If you are really asking this question with sincerity I will respond without getting offended and the usual language that would entail. If you look at it scientifically and there was a possibility of 'interbreeding' then no, Black Africans would not be decendents becasue Neaderthals actually originated in the north. They have bigger noses and wider nostrails to withstand the colder weather and broader physical structure in order to withstand the elements. Homo Sapiens are not portrayed to look more like Europeans...the narrow nose, and thinner lips are so reletive to the other 'Homo' species like Homo Erectus...who was the first one to walk "erect" out of Africa. As far as skin tone, there is no evidence to suggest that Homo Sapiens had any particualr skin tone to begin with...skin does not preserve as well as bone and you would not be able to tell what color a deteriorated skin originally was. What they can tell from bone structure can tell a lot about how these beings walked,survived and even ate, but it will never conclude race. Even today forensics only guesses and suggests when they find buried bones in criminal cases. So to answer your question if anyone would be a decendent of the Neandertals interbreeding it would be the Europeans just by their origins in the north...it is pretty unlikely that Neandertal traveled down to Africa to breed and move back up north in order to die. There has been no evidence of Neanderthal in Africa. Thanks for your question and curiosity, you gave me a chance to use my degree in Anthropology;)
2007-05-07 06:38:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rasta 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
Neanderthal DNA has been partially sequenced, and it is believed that it does not contribute to our gene pool. If Neanderthals and Homo sapiens sapiens did interbreed, then it would suggest that either pregnancy did not occur, or the offspring were sterile, like mules in horses and donkeys. In the 100,000 years between the first and second migrations out of Africa, it seems that the genetic make up of the Neanderthals drifted away from that of other Homo sapiens, so that we eventually became separate species, of which only one survived. Neanderthals became extinct about 50,000 years ago.
We are all descended from Africans, regardless of how we look. This has been understood by scientists for many years now. Neanderthals would have been lighter in skin colour, due to the colder climate of Europe. If anything, darker skin would have come from the Homo sapiens sapiens.
2007-05-07 00:31:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by Labsci 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Homo sapien and Neandertal interbreeding is still under debate. While they lived in the same area, we are still unsure what the relationship was. Even if the two species interbreed, there is much doubt that the offspring would be able to reproduce (like the horse and donkey make a mule but 2 mules cant make a mule).
Black Africans are Homo sapien sapien, there is not much difference between them and any other race. a species is different by more than skin color and hair type.
2007-05-06 16:07:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Vada Grace's Mommy 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Homo neanderthalis, like homo sapien, was just a branch off of homo
erectus. There were other homo erectus spin-offs, such as 'peking man'
in asia, and a neanderthal-like species in africa. Such advanced homo
erectus derivatives were all over the world. Neanderthals have no special
significance.
Homo erectuses and their non-homo-sapien spin-offs are characterized
by large brow ridges, a low sloping forehead, jutting teeth and jaw
(facial prognathism), lack of a nosebridge (nasion depression), large
cheek and jaw bones, and low intelligence.
Skin color, lip thickness, and nasal index are unrelated to how advanced
a human race is. Those traits are climatic adaptations.
Negroids, on the whole, have more facial prognathism, less nosebridge,
and lower intelligence. There is a particular subrace among the negroids,
called the 'paleonegros', who have the most prominent primitive traits
among the negroids. There is also a subrace among the asians called the
'paleomongols' who have such traits (paleomongols are common in the
regions with a high distribution of y-haplogroup C, namely southeast asia,
mongolia, and north of mongolia). The australoids also have such primitive
traits. The australoids, like the paleomongols, largely belong to
y-haplogroup C. Amerindians are also partially descended from australoids
(as evidenced both by phenotype and the presence of y-haplogoup C).
The australoids have some of the lowest IQs in the world, at an average
of 62, and paleomongols have much lower IQ than the nearby east asians
(87 vs. 105). There are also some caucasoids that have primitive traits.
The haplogroup maps show that caucasoids have substantial ancestry from
the australoids. Some siberians and amerindians, and to a lesser extent
some europeans, show phenotypic resemblance to peking man (an asian
homo erectus spin-off), indicating that peking man constitutes part of the
modern DNA. Peking man has very large cheek and jaw bones. There was
also a study in the journal PLoS genetics, that showed that 5% of the DNA
of the average european is of non-homo-sapien origin. Similar tests were not
done on members of the other regional human subspecies. Thus, there is
proof that primitive physical traits are correlated to low IQ, meaning that
some humans have more primitive DNA than others.
These are the kind of verifiable scientific details that the leftists just love
to suppress. I think and hope that this informative answer will piss some of
them off.
By the way, I am only motivated by curiosity. I do not care about about any
peoples' desires to seek supremacy of one race over another or to segregate
one race from another race, based upon such traits. I just hate it when people
try to interfere with science for political reasons, like the way that The Ry-Guy
(a leftist) habitually does. Of course, the racial supremacists often do the same
thing, and my bet is that 'submariner' is one of them.
2007-05-07 01:22:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
That is a conclusion not supported by any evidence of which I am aware.
Telling skin color, hair color (or texture), and lip thickness from skeletal features is not possible with any amount of repeatable accuracy. Those kinds of features are very likely interpretations of whoever had input into drawings or models of Neaderthals.
This, if you think about it, makes your question an interestingly circuitous one.
2007-05-06 13:28:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by The Ry-Guy 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
No; it is not.
Neanderthals were a northern climate species, probably with skin the same color as ours. There is (as of now) no evidence they ventured to Africa at all.
You should rent the Discover Channel's special "The Real Eve." It will answer a lot of your questions.
2007-05-07 04:04:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I was not aware that Neaderthal and modern humans interbred and I thought I read that it was proven that it didn't happen.
Also, it seems that neanderthal man developed north of the African continent.
2007-05-06 08:32:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Very good question and I've pondered this myself once.
I read in a book once that had something about this in it, in this story line the authors opinion on the matter is they did breed and neaderthals eventually died out due to being unwilling to learn and adapt to their surroundings. I'm interested to see what science digs up on the matter one day.
2007-05-06 21:37:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Just keep breathin' 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Bigfoot
2007-05-06 17:28:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Since humans evolved in Africa, and to date there is no proof the two species interbred, there's your answer.
2007-05-06 08:53:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋