data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fccd1/fccd117fc491c2630cb87fac4abcef24e2bfb6e6" alt="Science Science"
Oldest European Human Jawbone Discovered 34
DrLudicrous writes "A research group working in Romania has dated an ancient human jawbone to 35+/-1 thousand years old. This is a few thousand years older than other jawbones found in Europe. What is unusual about this specimen is that it has rather large molars, something that the lead scientist thinks may be an indication of human-Neanderthal interbreeding. Modern DNA studies have indicated that there is little to no traces of this inbreeding, so this raises some interesting questions."
Oldest European Human Jawbone Discovered (Score:2)
Re:Oldest European Human Jawbone Discovered (Score:2)
Re:Oldest European Human Jawbone Discovered (Score:2)
Not eating, that's for sure.
Re:Oldest European Human Jawbone Discovered (Score:2)
Multiregional vs. Out of Africa (Score:4, Insightful)
Yah, Neandertals have been classed human for ages (Score:2)
Re:Yah, Neandertals have been classed human for ag (Score:2)
Re: Neandertals have been classed human for ages (Score:2)
Yes, I know there are also articles claiming that sapiens and neandertalis didn't interbreed, people seem to need them every few years to reassure themselves that all of those hybrid skeletons are just phantasms. The last page above references several articles which address this very issue.
Re: Neandertals have been classed human for ages (Score:2)
More Info (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Damn! (Score:1)
Large molars (Score:1)
Sometimes scientists infer and speculate way too much based on the data they have. It's kind of getting stretched so far it's starting not to resemble science at all.
Re:Large molars (Score:2)
From your post, I can tell that your parents frequently beat you as a child, and that your neuroses have grown to your current distrust of scientific authority.
Re: Large molars (Score:3, Insightful)
> I think it's great how they find this jawbone that has large molars and all of a sudden that means that there was inter-species reproduction and all the current crackpot theories have to be thrown out the window for a new crackpot theory...
More charitably, these guys have offered some new evidence and an agument, and over the next few months or years we'll find out whether the relevant experts find the argument convincing.
> Sometimes scientists infer and speculate way too much based on the data
Re:Large molars (Score:2)
you do realise that you can have multiple theories about one issue and can evaluate all of them individually and as a whole and it is more probable that this leads to better understanding than just having 'one true theory' at a given time?
besides, i'm pretty sure you wouldn't notice science if it struck you in the head with a bsod of holyness.
Wouldn't that be Neanderthal/Cro Magnon inbreeding (Score:1)
Re:Wouldn't that be Neanderthal/Cro Magnon inbreed (Score:1)
They are us.
inbreeding != interbreeding (Score:3, Informative)
You could call me a nit-picker, but you wouldn't be quite correct :-)
35 thousand years old? (Score:2)
Inter-species breeding (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Inter-species breeding (Score:3, Interesting)
In the animal kingdom, two creatures are the same species if they can (and do) interbreed and produce viable offspring (i.e. offspring that can also reproduce. Therefore, horses and donkeys don't violate that rule. Plants are another matter entirly, as such rules don't seem to apply (plants love to hybridize)...
This can raise some interesting questions. For instance, are Bornean and Sumatran Orangutans of the same species? They certainly could produce viable offspring, but they are
Neandertal (Score:2)
Re:Neandertal (Score:2)
Re:Neandertal (Score:2)
Bullsh*t: neandertal [reference.com]
A real pedant would demand it be spelled and pronounced Homo neanderthalensis.
Re:Neandertal (Score:2)
Jawbone (Score:2)
Oh, jawbone, where is it you belong?
</the Band>
[What good is Karma if you can't burn some of it up once in a while?]