The Oldest Dna Evidence Yet Of Humans With An Interesting Twist

[NathanFooter]

 This was of particular interest because of the relation to Denisovan's  witch to my understanding are thought to be a large species due to the size of some large teeth and a finger bone.   Also noted in the below article how startling it was to find that this species related to the Denisovan's looked very Neanderthal like.  

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/science/at-400000-years-oldest-human-dna-yet-found-raises-new-mysteries.html?smid=fb-nytimes&WT.z_sma=SC_A4Y_20131204&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=+1385874000000&bicmet=+1388638800000&_r=1&

 

 Also I have to wonder, what would a large Neanderthal look like.   ,,,Hmmm.

 

[georgerm]

Nice find Nathan. The new information below is quite interesting. Can't tell if it's factual or a new theory.

 

 

 

Their shared ancestors split off from humans’ lineage and left Africa, then split further into the Denisovans and Neanderthals about 300,000 years ago. The evidence suggested that Neanderthals headed west, toward Europe, and that the Denisovans moved east.

 

Humans’ ancestors, meanwhile, stayed in Africa, giving rise to Homo sapiens about 200,000 years ago. Humans then expanded from Africa into Asia and Europe about 60,000 years ago. They then interbred not only with Neanderthals, but with Denisovans, too. Later, both the Denisovans and Neanderthals became extinct.

[MIB]

Interesting.   Where does the 4th species, the one that seems to be a DNA contributor but we have no (currently identified) fossils of fit?

 

MIB

[Guest SDBigfooter]

It is pretty crazy that about 28 complete skeletons were found in this pit.  Also, this cave was found over 40 years ago?  My existence is is so miniscule compared to the age of these fossils.   

 

I would be really curious to see how much DNA they actually were able to extract.  Also, is contamination a valid factor here? 

 

When I think of Denisovan DNA, I imagine they found something completely unique to "modern" humans.  Also, would that mean that nothing in the DNA findings matched modern humans?  Did it mutate slightly then?

 

400,000 years is really an inconceivable amount of time for us.

 

“Right now, we’ve basically generated a big question mark,â€

 

Anatomy = Neanderthal but DNA = Denisovan

 

Cool stuff.

[Guest lightheart]

Nathan, I have been reading a lot about the Sima de Los Huesos. site. The 400,000 DNA is the best news yet. I think this could be the beginning of the unraveling of the Sasquatch mystery. In that very same area they have something similiar to Sasquatch called Basajuan -large hairy man/creature. There are stories that date back hundreds of years and also current reports like here in North America.If the DNA turns out to Erectus it will be the first to be sequenced.Wow just Wow!

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I am wondering what impact this will eventually have on the mystery of sasquatch. I'm sure it can be frustrating to anthropologists and archaeologists who know the answers to their questions are out there, they just haven't been found yet, which is how I feel about sasquatch. Even if the subject of sasquatch is not a part of this research, the fact that there appear to be new discoveries being made in bioanthropology and related fields will definitely have an impact on sasquatch research sometimes in the future.

 

But for now, this is still interesting, and definitely important. Like others who are interested in sasquatch, I am just waiting for science to play catch-up, which I am confident will occur sometime in the future.

[WSA]

It has often been said, and it bears repeating: Homo Sapiens aren't the only human species to have ever existed, we are only the winners. (To which I'll add: "So far", and; "Maybe not 'the' ")  

[Guest]

I am wondering what impact this will eventually have on the mystery of sasquatch. 

 

Minimally, it demonstrates a remarkable lack of true insight into our shared origins with our close ancestors. Helpful when talking to those who like to sound like humans know more than they really do. 

[dmaker]

You have some better insights Bipto?

[Guest Stan Norton]

Hey D. I should put you in touch with my wife. She is a Dr and specialises in palaeolithic archaeology, in particular pleistocene tool technology. She's dug at or carried out research at many of the most important palaeolithic sites (i have even dug at one of em) in Europe and the middle east and worked with many of the big hitters in the field. She is never surprised by new revelations and you can bet she would be the first to admit that when it comes to human evolution we really know so little. I think Brian's comment was just about spot on actually.

[Guest Darrell]

Minimally, it demonstrates a remarkable lack of true insight into our shared origins with our close ancestors. Helpful when talking to those who like to sound like humans know more than they really do. 

Well I think we "know" more than any other species on this planet. Especially all those extinct ones wouldnt you say?

[Guest DWA]

I find it funny as screaming hell that every time scientists find something it's "there, we're done, the complete picture looks like this" instead of "hmmmmm. Here's one more piece of the puzzle.  Let's see, that's 55 pieces...of a 55,000-piece puzzle..."

Give or take a few dozen thousand, of course...

Well I think we "know" more than any other species on this planet. Especially all those extinct ones wouldnt you say?

By no means would I say that.

 

Many scientists wouldn't either.  As a matter of fact, some of them have wondered: 

 

Why is it that we're not finding signs of other 'intelligent' life in the universe?  Hmmmm.  We're 'intelligent', by our own definition of course....and we're threatening our home, and ourselves, with extinction...maybe when you get 'smart' enough, and are too stupid to handle that....?

[WSA]

Learn how to make and control fire, and it is all downhill from there brother.....Sasquatch might win the evolutionary lottery on that fact alone.

[dmaker]

I find it funny as screaming hell that every time scientists find something it's "there, we're done, the complete picture looks like this" instead of "hmmmmm. Here's one more piece of the puzzle.  Let's see, that's 55 pieces...of a 55,000-piece puzzle..."

Give or take a few dozen thousand, of course...

By no means would I say that.

 

Many scientists wouldn't either.  As a matter of fact, some of them have wondered: 

 

Why is it that we're not finding signs of other 'intelligent' life in the universe?  Hmmmm.  We're 'intelligent', by our own definition of course....and we're threatening our home, and ourselves, with extinction...maybe when you get 'smart' enough, and are too stupid to handle that....?

I was at a lecture last night by The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics on geomicrobiology and how it relates to astrobiology. It was quite interesting. Since you mentioned life on other planets The presenter mentioned that maybe we should start looking below the surface for life since our own geomicrobes can withstand some pretty extreme environments then perhaps there may be some geomicrobes on other planets that have survived. In one case an organism survived essentially in suspended animation for 10,000 years below the surface. She even went so far as to speculate that maybe even Mars is the source of life and not Earth since we regularly have matter transfers between Earth and Mars and perhaps way back when some microbes came from Mars hitching a ride below the surface of a large meteorite.  Fascinating speculation. Nothing more, at this point, of course. But it was an interesting lecture.  

 

Sorry for OT derail...

[Guest Darrell]

Learn how to make and control fire, and it is all downhill from there brother.....Sasquatch might win the evolutionary lottery on that fact alone.

Well, given that noboday can find one, take a pic of one, or even collect a hair from one, maybe you are right. Or maybe, just maybe, they just dont exist.