So much for the earth being 6000 years old.

LOL they did not find homo Sapien DNA in the Neandertal samples but vice versa and the samples are never mixed. You just deny all science in favor of your preacher and his bible. That said you are so totally uninformed that all you can do is babble. Learn what DNA mapping is, and trust me you didn't learn this in sunday school
The fact that Neanderthals have no modern human DNA is a bigger problem than most secularists realize. What that means is that if Neanderthals and modern humans did interbreed, then it was only Neanderthal women mating with modern human men, and no modern human women mated with Neanderthal men, a scenario that strains credibility.

'Simply did not work': Mating between Neanderthals and modern humans may have been a product of failed alliances, says archaeologist Ludovic Slimak | Live Science 2-7-24

'Simply did not work': Mating between Neanderthals and modern humans may have been a product of failed alliances, says archaeologist Ludovic Slimak

By Tia Ghose

published about 17 hours ago

"When two populations are close to one another but they are very distinct — maybe they can have a different language and different traditions, they are in neighboring territories — they are going to exchange their women."

A man looks at a Neanderthal women in these two reconstructions. (Image credit: mauritius images GmbH / Alamy Stock Photo)

Since the late 1800s, we've known that other types of humans once roamed our planet. At that time, scientists recognized that fossils unearthed in caves across Europe belonged to archaic humans now known as Neanderthals. Over that time, our understanding of Neanderthals has undergone dramatic upheavals. ...

Ludovic Slimak, an explorer and archaeologist at the Centre for Anthropobiology and Genomics of Toulouse in France, has been fascinated by archaeology since he was 5 and has spent more than 30 years hunting for our closest human relatives in caves on nearly every continent. He spoke with Live Science about his new book, "The Naked Neanderthal: A New Understanding of the Human Creature" (Pegasus Books, 2024), about why Neanderthals are not simply another version of Homo sapiens, what their mating with modern humans tells us about our first and last encounters with them, and what they reveal about our own human nature.

Editor's note: This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Tia Ghose: How did you first become interested in Neanderthals?

Ludovic Slimak: I must have been maybe 18 years old. So very, very early, I spent a lot of time tracking this kind of human. I wrote my first book, "Naked Neanderthal," after more than 30 years of quest for those creatures.

[There's a] certain perception of a Neanderthal like a beast, or since 20 to 40 years [ago] in Europe, we have another perception of Neanderthals like another "ourselves." And I think, after working so many times on millions of Neanderthal tools, searching for them in caves everywhere, I think that all that was just wrong.

The important thing about this book is that, with my very precise knowledge of these populations, I use Neanderthals to try to understand what we are — us, sapiens on Earth. By defining "What is a Neanderthal?" in fact, I created this mirror that allows us to talk about us, and to define us and to understand what we are and where eventually we are going.

TG: The image of the Neanderthal when I was growing up was subhuman on some level. But in recent years, we've learned that Neanderthals and humans mated at multiple points. Not only did they mate, but obviously those offspring went on to have children such that our DNA has their DNA in it. How do you think that's changed our understanding of who they were? Or does it?

LS: We use the fact that — look, all sapiens today, to different degrees, we all have a certain degree of Neanderthal DNA — and [use it to say], "OK, so they did not disappear. We all came together, and we created a new humanity."

And, in fact, that's not what it's saying, the DNA, at all. When you are searching for ancient DNA [from 40,000 to 45,000 years ago] … all these early sapiens have recent Neanderthal DNA, and that's why we have [Neanderthal DNA] today. But when you reach and you try to extract DNA from the last Neanderthals, contemporaries of these early sapiens — let's say between 40,000 and 50,000 years ago — there's not a single Neanderthal with sapiens DNA. [Editor's Note: except a newly studied 122,000-year-old Neanderthal from Siberia].

Related: Are Neanderthals and Homo sapiens the same species?

And this is something incredibly important in terms of cultural anthropology, because the exchange of genes is never a love affair. In every traditional society, it's the question of the identities we are going to build between two groups, and that's what we call patrilocality.

When two populations are close to one another but they are very distinct — maybe they can have a different language and different traditions, they are in neighboring territories — they are going to exchange their women. That means that the women have the mobility; that means that my sister will go into your group …

TG: They come to a place to marry and have kids, right?

LS: … But if we do that, your sister will come into my group, and with that, we will become brothers, and we will come all together and become one larger and more powerful group. That's something universal in anthropology.

And we know also by DNA that this question of patrilocality, the mobility of women, was also the same thing for Neanderthals.

But when we see what happened at the moment of the contact, we see that all sapiens have Neanderthal DNA, and there's not a single Neanderthal with sapiens DNA.This is a major issue to understand the extinction and the precise interaction between the two populations.

Your sister, your Neanderthal sister, will come with me among my sapiens group, but my sister won't come with you. It's very rare, but it happens when there's a total war between two populations. And in that case, you consider that the other group are the transgressors of certain taboos and they are no longer humans. You will kill everybody, but you will keep the children, the women with you.

I don't say that there was genocide at all here between sapiens and Neanderthals. That could have happened in certain regions, but I don't think that's the process of extinction of Neanderthals.

What could have happened? I think that, OK, they have exchanged their sisters. But the genetic differences between the two populations were so important that then they must have tried and it did not work. And we know by DNA that when these two populations met together and they had children — and these children, if they were male, they were sterile or they couldn't survive. And so I think that the population tried a lot to exchange and to have alliances between the populations, and that simply did not work.

TG: So are you saying that all of the mating would have been between Neanderthal women going to Homo sapiens' communities, having female children, and then those are the only children who passed on their genes?

LS: It's very likely that we have a process that must work like that. But we also, of course, must keep in mind that our understanding, the value of ancient DNA, is very partial.
 
Werbung:
The fact that Neanderthals have no modern human DNA is a bigger problem than most secularists realize. What that means is that if Neanderthals and modern humans did interbreed, then it was only Neanderthal women mating with modern human men, and no modern human women mated with Neanderthal men, a scenario that strains credibility.

'Simply did not work': Mating between Neanderthals and modern humans may have been a product of failed alliances, says archaeologist Ludovic Slimak | Live Science 2-7-24

'Simply did not work': Mating between Neanderthals and modern humans may have been a product of failed alliances, says archaeologist Ludovic Slimak

By Tia Ghose

published about 17 hours ago

"When two populations are close to one another but they are very distinct — maybe they can have a different language and different traditions, they are in neighboring territories — they are going to exchange their women."

A man looks at a Neanderthal women in these two reconstructions. (Image credit: mauritius images GmbH / Alamy Stock Photo)

Since the late 1800s, we've known that other types of humans once roamed our planet. At that time, scientists recognized that fossils unearthed in caves across Europe belonged to archaic humans now known as Neanderthals. Over that time, our understanding of Neanderthals has undergone dramatic upheavals. ...

Ludovic Slimak, an explorer and archaeologist at the Centre for Anthropobiology and Genomics of Toulouse in France, has been fascinated by archaeology since he was 5 and has spent more than 30 years hunting for our closest human relatives in caves on nearly every continent. He spoke with Live Science about his new book, "The Naked Neanderthal: A New Understanding of the Human Creature" (Pegasus Books, 2024), about why Neanderthals are not simply another version of Homo sapiens, what their mating with modern humans tells us about our first and last encounters with them, and what they reveal about our own human nature.

Editor's note: This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Tia Ghose: How did you first become interested in Neanderthals?

Ludovic Slimak: I must have been maybe 18 years old. So very, very early, I spent a lot of time tracking this kind of human. I wrote my first book, "Naked Neanderthal," after more than 30 years of quest for those creatures.

[There's a] certain perception of a Neanderthal like a beast, or since 20 to 40 years [ago] in Europe, we have another perception of Neanderthals like another "ourselves." And I think, after working so many times on millions of Neanderthal tools, searching for them in caves everywhere, I think that all that was just wrong.

The important thing about this book is that, with my very precise knowledge of these populations, I use Neanderthals to try to understand what we are — us, sapiens on Earth. By defining "What is a Neanderthal?" in fact, I created this mirror that allows us to talk about us, and to define us and to understand what we are and where eventually we are going.

TG: The image of the Neanderthal when I was growing up was subhuman on some level. But in recent years, we've learned that Neanderthals and humans mated at multiple points. Not only did they mate, but obviously those offspring went on to have children such that our DNA has their DNA in it. How do you think that's changed our understanding of who they were? Or does it?

LS: We use the fact that — look, all sapiens today, to different degrees, we all have a certain degree of Neanderthal DNA — and [use it to say], "OK, so they did not disappear. We all came together, and we created a new humanity."

And, in fact, that's not what it's saying, the DNA, at all. When you are searching for ancient DNA [from 40,000 to 45,000 years ago] … all these early sapiens have recent Neanderthal DNA, and that's why we have [Neanderthal DNA] today. But when you reach and you try to extract DNA from the last Neanderthals, contemporaries of these early sapiens — let's say between 40,000 and 50,000 years ago — there's not a single Neanderthal with sapiens DNA. [Editor's Note: except a newly studied 122,000-year-old Neanderthal from Siberia].

Related: Are Neanderthals and Homo sapiens the same species?

And this is something incredibly important in terms of cultural anthropology, because the exchange of genes is never a love affair. In every traditional society, it's the question of the identities we are going to build between two groups, and that's what we call patrilocality.

When two populations are close to one another but they are very distinct — maybe they can have a different language and different traditions, they are in neighboring territories — they are going to exchange their women. That means that the women have the mobility; that means that my sister will go into your group …

TG: They come to a place to marry and have kids, right?

LS: … But if we do that, your sister will come into my group, and with that, we will become brothers, and we will come all together and become one larger and more powerful group. That's something universal in anthropology.

And we know also by DNA that this question of patrilocality, the mobility of women, was also the same thing for Neanderthals.

But when we see what happened at the moment of the contact, we see that all sapiens have Neanderthal DNA, and there's not a single Neanderthal with sapiens DNA.This is a major issue to understand the extinction and the precise interaction between the two populations.

Your sister, your Neanderthal sister, will come with me among my sapiens group, but my sister won't come with you. It's very rare, but it happens when there's a total war between two populations. And in that case, you consider that the other group are the transgressors of certain taboos and they are no longer humans. You will kill everybody, but you will keep the children, the women with you.

I don't say that there was genocide at all here between sapiens and Neanderthals. That could have happened in certain regions, but I don't think that's the process of extinction of Neanderthals.

What could have happened? I think that, OK, they have exchanged their sisters. But the genetic differences between the two populations were so important that then they must have tried and it did not work. And we know by DNA that when these two populations met together and they had children — and these children, if they were male, they were sterile or they couldn't survive. And so I think that the population tried a lot to exchange and to have alliances between the populations, and that simply did not work.

TG: So are you saying that all of the mating would have been between Neanderthal women going to Homo sapiens' communities, having female children, and then those are the only children who passed on their genes?

LS: It's very likely that we have a process that must work like that. But we also, of course, must keep in mind that our understanding, the value of ancient DNA, is very partial.
You are retarded because only very few sources of Neandertal DNA have been gene sequenced, and billions of humans have Neandertal DNA. Besides Neandertals are extinct, but you can't do the math here so you are literally looking at the equation backwards like a dyslexic

That said you are still wrong because they did find human DNA in a Neandertal

For many years, the only evidence of human-Neanderthal hybridization existed within modern human genes. However, in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa (Kuhlwilm et al., 2016). Their findings are the first to show human gene flow into the Neanderthal genome as opposed to Neanderthal DNA into the human genome. These data tells us that not only were human-Neanderthal interbreeding events more frequent than previously thought, but also that an early migration of humans did in fact leave Africa before the population that survived and gave rise to all contemporary non-African modern humans.
 
Wiki is written by any motivated 6 year old, the fact that you quote this shows how uninformed that you are.

Why is Wikipedia not a trustworthy source?


Wikipedia is not a credible source because it allows multiple users to edit, and it is not safe to assume that the facts presented there have been checked before publishing them.

I quoted the Planck institute
You bring up a good question. Why trust any report or reporter? The truth is that those researchers with the best understandings of the subject matter are the ones that have examined all the evidence for better analyses, not just that evidence published by proponents of only one side of multi-faceted subject matters.

Let's look at what ICR said in one report:


Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma | The Institute for Creation Research (icr.org) 12-10-19

NEWS CREATION SCIENCE UPDATE MAN WAS RECENTLY AND MIRACULOUSLY CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD

Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma

BY BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D. * |

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019


Share Email Facebook Twitter Pinterest

How did Neanderthals go extinct? Four researchers from the Netherlands recently published the results of their computer-modeled human populations in the journal PLOS ONE.1 The findings show that small Neanderthal population sizes would have caused them to become extinct in just 10,000 years. How did Neanderthals survive the 400,000 years they were supposedly on Earth? ...

Faced with all this evidence, secularists find it almost impossible to stick with the old story that modern men evolved from Neanderthals. Instead, Neanderthals went extinct while other people groups multiplied (similar to the extinction of cave bears amid the fruitfulness of black, brown, grizzly, polar, and other bear varieties). Modern humans and Neanderthals lived side by side, at least in time. But as a distinct people group, Neanderthals went extinct and nobody knows exactly why.

Whoever wishes to address this problem should admit that science cannot directly solve it without a time machine. Forensic science can only evaluate possibilities. One long-held idea holds that ancient non-Neanderthals warred against them and drove them to extinction. Others suggest cold climates did them in.2 If so, then why did their neighbors survive? Perhaps Neanderthals suffered too much disease.3 With no data to back them, these ideas remain possible but unprovable. ...

Allee effects were just one factor, yet enough to doom Neanderthals in 10,000 years. This led the study authors to ask, “If Neanderthals lived in small populations since ~400 kya [400,000 years ago], why did it take so long for them to become extinct?”1 The weaknesses in the answers they gave suggest that questioning the 400k year-old premise should instead occupy their minds.

Their answers boiled down to hand-waving just-so stories. For example, they wrote, “There is nothing unusual about the persistently small size of Neanderthal populations. Hominin populations likely were small throughout the Pleistocene.”1 Should this ease reader discomfort over the mismatch between their modeled Neanderthals and ancient Neanderthal age assignments? Not at all, because the argument is circular. It says that we expect 400,000 year-old Neanderthals because other small populations lasted for that long, too. What scientist was there to record how long any of those populations lived? ...
Vast ages rest upon a presumed evolutionary past, not observational science. An objective scientist might also ask why the earth has only a few thousand years’ worth of Neanderthal and early human fossil remains instead of hundreds of thousands.4

What other explanation do they offer to explain how Neanderthal populations somehow avoided Allee effects for 400,000 years? They wrote, “Environmental conditions, for instance, might be favorable and alleviate the stress induced by demographic stochasticity [random calamities].”1 What are the odds that world offered no lethal droughts, volcanic explosions, landslides, or diseases for 400,000 supposed years? The key word in this explanation is might. Thinking along these lines, a duck might fly across the Pacific Ocean and back. But probably not.

Especially not when faced with so many obstacles. The PLOS ONE study lists an array of obstacles to small-population survival. Its authors wrote, “So even…when Allee effects are relatively small, random events might lead to extinction.”1 The longer the age assignment, the greater the odds of extinction from random events. The study authors wrote, “But in the very long run, such an unfavorable scenario eventually will take place.”1 400,000 years ought to count as a very long run indeed. Neanderthals would have gone extinct long before their allotted time. ...
 
Do you agree there were Neanderthals and how does that fit with the Bible's estimate of the age of the universe?
Neanderthals themselves prove to be a problem for old earth assumptions. I call your attention to the article I just posted:


Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma | The Institute for Creation Research (icr.org) 12-10-19

NEWS CREATION SCIENCE UPDATE MAN WAS RECENTLY AND MIRACULOUSLY CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD

Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma

BY BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D. * |

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019


Share Email Facebook Twitter Pinterest

How did Neanderthals go extinct? Four researchers from the Netherlands recently published the results of their computer-modeled human populations in the journal PLOS ONE.1 The findings show that small Neanderthal population sizes would have caused them to become extinct in just 10,000 years. How did Neanderthals survive the 400,000 years they were supposedly on Earth? ...

Faced with all this evidence, secularists find it almost impossible to stick with the old story that modern men evolved from Neanderthals. Instead, Neanderthals went extinct while other people groups multiplied (similar to the extinction of cave bears amid the fruitfulness of black, brown, grizzly, polar, and other bear varieties). Modern humans and Neanderthals lived side by side, at least in time. But as a distinct people group, Neanderthals went extinct and nobody knows exactly why.

Whoever wishes to address this problem should admit that science cannot directly solve it without a time machine. Forensic science can only evaluate possibilities. One long-held idea holds that ancient non-Neanderthals warred against them and drove them to extinction. Others suggest cold climates did them in.2 If so, then why did their neighbors survive? Perhaps Neanderthals suffered too much disease.3 With no data to back them, these ideas remain possible but unprovable. ...

Allee effects were just one factor, yet enough to doom Neanderthals in 10,000 years. This led the study authors to ask, “If Neanderthals lived in small populations since ~400 kya [400,000 years ago], why did it take so long for them to become extinct?”1 The weaknesses in the answers they gave suggest that questioning the 400k year-old premise should instead occupy their minds.

Their answers boiled down to hand-waving just-so stories. For example, they wrote, “There is nothing unusual about the persistently small size of Neanderthal populations. Hominin populations likely were small throughout the Pleistocene.”1 Should this ease reader discomfort over the mismatch between their modeled Neanderthals and ancient Neanderthal age assignments? Not at all, because the argument is circular. It says that we expect 400,000 year-old Neanderthals because other small populations lasted for that long, too. What scientist was there to record how long any of those populations lived? ...
Vast ages rest upon a presumed evolutionary past, not observational science. An objective scientist might also ask why the earth has only a few thousand years’ worth of Neanderthal and early human fossil remains instead of hundreds of thousands.4

What other explanation do they offer to explain how Neanderthal populations somehow avoided Allee effects for 400,000 years? They wrote, “Environmental conditions, for instance, might be favorable and alleviate the stress induced by demographic stochasticity [random calamities].”1 What are the odds that world offered no lethal droughts, volcanic explosions, landslides, or diseases for 400,000 supposed years? The key word in this explanation is might. Thinking along these lines, a duck might fly across the Pacific Ocean and back. But probably not.

Especially not when faced with so many obstacles. The PLOS ONE study lists an array of obstacles to small-population survival. Its authors wrote, “So even…when Allee effects are relatively small, random events might lead to extinction.”1 The longer the age assignment, the greater the odds of extinction from random events. The study authors wrote, “But in the very long run, such an unfavorable scenario eventually will take place.”1 400,000 years ought to count as a very long run indeed. Neanderthals would have gone extinct long before their allotted time. ...
 
You bring up a good question. Why trust any report or reporter? The truth is that those researchers with the best understandings of the subject matter are the ones that have examined all the evidence for better analyses, not just that evidence published by proponents of only one side of multi-faceted subject matters.

Let's look at what ICR said in one report:


Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma | The Institute for Creation Research (icr.org) 12-10-19

NEWS CREATION SCIENCE UPDATE MAN WAS RECENTLY AND MIRACULOUSLY CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD

Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma

BY BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D. * |

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019


Share Email Facebook Twitter Pinterest

How did Neanderthals go extinct? Four researchers from the Netherlands recently published the results of their computer-modeled human populations in the journal PLOS ONE.1 The findings show that small Neanderthal population sizes would have caused them to become extinct in just 10,000 years. How did Neanderthals survive the 400,000 years they were supposedly on Earth? ...

Faced with all this evidence, secularists find it almost impossible to stick with the old story that modern men evolved from Neanderthals. Instead, Neanderthals went extinct while other people groups multiplied (similar to the extinction of cave bears amid the fruitfulness of black, brown, grizzly, polar, and other bear varieties). Modern humans and Neanderthals lived side by side, at least in time. But as a distinct people group, Neanderthals went extinct and nobody knows exactly why.

Whoever wishes to address this problem should admit that science cannot directly solve it without a time machine. Forensic science can only evaluate possibilities. One long-held idea holds that ancient non-Neanderthals warred against them and drove them to extinction. Others suggest cold climates did them in.2 If so, then why did their neighbors survive? Perhaps Neanderthals suffered too much disease.3 With no data to back them, these ideas remain possible but unprovable. ...

Allee effects were just one factor, yet enough to doom Neanderthals in 10,000 years. This led the study authors to ask, “If Neanderthals lived in small populations since ~400 kya [400,000 years ago], why did it take so long for them to become extinct?”1 The weaknesses in the answers they gave suggest that questioning the 400k year-old premise should instead occupy their minds.

Their answers boiled down to hand-waving just-so stories. For example, they wrote, “There is nothing unusual about the persistently small size of Neanderthal populations. Hominin populations likely were small throughout the Pleistocene.”1 Should this ease reader discomfort over the mismatch between their modeled Neanderthals and ancient Neanderthal age assignments? Not at all, because the argument is circular. It says that we expect 400,000 year-old Neanderthals because other small populations lasted for that long, too. What scientist was there to record how long any of those populations lived? ...
Vast ages rest upon a presumed evolutionary past, not observational science. An objective scientist might also ask why the earth has only a few thousand years’ worth of Neanderthal and early human fossil remains instead of hundreds of thousands.4

What other explanation do they offer to explain how Neanderthal populations somehow avoided Allee effects for 400,000 years? They wrote, “Environmental conditions, for instance, might be favorable and alleviate the stress induced by demographic stochasticity [random calamities].”1 What are the odds that world offered no lethal droughts, volcanic explosions, landslides, or diseases for 400,000 supposed years? The key word in this explanation is might. Thinking along these lines, a duck might fly across the Pacific Ocean and back. But probably not.

Especially not when faced with so many obstacles. The PLOS ONE study lists an array of obstacles to small-population survival. Its authors wrote, “So even…when Allee effects are relatively small, random events might lead to extinction.”1 The longer the age assignment, the greater the odds of extinction from random events. The study authors wrote, “But in the very long run, such an unfavorable scenario eventually will take place.”1 400,000 years ought to count as a very long run indeed. Neanderthals would have gone extinct long before their allotted time. ...
Hug your bible retard

For many years, the only evidence of human-Neanderthal hybridization existed within modern human genes. However, in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa (Kuhlwilm et al., 2016). Their findings are the first to show human gene flow into the Neanderthal genome as opposed to Neanderthal DNA into the human genome. These data tells us that not only were human-Neanderthal interbreeding events more frequent than previously thought, but also that an early migration of humans did in fact leave Africa before the population that survived and gave rise to all contemporary non-African modern humans.
 
You are retarded because only very few sources of Neandertal DNA have been gene sequenced, and billions of humans have Neandertal DNA. Besides Neandertals are extinct, but you can't do the math here so you are literally looking at the equation backwards like a dyslexic

That said you are still wrong because they did find human DNA in a Neandertal

For many years, the only evidence of human-Neanderthal hybridization existed within modern human genes. However, in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa (Kuhlwilm et al., 2016). Their findings are the first to show human gene flow into the Neanderthal genome as opposed to Neanderthal DNA into the human genome. These data tells us that not only were human-Neanderthal interbreeding events more frequent than previously thought, but also that an early migration of humans did in fact leave Africa before the population that survived and gave rise to all contemporary non-African modern humans.
That contradicts what other researchers have reported, and I welcome any further corroboration of that evidence, but until I see more, I cannot accept what is reported just because of the credentials of those who reported it. Nobody should blindly accept contradicting reports from anyone until the contradictions can be resolved. Peer review can only be blindly trusted if we could also blindly trust that the reviewers have flawless judgment and make no mistakes.



Major Scientific Publisher Retracts More Than 500 Papers (theepochtimes.com) 10-1-22

Major Scientific Publisher Retracts More Than 500 Papers

By Zachary Stieber

October 1, 2022 Updated: October 2, 2022

One of the world’s largest open-access journal publishers is retracting more than 500 papers, based on the discovery of unethical actions.
 
That contradicts what other researchers have reported, and I welcome any further corroboration of that evidence, but until I see more, I cannot accept what is reported just because of the credentials of those who reported it. Nobody should blindly accept contradicting reports from anyone until the contradictions can be resolved. Peer review can only be blindly trusted if we could also blindly trust that the reviewers have flawless judgment and make no mistakes.



Major Scientific Publisher Retracts More Than 500 Papers (theepochtimes.com) 10-1-22

Major Scientific Publisher Retracts More Than 500 Papers

By Zachary Stieber

October 1, 2022 Updated: October 2, 2022

One of the world’s largest open-access journal publishers is retracting more than 500 papers, based on the discovery of unethical actions.
There is no mention in the bible of the Earth being 6000 years old, and the bible is not the word of God, it is the words of the men who wrote it as if it were really Gods word there would be only one edition not over 3000. So I guess God was too dumb to actually write huh? But you can point to the page that says the Earth is 6000 years old, then show us the chick that God turned to salt because it says so in the bible. The sad thing is that I do believe in God, but not in retarded creationist.

So you visit the ark yet?


Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Then again since this is a psychop nothing really matters, but I find dumb people like you refreshing because you believe that you are trying to best me.
 
Hug your bible retard

For many years, the only evidence of human-Neanderthal hybridization existed within modern human genes. However, in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa (Kuhlwilm et al., 2016). Their findings are the first to show human gene flow into the Neanderthal genome as opposed to Neanderthal DNA into the human genome. These data tells us that not only were human-Neanderthal interbreeding events more frequent than previously thought, but also that an early migration of humans did in fact leave Africa before the population that survived and gave rise to all contemporary non-African modern humans.
The question not answered by this report is whether they found any evidence in Neanderthals of the modern human Y-chromosome. In earlier reports the researchers claimed there was no evidence of modern human Y-chromosomes in Neanderthal remains.
 
There is no mention in the bible of the Earth being 6000 years old, and the bible is not the word of God, it is the words of the men who wrote it as if it were really Gods word there would be only one edition not over 3000. So I guess God was too dumb to actually write huh? But you can point to the page that says the Earth is 6000 years old, then show us the chick that God turned to salt because it says so in the bible. The sad thing is that I do believe in God, but not in retarded creationist.

So you visit the ark yet?


Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
I don't agree with your opinions about the Bible.
 
The question not answered by this report is whether they found any evidence in Neanderthals of the modern human Y-chromosome. In earlier reports the researchers claimed there was no evidence of modern human Y-chromosomes in Neanderthal remains.
You are just too much of a deadhead to admit that you just totally lost the argument

I never lose, sorry but that is just the way it is

in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa
 
You are just too much of a deadhead to admit that you just totally lost the argument

I never lose, sorry but that is just the way it is

in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa
How is it that Neanderthals supposedly got modern human DNA without ever having gotten modern human Y-chromosomes?
 
How is it that Neanderthals supposedly got modern human DNA without ever having gotten modern human Y-chromosomes?
How is it that you babble that the bible says that the Earth is 6000 years old, but can't point to where it says that.

How is it that you ask questions about the Neandertals that you said never existed because the Earth did not exist yet?

Oh yea, I forgot, you are a government special ed agent
 
Neanderthals themselves prove to be a problem for old earth assumptions. I call your attention to the article I just posted:


Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma | The Institute for Creation Research (icr.org) 12-10-19

NEWS CREATION SCIENCE UPDATE MAN WAS RECENTLY AND MIRACULOUSLY CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD

Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma

BY BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D. * |

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019


Share Email Facebook Twitter Pinterest

How did Neanderthals go extinct? Four researchers from the Netherlands recently published the results of their computer-modeled human populations in the journal PLOS ONE.1 The findings show that small Neanderthal population sizes would have caused them to become extinct in just 10,000 years. How did Neanderthals survive the 400,000 years they were supposedly on Earth? ...

Faced with all this evidence, secularists find it almost impossible to stick with the old story that modern men evolved from Neanderthals. Instead, Neanderthals went extinct while other people groups multiplied (similar to the extinction of cave bears amid the fruitfulness of black, brown, grizzly, polar, and other bear varieties). Modern humans and Neanderthals lived side by side, at least in time. But as a distinct people group, Neanderthals went extinct and nobody knows exactly why.

Whoever wishes to address this problem should admit that science cannot directly solve it without a time machine. Forensic science can only evaluate possibilities. One long-held idea holds that ancient non-Neanderthals warred against them and drove them to extinction. Others suggest cold climates did them in.2 If so, then why did their neighbors survive? Perhaps Neanderthals suffered too much disease.3 With no data to back them, these ideas remain possible but unprovable. ...

Allee effects were just one factor, yet enough to doom Neanderthals in 10,000 years. This led the study authors to ask, “If Neanderthals lived in small populations since ~400 kya [400,000 years ago], why did it take so long for them to become extinct?”1 The weaknesses in the answers they gave suggest that questioning the 400k year-old premise should instead occupy their minds.

Their answers boiled down to hand-waving just-so stories. For example, they wrote, “There is nothing unusual about the persistently small size of Neanderthal populations. Hominin populations likely were small throughout the Pleistocene.”1 Should this ease reader discomfort over the mismatch between their modeled Neanderthals and ancient Neanderthal age assignments? Not at all, because the argument is circular. It says that we expect 400,000 year-old Neanderthals because other small populations lasted for that long, too. What scientist was there to record how long any of those populations lived? ...
Vast ages rest upon a presumed evolutionary past, not observational science. An objective scientist might also ask why the earth has only a few thousand years’ worth of Neanderthal and early human fossil remains instead of hundreds of thousands.4

What other explanation do they offer to explain how Neanderthal populations somehow avoided Allee effects for 400,000 years? They wrote, “Environmental conditions, for instance, might be favorable and alleviate the stress induced by demographic stochasticity [random calamities].”1 What are the odds that world offered no lethal droughts, volcanic explosions, landslides, or diseases for 400,000 supposed years? The key word in this explanation is might. Thinking along these lines, a duck might fly across the Pacific Ocean and back. But probably not.

Especially not when faced with so many obstacles. The PLOS ONE study lists an array of obstacles to small-population survival. Its authors wrote, “So even…when Allee effects are relatively small, random events might lead to extinction.”1 The longer the age assignment, the greater the odds of extinction from random events. The study authors wrote, “But in the very long run, such an unfavorable scenario eventually will take place.”1 400,000 years ought to count as a very long run indeed. Neanderthals would have gone extinct long before their allotted time. ...
I haven't disputed they went extinct. We are talking about the age of the earth and your Bible suggesting it's 6000 years old.

Creation science??? That's an oxymoron.
Epoch Times? The godbotherers guide to religion.
 
Werbung:
Old god seemed to have got his dates wrong.


It's a fact that humans and neanderthals existed together. It's a fact that humans and neanderthals co mingled and reproduced together.

Carbon dating has proved that the earth and life on it has existed for millions of years.

There is no logical or honest dispute about that.
 
Back
Top