The Orgy-Progy with the Neanderthals

Recently a study confirmed that All non-Sub-Sahara people are part Neanderthal

The myth of genetic admixture between Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals have long been speculated by scientists for years. Since the “Out of Africa theory” basically labels every other alternative  human evolution theory as “scientific racism”, it is always a very tricky issue for such scientific discussion, thanks to those daydreaming liberals. But science is science, it has no “prejudice” towards things we imply artificially such as “racism”. However, the latest study did confirm that all non-African-black people have certain degrees of blood from the mysterious Neanderthals that left Africa between 400,000 and 800,000 years ago and disappeared completely around 30,000 years ago. Modern homo sapiens (of course, except for the blacks who never really managed to get out of Africa by themselves) left Africa to pass through Neanderthal’s hood between 50,000 and 80,000 years ago, so there’s at least 20,000 years for all those good-old-fashion orgy-progy between the two hominid species. And it theoretically does make sense. While liberal/leftist tend to argue that there was no mixing and homo sapiens evolved independently by themselves to adapt to different climate and living conditions within this 50,000 years outside Africa, this scientific ruthlessly pinches their little wishful denial bubble and solidly proves that Neanderthals are part of our ancestors and that makes us different from the black people.

So what does this difference mean to all non-black people?

It means at least Eurasians do not have black skins anymore and of course the acceleration of evolution! Here is why I said so: Eurasians benefit greatly from the admixture from Neanderthals, as apparently we inherited the capability to live in the diverse harsh environment in Eurasia quickly, thanks to the orgy-progy with Neanderthals, who evolved gradually to adapt to the non-African environment in a much long span of hundreds of thousand years already.  Likewise, it is highly possible that Eurasians got much fairer skins after mixing with Neanderthals. A scientific study back in 2007 has already confirmed the highly de-pigmented nature of Neanderthals from their hundreds of thousands of years of evolution from living in the Northern hemisphere. It is no surprise that non-black humans (the fair skin of Caucasoid and Mongoloid) largely inherited this particular genetic trait from the Neanderthals rather than self-evolution in just a 40,000 year-or-so time, provided that now there’s proof that large scale sex intercourse did happen between homo sapiens and Neanderthals. Variability is indeed very crucial for the evolution of a species, as it always does. Enriched by the Neanderthals gene, of course naturally the divergence between original African blacks and other hybrids started to emerge and widen gradually.

What I could also speculate is that the degree of admixture varies from places to places. For example, hypothetically that when Negrito islanders and Australian aborigines emigrated out of Africa eastwards, they must have passed over Neanderthals habitats and it’s highly possible that inter-breeding happened as well. This is actually supported as well in this recent study. But why are they still black-skinned and have little resemblance to Eurasians? Well, my theory is, Negrito and Australian aborigines were too imperative in their migratory phase. They probably can not wait to get off the mainland to live happily ever after in some jungle islands for eternality so as not to get sexually harassed by the darned horny Neanderthals. Probably that purpose would serve them well. They did come to absolute isolation as early as 40,000 thousand years ago (at least for Australian aborigines and even earlier for those Andaman Islanders). At the same time, they probably have way less mixing with the Neanderthals and therefore retain predominantly their pre-migratory African genetic traits, including the dense melanin in their skin. So… Wait a second! There were homo floresiensis living on their ways to Australia and Papua! Those little people could also have mixing and probably even more mixing with the Papuans than the Neanderthals. Then… Alas, all those suspicious evidences just couldn’t keep one from wondering what on earth happened back then… Nonetheless, notwithstanding whatever happened tens of thousand years ago, Europeans discovered them 40,000 years later while they are still in stone age.

Looks like science is racist after all.

 

9 comments

  1. There’s a good deal of material already out there re: genetic basis for skin pigmentation differences in extant human populations (and I’m not just talking about recent finds … check out this 2007 paper). Even a cursory look at the literature would have revealed that (a) light skin pigmentation appears to have been attained largely independently in East and West Eurasians and (b) your assertion that either group “largely inherited this particular genetic trait from the Neanderthals rather than self-evolution” is untenable.

    The extent of admixture, as you predict, does seem to vary from place to place, but it’s far from concordant with your expectations vis-à-vis skin coloration … the 2010 Reich paper estimates Neanderthal admixture at around 4.4% in Cambodians, 3.2% in Han Chinese, 2.6% in the French … and 2.5% in Melanesians.

    1. Thank you for your information. I wasn’t aware of that particular information when I wrote this article. The paper you provided is indeed very informative:

      “It is notable that no gene shows a shared signature of selection in Europeans and Chinese, relative to Africans. These results suggest that the lighter skin pigmentation observed in non-African populations is the result of positive selection on different loci in different human populations. The identification and analysis of additional genes involved in human skin pigmentation and the functional characterization of the allelic variants at the candidate loci presented here will help clarify the nature and extent of skin pigmentation adaptation in human populations.”

      That raises another question: what’s the role of Neanderthals admixture among non-sub-Saharan people? Since they were definitely fair-skinned as well. Still, I was shocked that such drastic evolution process could take place in tens of thousands of years. Of course by admitting the results from that paper you provided my speculation on the extent of admixture among different groups according to skin coloration would be unlikely to be valid as well. Now that you mentioned it, I would then consider the different habitat environments might be the most significant factor that triggered the alternation of melanin level latitudinal-wise? In that logic, humans are more likely to grow darker skin living close to the equatorial jungles and deserts? At first glance it seems pretty solid, but then I could argue it appears inapplicable to Amerindians in the central and south American tropical area. They didn’t seem to adapt a high melanin level in their skins after living under intensive equatorial sunshine over 10,000 years. Furthermore, assuming they split from Northeast Asia 10,000~20,000 years ago, they seem to well maintain their skin color similar to of east Asians’. One could also argue that the de-pigmentation process already occurred and significantly slowed down, if not completely reached stasis, at least before that time for the East Asians. What this means? This means that only leaves at most 20,000 years for the East Asians to undergo the de-pigmentation process (based on the earliest fossil record of homo sapiens in East Asia, though h.sapiens fossils dating back to 100,000 years ago were found in South China, according to out of Africa theory, it’s likely that those people are less likely to be the direct ancestor of East Asians today see: http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm ).

      After all, it needs lots of further explanations to put up all those pieces together on how non-sub-Saharan people went through the de-pigmentation process.

  2. Seems to me the attempt at putting a sharp stick into the eye of people who place a value on racial purity and skin color outweighed your dedication to formulating a nearly-as-possible accurate premise, observation, careful and unbiased examination of the available evidence, etc etc etc ad infinitum.

    The result is amusing conjecture and bottomless speculation.

  3. ” the attempt at putting a sharp stick into the eye of people who place a value on racial purity and skin color outweighed …”

    those are just my amateur speculations. though the topic of race evolution is very politically sensitive, I just would like to explore different theories based on new scientific findings. However, the correlation between the level of skin pigmentation and the ratio of Neanderthal admixture seem a bit shaky now, pointed out by previous comments. But there’s still tons of unknown gaps remaining to be explained.

    “The result is amusing conjecture and bottomless speculation.”

    Somehow I feel the true result might be too racist to be accepted by mainstream politic correctness…
    btw. did you read this http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/aug/09/genetic-differences-intelligence

  4. Morning to you. Thanks for the reply. No, I didn’t read the Guardian article. I don’t put a lot of value on mainstream political correctness, but if I wanted to know more about the differences between races insofar as intelligence I wouldn’t be tempted to learn about it through that particular source.

    Have a great day.

    1. Thanks for the reply. That Guardian article mainly talks about a recent scientific research on correlation between intelligence and heredity. Of course one can’t rely on only one particular source, but it’s always worth reading information from all types of perspectives. Among all those sources, scientific findings are the most authentic in my opinion.

  5. Consider amigo, how could it have been otherwise? Suppose for a moment you were the first out in the long chain of eventual human material to be classified as homo sapiens sapiens. Who the hell are you going to choose for a mate? Marilyn Monroe or Dale Evans? You’re going to mate with whatever the locals produce in the female department. And that’s going to continue for an awfully long time.

    Good article, but something of a yawn in the sense of going to a lot of trouble to restate the obvious.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s