After years of mystery, we now know what at least one Denisovan looked like.

Until now, we only had fragments of these cousins. Now we have face. Studying our evolutionary development and our sister-species is one of my favorite aspects of archeology. We’re constantly developing new information.

Side note: look up the initial presentation of Homo naledi. The leading archeologist did a phenomenal talk a couple of years ago (I think in December). It was really an exciting presentation. But I’m also pretty nerdy.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    19·
    2 days ago

    False. Have you even tried looking this up?

    They identified the right problem, but came up with the opposite of the right answer…

    Similarly, human evolution was rife with interspecies sex. Modern humans have interbred with both Neanderthals and Denisovans, Neanderthals and Denisovans interbred, and Denisovans interbred with an unidentified hominin.

    They’re saying because they could interbreed, it means some species can interbreed.

    Because the author isn’t ready to acknowledge it means they’re the same species.

    We really need to stick to one issue at a time if we’re gonna make any progress.

    If you just want an argument, I’m not investing the time to help tho.

    Quick edit:

    Nevermind, double replies are a big red flag.

    • kata1yst@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      8·
      2 days ago

      I apologize for the double reply, truly. Didn’t want to add a huge amount of text in an edit since I figured you’d reply quickly.

      I’ll summarize my rebuttal thusly, and you can decide for yourself if you want to continue.

      I think we’re arguing over the definition of species using two separate definitions. Encyclopedia Brittannica indicates that genetic species is a distinct definition from the definition of biological species.

      Is it fair to say that genetically these homonids are extremely closely related, but had distinct populations with distinct traits and morphology over time and across large geographies due to adaptive pressure?

      So then the debate centers on when or if speciation occured with each of those definitions, which I don’t think is a really productive exercise. We’re basically saying the same things just differently.