3 ms·
Did you follow the actual science? First neanderthal genome, 2010: about 6% admixture. Denisova, 2011: 2.5% admixture. Altai neanderthal, 2014: 1.5% admixt
by 08-15 8y ago
Did you follow the actual science? First neanderthal genome, 2010: about 6% admixture. Denisova, 2011: 2.5% admixture. Altai neanderthal, 2014: 1.5% admixture.
Every time the quality of the genome improved, the estimated admixture decreased. Isn't that a bit suspicious? And even if it isn't purely an artifact, the direction of the admixture was never established. Could be some neanderthal genes survived in humans, could be some human genes died with neanderthals. Could be that the analysis is no good.
- BurningFrog 8y agoI haven't followed it that closely, no, and your numbers are new to me. I'll admit that the facts can be reinterpreted in the future with more data. But calling them "suspicious" makes it sound like there is some conspiracy now.
- 08-15 8y agoAll the analysis comes from the same team (Pääbo and Reich), so no conspiracy is needed. And it's not even scientific misconduct, it's just incompetence.