Aspies For Freedom

I'm with you on this one, gwynfryn!

Unfortunately, we might have to wait for one of T. Kuhn's 'paradigm shifts' (scientists not being completely rational and all)...  >>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structu...evolutions

:roll:

Great link Aspie Girl, and I was sure I wasn't the first to perceive this, but I must add a caution; just because a science theory becomes accepted, doesn't mean it's valid, and (this is purely a personal bias) I've never had a lot of respect for people who use words like "paradigm"! [especially when asociated with "shift"]

Oh yeah - I absolutely agree with you there - just because the majority believes something, doesn't mean they're correct in their thinking....

Hey - are you familiar with Milford Wolpoff's Multiregional theory?  If not, I think you might enjoy it >>

http://www.jqjacobs.net/anthro/paleo/multiregional.html

It's he who wrote in the above SA article! Well I did say it's a minority view (but it makes sense to me!).

Ah!  Interesting.  I will have to get my hands on that special issue.  Thanks for giving the "heads up" that it's out there.  Perhaps we can discuss more after I've read it.

These guys examine the link between Neanderthal and Autism.
Interessting..?!

"Discussion of social behaviour of Neanderthals in light of archeological evidence like small, isolated and territorial groups. Discussing applicable models of evolutionary psychology for Neanderthals. Possible impact of modern human evolutionary psychology by interbreeding with Neanderthals. The group has restricted membership, and personal posts from the archive may not be spread outside of the group without consent from the poster."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/neanderthal-psychology/

Here's a link first discussed on the old Aspergia: http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm

and the discussion itself: http://www.aspergia.com/wforum/viewtopic.php?t=496

and yet another (note the last post ho!): http://www.aspergia.com/wforum/viewtopic.php?t=1139

The "Guest" in previous post is me, by the way (no idea why).

Guest, bear with me as I've much to add on these points (was waiting till somebody showed some interest, but then forgot all about it! Will get too it in the near future...)

Bugger, forgot to sign in!

I'll be setting up a jewellry poll on AI (as they have more numbers) but will do one here later maybe; it'll be interesting to see how it contrasts?

Eh? You are pure black then? If not you are sure to have some other ancestry. Finding an American of pure African decent is practically impossible!

What time scales are you thinking of? And autism by what definition? The modern Japanese didn't begin to replace the native Ainu until about three thousand years ago, and it's generally accepted that Amerinds didn't cross to America before around 50,000 years ago (this is disputed, but the earlier dates just gives them more Neandertal genes). Given that it's now claimed that the latest "Modern Humans" may have emerged as recently as 130, 000 years ago, the input they had on early amerinds is probably minimal; they would have been made up predominantly of whatever the asian version of Neandertal is. The people who made up todays Japanese would have a greater proportion of "Modern" genes perhaps but would still have mixed ancestry.

In any case, what makes you think that the Neandertals didn't make a similar contribution to the the African gene pool? The land joining Africa and Europe doesn't have a one way gate fitted you know?

Looked at statistically, the spreading of dominant genes is exponential, starting off slowly but then accelerating with successive generations. If "Moderns" and Neandertals have been interbreeding for more than a 100,000 years, but pure Neandertals only disappeared around 30, 000 years ago, then "Modern" input to the amerind gene pool is likely to be minimal, especially as the domination of the asian populations would most likely have occured well after that of the European or middle east.

Ever wondered why our western languages are referred to as  Indo European? It's because the genotype that now dominates us "whites" is fairly recent, and arose well to the south and east of what is now Europe. Before that, the native populations were generally darker skinned, and were not completely displaced until the great celtic migrations of just 3 or 4 millenia ago.

That being so, you're differentiation of whites from blacks in this context is completely meaningless...what were you saying about knowledge of cultures?

I think she is part chinese at least.  China  is vast multiethnic nation. Most speak some dialect of Chinese but not all. She lived in until 13. So if she is dark and wholly chinese. She might have some ancestors that are not Chinese. Some where back in the mists of time.

Tali can you clarify? most asians are light skinned and  "yellow hued" if pardon my clumsy wording. (i think you know me well enough to understand my good intentions in spite of clumsy words)

Not sure if it's relevant? My argument is that just about any part of the human race is sure to have been "infected" to some extent with the Neandertal or related genotype?

It's true the debate is too centred on European and western Asia, but there's a fair chance that other branches of homo (cold adapted or not) in eastern Asie will have started off with more in common with Neantertals than "Modern" man?

The possible exceptions are the older extant African tribes, but considering the centuries long Arab involvement in most parts of Africa (they were there centuries before Burton et al made their "discoveries") even that's uncertain!

One way of testing the Neandertal theory would be to survey such populations, and try to determine if any are (relatively) free of AS. First though, we need to understand just what we mean by "AS" and "Neandertal link", in this context. There's no point trying to link Neandertals to all current AS diagnoses; it's just not going to happen!

Size matters??? :lol:

Err, where are the prominent brow ridges by the way?

about DNA studies (mitochondrial) of neanderthals comparing to sapiens:

http://www.2think.org/neanderthal.shtml
http://www.google.com/search?q=dna+neand...8&oe=utf-8

and no we cant conclude on anything based on them


they have in fact found a few art artifacts, i think i remember something about  red ochre (religious) too.

Hey dude, as far as I've noted, joining here requires no comitment (I'm not part of the admin but they tolerate me, well, tollerably well). If you are for real then join us, help us, and if not....well most claimants seem well accepted...just like Simon Smiths dancing bear)