Recent comments in /f/history

Yrolg1 t1_jaawbtx wrote

> It’s not really a shift in academia or anything as much as advances in genetic sequencing allowing us to see conclusively that the genetic makeup of all modern Europeans is around 1-3% Neanderthal dna

And the article says a Neanderthal ancestor 4 to 6 generations back. 2^5 = 32, or about 3% of his ancestry.

11

supersecretaqua t1_jaaup6a wrote

Is that not what they said? I think you interpreted it as somehow meaning "the genes themselves physically lost battles in expression" or something but I'm certain they're just talking about overall dilution over time for the reasons you said ad an example lol, since that is generally the thing like they said

16

atjones111 t1_jaas2vc wrote

It’s not something promoted in intro courses as it opens up a conundrum, that being well what do you call the archaic/modern human that comes from it and so forth, probs not taught in 90s due to evolution bad hysteria then, colleges don’t like losing funding, maybe your profs sucked or were just of the 5% conservative anthropologists, idk odd they would say that

9

alphaphilomath t1_jaar59w wrote

I was taking Anthropology courses in the mid nineties and not one of my professors agreed with my opinion that there was no way sapiens weren't hooking up with Neanderthals repeatedly. As if they'd never met a human. So, I'm not sure where those who held that belief were especially 50 years ago, but I didn't meet them.

17