have to guess that there would be a sustained hostile and primitive interaction between the two groups as opposed to the image portrayed by durvasa's theory. If it's known that the Sapiens and Neanderthals interacted peacefully upon crossing paths, then I am totally off base. Again, I know little about evolution and was taking a wild guess.
