If the variance between chimps and humans is only 2% of the genome, and there’s a similar gulf between modern non-African humans and African humans, a disaster of epic proportions could be in our future.
At what point do reasonable, rational people put a halt to such science? We need to ban such studies, and prevent these so called scientists from exploring genomic differences. True, we may cure a few diseases and understand more about our human origins than we did, but at what cost?
Diversity is our strength. Racism is the worst evil known to humanity. Differences like those in the genome and in anatomy and cognition are completely irrelevant! If some speech is hate speech, and if some songs are sexist hate songs, then surely this kind of research and conjecture is hate-science. It needs to be stopped. Sometimes ignorance is best, like in the Garden of Eden.
4
To add to the criticism of this article, the title uses the word “Us” as though nobody reading this might be from sub-Saharan Africa or from a people that does not share this Neanderthal DNA.
21
the problem with this article is that it fails to explain that very few modern humans share the brain elongating genes. It leaves the reader to think that all Europeans have a general that improves brain function that isn't shared by Africans. That is just scientifically wrong, but for anyone that knows anything of 19th and early twentieth century history it is flat out dangerous. Fix it.
20
This article speculates that Neanderthal DNA may have helped modern humans develop language and tool development, in the absence of any research. This has dangerous racial implications. What’s not mentioned is that Melanesians and East Asians have Denisovan DNA, a third group of genus Homo, rather than Neanderthal. With Africans, Caucasians, and East Asians in different DNA groupings, it’s imperative to have solid proof of any genetic differences. The concept of race based on skin color developed in the 17th and 18th centuries to justify slavery and colonization, placing whites at the top of a hierarchy of intelligence vs. savagery. The founders of modern biology, Linnaeus and Darwin believed in racial differences and hierarchy. Now, the American alt-right promotes white supremacist pseudo-science, and the racial anxiety of many whites expresses fear of the racial “other”. Scientists and journalists should be cautious and self-aware to sort out researched science from speculation.
27
@Bruce Shigeura I'm not sure how you turned this article into a thesis on white supremacy. The article indicates that H.sapiens had more extensive language ability and better tool making than Neanderthals. There is no evidence Neanderthals had projectile weapons. Apparently H. sapiens also had a more developed cerebellum. They found Neanderthal genetic markers linked to myelin but don't know what it means. I don't see how this in anyway indicates having Neanderthal DNA could be superior, other than conferring resistance to some diseases.
37
I have read that, statistically, Europeans and Asians have longer torsos in relation to limbs than Africans. This has been attributed to adaptation to cooler vs. warmer climates, but I wonder if it is also a trait that is influenced by Neanderthal DNA.
It is not entirely true that Africans do not have Neanderthal DNA. I'm genetically 100% northern European and have 1.7% Neanderthal DNA according to a DNA test. My adopted daughter, who is from southern Africa, had her DNA tested. According to the test she is genetically south African (khoi-san) and east African. But the test said she also had .03% Neanderthal DNA. The testing company explained this as the result of an ancient back-migration of people into Africa from the Middle East.
9
@RR Parts of Asia are on the equator, very hot and moist ( Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia ). I doubt those torso differences are attributable to a small percentage of Neanderthal DNA. It doesn't take long for physical adaptations to evolve.
6
With Nietzsche's rejoinder to Descartes' "Cognito, ergo sum" that "were it not for our stomachs, we humans would take ourselves to be gods", there enters consideration of human technics of living.
Behold the human hand and it's engine of power in the arms and shoulders. No creature can match the physical dexterity and motor skills to throw like a professional quarterback.
When considering brain development ponder the immense mental capacities involved. By contrast, a three year old can speak.
8
Are we going through a period of belief in 21st century eugenics? Scientific bigotry to overlook that ALL HUMANS originated from Africa.
7
@John M
That was actually mentioned by stating that the neanderthals came from africa and migrated first from that continent.
So you are wrong, they do state that all humans came from africa.
21
This isn't scientific bigotry at all. It's a well known anthropological fact that Neanderthals were close relatives of us that integrated with humans of European and Asian descent. The "all humans come from Africa" line only refers to our earliest ancestors who migrated from Africa, outwards. Some becoming Neandertals in colder climates, others became other types of primates, including homosapiens (us). But Europeans and Asians do share DNA with Neanderthals due to mixed breeding in those regions when humans and Neanderthals coexisted some 50 thousand years ago.
10
Yes, what's with the phrase "non-African" decent?
9
If "Neanderthal DNA has persisted through the generations in people of non-African descent" only, then what implications, if any, does this new theory have for modern indigenous African populations who never came into contact with Neanderthals? How were modern indigenous African populations not exposed to Neanderthal DNA able to achieve the same levels of advanced brain development that the article suggests may have happened only as a result of exposure to Neanderthal DNA?
4
@Randall
The article states that the round head led to increases in certain areas that the elongated head did not have. And those areas might have led to language and other skills in the round head.
4
@Randall On top of that didn't Neanderthals originate in African as well?
4
@Randall The article doe not state that Neanderthals had more advanced brain development. To the contrary, Neanderthals may not have had the same language capacity and their tools were not as sophisticated.
8
Does the article imply that the populations native to sub-Sahara Africa, who presumably have no Neanderthal genes, all have elongated head?
1
@Fan
Actually it is the non-neanderthal who has a round head. Neanderthals have the elongated head.
So no, the article says the opposite.
12
@Fan
No: the article clearly states, and the lovely gif shows, that it's the now-extinct Neanderthals who had elongated heads. After the Neanderthals (or their ancestors) became extinct in Africa, humans in Africa evolved rounder heads with larger cerebellums. Some of them walked to Europe and bred with surviving long-headed Neanderthals there, and their descendants carry a percent or 2 of Neanderthal DNA. Nowhere does anybody say that either modern Africans or Europeans have elongated heads. But some modern Europeans carry a small amount of Neanderthal DNA, which may or may not have any detectable effect on their brain structure. Dr. Capra says we may or may not ever be able to determine that. In any case genetic diversity within ethnic groups far exceeds genetic diversity between ethnic groups, and the continent(s) your ancestors came from tells us very very little about you.
20
@Dan Coleman Neanderthals didn't go extinct in Africa. They left Africa when they and homo sapiens shared a common ancestor that was neither human nor neanderthal ( Homo Erectus possibly ?). Neanderthals then evolved in Asia and Europe as modern humans evolved in Africa.
9
One son has FragileX Syndrome, (genetic disorder causing “intellectual disability” and social anxiety), other son does not have the marker. Other than guessing, we do not know where in this small family it is inherited from. As a child he had a noticeably larger, or longer, skull. As an adult, only an eighth of an inch larger hat size.
Looking at those skulls, I’m immediately reminded of the black on white silouhette of his head at about two years old. Being just a very curious person, I add this to the pot.
Lynne Pfarrer Seidel
Pennington, NJ
14
As a lithic technologist, I find the biface production by these early H. sapiens in Africa generally more sophisticated than the projectile points produced by Neanderthals in Europe. Determining the motivation for tool production in prehistory is always hazardous, but there are clear differences in the knapping skill used to produce the bi-pointed bifaces from Africa and the mainly unifacial points of Neanderthals. There are exceptions, but that's generally the pattern perceived in the archaeological record.
M.S. Shackley
Emeritus Professor of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
25
@M.S. Shackley I thought Neanderthals lacked projectile weaponry except, perhaps, a crude throwing spear ? The evidence suggests they hunted big game with hand held spears. Consequently, there are many Neanderthals with an assortment of orthopedic injuries in the fossil record. Apparently modern humans arrived on the scene with atlatls which could bring down game from a distance.
6
I am always astounded when scientists studying other species and other humans decide on no evidence that I've seen that we modern humans are "smarter" than anyone or anything else. Eons ago we put ourselves on a pedestal and we have stuck ourselves to it, it seems, with indestructible glue. Do we have an inkling of how and why and even if the Neanderthals left Africa? Really, folks, the prime directive is "modern humans above all." We should spend our time and absorb all we can on these humans and on other species. We better work quickly. We've done in the Neanderthals, it seems, and we are fast working our way though the rest of the tree of life with our saws and dynamite.
26
@SFR Considering they were found outside of Africa, yes, we can logically deduce they left Africa as a common ancestor to modern humans.
I agree we tend to put ourselves on a pedestal above the rest of the animal kingdom. The article states, however, that Neanderthals had a brain at least as big as ours, possibly bigger.
7
Neanderthals didn't become extinct, they simply integrated with humans and became what is today Europeans and East Asians, the latter having the largest percentage of Neanderthal genes at over 2%.
9
@Chloe Really? I thought Europeans and Middle Easterners are closer to the Neanderthals considering the abundance of associated artifacts and physical traits such as robust physique and colored hair ....
2
@Chloe
And there lies the difference.
1
Has anyone considered the relative ease of giving birth to a baby with a human versus a Neanderthal brain? The skulls of Neanderthals are much larger, which could have removed many hybrids from the gene pool. Of course, Neanderthal women would have less trouble bearing babies with smaller skulls. My guess is such women, in addition to having stockier builds, were probably broader through the hips than human women were. Surely someone's written about that.
30
According to an article in Smithsonian that seems reliable, the differences between any two modern humans is on average 0.1%, while humans and chimpanzees differ by 1.2% if you compare those base pairs we share, or perhaps up to 7% if you compare the entire genome.
Given that, I would presume that the "2 percent of your DNA comes from Neanderthals" statement means 2% of the 0.1%, i.e., 0.002% of your DNA overall - is that correct?
7
No not correct. They mean a full 1-2 percent DNA sequence difference based on current larger data sets. Take a look at the original Cell paper and check out the references. Also this is the current consensus from looking at papers found searching pub med for recent related research papers and reviews.
7