Domain: tiger-web1.srvr.media3.us Cambridge: Anglo-Saxons aren’t real | Page 5 | Political Talk
Started By
Message

re: Cambridge: Anglo-Saxons aren’t real

Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:00 pm to
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:00 pm to
quote:

So, 'all modern humans come from Africa' isn't exactly accurate.
Sure it is. The ancestors of Neanderthalensis (Heidelbergensis) just left a bit earlier and took a different route (through the Levant).

I've read speculation that Neanderthals were blonde. That would be a kick, wouldn't it?
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
64333 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:07 pm to
quote:

Sure it is. The ancestors of Neanderthalensis (Heidelbergensis) just left a bit earlier
There are no neanderthal fossils in Africa. I mean, I guess if you want to go back to shite, maybe find where the first amphibian crawled out of the water.

Anyway, modern sub-saharan Africans have no shared DNA with them, is all.
Posted by RazorbackLaw501
Member since May 2012
966 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:09 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 10:29 pm
Posted by This GUN for HIRE
Member since May 2022
5928 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:10 pm to
Time for asses to meet caps
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
58537 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:10 pm to
quote:

Its teaching aims to “dismantle the basis of myths of nationalism” by explaining that the Anglo-Saxons were not a distinct ethnic group, according to information from the department.


This comes across as a step towards attempting to dehumanize whites by chipping away at European history so as to say nothing of value ever came from it.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:11 pm to
quote:

There are no neanderthal fossils in Africa
Correct. But there ARE heidelbergensis fossils in Africa. The current theory is that Heidelbergensis was the last common ancestor shared by Neanderthalensis and H. Sapiens sapiens.

A wave of heidelbergensis left Africa something like 300,000 years ago, and they later evolved into Neanderthalensis in Eurasia. The heidelbergensis who remained in African would have evolved differently, because they would have continued to interbreed with the other archaic human species still extant in Africa at the time. As I recall, there were three or four others still extant at that time.

The Denisovans present interesting questions. Clearly, they predate the Sapiens migration. Are they also descended from heidelbergensis, or are they descended from the still-earlier wave of H. Antecessor?
Or the STILL earlier wave of H. Erectus?
quote:

Anyway, modern sub-saharan Africans have no shared DNA with them
With Neanderthalensis? Correct. But modern Africans ARE descended from heidelbergensis.

Something else fascinating? Modern East Asians have 20% more Neanderthalensis DNA than modern Europeans, though Neanderthalensis lived only in Europe, the Levant and parts of the Near East.
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 9:30 pm
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
64333 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:11 pm to
quote:

I'm sorry man, but I wouldn't even try seriously talking to people like him.
He does the exact same passive aggressive shite in every thread. Just remember he supports pedos (yes, really) and you know all you need to.
Posted by Jorts R Us
Member since Aug 2013
17266 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:22 pm to
quote:

AggieHank86


What did you do now? You riled some dipshit up so much he logged in to post on his 11 year old account with 800 posts.
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 9:23 pm
Posted by GruntbyAssociation
Member since Jul 2013
9079 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:24 pm to
My DNA report says otherwise.
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:27 pm to
quote:

What did you do now? You riled some dipshit up so much he logged in to post on his 11 year old account with 800 posts.
I suspect that it may be NIH, actually. I see some similarities in posting style. Is he banned at the moment?

The problem is that NIH is brighter than this guy. Unless this is NIH drunk.

He also has some similarities to that yahoo from San Diego that caught a permaban about a year ago. SDVTiger or something like that?
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 9:31 pm
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
39520 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:36 pm to
quote:

Everyone on earth except sub-Saharan Africans has Neanderthal DNA. 


Except the remnants of that DNA are including in non-coding portions.

Also, there are several other homo populations that coincided with homo sapiens, with varying admixture.

quote:

Neanderthals are also said to have been more intelligent than their human contemporarie


Nonsense.

quote:

all modern humans come from Africa' isn't exactly accurate


You fricking idiot, humans, even the ones with Neaderthal DNA, share 99.9% of the genome with one another, which translates to around 100-120 genes.


Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
64333 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:45 pm to
quote:

Neanderthals are also said to have been more intelligent than their human contemporarie


Nonsense.
Not at all. Many believe that. The evidence of their sophistication goes back farther, especially the aforementioned musical instrument, a flute. plus, they had much larger brains.
quote:

Except the remnants of that DNA are including in non-coding portions.

Also, there are several other homo populations that coincided with homo sapiens, with varying admixture.
K. All other humans have about 5% Neanderthal DNA. SS Africans don't.
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 9:54 pm
Posted by Jorts R Us
Member since Aug 2013
17266 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:52 pm to
quote:

suspect that it may be NIH, actually. I see some similarities in posting style. Is he banned at the moment?

No clue. I can't recall any interactions with him so I'm not familiar with his style.

quote:

He also has some similarities to that yahoo from San Diego that caught a permaban about a year ago. SDVTiger or something like that?

Doesn't sound like him to me. This wasn't one of his hot buttons.
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 9:56 pm
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
39520 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:55 pm to
quote:

Not at all.


It is.

quote:

Many believe that. 


Like who?

quote:

The evidence of their sophistication go back farther


Like what?

quote:

plus, they had much larger brains


Which isn't correlated to intelligence specifically, especially when the brain measurements are so close, as the difference on average is less than 5%.

Homo sapiens are exceedingly robust, and likely outcompeted other homo species through several features, ranging from minute differences in sexual adaptations to the ability to withstand several harsh environs to possibly sociological adaptations.

Regardless, please stop talking about archeogenetics. You are very stupid.

Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
39520 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 9:56 pm to
quote:

All other humans have about 5% Neanderthal DNA. SS Africans don't.


Again, they are in non-coding portions. They aren't expressed at the molecular level.

Define for me discretely what the effect of this DNA is on the populations that do have that DNA.
Posted by RazorbackLaw501
Member since May 2012
966 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 10:04 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/4/23 at 10:29 pm
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
64333 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 10:05 pm to
quote:

Many believe that. 


Like who?
These guys

Apparently, the rate of Neanderthal brain growth was originally overestimated and now is believed to be as slow as humans, which they say increases the peak learning potential. With that in mind, and considering the larger brain, they think it's very possible they were smarter.
quote:

Like what?
this, for example
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
64333 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 10:06 pm to
quote:

Again, they are in non-coding portions. They aren't expressed at the molecular level.

You're not a fricking geneticist. Suck dicks.
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
39520 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 10:11 pm to
quote:

You're not a fricking geneticist. Suck dicks.


Lol bitch I have a MD/Ph.D. Population genetics is definitely my purview. And I remain right. There isn't a specific 'gene' that was exclusive to Neanderthals that has entered into the human genome. Again, the portions of the human genome that show evidence of admixture between the two population sets includes only non-coding portions.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
64333 posts
Posted on 6/4/23 at 10:14 pm to
Okay, I'll trust you instead of all those other guys.
Jump to page
Page First 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 10Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram