My favorite part is when scientists/archeologists/anthropologists have it all figured out. Until a new discovery changes the consensus. Which then becomes the new narrative and were back to them always having it all figured out.
4 days ago | 6
I need to see this study, because the 2023 studies that used 3-D geometric morphometrics and internal structure to compare it with other hominids were not conclusive. His morphology is Neanderthal-like but there are also parts that don’t exactly match + conflicted studies. So I don’t know why it categorised it as a Neanderthal.
3 days ago (edited) | 4
Was clear even without analysis. In that time, it can' t be different.
21 hours ago | 0
It's interesting - if look at the diagram, it turns out that Homo sapiens is closer to Denisovan man than to Neanderthal man, despite the geographical proximity of the latter.
3 days ago | 0
Humans expaned across Eurasia in like a few thousand years surely any ancient hominin could migrate almost across the world in a 10-20ky span
3 days ago | 0
1) what method was used? 2) what does it mean for us/them?
4 days ago | 0
I would be very careful with classifying Xuchang Man as Neanderthal. The people who proposed Homo juluensis included Xujiayao and Xuchang. And we know most likely Homo juluensis were Denisovans. There is also the fact that Neanderthal were never discovered in China, but quite a few Denisovans have already been found in China and southeast Asia. It's a shame the Xuchang Man didn't include the jaw or the teeth, or else proteomics would determine if they were Denisovans or not.
3 days ago | 0
"Confirm" doesn't mean anything any more, the opposite will be confirmed in a week.
3 days ago | 0
Highly Compelling
Multiple studies confirm that the Xuchang skull of northern China dated to around 100,000 years old is a Neanderthal (and not Denisovan/Harbin) and other skulls from that region and time also have Neanderthal traits.
4 days ago | [YT] | 294