Why are whites still considered modern humans, since it's a scientific fact that they are a mixed breed?

Question

All the latest research shows that whites in Europe are a mix of real humans (H. sapiens sapiens) and Neanderthals (H. sapiens neanderthalensis). See for example:

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/814

"In a paper published this week in the U.S. journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a team of European researchers report a "mosaic of modern human and archaic Neanderthal features" in 30,000 -year-old human fossils from Romania.
...
"This new study helps to settle the controversy. According to the researchers, the populations probably blended together through sexual reproduction. "Extinction through absorption is a common phenomenon," says Trinkaus."

Neanderthals lived in Europe and the Middle East, and unlike true humans their hair had more pheomelanin and less eumelanin, meaning they had red or blond hair (while H. sapiens sapiens had black hair). Similarly, Neanderthals also had the pigment that made their eyes blue.

Why not be open and admit it?

Answer 1

You've got your basic apples -to -oranges problem here. Homo sapiens sapiens is a SPECIES. "White" (Caucasian) is a RACE. Which is to say that the white race is one common appearance of a species which also includes OTHER races (*******, mongoloid, etc.).

Butr let's have a look at what you're talking about, because it portrays a very real -and continuing, unresolved- debate about the originis of sapiens sapiens. At the extreme ends of the debate, one theory holds that "modern" human populations evolved from local populations of Homo erectus and intermediate "archaic" forms -maybe Neanderthals. The other advances the idea that a small, relatively isolated population of early humans evolved into modern Homo sapiens, and then spread out globally, eventually replacing all other early human populations as they went their merry way.

Each side has data to support its position, but neither, at this point, can be conclusively held up as the last word. But regardless of which side you take, the concept of mixing -through sexual contact and subsequent reproduction- is likely to occur in both if for no other reason than humans -of whatever stage- are now and evidently have always been, about "mixing," and "blending together" -as your citation says.

And so, "admitting" to the presence of traits from our forebearers, be they Neanderthal, Erectus, or whatever, is no more profound than admitting to our genetic match to gorillas, or for that matter, to simple bacteria. The simple (and really quite profound, in my opinion) truth is that among all forms of life -meaning everything there is- the incredibly vast OBSERVED differences (wings, feet, internal or external skeleton, size, intelligence ...etc.) is attributed to the tiniest differences in the genetic codes that control it all. A change of just one half of one percent is the differnce between e. coli and Abe Lincoln, literally. This would be like changing just a single drop in a swimming pool of water to make the entire pool into gasoline!

Point being, there is nothing, really, to "admit" when it comes to the expected appearance of ancestral traits in currently living organisms of ANY kind.

A very interesting and provocative (in the "makes you think sense") question. Thanks for asking it.

Answer 2

The original study of a single Neanderthal bone done10 years ago, had a flawed conclusion...

The scientist concluded that Neanderthals were only 99.9% identical to Homo Sapiens because the DNA found in this 25,000 year-old Neanderthal, was 95% more extreme than all people living today. This also means that 5% of the people walking the earth today, have more extreme DNA than this ancient Neanderthal (350 million people)...

Since then, at least 5 Hybrids (Neanderthal/Cro-Magnon mix) remains have been found, and since Cro-Magnon is 100% genetically identical to modern man, sucessful mating could not have occurred if they were not genetically identical...

Answer 3

Arabs are Semites and considered Caucasian. Turks, in the Near East, are partly Mongoloid and if you go back, they have bloodlines descending from Greeks and the ancient tribes of the Caucasus region of Southwest Asia. Most Europeans are Caucasian. 'White' is just a colloquial term based on cultural beliefs and not ethnological classification. Jews are Semites and are considered Caucasian. As for 'Aryans', the Iranians and Northern Indians have Aryan blood. The tribe moved out of Northern Europe over three thousand years ago. Hungarians, Gypsies and Finns are not considered to be Caucasian but Indo-European.

Answer 4

I think we are all mixed with some kind of neanderthal or some other type of primitive human. We've always known whites are not a pure race. The only pure race are blacks in Africa. Everyone else, though, is a mixture of everything. This just proves it for those whites who think they are a pure race. They are probably the most mixed race in the world.....great question.

Answer 5

Unfotunately Y!A's obscenity filter won't allow me to show the scientific name properly, so I have to put spaces between the letters of the first word: H o m o sapiens Note that, like all zoological species names, the first word, the genus, is capitalized, but the second word, the species, is not. [Edit] "H o m o sapiens sapiens" is the scientific name for a particular subspecies of humans, but most anthropologsts agree that there are no valid subspecies among humans, so its use is deprecated. Like all species names, it must be written as two words, and "sapiens" must have the "s" on the end, since it is part of the Latin adjective for "wise," "sapiens," not a plural noun. "Sapien" is not a Latin word. Oh, and species names should _always_ be written in italics, but Y!A doesn't allow this.

Answer 6

Diversity is a gift from life, modernity is a human concept, so less valuable than diversity in itself... So diversity increase adaptation capabilities of a specie. And since modern philosophy come from the countries having those genetics traits, it may mean that "modern" humans of the rest of the world are not and will not be up to the task... Diversity is this, what makes a specie capable to adapt to change... Less diversity, less capability to survived... I think it is your problem now... Good luck!!

Answer 7

Honestly wha is this question doing here??? As far as I can tell from looking around the world, there are humans of all colours and races, and we are all modern, we are all here right now arent we???
It seems that you may have your head in the wrong place on this subject, " true humans"???? incredible to actually know someone still has this mentality....

Answer 8

Neanderthals were only one of several evolved homo erectus types that
lived on earth at the time of the early homo sapiens. Modern humans
have multiple such pre-homo-sapiens in their ancestry, with people
from different regions having different pre-homo-sapien species in their
ancestry.

Skeletal remains can not identify hair color, eye color, or skin color,
so it is clear that your statements about such things are fabrications,
made for political reasons. It is evident that you are willfully self-deluded
by racial supremacism or leftism.

One thing that is known though is that the pre-homo-sapien species were
less intelligent, because their technologies were more primitive.

A geographical demographic study by Peter Frost shows that the
genetic mutations of blue eyes and blonde hair originated in southwest
Finland, and spread outward from there. The neatness of the distribution
indicates that those mutations were relatively recent. I don't know about
the origin of red hair and freckles, but their origins can not be determined
by skeletal remains.

Modern human phenotypes (referring to both skeletal form and IQ),
when compared to those of the homo sapien and pre-homo-sapien skeletons,
clearly demonstrate that the people with the most pre-homo-sapien ancestry
are:
1. most africans, especially khoisan, bambutid, and paleonegro
2. australoids, not excluding veddoids
3. paleomongols
4. the ainu
5. tungids and related native americans

The modern humans with the most homo sapien phenotypes are:
1. caucasoids, not excluding aethiopid africans
2. sinid asians
3. some native americans

The tungids have ancestry from a unique pre-homo-sapien species.
The khoisan have ancestry from a different unique pre-homo-sapien
species, which is also part of the ancestry of paleomongols.

Answer 9

Why Does It Matter Everyone Is Equal. And Its A Known Fact That Nobody Likes Imbreeding Kinda Gross.

Answer 10

I would advise people to go to the site and see that this is very controversial. I would give arguments, but people much more qualified do in the article. I think the debate goes on. We may never know for sure.