The "What Is More Likely Test"

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:06 pm

The ongoing discussion about Neanderthals on the other thread has reminded me of a test which Dilbert author ( http://www.dilbert.com ) Scott Adams mentioned in one of his books.

Essentially, Adams put it in work place terms since that is his thing. For example: Your boss says to you that if you work unpaid overtime you will be rewarded with a future promotion. Adams asks, "What is More Likely?" Is it:

a) the senior managers will be impressed by your dedication to the firm and reward you accordingly or,

b) that your boss' promises will be revealed to be a stinking pile of 4 day old vomit?

Obviously, in the corporate world the usual answer would be "b."

In this case, A) we have one group which says that HSS came out of Africa 70,000 years ago and replaced (by warfare, disease or because we are so much smarter than) HNS with no interbreeding between them because, after all, they were different species...or

b) that both HNS and HSS evolved from an earlier common ancestor (HE) and in spite of regional differences resulting from isolation and too much inbreeding, still retained the ability to interbreed thus picking up (in those areas where traits such as red or blond hair had developed) certain distinctive characteristics which did not develop in "Africa?"

Which is more likely?
I'm voting for B.

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:20 am

But have we found blond or red haired HN?
Which genes would dominate?
I thought the general rule was the darker trait dominates.
If blond and brown haired parents, the kids are brown haired.
Blue and brown eyed parents, the kids will have brown eyes.
Etc.
(This is at adulthood. For instance, I was a blue eyed blond until about 12.
Now I am a hazel eyed, brown haired adult.
This is in spite of having a red haired mother.)

Post by **Minimalist** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:05 pm

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/n ... hal26.html

PHILADELPHIA — In an unprecedented feat of forensic anthropology, European researchers extracted enough DNA from two Neanderthal skulls to suggest their owners sported red hair and white skin when they were alive 43,000 and 50,000 years ago.

The hair color of humanity's closest relative might sound trivial, but the finding, announced today in the journal Science, stunned anthropologists with the sheer power of genetics to reveal what Neanderthals looked like and how they behaved. And that, some say, will change the way humanity views itself.

As I recall, kb, we had a fairly spirited discussion of this when it first hit the fan....er...news.

E.P. Grondine · Post by **E.P. Grondine** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:22 pm

Hi Min -

You want to talk about s*** getting thrown - just use any taxa name, and you will have those who use another taxa name slinging some your way like an irritated chimp.

Clearly the common HN and HS ancestor was a more "robust' hunter than HE, but what do you call him, as "robustus" is already taken, for a Paranthropus, if memory serves? I went with Homo Heidelbergensis, which was about as controversial a choice as I could have made, but that's how I called it. Of course, this was before the new finds in Asia.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas

Post by **Minimalist** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:14 pm

Possible, of course, although I wasn't aware that any Heidelbergensis remains had been found outside of Europe.

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:35 am

Possible, of course, although I wasn't aware that any Heidelbergensis remains had been found outside of Europe.

Nor am I. I thought that, along with God, they were English!

Roy.

E.P. Grondine · Post by **E.P. Grondine** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:12 pm

About the only way I see of making everyone happy is to name each Homo after the site where it was found.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:34 pm

I remember the DNA disscussion.
But have we found a mummys, etc.
Burials with something more than bones.

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:54 pm

For HNS?

Yeah, in Israel I think.

bevisandrew · Post by **bevisandrew** » Thu Mar 20, 2025 9:08 pm

Hey, this “What Is More Likely” idea is pretty cool—it’s like a fun way to guess what really happened. Minimalist brought up Neanderthals, and I’m vibin’ with their option B. Instead of humans just rolling out of Africa and wiping out Neanderthals like some big takeover, B says maybe we all came from the same family tree way back. Then, even with some distance and differences—like living far apart and getting kinda unique—we could still mix and share stuff, like how some folks ended up with red hair. It’s less “war and conquer” and more “hey, we’re cousins who hooked up sometimes.” Makes me think about how random little connections can lead to big changes. What do you all think—B sound good, or you got a different spin? Which way you leaning?
block breaker

Archaeologica.org

The "What Is More Likely Test"

The "What Is More Likely Test"

Re: The "What Is More Likely Test"