I should have been more specific and said recent ancestorsEverybody does, unless you don't believe in Evolution.
Most likely we all have blood from different groups of ancestors, most of them not discovered yet (or ever). Neanderthals are simply best known because geographically they populated Europe where earliest findings were conducted (due to good climate and the development of science).I should have been more specific and said recent ancestors
Not all of us have neanderthal blood :wavey:
This is disputed.
https://www.genetics.org/content/202/1/261
However, we did not find a genetic connection between the Ainu and populations of the Tibetan plateau, rejecting their long-held hypothetical connection based on Y chromosome data. Unlike all other East Asian populations investigated, the Ainu have a closer genetic relationship with northeast Siberians than with central Siberians, suggesting ancient connections among populations around the Sea of Okhotsk.The Ainu form an outgroup to all East Asian farmers including Tibetan populations
They contradict that later saying:However, we did not find a genetic connection between the Ainu and populations of the Tibetan plateau,
So, instead of the Ainu ancestors coming from Tibet (as I had previously read,) both Tibet and Ainu ancestors came from more in the area of Thailand according to this study. And that weak connection would be due to it being a long time ago. Ainu ancestors have been in Japan since 20,000 years ago or so. The common ancestor with what would become Tibetans is maybe 30,000 years ago or more. And since Japanese ancestors didn't get to Japan until a few thousands years ago there is a long time for those "East Asian features" to have developed since the Ainu ancestors left south-east Asia (and connecting with northeast Siberians in the meantime).Therefore, even if the presence of the D-M174 haplogroup in the Ainu and Tibetans is due to shared ancestry, the shared history of these populations was short and left only a weak genome-wide signature of shared variation in their gene pools.
This is based on?Most likely we all have blood from different groups of ancestors, most of them not discovered yet (or ever). Neanderthals are simply best known because geographically they populated Europe where earliest findings were conducted (due to good climate and the development of science).
Science.This is based on?
This doesn't have anything to do with the "out of Africa" theory.I don't know if this has made the news outside Germany had, it's brand new.
In Germany, they have discovered something which might considered a super early man, walking upright and so, which has lived 11,6 million years ago. Remember Lucy, who is up until now considered one of the first "humans" is 3,2 million years old.
If all that proves to be true, the "Out of Africa" theory might be just dust.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danuvius_guggenmosi
Of course it does. In Germany, remains of a creature have been found that went on two feet and which is 7 million years older than the oldest remains ever found in Africa.This doesn't have anything to do with the "out of Africa" theory.
This is only about when bi-pedalism may have begun.
Didn't the Nazis say something similar?Of course it does. In Germany, remains of a creature have been found that went on two feet and which is 7 million years older than the oldest remains ever found in Africa.
So one might have to think about an "into Africa out of Africa theory". It's super new, so scientist really have to look into that. But those findings might turn the actual theories upside down.
Huh?Didn't the Nazis say something similar?
:shrug:
The out of Africa theory only has to do with homos, and more so homo sapiens.Of course it does. In Germany, remains of a creature have been found that went on two feet and which is 7 million years older than the oldest remains ever found in Africa.
So one might have to think about an "into Africa out of Africa theory". It's super new, so scientist really have to look into that. But those findings might turn the actual theories upside down.
Yes but even Homo sapiens might have some predecessor. Maybe even MUST have. And this discovery in Germany (and if you prefer it Europe) that shows some upright walking creature, which is like 3x older than the oldest remains found in Africa might be a game changer.The out of Africa theory only has to do with homos, and more so homo sapiens.
But this is still actually shocking as a finding as it means that this is way before humans and chimps' common ancestor lived (6 millions ago). It does not obviously that this particular hominid is a common ancestor for chimpanzees and us.This doesn't have anything to do with the "out of Africa" theory.
This is only about when bi-pedalism may have begun.