Why didn't God save Neanderthals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holyorders
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If by your opening sentence you are alluding to those of us who have mental/learning issues/understanding issues, then I agree with you. But if a whole ‘species’ runs short of the paradigms that make us human and ‘in the image of God’ - that of knowledge of good and evil, of the other things that separate humans from the other animals, then they can be considered as amoral beings and not in the same rules ‘ball park’.

It may well be that they are ‘soulish’ and like the question of pets and the other higher animals may have some spiritually ‘lesser’ part to play in the afterlife.
 
Stephen_says said:
No, Man did not evolve from Neanderthals, but is conclusive that there are humans today who poses Neanderthal DNA, meaning that indeed some people are descended from a relationship between a Human and a Neanderthal sometime in the past.

genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/
Click to expand...
I did testing through the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project and my DNA is 2.1% Neanderthal and 1.5% Denisovan (yet another extinct species). This proves that some of my human ancestors (Homo sapiens sapiens) interbred with some individuals from those other two species.
 
Thorolfr said:
I did testing through the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project and my DNA is 2.1% Neanderthal and 1.5% Denisovan (yet another extinct species). This proves that some of my human ancestors (Homo sapiens sapiens) interbred with some individuals from those other two species.
Click to expand...
Species is not an accurate description. I don’t think scientists get it but Catholics do. Everyone alive today had two sole parents.

Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Species is not an accurate description. I don’t think scientists get it but Catholics do. Everyone alive today had two sole parents.

Ed
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with calling them different species? They are genetically distinct from each other based on DNA studies. Also, there is genetic evidence that the male offspring of human/Neanderthal interbreeding probably suffered from infertility similar to what happens when you cross a donkey with a horse to get a mule. Most people would consider donkeys and horses to be two different species.
 
Thorolfr said:
What’s wrong with calling them different species? They are genetically distinct from each other based on DNA studies. Also, there is genetic evidence that the male offspring of human/Neanderthal interbreeding probably suffered from infertility similar to what happens when you cross a donkey with a horse to get a mule. Most people would consider donkeys and horses to be two different species.
Click to expand...
This isn’t a science forum, nor one dedicated to genetics; so, I will not ask you to reference your assertions.
Based on what you said two posts earlier, I am tempted to ask what it feels like to be the human equivalent of a cross between a horse, a donkey and a zebra. Bet you are as human as the rest of us.
What is it is that makes us human?
What about those of us who suffer from trisomies?
How is it that we are here?
 
Thorolfr said:
What’s wrong with calling them different species? They are genetically distinct from each other based on DNA studies. Also, there is genetic evidence that the male offspring of human/Neanderthal interbreeding probably suffered from infertility similar to what happens when you cross a donkey with a horse to get a mule. Most people would consider donkeys and horses to be two different species.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the comparison applies here.

Ed
 
God did not save the Neanderthals because human evolution is a great fallacy in today’s world.
 
First of all we don’t know if they weren’t saved.🤷

Second evolution is a banned topic so we might want to take that into consideration. 😉
 
Thorolfr said:
I did testing through the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project and my DNA is 2.1% Neanderthal and 1.5% Denisovan (yet another extinct species). This proves that some of my human ancestors (Homo sapiens sapiens) interbred with some individuals from those other two species.
Click to expand...
Hold on there. 2.1% is not a real number. We are well into the 90 percentile in DNA with chimpanzees. That says nothing about ancestors crossbreeding. The scientists that at one point thought that humans and Neanderthals may have interbred have backed off on that theory completely. They say a few segments made it look like that, but it is much more reasonably explained by viruses copying DNA out of and into infected people and Neanderthals that may have lived many thousands of years apart.

This is another example of a scientific theory making shock waves and then departing the scene as “oops just another theory of yesteryear flung aside”.
 
wmw said:
Hold on there. 2.1% is not a real number. We are well into the 90 percentile in DNA with chimpanzees. That says nothing about ancestors crossbreeding. The scientists that at one point thought that humans and Neanderthals may have interbred have backed off on that theory completely. They say a few segments made it look like that, but it is much more reasonably explained by viruses copying DNA out of and into infected people and Neanderthals that may have lived many thousands of years apart.

This is another example of a scientific theory making shock waves and then departing the scene as “oops just another theory of yesteryear flung aside”.
Click to expand...
The 2.1% number means that it is calculated from my own DNA sample that it is comprised of 2.1% Neanderthal DNA. The information comes from testing done by the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project which is run by the geneticist Dr. Spencer Wells. They have not changed their stand on this issue of interbreeding, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the science behind all of this is disputed by some scientists.
 
Thorolfr said:
The 2.1% number means that it is calculated from my own DNA sample that it is comprised of 2.1% Neanderthal DNA. The information comes from testing done by the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project which is run by the geneticist Dr. Spencer Wells. They have not changed their stand on this issue of interbreeding, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the science behind all of this is disputed by some scientists.
Click to expand...
The Huge majority: (from humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/neanderthal-mitochondrial-dna)
The Neanderthal mtDNA sequences were substantially different from modern human mtDNA (Krings et al. 1997, 1999). Researchers compared the Neanderthal to modern human and chimpanzee sequences. Most human sequences differ from each other by on average 8.0 substitutions, while the human and chimpanzee sequences differ by about 55.0 substitutions. The Neanderthal and modern human sequences differed by approximately 27.2 substitutions. Using this mtDNA information, the last common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans dates to approximately 550,000 to 690,000 years ago, which is about four times older than the modern human mtDNA pool. This is consistent with the idea that Neanderthals did not contribute substantially to modern human genome.
Click to expand...
A second mtDNA sequence, announced in 2000, was derived from a 29,000 year old Neanderthal found in Mezmaiskaya Cave, Russia (Ovchinnikov et al. 2000). Although the Mezmaiskaya Cave sequence was slightly different than the Feldhofer Neanderthal, the two Neanderthal mtDNA sequences were distinct from those of modern humans. These results confirmed the earlier findings that showed that Neanderthals were unlikely to have contributed to the modern human genome. As with the previous study of Neanderthal mtDNA, results were consistent with separation between the Neanderthal and modern human gene pools or with very low amounts of gene flow between the two groups.
Click to expand...
Further mtDNA sequences confirmed sequence differences between Neanderthals and modern humans. Researchers compared Neanderthal mtDNA to that of modern humans from different geographic regions. If Neanderthals had interbred with modern humans in Europe, then researchers would have expected to find more similarities between Neanderthals and Europeans than between Neanderthals and other modern humans. However, Neanderthals were equidistant from modern human groups, which is consistent with genetic separation between modern humans and Neanderthals. However, this does not explicitly disprove admixture because interregional gene flow between modern humans could have swamped the Neanderthal contribution to Europeans (Relethford 2001).
Click to expand...
Researchers have also studied ancient DNA from anatomically modern Homo sapiens from Europe dating to the same time period as the Neanderthals. Material from two Paglicci Cave, Italy individuals, dated to 23,000 and 25,000 years old, was sequenced. The Paglicci Homo sapiens mtDNA sequences were different from all Neanderthal mtDNA sequences but were within the range of variation for modern human mtDNA sequences (Caramelli et al. 2003). Mitochondrial DNA from the Paglicci specimens as well as other ancient humans fit within the range of modern humans, but the Neanderthals remain consistently genetically distinct. This shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapiens were not very different genetically from current modern humans, but were still different from Neanderthals.
Click to expand...
 
wmw said:
The Huge majority: (from humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/neanderthal-mitochondrial-dna)
Click to expand...
Your quote looks like slightly old science and is based only on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). All the references are from 2003 or earlier. A much more extensive sequence of the entire Neanderthal genome was generated by the Max Planck Institute in Germany in 2010 from a Neanderthal toe bone found in Siberia. Scientists now know a lot more about Neanderthal DNA than what they did in 2003.
 
Quote from post 57
“The relationship between modern humans and archaic hominins, particularly Neanderthals, has been the subject of much debate. While the idea that modern humans originated in Africa and spread out to other parts of the world (Out of Africa) is widely accepted, several scenarios have been proposed to account for the replacement of archaic hominin populations.”
This, my friends, is the current issue which contradicts the Catholic doctrine that all humankind descended from a sole population of true, fully-complete human parents lovingly known as the biblical Adam and Eve.

Note the plural “modern humans originated in Africa” in the above quote. The “Out of Africa” theory based on a population in the thousands became a staple of the science of human evolution in 1987. In other words, according to current science, a large indiscriminate, random mating, humanizing, large archaic breeding population created humankind instead of Genesis 1: 26-27.

Whatever the outcome of the recent fossil finds and uncontaminated DNA, the fact remains that the Neanderthals and other species under consideration are physical/material populations and therefore did not create Adam and Eve.
 
Robert_Sock said:
God did not save the Neanderthals because human evolution is a great fallacy in today’s world.
Click to expand...
Can’t see the reasoning there, since Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens actually lived along side of each other for a few tens of thousands of years.

Neanderthals made jewellery, weapons, simple clothing, simple ‘art’, and there is evidence of ritual burial, and of even a little inter species fertilisation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top