Hi Dave,
----- Original Message -----
From: <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 4:40 PM
> I can't comment on the report, but the article on genetics in _Science_,
> p. 1781, reminded me of the accepted 150-200kya African origin of _Homo
> sapiens_ and Glenn's' earlier report on Neanderthal hybrids. While
> swamping of the Neanderthal contribution is possible, it is also possible
> that the reason Neanderthal characteristics are not found in the modern
> population is that they were a different species, sufficiently similar to
> allow hybridization, but with sterile progeny. The classic example of
> this is found in the Equidae, where _Equus caballus_ and _E. asinus_
> produce mules and hinnies, reproductive dead ends. I have read that
> horses, donkeys, onagers and zebras in any combination produce hybrids.
> But I have not found specific data on the fertility of the offspring.
I will post again what I think is some good evidence of Neanderthal
interbreeding with modern humans. First off, the early Anatomically modern
peoples, people who were very modern, showed a suite of Neanderthal
characters which declined over time. One trait is the Horizontal oval
mandibular foramen. Note the use of this with Vindija:
"The human remains from Vindija level G1, are fragmentary and not
extensive, but they clearly represent Neanderthals. This assessment is
based on the presence of a true surpaorbital torus on Vi 308, the morphology
of the Vi 307 zygomatic, the large size and shoveling pattern on the Vi 290
incisor, and the retromolar space and horizontal-oval mandibular foramen on
Vi 207." ~ Ivor Karavanic, and Fred H. Smith, "The Middle/Upper Paleolithic
interface and the relationship of Neanderthals and early modern humans in
the Hrvatsko Zagorje, Croatia." Journal of Human Evolution,
34(1998):223-248, p. 239
The retromolar space is practically definitive of Neanderthal and only a
couple of fossils outside of Europe have the horizontal oval
(H-O)mandibular foramen. However, the early modern humans who invaded
Europe from AFrica (where they didn't have the H-O mandibular foramen
suddenly got it when they entered Europe? If there weren't any inbreeding,
where on earth did they get this trait?
Wolpoff and Caspari state:
"The mandibular foramen, for example, is an opening on the inside of the
vertical part of the mandible for the branch of the mandibular nerve that
reaches the teeth. This is the uncomfortable spot a dentist tries to reach
with a nerve block for the mandibular teeth. In the H-O form the rim of the
opening has an oval shape with the long axis of the oval oriented
horizontally. Alternatively, in the normal form the rim may be broken,
along with its lower border, by an unbridged vertical groove. The broken
rim is the usual form in living populations.
"The horizontal-oval mandibular foramen is virtually unique to European
fossils. It is found in almost no other remains, including Late Pleistocene
Africans and the Skhul/Qafzeh sample, the putative alternate ancestors of
the post-Neandertal Europeans. But the horizontal-oval foramen has a
significant frequency in the subsequent post-Neandertal populations of
Europe and only decreases to rarity in recent Europeans. The exact form of
the foramen opening is an example of nonadaptive equivalents. It is
important that the foramen be there (the nerve must enter the mandibular
body), but it makes absolutely no difference which form its rim has." ~
Milford Wolpoff and Rachael Caspari, Race and Human Evolution, (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1997), p. 296-297
To believe as you suggest that all Neanderthal/human hybrids were sterile
requires that one believe that simply being in Europe creates the genetic
pattern for retromolar spaces and H-O mandibular foramens! I for one find
it silly to believe that. And the clearly modern, Vogelherd men, men who
created art, had a retromolar space! See Kate Wong, "Who Were the
Neanderthals," Scientific American April 2000, p. 100. Once again, a modern
human with a Neanderthal trait. Does being in Europe create these traits
which don't exist in Africa? Interbreeding can account for it--sterility
can't.
Secondly, , we can't know which of the cases is with the Neanderthals with
absolute certainty. It very well be that they were reproductively isolated
from us and thus left no offspring. Likewise, like the American Indian in
the US, their genes could easily have been swamped by invaders. This
apparently happened with the original inhabitants of Europe prior to the
Neolithic revolution. A recent study in Nature (ill et al, "Y-Chromosome
Variation and Irish Origins," 404(2000):351) They studied the Y chromosome
and found that certain genes show a cline from the Middle East to Ireland in
which fewer and fewer of the natives were of the middle-eastern haplotype.
What does this show? They say this:
"This cline mirrors other genetic gradients in Europe and is best explained
by the migration of Neolithic farmers from the Near East. When the
surname-divided Irish data are appended to this cline, it continues to the
western edge of Europe, with hg1--the putative pre-Neolithic western
European variant--reaching its highest frequency in Copnnaught (98.3%)"
Ibid.
Just because the genes of the pre-neolithic Europeans were swamped, it
doesn't mean we can say that they weren't human. And all this swamping took
place in the past 6000 years. Think of the swamping that can take place in
30,000. I think we Christians are loathe to accept the Neanderthal as our
equal for theological reasons--not because of the data.
Third, Blond hair and blue eyes provides some protection from frostbite. The
Inuit and other polar peoples protect themselves by means of more veins and
arteries in their hands and feet. The only place that blond hair and blue
eyes is found is in the former range of the Neanderthals. Why should we pay
attention to this? Because the black african invaders (who were the first
modern humans in Europe) would have been ill-equipped to handle the cold.
Black soldiers in Korea had a higher frostbite rate than brunette Europeans
who had a higher rate than blonds. The only real source for the skin and
hair of the Europeans would have been intermarriage. Our African ancestors
would have had black skin and at least in southern Europe, they should have
retained it.
This is no different than what has happened in Europe. The Benin type sickle
cell anemia which comes from Nigeria and provides protection against
malaria, has been incorporated into the European genes in Greece and Sicily
(G. Schiliro et al, "Sickle Hemoglobinopathies in Sicily," American Journal
of Hematology, 33(1990):81-85, p. 84) and Portugal (~ C. Monteiro, et al,
"The Frequency and Origin of the Sickle Cell Mutation in the District of
Coruche/Portugal," Human Genetics 82(1989):255-258, p. 255) and yet the
Greeks, Sicilians and Portuguese retain the native ethnic characters. It
would not be hard to envision the Neanderthals passing on to us, their blond
hair which provides a protection from frostbite that the Africans would have
had no reason to have. The only reason that the Portuguese retained their
ethnic traits is because they are able to swamp all African Genes except for
the sickle cell trait which has high selective pressure. Blond hair would
have had a high selective pressure in glacial Europe.
Fourthly, animals that have been evolving along separate paths for a million
years (coyote and dog) can still form viable offspring. (Carles Vila et al,
"Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog," Science, 276(June 13,
1997):1687-1689, p. 1689) Since Neanderthals and sapiens were separated for
only about 300,000 years what exactly is the problem?
Fifthly, even if one excludes neanderthals, there is still the problem that
the human genome shows evidence of insertions that are hundreds of thousands
of years old. Wallace writes:
"Regardless of the origin of the putative AD missense mutation mtDNAs, the
nuclear CO1 and CO2 sequences reported in this study are interesting in
their own respect. They were transferred from the mtDNA to the nucleus long
after the hominid lineage separated from the chimpanzee and gorilla
lineages. Because the time of insertion of the sequence into the nucleus is
estimated to be about 770,000 years before present, the transfer of these
sequences might have occurred in archaic Homo." Douglas C. Wallace, et al,
"Ancient mtDNA sequences in the Human Nuclear Genome: A Potential Source of
Errors in Identifying Pathogenic Mutations," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.,
94(1997):14900-14905, p. 14905
Now if we have to deal with genetic events which are 700,000 years old, why
are we worried about the Neanderthal?
>
> None of this answers the question of the extermination of Neanderthals,
> whether it was ecological, where they were outcompeted or overheated by
> climatic changes, or fratricidal, where they were deliberately killed. I
> exclude their elimination by novel diseases, for that seems more likely
> to decimate than to exterminate a population. I note the Black Death in
> Europe and the introduction of measles and small pox into the Americas as
> evidence.
Neanderthals had huge noses (like my wifes Uncle Cecil) Some have suggested
that as the climate warmed, they became great breeding grounds for disease.
To me, the details of morphology clearly shows that there was interbreeding.
If there was interbreeding, then we must deal with the Neanderthals as
brothers.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 03 2000 - 22:32:05 EDT