[greatpostman]

The big secret:

“Homo sapiens” are hybrid combinations of different species that have long disappeared. “Non human hominids” are frequently groups that mixed with Homo sapiens. Large variances in human populations come from different hybrid compositions

[shrubble]

Are you referring to those with Denisovan vs those with Neanderthal vs those with neither?

[greatpostman]

There’s other unidentified populations. They just can’t find bones to isolate the dna

[alcover]

I found this abstract maybe : https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1109300108

  "(...)an unusual segment of DNA that extends for >31 kb on chromosome 4 seems to have introgressed into modern Africans from a now-extinct taxon that may have lived in central Africa"

That's fascinating stuff. Says introgression may have occured 35ky ago from a branch that split 700ky ago.

[revicon]

The statement "Large variances in human populations come from different hybrid compositions" seems a particularly provocative statement. Is there a source where this comes from?

[hackinthebochs]

I'm not sure what part specifically you take issue with, but this provides some relevant citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interbreeding_between_archaic_...

[PM_me_your_math]

I don't see how. Many of us have Neanderthal DNA. Objective facts are only considered (falsely) provocative if the provoked has an axe to grind, or a pursuit other than objective truth.

[r13a]

I definitely see how this statement is provocative when overwhelming scientific consensus underlines a very low variance in human population that is NOT explained by variance in traces of non-homo sapiens DNA.

[tsimionescu]

There are no large differences between human populations though: that is the provocative part of the statement.

[hexator]

You imply that it's a significant percentage though, which is highly debatable.