[HN Gopher] What the debate about Neanderthals reveals about us
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What the debate about Neanderthals reveals about us
        
       Author : Vigier
       Score  : 31 points
       Date   : 2023-09-21 18:10 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | user982 wrote:
       | _> Perhaps that is a surer way to restore them to dignity than
       | any other: to see them not as falling prey to our ancestors but
       | as our ancestors._
       | 
       | I did notice that the popular transition to recast Neanderthals
       | from primitive troglodytes to advanced peers seemed to coincide
       | closely with the revelation that all Europeans have some
       | Neanderthal DNA.
        
         | NotSuspicious wrote:
         | Funny response and probably true to some extent although all
         | human groups seem to have archaic hominid admixture whether
         | it's neanderthal, denisovan or "ghost" dna (Why did they choose
         | that name?). I think ultimately, controversy by controversy,
         | the academic community will gradually admit that 'humanity' has
         | a much longer "pre"history than we like to admit. Likely on the
         | order of 1-2 million years. If I had to bet, within the next
         | century some archeological evidence will be unearthed that
         | shows some level of Civilization (tm) among humans that lived
         | over 100 kya.
        
           | marssaxman wrote:
           | Indeed, something along those lines was announced just the
           | day before yesterday:
           | 
           | "Waterlogged deposits at the archaeological site of Kalambo
           | Falls, Zambia, dated by luminescence to at least 476 +- 23
           | kyr ago (ka), preserved two interlocking logs joined
           | transversely by an intentionally cut notch. "
           | 
           | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06557-9
        
           | dboreham wrote:
           | This has to be (roughly) true because the energy to power the
           | size of brain found in hominids post 2Mya can only come from
           | cooked food (or living in the very small number of places
           | where there's enough fruit available year round to provide
           | equivalent diet).
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | civilitty wrote:
           | Huh? The academic community has been clear on that for
           | decades now. The problem is the oversimplification taught in
           | schools, which is often decades behind the cutting edge
           | science.
           | 
           | See the timeline on the archaic humans wiki page [1]. The
           | first migration out of Africa and the first use of fire were
           | all _millions_ of years ago. The first stone tools made by
           | _Australopithecus_ predate archaic humans altogether. It
           | really just depends on where you draw the  "human" and
           | "civilization" lines.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_humans
        
         | everdrive wrote:
         | This a bit short sighted (both the view that Neanderthals are
         | primitive troglodytes and also that that are sophisticated) as
         | all (or nearly all? I'm not 100% sure here) human populations
         | show evidence of admixture with other hominids. Whether or not
         | that's a _good_ thing largely has to do with being able to
         | understand the genes we received. We're not quite there yet,
         | but research keeps advancing.
        
         | mitthrowaway2 wrote:
         | Regardless, is this change a step in the truth-seeking
         | direction? Or is it motivated reasoning? I'm inclined to
         | believe the former.
        
           | _a_a_a_ wrote:
           | Why are you inclined to believe the former?
        
           | yterdy wrote:
           | The acknowledgement that GP's obersvation is significant
           | might lead to further reevaluation of "set" attitudes, based
           | on the recognition that self-serving bias was involved in
           | their formulation.
        
         | LAC-Tech wrote:
         | A brief wikipedia search suggests a lot of humanity has
         | Neanderthal DNA, not just Europeans.
         | 
         |  _Neanderthals shared more alleles with Eurasian populations
         | (e.g. French, Han Chinese, and Papua New Guinean) than with
         | sub-Saharan African populations (e.g. Yoruba and San).[8]
         | According to the authors Green et al. (2010), the observed
         | excess of genetic similarity is best explained by recent gene
         | flow from Neanderthals to modern humans after the migration out
         | of Africa.[8] They estimated the proportion of Neanderthal-
         | derived ancestry to be 1-4% of the Eurasian genome._
        
           | bjourne wrote:
           | That is because Homo Sapiens "returned" to Africa after the
           | invention of animal husbandry and agriculture. They out-
           | competed and drove away many traditional hunter-gatherer
           | tribes.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | gumby wrote:
         | AFAIK they aren't our ancestors but cousins.
        
           | daveslash wrote:
           | Insert: _Zoidberg says: "Why not both"?_ meme
        
           | ljf wrote:
           | I'm about as high a percentage of neanderthal dna as is
           | possible (2 to 4 percent) (according to 23andme) - so they
           | certainly were my ancestors.
        
             | flextheruler wrote:
             | Not a geneticists but mathematically speaking isn't that
             | actually lower than what you'd expect for cousins. Parent =
             | 50 Grandparent = 25 Cousin = 12.5
        
               | saalweachter wrote:
               | Mathematically, 2-4% is equivalent to one of your great-
               | great-great-grandparents being a full-blooded
               | Neanderthal.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | Species =|= individuals
        
             | [deleted]
        
       | renewiltord wrote:
       | Something I liked from _Sapiens_ is this idea of how all these
       | other hominids existed and we whacked them. In some sense, we had
       | aliens among us and we killed them and vilified them. It would
       | have been so cool to have seen alternative related species, but I
       | suppose this was a winner-take-all market.
       | 
       | It may be that describing our victims as villains (itself such a
       | word) is an adaptive trait.
       | 
       | In that vein, "anyone who downvotes this is a moron"!
        
         | stewbrew wrote:
         | Or maybe they had sex, interbred, and nobody cared until some
         | white anthropologist from an elitist school came along.
        
           | carlosjobim wrote:
           | But at least racial hatred lives on - not least in your
           | comment.
        
           | networkchad wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | edgyquant wrote:
           | Replace the word white with Jewish and maybe you'll realize
           | how fucked up your belief system is
        
         | jsndidneske wrote:
         | Well... if it is any solace to you, as time moved forward the
         | way we valued life, saw mortality and death in ouraelves and
         | others, what we value, has changed.
         | 
         | People were violent and death was a much more normal thing.
         | 
         | When we look at it in modern time with all our accumulated
         | knowledge we seek to not cause it. Even tyranical and psycotic
         | individuals hold nihlistic or anarchic philosphies.
         | 
         | Truely to understand the worlds pardigm change over history is
         | multifaceted in regard to demographics, and skills aquired, and
         | scarcites and suppluses come into effect too.
        
         | adr1an wrote:
         | Technically those 'aliens' were humans too. Different species,
         | same genera. We had interbreeding with them, though it's a
         | small proportion of neanderthal and some other species dna that
         | were discovered.
        
           | nextaccountic wrote:
           | I like to believe that we viewed them as close as another
           | ethnicity, rather than a different species altogheter
        
             | edgyquant wrote:
             | Doubtful. They were probably viewed as demons
        
               | kej wrote:
               | You don't get 1.5-2% neanderthal genes in modern humans
               | by viewing them as demons.
        
               | hutzlibu wrote:
               | Possible. The native americans had (have?) the word ghost
               | to describe the europeans who conquered their land.
        
         | ericmcer wrote:
         | Was it an intentional genocide? Or was it repetitions of
         | human/neanderthal clashes that resulted in us wiping out male
         | neanderthals and breeding with the females until their genetic
         | contribution got reduced to current levels (~2% on the high
         | end). I guess technically we are still slowly killing them off
         | every time someone with a high % procreates with someone who
         | has none.
        
           | Jensson wrote:
           | Evidence points towards the opposite, Neanderthal males bred
           | with us but Neanderthal females didn't.
           | 
           | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC368159/
           | 
           | We don't know why, but that would suggest we didn't conquer
           | them, maybe our males didn't find their females attractive
           | enough to have sex with. Neanderthals are more masculine
           | looking than us, so their males would be attractive, but
           | their females maybe looked too much like males to us.
        
       | mo_42 wrote:
       | I think the debate reveals how flawed and entitled our thinking
       | is.
       | 
       | A bit over-simplistic, we find a couple of bones in a cave and so
       | a few pieces of evidence. From this, we patch up a full picture
       | of the Neanderthals (flawed) and we do it in a way to convince
       | ourselves how great we are (entitled).
       | 
       | With "our thinking" I'm talking about the not-so-scientific
       | public. I guess the scientists get this right. They know about
       | their unknowns. But these subtleties are lost on their way to the
       | general public.
        
         | ulizzle wrote:
         | A lot of people just believe whatever the supposed science is.
         | I don't think I've ever seen anyone question science outside of
         | HN.
        
           | amanaplanacanal wrote:
           | You must have missed all the debate about the Covid vaccines.
        
             | kibwen wrote:
             | Allow me to also gesture broadly towards every discussion
             | regarding anthropogenic climate change, or any US school
             | that's still teaching creationism as a valid alternative to
             | evolution.
        
               | b59831 wrote:
               | [dead]
        
           | _a_a_a_ wrote:
           | 5G? Homeopathy? chemtrails?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-22 23:01 UTC)