At least part of the answer has to do with people not using words carefully. For example you may have heard that you share 50% of your genes with siblings, but it is actually closer to 95%. Why? because you share about 90% of your genes with all humans and of the remaining 10% you would share 50% of that with a sibling.
Well shit. I just read up on how interbreeding was highly unlikely... I hope that somehow there was a problem in the sequencing of the genome, or... human error or something.. But until then, the evidence is overwhelming... and given my family ancestry, as well as unreasonable alergic reactions, it's very well possible that I am part Neanderthal. The difference between skull sizes of anatomically modern homosapien and neanderthal. Shown to give good contrast between the two species. I would like to add however, that there is no defined genetic superiority between humans. It is simply culture and individual merits that define how we evolve in our lifetime. Now compare to a chimpanzee skull.
I have to agree with you there Skip, the species barrier is about the genetic tolerance of reproduction. From what I have read, humans and neanderthals lived peacefully together. Many would say that although the neanderthals were not subjects to the "humans" of the time - because of their athletic prowess - they were surpassed by technology, culture and production, primitive though it was. This could mean that they were also surpassed genetically. I always imagine neaderthals like a pet that you could have around that was also human, something like that. Interesting that somebody mentioned canines, they have always fascinated me in their diversity. Most other creatures do not really vary that much, if you think of humans or horses cats or fish... but the dog can reproduce between a great dane and a chihuahua... If a cotoye can breed with a chihuahua, it's just another dog to me. It's like humans, a tall white blond Scandinavian can reproduce with a tiny black Pygmy, Shaqquile O'neil can reproduce with his wife, they're all the same species. It is perhaps a valid point that the number of species on this planet is not as high as we first thought it was. From bats to beetles across many species we have observed and corrected our prior assumptions already. So this same process may have to be applied to our evolution to make it all fit, or at least the part about the neaderthals.0 Did you know that you're only 33% human (somewhere aruond there)!! You're only comprised of 33% human cells, the rest is material and bacteria and elements that you are living in symbiosis with! We are bacteria using tools. We are bacteria technology. Our stomachs are the nuclear power plants, our hearts and bloodways the irrigation systems, our brains the supercomputer. Such marvellous beings we are! And yet every sentient species exists in this way, to some point or another.
Ok, thanks for answering that. I've asked that sort of question before and been mocked (not here) but never got any answers. I am glad the answer is so simple. For that to work I'm assuming that it's more like 99% than 90%, as I've seen multiple claims of chimpanzees sharing as high as 98% of our genes. Interesting comparison on the skulls. I think that we could draw comparisons, but not quite as dramatic, in modern humans that could lead a bone studier (huh huh) in the future possibly making the assumption that there are two species in front of him. That is, if he has the mindset of the people in the past who looked at the bones.
So, much for science. King James Version (KJV) Genesis 6 1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. - - Luckily, my ancestors didn't do that. My ancestors, the sons of God came in unto the daughters of God Babes, only. So, I'm a pure blood. LOL My Deoxyribonucleic acid is all cool and all.
for those who are interested in genetics, i have found these links to be a starting point: http://www.genealogywise.com/group/isogg http://www.familytreedna.com/general-papers.aspx we are all far more alike than different. just observing behaviour will reveal that...goddam tribes...STILL. one might well ask 'evolution? what evolution?'. too slow for us to see.
I think its interesting that despite the evidence that skull/body shape/configuration has little to do with genetic compatibility, not just dogs as mentioned, but also look at the variations across goats, chickens, cows and so on. If you were to use the same logic applied to the idea that because humans look different (different skulls and such), they must be a different species to animals, you would quickly see its false. Something else that I think should be pointed out.... The neanderthals, throughout their entire history (300,000 years) did less damage to the planet then we have in the last 200 years.
This is quite true, but I think it would be a mistake either to assume that neanderthals lived in harmony with the environment or that they would not have caused more damage if they had better technology. At the very least I'm willing to bet they hunted a few species out of existence.
I reckon that the Star travellers had and have a part in it also. I also think that there are some that know = "Too many secrets" Still, would the every day joe really care? hmm
The whole "we share 99% of our genes with a worm" way of thinking is gone now. Why? Cause one day scientists realized that connected to our DNA are strips of RNA, and if you include those, which seem to have some latent effect on our genetics, then you come up with a much lower percentage of shared genetic material. I think the % of shared genes has decreased like 30% now. Maybe someone can look it up and post it.