Evidence for God from Science

I've been following the Neanderthal question in science for a little while now. Of course, there have been some scientists who say that Neanderthal and modern humans were related in some way; then in 2004, Katerina Havarti published a scholarly piece saying that each one was a separate species; then in 2010 some Neanderthal bones were found in a cave in Croatia, and supposedly some of the DNA samples resembled human DNA, suggesting at least some mating between the species. Now some European scientists have published a paper in the Molecular Biology and Evolution Journal, implicating that Neanderthal may have been long extinct before modern humans arrived on the pages of history! As an old-earth creationist, this is fascinating to me.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17179608

I'll have to wait and see what RTB has to say about this. By the way, welcome, sylvanicdawn.

Thank you, RickD. Looking forward to participating and learning new things

I think you may have misread this particular article. It never says that humans and neanderthals weren't related, just that the species may have died out sooner than we had originally thought. It says that most of the species may have died around 48,000 years ago, with a very small contingent of neanderthals living on for another 10,000 years thereafter. They concluded this because the genetic variation in neanderthals drops off significantly at 48,000 years ago, a sign that there was a massive population drop off.

Perhaps you are under the impression that neanderthals are the predecessors of homo sapiens? That would seem to be disproved by the idea of neanderthals dying out quicker than we thought, but in actuality biologists and anthropologists regard the two species as cousins, not as homo sapiens coming from neanderthals.

Hi sylvanicdawn,

It's actually Harvati.

Ivellious wrote:I think you may have misread this particular article. It never says that humans and neanderthals weren't related, just that the species may have died out sooner than we had originally thought. It says that most of the species may have died around 48,000 years ago, with a very small contingent of neanderthals living on for another 10,000 years thereafter. They concluded this because the genetic variation in neanderthals drops off significantly at 48,000 years ago, a sign that there was a massive population drop off.

Perhaps you are under the impression that neanderthals are the predecessors of homo sapiens? That would seem to be disproved by the idea of neanderthals dying out quicker than we thought, but in actuality biologists and anthropologists regard the two species as cousins, not as homo sapiens coming from neanderthals.

Maybe the neanderthals were the native people of Croatia, and the white European settlers massacred them all, just like they tried to do with the Native Americans, and Australian Aborigines.

sandy_mcd wrote:Hi sylvanicdawn,

It's actually Harvati.

You're right. My bad

Ivellious wrote:I think you may have misread this particular article. It never says that humans and neanderthals weren't related, just that the species may have died out sooner than we had originally thought. It says that most of the species may have died around 48,000 years ago, with a very small contingent of neanderthals living on for another 10,000 years thereafter. They concluded this because the genetic variation in neanderthals drops off significantly at 48,000 years ago, a sign that there was a massive population drop off.

Perhaps you are under the impression that neanderthals are the predecessors of homo sapiens? That would seem to be disproved by the idea of neanderthals dying out quicker than we thought, but in actuality biologists and anthropologists regard the two species as cousins, not as homo sapiens coming from neanderthals.

Ivellious,
I have seen different science articles here and there claiming that Neanderthals were the predecessors of homo sapiens. Not all articles, but some. Keep in mind, though, that the subject of Neanderthal is relatively new for me. I certainly don't believe that we descended from Neanderthals, though. I would have to see more evidence to believe something like that. I've also encountered science articles that say there could have been interbreeding between certain homo sapiens and certain Neanderthals. Would be curious to what everyone's thoughts were on this.

sylvanicdawn wrote: Ivellious,
I have seen different science articles here and there claiming that Neanderthals were the predecessors of homo sapiens. Not all articles, but some. Keep in mind, though, that the subject of Neanderthal is relatively new for me. I certainly don't believe that we descended from Neanderthals, though. I would have to see more evidence to believe something like that.

Evidence shows that we aren't directly related to neanderthals.. But even if it did, it still wouldn't disprove a creator. I remember in the past being heated up over such topics.. Now frankly, I really don't care. I've learned that "so called" scientific rabbit trails can't disprove the G-d of the Bible.

Gman wrote:

sylvanicdawn wrote: Ivellious,
I have seen different science articles here and there claiming that Neanderthals were the predecessors of homo sapiens. Not all articles, but some. Keep in mind, though, that the subject of Neanderthal is relatively new for me. I certainly don't believe that we descended from Neanderthals, though. I would have to see more evidence to believe something like that.

Evidence shows that we aren't directly related to neanderthals.. But even if it did, it still wouldn't disprove a creator. I remember in the past being heated up over such topics.. Now frankly, I really don't care. I've learned that "so called" scientific rabbit trails can't disprove the G-d of the Bible.

True. I can't say that I'm 'heated up' over the topic---just interested. I don't like getting into long debates about a lot of subjects anymore. Maybe I would if I was still a teenager, or in my early to mid 20's...but not now. But I still like to ask questions; I still want to remain curious.

Gman, quick question...What evidence are you saying says we aren't related to neanderthals?

Sylvanicdawn: I think the phylogeny and history of humans is very interesting. It's amazing how complex the "homo" family really is/was. I think for a long time we believed all human-like fossils from that time frame were just human ancestors, but more recently genetics and more detailed analyses of their bodies and ages have developed a more intricate web of relationships.

The inter-breeding thing is very interesting, and the article you originally posted points out that if that did occur, it only happened during a brief period of time and likely only in northern Europe. Some have actually begun to think that neanderthals are the source of the gene that causes red hair (which would make even more sense because humans with that hair color all descend from northern Europe). Also, one way or another, if we interbred with neanderthals we must have been extremely closely related. I read an article recently that said "though by our evolutionary ancestors homo sapiens and neanderthals are cousins, their physiological and cultural roots seem to make the two groups more like brothers and sisters than anything."

Ivellious,

Gman, quick question...What evidence are you saying says we aren't related to neanderthals?

Some evidence would be that their DNA is about as different from ours as a chimps, they have no evidence of clothing, no art, no music and their tools were different than human's.

You do not need to closely related to interbreed.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w04551203548j670/
http://www.hemmy.net/2006/06/19/top-10-hybrid-animals/

So...first of all, those examples of crossbreeds are all between very closely related species...at the very least within the same family of animal. So, yes, you do need to be closely related at least within the same family. The examples of "lesser apes" interbreeding makes that point as well, as "lesser apes" are obviously all in the same close lineage.

Also, how does our DNA being similar to both chimpanzees and neanderthals demonstrate that we aren't related to neanderthals? All things considered, if we are related to chimps, and we are equally similar DNA-wise to neanderthals...doesn't that point to us being related? And since when was "culture" a scientific indicator of genetic lineage?

Posted this in the jokes section a while back, thought it might be appropriate here

RickD wrote:Maybe the neanderthals were the native people of Croatia, and the white European settlers massacred them all, just like they tried to do with the Native Americans, and Australian Aborigines.

Rick, a little bit more respect for my peoples, please! We never massacred, colonized or enslaved anyone. In fact, we didn't know what racism was until we heard about it from the West.