/sci/ - Science & Math

genetic analysis algorithms discoverd traces quite large traces of africans interbreeding with an as yet unidentified hominid species.
It seems quite dtraightforward.

The problem is that most of africa is a bad location for the preservation of remains

>>16159330
the theory is that homo sapiens mixed with other hominids in africa, but not out of africa
some say they still exist in the jungles of central africa

>>16159330
Calling the neanderthals a different species comes from an error, when their mtDNA was found to be too different from model people to be the same species, however the authors didn't know that modern people are quite inbred, and the difference is in fact well within the norm. And the results like these are artifacts which come from starting with that as an assumption, it was in all likehood only one species with similar diversity as modern apes.

>>16159336
So only Africans interbred with hominid species?

>>16159340
>some say they still exist in the jungles of central africa
Along with the dinosaur in the Congo?

can clarify based on what I recall from the paper
roughly 60kya basal west africans underwent an admixture event with a hominin who derived its origins from before the neandertal denisovan split roughly 800-600kya (perhaps someone like rhodesiensis). This was after the most recent sapiens exodus from Africa so groups outside of west Africans do not purport this genetic signal at high frequencies. For west Africans, the maximum value of this introgression is 19%, but the mean is somewhere somewhat lower (paper had good violin plots for this) however the purported range they give is somewhat odd for an admixture event that occured 60kya, but that's just my thought other people are cool with the information

>>16159340
>the theory is that homo sapiens mixed with other hominids in africa, but not out of africa

Oceania populations likely have Denisovan/Sapien ancestry

European populations likely have Neanderthal/Sapien ancestry

West/Southern Africans likely have Erectus/Sapien ancestry

The former two occurred outside Africa, the Erectus likely in Africa. Else Euros/Oceania populations would have the ghost DNA West Africans do and Africans would also have Neanderthal/Denisovan DNA.

There are some arguments to be made that the Euroasia interbreeding actually involved a superarchaic population as noted here:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aay5483

Regardless, all evidence I've seen indicates this interbreeding occurred outside of Africa. Modern genetic testing is also proof of this.

>>16159409
what do you mean by "the most" the science advances paper, if correct, absolutely indicates west Africans purport the highest admixture component of non sapiens dna of any modern people, and the most archaic too. the only group that would come close is the combined neandertal/denisovan component seen in modern Papuans or the Aeta, either way one of those groups past Huxley's modified Wallace line

>>16159409
also no to erectus ancestry unless you're lumping all of African heidelbergensis / rhodesiensis into one giant taxon for whatever reason. The ghost ancestor paper doesn't at all indicate the mystery hominin is erectus, African erectus/ergaster was long gone by the time when the ghost ancestor emerged

>>16159408
>>16159409
>>16159424
So what's the prognosis in layman terms?

>>16159330
They are hybrids of apes and humans. They are like you, but a few less human genes. Simple as.

>>16159431
/pol/ was right again...

>>16159501
>Again
They're hardly ever.

>>16159431
If you aren't willing to take a pol answer it doesn't mean anything. Everyone is different and that's like our strength and shit.
The pol answer is that they are niggers and weather the reason they are niggers is because they were once humans that bred with these apes or perhaps they were even niggerer niggers and the addmixture upgraded them to current ghoulish states is hard to figure out and largely irrelevant I suppose.

Objectively speaking humans have different genes and they can be grouped based on these genes and the genes cause real world differences in their abilities and appearance. You can draw various lines and circles around different groups but that's all pol.

>>16159509
/pol/ is always right, eventually

>>16159528
This.
Shitlibs at t0: it's not happening, chud
Shitlibs at t1: it's happening, and it's a good thing, chud
Shitlibs at t2: it's too late to do anything about it, chud

>>16159501
>>16159509
>>16159528
>>16159545
/pol/ flings so much shit around eventually it will land onto something.

>>16159568
Technically also correct, but when it's something as big as saying africans don't act like other humans then when that is finally validated I think it's fair to say /pol/ was right.

>>16159330
>Can I get a non-/pol/tared answer on this?
Because of their high user rate there is inevitably a lot of bleed over into other boards. Beware you get anos on here from there pretending to be fair-minded giving you their typical confirmation bias.

>>16159409
>There are some arguments to be made that the Euroasia interbreeding actually involved a superarchaic population as noted here:
How was that possible with a 2 million year seperation, when it was hard enough with Neandrthals that were far closer in time?

>>16159330

Judge for yourself.

>>16159424
also no to erectus ancestry unless you're lumping all of African heidelbergensis / rhodesiensis into one giant taxon for whatever reason

I'm not and didn't indicate that by my post.

>The ghost ancestor paper doesn't at all indicate the mystery hominin is erectus, African erectus/ergaster was long gone by the time when the ghost ancestor emerged

If you're going to be tedious about the Erectus lineage and the (multiple) introgressions of mating and DNA mixing--there is no point to this conversation. There was no single point where some random sapien bent an erectus over a rock, like Clan of the Cave Bear, and gave rise to Africans. Homosapiens fucked a lot of hominid variants, multiple times, over thousands of years. It's going to be muddy, a venn diagram with 12341234 circles not a straight line. But at some point we have to categorize them to have a conversation. I mean--without looking it up--how many in this thread would say that Africans have Neanderthal DNA? That's European lineage right---well no---0.2%ish in some Africans because after we fucked the Neanderthals a bit 200k years ago, some of those hybrids walked back down to Africa and fucked there too.

>According to Omer Gokcumen, assistant professor of biological sciences, University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences.
Based on our analysis, the most plausible explanation for this extreme variation is archaic introgression — the introduction of genetic material from a ‘ghost’ species of ancient hominins. […] This unknown human relative could be a species that has been discovered, such as a subspecies of Homo erectus, or an undiscovered hominin. We call it a ‘ghost’ species because we don’t fossils.

>>16159509
>>16159513

Seek help, you're radicalized. The fact that the idea that Erectus was (possibly) a heavier part of African ancestry than say---Oceanic populations makes you jump to this conclusion says more about you than anyone else talking out the science.

You are the yang of pols ying and both of your (populations!) are useless to real discussion.

>>16159657
ergaster was extinct by 1.4 mya. the admixture event occured 60kya, and the bulk of introgression occured from a species traced back to ~600kya. Did you read the science advances paper? There is moderate gene flow that occurs of course, but this isn't that, it's an admixture event, for this unequal introgression of a significant component of archaic dna these populations went from once isolated to no longer isolated, otherwise we would've just seen extended, gradual gene flow. Read the durvasula paper again, it was not ergaster.

>>16159330
>archaic admixture
eurasians have the admix of other archaic species the neanderthals and denisovans the difference being something something IQ or monkey blah blah, but this is essentially just racism bait and distraction from talking about like how IQ and jungle environments promote various forms of uncultured and archaic behaviors

>>16159330
What >>16159409 said. Humans will fuck anything approximately human shaped and beyond, the idea that there was interbreeding between Homo sapiens and another Homo species in Africa is not a surprise at all when it’s already known to have happened in Eurasia and Australasia. It wouldn’t surprise me if there’s still more interbreeding events to be discovered not just between H. sapiens and other human species but also between two extinct Homo species

>>16159817
there already have been yeah, denisova cave yielded a genetic hybrid between Neandertals and Denisovans named Denny.

>>16159823
Sounds about right. There’s probably a toe bone or something from a Neanderthal x H. erectus sitting in a museum drawer somewhere waiting to have genetic analysis done on it

>>16159817
>Humans will fuck anything approximately human shaped and beyond
soientists fuck dogs

>>16159340
not a smartphone in sight

>>16159583
>everything I don't like is confirmation bias

>>16161059
don't forget about dolphins

>>16159528
broken clock is right twice a day but sure, maybe bit more often than that. tho not as much as they brag about.
they also polish their understanding with /sci/ gods skull fucking them

>>16159330
it means that sub-saharans are 20% not Sapiens (Modern Human), but rather roughly quarter-hybridized with some other form of less advanced hominid great ape that we don't have a good DNA sample for, either erectus or habilis.

Which is probably why Egypt was Kangz, but suddenly everything below 22° N has no joke literal retard IQs, see picrel.

>>16159330
jeet here, how relevant is this to me
am I an ungodly homunculus (more than previously speculated)?

>>16161187
>not found in present-day asians
The good news is, you don't have 20% extra monkey dna.
the bad news is that didn't save you from being retarded anyways.

To spell it out, if it's ONLY in sub-saharans, then it can have happened no later than this red line (modern algeria, libya, tunisia and morraco are all largely arabic invaders from the east, and the berbers who came up and around through egypt and west, they're still E1b1b haplogroup, Meditids.)

>>16161275
how do ayys play into this

>>16159330
picrel isn't 100% right. but based on this finding it wouldn't be incorrect to say that people on the wrong side of the blue line I've drawn literally fucked a hairless monkey and are not Human the Species as a result, but some other hybrid hominid.

picrel isn't 100% right. but based on this finding it wouldn't be incorrect to say that people on the wrong side of the blue line I've drawn literally fucked a hairless monkey and are not Human the Species as a result, but some other hybrid hominid.

which matches up with >>16161169 and >>16161275

>>16161295
all this is telling me is that we need mandated race-mixing to eliminate any remaining differences

>>16161295
And, to paraphrase Sapolsky's studies on private intelligence, less forebrain means less emotion regulation, less impulse control, less empathy, less abstract thought and forward planning. The difference between baboons and chimps is that even when they cook up a good plan, they'll self-sabotage it with impulsive thoughts they don't have the forebrain to resist.

Which is why chronic lead poisoning fucks you up good and it's highly irresponsible that most governments have only banned new lead lines not mandated replacement, why Phineas Gage became an aggressive, hedonistic asshole dumbass that squandered the rest of his life getting into drunken brawls, and why lobotomies regress someone to basically a talking animal.

Or, put in other words
Pic related and this
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/10/30/prisoners_in_2019/

Or, put even more succinctly
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zKZbyC1ccMY

>>16161297
Nah, just acknowledging that subsaharans are still cavemen that physically cannot be uplifted short of extreme genetic repair/reintegration would probably be enough.

Heck, that might even be what they're trying to accomplish with the mixing push. What you see as a human baby tainted with 10% subhuman, TPTB see as a caveman now 10% closer to modern human and no longer being useless at best volatile at worst.

>>16161319
*Primate. Damn autocorrect.

tfw no qt3.14 australopithecus gf

>>16161460
how does one sound while fucking? I imagine a lot of growling

>>16161467
animalistic, primal, raw, better than anything you're heard before

>>16161275
humans did not evolve in or originate from africa

>>16161460
>Literally just Mbalenhle from down the street, but naked with a fuckton of body hair.
Lmao

>>16161506
Yeah yeah, christcuck, "Eden's in Mesopotamia." We've heard it all before. Come back when there's literally any data that supports that.

>>16161543
>a fuckton of body hair.
she looks like she has fleas

>>16159409
East asians has more Neanderthal than Europeans, Denisova is more concentrated to Oceanians.

>but what does this mean
That someone made a fake pic. Every human shares over 99% of their DNA and every human group EXCEPT Sub-Saharan Africans has ancestry from other subspecies, being Neandertals and Denisovans.

Fuck's sake, Homo Erectus was extinct well before modern humans left Africa.

Well whatever this other hominid species was, it had huge dicks

>>16161582
actually, small

>>16159330
all nonblacks have neanderthal ancestry, some asian populations have denisovan ancestry
archaic ancestry is not proof of subhumanity. it's one of the many incorrect arguments people make about the cause of black inferiority, while the correct argument involves their environment's lack of seasonality meaning they had no need to develop long-term planning and related higher cognitive functions

>>16159545
haha, just like with climate change

>>16161111
its also
>everyone except me is prone to confirmation bias
>i am uniquely infallible

>>16161686
>their environment's lack of seasonality meaning they had no need to develop long-term planning and related higher cognitive functions
>what are dry/wet season cycles

>>16161572
are you fucking retarded? It's literally published in Science Advances, nobody made it up, you can go read it for yourself.

>>16161686
what do you define as human, and then what do you define as sub-human? What is the threshold for sub-humanity for you?

>>16161545
Nah, her and her gal pals pick them off of each other and eat them.

>>16161582
BBC is a (((myth.))) IIRC, other than specifically the Congo, Africa is actually pretty normal. No idea why they're especially hung, probably the same inbreeding that made them eponymous pygmies. Honestly, can't even be mad, let the sub-5 short kings have their 7 inch dicks.
Ignoring that outlier, as long as you're using actual measurements not self-reporting, the actual largest penises are Native Americans or derivatives for length (e.g. Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Brazil all pretty hung and they didn't get it from Portugal or Spain, Canada is higher than ite forebears because of its 20% natives, it's hard to relocate it, but one I read specifically about race in the US had them as highest) and Scandinavians or derivatives (Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, etc) for girth.

Smallest is southeast asian. Thai ladyboys have no difficulties tucking. 3.71" average. AVERAGE, half the guys are smaller. 3.67" is medical definition of a micropenis. If they start taking HRT I wonder if it straight up flips inside out, don't even need surgery. Or maybe it integer underflows and they grow to 12 lmao.

>>16161771
>nobody made it up
But they did though?

Habilis and erectus aren't mentioned in the study, the study leaves open the door that they actually just interbred with a modern human population that had carried forward DNA from a previous earlier interbreeding event, the study only mentions West Africans in reference to genetic evidence, and the study confirms that the genetic exchange happened before the African-Eurasian split since they found genes in white Utahans as well.

It's literally all fucking lies.

>>16161686
1. Asians, American Aboriginals, and Caucasians don't have 19% neanderthal DNA. They have 2%. And highest percent of Denisovian DNA is Melanesian at 5%, most have much less.

2. Neanderthal and Denisovian are a much, much nearer ancestral cousins to cross with, only 40,000 years or so, than homo fucking habilis, a species nearly 3 million years old, a literal non-upright fur-covered partial tree-dweller with brains half our size that there's debate if they even had language and certainly have no evidence of using fire. Our first split from other australopithecines, the literal start of our genus, anything further back isn't "Homo."

>>16161295 isn't even describing it bad enough, because the monkey wasn't hairless yet.

>>16161771
>>16161845
Also
>Telling someone to go read a study you haven't read
Rookie fucking mistake, bitch.

>>16161845
>since they found genes in white Utahans as well.
Amerimutts gonna mutt.

>>16161845
I should say West Africans as opposed to Sub-Saharan Africans. The word Sub-Saharan only comes up in the study once.

And, again, the study found the fucking genes in white people. The proposed model is that the interbreeding occurred before the African/Eurasian split and possibly continued after.

The study ALSO says South Africans wouldn't have this ancestry, as the interbreeding occurred at most 124k years ago and South Africans split off 240k years ago.

Seriously, the OP is nonsense.

>>16161857
Wait, so you're saying the interbreeding that the South Africans didn't partake of is what made North Africans, Asians, Europeans, and Americans not literal retards?

Damn, too bad the super smart mystery Homo didn't stick around, earth would have moonbases right now. Wonder why it died out, too small and weak or something? Glad we at least got some of its genes in most of the planet, too bad it missed a spot.

>>16161275
I really wish people would stop saying this. Arabs did not replace the origonal people anywhere. The north africans today ate literally mostly unmixed north africans. The arabs placed themselves at the top of society and obviously married some north africans. They did the same in spain and Egypt and syria. They are culturally arab. Not genetically.

>>16161297
Wouldn't that just give everybody the same traits and make everyone more related since we would share ancestry? Sounds good to me lol. Paraguay did that by the way.

>>16159330
>That only blacks have archaic admixture or that theirs is a mystery?
PRESENT-DAY SUB-SAHARAN AFRICANS only, not "blacks".

>>16162239
American "blacks" only left Africa by slave trade at furthest 500 years ago, 150 years at most recent.
There was no Homo Habilis or even Homo Erectus around to fuck 150 years ago or even 500 years ago. Your premise is incredibly silly.

They're just as Subsaharan African, except their 25%ish percent mixture with Europeans from frequent slave rapes by masters (Y chromosome results say they're 35% european, but mitochondrial tests say 8%, ergo European fathers African mothers) and the last 50 years of mixed couple marriages.

>>16161845
you literally didn't specify what aspect of it was made up. Yeah the Habilis and ergaster part are, but to refer to a super archaic on your part is also fucking false. Rhodesiensis is the most likely candidate given the estimated ~600kya divergence time of the ghost ancestor, and that is absolutely not a modern human
>>16161847
I did read it you stupid fucking nog

>>16161845
the breeding event occured among West Africans 60kya, but the ghost ancestor genes don't persist in Eurasia. 60kya to you is pre Eurasian split? Literally how would this admixture event have occured before the Eurasian split, the paper literally never says this.

>>16162481
>you literally didn't specify what aspect of it was made up.
>Pointed out singling out Sub-Saharan Africans was bullshit
>Pointed out the Homo Erectus part was bullshit
So, I did. I just didn't specify EVERY aspect of it that was made up because it happened to include more lies than I spotted at a cursory glance.

It doesn't suddenly become fucking honest just cause I didn't point out every fucking lie at first go around though, you dumb bitch.

>>16162483
>the breeding event occured among West Africans 60kya
That's just the middle of a 126kya range assuming a single breeding event you dumb fuck. Read the paper in more fucking detail. Just cause a model would fit the limited data they gathered doesn't mean that model is correct. They acknowledge it almost definitely isn't and even provide evidence against it elsewhere, including the fact that the DNA is found in control populations of European descent.

>>16161861
It's interesting that you think West Africans are superior to the rest of us as the greatest recipients of genes from superior forerunners, but I think you might just be a fuckwit.

>>16162947
hey you retarded faggot, tell me the ghost ancestor admixture component found in Eurasians, and then tell me the admixture component found in modern west Africans

>>16159344
Europeans and Asians interbred with Neanderthals.

>>16163421
>hey you retarded faggot, tell me the ghost ancestor admixture component found in Eurasians, and then tell me the admixture component found in modern west Africans
Between 2% and 19%. The paper doesn't go into more detail.

>>16163472
it gives the means as well as the upper and lowers for various west african populations lol. What does it describe the Eurasian component as?

>>16163521
>What does it describe the Eurasian component as?
It doesn't. Simply saying it is some share of the West African portion, which was 2%-19%.

>Non-African populations (Han Chinese in Beijing and Utah residents with northern and western European ancestry) also show analogous patterns in the CSFS, suggesting that a component of archaic ancestry was shared before the split of African and non-African populations.

Why the fuck are you asking me and not reading the paper?

>>16163615
>Our analyses provide support for a contribution to the genetic ancestry of present-day West African populations from an archaic ghost population whose divergence from the ancestors of modern humans predates the split of Neanderthals and modern humans.
>subsequently introgressed into the ancestors of present-day Africans 0 to 124 ka B.P.
Notice how it doesn't mention introgression into present-day Europeans during this temporal range? Presence of minor admixture components from the ghost in Eurasia is probably literally the same as neandertal admixture being detected in Africa.
>Ne of the introgressing lineage in YRI and MSL is larger than that in the other African populations, possibly due to a differential contribution from a basal West African branch
keyword. differential contribution from a basal west African branch.
>models of continuous gene flow produce a U-shaped CSFS for low migration rates and deep splits, they do not provide an adequate fit to the empirical CSFS over the range of parameters considered
thus, looping back
>we have chosen to represent the genetic contribution of the African ghost population as a single discrete interbreeding event
even with the CEU having a U shaped line, they literally suggested that it would only be a component of the admixture seen in west African populations, and that even what haplotypes *MIGHT* be present could be undetectable and/or lost in OOA bottle necks. The vast bulk of this admixture is very likely post OOA, connecting it to contributions from a basal west African branch. Based on their modeling from the supplementary data, the models which identify the gene flow as occuring into African branches as opposed to modern human ancestors possess far lower P values and better fits the data.

>>16163653
>Notice how it doesn't mention introgression into present-day Europeans during this temporal range?
The split of African and non-African populations was during that range. If the introgression had occurred BEFORE that range it also would have shown up as occurring in West African populations before that range, you fucking idiot.

>Presence of minor admixture components from the ghost in Eurasia is probably literally the same as neandertal admixture being detected in Africa.
...wat? The ghost line isn't Neandertal. The fuck are you talking about?

>>16163660
literally didn't say it was a neandertal, it's a comparison to how neandertal DNA introgressed into African populations at low levels despite them not seeing a direct admixture event.
"erm but event X occured during tiny Y"
Are you fucking retarded? Did you read literally anything I sent about their models? They not only denote it as an event occuring WITHIN that range, meaning it could have very easily occured in bulk post OOA, but the P values of models for the admixture component occuring from an ancestor into African populations are significantly lower than models for the ancestor into pre-ooa sapiens.

>>16163662
>meaning it could have very easily occured in bulk post OOA
READ
>we find that the lower limit on the 95% credible interval of the introgression time is older than the simulated split between CEU and YRI (2800 versus 2155 generations B.P.), indicating that at least part of the archaic lineages seen in the YRI are also shared with the CEU (section S9.2)

>>16159509
They're literally ALWAYS right. Not wanting to admit to it makes clear you're an enabler at the very least.

>>16159330
All that means is that some ancestor of blacks didn't outmix.

>>16159330
Do you read that and really not realize it's just psyop propaganda? Listen to the language. Think it though. It's literally not even rational. When I see that even the "intelligent" people in our society can't see through this simple stuff, it makes me really lose hope. The "elites" have won.

>>16159330
Everyone has archaic ancestry, that's what Neanderthal DNA is. The difference here is in how the ancestry was identified. Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry was identified by comparing actual samples of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA. We have no samples of these supposed ghost populations in Africa. They're just hypothesised based on models reconstructing the variation in modern DNA samples.
They might not exist, as these kinds of reconstructions are sensitive to your model. They often use simplifying assumptions which treat the common African ancestors of modern humans as one panmictic population until the last hundred thousand years, all intermixing freely, and when you do that you need these archaic populations to explain alleles that seem to have diverged too early.
But these models are probably not realistic. Africa's prehistoric population probably already had structure. You can model things differently, and have multiple subpopulations of Africans from an earlier date. They would still need to interbreed to explain overall genetic similarity, but if you make the interbreeding more restricted and occasional, rather than modelling one big prehistoric melting pot, you can explain the segregation of these anciently diverging alleles into different subpopulations without needing any ghost archaic interbreeding.

>>16163772
Most people don't possess specialist knowledge about any topic,in this case genetics. All that is needed is someone to say some bullshit confidently with some jargon terms sprinkled in and they'll believe it.

>>16161460
Why would she have straight hair in those latitudes? That's hot as fuck, as of in, sweaty. Even I have to shave mine every summer in yurop.

>>16159660
>Seek help, you're ra—ACK!

>>16163672
>lower limit
read the supp models you stupid fuck I read that part already.

>>16161822
>BBC is a myth
Is it?

>>16164166
All apes/monkeys/hominids have straight hair

>>16164281
no they don't, gorilla hair is tightly coiled, just like the african negroes' hair

>>16159330
Robert Sepehr usually spams it

>>16165187
That's a temporary condition caused by morning mist and even then it's just barely frizzed, far from "tightly coiled". Kinky hair is uniquely human while straight hair is commonplace among most animals.

>>16166166
...

>>16165187

>>16164252
The last part of the sentence you illiterate fuck.

>>16166304
>part
yeah no shit, just like "part" of the neandertal admixture is present in Africa. Read the fucking models you retard, P values are significantly lower for introgression from an archaic ancestor into an African population.

>>16166249
>Artistic license on a reconstruction.

>>16166267
No doubt due to moisture, same as the gorilla. Orangutans normally have straight hair.

>>16165187
>>16166249
>>16166267

>>16166465
We come from tree Lizards, not monkeys. Monkeys evolve into a species d+2 to humans.

>>16166470
This planet was apt at generating neutral species. In fact, it spawned humans, 2 away from central neutral. This 2 away position has 8 species. Humans are d-1, d+2 would be 2* positive steps, or to-the-right. You can tell by a monkeys face that they are 2 positive steps out from a perfect transition to humans. You can know we came from this really prosperous tree lizard.

>>16166434
I accept your concession.

>>16159424
erectus lasted in small populations up till about 100,000 years ago, so its possible, though its far more likely to be some other unknown species .

>>16167049
>erectus lasted in small populations up till about 100,000 years ago
In Java.
And nowhere else for the prior 200k years.

>>16161564
>>16159409
South Asians also have a significant amount of exclusive Neanderthal sequences

>>16166465
Okay but were those hanabilis dudes as smart as that monkey or were they stupider?

>>16164215
>that highlighting
What’s the fucking point of highlighting if you highlight the whole fucking page

>>16167307
Department of Redundancy Department.

>>16166940
read the models

>>16167069
if erectus survived in one place , its not inconceivable that another group survived somewhere else.

>>16159330
>only blacks have archaic admixture
its not archaic, its chimpanzee

>>16167941
Crossbreeding between humans and chimps is not possible.

>>16167523
I'm reading the report's interpretation of the data used to produce the models which you've already casually accepted while arguing nonsense with me. You conceded my point.

"I accept your concession" wasn't me being cheeky. This debate is over.

>>16167564
The counterpoint to that is if erectus didn't survive contact with heidelbergensis in a bunch of places, it is not inconceivable it didn't survive contact in any place. And your geography argument could be extended temporally as well. Do you think there are wild erectus in the wilds of Java today?

Anyway, you're arguing without evidence.

>>16159330
In that image it says Homo erectus or habilis in brackets. Is this what scientists actually theorize or just some association Robert Sephr(the person whose twitter feed this screencap is from) is forcing?

>>16167985
Correct, but crossbreeding between Africans and chimps is possible and fairly commonplace.

>>16168103
Why do you lie?

>>16167992
I didn't concede on any point you stupid fucking faggot they reference the models in the text and the P values for each and why they chose them are in the supplementary. You fucking lost you stupid nog. Your entire fucking argument stems from
>part of the lower end
unironically kill yourself if you're this fucking stupid, the admixture component is associated with basal west Africans in the text, and then the model that operates under the impression an archaic ancestor introgressed primarily into an AFRICAN population, they fucking modeled for your theory and it has LOWER P VALUES. If you read the fucking models you'd know this you dumb fuck. They ALSO operate on the introgression primarily being derived from an admixture event and not gradual gene flow you fucking moron.
>part of the lower end
guess what that also applies to retard? Neandertal DNA in Africa. Do you think the Eurasian component of neandertal DNA is equivalent to the African component? Are all admixture components just by default equal if they're present to you? Why are you even fighting this losing battle so desperately?

>>16168140
So blatantly too.

>>16159330
What is this? qrd

>>16159431
Current prognosis:
>Let in the niggers goy!

>>16164277
It all makes sense now! The intense anger,the seething,the coping. At last I understand.

>>16169095
Don't worry about it.

I need this explained to me.

>>16167996
human fossils are pretty rare, if you think that the current estimated ranges and timelines are accurate, you're a complete moron, we're litterally talking about a unknown archaic human species of which the only evidence is heuristic dna analysis , of which no known fossils exist.
you cant discount it because there is no more evidence to support it than against it, a new human species vs species known to exist during that time, take your pick , both are possible , considering what ever it is split off long before heidelbergensis.

there are contemporary examples of extreme isolation in africa such as the pygmies, which have been separated for 70-60k years genetically.

>>16159330
(((Robert Sepehr)))

>>16171412
I suspected it was him.

>>16159340
Pure soul. That's what they took away from you

>>16159330
>but what does this mean;
it means that we know Europeans and Asians are around %3-10 percent Neanderthal/Denisovan while we do not know what kind of Archaic Hominin did contributed to the African genetic pool.
So, it does not directly indicate anything, what it means that both African and Non-African populaces has ancestors fucked some cave unga bunga tribe, we know which tribes Nno-Africans' ancestors fucked while we dont know which one Africans' ancestors did.

>>16171581
>but not out of africa
bro, do you think Neanderthals just diappeared into void when Homo Sapiens arrived?
Our
ancestors
fucked
neanderthals.
It is not even a debated subject.

>>16171588
was response to
>>16159340

>>16171586
You're a libtard.

>>16159340
Beautiful image

>>16171588
eh?

>>16159340
>some say they still exist in the jungles of central africa
human chimp halfbreeds exist throughout africa as well as in most western urban areas

>>16173463
Stop making up nonsense.

redpill me on homo floresiensis
They say it actually had comparable intelligence to humans despite a way smaller brain
Something about the prefrontal cortex still being proportionally the same size
But that might just be some way of maintaining liberal cope in case we sequence its DNA and find out it interbred with some modern humans

>>16174031
He was a homo much like you.

>>16174389
But you are a gigantimus homomus mark III

>>16159420
Amazing, really interesting stuff. It makes sense, if nowadays desperate horny human males will fuck goats and chickens, why would they not have fucked something like a hominid in the past.
Testosterone is one hell of a drug.

>>16159528
/pol/ is a chaotic mess of competing, conflicting ideas. Nazis, communists, racists, libertarians, leftist liberals, republicans, democrats, antinatalists, incels, chads, globalists, modernists, progressivists, straight gay, transvestites, transexuals, asexuals, cucks, conservatives, luddites, atheists, catholics, muslims, jewish people, etc, I've seen it all and still see it all regularly. I know because I'm there practically everyday, and have been for many, many years.
There is no /pol/ ideal, or stance, there is only a place of gathering called /pol/, that's all.

>>16159573
>west africans
FTFY

>>16174430
Yoruba, Esan, Mende, and Gambian people, to be more precise.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Africa_ethnic_groups_1996.png

>>16174393
All sapien no homo.

So basically non-Africans have a smaller amount of comparatively less primitive non-sapien ancestry, while Sub-Saharan Africans have a larger amount of comparatively more primitive non-sapien ancestry. Is this a good high-level summary?

>>16174810
not exactly all this suggests is that some unknown hominid species diverged earlier than other known homininds such as neanderthals and at some point was introduced to the west african sapien population, and contributed significant dna, and its presence is much less signficant in non africans, what kind of hominid it was is unknown, but given the state of current living peoples in those regions, you can make some guesses about that they may have been (ooga booga)

>>16161169
It's extremely embarrassing that you believe this study to be real. There are so many flaws with the Lynn and Vahanen study. Most of the countries had their IQs GUESSED, not even tested but GUESSED!!!

>>16174869
I think its worth stating despite the flaws, no one wants to publish their own dataset with comparable scope , my guess is that anybody working on it comes to similar numbers, and even if they paint a better than lynns , they still arent "acceptable".

>>16161169
So what's the excuse for Aboriginal Australians or the people of Nepal and Guatemala? They have even lower IQ averages but lack this "less advanced hominid" ghost admixture from Africa.

Also why weren't the Amerindians as advanced as Europeans and East Asians if they were the most ""modern"" derivative of the sapien? I mean it's basically established that outside Mesoamerican Mayan/Aztec civilization Amerindians of both South and North America were effectively Sub-Saharan African tier civilization wise but with worse immune systems and athletic builds.

>>16175016
for the abos , they are evolved for their environment, they probably had higher intelligence when they arrived , as it is believed that they arrived on boats, but lost the ability to make them at some point, they have eyesight that is much better than an average human as good as 20:4 vision in some individuals, and their spacial intelligence is higher than average to match

its litterally what happens when you throw boomarangs to hunt for food for >50,000 years

>>16175163
If they had higher intelligence why didn't they realize there was nothing in Australia for them and collectively leave a century or two later?

What would convince the abos to stay, abandoned their sea life, abandoned most of their intelligence and throw boomerangs at large jumping rats for millennial?

>>16175650
Australia during the Pleistocene was pretty lush and covered in floodplains with lots of big game to hunt. Then it dried out into an inhospitable hellhole that can’t support anything bigger than a kangaroo

>>16161169
>some other form of less advanced hominid great ape that we don't have a good DNA sample for
Its chimpanzees, we have plenty good DNA sample for them, but anyone in the professions who would speak the truth would get inquisitioned and excommunicated for racism heresy for speaking the truth. Africans continue to interbreed with chimps to this day.

>>16175650
Australia was fine until the abbos ruined it with deliberately lit bushfires and killed off all the giant marsupials
I'd rather have giant wombats than abbos

>>16177516
they're still doing their best to ruin the place to this day, they're cancer, they should be wiped out or caged in zoos

>>16175650
crossing the ocean isnt a easy task, also it could be the ones there today are just the ones who stayed, its very possible some did go back.

West Africans have something that pulls them away from Denisovans and Neanderthals in contrast to South Africans, Pygmies and Eurasians.

>>16178118
What is it?

Oh look, it's this thread again.