Fallingdamage t1_ja9qnm0 wrote on February 27, 2023 at 9:47 PM

Reply to comment by gwaydms in Revealed: Europe's Oldest Humans had Surprisingly Frequent Intermingling with Neanderthals by OptimalCrew7992

Because science is vague?

Aekiel t1_ja9sftw wrote on February 27, 2023 at 9:58 PM

Because the term species was introduced before we understood genetics that well.

HegemonNYC t1_ja9u9f3 wrote on February 27, 2023 at 10:10 PM

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.

smashkraft t1_jaa9y57 wrote on February 27, 2023 at 11:58 PM

I think this article has an interesting, nuanced take.

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/are-neanderthals-same-species-as-us.html

A few interesting pieces of information:

Neaderthal and Homo Sapien do not have 1 common ancestor directly before the "species" / "population group" / <insert whatever vocabulary word you want>. Actually, they don't share a common grand-ancestor. The divergence is older than 2 grand-ancestor speciations.
There are other examples of hybridization, some of them produce fertile offspring. We still consider those original individuals as distinct species. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/animal-hybrids-ligers-and-tigons-and-pizzly-bears-oh-my-31133439/
The latest estimate is that 16% of all bird species interbreed in the wildhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ibi.12285
Lastly, biological species is a word that predates a LOT of genetic research. Due to the lack of information, the definition is lacking - however, the difference between animals can still be significant even if interbreeding can occur. Tigers and Lions are definitely different animals - huge behavioral changes in terms of hunting, mating, social structure. Consistent differences in size and athleticism
Species was first used in 1686, it's an outdated term and associated definition. It probably isn't very scientifically accurate, but we need to actually find the right balance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_concept#:~:text=Before%20Darwin,-The%20idea%20that&text=The%20term%20species%20was%20just,was%20possible%20within%20a%20species.

HanseaticHamburglar t1_jaacri7 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 12:18 AM

It started that way but its becoming more scientific as we understand DNA.

Manatees are closer to elephants than whales but i don't think scientists 150 years ago could have drawn those conclusions. And there are countless examples of reclassification based on new evidence, and to some extent that goes beyond phenotypic expressions.