Evidence for God from Science

With a Neanderthal mother and a Denisovan father, what should we call the new specimen? “We shy away a little from the word ‘hybrid’,” says Pääbo. The term implies that the two groups are discrete species of human, whereas in reality the boundaries between them are blurry — as the new study shows. Defining a species in the natural world is not always clear-cut, says Harris, and it’s interesting to see long-running debates about how to categorize organisms start to be applied to humans.

DBowling wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:32 pm Here is an interesting article about the discovery of bone fragments from a hybrid of two hominin sub-species, Neanderthal and Denisovan.

Mum’s a Neanderthal, Dad’s a Denisovan: First discovery of an ancient-human hybrid
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06004-0

With a Neanderthal mother and a Denisovan father, what should we call the new specimen? “We shy away a little from the word ‘hybrid’,” says Pääbo. The term implies that the two groups are discrete species of human, whereas in reality the boundaries between them are blurry — as the new study shows. Defining a species in the natural world is not always clear-cut, says Harris, and it’s interesting to see long-running debates about how to categorize organisms start to be applied to humans.

All hominins with the exception of Modern Humans (species homo sapiens sapiens) went extinct over 50,000 years ago, but this discovery of a Neanderthal/Denisovan hybrid along with trace elements of Neanderthal DNA in some humans today demonstrate that there appears to have been some amount of interbreeding between different hominin species in the ancient past.

DB: Are there any Biblical issues with Neanderthals and Modern Humans (species homo sapiens sapiens) interbreeding?

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:08 am

DB: Are there any Biblical issues with Neanderthals and Modern Humans (species homo sapiens sapiens) interbreeding?

IF Neanderthals are not human, then that's some form of bestiality.

DB: Would it be bestiality if the interbreeding took place 40,000 years before mankind came to "know good and evil"?

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:11 am

DB: Would it be bestiality if the interbreeding took place 40,000 years before mankind came to "know good and evil"?

That's a good question! Meanwhile, the Young Earth guys are having a stroke over that one, LOL.

Neanderthals were a group of humans, descended from Adam and Eve, who lived in the harsh post-Flood world. Archaeology confirms they made instruments, make-up, jewelry, weapons, and ritually buried their dead. Many humans today share DNA with Neanderthals. This fully human lineage died out sometime after the Flood.

Because the biological species concept (BSC) defines a species as an interbreeding population, some people argue that modern humans and Neanderthals must belong to the same species. This perspective is common among young-earth creationists who see Neanderthals as a subset of humanity.
This argument fails to take into account the limitations of the BSC, one being the phenomenon of hybridization. Mammals that belong to separate species have been known to interbreed and produce viable—even fertile—offspring called hybrids. For example, lions and tigers in captivity have interbred successfully—yet both parent animals remain considered separate species. I would argue that the concept of hybridization applies to the interbreeding that took place between modern humans and Neanderthals.