Near extinction of humans some 70,000 years ago

"Some 200,000 years ago, our ancestors evolved in East Africa. They spread throughout the rest of the continent and then moved out into Asia and Europe. As they journeyed along coastlines and over mountains, they encountered Neanderthals and other human relatives. And at least once in a while, they had sex.

We don’t know the prurient details of those encounters, although it is possible that someday Reich and other scientists will be able to fill in a few of them. But the work Reich has done already leaves no doubt that interbreeding was a major feature of human evolution. Billions of people carry sizable chunks of DNA from Neanderthals and other archaic human relatives. Some of those genes may play important roles in our health today."
http://discovermagazine.com/2013/march/14-interbreeding-neanderthals#.UUrKW9nl1WM

 

The interesting part is that old HS had the same brains with us 200k years ago and they did not put them into use until the Toba eruption .
The entire non-Subsaharan line came from a small band of people numbering between 150 and 400 individuals , where is your nationalism now?

Actually there are bones of HS in Israel that predate the exodus that happen 70k years ago but this family line was exterminated , probably by Neanderthals.

 

Look up the "Wallace Line"

 

Interestingly enough, it is the humans whose ancestors left Africa thousands of years ago who have Neanderthal DNA in their genome. Those whose ancestors stayed in Africa until more recently (after the extinction of the Neanderthals) have no such traces of DNA.

 

Now, this is certainly food for thought. The notion of "species" is necessarily fuzzy, since no two individuals are alike and it's variation that leads to speciation and evolution. So what, exactly, is a "species" when there cannot be any exact definition? Generally, biologists consider two interbreeding populations to be different species if the two populatons do not breed between groups. If their ranges overlap, then they choose not to interbreed. Otherwise, they are kind of "de facto" species. And indeed, it happens from time to time that geographically isolated populations come into contact, and interbreed readily. This has happened with worms, with birds...and with hominids!

So if in their wanderings populations came into contact, interbred, and produced fertile offspring, the biological position is that they in fact were never different species at all. Simply two populations of the same species. Even today, we see distinct physical differences among people associated with geography - such things as skin color, eye shape, physical development, propensity to suffer (or be immune to) certain diseases, etc. Certainly the various human populations are far from homogeneous. DNA tests are entirely capable of identifying what part of the world your ancestors came from, with some precision. This is true because for a very long time, there was almost no interbreeding among the human populations (tribes) in widely separated parts of the world.

So by biological convention, these various flavors (or races, or subspecies, or whatever) of humans are regarded as all the same species because when they come into contact with one another, they breed willingly and successfully. Cro-Magnons and Neandertals apparently (that is, from DNA evidence) followed this same pattern. There were visible physical characteristics differentiating these groups, just as there are today, but nonetheless the differences didn't prevent or even discourage successful interbreeding. And THAT in turn means the physical differences couldn't have been all that great.

 

Most Europeans are descended from the stupid and slavish race that was conquered by the Indo-Europeans around 2,000 BC. The natives carried Neanderthal genes. This made them enslaved within themselves. As in the movie The Fly, they had to constantly fight being taken over by the predatory species within them and were easy to dominate from the outside by the decadent hereditary rulers. The natives' Neanderthal beast was only expressed outward in service to their Masters. Eventually, some of them received genes from the intelligent and defiant race, but these have always been suppressed by the Heirhead ruling class. Whites became ruled by birth rather than worth and began their present march backward after the self-genocide of World War Two. The New Age is only a self-serving name for just another Dark Age.

 

You should write a novel....wonderful imagination.

 

Or they would be if we didn't have nukes

 

And what a marvellous example of Darwin's theory it is.

 

I am a bit out of touch these days, but there was a theory doing the rounds that environmental stress actually increases the rate of genetic mutations in organisms. It used to be called the evolutionary pump theory. Not sure how recent developments in genetics have done to advance the theory.

 

Or mebbe de-volvement at the rate things are goin'...

Neanderthal Genome Data Sheds Light on Human Ancestors
March 21, 2013 - Scientists at Germany's Max Planck Institute have released a final version of a high-quality sequencing of a Neanderthal genome, which could shed light on why humans survived and earlier hominid species did not.

 

Yes, the stressor that brought the human population to near extinction all those years ago also may have spurred them to advance.

 

I find this fascinating. I had never considered Human-Neanderthal interbreeding but analysis of the Neanderthal genome (from several different research groups) suggests that between 1% and 4% of the Eurasian human genome seems to come from Neanderthals. Reich's studies suggest that it's around 2.5%.

 

Mega-Eruptions Caused Mass Extinction ...

Mega-eruptions Caused Mass Extinction, Study Finds
March 21, 2013 - Behind the extinction that wiped out at least half of Earth’s species.

 

A slavish majority directed by predatory ruling classes explains all Western history. Fiction is something that you find most in the accredited dogma preached in academentia. The Ivory Tower is a sheltered fantasyland inhabited by faddish narrow-minded conformists. There lies nothing but their lies.

 

In sink or swim, most people drown. The guillotine-fodder in yachts laugh at the suckers who believe competition will get them onto the soft beach, which will only become bitter sand in their mouths for the "winners." It is an entertaining spectacle watching the deluded class-climbers strive for positions mostly granted in advance to the heirhead slime that oozed out the fatcats' trophy wives.

 

What is interesting about this evidence is the corrrespondence with the Genesis account that during the 40 (thousand years) "days and nights" all Neanderthals disappeared as three racial stocks of Modern man flooded "Out-of-Africa" and populated all the earth even to the tops of the mountains.

Recent genetic evidence supports a common, singular ancestor, who lived 40,000-142,000 year ago, for all of us living today.


True, we would have to assume that the 40 days of Noah's flooding actually was a subte hint for 40,000 years ago, but the writers would never have been able to get away stating such an inordinately long time ago, not until now.

 

In stark ontrast to that explanation, other researchers believe there is evidence to support the idea that Neanderthals were sexually promiscuous people.

This amoral bi-sexual promiscuity always develops into a social system dominated by the women, who can and willuse sex as a currency to get whatever they are motivated to want or need.

Matriarchies become the dominate culture which tends to rely upon Intuition and Feelings for decision making processes.
The impotence of male Logical/Mathematical Intelligence tends to deprive the society of realistic perspectives in particular, concerning self defense and safety from more patriarchy-type neighbors.
The fatherless offspring that are conceived in these matriarchies lose the aggressiveness that tends to fuel exploration and effect hunting'gathering in team work among the males.
This isolates the society and reduces the awareness of neighboring apes and predators.

The whole community is softer and less well adapted for the survival of the fittest.

 

That was the real tragedy.

 

That's not interesting. That's a bold faced lie. What is interesting is why you keep telling it even though you are aware that everyone knows it is a lie? Please inform us, why you keep telling things that you know are not true?

Another lie. A modification of your previous lie combined with the truth,. which you had to have your ass handed to you over and over and over.


The lie is in 2 parts.

Your lie) our most common recent ancestor lived 40,000 years ago.

The truth) the real range for our most common ancestor is 60,000-142,000 years ago.


So now you are lying about the range so it includes the number you want. The point is that genetic evidence don't support what you claim.

Why not? If they meant that, the would have said it. Nothing stopped them from claiming all the other miracles and unbelievable things in the bible. Regardless, 40,000 years ago has no special significance in terms of paleontology. You've lied about the numbers and the events. Your thoughts on the subject are pointless.

 

Proving my point, the indigenous Europeans who were conquered by Caucasians in 2,000 BC were Mamas' Boys. That's why they surrendered. There is an unintentionally amusing book on these people written by a feminist. She praises these pre-Whites as gentle Flower Children. The decadent William Golding (Lord of the Flies) even considered the Neanderthals to be such harmless little darlings (The Inheritors.

We have become dominated by the passive genes inherited from these creatures. Class supremacy is one of the main symptoms of slavishness and its main enforcer. Richgirl feminism, and all such tiny groups with power, is strictly a ruling class scheme to emasculate the majority so it won't stand up to the Nobility With No Ability.

As an example of our effeminate wimpiness in not standing up to class privilege, someone who is "proud to die taking a rich kid's place" is a gutless tough guy. Shaking the chains that the castrating rulers put on him, such a chest-thumbing phony bullies his fellow workers but won't stand up to his boss, proving that he is really a girlyman. The illusion that feminization is a Liberal tactic is a sign of a weakling's submission to Conservative misdirection, becoming chicken feed for chickenhawks.

 

So, does all that explain why humans have proven themselves to be passive and not at all warlike?

or is it simply meaningless doublethink and gobledegook, which is how I read it?

 

I agree with most of what you say here.

What sexual promiscuity does is create fatherless boys.

They are coodled by over protective mothers, who usually are those who have access to wealth and power in the society.
We see this today, with the working mothers who have taken the soft well paying jobs that fcilitate raisng their son to obey their authority.

Sadly, the great majority of single mothers remain poor.
They double the Unskilled Labor Pool, so the wages of the common working male drops below the salary needed to housing and a family's support.
The fatherless kids become the criminal element, which is the seed of the patriarchs who develop fom them, in the inner cities where they will form gangs lead by the strongest/undereducated among them.

These are the seed of the patriarchs which will at first throw over the society of wimps, by force usually. (i.e.; French Revolution).
They may just lead an anarchy that follows the financial ruin of the society let alone to decay and fall, (as happened in Rome with the Vandals).

The same syndromes are repeated, the same drama of feminization in future generations by means of sexual negotiations with these new leaders, will predictable see one great society rise up, become feminized, fall down, be replaced,... over and over.

 

?
Proven..?
In comparison to what other species does man's constant warfare against himself appear to be passive?

The history of mankind seems to reveal the great Battle of the Sexes manifect between whole societies, one which is Matriarchic by comparison to the patriarchies neigboring them.

We see America today as a matriarchy in stark contrast to Islam, N. Korea,and china, all clearly poised for the moment of our weakness to strike one way or the other against us.

Our resouces have fallen so low that we already have "sold" ourselves to China, while our pagan behaviors and export of pornography has aroused the hate of the muslims.

 

Are you going to comment on the topic?


If not, you probably shouldn't post.