HegemonNYC

HegemonNYC t1_jaa4fbd wrote

Seems like a different crowd. Scientists simultaneously understand and embrace evolution and dna etc. Yet they also use ‘species’ when ‘regional variant’ or something similar is more appropriate. I think it’s because scientists like to discover new species, and don’t like to discover ‘a fossil of a known species that might be a little different looking’. Again, Victorian holdover.

0

HegemonNYC t1_ja9u9f3 wrote

Right. Hence any discussion of human ‘species’ like Neanderthals sounding very Victorian and eugenicy. ‘They had broad chests and survived well in the cold’ or ‘they had heavier brow ridges’ seems like ridiculous concepts to determine a different species. You can easily make the same kind of list about Northern Europeans vs SE Asians for example (the Homo Scandanavianus species is defined by its great height and broad frame, high nose bridge, facial hair and and exotic coloration in eye and hair color). It is considered preposterous and racist to categorize modern humans into separate species yet it seems to be the method we categorize other genuses of ‘Homo’ and even all species are just separated by looking kinda different. It seems very archaic and pre-science.

12

HegemonNYC t1_ja9t74s wrote

No, it is in no way like a mule. Mules are not fertile. Horses and donkeys are barely fertile together, they can make the mule but a mule can’t make more mules. Neanderthals and Homo sapiens can fully interbreed, with fertile offspring. Hence why we can see Neanderthal dna in ours.

11

HegemonNYC t1_ja9ffsz wrote

The concept of species seems vague and not very scientific. If sapiens and Neanderthal can commonly interbreed, what definition is there of species other than they have some distinctive features in their bones? Considering modern races or ethnic groups of homo sapien can also be identified by their phenotype/appearance while living or as skeletons/fossil why do we consider Neanderthals a separate species, or subspecies? Isn’t it more accurate that Neanderthals were just a distinctive looking group of the same species as Homo Sapien?

33