phorum - Our World Forum II at Asiawind - Re: New Human species found in China

Our World Forum II at Asiawind

Newer Topic | Older Topic

New Human species found in China

Author: tom Dragon
Date: 03-15-12 18:33

http://www.bluelyn.com/2012/03/15/new-human-species-discovered/not sure if the drawing reconstruction is correct though he should look very chinese.

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 03-16-12 00:34

The reporting is coming thru' suggestively insinuating Chinese are from this branch of Humanoids. And, therefore........mighty different from them Neanderthals of European stock !!
Psychologically.....the war machine is using all tools on the table....preparing for the grand rapture !!

Reply To This Message

Neanderthal

Author: coyote
Date: 03-16-12 09:19

Paranoia got you again. Look, Suen, it was only a scientific paper. Lighten up! As for your Neanderthal shot, read below:

http://news.discovery.com/human/neanderthal-human-interbreed-dna.html

NEANDERTHALS, HUMANS INTERBRED, DNA PROVES

"Supporting that conclusion is the fact that the Neanderthal DNA more closely matched that of the China, France and Papua New Guinea individuals in their study. All had the one to four percent Neanderthal contribution to their DNA, so the interbreeding must have first occurred before the humans migrating out of Africa colonized other, more distant regions in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: tom Dragon
Date: 03-16-12 16:45

THE reconstruction looks more like Bernanke than Ah Q.

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-16-12 22:58

Author: tom Dragon
Date: 03-16-12 16:45

THE reconstruction looks more like Bernanke than Ah Q.
=======================
You're right for once.

Neanderthal and other modern humans all probably descended from the Homo erectus which migrated out of Africa some 1.5 million years ago. Since then there has been no definite new human species until Homo sapiens. That is, both Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalis are both descendents of erectus. The two did not mix. All modern humans migrated out of Africa some 70,000 years ago. Whether Chinese had descended from Homo erectus directly and then mixed with the modern humans from Africa since 70,000 years ago is questionable but not impossible. The shovel shape incisors of the Chinese is probably parallel evolution.

I doubt if the Red Deer Cave people are a unique species. But we can't tell until there is DNA evidence. One can only speculate for now.

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: tom Dragon
Date: 03-17-12 00:39

[The shovel shape incisors of the Chinese is probably parallel evolution. ]
You don't see this is totally a new specie? my goodness!
Precisely the shovel shape (or concave shape in the back )of the chinese incisors are missing or not clearly shown on the skull. Several more very important features point to a totally new specie which I let you find out yourself since you appear to be very smart ..

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: tom Dragon
Date: 03-17-12 00:59

this should look more like it http://www.truefresco.org/postershop/11974341.html as the specie had evolved a lot or mixed with others but most of the features still match that of the skull, notice also the roundness of the head is astounding.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 03-17-12 04:03

Darn.....I thought its the other way around......since I'm with the school that holds the view that Chinese evolved uniquely on its own !

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-17-12 22:50

Frankly I don't know too much about the Red Deer Cave People. I just don't have enough data to believe one thing or another. I'll let the anthropologists argue about this for a while and see what shakes out. Too often there are just malnutrition or reaction to cultural customs such as the neck stretching or foot binding or the small size of the pigmies or Flores people. It has been found that large animals tend to grow smaller on islands due to lack of food. Of course, there is always the case that the Red Deer People descended from Homo sapiens but underwent some kind of genetic mutations that give them thicker skull and other more primitive features. I'm sure you have read about some people with very thick hair all over their bodies. That doesn't make them a new species, just common people with mutation is hair gene.

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: tom Dragon
Date: 03-18-12 21:15

it's all about the skulls so concentrate on skull features, think skull skull skull.
if you still not figure out google-the new human specie in china.

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: coyote
Date: 03-19-12 02:22

"Whether Chinese had descended from Homo erectus directly and then mixed with the modern humans from Africa since 70,000 years ago is questionable"

Baseless speculation on your part, Mr Liang.

"Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalis are both descendents of erectus. The two did not mix."

An assumption already proven wrong:

http://news.discovery.com/human/neanderthal-human-interbreed-dna.html

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: coyote
Date: 03-19-12 02:22

Well, we did not. Lets move on.

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: coyote
Date: 03-19-12 02:24

Ha ha You are a funny bird.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 03-19-12 02:43

Not so fast.
Now....since its a new speci, what G-d made them?

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: coyote
Date: 03-19-12 02:51

I suspect, from a non professional guesstimate, that he was an offshoot/descendants of an early wave of humonoids from Africa. And as such, were quite unrelated to us. I will stick with that until there is DNA proof otherwise. The DNA proof of our origin in Africa and emergence with the rest of the human races (non-African part) from Africa around 70,000 years ago, is now mountainous.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 03-19-12 11:33

The problem with this assumption of yours is typical of your...'Move On' mentality. You like to make way and give way for the bigger size wolf of your family tree. So much so you are left with bits and pieces for you to scavenge eventhough you have developed craftily the skill to stay alive.
Pretty soon, out of somewhere our long lost Peking man bones will surface and, another explosive discovery will be announced by them western paid-to-write- scientists that Chinese are all.indeed in fact....apes!
And, you'd come along here, just the same , to tell us to accpet it and move on!

Reply To This Message

Re: New Human species found in China

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-19-12 21:58

http://news.discovery.com/human/neanderthal-human-interbreed-dna.html

"Although the Neanderthal contribution to the DNA of these individuals is estimated at being just one to four percent of the total, the finding, published in the latest issue of the journal Science, helps to resolve the long-standing controversy over whether or not humans mated with Neanderthals when the two groups encountered each other outside of Africa. "
============================

I'm not sure what is meant by "one to four percent of the total". Of which total? The total human genome? Since both modern human and neanderthal descended from erectus they obviously share many genes. In fact, human genes and chimp genes are 96% to 98% similar. The important thing to prove is that modern human genome contain genes found in the neandethals but not in Africans.

According to the most widely accepted theory, erectus evolved into heidelbergensis in Africa and then migrated out of Africa some 800,000 years ago into Europe. Then neanderthals evolved from heidelbergensi around 300,000 years ago. Modern humans or H. sapiens evolved from heidelbergensis also around 300,000 years ago. So the two will share many heidelbergensis genes. But H. sapiens only left Africa some 70,000 years ago and migrated into Europe around some 45,000 years ago. Therefore, to prove that a common gene is derived from neanderthal there must be proof that it is not found in the African genome prior to 70,000 years ago. Putting it in another way, if a presumptive neanderthal gene is found in African bone prior to 70,000 years ago, then H. sapiens would have gotten it from their African ancestors and not from neanderthals.

But I'm not married to the theory that there is no intermixture between H. sapiens and neanderthals. Show me the proof and I will believe it. But just saying humans and neanderthals share some common genes is not good enough since they obviously share many genes being descended from the same heidelbergensis ancestors.

Reply To This Message

Stupid illogical nonsense!

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-19-12 22:06

"so the interbreeding must have first occurred before the humans migrating out of Africa colonized other, more distant regions in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."
=========================
This is nonsense! Neanderthals evolved in Europe and not in Africa. There were no neanderthals in Africa, ever! So how could any interbreeding take place in Africa between humans and neanderthals before humans migrated out of Africa? Stupid illogical nonsense!

Reply To This Message

Re: Stupid illogical nonsense!

Author: coyote
Date: 03-21-12 04:57

Your level of English (very good) should not prevent you from understanding that simple sentence. Read again:

"so the interbreeding must have first occurred before the humans migrating out of Africa colonized other, more distant regions in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."

It isn't saying "interbreeding take place in Africa". It says it occurred - before - humans... colonized other distant regions...."

ie. interbreeding occurred sometime after leaving Africa and before reaching distant lands such as those in Asia.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: coyote
Date: 03-21-12 05:00

Well, with that attitude, you should continue to wonder if you may not be a descendant of some alien creature. After all, you have no proof that you are not. All rather silly, Suen. Go with what evidence there is, not what may or may not crop up in some future unknown times.

Reply To This Message

Re: Stupid illogical nonsense!

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-21-12 19:59

Author: coyote wrote:

Date: 03-21-12 04:57

Your level of English (very good) should not prevent you from understanding that simple sentence. Read again:

"so the interbreeding must have first occurred before the humans migrating out of Africa colonized other, more distant regions in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."

It isn't saying "interbreeding take place in Africa". It says it occurred - before - humans... colonized other distant regions...."

ie. interbreeding occurred sometime after leaving Africa and before reaching distant lands such as those in Asia.
------------------------
Liang's response:
Thanks for the compliment but I can't honestly return the encomium. Your explanation is not satisfactory. For example:

The breaking of the vase must have first occurred before Johnny leaving the house played tennis.

Anybody who knows English well will interpret this to mean that Johnny had broken the vase while he was still in the house and not leave the house first and then broke the vase in front of the house and then proceeded to play tennis.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 03-22-12 00:21

At the rate you gobble down everything they spoon-feed ya, Coyote, you'll be moving on real soon pushed to the edge of that Buffalo Jump.
I seriously doubt your concept of being a Chinese .

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: coyote
Date: 03-22-12 01:53

Ok brother, if you think you are more Chinese than I am, then so be it. For your self-proclaimed super Chineseness, you can go over there by the door, there is an extra large red and delicious apple for you.

Reply To This Message

Re: Stupid illogical nonsense!

Author: coyote
Date: 03-22-12 02:01

Don't mean to quibble...

"The breaking of the vase must have first occurred before Johnny leaving the house played tennis."

That's not even close, my dear Mr Liang. To parallel what the article writer said, it should be rewritten as follows:

"The breaking of the vase had to have occurred before Johnny played a game on the tennis court."

So the vase-breaking (or interbreeding) occurred sometime (somewhere) between house (Africa) and tennis court (Asia).

Ok. All in good fun.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 03-22-12 07:35

Sounds like you got the exact opposite treatment by them westerners and got lured by them red delicious !

Reply To This Message

Re: Stupid illogical nonsense!

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-22-12 20:52

Author: Liang2a
Date: 03-21-12 19:59

Author: coyote wrote:

Date: 03-21-12 04:57

Your level of English (very good) should not prevent you from understanding that simple sentence. Read again:

"so the interbreeding must have first occurred before the humans migrating out of Africa colonized other, more distant regions in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."

It isn't saying "interbreeding take place in Africa". It says it occurred - before - humans... colonized other distant regions...."

ie. interbreeding occurred sometime after leaving Africa and before reaching distant lands such as those in Asia.
------------------------

Liang's response:
Thanks for the compliment but I can't honestly return the encomium. Your explanation is not satisfactory. For example:

The breaking of the vase must have first occurred before Johnny leaving the house played tennis.

Anybody who knows English well will interpret this to mean that Johnny had broken the vase while he was still in the house and not leave the house first and then broke the vase in front of the house and then proceeded to play tennis.
============
Author: coyote
Date: 03-22-12 02:01

Don't mean to quibble...

"The breaking of the vase must have first occurred before Johnny leaving the house played tennis."

That's not even close, my dear Mr Liang. To parallel what the article writer said, it should be rewritten as follows:

"The breaking of the vase had to have occurred before Johnny played a game on the tennis court."

So the vase-breaking (or interbreeding) occurred sometime (somewhere) between house (Africa) and tennis court (Asia).

Ok. All in good fun.
========================
OK, this is the last response I will make to this.

The original quote:
"so the interbreeding must have first occurred before the humans migrating out of Africa colonized other, more distant regions in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."

My example:
The breaking of the vase must have first occurred before Johnny leaving the house played tennis (at a court across town).

Anybody can see the similarity between my example and your original statement. Obviously, Johhny broke the vase before leaving the house. Therefore, by the same token and grammatical conventions and rules, the interbreeding had already taken place while humans were in the process of migrating out of Africa and not after having left Africa. Leaving is present progress and does not indicate an action that had been completed.

Yours response is even worse:

"The breaking of the vase had to have occurred before Johnny played a game on the tennis court."

You have not related the whereabouts of Johnny while the vase was being broken. You have evaded the question of where was Johhny in relation to the house and the time when the vase was broken. All you said was Johnny played a game after the vase was broken. For all anybody knows Johnny first broke the vase and then went out to play a tennis game. You certainly have not precluded the possibility that Johnny broke the vase before he left the house to play tennis. And the whole point of this "quibble" is your original statement was more likely to mean that interbreeding took place before humans left Africa. And you last statement only strengthen that interpretation. The vase was broken before Johnny played tennis equals interbreeding was done before humans migrated to other places.

I will not respond to further posts in this thread.

Reply To This Message

Re: Neanderthal

Author: coyote
Date: 03-23-12 07:52

Do all super Chinese wear the superman cape? I am not impressed by men wearing little underwear as costume...

Reply To This Message

Newer Topic | Older Topic

All messages are the expression of the contributors, who are solely responsible for the content. The forum does not endorse any views.

The Asiawind forums are provided to you by InTechTra Inc.