Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 174

Thread: Do modern Europeans partly descend from Neanderthal ?

  1. #126
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,247


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by firetown View Post
    Not entirely true. Read through Maciamo's posts in this thread.We don't know that. This was an assumption made based on Neanderthal y-DNA missing in modern man.
    No, that isn't entirely what it was based upon. You should re-read the papers.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  2. #127
    Regular Member firetown's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-08-11
    Posts
    499


    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    No, that isn't entirely what it was based upon. You should re-read the papers.
    I have been reading and re-reading them, Angela. And each of them has statements along the lines of
    these genetic differences may have triggered the immune system of a pregnant Homo sapiens to attack her foetus if she bred with a Neanderthal.
    There is no certainty behind this theory.
    If you search this forum for "blood type", "rhesus negative" or "rh negative", you will probably see my posts.

  3. #128
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    18-08-17
    Posts
    6

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G-S18765
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J2a1a1

    Country: France



    Why don't they descend fully from Neanderthal and not partly !

    I have read many papers on Neanderthal disappearance : they all explain that they disappear following the arrival of Modern Humans coming out from Africa and there were interbreeding between them resulting in up to 4% DNA sharing with non African today humans.

    The 2010 paper from Max Planck institute (Science 328 (5979), 710-722 )concludes to this sharing percentage by comparing Neanderthal genomes of 3 individuals to genomes of 5 present-day humans and not with genomes of Homo Sapiens contemporary to Neanderthals individuals ! I didn't notice that striking detail the first times I read the paper but it makes a big difference : the percentage could have been very much higher if comparison have been made with 40000 years old modern humans !

    The study on Oase 1 is very informative : DNA analysis of Oase 1 since 2015 has made a number of significant findings.

    About 6-9% of the genome is Neanderthal in origin. This is the highest percentage of archaic introgression found in an anatomically modern human
    and together with the linkage disequilibrium patterns indicates that Oase 1 had a relatively-recent Neanderthal ancestor – about four to six generations earlier. (Wikipedia)
    This fossil has 6-9 % of Neanderthal genome and it is said that he had a Neanderthal ancestor four to six generations earlier (that is between 100 to 200 years earlier so very very close !) It is strange to have still 4% in present days humans after more than 10000 generations !

    I have never found a paper with a clear evidence that Neanderthal is not a direct Homo Sapiens ancestor but for me, it is the simplest explanation to all the questions. There was not migration from Africa, Homo Sapiens descends directly from Neanderthal and the differences we see between contemporary individuals are due to a large diversity among these populations. This diversity was likely very large : to illustrate that look at the big differences we have between the 5 skulls from the same site Dmanisi and from the same age (-1.8 Ma). That is so large that they thought there were different species !

    I am interested to have references to papers showing strong evidence that we don't descend directly from Neanderthal !

  4. #129
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    18-08-17
    Posts
    6

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G-S18765
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J2a1a1

    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Phil95 View Post
    It is strange to have still 4% in present days humans after more than 10000 generations !
    Sorry, it's 1000 generations instead of 10000 !

  5. #130
    Moderator
    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    2,253


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    It is not strange that after 1000 generations there is still 3-4% of Neanderthal DNA. If almost all people who procreated and mixed along all those generations also had some percentage of Neanderthal DNA, that ancestry would have no reason to be pulled out of the genetic pool of non-Africans. If you mix a 10% Neanderthal man with a 8% Neanderthal woman, you'll have a 9% Neanderthal child, and if that child mixes with a 5% Neandertha child, you'll end up with 7% of Neanderthal DNA. The percentages won't drop suddenly unless there had been a really massive replacement of non-Africans by later waves of Africans without any mixing with Neanderthals.

    Besides, the fact that modern non-African and modern Subsaharan Africans without any hint of Neanderthal ancestry share a lot more between each other than either of them to Neanderthals from a mere 30,000 years ago (a very short time in bio-evolutionary terms, not enough to make Neanderthals so genetically and phenotypically different from present-day non-Africans) certainly demonstrates that the best explanation is that out-of-Africa people intermixed with Neanderthals in different times and places, and that Neanderthal ancestry was gradually reduced and then stabilized due to the heavy expansion of Basal Eurasian (people who were most similar to other non-Africans, but lacked any Neanderthal mixing at all) in the Late Paleolithic, and due to some negative selection against some Neanderthal-derived genes.

    Modern humans share a lot more with modern humans from 30,000-20,000 years ago than to clearly Neanderthal individuals from just before that time, before they got extinct with some traces absorbed by modern humans. If those non-African humans were fully Neanderthal, you'd have to presume that a huge genetic transformation happened in just a few milennia. That just doesn't make sense.

  6. #131
    Elite member epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by firetown View Post
    Not entirely true. Read through Maciamo's posts in this thread.We don't know that. This was an assumption made based on Neanderthal y-DNA missing in modern man.
    The male infertility issue is based on the fact that the X-chromosome has substantially less Neanderthal on it than non-sexual chromosomes.

    See Haldane's rule.

    PS: Greg Cochrane states that he thinks the split between humans and Neanderthals is far to recent for Haldane's Rule to be applied.

    Trigger Warning for the weakhearted: Greg Cochrane is on the SPLC's shitlist.

  7. #132
    Elite member epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Phil95 View Post
    I have read many papers on Neanderthal disappearance : they all explain that they disappear following the arrival of Modern Humans coming out from Africa and there were interbreeding between them resulting in up to 4% DNA sharing with non African today humans.

    The 2010 paper from Max Planck institute (Science 328 (5979), 710-722 )concludes to this sharing percentage by comparing Neanderthal genomes of 3 individuals to genomes of 5 present-day humans and not with genomes of Homo Sapiens contemporary to Neanderthals individuals ! I didn't notice that striking detail the first times I read the paper but it makes a big difference : the percentage could have been very much higher if comparison have been made with 40000 years old modern humans !

    The study on Oase 1 is very informative : DNA analysis of Oase 1 since 2015 has made a number of significant findings.

    About 6-9% of the genome is Neanderthal in origin. This is the highest percentage of archaic introgression found in an anatomically modern human
    and together with the linkage disequilibrium patterns indicates that Oase 1 had a relatively-recent Neanderthal ancestor – about four to six generations earlier. (Wikipedia)
    This fossil has 6-9 % of Neanderthal genome and it is said that he had a Neanderthal ancestor four to six generations earlier (that is between 100 to 200 years earlier so very very close !) It is strange to have still 4% in present days humans after more than 10000 generations !

    I have never found a paper with a clear evidence that Neanderthal is not a direct Homo Sapiens ancestor but for me, it is the simplest explanation to all the questions. There was not migration from Africa, Homo Sapiens descends directly from Neanderthal and the differences we see between contemporary individuals are due to a large diversity among these populations. This diversity was likely very large : to illustrate that look at the big differences we have between the 5 skulls from the same site Dmanisi and from the same age (-1.8 Ma). That is so large that they thought there were different species !

    I am interested to have references to papers showing strong evidence that we don't descend directly from Neanderthal !
    It's done by investigating linkage (dis)equilibrum. Look it up. It's how you find *unknown* admixtures as well, such as the million year old impuls in Denisova. It's actually far simpler than you think

  8. #133
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    18-08-17
    Posts
    6

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G-S18765
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J2a1a1

    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by epoch View Post
    It's done by investigating linkage (dis)equilibrium. Look it up. It's how you find *unknown* admixtures as well, such as the million year old impuls in Denisova. It's actually far simpler than you think
    If it is what you call a clear evidence, it is anything but clear !
    Could you explain with simple words, thank you ?

  9. #134
    ReichsRitter Sonnenburg's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-08-13
    Posts
    32

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1 FT274828
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1b1 Germanic-Baltic

    Ethnic group
    Baltic/German
    Country: United States



    That means Neandertal DNA in Haplogroup I1 is from Female that got pregnant by Cro-Magnon male, no? If Neandertal males couldn’t make Cro-Magnon Females pregnant or male offsprings couldn’t survive due to ‘incompatibility’, that would indicate that Cro-Magnon males could get Neanderthal Females pregnant successfully. Is there evidence that Neanderthal males got ‘exterminated’ or legitimately replaced just because of Neanderthal Females ‘preferred’ Cro-Magnon Male as a mate?

  10. #135
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    08-12-18
    Posts
    62


    Country: UK - England



    Neanderthal genes still influence the skin colour and hair colour of modern Eurasians. They influence the behaviour and immune system of modern Eurasians and the brain and skull shape of Europeans. Europeans especially are nothing but Neanderthal hybrids. Asians also interbred with two groups of Denisovan.

    So why is it so difficult for some peoples to acknowledge they are nothing but Neanderthal hybrids?

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-...rn-humans-look

  11. #136
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,247


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Two percent of our genome makes us Neanderthal/Human hybrids? The vast majority of Neanderthal dna in humans has been purged through selection because it was detrimental, including large chunks of the X chromosome according to a recent paper.

    The Neanderthal de-pigmentation genes largely have nothing to do with de-pigmentation in homo sapiens sapiens. The major ones weren't present in Neanderthals.

    You really should read all the recent papers before commenting.

  12. #137
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    08-12-18
    Posts
    62


    Country: UK - England



    From Eupedia, modern humans likely inerited light skin and hair colours from continous interbreeding with Neanderthals:
    https://www.eupedia.com/europe/neand...nd_myths.shtml

    This also applies to behaviour, immunity to diseases and according to some scientists, the shape of modern European skull and brain.

    So considering that Neanderthal DNA is still influencing the genes of modern humans in the above ways, modern Europeans are nothing but NEANDERTHAL HYBRIDS! Asians also interbred with Denisovan.

    Neanderthal looking just like a modern European, his descendants:


  13. #138
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,247


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigblob View Post
    From Eupedia, modern humans likely inerited light skin and hair colours from continous interbreeding with Neanderthals:
    https://www.eupedia.com/europe/neand...nd_myths.shtml

    This also applies to behaviour, immunity to diseases and according to some scientists, the shape of modern European skull and brain.

    So considering that Neanderthal DNA is still influencing the genes of modern humans in the above ways, modern Europeans are nothing but NEANDERTHAL HYBRIDS! Asians also interbred with Denisovan.

    Neanderthal looking just like a modern European, his descendants:

    Indeed, and what camera did the photographer use for his time travel? :)

    You have understood neither the article nor my posts above.

    Try again. I suggest some re-reading of both. Please read the recent Neanderthal papers again as well.

  14. #139
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    29-12-18
    Location
    Cantabria
    Posts
    3


    Country: Spain



    Yo siempre he ledo que los cruces sapiens neandertales se produjeron en Oriente Medio

  15. #140
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    08-12-18
    Posts
    62


    Country: UK - England



    Blonde hair, white skin and blue eyes are only indigenous to Europe and found nowhere else. How can it be you have modern humans living in the exact same areas where the blonde, light skin, blue eyed Neanderthal lived and then claim they both developed light skin, blonde hair and blue eyes seperately? Its absolutely ridiculous. Sometimes I think most scientists are idiots that publish rubbish because they have to publish something.

    Finally, some scientists have been claiming, its likely that modern Europeans likely got their genes for light hair,skin and eyes from Neanderthals because Neanderthals also had those traits. Absolutely right.

  16. #141
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    29-04-18
    Posts
    74


    Country: Norway



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigblob View Post
    Blonde hair, white skin and blue eyes are only indigenous to Europe and found nowhere else. How can it be you have modern humans living in the exact same areas where the blonde, light skin, blue eyed Neanderthal lived and then claim they both developed light skin, blonde hair and blue eyes seperately? Its absolutely ridiculous. Sometimes I think most scientists are idiots that publish rubbish because they have to publish something.

    Finally, some scientists have been claiming, its likely that modern Europeans likely got their genes for light hair,skin and eyes from Neanderthals because Neanderthals also had those traits. Absolutely right.
    We know which genes cause light hair and blue eyes in humans. And we have high-coverage Neanderthal genomes. As far as I know we do not find the genes that produce light pigmentation in humans in the Neanderthal genome.

    Neanderthals probably developed light pigmentation for the same reason humans did -because its an advantageous environmental adaptation in northern latitudes. But separately.

  17. #142
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,247


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Convergent evolution of beneficial traits is common in nature. That includes humans. For example, East Asians are relatively fair skinned, but it comes from their own de-pigmentation snps, not those of West Eurasians.

    See:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...nd_East_Asians

  18. #143
    Moderator
    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    2,253


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigblob View Post
    From Eupedia, modern humans likely inerited light skin and hair colours from continous interbreeding with Neanderthals:
    https://www.eupedia.com/europe/neand...nd_myths.shtml

    This also applies to behaviour, immunity to diseases and according to some scientists, the shape of modern European skull and brain.

    So considering that Neanderthal DNA is still influencing the genes of modern humans in the above ways, modern Europeans are nothing but NEANDERTHAL HYBRIDS! Asians also interbred with Denisovan.

    Neanderthal looking just like a modern European, his descendants:

    You seem to have missed most of the scientific papers on that topic in the last years. Humans DID INHERIT genes related to behavior (of course a tiny proportion of all the genes associated with human behavior), as well as to skin and hair color, but NOT JUST those that are associated with loss of pigmentation, but also some of those associated with heavier pigmentation (darker color). Besides, and most importantly, NONE OF THOSE gene variants were among the most relevant and impactful gene alleles that caused light skin, light hair and other traits in modern humans. None. Therefore the modern phenotype of humans was NOT heavily influenced by Neanderthals, but they had a very very minor contribution, indeed.

    Well, if you think that Neanderthal man looks exactly like a modern European, I'm afraid all you're loking at is the hair and skin color. He does not look like average Europeans at all, and that's pretty obvious and visible. Besides, all those "Neanderthals" out there are preconceived reconstructions made by artists. The latest findings of DNA studies have clearly established that Neanderthals probably had a range of skin, hair and eye colors roughly like modern Eurasians also do. Therefore, there were very probably black-haired, darker-skinned Neanderthals, too, but the reconstructions are clearly based on the assumption that, because they were very northern hominins, then they must all have looked white and blonde. But even if they were, well, that's exactly a classic case of convergent evolution, especially because we ALREADY KNOW that the looks-related genes Eurasians inherited from them were not that significant to us moderners. If blonde hair, blue eye or very light skin had indeed come from Neanderthals, we'd also expect East Asians to have much more of those traits, because it is in East Asians that we actually find the highest proportion of Neanderthal ancestry.

    I find it kind of ludicrous that some Europeans are talking so much about this "Neanderthal ancestry in Europeans". It's not "in Europeans". It's in non-Africans as a whole, and Europeans aren't even those with more archaic human admixture, not even Neanderthal-specific ancestry. East Asians, Central Asians, Native Americans, Middle Easterners, South Asians, all of them have partial, even if invariably tiny, Neanderthal ancestry, and yet we don't see many non-European people supposedly "looking just like Neanderthals". Europeans as a whole are NO OUTLIERS at all in that respect.

    Like Angela, I find it a bit bizarre that, instead of merely acknowledging archaic hominin introgression in modern Europeans (actually in all modern humans, including Africans), people think it's reasonable to talk of Europeans as "AMH-Neanderthal hybrids" when the average Neanderthal contribution to the modern European genetic pool is, what?, around 1.5% (and, if anything, all non-Subsaharan-Africans would be such "hybrids", not just Europeans). So a 98.5% European man with 1.5% Subsaharan ancestry is "multiracial", or a white American with 1.5% Native American ancestry is maybe a "Native American hybrid"? I can't follow that reasoning...

  19. #144
    Moderator
    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    2,253


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by bigblob View Post
    Blonde hair, white skin and blue eyes are only indigenous to Europe and found nowhere else. How can it be you have modern humans living in the exact same areas where the blonde, light skin, blue eyed Neanderthal lived and then claim they both developed light skin, blonde hair and blue eyes seperately? Its absolutely ridiculous. Sometimes I think most scientists are idiots that publish rubbish because they have to publish something.

    Finally, some scientists have been claiming, its likely that modern Europeans likely got their genes for light hair,skin and eyes from Neanderthals because Neanderthals also had those traits. Absolutely right.
    1) Of course white skin, light hair and light eyes exist outside Europe, and in the ancient DNA record the main skin-lightening alleles are found earlier in West Asia than in much of Europe, particularly east of Ukraine. The frequency of skin-lightening alleles in most of Europe actually increased a lot after the West Asian farmers migrated into the "core" of Europe. That premise of your reasoning is totally flawed and extremely outdated.

    2) There is no evidence at all that the main blue eye-related alleles derive from Neanderthals. It actually looks much more probable that it's much more recent. Oh, and the gene for blue eyes was also found in the ancient (Chalcolithic and Neolithic) Middle East associated with 100% non-European autosomal admixtures.

    3) Neanderthals actually also lived in all of West Asia and Central Asia (and certainly in North Asia, too, because a 1st generation Neanderthal+Denisovan hybrid was found recently in Siberia), so it seems your "Europe = Neanderthals = Modern Europeans" equivalence is not that accurate either.



    4) "Some scientists" are just wrong and have seen their hypothesis based on totally faulty and unscientific reasoning ("Europeans must have derived XYZ from Neanderthals because they also had XYZ" - what an utter phallacy!) continuously debunked in the last years as science advances rapidly.

  20. #145
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,247


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    ^^
    Relatively new reconstruction of Neanderthal "Altamura Man" from southern Italy.



    Even with hair cut, cleaned up, and wearing modern clothes (which would have to be custom made), there is no way this person would pass as a modern human.

    If homo sapiens sapiens helped drive them to extinction, I'm sorry about that, but those are the facts, just as it's a fact that we had to purge most of their genes because they were harmful. Not all admixture is ultimately beneficial.

  21. #146
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-09-16
    Posts
    175


    Country: Canada



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigblob View Post
    Blonde hair, white skin and blue eyes are only indigenous to Europe and found nowhere else. How can it be you have modern humans living in the exact same areas where the blonde, light skin, blue eyed Neanderthal lived and then claim they both developed light skin, blonde hair and blue eyes seperately? Its absolutely ridiculous. Sometimes I think most scientists are idiots that publish rubbish because they have to publish something.
    What actual evidence - rather than artists' guessing - do we have for Neanderthal skin, hair, or eye colour?

    As far as Neanderthal light pigmentation alleles, the one with highest frequency in modern populations I know of (Val92Met in MC1R) is most common in East Asia and peaks in Taiwanese Aborigines. Most people from the Arctic to the Tropics have dark hair and eyes, blue eyes are rather West Eurasian, blond hair is famously found in Melanesia. What parallel dimension are you from where blond hair, blue eyes, and light skin are restricted to Europe? I know of no evidence that light eyes or hair (as opposed to light skin) are under selection at high latitudes, so while we can reasonably argue that Neanderthals ought to have been relatively light-skinned, we can hardly claim they ought to have been blue-eyed and blond-haired.

    Neither Neanderthals nor high latitudes are specific to Europe, so I can see no reason to expect that Neanderthal ancestry or adaptive alleles from them ought to be specific to Europe today.

  22. #147
    Banned
    Join Date
    23-04-18
    Posts
    73


    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    ^^
    Relatively new reconstruction of Neanderthal "Altamura Man" from southern Italy.

    Even with hair cut, cleaned up, and wearing modern clothes (which would have to be custom made), there is no way this person would pass as a modern human.
    If homo sapiens sapiens helped drive them to extinction, I'm sorry about that, but those are the facts, just as it's a fact that we had to purge most of their genes because they were harmful. Not all admixture is ultimately beneficial.
    I haven't seen any evidence at all that Neanderthal genes were mostly harmful and had to be "purged". For +50,000 years everyone in Europe and Asia was a Neanderthal hybrid with 10-75% Neanderthal DNA. By 45,000 YBP we have mostly modern-looking remains that are still autosomally 10% Neanderthal. Neanderthal ancestry in middle Siberia has decreased by perhaps half a percentage point since 18,000 YBP, if the remains in Afontova Gora are anything to go by. That could be due to European admixture. Neanderthal ancestry pretty much hasn't decreased in Asia in any significant way that indicates natural selection against Neanderthal alleles.
    This is quite remarkable given that Neanderthals never made up more than 4% of Earth's population at any given time. According to John Hawks the entire world's population of Neanderthals at any given time could have been seated comfortably at at an NFL superbowl stadium. The amount of Neanderthal ancestry in modern humans is actually higher than what one would expect; given the very shallow populatuon size of Neanderthals as compared with modern humans.
    Unadmixed modern humans (west-central Africans and western Negritos) have lagged behind immensely and suffered a kind of "purge" of their own, if you will, throughout recorded history. One wonders if you were given a choice to be born black at any given time in history, vs being born white or Asian with some Neanderthal ancestry, which would you choose? Clearly, Neanderthal ancestry was critical to the current standard of living and status that you enjoy.

  23. #148
    Regular Member ToBeOrNotToBe's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-12-16
    Posts
    1,110


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    ^^
    Relatively new reconstruction of Neanderthal "Altamura Man" from southern Italy.



    Even with hair cut, cleaned up, and wearing modern clothes (which would have to be custom made), there is no way this person would pass as a modern human.

    If homo sapiens sapiens helped drive them to extinction, I'm sorry about that, but those are the facts, just as it's a fact that we had to purge most of their genes because they were harmful. Not all admixture is ultimately beneficial.
    This might sound horrible, but he definitely passes as more human than most Australian Aborigines (who are the most archaic modern humans):






  24. #149
    Banned
    Join Date
    23-04-18
    Posts
    73


    Country: Japan



    Neanderthals actually had less primitive faces than modern humans:

    http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170...a-neanderthals

    The truly human face is primitive -- hollow cheeks, a short, flat nose, low orbits, a high FWHR, cheekbones shifted forward -- these are the primitive features found on early hominids such as erectus.

    Neanderthals had newly evolved traits such as inflated maxillae, tall and projecting noses, high and large orbits, low FWHR, retreating zygomatic bones.

  25. #150
    Banned
    Join Date
    23-04-18
    Posts
    73


    Country: Japan



    When compared to Neanderthal skulls, modern human skulls just look like trash, to be honest.











Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-10-16, 10:54
  2. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-03-12, 00:53
  3. Do modern Europeans partly descend from Neanderthal ?
    By Maciamo in forum Autosomal Genetics
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 03-04-11, 21:14
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-01-10, 17:07
  5. How much of a Neanderthal are you ?
    By Maciamo in forum Humour & Tests
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-09-06, 12:01

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •