Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(106,765 posts)
41. It's meaningless for the Neanderthal
Fri May 3, 2024, 06:22 AM
May 2024

It does not mean "the Neanderthals were African". The "North East African" that a modern DNA database has as a reference is North East Africans from long after 29,000 years ago. The Neanderthal's genes could not be made up of sets of genes from after they lived. North East Africans may well have inherited some Neanderthal genes, but so have various groups that are listed as "-" in the picture in #31, such as West Mediterranean.

In one sense, we (and Neanderthals) are all 100% African - all humans descend from a population in Eastern Africa, a few hundred thousand years ago. But when someone defines group as 'Baltic' etc., you're looking at a moment in time where they reckon there was little enough migration to be able to fix groups, and their genes, to those points. That might be 1492 CE, or a general "people who think their ancestors were all in this area in the 19th century", or similar. But it's well after 29,000 BCE.

(on reload, your pictures did show up for me)

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

She looks great for her age! nt intrepidity May 2024 #1
Granny! Arne May 2024 #2
There's a congressional district in Georgia where Mr.Bill May 2024 #3
OMG I see the similarity! Maraya1969 May 2024 #4
You have a good eye! LOL LeftInTX May 2024 #5
Ouch. GB_RN May 2024 #7
+1 orangecrush May 2024 #9
Same here. Definitely. calimary May 2024 #15
I think she is better looing than the one in Georgia Bev54 May 2024 #11
Probably more intelligent, too. n/t Mr.Bill May 2024 #12
+1 dalton99a May 2024 #18
That is a sick and disgusting comment. She was a person. Show a little respect. Martin68 May 2024 #25
That brow, chin and smile, multigraincracker May 2024 #6
No one has ever lived at any time other than the most modern of times sanatanadharma May 2024 #8
Not to confuse the packaging with the package. WheelWalker May 2024 #32
She lived StarryNite May 2024 #10
Is that MGT without the blonde hair? Chainfire May 2024 #13
Enough with the juvenile jokes. This was a real person. Stop demeaning yourself and the scientists and artists who Martin68 May 2024 #26
Exactly! usaf-vet May 2024 #28
I'm sure this particular lady Aussie105 May 2024 #36
I care. I'm not going to second guess highly rained forensic anthropologists. Martin68 May 2024 #43
Where did it say her age? Polybius May 2024 #45
What is your point? Facial reconstruction its based on bone structure, not age. Jus because she looks old to your eyes, Martin68 May 2024 #47
My point is that i was responding to the other poster Polybius May 2024 #49
Yes, that's very ok. I'm sorry if I came across as unpleasant. The comments about age and flippant quips about the woman Martin68 May 2024 #51
It's all good! Polybius May 2024 #53
No, that image is an artist conception of what this protohuman may have looked like. It is a fantasy. Chainfire May 2024 #42
Her sex was determined by DNA from her tooth enamel. Bone structure is fairly straight forward. LeftInTX May 2024 #46
now use ai to de-age catsudon May 2024 #14
There are better pictures Warpy May 2024 #16
23 and thee. Marcuse May 2024 #17
No eyebrows or did she pluck them? twodogsbarking May 2024 #19
MTG ananda May 2024 #20
Seriously now, that (and I may be in trouble for saying it) is a Native American face. mpcamb May 2024 #21
No, it is not a Native American face. It is a Neanderthal face. The differences are quite obvious. Martin68 May 2024 #24
neat. AllaN01Bear May 2024 #22
Will posters please stop the agist, misogynistic, and foolish comments on how good she looks for her age? The article Martin68 May 2024 #23
This message was self-deleted by its author Elessar Zappa May 2024 #44
Wow. Science has brought us wonderful insight into our pass. Now 75,000-year-old Neanderthal woman. That doesn't ..... usaf-vet May 2024 #27
Get thee behind me SATAN! brooklynite May 2024 #30
MJT is older than we thought relayerbob May 2024 #29
I'm watching the documentary on Netflix. LeftInTX May 2024 #31
I don't understand what that pie chart is trying to tell us muriel_volestrangler May 2024 #33
Wrong interpretation. Aussie105 May 2024 #35
Your sentence "Current Baltic genotype has some Neanderthal commonality" may be true muriel_volestrangler May 2024 #37
It's cool! Right! LeftInTX May 2024 #39
It's from GedMatch. It's DNA markers and what modern populations the DNA matches with. LeftInTX May 2024 #38
It's meaningless for the Neanderthal muriel_volestrangler May 2024 #41
I was going to say there is a lot of guess work involved. Aussie105 May 2024 #34
What's weird is: Neanderthals carried mostly African genes, but modern Africans do not carry the Neanderthal genes. LeftInTX May 2024 #40
I think there's been a tendency to assume snot May 2024 #48
Homo sapiens prevailed? Aussie105 May 2024 #50
My understanding is that only ca. 2% snot May 2024 #54
An apex predator John Shaft May 2024 #52
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Face of a 75,000-year-old...»Reply #41