Scientists said Wednesday they had unravelled the oldest DNA ever retrieved from a Homo sapiens bone, a feat that sheds light on modern humans’ colonisation of the planet.

A femur found by chance on the banks of a west Siberian river in 2008 is that of a man who died around 45,000 years ago, they said.

Teased out of collagen in the ancient bone, the genome contains traces from Neanderthals–a cousin species who lived in Eurasia alongside H. sapiens before mysteriously disappearing.

Previous research has found that Neanderthals and H. sapiens interbred, leaving a tiny Neanderthal imprint of just about two percent in humans today, except for Africans.

The discovery has a bearing on the so-called “Out of Africa” scenario: the theory that H. sapiens evolved in East Africa around 200,000 years ago and then ventured out of the continent.

Dating when Neanderthals and H. sapiens interbred would also indicate when H. sapiens embarked on a key phase of this trek–the push out of Eurasia and into South and later Southeast Asia.


The bone found at the Irtyush River, near the settlement of Ust’-Ishim, carries slightly more Neanderthal DNA than non-Africans today, the team found.

But it takes the form of relatively long strips, whereas Neanderthal DNA in our genome today has been cut up and dispersed in tiny sections as a result of generations of reproduction.

These differences provide a clue for a “molecular calendar”, or dating DNA according to mutations over thousands of years.

Using this method, Paabo’s team estimate interbreeding between Neanderthals and H. sapiens occurred 7,000 to 13,000 years before the Siberian individual lived–thus no more than 60,000 years ago.

This provides a rough date for estimating when H. sapiens headed into South Asia, Chris Stringer, a professor at Britain’s Natural History Museum, said in a comment on the study.


Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • propagandaoftruth

    Go Neanderthals!
    Neanderthals of the world, unite!
    Dylsexics of the world untie!

    • That said, with this news, it’s a shame you no longer call yourself Neanderthal DNA on Disqus. That should be something to be proud of.

      • Tarczan

        I’m 5%, and proud of it. That’s where I get my charm and good looks!

        • Let me put it to you this way: If everyone else but black Africans have it, then it must be something worth having.

          • Bossman

            It could be one of those strange things; when those pioneers left East Africa and interbred with a bunch of near-apes, they produced something far better than themselves.

          • KristiMartin7

            Bossman If you think Sherry`s story is nice..., 1 weak-ago my girlfriend‘s half sister basically made $4423 just sitting there twenty hours a week from their apartment and the‘re buddy‘s sister-in-law`s neighbour done this for eight months and got paid over $4423 part time On there computer. apply the guide on this address,…C&#97&#x73&#104&#83&#116&#111&#x72&#101d&#46&#x43&#111&#77

          • propagandaoftruth

            That is the only thing that gives me anything resembling hope or solace regarding mixture with ape like subspecies of humanity.

            Must end, however.

          • ElComadreja

            Mixing with black Africans does nothing but degrade humans.

          • There were already other hominids that looked very much like people, all over Eurasia, even then. It would be complete lunacy to believe that they did not interbreed.

          • ElComadreja

            Is that supposed to be an endorsement of miscegenation?

        • Petronius

          Wow. 5% Neanderthal, that’s truly impressive. I salute you.

          According to National Geographic Geno 2.0, the upper limit of Neanderthal DNA in modern non-African humans is about 4% and the average is 2.1%.

          me: 2.7% Neanderthal, 3.4% Denisovan, total Old Hominids 6.1%.
          my mother: 4.0% Neanderthal, 2.6% Denisovan, total Old Homs 6.6%.
          my daughter: 2.7% Neanderthal, 4.2% Denisovan, total Old Homs 6.9%.
          All scores well above average.

          • journey

            Quite correct. We all could come up with make believe numbers which. of course, all will change depending on which direction the wind blows or who comes along with the next best guesses.

          • Tarczan

            That’s the total of the two.

          • I should probably get tested, but I would rather not the result return as some percentage of “Unknown Non-Human” along with some people wearing biohazard suits.

      • NeanderthalDNA

        Oh I’m still here. Been here all the time. Maybe I should switch back. Both are banned on the Nation, LOL!

        Go team!

        • JohnEngelman

          I have been banned from Nation too, but they keep trying to get me to subscribe to their magazine.

          • I can’t imagine why I would start posting someplace from which I would only be banned.

          • propagandaoftruth

            I started this identity to get in and burn the Nation hard over that negro’s blog about how poor White hillbillies don’t deserve welfare.
            I burned them up, got LOTS of upvotes over a weekend until el ban-o.

            I REALLY hate those smug, self righteous, libtard mandarins there, with a few reservations. Melisa Harris Perry Pedentic Upjumped Pinch Nosed AA Farce is the worst.

          • Mack0

            I was given a three year subscription to the Nation as a gift. No joke.

          • A practical joke?

            Either that or someone really hates you.

          • propagandaoftruth

            Oooh. Make mischief. Gimme your personal info and let me make mischief.

            Meh, gmail accounts are zero cents a dozen.

          • propagandaoftruth

            Hey I used to live over there the way I live over here…ugh…

            Did you ever post there in the old days?

            Hey – when I say “libtard” I don’t mean people like you and I. I think a lot of “liberalism” is fine sans race stupidity. I do hate the messianic quality of it yet still feel messianicly impelled in my new skin.

            Ha ha! There’s a way to channel any eloi libtard tendencies we may still harbor. We can hate our former stupid selves – back when we believed that and lent our voices and energies toward betraying ourselves.

            Wisdom and compassion.

            The Tale of the Compassionate Fool

            One day a very compassionate fool was following a fishing cart. The cart hit a bump and a gigantic fish, still barely alive, fell onto the road. The compassionate fool took pity on the big fish, picked it up and flung it into a nearby fishing hole. Went about his way feeling smug and warm inside.

            Unfortunately the big fish ate all the little fish in that tiny pond and the poor peasants went hungry that winter when their little pond went barren.

            No more compassionate tomfoolery, John. Ever. Vow to myself as recovering libtard.

          • JohnEngelman

            There are various kinds of liberals and liberalism. Generally speaking I am liberal on economic and environmental issues, conservative on social issues, and very conservative on crime and punishment. I hate criminals. I want them to suffer.

            I am a convinced race realist, but I am neither a white supremacist, nor am I a white nationalist.

            But back to Nation. Soon after I discovered its website its editor and publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel wrote an article deploring the increase in de facto segregated public schools.

            I posted a comment saying that it is hypocritical for liberals to complain about this, because they send their children to all white private schools if the alternative is public schools with large black populations. I added that this is true, even when the public school systems are well financed, like the system in Washington, DC.

            Bad move! It turns out Ms vanden Heuvel sent her children to all white private schools.

            Anyway, that was the end of my very short career of contributing to Nation’s website.

          • propagandaoftruth

            I used to be a favorite poster for a few years. I was able to take mild proto race realist positions, sensible anti-Islam positions, without getting booted.
            In the early oughts they were very tolerant of dissent and lot’s of sometimes obnoxious conservatives posted regularly.
            Then, as Obama’s victory sunk in they cracked down hard on dissent. First my old non disqus ID got banned after some comments on a Melissa harris perry column. Then NeanderthalDNA got banned because I was admittedly asinine and thoughtcrime spewing.
            Then I went in for that weekend as this guy here and…I don’t know…maybe the mods were slack or maybe they tolerated or maybe I was pretty slick…or some combination, but made it several days before I stepped on the wrong toes…

      • Sick of it

        We should be proud of our human lineages alone.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Shoplifters of the world: Unite and steal Morrissey CDs.

    • Michael Whalen

      Did you hear about the atheist with dyslexia? He didn’t believe in Dog.

  • Luca

    Neanderthals took one look at Africans and said “I’d rather go extinct than mate with that mess”. Even a Neanderthal could figure that out.

    • Sick of it

      Or we got rid of them before they had the chance.

    • Garrett Brown

      New studies have shown Neanderthals are not the dopey ooga booga caveman the majority of people believe them to be. An argument can be made that that’s what makes Whites so special, we have Neanderthal DNA.

      • Anna Tree

        I fear they gave us that pathological altruism gene though.

        • Garrett Brown

          Nah, that’s only come relatively recent in Caucasian history.

          • They cared for their badly injured. Some of those fossils show healed bone breaks that would have required long-term care.

          • Garrett Brown

            I believe caring for your own so you can continue to hunt is quite different than promoting your own genocide.

          • Ungingurz having Gruk cared for after he got trampled by a mastadon at work one morning isn’t anything like what Tim Wise advocates.

          • Garrett Brown

            Sounds like two orcs just slain by Aragorn.

          • Yrrchs don’t have names. They don’t need them.

          • Garrett Brown

            What are yrrchs?

          • Anna Tree

            The pathological component came relatively recent I agree (along with colonialism and of course greatly accentuated with the liberal leftism and the feminization of our society of the last 50 years or so).

            But altruism to one’s kind, moreover family, has always be strong in the Western world and the Asian world, where I think it is even found in its purest (extreme?) form in acts like kamikaze, suicidal military attacks against the enemy soldiers (different in my opinion from the religious islamic suicidal terrorist attacks that are mainly aggressions against civilians because they are bad muslims/from another sect or because they are non-muslims.)

            On the contrary, it seems to me that it is not as much found in Africa, where individualism is more pronounced (while collectivism is more pronounced in the East and the west is as usual in between.)

            I always wonder why black Americans seldomly donate, go to volunteer in Africa, or go on vacations there for the matter.

          • Garrett Brown

            You just typed it, “to our own kind”, not to low IQ invading trash. That’s from programming, that we can treat them just as we treat our own.

  • JohnEngelman

    The oldest existing race is that of the San Bushmen of southern Africa. By “oldest” I mean that we need to go further back in number of generations to find a common male and a common female ancestor. When modern humans appeared in Africa 100,000 years ago they resembled the Bushmen more than any other existing race.

    One hundred to several hundred of these modern humans left Africa about 60,000 years ago, probably crossing the Sinai Peninsula. The difference between these modern humans and the Neanderthals were greater than the differences between any two existing races.

    Nevertheless, they were capable of producing fertile offspring. The first generation of these offspring were considerably less intelligent than the modern humans. They probably looked ugly to both the modern humans and the Neanderthals. I suspect many of them were killed or abandoned.

    Nevertheless, a few survived. Those few are among our ancestors.

    • journey

      The human races did not evolve from blacks or out of Africa.

      • Pathfinder75

        Even if we did “evolve from blacks or out of Africa”,the existence today of fair-skinned brunettes,blondes and redheads,with their dazzling array of hair and eye colors,proves that us Whites evolved into something much,much better,and far more beautiful than anything blacks could ever hope to reproduce.

        • journey

          Would have needed very strong magic for whites and Asians to have evolved from blacks. All wishful fairytales from academia to fill the unknown loopholes.

          • Luca

            Genetics is the new archeology. Have your DNA examined, you will find amazing things. Perhaps even .001 % African DNA, a remnant from tens of thousands of years ago. Also a greater amount of Neanderthal DNA probably in the 2 percentile range.

          • journey

            The human races have been interbreeding for centuries. The quality of the gene pool is determined by the quality of the genes.
            Genetics is still in its infancy. I would not trust the data. Although, I agreed with you the fascinating information coded into our genome.

          • Pathfinder75

            It is important to keep in mind,sir,the studies showing that at least 95% of us White Americans have absolutely NO African ancestry whatsoever:

            “95% of White Americans Have No African Ancestry” by Alfred W.Clark,March 23,2013
            Occamsrazormag [DOT] wordpress [DOT] com/2013/03/23/ racial-admixture-in-usa-and-why-mulattoes-identify-as-black/

          • journey

            Or the white gene pool would have been suppressed as in ancient India. There were two Aryan waves into India each time the inferior genes became dominant even with the caste system during the second wave. The submerging of superior genes also happened in ancient Greece and Egypt = collapse of the advanced civilizations..

          • Luca

            You have no recent African DNA. Try going back 50,000 years and see what you come up with. Many of us whose ancestors came from southern Europe may have had some ancestors who bred with the Moors who carried African DNA with them when they conquered Iberia, Sicily and Malta.

            On the other hand, it is also possible that through selective and protected breeding, the African DNA is too small to be detected or altogether “bred-out”.

            If our Neaderthal DNA is detectable than our African DNA should be as well, in most cases.

          • journey

            You are correct. The black race (the superior strain due to mixing with other races) did migrate into Spain then outward to adjacent areas. Some lesser strain went to Palestine, Ceylon, and Arabia. But the purer strains of the black race went into Africa steadily regressing until discovered by the white man.

          • ElComadreja

            Thank God for that.

      • JohnEngelman

        Then where did we evolve?

        Our closest relative is the chimpanzee. Our second closest relative is the gorilla. Both are native to Africa.

        Human evolution has been traced back in Africa to an animal very similar to a chimpanzee, although he walked upright, and had a foot that resembles a human foot. Chimpanzee feet resemble hands. Where human feet have big toes, chimpanzee feet have opposable thumbs. Chimpanzee feet can manipulate objects.

        • journey

          About 1 million years ago, human evolved from primates not from apes in southwestern Asia. Apes appeared at the same time also from primates but of different lineage. The dawn mammals (had a primitive opposable thumb) descended from lemurs were an important evolutionary step along with the frog in the eventually appearance of man.

          The early humans eventually migrated to Europe living in caves. The first human couple (brother and sister) early on knew how to create fire for warmth by using flint to create sparks. Their off springs also discovered how to use make tools from flint. As the population increased, the early humans migrated outward but not to Africa.

          About 500,000 years ago, the six colored races appeared
          in the highlands of India. Only three of the six survived as distinct races today – red, yellow, and black. The blacks migrated into Africa seeking the tropics for easier existence. There they steadily regressed until the white man discovered them. The superior races (red and yellow) avoided the tropics instead went toward a more strenuous environment as it fosters ingenuity – more usage of brain power. As for the white race, it primarily is an amalgam of the blue race (superior) and Adam and Eve descendants – some of their descendants of long ago were the Aryans and ancient Greeks and Egyptians. The gene pool of Adam and Eve (appeared some 38,000 years ago) is what gives the whites their light colorings and superior brain power. So, yes, blue eyes did come from a distinct gene pool as some research is pointing out. Then there are the Sumerians another superior race to throw into the gene pool.

          There’s more to the narrative of man’s evolution on this planet. This is just a very brief synopsis. Madison Grant is correct in that in the Siwalik Hills of northern India, may be found fossils showing the transition between man and various pre-human groups. Prior to WWII, there was more academic freedom in the exchange and discussion of ideas.

          • JohnEngelman

            Humans and chimpanzees are more closely related to each other than either of us are to gorillas. Humans, chimpanzees, and gorillas are more closely related to each other than any of us are to apes that evolved outside of Africa, especially orangutans and gibbons.

            Distinctly human evolution began about six million years ago when the Rift Valley developed, in north eastern Africa, dividing the common ancestor of chimpanzees and humans. The earliest human fossils appear in eastern Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia.

            Neanderthals evolved from Homo Erectus individuals who may have left Africa in at least two migrations beginning about a million years ago. Modern humans appear in Africa by 100,000 years ago.

            About 60,000 years ago one hundred to several hundred of these left Africa, probably crossing the Sinai peninsula. They interbred with a few Neanderthals, but miscegenation was minimal.

            In the Fertile Crescent some of these began agriculture about 10,000 years ago, and civilization 5,000 years ago.

            This is the out of Africa theory of human origins. It is the informed consensus. It is well substantiated by fossil evidence, and DNA evidence. Those who reject it do so because the prefer to believe in the literal truth of the first eleven chapters of Genesis, or because they do not want to believe that their ancestors 60,000 years ago looked much more Negro than Nordic.

          • journey

            You asked and I responded with out of the box current dogma. Just for your information, the current theories/dogma are ever evolving based on chance findings. So, your posted dogma will
            change again once some chance discoveries are found as like the article.

            And man today will never know what the early humans looked like, but definitely not Negroid. They looked more like the current Eskimos than blacks. You do know that the out of Africa/humans from blacks dogma was solely based on Leakeys’ findings? This gets repeated enough, it becomes fact.

            “It is well substantiated by fossil evidence, and DNA evidence.” Really? Dogma is constantly changing as man keeps discovering his past and digging for his origins. But modern man will never ever know the full story of his origins as some of the evidence is undiscoverable and long gone.

            Your insults will not change the facts.

          • JohnEngelman

            On any complex and controversial subject the consensus of the experts is more likely to be right than wrong.

            Eskimos look the way they look because that appearance enhances one’s chances for survival where Eskimos have lived for many thousands of years. If human evolution began in North America above the Arctic Circle, how did it begin? No other primates live there. There is no fossil evidence that another species of primates ever lived there.

            Also, how did I insult you? I criticized your opinion, not you as a person.

          • journey

            As for your insults, as for me I do not care, look at your last sentence.

            Read my first posting in response to your original question again. The original humans migrated from their origin but never into Africa. The first humans ran away from their inferior primate family group. This was a very wise decision (their first). Consequent migrations were due to population pressures as the early humans increase. This was necessary due to food supply. This is not just in regard to humans but other life forms as well. The first migrations into Africa were the orange, green, and black races (secondary races – with less than inherent superior IQ endowment). The first two are now extinct and primarily absorbed into the black race. The evolution of man on this planet is more complex than the simple out of Africa and humanity evolved from blacks theories/myths. But this is the best that man can do for now.

            The Eskimos along with the other races appeared as is. Environmental factors do not change physical or inherent genetic abilities. The dogma concerning inherent racial differences is to explain it away by environmental factors. But anyone with intelligence can decipher that this dogma does not make sense. Also, superior genes are enhanced by the environment but inferior genes cannot be changed into superior.

            As for the first appearance of agriculture, the Chinese accidently discovered the sprouting of seeds and proceed from there. And they were the first to truly live in communities due to having less aggression tendencies to each other (but not to other racial groups).

            Are you that naïve? Popular pressured consensus does not change conjectures into facts or truths. And, this common consensus is also based on who wins the battle in academia. But it does not make the losing party incorrect. Understand? Just look what happened to Jason Richwine and his thesis regarding Hispanic IQ. You truly believe Richwine is incorrect because the majority says not true? Or Arthur Jensen and William Shockley. All highly intelligent individuals and part of academia.

          • JohnEngelman

            It sounds like you’re making up stuff as you go along. If that is an insult, you deserve it.

          • journey

            Actually, like I stated, insults cannot turn myths/dogma into facts.

            I would have quite an imagination and IQ to be “making up stuff”! Unfortunately and humbly, the “made up stuff” is not from me. How about respond to my posting instead, as like an intelligent person?

          • JohnEngelman

            I Jared Taylor dislikes conversations that go back and forth with little more communicated than, “Nya nya nya nya nya.”

            I have already explained that the out of Africa theory is the informed consensus. I have explained why I believe it, sharing my knowledge of physical anthropology.

            You respond talking about “the orange, green, and black races.”

            When I did an internet search for “orange + green + black + races” I got a bunch of websites about auto racing.

            You can have the last word if you want. I am bored with this conversation.

          • journey

            I will take the last word. As for the “Nya, …. ” look to your own comments.

            Of course, you will not find any information as to the orange and green races. Did I not say those races have long since disappeared? And that man will never ever discovered all the events that occurred on this planet? And what did I say regarding popular consensus of the day?

            As for your boredom, who cares.

        • We evolved in Eurasia, though some of us were taken by Dark Powers…

          • journey

            The “Dark Powers”?

      • propagandaoftruth

        Early modern humans were darker skinned, but the Bushmen are a strange lot – lighter skinned than Bantus, they have sort of oriental/Caucasoid features. Along with early pre-Bantu East Africans, I can see how these, mixed with native groups like Neanderthal, could have produced modern Whites, nature and selective pressures taken into account.

        It was not the Bantu that evolved into Whites.

        • journey

          The colored races appeared from the same gene pool some 500,000 years ago – evolutionary. So this is the reason why you see some over lapping features but still distinct racially. The Bushmen is of the black race. The Neanderthal race appeared some 850,000 years ago. They are descendants of humans that had interbred with humans who had mated with primates. This occurred because the differentiation between human and primate was still too recent. So, the evolution of man was and still is a constant battle between inferior and superior genes.

          Also, see my posting below regarding the evolution of man on this planet. Fascinating but also nerve whacking because the quality of the gene pool plays such a large factor in the destiny of mankind on this planet. And currently, man tends not to treasure the higher genetic strains (except for the Asians).

      • M.

        No-one ever said we evolved from blacks. Instead, whites and blacks evolved from a common ancestor in Eastern Africa.

        • journey

          The current dominant theory is that mankind evolved from blacks, the out of Africa myth. The theory is that blacks were the first humans evolved from primates or apes. And that the whites developed their physical characteristics due to environmental reasons.

          • Luca

            Blacks are the primitive prototype and when they stayed in Africa they had no need to evolve.

          • journey

            Blacks are just one of the evolutionary colored races that appeared some 500,000 years ago. Man first appeared some 1 millions ago. This black fairy tale started with the Leakeys due to chance findings of bones in Africa. See posting below.

          • M.

            “The current dominant theory is that mankind evolved from blacks, the out of Africa myth.”

            Again, it’s not. That theory says part of modern humans moved from Africa to Europe and Asia around 60,000. The part that moved to Europe evolved to be Caucasians and Asians; those who stayed there evolved into what we know today as black people.

            Now, one can dispute the migration from Africa, or the date thereof. But whites (and Asians) surely didn’t evolve from blacks, as there was no black race then. Rather, they share with them a common ancestor.

            However, the blacks of today are certainly closer (at least physically) to that common ancestor than whites, because they kept evolving in similar environments to that ancestor.

          • journey

            And I have seen theories that the blacks are the oldest humans on this planet and ancestor of all mankind. That is, the first humans to appear on this planet which fits into the out of Africa theory. Just look at the picture used for the article. It is a creature with Negroid
            features (imagination gone wild)! I use the black race, but the current thinking is there is no race!

            And then magically, Asians and whites appeared once they move out of Africa? So you really believe that environmental factors made some humans turn into whites, Asians, brown peoples, etc.? If that was the case, humans should still be evolving into some other physical characteristics. From empirical observation (easily
            observable), the only racial changes are from interracial breeding! And the 60,000 years ago is another number out of the hat.

            To keep it in perspective, we are just trying to flesh out the theories of the day. I respect your opinions. But all these theories are conjectures based on chance findings from which efforts are made
            to create a coherent conclusion(s). Of course, humans do have a duty to chase after/search for the truth.

          • Anna Tree

            I explain with: I don’t descend from my brother. But my brother and I descend from the same dad.

            And regarding your last paragraph, blacks are closer to that common ancestor because unlike the Croc-magnons (Caucasoids and Mongoloids) and the ancestors of the Australoids, Negroids continued to mate with those African homonids. Meanwhile the others didn’t anymore AND mated with homonids living outside of Africa.

          • Anna Tree

            I found an article connected with that ancestor (he is named Pan in science) and an old post of mine on this:

            “[…]one grand-pa, Pan, two sons, Human and Ape, then another “generation” African and European, sons to Human, and Chimpanzee and Bonobo, sons to Ape.

            Human diverged from Ape some 6-7 million years ago. Chimpanzee diverged from Bonobo some 2 million years ago (because of the Congo River, confirmed by test D statistic). European diverged from African some 50,000 years ago (because of migration out of Africa. I personally add: European mixing with Neanderthals while African may have mixed
            longer with other African hominins).

            I think the article wants to find out more about Pan through comparing Human, Chimpanzee and Bonobo.

            The article just points out that some of Human genes are in common with chimpanzee and Bonobo (6%?). Of those, 1.7% are only in common with Chimpanzee and 1.6% are only in common with Bonobo. And 3% of those traits are not even found in common between Chimpanzee and Bonobo.

            To continue my comparison with a grand-pa, his two sons and his four grand-sons, it happens that some traits of the two Human grand-sons (African and European) are original from their Pan grand-pa and therefore will resemble some traits of this Chimpanzee cousin or this Bonobo cousin that are also original from Pan, while those traits are not even in common between Chimpanzee and bonobo.

            Then I think the article bring the example of one trait of African that is closer to Bonobo: European and African show a difference in their X/a ratio (if I understand, it is how many a female reproduces compared to a male). The X/a ratio of African is closer to Pan compared to Bonobo, but much closer to Pan and Bonobo than the X/a of European is. That is while African X/a shows a bit above two females reproducing for each reproducting male (almost similar to Pan and Bonobo), the European X/a is much lower. (see my post above for my personal explanation)

            So I don’t think this article is racialist per se. The X/a ratio was I think the only thing the article differentiated between African and European.
            The article just says, to continue my allegory, that Human has this
            trait like his nephew Bonobo, while having this other trait like his
            nephew Chimpanzee, and that is because their grand-pa, Human’s father, had both traits. And by discovering all these traits, the authors hope to find out more about Pan and about the population history and selective events happening to Pan and his family.

            More articles on this issue could become racialist (if allowed by the thoughtpolice) if more differences are found between African and European despite existing in Pan or… because not existing in Pan (i.e. because of separation, selection, mutation and admixture).

            amren com/news/2014/04/the-bonobo-genome-compared-with-the-chimpanzee-and-human-genomes/#comment-1337256141
            and the second post

          • propagandaoftruth

            Again, it’s not. That theory says part of modern humans moved from Africa to Europe and Asia around 60,000 years ago. The part that moved to Europe evolved to be Caucasians and Asians; those who stayed there evolved into what we know today as black people.

            The earliest example of White flight, lol. Or proto-White flight in this case.

        • Luca

          That’s possible but that common ancestor would have been African as well.

          • M.

            Yes, but only in the geographical sense, not the racial sense we tend to mean today.

          • journey

            You are stuck with Leakeys’ dogma. All that came about because of chance findings around Africa where the original Leakeys were digging. This dogma is as bad as life on this planet started with some amino acids some how appearing with lightening striking it to eventually evolve into a complex being – man.

    • Bossman

      Pictures of modern-day Bushmen look like like they are a cross between Africans and Asians. And facial reconstructions of Neanderthals show many of them looking like American Indians.

      • propagandaoftruth

        American Indians are not subSaharan Bantus, therefore they have Neanderthal genetics in them. They were originally about a third Caucasoid too.

    • Valmont

      One wonders if they looked like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, and to primitive ancestral eyes that was reason enough for infanticide.

  • journey

    The evolution of man on this planet is more complex than the out of Africa and humanity evolved from blacks theories. Both of those myths/fairly tales came about due to Leakey and his family finding some chance bones around Africa. And Leakey’s theories won the academia battles which is still dominant today even though erroneous. But if fairy tales/myths get repeated long enough, they become “facts”.

    • Bossman

      Well, at least, these “fairy tales” are based on good logic and good science. That is far better than believing that God planted a garden in the east of Eden and put someone there called Adam who didn’t behave himself and was hiding when God was taking a walk “in the cool of the day.”

      • journey

        So off base, no response needed.

  • journey

    Link on the original article link, one is treated to a picture of a scary subhuman! Such imagination the author of this article has.

  • Mack0

    Out of Africa, the first historical instance of white flight.

    • Pathfinder75

      For many very good reasons,too.


  • Julius Caesar

    The U5a1a1 DNA that I inherited maternally dates back to about 40,000 years ago. Damn it feels good to be White.

    • Valmont

      Anything more recent than 45,000 years strikes me as an arriviste.

      • Julius Caesar

        The R1b1b2a1a from my fathers side…I’ll just go ahead and copy paste the explanation. “Today R1b1b2a1a1 is found mostly on the fringes of the North Sea in England, Germany and the Netherlands, where it reaches levels of one-third. That distribution suggests that some of the first men to bear the haplogroup in their Y-chromosomes were residents of Doggerland, a real-life Atlantis that was swallowed up by rising seas in the millennia following the Ice Age.

        Doggerland was a low-lying region of forests and wetlands that must have been rich in game; today, fishing trawlers in the North Sea occasionally dredge up the bones and tusks of the mastodons that roamed there. Doggerland had its heyday between about 12,000 years ago, when the Ice Age climate began to ameliorate, and 9,000 years ago, when the meltwaters of the gradually retreating glaciers caused sea levels to rise, drowning the hunter’s paradise. Doggerland’s inhabitants retreated to the higher ground that is now the North Sea coast.”

        R1b1b2 is the most common haplogroup in western Europe, where its branches are clustered in various national populations. It seems to have or originated in southwest Asia about 30,000 years ago and moved into Europe around 17,000 years ago if I recall.

        • Itooktheredpill

          23andme? Here are my paternal and maternal lines

          (Paternal) R1a1a is the primary haplogroup of Eastern Europe, where it spread after the end of the Ice Age about 12,000 years ago. The haplogroup is most common in a swath from Ukraine and the Balkans north and west into Scandinavia, along the path of the men who followed the receding glaciers into Europe. It is also common near its presumed point of origin in south-central Asia.

          (Maternal) Haplogroup H5 originated in the Caucasus region during the Ice Age, then spread out in several directions after the climate began to warm about 15,000 years ago. Today the haplogroup is common in Lebanon and many parts of Europe.

          My genome also indicates I am 100% white. Damn it feels good but honestly tell me something I did not already know.

  • Itooktheredpill

    Proud to be 3.1% Neanderthal. I have often wondered whether interbreeding with Neanderthals is partly responsible for higher East Asian and White IQ as well as brain size. The average Neanderthal skull and brain volume was actually larger than the average H. Sapiens. Its possibly admixture with them based on some of those genes for larger brains to us. Just some fuel for thought.

    • Luca

      Brain size does not automatically correlate to greater intelligence, nor does brain to body size ratio. Which portion of brain is better developed is what matters. Neanderthals’ larger brain may have developed larger in those areas dedicated to sight, smell, balance, eye-hand coordination etc.

      • Itooktheredpill

        Ya I am aware. In particular how much or how developed white and grey matter are in your brain seem to matter. There is some correlation however. Most studies put it between 0.30 and 0.40

  • KenelmDigby

    As more and more studies are published using genetic techniques and ancient human remains – genetic techniques beyond the imagination of scientists even 10 years ago – the old so-called ‘out of Africa’ that has held sway over academia over the past 25 years or so, looks increasingly untenable.
    The Ush-Isim femur is exceedingly ancient, 45 000 years or so before present times. Yet the x and y DNA haplotypes of the bone – or individual – are of distinctively Eurasian types, whose descendant types are very widespread in Europe and Asia today, and are decidedly not of the types that typify sub-Saharan Africans.

  • John

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see the top end (meaning, more expensive) of the black personal grooming products to have labels reading “now featuring enhanced Neanderthal DNA technology”. The government might even start issuing Neanderthal branded condoms in the ghetto in an attempt to lower the illegitimacy rate and the prevalence of STDs.

  • JustSayin

    Am I the only one who finds it ironic that for an article discussing the dna of an ancient human found in Siberia, they post a photo of a mockup sporting a prominent bantu look? Who knew bantus were in Siberia.

  • John R

    We may have all come out of Africa, but that doesn’t mean we are all-I will use that non-PC term-Negroes. We don’t know exactly what our ancestors looked like over 60,000 years ago. And the “Black” race that remained, may have changed, left alone for all those thousands of years. I suspect that modern blacks just evolved for that specific environment and are most suited to it. They are therefore, not adapted to cooler climates nor to any type of civilization. And, btw, the one anatomical difference between Neanderthals, and “Humans” (I use quotes because, if they could interbreed, then obviously, Neanderthals are human, too.), is that the former actually have larger brains. Makes you wonder about Africans not having any such DNA, huh?

  • LHathaway

    So, ‘Neanderthals’ may have had bigger-brains than we do. We may be as much as 4% ”Neanderthal’ today. These ‘Neanderthals’, who lived only ever lived one place on this Earth, Europe, they are now completely extinct. Another completely true factual story in the news and found in the ‘science’ journals. It’s even more of that ‘science’ from the anthropologists and all their friends we’ve come to know and love. Why can’t these ‘Neanderthals’ (who went completely extinct in only thousands of years eons ago) why can’t they be discovered in North America?

  • Neanderthals gave us much and I for one am very thank full. like eliminating some genetic diseases that you don’t find other than in blacks in most cases, like Sickle Cell Anemia, as well as the ability to live in a wider range of environments. as you know people of darker skin will have health issues in climate that have little sun. As well the ability to learn and trade with a group of people that you have very little in common with, what I like to call Proto politics began then. so yes I am very proud of my Neanderthals heritage. I owe them my lighter skin too.

  • Luca

    23andMe (dot) com I also did the one on Ancestry (dot) com but I like the
    one on 23andMe better. There is also one you can get through NatGeo.

  • Thorsted

    i dont if some of you know more of this. But until recently it was thought that the small part of the DNA called “junk DNA” didn´t matter because it didn´t code for proteins.I read a review by an antrophologist of Nicolas Wade book and he said that there was between races not so large differences -it was only in the “junk DNA” there was huge differences and it didn´t matter. The there came some publications first in 2012 -and recently I read an article in danish that “Junk DNA” was active all the time for gene transcription (up and down regulation) off genes and we had a constant adaptations epigenetically to environment stimuli. “Junk DNA” should be crucial in epigenetic responses. If “junk DNA” plays that role and there is significant differences between races in “junk DNA” then we might not have the same epigenetic response to the same environment. I recently came across an abstract by pubmed on cancer research where the huge racial differences in cancer statistic was related to epigenetic differences.
    So, it might no be the full story to look at just DNA differences but also consider the differences “Junk DNA” or epigenetics. In cancer and other disorders thise are a result of pathological epigenetic. That is a transcription of gene where it should not be normally.

  • journey

    Just to put another wrench into the mix, the early humans were the Eskimos giving rise to the Neanderthals eventually the six colored races. To be human is different from being in the animal kingdom.