New genetic mapping shows that Neanderthals were fair skinned and often redheaded -- and that Euroasian skin color and...

New genetic mapping shows that Neanderthals were fair skinned and often redheaded -- and that Euroasian skin color and red hair is probably the result of Neanderthal interbreeding with Homo Sapiens, while the only human population that does not include Neanderthal DNA is the African population.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomically_modern_human
youtube.com/watch?v=sQgbxGI_mqE
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Got those orangutan titties

proof that negroes are a different spieces if human

Yep, the negro is indeed the missing link...

Gonna need sauce to your claim faggot

sub-saharan africans are mixed with a different hominid. unsurprisingly, no serious scientists are taking the time to discover what it was. genetic studies have shown that the humans most like the original homo sapiens alive today are the khalahari bushmen,

It seems "euroasians" are homosapiens cross contaminated with neandrethals. Africans contain pure homosapian dna. Also link to the study?

>apes are brown
>niggers are brown
Coincidence?

World average is 2.7% Neanderthal DNA, asians have 2.6% and africans 2.8%.
I'm caucasian but personally have 2.8%, still my personal attributes are most way better than average. It's all so mixed now so not even worth mentioning.
We also have 95% DNA shared with pigs.

>no neanderthal tits to suck on
Why live

africans are 0% neanderthal dna u fucking illiterate ape

I'd hit that...

>species
Race, user. Race.

Species can't normally interbreed.

Asian and European light skin color is generated by different mutations. Neanderthals also had light skin color, but by a third mutation, which is not present in European or Asian DNA. However we did interbreed with them, this is known for years now.

Not different species at all.

If you can see them, they aren't missing.

No, this is not true.

No, it's not. Both species live in similar climate therefore their skin color is similar.

Incorrect, sub-saharan africans have 0% neanderthal DNA. The 95% shared with pigs is a completely different thing. The 2.8% you have from neanderthals is 2.8% from the genes that are different from neanderthals (which is far less than 1% in total anyway)

Incorrect. There are many species that can interbreed.

>illterate ape
>still cant post link to support his claims

what does that mean
because niggers are dumber than white people
this is a well documented fact

It was white people all along.. Fucking disgusting white neanderthals

They aren't dumber than you though. Otherwise you'd know that Neanderthals had larger brains than we have now and you wouldn't consider being mixed with them a bad thing.

Not just white. Asians too.

>having neanderthal DNA
>a bad thing
Choose one.

That's not any new info nigger, they've been saying that shit for decades. It's true. Everyone who left Africa are descended partly from Neandertals. We are all more or less a sub-species of Homo sapiens. Ironic that niggers are the pure humans.

So, you're saying that the Neanderthal were superior to the cretins that crawled out of Africa, huh?

It might have been white supremacist pseudo-science but I read somewhere the neanderthal DNA made white people more creative.

Black people have lower IQs than white people. You can't deny that

>There are many species that can interbreed
There are some.

Lions and tigers, horses and donkeys, etc.

They create hybrids offspring that are infertile.

I like to think of them as beta testing the idea. Everyone else got the upgrade.

i was reading a article somewhere that said all modern humans have neanderthal admixture. the next sentence said that niggers didn't. so there you go. the only true homo sapiens are the ones that were sapient enough to leave shit hole africa.

neanderthals did have a larger brain case that sapiens, and i'm sure they had plenty genetic advantages and is white people got the best of both. it's no surprise that the cradle of civilization is mesopotamia, northern africa and the mediterranean, just about ten thousand years ago when the best genes of all homos worked their way to the top. what man goes to moon while niggers still living in huts of broken sticks and mud...

When you start to realize that some sects of sapians coexisted within the same time frame, leading to the fact that there can't be one true missing link.

So you're saying niggers are closer to apes than humans? Not shocked.

AND STILL WE HAVE THE MOST MONEY SO FUCK YOU

Nope Neanderthals got their asses kicked by Sapiens.

We do inherit lots of genetic diseases from them though.

They weren't though. If they were superior, we'd have a world inhabited by their offspring now. They did have larger brains, but we ran faster and were better with projectile weapons.

The average IQ of black people is lower than the average IQ of white people. However, IQ doesn't mean much in itself, and you are likely to be on the lower spectrum - considering you failed to comprehend what I wrote - so you are still way below most of black people.

There are many that can have viable offspring too. Dogs and wolves come to mind as first example, but there are more.

We actually didn't get the best of both, we got lot's of genetic diseases from Neanderthals too. We got some good stuff and some bad stuff too.

No, niggers are closer to original homo sapiens than white people. Our most recent common ancestor with the chimps was the same ape, and the exact same number of generations separate white and black people from chimpanzees.

oh look the resident "expert" has dropped by to tell us all what he thinks is correct

rejoice everybody, embrace the enlightenment of this smug cunt

Not my fault if you prefer to live in ignorance.

blacks aren't even homo sapien, they're homo erectus

Just read the book Sapiens

im not saying they were superior, but your logic needs work. their way of life was over, the large game animals they subsisted on were dying (mammoth) and they were out-competed at this critical juncture but incoming homos. also you said the world would be populated by their offspring which is actually the case, idiot. there is no "original homo sapien", unless you think a man in the sky popped us out of the garden of eden. the arbitrary term homo sale in is best defined by the average of all living humans. you need to look past labels a little more. also what genetic diseases did we get from neanderthals? addiction to tobacco is the only thing i know about.

i forgot to say that also the neanderthals habitat i was changing, i.e. glaciers retreating and what not

...

>big lips like chimps
>flat noses like chimps
>strong and fast like chimps
>females grow big giant booties to attract black mates
>black males seek out big black booties to mate with
>inherently selfish, stays to its specific group like chimps
>only shares with immediate group members like chimps
>prone to violent fear and lashing out like chimps
>attack in packs like chimps
>get in large groups and make noises eerily sounding like chimps
>black skin like chimps
>no concept of long term goals, steals and riots for immediate reward, just like chimps
>fast and agile like chimps
>cunning and deceptive like chimps

If you dont think they are closer to being chimpanzee's than sapiens than you are in denial.

Not saying its bad, maybe a long time ago some primitive sapiens decided to fuck their neighboring monkey population out of desperation.

But it would seem that the africans did miss an important milestone in being civilized and learning to use agriculture.

Maybe they missed the last train to evolution or something, just look at Abbo's, those thing HAVE TO BE NEANDERTALS, They basically live in caves!

>if somebody doesn't know something they have a lower IQ than a nigger
Oh, so that's what you meant.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.

>you have a low IQ if you don't know my meaning right away
You sure are an annoying cunt

>no serious scientists are taking the time to discover
Fortunately for you, the world abounds in facetious scientists nowadays.

Their genetic contribution is too low to consider them successful in that aspect. Most of our genes come from homo sapiens and not the neanderthals. We inherited higher allergy rates from them and I vaguely remember some other things too, but too lazy to look it up right now. Fact is they weren't superior. They had certain advantages and certain disadvantages, but the homo sapiens prevailed.

When I talk about original homo sapiens, I am talking about the common ancestor of all living humans on the planet right now.

Sorry if your stupid butt got hurt.

This user knows what's up.

Except for this:
>Not different species at all.

What I've always found rather interesting is how research into the differences of human "races" seems to be purposefully avoided.
The most you'll get is that the usual classifications like "caucasian" or "negroid" are too broad to make definitive statements.
But that doesn't mean that interesting differences couldn't be found if we narrowed it down more.
And I say races just because that lack of research really doesn't allow us to make a definitive statement on whether or not we are all the same species.

>the only human population that does not include Neanderthal DNA is the African population.

Because they have chimpanyeezee dna?

>Black people have lower IQs than white people.
IQ was created by and for white people. It doesn't measure what you think it measures, either.

White people who only have ever hung out with white people, from a different life perspective you guys look and sound moronic but it's hard to share that without being a poisoned messenger

Lol not him but you we're being a stupid cunt first and he was just poking fun at you for it dude because he didn't give you the benefit of the doubt because you were wearing it As convincingly as a paper bad mask at a proper costume ball

FYI here is the competing theory to racism

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomically_modern_human

It is defined by traits such as tool use, culture and langage and not by genetic makeup

Addendum:

Smaller variations in genetics than exist in humans have been deemed enough to speak of different species in some other animals.

yeah but my fishtank has species from completely different phylums, so of you cant coexist with other humans peacefully thats your problem

what the fuck

Lol and rules that some people made up by us in our infancy of our understanding of the world we live it (we're still there) are the rules forever right? What if the other way around is wrong? Blind adhesion to science is the least scientific thing one can do (and yes I know what you said and what you didn't say, but it was a weighted statement that will read to people as "lol white people are the only humans" so I responded as such)

I'm as sure they know more about homo sapiens subspecies as I'm sure there is a moral aspect as to why they don't say anything about it. Could you imagine the chaos if you announced to the world "Homo Sapiens Sapiens are Caucasian and Asians and Homo Sapiens Inferior are the Blacks and Hispanics"?

TL;DR They know, it's just that you don't tell a subspecies of sentient monkeys that they're inferior, especially scientifically proven to be inferior, with a moral compass.

>ugly dumb
>redditor scum

Ridiculous, white tigers arent the only tigers

I don't think we are same or that the difference is skin deep. There are differences in bone structure, muscle structure, brain size, etc. But we are still the same species. If you look at it objectively, the differences between different sexes of the same race are larger than the differences between same sex individuals of different races. (excluding the native australian population)

As a side note: I am also annoyed at the scientific world having to pretend that we are completely same, but that doesn't make us different species.

Only that whites are not the best performers. Asians rule and ashkenaji (can't remember names but you know what i mean) jews get an average iq of 115 leaving the rest likewise behind. And these things correlate heavily with academic success so it showcases that some groups are better than others on average and IQ does work to forecast success due to correlation.

The important thing however is to understand that it's only statistics for groups, the individual can still outperform everyone regardless from which group he comes.

...

youre the scum stormturd

...

fake news

...

...

Most of those have to do with the social environment not genetics (true some people are born quicker than others but that's different) an iq test only shows a small portion of intelligence that can be utilized (anylitical folks seem to have trouble finding the intelligence behind emotions and art... Or intelligence with ones body, and other things, watch people from time to time, they'll surprise you daily with a shining spot of smart), it's why since I was little I told ever adult that asked that, no I will not take an iq test... I kind of sabotaged myself a bit too hard tho, I ended up dropping out of high school, I've spent my life trying to convince people that I am well and truly dumb... Kind of over that now... Just gonna live my life and let what comes come

>What I've always found rather interesting is how research into the differences of human "races" seems to be purposefully avoided.

Actually it isn't, yall are just ignorant.

Read up on shit called haplotypes. There are distinct gene pools within the human species representing major population groups. These are fuzzy at their edges, where there's a higher frequency of interbreeding between populations (gene flow). Both the Chinese and Indian are two major haplotypes, as are Europeans and Indigenous Americans (of whom settled the north and south american continents as a foundation population with a unique set of allele frequencies, all within a relatively rapid timespan of ~5,000-10,000 years).

>it was a weighted statement

No, I was making a criticism towards this particular area of study.
But you assuming it was kinda gives us an idea as to why it isn't studied more.

This is exactly what I suspect aswell, user.

>but that doesn't make us different species

It might, though. It kinda depends on where you draw the line.

I think it was some kind of rabbit where they found that 2 populations were almost exactly the same but they are classified as different species just because they populated 2 distinct areas without overlap.

You've got 95% of your DNA the same as a fucking banana most of that is all like cellular respiration and stuff

OP's neanderthal chick looks pretty fuckable if you'd ask me

The other issue is that there is no such thing as "black race". You have black people who are genetically closer to caucasians than to other black people.

this shit gay
youtube.com/watch?v=sQgbxGI_mqE

SeeThat is why it was a weighted statement friend

Aggreed but the social enviroment is part of what makes the group. Asians wouldn't be the asians we know if they hadn't that thirst for success ingrained from childhood. On that account the stereotypes created help also - there are psychological studies showing that reminding people of things like "asians are good at math" before a test visibly boosts their average score.
Regarding the iq test - sure it doesn't account for everything but does that matter? It's sufficient for stem predictions. On a sidenote i would say being stupid with perfect memory would likely result in better academic success than smart with terrible as most tests are just memory quizzes.

What race does the ape look now?

i doubt they won in fights. maybe when they ganged up.

All they did was out breed them and most likely survived a giant disaster better because of it.

I addressed this clearly in my initial statement.

I'm aware what haplotypes are, buddy.
I was suggesting we should look at differences between smaller groups. Looking at haplogroups is not the way to achieve that.

Lol people like you guys are the biggest reason people can't phrase things in certain manners, you talk code that pings on alot people who aren't whites radar because it was heard all their life... I'm mixed but pass hard for white and grew up with a grandpa that was raised in the kkk, you guys legit sound like him

It's the way you phrased it, one person said it and it sounded gross (that was you) the other didn't sound gross, you keep arguing your point like that's what I was saying

Neanderthal women can be surprisingly bangable.

>White person lips
>white skin
>no butt lol
That's you guys

I'm not concerned about phrasing things in a way that doesn't sound "gross". I'm concerned about expanding knowledge.

Nothing new about the study. Everyone except niggers have 2-4% neanderthal genes.

But user, a key factor in gaining knowledge is seeking the perspectives and experiences of others. Otherwise humanities knowledge wouldn't progress you silly goose

Fun fact: there is zero neanderthal DNA in human mitochondria.

Theory: they were to mannish more human men to bone, but human women were ok with thire big clunky man looks.

Conjecture: all red heads are cucks.

That's essentially the official theory

Full story:
homo sapiens is theorized as dumber but better at cooperation compared to neanderthal and if you want a war party you need some idiot for the front to die for the cause so the group can thrive. Given the premise that would be easier with homo sapiens while neanderthals would be not as easily convinced to self-sacrifice as they were supposed to be more asocial and smarter. End result: sapiens war parties slaughter loner neanderthals one by one.

Wasn't making a deliberately derogatory statement. Just an example.

Although, growing up in the area of the country I live has given me quite an interesting experience with people of multiple cultures. The town I live in, for example is 70% white, 20% native, around 7% mexican, and 3% black. Very rural area. The whites are mostly farmers or athletes. The natives are all drunks. The Mexicans don't speak any fucking English, and the blacks are thugs.

A nearby town with around 6x the population. Roughly 50% white, 20% Mexican, 20% Black, 5% Native, 2.5% Oriental, and 2.5% Russian (Strangely) has almost the exact result. The whites, instead of being farmers are largely oilfield or corporate. The Mexicans barely, if at all, speak English and work cheap labor shit. The blacks are even fucking worse than here. The natives are drunks. The Russians are hard workers, as are the Asians.

Everywhere I go in my state, I see this trend. Only in specific communities do I see a disproportionate population of low class whites. I've never seen a family of sober natives. I've only on ONE occasion met a family of blacks that acted like civilized people. I don't get it. Is it just the culture or the way they're built? What fucking gives? I've literally met adopted-at-birth-to-rich-white-families-black-kids who acted like the fucking white man owed them and behaved completely uncivilized.

>new

She would break you in half

That's just plain false. You don't necessarily need other people to learn stuff.

Though, to learn anything worth knowing these days, you do need to build on the knowledge of others. I'll give you that.
But others doesn't mean all others.
For instance, I've quickly assessed that on this subject the chances of learning something from certain dumb-asses who replied to me are quite slim.

Negros are the newest species to the planet. Not the oldest

dem tiddies

Where I live most of the lower economic and social class is white they are the ones everyone (including white people) are afraid of, the others are spread evenly... So by your metric white people are the lowest. Having grown up inside the Mexican and native communities I can tell you that you have a sampling error friend

So... You called me wrong then said what I said in more words and called it right... Ok

>not wanting death by snu snu

I'd probably let her...hnnng...

You said it was a key factor. I said it wasn't.
Then I threw you a bone by saying what you probably meant with your false statement.
Then I called you a dumbass.

And now, by writing this, I'm questioning your reading comprehension.

>If they were superior, we'd have a world inhabited by their offspring now.
>They did have larger brains, but we ran faster and were better with projectile weapons.

This is inaccurate. Predominantly, the cause of their extinction was their inability to adapt to a changing climate and overall environment. What humanity lacks in physical or mental acuteness, we make up for with versatility.
We simply outlived them. No real superiority necessary.

As a "black" user, I don't know if I'd want to interact with you, given how you've assessed things.

There's a lot to it. The problem is that, before you could even be encouraged to follow the little threads of red yarn that'd get you to the conclusions you say you're looking to seek... you're beset to conclude first, instead, that the problem is either just the culture to the way they're built- and come off as indignant with regards to the small sample of people you've met, on behalf of all people who can be lumped into the group.

Identifying as "black"... I've heard that all before.

Well, I can tell you probably haven't ever seen a res...

Well we need them back! Preferably the women! Look how fuckable they might've been! I'd stick my dick in that!

>user attacked by pack of cunning and deceptive chimps
>Years later, posts strange description of chimps in neanderthal thread

kek'd. When are chimps "deceptive"?

You don't need agriculture if your food runs across your doorstep every morning.