Well that is a bit like proposing Adam and Eve were the common ancestor, which of course some do.

But back to the topic at hand, I don't believe it would be correct to assume all the other homo species, or the ‘locals’ I call them, were identical. Species aren't identical in animal variants when geographically spread out, you only have to look at the Galápagos Islands to know this, so why would they be identical for all the pre sapiens homo communities? If they cross mated with sapiens then there would be multiregional variance.

I’m not stating they did successfully reproduce, that is well beyond my pay grade, but some scientists seem to be suggesting it happened so I keep an open mind on that possibility for now.

Those Neanderthals put the cat amongst the pigeons. Are they, um, sub species, races, varieties. They certainly make the out of Africa idea up for debate.

Hardly, pink.
It merely means that some Punjabis might have a trace of Caveman DNA, while the vast majority of their DNA has been from our recent common African ancestor.

Even so, a trace may have great consequences. Obviously it isn't the vast majority of similar DNA to chimps that makes us what we are. It's something else lurking in that 2% or so.

Might it indeed, pink?
How much Caveman blood do Punjabis have, as a percentage?

pinkharrier wrote:Those Neanderthals put the cat amongst the pigeons. Are they, um, sub species, races, varieties. They certainly make the out of Africa idea up for debate.

To me it is more a case of after Africa as we know we came from there, and they came from there a long time before us.

Whatever the ramifications are it would be miniscule even more so now the expansionism of Empires have truly mixed up the gene pool. But it might say why the Chinese have that particular skin colour and eye shape, which was just a good design passed on by the prior inhabitants. Or it might mean nothing at all as whatever traits were pasted on weren’t dominate and phased out over a few generations. But that is the physical, the cultural advances might be a whole different ball game, and we might have learned the god delusion from Neanderthals or how to build boats?

Funny about how much caveman (read Neanderthal) in the Punjab (read Caucasian). Apparently about 4%.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... -dna-gene/

Apparently missing from Negroids.

The significance is not clear.

rainbow wrote:Multi-Regionalism is the pseudo-science behind Racist Theories.

Whatever you've been smokin' Rainbow, I don't want it.
Multiregionalism is a fact of human evolution. All your ranting won't change that. It might obscure the science for some, for a while, but the truth has a nasty habit of re-emerging.
Multiregionalism simply means that there have been successive waves of emigration to & from Africa, over hundreds of thousands of years.
And as these waves of emigres met the former immigrant population (which had evolved in its own direction), they interbred to some extent, before one or other went extinct.
The mixing of Neanderthals & Cro Magnon had been poo-pooed for many decades. Only brave anthropologists dared whisper it. It has now been established by DNA analysis that some 4% of European & Near East inheritance is Neanderthal. The Chinese don't have that component, so hey presto... we have multiregionalism!
There are skeletal features that are distinct between pure Mongoloids & pure Nordics, such as the position of nerve sinuses on the skull.
Some wombat out there has suggested that different features are just due to climate. Yeah, keep on dreaming

Doesn't the idea of 'waves' of humans migrating make sense?

Bookmarking. I don't have anything to add just yet, I'm interested.

Agrippina wrote:Doesn't the idea of 'waves' of humans migrating make sense?

Certainly.
The Myth is in the idea that "Races" arose in isolated pockets and remained pure right up to recent times. Clearly there have been migrations of people since the beginning. Back and forth.
We are just one big gene pool, us humans.

rainbow wrote:

Agrippina wrote:Doesn't the idea of 'waves' of humans migrating make sense?

Certainly.
The Myth is in the idea that "Races" arose in isolated pockets and remained pure right up to recent times. Clearly there have been migrations of people since the beginning. Back and forth.
We are just one big gene pool, us humans.

True to a point. But races arose not just in isolation, but even next to each other. Examples in many places

Galaxian wrote:

rainbow wrote:

Agrippina wrote:Doesn't the idea of 'waves' of humans migrating make sense?

Certainly.
The Myth is in the idea that "Races" arose in isolated pockets and remained pure right up to recent times. Clearly there have been migrations of people since the beginning. Back and forth.
We are just one big gene pool, us humans.

True to a point. But races arose not just in isolation, but even next to each other. Examples in many places

You are free to Believe in Racist Mythology, of course.

rainbow wrote:

Galaxian wrote:

rainbow wrote:
Certainly.
The Myth is in the idea that "Races" arose in isolated pockets and remained pure right up to recent times. Clearly there have been migrations of people since the beginning. Back and forth.
We are just one big gene pool, us humans.

True to a point. But races arose not just in isolation, but even next to each other. Examples in many places

You are free to Believe in Racist Mythology, of course.

I look forward to when you have a pertinent thing to say. My point was valid. The RACE thread link

Spearthrower wrote:Disagree, as races are a social construct, not a biological one.

Tell a biologist that. Anyway, RACE thread is > http://www.rationalskepticism.org/anthr ... ml#p902891

Spearthrower