(urth) The problem of Cthulhu

[Daniel D Jones]

On Wednesday 20 June 2007 21:25, brunians at brunians.org wrote:
> >> To date, no DNA evidence exists of any genetic contribution to
> >> presentday
> >> humans.
> >
> > Maltese teeth.
>
> I figured I'd expand (though of course everyone knows what I am talking
> about, here, right?).
>
> Some Neanderthal skulls got funny teeth. Supposedly unique to the seperate
> species that didn't interbreed. Except a bunch of Maltese people have
> teeth like this. How'd that happen?
>
> There's all sorts of bogosity in paleoanthropology. Did you know there are
> a bunch of these academic scientists who seriously maintain that human
> beings didn't have speech before 70,000 years ago or so? They were every
> way identical to us, they just couldn't talk, poor things.
>
> Where do they get these ideas?
>
> The species is a million years old and for 990,000 of those years we were
> sort of half-smart animals scraping out a living. Then, all of a sudden,
> ten thousand years ago, something happened, and now we're flying in space.
>
> Two kinds of people who didn't look any different than hottentots and
> swedes hung out around each other for tens of thousands of years, with
> interbreedable genomes, and none of them had children.
>
> People want to believe these kinds of things, they can. I'll pass.

I'm not sure if you're trolling or really believe  what you've posted above, 
but what you wrote matches little or nothing that I've read on the subject.  
They're more like caricatures of actual anthropological positions and 
theories.  This list isn't the place for such discussions, so I'll bow out 
but anyone interested, please take the time to do some Googling and see 
what's actually being said rather than take a second or third hand account of 
it.