Re: New paper: Neanderthals were not subspecies of H. sapiens, but different species

On 12/26/2024 7:28 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:

On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 17:22:24 -0600, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>:
 Commenting solely on the subject, my recollection is that
the accepted taxonomy was that there were two subspecies: H.
sapiens sapiens and H. sapiens neanderthalensis. Is that now
considered to be incorrect?

They are trying to define different species by genetic distance.  They want to claim that limited gene flow that produces two populations as different as modern humans and Neanderthals should be designated as different species.
This allows geographically separated populations to be called different species if they are different enough in their population genetics.
It would likely be good news for racist segregationists.  Just think of how close to being a different species the New Guinea populations are that are over 7% Denisovan and 3% Neanderthal compared to African Modern humans that never left Africa.  Denisovans are even less genetically related to African modern humans than Neanderthal.  Both Neanderthals and Denisovans left Africa around 800,000 years ago, but Neanderthals interbred with Africans a couple of ice ages ago, so they were already more closely related to the modern humans that made it out of Africa during the last ice age.
Ron Okimoto

 

On 12/14/2024 12:21 PM, Ernest Major wrote:
On 14/12/2024 16:32, erik simpson wrote:

On 12/14/24 6:58 AM, Chris Thompson wrote:

https://scitechdaily.com/rewriting-evolution-study-shows-
neanderthals- and-humans-were-not-the-same-species/
>

Interesting paper.  It's turning out that species is a slippery
concept.   If two species never interbreed, they're clearly separate.
If the occasionally interbreed, they may still be separate, but how
occasionally?  I'd agree that Neanderthals are separate.  It's
interesting that interbreedability can go on for a surprisingly long
time, hundreds of thousands of years.  Some plants are still separate
species after tens of millions of years of interbreeding.
>

>
Some plants are still interfertile after tens of millions of years of
presumed isolation. For example North American and European species of
lime (basswood), oak, plane, poplar, and horse chestnut (buckeye). Is
that what you meant; if not I'm curious what taxa you have evidence for
tens of millions of interbreeding; I would have thought that evidence
for such would be hard to come by.
>

Brassicaceae should count.  Many hybrids are viable and have produced
new crop plants.  Think of broccoflower (broccoli and cauliflower).
>
They wanted to put restrictions on making them roundup resistant because
so many weed plants interbreed with them that the resistance was likely
going to get into the weeds.
>
Ron Okimoto