This essay is a wonderful perspective on the state of the field. The penultimate paragraph provides a great image of how different the non-interglacial Ice Age Earth was, 0.1 million years ago. From a human perspective.
On the first illustration showing the twists and turns of the recent hominim lineages: I wish it showed the "braided river delta" nature of the introgressions that Razib discusses in the text.
Who used the term superior? Neanderthal were well adapted to northern climates, and had large skulls; however they never appeared to achieve the population densities or scales of organization that “moderns” appear to have.
Very important to not conflate value judgements with the history of populations or vice versa.
What about brain size (a trait frequently mentioned as characteristic of Neanderthal)? I think of brain size as a measure of intelligence and I think of intelligence as a measure of superiority. But I'm happy to be corrected if it's wrong to equate these things.
Surely the fact that a vast majority of humans alive today carry Neanderthal genes suggests they didn't die out so much as mix with a larger population? They may in fact have been superior but were simply absorbed over countless generations of interbreeding
Razib, Thank you very much for this piece and all you do. A few questions, please:
- Granted that there is no agreed definition of species, I favor successful mating for working purposes. Might we then say that Sapiens, Neanderthals, Denisovans, etc., are one species? We could say that the species has varieties as a result of differing environments.
- We are all ultimately descendants of Erectus. We might speculate that Sapiens etc. and Erectus could mate. But there's no Erectus DNA, is there?
- Erectus spread throughout the supercontinent. Did they begin in Africa? As to ghost populations, Reich's book documents them in EurAsia. It seems logical to extend the idea to all of Homo everywhere. The question then is, which such populations can we detect?
This essay is a wonderful perspective on the state of the field. The penultimate paragraph provides a great image of how different the non-interglacial Ice Age Earth was, 0.1 million years ago. From a human perspective.
On the first illustration showing the twists and turns of the recent hominim lineages: I wish it showed the "braided river delta" nature of the introgressions that Razib discusses in the text.
"Artifacts in China and Sumatra dating to before 60,000 years ago seem suspiciously modern" - there is also Narmada man from India as well.
Neanderthals died out despite being the superior species. That seems contrary to the rule that the fittest survive.
Who used the term superior? Neanderthal were well adapted to northern climates, and had large skulls; however they never appeared to achieve the population densities or scales of organization that “moderns” appear to have.
Very important to not conflate value judgements with the history of populations or vice versa.
What about brain size (a trait frequently mentioned as characteristic of Neanderthal)? I think of brain size as a measure of intelligence and I think of intelligence as a measure of superiority. But I'm happy to be corrected if it's wrong to equate these things.
Differential survival and reproduction are the driving forces behind evolution, and not necessarily differential brain size.
Chance plays a huge role too.
Surely the fact that a vast majority of humans alive today carry Neanderthal genes suggests they didn't die out so much as mix with a larger population? They may in fact have been superior but were simply absorbed over countless generations of interbreeding
Razib, Thank you very much for this piece and all you do. A few questions, please:
- Granted that there is no agreed definition of species, I favor successful mating for working purposes. Might we then say that Sapiens, Neanderthals, Denisovans, etc., are one species? We could say that the species has varieties as a result of differing environments.
- We are all ultimately descendants of Erectus. We might speculate that Sapiens etc. and Erectus could mate. But there's no Erectus DNA, is there?
- Erectus spread throughout the supercontinent. Did they begin in Africa? As to ghost populations, Reich's book documents them in EurAsia. It seems logical to extend the idea to all of Homo everywhere. The question then is, which such populations can we detect?
we're one species
Can you send a link regarding the Andaman islanders being more like Swedes than Africans in genetic terms?
it's literally on ever genealogical tree
thanks