First Europeans Weathered the Ice Age

Yahoo! News, November 6, 2014

DNA recovered from the fossilized leg bone of a man who lived 36,000 years ago suggests early Europeans survived the Ice Age, researchers said Thursday.

The international team of scientists also said the DNA from one of the oldest known anatomically modern humans shows that interbreeding with Neanderthals took place some 54,000 years ago, far earlier than previously thought.

Researchers from the Centre for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen used DNA from a fossil known as Kostenki 14 for their study, published in the US journal Science.

The hunter’s genome is the second oldest ever sequenced from a modern human, and was found in what is now western Russia.

When researchers compared it other ancient human genomes, they found a “surprising” level of genetic unity that extended to first known Europeans, the researchers said in a statement.

This suggests that some “Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers with deep shared ancestry managed to survive through the Last Glacial Maximum and colonize the landmass of Europe for more than 30,000 years,” the team said.

Ice sheets came and went over these tens of thousands of years, and some cultures died off entirely. However, pockets of people must have been able to survive, and continue to maintain the human population.

“For 30,000 years ice sheets came and went, at one point covering two-thirds of Europe. Old cultures died and new ones emerged–such as the Aurignacian and the Grevettian–over thousands of years, and the hunter-gatherer populations ebbed and flowed. We now know that no new sets of genes are coming in: these changes in survival and cultural kit are overlaid on the same biological background,” said co-author Marta Mirazon Lahr, from the University of Cambridge’s Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies.

“It is only when farmers from the Near East arrived about 8,000 years ago that the structure of the European population changed significantly.”

The Kostenki genome also showed a small percentage of Neanderthal genes.

Researchers have long known that some interbreeding occurred between Neanderthals and the first humans to leave Africa for Europe.

But the latest study allowed a closer look at the timing of such mixing, and researchers bow believe it took place long before the European population began to separate into three distinct groups more than 36,000 years ago.


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.
  • superlloyd

    Neandertal admixture marks the difference between all non African humans and Africans. Gnomesayin’?

    • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

      If interbreeding between Europeans and Neanderthals took place 54,000 years ago, then Europeans were definitely a separate race by that time (but I suspect they had already evolved into a separate race long before that time). Moreover, I would consider the out-of-Africa theory wrong on the grounds that Europeans are descended from Neanderthals, and not merely from what these scientists would call ‘humans.’ ‘We’re all Africans’ is as useless a saying as ‘we’re all made of stuff that comes from the universe.’

      For the sake of argument, let’s consider the liberal ‘we’re all Africans’ argument for a moment. IF we are all made of stuff that comes from the universe, yet we’ve changed from our primordial stage which is the stuff that comes from the universe, then we’re NOT equal to the stuff that comes from the universe. Any species which would think it is nothing more than ‘stardust’ is doomed to oblivion, because there is a huge difference between ‘stardust’ and a life form made of ‘stardust.’ Therefore, IF we all came from Africa, yet we’ve EVOLVED from our primitive stage which dwelt in Africa, then that doesn’t make us all Africans.

      Moreover, the Black race is a primitive race which has many archaic traits. It didn’t evolve in the direction we evolved, because there was no evolutionary necessity in Africa for the Black race to become a biologically more highly evolved race. We’ve considered the liberal argument now, and we’ve concluded it’s pure nonsense, even if we’d ignore that Europeans are descended from Neanderthals. The Neanderthals are considered another species, yet primitive humans could interbreed with this species (which, I suspect, might have been a quite intelligent humanoid species, judging from the size of its brain and head).

      I know that some species of animal can interbreed in the same way humanoids could interbreed. Therefore, if animal populations can interbreed, it does not necessarily mean that they are the same species. Since non-Africans are descended from Neanderthals, I think that it is reasonable to believe that it might be a better idea to consider Africans and non-Africans different humanoid species (let’s call them Homo meridionalis and Homo occidentalis).

      The differences between Africans and non-Africans (H. meridionalis and H. occidentalis) are so huge that I don’t see why we would consider them the same species. If we apply to humans the same biological standards that are applied to non-human animals (no offence, but humans are animals too), then, as far as I know, we could consider Africans another species. The differences between Africans and non-Africans are so numerous that I will not attempt to reproduce them here, but these differences range from worldview to bone structure.

      Some people might disagree with me and say that Africans aren’t another species, and they might even hold the opinion that Africans aren’t at least a different race. For some animals, only one or two traits are enough to consider them different races. In humans, we’re dealing with a whole host of different traits which are so many that, as I have said before, I won’t make an attempt to enumerate them here. So it’s obvious that there are different human races. But then we notice that the largest difference is between Africans and non-Africans. So to me it would make perfect sense if they were different species. It would surely explain a lot, from a purely biological point of view.

      • superlloyd

        On your point re. different species, here is some interesting data.

        The genetic distance between the two species of gorilla, Gorilla gorilla and Gorilla beringei, 0.04%, is nearly six times less than the genetic distance between sub-Saharan Africans (Bantu) and Eurasians (English), 0.23%. The genetic distance between the common chimp and the bonobo (two more different species) is 0.103%, less than half the English-Bantu genetic distance of 0.23%.

        I am sure that all non-african humans have larger genetic distances between them and africans than the distances between the two pairs of apes described above.

        • bilderbuster

          I’ll bet the bonobo’s weren’t too thrilled when they heard about that.

          • Earl P. Holt III

            Made me LOL…!

      • SolStans

        So, their hatred of all of us “northies” is just plain old Neanderphobia?

      • Petronius

        Given just a few more thousand years of separation, I believe that Africans would have become non-interfertile with the northern races.

      • Luca

        We are the same species but different breeds. Think of wolves and dogs. While we may have all come from Africa, those of us who left, developed, evolved, then interbred (away from Africa) to the point where scientist can barely find any trace of African DNA in European types. In essence, we have shed and traded our African DNA for other more advanced types that served us in the new environments we traveled too and thrived in.

        • Where do you think that “other” DNA came from?

          • Luca

            Mutations, caused by isolation, time and selective and chance breeding. And luck. Very good luck.

          • I think it came from earlier hominids.

          • Bobbala

            There is no such thing as chance. If you flip a coin, just because you don’t know the outcome does not make it random, merely unknown to you.

        • BulgAryan


          • none of your business

            But as welfare scroungers the dogs have a much, much better life than the wolves who must hunt every day and live outside in freezing cold.
            Dogs are blacks on welfare, Whites are wolves who must hunt or starve especially since affirmative action took most of our jobs away.

          • Max

            Wolves and dogs are Canis lupus thus can interbreed with fertile offspring as has been done many times. Dogs are Canis lupus (domesticus) which is a subspecies -not a separate species.

          • Luca

            So, if I feed a wolf he becomes less intelligent? Please think before you write.

        • I would say “species”.

        • none of your business

          That is the out of Africa theory which is totally bogus. Our ancestors were never in Africa and thus never left. Those critters like Lucy claimed to be ancestors are not. Their lines went extinct millions of years ago and are not the ancestors of any humans or pre human hominoids. I think a book proving out of Africa totally bogus has been published, “not of Africa”

          • BulgAryan


          • journey

            The black race appeared in India as all the colored races. They were the last to migrate out, INTO Africa. As the red man migrated to North America. The yellow man to China. The blue man to Europe eventually interbreeding with the Netherlanders who were already there. The orange and green races migrated to Egypt to be later submerged by the black race.

          • Bossman

            It makes very good sense to believe that humanity evolved in the tropics like the tree-dwelling apes. All of humanity is related if you travel far back in time. It is all a matter of time and distance.

          • If one goes back far enough in time, all mammals are related to reptiles.

          • Max

            If we go back far enough we are all related to cyanobacteria. This doesn’t concern me in the least though it is the logical extension of the liberal chant “we are all equal”. What they fail to comprehend is that some organisms have not kept up with western man in the intervening 3.5 BY. They believe fervently in evolution for everything but the human brain.

          • none of your business

            Until the bogus propaganda carefully manipulated out of Africa theory came along most scientists believed that the races evolved separately. Look at Java man a fully modern Asian type human skeleton 750,000 years old. Of course as soon as out of Africa came out Java man was expunged.

          • Luca

            The study of DNA would indicate otherwise.

        • none of your business

          I thought dogs are descendants of wolves. They can breed puppies who are not sterile.

          • Luca

            Correct, just like different breeds of humans.

        • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

          A hybrid is not necessarily a cross between different subspecies/races, but it can also be a cross between different species. Not all species can be crossed, but some can. Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens were different species, but crosses were possible.

          Crosses between different species do not always produce fertile offspring, but some do. The cross between H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens produced fertile offspring. I think the cross between H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens can be compared to the cross between Bos taurus and Bison bison. The cross between Bos taurus and Bison bison produces fertile offspring.

          I believe the biological difference between Africans and non-Africans might be better explained by species than race; in other words, I believe the biological difference between them amounts to a difference in species rather than a difference in race. A common misconception is that different species cannot be interfertile (my list proves the opposite).

          Moreover, it can be hard to define what a species is, and this problem is known to biologists as the ‘species problem’. Therefore, the distinction between species and race can also be quite vague, such as in the case of Sus and Sus domesticus. A host of difficult questions arise when biologists need to define the concept of species.

          However, once a reasonable amount of research on two more or less distinct or even similar organisms has been conducted, the facts could lead one to draw the conclusion that one is not dealing with two different races/subspecies but with two different species.

          I’ve already mentioned that the differences between Africans and non-Africans are too many to enumerate here; suffice to say that the differences would be a bit much for just a different race. Basing on my knowledge of the differences between more or less related species, I would rather expect the differences between Africans and non-Africans to indicate a difference in species.

          Let’s imagine a silly scenario to get the idea of forming an objective opinion on this matter. If an advanced alien species were to come to our planet, and were interested in classifying the different organisms including humans, then would this species, with its lack of bias concerning the ‘equality and unity of mankind’, consider Africans and non-Africans the same species?

          We’ve been told about the ‘equality and unity of mankind’ for so long that it might be hard for us to consider other possibilities which might be closer to the truth. Even racial realists might to a certain extent be infected with the diseases of mainstream society. Our minds might still be too inclined or willing to grant that there is some equality or unity.

          If equality is a lie, then we should also seriously reconsider the unity of mankind. We might not be one species. I have made a list of hybrids to prove my point that different subspecies (also called ‘races’) as well as different species can interbreed or be crossed. Any good biologist knows that the observation of interfertility between organisms does not necessarily rule out the possibility that one might be dealing with different species.

          Before we jump to my list of hybrids, let me present a definition of ‘hybrid’. I am no supporter of communism, but I often use their sources, because sometimes those sources are still relevant. Russian race science which continued unhampered in the communist era proves my point that ‘communist’ sources are not necessarily irrelevant, as long as they are not influenced by ignorant charlatans and ideologues but are manifestations of rigid and true science instead.

          The definition of ‘hybrid’ that The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979) offers is still relevant: ‘sexual offspring produced by the crossing of two genotypically different organisms. The organisms crossed are called parental forms and are designated by the letter P. The maternal form or female individual is designated by the symbol ♀ , the paternal form or male individual by the symbol ♂, crossing by the symbol ×, hybrid offspring of the first generation by F with the subscript 1 (F1), second generation by F2, and so forth. For example, the F4 hybrid of ♀(beardless wheat) Bezostaia 1 × ♂ Belotserkovskaia 198 is the fourth generation of the hybrid in which the maternal form was Bezostaia 1 and the paternal form Belotserkovskaia 198. Hybrids may be spontaneous or artificial, intraspecific or remote. The following hybrids are distinguished in breeding corn: the intervarietal, when two varieties are crossed; the variety-line hybrid, when a variety is crossed with an inbred line (for example, to produce the hybrid Bukovinskii 3: ♀ Gloriia lanetskogo × ♂ VIR 44); the single cross hybrid, from the crossing of two strains (for example, the hybrid Slava is produced by crossing the inbred lines ♀ VIR 44 ×♂ VIR 38); and the double cross hybrid from crossing two simple hybrids (for example, the hybrid VIR 42 is produced by crossing ♀ Slava × ♂ Svetoch).’

          My list of hybrids:

          1. Blood parrot cichlid (Amphilophus citrinellus × Paraneetroplus synspilus)

          2. Hybrid striped bass (Morone saxatilis × Morone chrysops)

          3. Tiger trout (Salmo trutta × Salvelinus fontinalis)

          4. Tropidophoxinellus alburnoides (Squalius pyrenaicus × unknown cyprinid species)

          5. Gilliard’s bird of paradise (Paradisaea raggiana × Paradisaea minor)

          6. Loborhamphus nobilis (Paradigalla carunculata × Lophorina superba, at least according to Erwin Stresemann)

          7. Sharpe’s lobe-billed parotia (Paradigalla carunculata × Parotia sefilata)

          8. Maria’s bird of paradise (Paradisaea guilielmi × Paradisaea raggiana)

          9. Neoparadisaea ruysi (Cicinnurus magnificus × Paradisaea minor)

          10. Janthothorax bensbachi (Ptiloris magnificus × Paradisaea minor)

          11. Paradisea duivenbodei (Paradisaea guilielmi × Paradisaea minor)

          12. Pseudastrapia lobata (Paradigalla carunculata × Epimachus fastosus)

          13. Lophorina superba pseudoparotia (Parotia carolae × Lophorina superba)

          14. Parotia duivenbodei (Parotia sefilata × Lophorina superba)

          15. Paradisaea apoda luptoni (Paradisaea apoda × Paradisaea raggiana)

          16. Diphyllodes gulielmi III (Cicinnurus magnificus × Cicinnurus regius)

          17. Paradisaea bloodi (Paradisaea raggiana × Paradisaea rudolphi)

          18. Lamprothorax wilhelminae (Lophorina superba × Cicinnurus magnificus)

          19. Epimachus astrapioides (Astrapia nigra × Epimachus fastosus)

          20. Astrarchia barnesi (Astrapia stephaniae × Astrapia mayeri)

          21. Duivenbode’s riflebird (Ptiloris magnificus × Lophorina superba)

          22. Paradisaea mirabilis (Seleucidis melanoleucus × Paradisaea minor)

          23. Mysterious bird of Bobairo (Epimachus fastosus × Lophorina superba)

          24. Schodde’s bird of paradise (Parotia lawesii × Paradisaea rudolphi)

          25. Cicinnurus lyogyrus (Cicinnurus regius × Cicinnurus magnificus)

          26. Craspedophora mantoui (Seleucidis melanoleucus × Ptiloris magnificus)

          27. Paradisaea mixta (Paradisaea raggiana × Paradisaea minor)

          28. × Myrtgerocactus lindsay (Myrtillocactus cochal × Bergerocactus emoryi)

          29. Magnolia × soulangeana (Magnolia denudata × M. liliiflora)

          30. Typha × gezei (Typha domingensis × Typha angustifolia)

          31. × Cremnosedum (Cremnophilia nutans × Sedum humifusum)

          32. Sorbus × pinnatifida (Sorbus aucuparia × Sorbus aria)

          33. Symphytum × uplandicum (Symphytum officinale × Symphytum asperum)

          34. Mahonia × media (Mahonia lomariifolia × Mahonia japonica)

          35. × Sorbaronia mitschurinii (Aronia melanocarpa × Sorbus aucuparia)

          36. Narcissus × medioluteus (Narcissus poeticus × Narcissus tazetta)

          37. Nepeta × faasseni (Nepeta racemosa × Nepeta nepetella)

          38. Origanum × pulchellum (parentage unknown to me)

          39. Ophrys × arachnitiformis (Ophrys fuciflora × Ophrys sphegodes)

          40. Osmunda × rugii

          41. Osmunda × intermedia

          42. × Triticosecale (Triticum × Secale cereale)

          43. × Pachyveria glauca (Pachyphytum × Echeveria)

          44. Helianthus × laetiflorus (parentage unknown to me)

          45. Asplenium × kentuckiense (Asplenium pinnatifidium × Asplenium platyneuron)

          46. Galium × carmineum (Galium anisophyllon × Galium pumilum × Galium rubrum)

          47. Platanus × acerifolia (Platanus orientalis × Platanus occidentalis)

          48. Asplenium × boydstoniae (Asplenium tutwilerae × Asplenium platyneuron)

          49. Grevillea × gaudichandi (Grevillea acanthifolia × Grevillea laurifolia)

          50. Iris × hollandica (Iris tingitana × Iris xiphium)

          51. Ocimum × citriodorum (Ocimum basiculum × Ocimum americanum)

          52. × Sorbopyrus auricularis (Pyrus communis × Sorbus aria)

          53. Leucanthemum × superbum (Leucanthemum lacustre × Leucanthemum maximum)

          54. Cupressus × leylandii (Cupressus macrocarpa × Cupressus nootkatensis)

          55. Lena Broom (Cytisus scoparius × Cytisus dallimorei)

          56. Typha × argoviensis (Typha latifolia × Typha shutleworthii)

          57. Typha × smirnovii (Typha latifolia × Typha maxmannii)

          58. Typha × suwensis (Typha latifolia × Typha orientalis)

          59. Typha × provincialis (Typha domingensis × Typha latifolia)

          60. Typha bavarica (Typha angustifolia × Typha shuttleworthii)

          61. Asplenium azoricum (parentage unknown to me)

          62. Iris albicans (parentage unknown to me)

          63. Asplenium majoricum (Asplenium fontanum × Asplenium petrarchae)

          64. Miscanthus × giganteus (Miscanthus sinensis × Miscanthus sacchariflorus)

          65. Ipomoea sloteri (Ipomoea × multifida?)

          66. Buddleja × lewisiana (Buddleja madagascariensis × Buddleja asiatica)

          67. Hyacinthoides × massartiana(Hyacinthoides non-scripta × Hyacinthoides hispanica)

          68. Hican (pecan × hickory?)

          69. Forsythia × intermedia (Forsythia viridissima × F. suspensa var. fortunei)

          70. × Pacherocactus orcutii (Pachycereus pringlei × Bergerocactus emoryi)

          71. Philadelphus × lemoinei (Philadelphus microphyllus × Philadelphus coronarius)

          72. Allium × proliferum (Allium cepa × Allium fistulosum)

          73. Asplenium × trudeli (Asplenium montanum × Asplenium pinnatifidum)

          74. Rhizophera × lamarckii (Rhizophera apiculata × Rhizophora stylosa)

          75. Rosa × damascena (Rosa gallica × Rosa moschata)

          76. Amelanchier × grandiflora (Amelanchier arborea × Amelanchier laevis)

          77. × Chitalpa tashkentensis (Chilopsis linearis × Catalpa bignonioides)

          78. Fragaria × ananassa (Fragaria virginiana × Fragaria chiloensis)

          79. Vasconcellea × heilbornii (Vasconcellea cundinamarcensis × Vasconcellea stipulata)

          80. Iron Age pig (Sus scrofa × Sus scrofa domesticus)

          81. Polecat-Ferret hybrid (Mustela putorius × Mustela putorius furo)

          82. Polecat-mink hybrid (Mustela putorius × Mustela lutreola)

          83. Polar bear-grizzly bear hybrid (Ursus maritimus × Ursus arctos)

          84. Calidris × paramelanotos (♂ Calidris melanotos × ♀ Calidris ferruginea)

          85. Dzo (Bos grunniens × Bos taurus)

          86. Wholphin (Tursiops truncatus × Pseudorca crassidens)

          87. Mulard (Anas platyrhynchos domestica × Cairina moschata)

          88. Huarizo (♂Lama glama × ♀ Vicugna pacos)

          89. Mule (♂ Equus africanus asinus × ♀ Equus ferus caballus), hinny (♂ Equus ferus caballus × ♀ Equus africanus asinus),

          90. Zony (zebra × pony)

          91. Cama (♂ Camelus dromedarius × ♀ Lama glama)

          92. Perlin (♂ Falco peregrinus × ♀ Falco columbarius)

          93. Liger (♂ Panthera leo × ♀ Panthera tigris)

          94. Africanised honey bees (Apis mellifera × Apis mellifera var. scutellata)

          95. Beefalo (♂ Bos taurus × ♀ Bison bison)

          96. Sheep-goat hybrid (Ovis aries × Capra aegagrus hicus)

          97. Savannah cat (Leptailurus serval × Siamese cat)

          98. Coy dog (Canis latrans × Canis lupus familiaris)

          99. Hybrid iguana (♂ Amblyrhynchus cristatus × ♀ Conolophus subcristatus)

          100. Miligold macaw (Ara ararauna × Ara militaris)

      • journey

        Blacks are humans, of the black race. Each race appeared as is, with their own genome but from the same parents. The races are different because each has their own genome. In other words, each of the distinct racial genome did not evolve due to environmental factors.

        Chronological order: First humans appeared some 1 million years ago from primates. A brother and sister couple appeared from the same parents, eventually giving rise to the human race. The Eskimos are the residuals of these original humans. 850,000 thousand years ago Netherlanders appeared descended from earlier humans and of humans who mated with primates. 500,000 years ago the six colored races appeared in India, again to one couple. The colors of the races are blue, red, yellow (primarily races), orange, green, and indigo (secondary races – lesser genome). The red, yellow, and indigo are the surviving races we see today. Whites are primarily of the blue race (who interbred with the Netherlanders) and descendants of Adam and Eve (who appeared 38,000 years ago) and of the genome of the Sumerians (their ancestors appear 500,000 years ago). As you can the whites inherited both an evolutionary and non-evolutionary genetic base. That is, the genome from Adam and Eve and the ancestors of the Sumerians are of much higher quality than the genome that evolved on this planet. This is the main reason why they are the main innovators and inventors on this planet.

        Life on this planet was planted from higher sources in three separate shallow warm water seas some 550 million years ago. Life on this planet did not evolve from some amino acids somehow coming together. Our
        planet is about 1 billion years old. A very brief synopsis of the events that transpired on this planet.

        • BillMillerTime

          I admire your rather active imagination.

          • journey

            Thank you for your compliment, except I have none! You should give the compliment to the generators of the article and the out of Africa, etc myths.

          • BillMillerTime

            “descendants of Adam and Eve…” What about the talking snake? You believe int he talking snake, right? I mean, hell, who wouldn’t?

          • journey

            Do you believe in the “talking snake”? or how about jump to the next intellectual level, like symbolic meanings?

            You do know the Bible is actually a human history book, recordings of past ancient events that occurred long ago on this planet? Contributions from many authors – some true and not.

          • none of your business

            Did Eve have Cain and Abel when she was young enough so she could commit incest with them and be the Mother of all humans?
            Inquiring minds want to know. Let’s see, oldest boy born when she was 14, oldest boy impregnated her when she was about 30.
            It was not a dish of pottage they were fighting over, it was the only human female in the Garden of Eden.

          • journey

            Should not belittle the Adam and Eve descendants (Adamites) as they were carriers of the genome that have speeded up the technology and social innovations and inventions on this planet. Otherwise, the evolutionary races would still be in the Stone Age. Some races received more of those genes than others, whites received the most. The yellow man some. The black and red man practically none.

          • I know where the Garden of Eden was. It was what is now the Persian Gulf, a fertile river valley at the time.

          • journey

            To be exact, the second Garden was between the Euphrates and Tigris in Iraq. The first Garden sank. It was located in a long narrow Mediterranean peninsula. It was chosen due to its beauty and easy to defend against the surrounding savages (think ISIS types). They had to build double walls with wild animals (lions) between them as defense.

            The second Garden massive structures are buried underneath the sand. Anthropological work has been prevented due to the ever constant ongoing hostilities. There is lot more to the sad Adam and Eve story.

          • none of your business

            Ancient Aliens now claims it is in America somewhere.

        • none of your business

          All humans are descended from the Sun Goddess. She had boy girl twins and they committed the sin of incest and here we are.

          • journey

            Afraid, humans evolved from primates (animalistic origins), such mundane beginnings. The only exciting part was Adan and Eve (beautiful creatures – like the ancient Greeks) and the ancestors of the Sumerians.

      • propagandaoftruth

        Well stated and thorough. Are you involved in research?

        • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

          I consider myself a humble student of classical and modern race scientists.

      • JohnEngelman

        The Neanderthal genome has been decoded. This article does not say it, but I am confident this man who lived 36,000 years ago was genetically more similar to Negroes than Neanderthals.

        Neanderthal campsites indicate that Neanderthals were less intelligent than the Cro Magnons who displaced them. Their stone tool kit was less varied. They did not practice trade. They did not plan a year ahead into the future, like the Cro Magnons did.

        Cro Magnons picked up a few Neanderthal genes. Genetically the Cro Magnons were much more similar to the San Bushmen of southern Africa.

        • journey

          In certain ways you are correct. The Neanderthals were non evolving until interbred with the blue race (the Cro Magnons) who came much later. The blue race are the cave artists.

          There will be overlapping of racial genome as all evolutionary humans came from just two set of parents at different times. Will modern man be able to decipher the origins of mankind on this planet completely without higher non human sources? No.

          • none of your business

            So the Cro magnons are the blue race. Is that why the Celts and Germans thousands of years later tattoed themselves blue?

          • journey

            Here’s another angle, the Europeans speak of “blue blood” as being the royals. These events happened so long ago. It’s all historical interest now except that whites must understand about their gene pool – safe guarding it against miscegenation with inferiors. It’s the white gene pool that has, now, and will be pulling this planet forward.

          • David Ashton

            Surely “blue blood” refers to the visibility of the veins through the pale skin of aristocratic north Europeans? Anyway, Mr Journey, we look forward to studying the sources of your historical anthropology, which seem to have a more colorful basis than rival schemes from Annie Besant or David Icke.

          • journey

            Really? Not just “royals”, but other whites have veins showing through and also light skinned Asians! Come to think of it, perhaps even on darker skin their veins can show. You do know veins carry de-oxygenated blood creating the blue appearance? But blue veins did not caused the coloring of the blue man if that’s what you implying. Not anymore than arteries (carrying oxygenated blood) caused the red man to have their skin color.

            I would gladly give/share the source but unfortunately, it keeps getting deleted. So sorry. And by the way, see the quote by Thomas Jefferson at the top of this website? One should recognize truth whatever its source even when it’s out of the accepted dogma box! So be courageous and keep your mind open in the searching for truth. And I have found that particular source of truth to be the most complete in all my years of searching. As with all sources of truth, it does presents itself but one must be ready to accept.

            I will not comment on your two mentioned names.

          • David Ashton

            I have always tried to integrate accurate new information into my worldview. As Keynes said, “If the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do?” So I still await your evidence for rational analysis.

          • journey

            I have always wondered about the racial differences in my younger years. And the origin of life on this planet. After much reading, the resources did not enlighten on the subject much, just more convoluted reasoning. Google “Universal Father” and report back.

          • David Ashton

            I have looked at the Urantia (Book) website, and downloaded “Paper 64 The Evolutionary Races of Color”. It is all mostly assertion attributed to celestial beings and inconsistent with the findings of prehistoric anthropology. It carries no more conviction than the Book of Mormon or The Secret Doctrine. I also have objections to some of its material regarding the life of Jesus and the New Testament story.

          • journey

            Great, you went in the correct direction! I also was resistant and kept trying to find inconsistencies but, none. Yes, the information is new and the human mind needs to adjust. But I was quite surprised on Paper 64, page 720 Section 3, the mention of transition types from prehumen to human which Madison Grant also mentioned in his book, The Passing of the Great Race, almost word for word. I mentioned once on this website that Grant published his book prior to the Urantia Book. So of course, in trying to knock down the Book, it has been accused of plagiarism. But then where is the human author? As you delve deeper into the book, you will realize that no human can write and think such levels. I have yet to come across any logical disproving
            of what is contained in the Book. A physicist actually found an answer in the Book to a question they were doing research on. And when I was taking classes in the life sciences, the Book expanded in deeper depth what was presented.

            Of course, the Book will go beyond what is known by modern man. That is the sole purpose for the Book, to educate the generations yet to come on a very scholarly format. What is contained in the Book can never be “scientifically proven” as man was never there when some of the events occurred. All man can do is to theorize and try to make some sense on chance discovered findings. The Book is actually for future generations as the human race evolved higher in intelligence.

            As for the sections on Jesus, it is more credible to me than the current fossilized religious myths. And the teachings by Jesus are more complete and logical.

            Check out Papers 58, 65, and 74 if you wish. Truly hope the Book gives you a deeper understanding of your place in the cosmos, now and eternally.

          • David Ashton

            I have serious problems with much of the content I have reviewed so far, and therefore cannot put it as a priority in my limited time. However, it is certainly the most impressive construction of its kind I have hitherto seen, superior to Blavatsky for instance. Apart from my own reservations about many specifics, I would also wish to see what Mullins, Lewis, Gardner and other analysts have to say.

          • journey

            Are you speaking of Martin Gardner? Larry Mullins? Lewis, what’s the first name? (You do not need to answer). As for Blavatsky and your other two names mentioned earlier, they do not come close, not even close. They are childish play. Did not want to waste my time discussing them. As for your other earlier references, not familiar with them.

            Ultimately, the Book will stand on its own for eons to come, hopefully undulated as the copyright in this country was over turned by the courts. It is the fifth epoch revelation on this planet after Christ. Since it is still just a book, each individual will take from it what he needs, for some nothing. For others, it serves as a stepping stone to their spiritual growth and learning.

          • journey

            Look at Paper 80, if interested, especially on page 899 on what it states about the future of Europe and America. Both are at crossroads concerning the future level of its civilization because of unwise and corrupted leadership.

            The Book on whatever subject matter states it in a clear, crisp, and to the point manner. The Book would be banned if it was more widely known. It would be labeled as white “supremacy” to be thrown into the trash can. And it would also be perceived as a threat to the various religious establishments.

          • David Ashton

            My short considered answer to both your comments: I have no blind personal prejudice against “white supremacy” and “eugenics” ideas that were fashionable before WW2 and acceptable for some years afterwards. But I do not think that theologians, philosophers, scientists or even politicians would take its fantastic contents, and alleged origins, seriously enough to consider it a dangerous threat. There is now cumulative evidence of numerous, even verbatim, plagiarisms that indicate human origins and dated science. As concoctions go it is not as impressive as the Koran, but it is more impressive structurally than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Secret Doctrine, the Aquarian Gospel and a variety of gnostic texts that trap the “itchy ears” of credulous moderns.

          • journey

            The “itchy ears” of those who are opened to truth and recognizing it, no matter what the source after years of searching. As for the charges of “plagiarism”, the Book clearly states in the opening pages to make it understandable to the human mind, they will use phrases and terminology that are familiar so as to better understood by humans. If none can be
            found, then they will resort to the unfamiliar. As for the foretelling of future scientific discoveries in the hard sciences, it clearly states its position of no interference, although, it does
            give few hints here and there.

            As stated earlier, for some, they will take nothing from this Book. Each has their own time and pace. If not this life, then the next that humans will have to learn what is contained in the Book. Man cannot be compelled to love truth.

            Yes, this Book is a threat to established Christian religions as it undermines the myths that have been their foundation for
            centuries. Just like Jesus was a threat to the Jewish authorities two thousand years ago. Man is on the march for higher truths. (Believe the churches in Europe are steadily losing membership). So quietly, this Book is steadily gaining in readership.
            There will be bumps along the way but, ultimately, it is here to stay to guide humans to their next developmental levels. It clarifies and unifies human understanding of their journey in the universe. This is one of the main reasons for the Book touching on so many different subject matters. And for it to remain a true source of knowledge it stands on its own with no “church”, human authors, etc. associated with it.

          • David Ashton

            Readers interested in the documentation of many specific plagiarisms should start by Googling “Matthew Block’s Response to the JCR Review” and work from there. It is as futile to debate with someone who possesses “The Truth” supposedly delivered by celestial entities, and regards OTHER people as thinking “inside a box”, as to persuade David Icke that he is nuts, to prove to George Adamski devotees that his flying saucer photos were faked, to show that the Oera Linda is (another) fake, to demonstrate the weaknesses in Velkovsky’s theories, or to convince blind homosexual antisemites that Scarlett Johansson is quite attractive.

          • journey

            I know of Block’s human endeavors. So what? The Book clearly indicated why they were ordered to use human terminology and phrases whenever possible. The Book is a unifier, clarifier, and expander of human knowledge – to educate beyond for eons to come. As for the rest of your comments, each to their own beliefs as stepping stones in the search for truth and outside the dogma box.

          • David Ashton

            Verbatim quotes from published works of a particular period and sometimes scientifically out of date, that’s what.

          • journey

            The Book stated why it is so. As stated previously, you have free will therefore, you can ignore the Book. You asked for the source and it was given to you. The Book stands as it is, in other words, no more revelations (updates). As for the more abstract sections regarding the universe and cosmos, it will eons for humans to read and understand. The majority of the masses are still illeriate

          • David Ashton

            This exchange between us may not be of general interest to AmRen readers, and any individuals impressed by the “celestial revelations” can follow them up. So I shall not comment further.

          • journey

            The Book stated why it is so regarding certain scientific portions. (Believe you are reading human scientific theories or allegations of plagiarism from a human perspective which is ever changing as man discovers new truths. This in turn would allege that the Book is incorrect. There are numerous statements contained within the Book that is against modern man current beliefs.)

            It also states truth other than from God (the source) can never be the absolute truth. So, they never stated the Book is the absolute truth in non-human affairs. The higher beings do not care if they quoting verbatim or otherwise as their main objectives are to educate on a human level using human thought patterns.

            As stated previously, you have free will. Therefore; you can ignore the Book if you choose. You asked for the source my
            statements and it was kindly given to you. The Book stands as it is, in other words, no more revelations (updates) needed at this time. It will take eons for humans to read and understand what has already been given, especially, the more abstract sections regarding the universe and cosmos. The majority of the masses are still illiterate.

            Some human mind now rejects it because of no human author but from sources the human senses cannot detect or see. But for others, the mind can sense truth beyond the human senses. Truth comes in many different forms.

          • none of your business

            All N Europeans have White skin.

          • David Ashton

            Sangre azul, distinguishing the Nordic nobility from their sunburned and hard-skinned Mediterranean peasant laborers. Even in Britain Lord Curzon was reportedly astonished to see the pale pink flesh of workers after bathing.

          • none of your business

            The history and Smithsonian channels have a lot of interesting stuff. As well as the Garden of Eden being in N. America, they have a program that claims that the son of Antony and Cleopatra fled when his parents were defeated and ended up in the Grand Canyon.

          • David Ashton

            Nonsense is often more interesting than fact. The garden of Eden in Genesis is quite clearly located in the region of the Euphrates. The narrative therein is not a literal historical event.

          • journey

            Believe you are in England? You are correct. The Europeans have a greater sense of what is contained in the Bible (a living history book). I was quite surprised when the English troops were preparing to invade Iraq, the commander reminded the troops that Iraq was also home to the Garden of Eden, meaning respect should be shown.

          • The Garden is under water now. It used to be the Persian Gulf, where the rivers flowed into the Arabian Sea during the last Ice Age.

          • journey

            Where did you get that information? Did you see my earlier posting below? The first Garden sank. The second one is in Iraq.

          • Celts and Germans were originally the same people.

          • journey

            You are correct, from the same gene pool as with the English. Denmark was once the capital of these people.

          • none of your business

            Actually, the Germans were living in E. Europe and Central Asia until about 700 BC when the Han Chinese achieved enough critical mass to drive the mongols west who in turn drove the Germans and Slavs west.

          • David Ashton

            There is a good chapter on the Celts in John Baker’s “Race” (1974), a book of such scientific quality that it is almost unobtainable, for obvious reasons.

          • journey

            Baker’s book can be downloaded for free. Again, Baker is trying to make sense (conclusions) from chance physical discoveries meaning the evidence is incomplete. In sum, his conclusions are interesting but to be taken with a grain of salt.

          • David Ashton

            This is a ridiculous denigration of a beautifully written and carefully documented book, albeit since supplemented by other research during the past 40 years. “Convoluted” it ain’t!

          • journey

            It’s my opinion.

          • David Ashton

            And that’s mine.
            Not many books on human biology show so much meticulously detailed data.

          • journey

            Too many subjective conjectures all over the place based on chance accidental findings.

            Detailed data does not = to the advancement of a subject. But rather are the analysis/conclusions correct.

          • David Ashton

            “No book known to me tries to encompass everything relevant to the idea of race with such thoroughness, seriousness and honesty…high time someone wrote about race as Baker does, i.e. in the spirit and style of a one-man Royal Commission.” – Professor Sir Peter Medawar OM FRS, Nobel & Faraday Prizewinner. One must add the subsequent studies by Cavalli-Sforza, Rushton and Lynn, but let other readers judge between us after reading the book itself.

          • journey

            The bottom line, no human today can know how and when the different races appeared except for the ones who were there when it occurred or were the direct actors themselves. All modern man can do today is to speculate based on chance physical findings. And, over the eons some evidence has absolutely disappeared forever. So, books like Baker’s have to be taken with a grain of salt. As stated earlier, I have done quite a bit of reading in my search for racial differences. Therefore, I have come across and read books like Baker’s. And perhaps I did read Baker’s. But the reasoning was too circular and not definitive in books like Bakers for the reasons already mentioned. I mean, you can read Baker’s book for entertainment for he certainly displays man’s search for truth.

            As for the origin of life on this planet, no modern man will ever know as he was not the originator nor was he there when life was implanted on this planet some 550 million years ago. Again, the Book offers the most logical and consistent knowledge and information for me. I did also email Richard Lynn years ago about the Book which he thanked me.

            What I did with the Book was to correlate it with the life science classes when I was taking them years ago. The Book added a whole new dimension to the human sources and knowledge. The
            information in the Book did not contradict what was presented in the classes.

            I would not keep a book in my life since 1978, if I sense any kind of fraud. And like you, I have delved into metaphysics searching for something but did not know what, especially in the 70’s.

          • I just ordered that book from Amazon for $25, including shipping.

          • journey

            You could have downloaded it for free on a website! It is mainly convoluted thinking trying to make sense of something that he thinks is there.

          • David Ashton

            Excellent investment. I believe Arthur Kemp has added an appendix to a reprint. OUP withdrew the original book from all the shelves after leftist protests & rushed out Montagu’s MAN’S MOST DANGEROUS MYTH as an apologetic replacement.

        • none of your business

          Another bit of nonsense from Engleman. His conclusion, Africans, Asians and everybody else are more intelligent than Caucasians especially European Caucasians. Actually they did practice trade as things from thousands of miles away have been found in their graves and camp sites. No way of knowing other than Engleman’s imagination if they planned ahead. Since they lived in the glaciers one must assume they planned ahead enough to kill and skin animals for their fur clothing.
          Go away Engleman. Surely Salon or Huffington will welcome your anti White screeds.

          • JohnEngelman

            On many occasions I have pointed out that average IQ for Negroes is below that of Europeans.

            The best kind of stone for stone weapons is flint. Cro Magnons nearly always used flint. This demonstrates trade. Neanderthals only used it if it was in the area. Mediterranean sea shells have been found in Cro Magnon campsites as far away as the Ukraine. This again is obvious evidence of trade. Neanderthal campsites only have items found in the area.

            Of distinctly human genes Caucasians share about four percent with Neanderthals. A few have evolved since our ancestors left Africa about 60,000 years ago. The vast majority we share with Negroes.

          • none of your business

            Stop lying. Sea shells and even amber have been found in Neanderthal campsites far away from the sources. You hate us White American Christians and non believers of Christian heritage so why do you keep posting her? You think you impress us with your standard basic propaganda of the hostile elites?

          • JohnEngelman

            Although many Neanderthal sites have rare pieces of high-quality stone from more than 100 kilometers away, there is not enough to indicate trade or even regular contact with other communities.

          • JohnEngelman

            I am a white American Christian.

          • David Ashton

            Who thinks the US belongs to the “Red Indians” and the Middle East to the “Jews”, voted for Obama, and wishes he could live in China. Still, you can’t have it all.

          • JohnEngelman

            Laughing out Loud.

        • If you want to see a Cro-Magnon, talk with a Basque. Even their language is archaic and not Indo-European nor even Uralic. My best friend from high school is built literally like a gorilla. I completely understand, and rest assured Glenn sure does. Even I have the wrong hands for a person. We “get it”.


          • none of your business

            Some say a lot of Slavs must have Neanderthal blood because of their size and strength.

          • Ella

            I saw a huge man in Central Europe that had massive hands and large wide-squarish face with light, wavy hair. He looked liked a living Neanderthal or Lurch but with a “gorilla” built. It was memorizing and frightening at the same time. The hands could crush a small man.

      • We began to diverge about 160,000 years ago.

        • journey

          The “diverging” was way earlier than your number. Try 850,000 years ago as the first phrase.

      • John

        One of the guest speakers at Amren’s most recent conference spoke of exactly the phenomena you discuss on species and subspecies differentiation. I believe he called it the “90% rule”. If you have two groups that you suspect are subspecies of one another, mix them together and then attempt to resort them back into their original groupings. If you can do this as accurately as 90%, then they are indeed subspecies. Real world application- do this with a group of indigenous Swedes and indigenous Somalians. A smart 6 year old could sort them back out with 100% accuracy.

        • journey

          There are subspecies of humans, interesting? Don’t think so.

        • Martel

          Douglass Whitman in his speech titled The Evolutionary and Biological Reality of Race.

          • John

            Thanks. I wasn’t feeling energetic enough to look up that information. I trust I got the essence of his presentation correct?

      • Bossman

        You’ve written a very long article but have said nothing of significance. We are all stardust ultimately. You should have watched the recent “Cosmos” series that was on TV. Africans and non-Africans can interbreed freely and the offspring can be very fertile. That is what is important.

        • none of your business

          Very true. Probably the biggest interbreeding of those groups occurred between about 1600 and 1950 in the Americas and the Caribbean Islands, the most unfortunate example of interbreeding that ever occurred in the history of the earth.
          I don’t think that black African and other races is interbreeding. We are all humans, just superficial differences of coloring, bones structure intelligence and impulse control.

          • Bossman

            Unfortunate to whom? The Americas is a great continent because it makes possible the cross breeding of the races. It makes possible new ideas, new standards of beauty and new possibilities.

          • David Ashton

            Compare Brazil with Canada.

          • Bossman

            I’ve been to both places. Both countries are young with tremendous potential. The first inhabitants of both countries were of the same race. Brazil may even become a better, happier and even whiter country than Canada if Canada doesn’t stop importing so many East Asians and South Asians.

          • David Ashton

            Would a correct inference from your comment be that you consider that the happiness and achievement of a country depends largely on the proportion of its white population?

          • Bossman

            That is because he didn’t hang out on the beach and watch the ladies parade in their tangas.

        • antiquesunlight

          Actually, her post was full of logical points which mostly seem strong to me and certainly not insignificant. I don’t believe she or anyone else is claiming that whites can’t breed with blacks, which would be an obviously false claim. Rather, she was arguing that whites and blacks are quite different in practically every way.

          • Bossman

            If they can interbreed then they are not that different. There are greater differences between Blacks and Chinese than between Whites and Blacks.

          • antiquesunlight

            We are substantially different. Just because we can interfered does not mean the differences are insignificant. Your second point is irrelevant.

          • David Ashton

            West African blacks have more “private” genes than other groups and have a closer skull resemblance to more primitive hominids.

      • De Doc

        The major problem with your argument is that all Out-of-Africa populations have demonstrable levels of Neaderthal admixture, usually around 2-5%. Sub Saharan African (SSA) populations have much lower percentages on average. This argues that the H. sapien – Neaderthal interbreeding scenario occurred fairly early as anatomically modern humans migrated outside Africa. If these proto-Europeans were mixing with Neanderthals well beyond those earlier times, we’d expect to see on average much higher % admixture in the analysis.

        The species argument is a bit weak too, since one of the operational definitions of a species is isolation of breeding populations. SSAs clearly are able to mix with any other human population and produce viable and fertile offspring. As to the race and cultural issue of Black Africans and their diaspora, I’ve no objection there. Only a hide bound PC ideologue denies those aspects.

        • none of your business

          Homo Sapiens and Homo Dumbo can unfortunately have children to the great detriment of the countries in which it occurs.

        • Their population level wasn’t very high.

  • MekongDelta69

    Yahoo! News has a left-wing agenda, so I don’t even bother to read what they say.

    • I routinely post there, quite brutally.

      • Kenner

        Me too, I’m just ‘Ken’ on there.

    • wildfirexx

      Yahoo is still one of my favorite sites that don’t censer one’s comments, except if you use foul language of sorts. I quoted the word retarded in my comment from someone’s else’s article…and they scrambled it! #@%& lol

    • none of your business

      As well as a jillion trillion ads

  • John Smith

    Want to provoke a leftist?…especially a white one?

    Just ask –

    “does it require more intelligence, planning, family structure, societal cohesiveness to live in areas with frigid cold and drastically changing weather patterns (or) in warmer/milder areas with more stable weather patterns”?

    “can these different scenarios have an evolutionary pressure on the human brain”?

    • Luca

      Is it easier to plan, organize, plant, harvest, store, ration and distribute seasonal food or pick the low-hanging fruits and grubs?

      • Max

        It’s easiest of all to wait for a check in the mail. They have made great strides backward.

        • Who Me?

          They don’t even have to do that anymore, just wait till after midnight on the appointed day and the money just magically appears on the EBT card balance.

          • ghettovalley

            I can’t wait to see what happens when the magic runs out. When all of that magical money stops being loaded into the EBT cards and their true nature surfaces. Now that will be some good tv.

          • journey

            Might want to be in a safe place. As the Hispanics increase and the whites decrease, judgment day is coming = less tax money to fool around with.

  • Max

    I see a new movie on the horizon: “36,000 Years a Slave” narrated by Morgan Freeman.

  • antiquesunlight

    I don’t have a clue about how this sort of thing works, but I guess it is theoretically possible to deduce intelligence from ancient DNA? It would be pretty cool if our understanding of genetic intelligence advanced enough that we could get an idea of the IQ levels of ancient peoples. It would put an entirely new light on history if we could track IQ patterns throughout time.

    • JohnEngelman

      I am confident that by the end of this century if not sooner that will be possible.

      • none of your business

        If it happens and you live long enough you will be terribly disappointed.

  • Adolf Verloc

    This is fascinating stuff. I enjoy reading about it completely aside from any racial realist issues.

  • NorthernWind

    “Ice sheets came and went over these tens of thousands of years, and some cultures died off entirely. However, pockets of people must have been able to survive, and continue to maintain the human population.”

    I’m sure that this had absolutely no effect on our brains.

    • none of your business

      many of us, probably most moved down to S. Spain, Sicily and Malta where there was no ice. Civilization however, began in what is now known as Crimea and Ukraine.

  • BulgAryan

    The human brain did not gain a single gram for the last 10,000 years, every anthropologist knows that.

    Thanks to technology and the benefits of civilization, modern man is much dumber than people 3,000 years ago. Current guy thinks he’s smart, because he can press the button on a remote control. The truth is that 3,000 years ago astronomers did not have computers, the Hubble telescope and the Internet, but calculated the exact time of solar and lunar eclipses with accuracy to the minute using only a string of cord, plumb-line and angle gauge.

    • Tim_in_Indiana

      But somebody had to invent, design, and manufacture those remote controls…

      • IstvanIN

        Invented and designed by Americans.
        Manufactured by the Japanese in factories located in China.

    • none of your business

      But we got more of those folds. It is the number of folds I don’t know the anatomical names of those folds but we have gained more folds even since 1600.

  • ghettovalley

    It appears that there were many groups of archaic humans living throughout the world for much of this period. What else could explain the high amount of genetic diversity of people on the earth? Luckily we mixed with the Neanderthals, and the more we learn about them we find that they were much like ourselves. They even created musical instruments. This is not the work of a mindless savage, it suggests at least a moderate level of intelligence. Try to imagine what the archaic human ancestors of the africans were like. Now you can understand the migration to Europe. History’s first documented instance of white flight.

    • none of your business

      It was their hunting that needed the most intelligence and a VERY HIGH LEVEL OF COOPERATION AND ORGANIZATION. Think of the size of the animals they hunted with primitive not so effectual weapons.

      • ghettovalley

        It really is amazing. Imagine getting five or six of your friends together, making spears, then killing a mammoth. It’s hard to imagine just how difficult their lives really were.

  • none of your business

    Check out Java man, a fully modern Asian type whose skeleton is about 750,000 years old. When the out of Africa hoax came along all mention of Java man was verboten.

    • journey

      The Java man is actually a Neanderthaler. They appeared 850,000 years ago.

      • none of your business

        Thanks for the info. Everything I read claimed he was a fully modern human.

        • journey

          You are welcome. Could I ask for your sources? I know you mentioned “Not out of Africa”.

  • WR_the_realist

    If I had ancestors who survived the depths of the Ice Age then my ancestors were hellaciously tough people.

    Proud to be an ice person.

  • SubersivusMagnus

    A small number of people survived in ice age Europe for tens of thousands of years. No doubt that those populations became blonde by the ends of that time.

  • Bantu_Education

    I read somewhere recently that West African negroes may be a very recently evolved species possibly no more than about 6,000 years old. The same article claimed that anthropologists have never found any very ancient human bones or fossils in W.Africa. Does anyone know whether this is true?

    • none of your business

      It is true that no ancient human bones or fossils have been found in Africa. All they have is Lucy who is not the ancestor of any human or ape type thing. Her line of descendants went extinct millions of years ago. there is one idea that W. Africans migrated from S. India where the people are equally dark skinned. That doesn’t explain the hair, features and low level of intelligence though.

      • Bantu_Education

        Hmmm, I think that is incorrect. There have been some ancient hominid discoveries in South Africa, by whites of course. The place name Sterkfontein is often mentioned.

  • Canadian Friend

    We survived the ice age… will we survive the age of multiculturalism ( which is actually race replacement under a different name )?

    • David Ashton

      If we try to do so.

  • Bossman

    From star seed to human seed is one great big continuum. This is what is called occult knowledge. Stars evolve to become planets. The sun is the great giver of life but it is not the parent of the earth.

  • Luca

    Dogs retain the wolf instinct and can revert back to the wild if need be. Not all breeds, but most.