Neanderthals - Meet Your Ancestors

by Earnest 39 Replies latest jw friends

  • Earnest

    I should have advised that the second part of this series was on BBC 2 tonight (Sunday, 20th May) at 20:00. It is still available on iPlayer for the next month.

    This episode explored why the Neanderthals became extinct. One of the reasons might have been that they lost out in a physical showdown with modern humans, or it might have been their small population size, or maybe even climate change.

    Interestingly, our genetic legacy from Neanderthals may have assisted the survival of modern humans in Ice Age Europe. Even today the DNA we have from the Neanderthals affects our skin, our immune system, our risk for cancer, and even certain neuro-psychiatric diseases such as addiction.

  • slimboyfat

    I’m going to watch it now.

  • Earnest

    slimboyfat : In my experience, and from what I’ve read, 23andme are spot on

    When 23andMe were queried about the differences in the results of these triplets, they said :

    It’s a misleading story. Our Ancestry Composition feature allows you to select varying confidence levels, between 50 and 90 percent.

    In this case I believe they were changing their confidence levels and making comparisons. If you drop to the ‘speculative’ selection, which has a confidence level of 50 percent you are going throw off the comparisons. Even when they did that, there wasn’t that great of a difference.

  • slimboyfat

    Well I’m pretty confident their results were accurate in my case. A relative also used 23andme and their results made sense in comparison with mine, in that we shared the aspects we would expect to share. The reason we chose 23andme is because Adam Rutherford from Radio 4 recommended it as accurate.

  • Esse quam videri
    Esse quam videri

    Science progresses constantly as new discoveries opens up new possibilities for research.

    Apparently the motivation to seek funding by scientists, for their research, has lead to an extremely large percentage of their published works being found to be fraudulent, misleading, biased, incomplete, inaccurate and even undependable. It has been said by some authorities, on the subject of research, that the most benefit that can be derived from these published works is to open the mind to fresh ideas and help expand vision.

    Solomon Snyder, senior editor at the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and a neuroscientist at Johns Hopkins Medical School in Baltimore, US, says most working scientists understand the limitations of published research.

    “When I read the literature, I’m not reading it to find proof like a textbook. I’m reading to get ideas. So even if something is wrong with the paper, if they have the kernel of a novel idea, that’s something to think about,” he says.

    Now, I am not arguing the value of scientific research. However, bias can lead a person to favour and accept a finding that supports an already accepted belief.

    Now, on the subject of Neanderthals, if they were once thought to be a knuckle dragging, grunting, lower form of life and now, apparently they are thought to be a form of life much closer to modern man, how would it be accepted by the supporters of these beliefs if, in the future, papers started being published that showed, with equally persuasive empirical evidence that the Neanderthals were actually much higher advanced than modern man with higher intelligence and a more perfectly formed body. Would there be quick acceptance or would there be resistance? Is there a line that science cannot cross over, even for Cofty?

  • MrRoboto

    Esse, that line is where there is firmly entrenched "science" doctrine. Army time you venture to information, experiments or suggestions that run counter to these dogmas, you crossed the line.

    Lines can actually be crossed but as Max Planck said: A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it

  • Phizzy

    " bias can lead a person to favour and accept a finding that supports an already accepted belief."

    I agree that this is true of the general populace to a great degree, I am guilty of that too, any research that shows that drinking beer or wine is good for you is O.K by me !

    But, like Cofty, I respect the findings of tested, Peer reviewed Scientists, so for me,and I suspect Cofty, there is no " line that Science cannot cross" as far as findings are concerned.

    To find out that Neanderthals were far superior in certain ways to us would not surprise me even, and it would certainly not contradict Evolution by Natural Selection.

    Natural Selection has no aim, no thoughts, is not trying to perfect a Species, it is simply a fact that the living things better equipped to survive various changes in circumstances will do so, those not thus equipped will become extinct,even mankind may do so.

  • Xanthippe

    Yes I remembered it was on again, thanks Ernest. Interesting that Neanderthals may have become extinct because they didn't travel like Homo sapiens do so they couldn't get away from drought-stricken areas.

    Neanderthals would not cross an ocean if they couldn't see land but homosapiens spread across the entire planet, the program said. The scientist that sequenced the Neanderthal genome made me smile when he said Neanderthals wanted to stay alive but homosapiens are mad, they'll go anywhere. So I guess we were more successful as a species because of that even though it meant loss of life to individuals at sea and so on. Interesting.

  • punkofnice
    Earnest - I am quite interested on what it means to say "according to its kind".

    There was an interesting debate between creationist and tax dodging, fake Doctor and utter nut job Kent Hovind and Aron Ra which covered this subject. It's on YouTube somewhere (I can't access it on this works PC though).

    Here is evidence of mentally retarded pig DNA........

    Image result for jehovah sanderson

  • humbled
    Xanthippe—The scientist that sequenced the Neanderthal genome made me smile when he said Neanderthals wanted to stay alive but homosapiens are mad...

Share this