An interesting "anomaly" in DNA research which suggests that Neanderthals and modern humans share DNA from relatively recent mixing between them, is confirming that interbreeding between early races of man led to more modern humans. While scientists theorise a split in common ancestory of human ancestors and Neanderthals being around 350,000 years ago, the new DNA research suggests that interbreeding occurred 35,000 years ago.
This of course challenges all previous theories of human ancestories. For one thing, if modern humans and Neanderthals interbred around 35,000 years ago, they must have been the same species otherwise they could not have produced viable offspring. Another is that it also suggests that the disappearance of the Neanderthal can be attributed to interbreeding with modern human so that the more "primitive" features of the earlier neanderthals are no longer distinguishable.
The newer data indicating the interbreeding of "modern" humans with Neanderthals is not incongruent with the history and chronology of the ancient races of man according to Oahspe. The earlier Druk races had crossed with I'hins and produced I'huans at least 3 times since 72,000 years ago. Through interbreeding or “retrobreeding” back into the Druk races, the I'huans were lost as a distinct race after the first two times they appeared, the first time being around 72,000, and the second around 39,000 years ago, according to Oahspe. The appearance of modern human fossils with archaic features approximately 40,000 years old, also co-relates with this second appearance of I'huans as detailed in Oahspe. (See reference below.)
The "modern human" DNA which scientists have found in Neanderthal (Druk) genes is consistent with the chronology of the ancient races of man as given in Oahspe. Modern (today’s) humans, being a more or less hybrid of I'hin and Druk would be sufficiently similar to the earlier so called modern humans of 40,000 years ago as to have close to identical DNA (as they are both I'huan, the "hybrid" between I'hin and Druk).
The mixing of the I'huans (Modern Man) and Druks (Neandeathal) after the appearance of the I'huans about 39,000 years ago, is also consistent with DNA research suggesting cross breeding around 35,000 years ago. From Oahspe, it appears as though the I'huans remained distinct (I’huans being capable of of everlasting life, while the Druks were not due to the ratio of angel/animal heritage) right up until the cycle before Aph, being about 28,000 years ago (Oahspe, Synopsis of 16 cycles).
It seems that the loss of the I'huan in the second round (the first being around 72,000 years ago) by interbreeding with Druks, produced a druk that was "less primitive" or in more complete terms, with a higher ratio of angel inheritance to asu animal inheritance, than before. So that by the time of the flood, there were a predominance of druks who had a higher ratio of I'huan heritage; and these were referred to as `barbarian' (Bk of Aph), being distinguished from earlier Druks. When these mixed with the I'hin after the flood, to manifest the third appearance of I'huans, their offspring had a sufficient ratio of angel/animal heritage to be further raised by further interbreeding with I'hins to produce a higher ratio of angel to animal heritage in the first of the Ghans (modern man) in Apollo'c cycle about 18,000 years ago.
Jan, 07. Extract: ||Neanderthals disappeared from the fossil record 28,000 years ago, about 12,000 years after modern humans began to spread across Europe. (Related: "Neanderthals' Last Stand Was in Gibraltar, Study Suggests" [September 13, 2006].)......... The skull was discovered in a cave in southwestern Romania and is at least 29,000 years old. A jawbone found nearby with similar morphological traits is dated to 40,500 years ago. The researchers conclude both specimens are about 40,000 years old. Comparisons to other skulls suggest the Romanian skull clearly belongs to a modern human, said paper co-author Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri.
"But some characteristics are extremely unusual and rather archaic," he said. For example, the forehead is "extremely long and flat" when compared to modern humans from western Europe and Africa, Trinkaus said. And the molars are the largest ever documented for modern humans...... These differences suggest that "modern human evolution did not stop when people we call moderns appeared," he said. "There have been significant changes in human anatomy since the time we have the first modern humans."
Moreover, Trinkaus said, the unusual features suggest intermixing between modern humans and Neanderthals.......... the skull shows "there is continuing evolution for the modern human skull even after humans got to Europe and other places in the world. But, he said, as the authors point out, the skull lacks uniquely Neanderthal traits and thus does not prove interbreeding. In fact, he said, similar archaic traits are found in modern human remains found in a cave in China.
Nevertheless, he added, evidence for interbreeding between modern humans and Neanderthals would not be a surprise."||
Oct 15, 07 Extract: ||........the Nature paper suggested that modern humans and Neanderthals shared a common ancestor more recently, and may have interbred after their separation...........They discovered that the data in the Nature paper contains sequence differences that appear to have arisen recently within the human lineage, which suggested something was wrong. Performing an estimation of the human- Neanderthal split date using the Nature data produced a value of 35,000 years, which is completely incompatible with the fossil record. Finally, using a date of 350,000 years for the split (obtained using the data from the Science paper), they found that the Nature data indicated extremely high levels of interbreeding between humans and Neanderthals; the Science data continued to suggest there was none.
All of these results point to one conclusion: the Neanderthal sequence in the Nature paper looks far more like that of modern humans than any other data would suggest is possible. All of these results point to one conclusion: the Neanderthal sequence in the Nature paper looks far more like that of modern humans than any other data would suggest is possible. Of course, there's a simple and obvious explanation for that discrepancy: the sequence is from modern humans. ....||