How could you possibly step into a discussion like this without knowing what mDNA is?
There is a recently discovered skeleton of a youngster from Spain that shows intermediate Hss and Neanderthal characteristics. The ball is now in the infertile union proponents’ court. Don’t you read anything?
There is conflicting evidence on this subject from the paleontologists and the geneticists. It might never be resolved. In such a case, those who are interested (and knowledgeable) propose hypotheses based on the facts. Until a evidentiary knockout punch is available, Occam’s Razor is a valid tool is sift through the conflicting ideas.
A little knowledge is a stupid and often times embarassing if not dangerous thing.
Thanks for the info. I have a pretty big cat at home, weighing in at a hefty 20 pounds, but the thought of him trying to mount a leopard…!
Huh, boy, talk about dangerous:
quote:
Well ya'all I musta been fishin down at the crick that day what they taught the chillin this in school. Tell me you are really not as much of a pompous ass as you are coming across? Incidently, I do know that mDNA is, just stated for the record I am not an expert in this field. You might note that folks on this board are welcome to give their opinions whether they are experts are not, and you might be in a position to actually teach us something, that is to say unless you come across as a SOB (you're not doing well thus far)
quote:
~~~There is a recently discovered skeleton of a youngster from Spain that shows intermediate Hss and Neanderthal characteristics. The ball is now in the infertile union proponents' court. Don't you read anything?
I would be more than happy to read this article if you would be so kind as to provide a reference to the peer reviewed article from whence it came.
quote:
~~~Until a evidentiary knockout punch is available, Occam's Razor is a valid tool is sift through the conflicting ideas.
Again, you fail to understand the logic of OR. You seem to be using it so that you can defend your personal opinion and sound like Mr. Rational Philosopher in the process. In the current cases, all possible theories are ambiguous, so OR would not be applied. I suggest that you bone up a bit on this sort of thing yourself.
quote:
~~~A little knowledge is a stupid and often times embarassing if not dangerous thing.
And thank you for providing the case example. I have no problem at all with your position, you may indeed be correct. You are however coming across as uncivil, and I suggest you take care. Some good nature ribbing is always fun, and perhaps you mean things this way, but insults are not welcome. We all have things to share here. Lighten up.Are you saying that I am “not doing well thus far” as “com(ing) across as a SOB”? Hmm, I screwed up then because that is exactly what I wanted to project after your “Are you trying to suggest human males and female evolved along 2 separate tracks? Tell me I misunderstand you. Mendel would be rolling over in his grave.” comment.
I have crossed swords with people here with opposing opinions on this subject who have cited me into a huddled blob whimpering in the corner but there really is no clear cut answer one way or the other. Synthese hypotheses from the evidence, float them, correct them where the assumptions are shown to be in error or new data comes in. And it always helps to reduce entities to a minimum.
Do you have a cite for this: “I have crossed swords with people here with opposing opinions on this subject who have cited me into a huddled blob whimpering in the corner but there really is no clear cut answer one way or the other.”
Do you want a cite that I was a huddled blob or that there is no clear cut answer?
No I believe that you were a huddled blob (your words, not mine).
I guess I didn’t misunderstand you about the males and females developing on two separate tracks then? Let me ask you to ponder this question, since mDNA only transmits through women, where do you suppose MEN get mDNA…that’s right from their mothers! Saying that the mDNA passes down maternally is completely different from saying that males and females exist on separate evolutionary tracks, which was your thesis.
quote:
Ah yes the old fashion literal translation of a dictum written in the 13th century. Just what "entities" are you suggesting that are being eliminated by your theory? Seems to me that yours would be the more complex of the two.
quote:
~~~Are you saying that I am "not doing well thus far" as "com(ing) across as a SOB"?
No you're doing just fine. Again, sarcasm is always part of the fun here, but personal attacks are most unfortunate.
you never did actually provide that citation by the by.The guy made a joke. Give him a break.
I’ve always wondered about groups that have been isolated for a long time, say the Klung! and Eskimos. (I’m probably not PC here, sorry). How does their DNA compare?
Avalongod said:
Mipsman responded:
Avalongod replied back:
He’s right. The possibility has not been disproven. Most people in the field right now disagree with it, but it has not been disproven.
(And, no, I’m not an archaeologist, but I play one on the SDMB.)
DavidB:
I stand corrected. My understanding was that they had compared human DNA to Neanderthal DNA, and found no match.
If memory serves, they are trying to look at some Neanderthal DNA right now. But I would be severely surprised if they “found no match.” I mean, we match almost all of our DNA with chimps!
I worded that last post badly, please don’t let my inability to phrase decrease the impact of the research. Obviously we share DNA with trees for that matter. But my understanding that (and here my knowledge of genetics leaves me) they looked for whatever kinds of genetic similarities one would expect to find had the two species successfully produced live young. These they did not find.
Again, my source is a documentary, not a peer reviewed journal, but they seemed to state it in no uncertain terms, that Neanderthals were not absorbed into Hss, nor do any humans have Neanderthal lineage.