<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_27_1853237</id>
	<title>Neanderthals "Had Sex" With Modern Man</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1256643840000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>According to Professor Svante Paabo, director of genetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology\_evolution/article6888874.ece">Neanderthals and modern humans had sex across the species barrier</a>. The professor has been using DNA retrieved from fossils to piece together the entire Neanderthal genome, and plans on publishing his findings soon. He recently told a conference that he was sure the two species had had sex, but still had questions as to how "productive" the relations had been. "What I'm really interested in is, did we have children back then and did those children contribute to our variation today?" he said. "I'm sure that they had sex, but did it give offspring that contributed to us? We will be able to answer quite rigorously with the new [Neanderthal genome] sequence." What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Professor Svante Paabo , director of genetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology , Neanderthals and modern humans had sex across the species barrier .
The professor has been using DNA retrieved from fossils to piece together the entire Neanderthal genome , and plans on publishing his findings soon .
He recently told a conference that he was sure the two species had had sex , but still had questions as to how " productive " the relations had been .
" What I 'm really interested in is , did we have children back then and did those children contribute to our variation today ?
" he said .
" I 'm sure that they had sex , but did it give offspring that contributed to us ?
We will be able to answer quite rigorously with the new [ Neanderthal genome ] sequence .
" What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Professor Svante Paabo, director of genetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Neanderthals and modern humans had sex across the species barrier.
The professor has been using DNA retrieved from fossils to piece together the entire Neanderthal genome, and plans on publishing his findings soon.
He recently told a conference that he was sure the two species had had sex, but still had questions as to how "productive" the relations had been.
"What I'm really interested in is, did we have children back then and did those children contribute to our variation today?
" he said.
"I'm sure that they had sex, but did it give offspring that contributed to us?
We will be able to answer quite rigorously with the new [Neanderthal genome] sequence.
" What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891717</id>
	<title>Pics or it didn't happen</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1256649840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cave drawings will do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cave drawings will do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cave drawings will do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892177</id>
	<title>I am sorry...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256653740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is laughable...not that it could happen but that he is sure that it did.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is laughable...not that it could happen but that he is sure that it did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is laughable...not that it could happen but that he is sure that it did.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397</id>
	<title>We can finally explain wherefore Celtic people are</title>
	<author>a whoabot</author>
	<datestamp>1256647920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are!</p><p>(*Dodges tossed caber*)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are !
( * Dodges tossed caber * )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are!
(*Dodges tossed caber*)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893045</id>
	<title>Re:What a troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256661960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say you're proof enough that neanderthals did mate with humans...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say you 're proof enough that neanderthals did mate with humans.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say you're proof enough that neanderthals did mate with humans...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897103</id>
	<title>Next Stephen Sommers film</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm; could be the same kind of relations ship that horses/donkeys have. They could procreate and make sterile offspring.</p><p>Sure! They would be sterile but they would've had powers far beyond that of ordinary cave men! They could have made armies - two great powers, titans of their time fought a long and bitter war using surrogate Homo-Sap/ Neanderthal hybrids. Finally destroying themselves in a conflagration that is only vaguely described by the small, nomadic tribes that survived.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm ; could be the same kind of relations ship that horses/donkeys have .
They could procreate and make sterile offspring.Sure !
They would be sterile but they would 've had powers far beyond that of ordinary cave men !
They could have made armies - two great powers , titans of their time fought a long and bitter war using surrogate Homo-Sap/ Neanderthal hybrids .
Finally destroying themselves in a conflagration that is only vaguely described by the small , nomadic tribes that survived .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm; could be the same kind of relations ship that horses/donkeys have.
They could procreate and make sterile offspring.Sure!
They would be sterile but they would've had powers far beyond that of ordinary cave men!
They could have made armies - two great powers, titans of their time fought a long and bitter war using surrogate Homo-Sap/ Neanderthal hybrids.
Finally destroying themselves in a conflagration that is only vaguely described by the small, nomadic tribes that survived.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893069</id>
	<title>look at this man</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1256662200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and tell me we didn't interbreed with neanderthals</p><p><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/\_CM1pqhodMRQ/STVQv5XO3BI/AAAAAAAABU8/2Iw4dL9R6Kg/s1600-h/pablo\_picasso\_58.png" title="blogspot.com">http://1.bp.blogspot.com/\_CM1pqhodMRQ/STVQv5XO3BI/AAAAAAAABU8/2Iw4dL9R6Kg/s1600-h/pablo\_picasso\_58.png</a> [blogspot.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and tell me we did n't interbreed with neanderthalshttp : //1.bp.blogspot.com/ \ _CM1pqhodMRQ/STVQv5XO3BI/AAAAAAAABU8/2Iw4dL9R6Kg/s1600-h/pablo \ _picasso \ _58.png [ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and tell me we didn't interbreed with neanderthalshttp://1.bp.blogspot.com/\_CM1pqhodMRQ/STVQv5XO3BI/AAAAAAAABU8/2Iw4dL9R6Kg/s1600-h/pablo\_picasso\_58.png [blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892197</id>
	<title>Battlestar Galactica</title>
	<author>theReal-Hp\_Sauce</author>
	<datestamp>1256653920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't anyone see the last episode?  They found earth and it had primitive tribal humans already.  They were planning to educate them, give them language, teach them, etc... so obviously some would have sex (whether in love or not).</p><p>BSG is clearly an accurate account of our own history, so I was not surprised to see this headline.  Nor will I be surprised next year when the headline says they've discovered Humans mated with Cylons around the same time.</p><p>-hps</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't anyone see the last episode ?
They found earth and it had primitive tribal humans already .
They were planning to educate them , give them language , teach them , etc... so obviously some would have sex ( whether in love or not ) .BSG is clearly an accurate account of our own history , so I was not surprised to see this headline .
Nor will I be surprised next year when the headline says they 've discovered Humans mated with Cylons around the same time.-hps</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't anyone see the last episode?
They found earth and it had primitive tribal humans already.
They were planning to educate them, give them language, teach them, etc... so obviously some would have sex (whether in love or not).BSG is clearly an accurate account of our own history, so I was not surprised to see this headline.
Nor will I be surprised next year when the headline says they've discovered Humans mated with Cylons around the same time.-hps</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891499</id>
	<title>Proof...</title>
	<author>adosch</author>
	<datestamp>1256648340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>My neighbors and their four kids.  Their breed mimicks Harry and the Hendersons + Flinstones meets the Coneheads.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My neighbors and their four kids .
Their breed mimicks Harry and the Hendersons + Flinstones meets the Coneheads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My neighbors and their four kids.
Their breed mimicks Harry and the Hendersons + Flinstones meets the Coneheads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895673</id>
	<title>Re:Humans</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1256737680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn it, it's a society, not a league.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn it , it 's a society , not a league .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn it, it's a society, not a league.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896991</id>
	<title>Neanderthals Hunted, Raped And Ate Humans</title>
	<author>Taylor123456789</author>
	<datestamp>1256743440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I happend to be reading an interesting book "Them and Us: how Neanderthal predation created modern humans" about how physical, social, and psychological characteristics now seen as uniquely human (ie hairless bodies) are direct results of Neanderthal predation and natural selection.</p><p>Here's an article summarizing the book:</p><p><a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0909/S00246.htm" title="scoop.co.nz" rel="nofollow">http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0909/S00246.htm</a> [scoop.co.nz]</p><p>A must read if you are interested in this topic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I happend to be reading an interesting book " Them and Us : how Neanderthal predation created modern humans " about how physical , social , and psychological characteristics now seen as uniquely human ( ie hairless bodies ) are direct results of Neanderthal predation and natural selection.Here 's an article summarizing the book : http : //www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0909/S00246.htm [ scoop.co.nz ] A must read if you are interested in this topic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I happend to be reading an interesting book "Them and Us: how Neanderthal predation created modern humans" about how physical, social, and psychological characteristics now seen as uniquely human (ie hairless bodies) are direct results of Neanderthal predation and natural selection.Here's an article summarizing the book:http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0909/S00246.htm [scoop.co.nz]A must read if you are interested in this topic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893759</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>cyberzephyr</author>
	<datestamp>1256671800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's is sooooo fucked up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's is sooooo fucked up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's is sooooo fucked up!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891901</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256650920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For in those days</p></div><p>When the Kli is filled with Ohr</p><p><div class="quote"><p>there were giants in the earth,</p></div><p>Malchut is in a state of Gadlut</p><p><div class="quote"><p>and they bred with the son of man</p></div><p>and the Ohr descends into Zeir Anpin</p><p>l2kabbalah.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For in those daysWhen the Kli is filled with Ohrthere were giants in the earth,Malchut is in a state of Gadlutand they bred with the son of manand the Ohr descends into Zeir Anpinl2kabbalah .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For in those daysWhen the Kli is filled with Ohrthere were giants in the earth,Malchut is in a state of Gadlutand they bred with the son of manand the Ohr descends into Zeir Anpinl2kabbalah.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898345</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>Bob-taro</author>
	<datestamp>1256748960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's in Genesis 6:1 (AC was close)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.  Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with  man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
</p><p>The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's in Genesis 6 : 1 ( AC was close ) When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them , the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful , and they married any of them they chose .
Then the LORD said , " My Spirit will not contend with man forever , for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years .
" The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them .
They were the heroes of old , men of renown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's in Genesis 6:1 (AC was close)When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with  man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years.
"
The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them.
They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893087</id>
	<title>Sex</title>
	<author>RoboRay</author>
	<datestamp>1256662500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So easy a caveman can do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So easy a caveman can do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So easy a caveman can do it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893279</id>
	<title>Re:Wonder how they will work this out...</title>
	<author>rainmaestro</author>
	<datestamp>1256665140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not necessarily. It is possible for two distinct species to interbreed and produce fertile offspring. It is *rare*, but it has been documented in several hybrid species (ligers, mules, etc). Generally speaking, male hybrids are sterile, while females have the rare chance of being fertile. The ability to produce fertile offspring is an indicator of two species being part of the same genus, not species.</p><p>As far as interbreeding goes, the genetic structure between the two is quite similar. Assuming the current accepted theory that the common ancestor is Homo heidelbergensis, our DNA would be about 98-99\% identical with Homo neanderthalensis. Additionally, current theory based on genetic analysis suggests that the hominoid X chromosome diverged much later than the initial divergence, suggesting that interbreeding may have happened for in excess of 1 million years afterward.</p><p>Having said that, hybrids are generally sterile, and are generally more prone to disease, genetic disorders, etc. Even if we did mix, the offspring would almost certainly have died off by natural selection (hybrids are almost always inferior to their parents in terms of fitness for survival).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not necessarily .
It is possible for two distinct species to interbreed and produce fertile offspring .
It is * rare * , but it has been documented in several hybrid species ( ligers , mules , etc ) .
Generally speaking , male hybrids are sterile , while females have the rare chance of being fertile .
The ability to produce fertile offspring is an indicator of two species being part of the same genus , not species.As far as interbreeding goes , the genetic structure between the two is quite similar .
Assuming the current accepted theory that the common ancestor is Homo heidelbergensis , our DNA would be about 98-99 \ % identical with Homo neanderthalensis .
Additionally , current theory based on genetic analysis suggests that the hominoid X chromosome diverged much later than the initial divergence , suggesting that interbreeding may have happened for in excess of 1 million years afterward.Having said that , hybrids are generally sterile , and are generally more prone to disease , genetic disorders , etc .
Even if we did mix , the offspring would almost certainly have died off by natural selection ( hybrids are almost always inferior to their parents in terms of fitness for survival ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not necessarily.
It is possible for two distinct species to interbreed and produce fertile offspring.
It is *rare*, but it has been documented in several hybrid species (ligers, mules, etc).
Generally speaking, male hybrids are sterile, while females have the rare chance of being fertile.
The ability to produce fertile offspring is an indicator of two species being part of the same genus, not species.As far as interbreeding goes, the genetic structure between the two is quite similar.
Assuming the current accepted theory that the common ancestor is Homo heidelbergensis, our DNA would be about 98-99\% identical with Homo neanderthalensis.
Additionally, current theory based on genetic analysis suggests that the hominoid X chromosome diverged much later than the initial divergence, suggesting that interbreeding may have happened for in excess of 1 million years afterward.Having said that, hybrids are generally sterile, and are generally more prone to disease, genetic disorders, etc.
Even if we did mix, the offspring would almost certainly have died off by natural selection (hybrids are almost always inferior to their parents in terms of fitness for survival).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891615</id>
	<title>Jurassic Park redux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>All we need to do now is to take that DNA, splice it back together with human 'junk' DNA and breed Neanderthals for the next great Disney theme park! Instead of being entertained by people walking around in giant suits pretending to be cartoon characters, it could be the greatest edutainment center in the world!!<br> <br>But seriously. People have sex across interspecies barriers all the time; animal, vegetable, mineral, it doesn't matter. I doubt that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals looked at each other and said, Hey, I can't have sex with you, you're obviously a different species! Probably they thought to themselves, Two arms, two legs, looks about right, the bits are in the right places, why not?</htmltext>
<tokenext>All we need to do now is to take that DNA , splice it back together with human 'junk ' DNA and breed Neanderthals for the next great Disney theme park !
Instead of being entertained by people walking around in giant suits pretending to be cartoon characters , it could be the greatest edutainment center in the world ! !
But seriously .
People have sex across interspecies barriers all the time ; animal , vegetable , mineral , it does n't matter .
I doubt that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals looked at each other and said , Hey , I ca n't have sex with you , you 're obviously a different species !
Probably they thought to themselves , Two arms , two legs , looks about right , the bits are in the right places , why not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All we need to do now is to take that DNA, splice it back together with human 'junk' DNA and breed Neanderthals for the next great Disney theme park!
Instead of being entertained by people walking around in giant suits pretending to be cartoon characters, it could be the greatest edutainment center in the world!!
But seriously.
People have sex across interspecies barriers all the time; animal, vegetable, mineral, it doesn't matter.
I doubt that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals looked at each other and said, Hey, I can't have sex with you, you're obviously a different species!
Probably they thought to themselves, Two arms, two legs, looks about right, the bits are in the right places, why not?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898091</id>
	<title>Paging Captain Obvious</title>
	<author>RogueWarrior65</author>
	<datestamp>1256747760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just go down to your local watering hole any Friday night and you'll see herds of neanderthals hitting on our human women.  The real question is why human women go for them.  Now if I could just get a couple million dollars of grant money I'd be happy to research the issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just go down to your local watering hole any Friday night and you 'll see herds of neanderthals hitting on our human women .
The real question is why human women go for them .
Now if I could just get a couple million dollars of grant money I 'd be happy to research the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just go down to your local watering hole any Friday night and you'll see herds of neanderthals hitting on our human women.
The real question is why human women go for them.
Now if I could just get a couple million dollars of grant money I'd be happy to research the issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896257</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>mindbrane</author>
	<datestamp>1256740680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry for the lack of specifics in what follows but if anyone cares to chase after it, it's not that hard to run down. IIRC the last segment of a "The Miracle Planet" and "The Brain's Big Bang" both address the supposed cultural explosion that took place ~50K ago. Steven Pinker, mit language theorist, suggested there might be many variables that came into play and that any one, or few, changes, either genetic or environmental, would probably not be adequate enough to substantiate the significant changes that archaeological evidence suggests. Although I've never come across anyone who baldly stated Neanderthals could interbred with our species the question has always hung in the air. What makes the question tantalizing is that our species is ~100k years old and the Neanderthals older. If our kind was +50K, even as much as +150K years old before said cultural revolution took place than something like interbreeding with a close species tends to look attractive. I'd go into how difficult it is to pick up an attractive partner when you don't speak the language but this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. Take my word for it, you'd almost need to club somebody over the head and drag them home.</p><p>Neanderthals are now thought to have been far more widely spread around the old world then was previously thought. The squat, thick build of the northern European Neanderthal was complimented by less compact builds in southern and more mild climates. The outstanding anatomical difference between Neanderthals and us is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larynx" title="wikipedia.org">larynx</a> [wikipedia.org]. In our species the larynx makes a dangerous descent down the throat to a much lower position than that in Neanderthals and other primates. The lower position of the larynx makes choking on food more likely but allows for the clear pronunciation of sounds that enables our complex speech. It's thought our complex social behaviour tied to our compulsion for social communication is in large part what drove the development of our big brains. If language can be said to have driven our social development than it's possible Neanderthals with their much more restricted vocal apparatus were at best able to mimic our fast evolving, language driven culture.</p><p>While not being able to answer questions as to whether we could have interbred viably with Neanderthals the language issue does raise a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamark" title="wikipedia.org">Lamarkian</a> [wikipedia.org] question as to the hows and whys of an essential species trait, like language in our species, positions and predisposes the species to evolve outside of the descent with modification that informs genetic, neo Darwinian theory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry for the lack of specifics in what follows but if anyone cares to chase after it , it 's not that hard to run down .
IIRC the last segment of a " The Miracle Planet " and " The Brain 's Big Bang " both address the supposed cultural explosion that took place ~ 50K ago .
Steven Pinker , mit language theorist , suggested there might be many variables that came into play and that any one , or few , changes , either genetic or environmental , would probably not be adequate enough to substantiate the significant changes that archaeological evidence suggests .
Although I 've never come across anyone who baldly stated Neanderthals could interbred with our species the question has always hung in the air .
What makes the question tantalizing is that our species is ~ 100k years old and the Neanderthals older .
If our kind was + 50K , even as much as + 150K years old before said cultural revolution took place than something like interbreeding with a close species tends to look attractive .
I 'd go into how difficult it is to pick up an attractive partner when you do n't speak the language but this is / .
Take my word for it , you 'd almost need to club somebody over the head and drag them home.Neanderthals are now thought to have been far more widely spread around the old world then was previously thought .
The squat , thick build of the northern European Neanderthal was complimented by less compact builds in southern and more mild climates .
The outstanding anatomical difference between Neanderthals and us is the larynx [ wikipedia.org ] .
In our species the larynx makes a dangerous descent down the throat to a much lower position than that in Neanderthals and other primates .
The lower position of the larynx makes choking on food more likely but allows for the clear pronunciation of sounds that enables our complex speech .
It 's thought our complex social behaviour tied to our compulsion for social communication is in large part what drove the development of our big brains .
If language can be said to have driven our social development than it 's possible Neanderthals with their much more restricted vocal apparatus were at best able to mimic our fast evolving , language driven culture.While not being able to answer questions as to whether we could have interbred viably with Neanderthals the language issue does raise a Lamarkian [ wikipedia.org ] question as to the hows and whys of an essential species trait , like language in our species , positions and predisposes the species to evolve outside of the descent with modification that informs genetic , neo Darwinian theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry for the lack of specifics in what follows but if anyone cares to chase after it, it's not that hard to run down.
IIRC the last segment of a "The Miracle Planet" and "The Brain's Big Bang" both address the supposed cultural explosion that took place ~50K ago.
Steven Pinker, mit language theorist, suggested there might be many variables that came into play and that any one, or few, changes, either genetic or environmental, would probably not be adequate enough to substantiate the significant changes that archaeological evidence suggests.
Although I've never come across anyone who baldly stated Neanderthals could interbred with our species the question has always hung in the air.
What makes the question tantalizing is that our species is ~100k years old and the Neanderthals older.
If our kind was +50K, even as much as +150K years old before said cultural revolution took place than something like interbreeding with a close species tends to look attractive.
I'd go into how difficult it is to pick up an attractive partner when you don't speak the language but this is /.
Take my word for it, you'd almost need to club somebody over the head and drag them home.Neanderthals are now thought to have been far more widely spread around the old world then was previously thought.
The squat, thick build of the northern European Neanderthal was complimented by less compact builds in southern and more mild climates.
The outstanding anatomical difference between Neanderthals and us is the larynx [wikipedia.org].
In our species the larynx makes a dangerous descent down the throat to a much lower position than that in Neanderthals and other primates.
The lower position of the larynx makes choking on food more likely but allows for the clear pronunciation of sounds that enables our complex speech.
It's thought our complex social behaviour tied to our compulsion for social communication is in large part what drove the development of our big brains.
If language can be said to have driven our social development than it's possible Neanderthals with their much more restricted vocal apparatus were at best able to mimic our fast evolving, language driven culture.While not being able to answer questions as to whether we could have interbred viably with Neanderthals the language issue does raise a Lamarkian [wikipedia.org] question as to the hows and whys of an essential species trait, like language in our species, positions and predisposes the species to evolve outside of the descent with modification that informs genetic, neo Darwinian theory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895649</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>(arg!)Styopa</author>
	<datestamp>1256737500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's hard for this layman to understand is the certainty with which anthropologists and such have approached the issue.</p><p>Why would there be any question but that neanderthals and humans had sex together?  OF COURSE THEY DID.  In the 21st century, we call it Rule 34.  Previously, it was simply called perversion: the human male will generally mate with anything that has an-even-somewhat-suitable orifice.</p><p>Further, probably every one of us knows one or more people who LOOK like neanderthals - heavy brow ridge, differently-shaped head, etc. cf Ron Perlman <a href="http://goremasternews.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/ro-perlman.jpg" title="wordpress.com">http://goremasternews.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/ro-perlman.jpg</a> [wordpress.com]</p><p>Commonsensically, it seems obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's hard for this layman to understand is the certainty with which anthropologists and such have approached the issue.Why would there be any question but that neanderthals and humans had sex together ?
OF COURSE THEY DID .
In the 21st century , we call it Rule 34 .
Previously , it was simply called perversion : the human male will generally mate with anything that has an-even-somewhat-suitable orifice.Further , probably every one of us knows one or more people who LOOK like neanderthals - heavy brow ridge , differently-shaped head , etc .
cf Ron Perlman http : //goremasternews.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/ro-perlman.jpg [ wordpress.com ] Commonsensically , it seems obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's hard for this layman to understand is the certainty with which anthropologists and such have approached the issue.Why would there be any question but that neanderthals and humans had sex together?
OF COURSE THEY DID.
In the 21st century, we call it Rule 34.
Previously, it was simply called perversion: the human male will generally mate with anything that has an-even-somewhat-suitable orifice.Further, probably every one of us knows one or more people who LOOK like neanderthals - heavy brow ridge, differently-shaped head, etc.
cf Ron Perlman http://goremasternews.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/ro-perlman.jpg [wordpress.com]Commonsensically, it seems obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892901</id>
	<title>Love the old way</title>
	<author>oneleggedmule</author>
	<datestamp>1256659980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back to more utopian times where people actually co-exist in love and harmony, regardless of race language religion<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and species</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back to more utopian times where people actually co-exist in love and harmony , regardless of race language religion ... and species</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back to more utopian times where people actually co-exist in love and harmony, regardless of race language religion ... and species</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893379</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256666760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your sarcasm is unwarranted, this is slashdot, there'd be plenty who would 'hit that'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your sarcasm is unwarranted , this is slashdot , there 'd be plenty who would 'hit that' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your sarcasm is unwarranted, this is slashdot, there'd be plenty who would 'hit that'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899265</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256753040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if there are any Neanderthals left?...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if there are any Neanderthals left ? .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if there are any Neanderthals left?...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29901783</id>
	<title>Gives new meaning to Geico tagline</title>
	<author>gujo-odori</author>
	<datestamp>1256763480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This gives new meaning to the Geico tagline, "So easy even a cave man could do it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This gives new meaning to the Geico tagline , " So easy even a cave man could do it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This gives new meaning to the Geico tagline, "So easy even a cave man could do it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894575</id>
	<title>A possible hybrid skeleton already exists</title>
	<author>jabjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1256727420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapedo\_child" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapedo\_child</a> [wikipedia.org]
<br> <br>
The two species lived side by side long enough that mating (and rapes?) must have happened. It is quite possible this was often enough, and the species close enough, that a fertile off spring was born. It's also quite possible these fertile hybrids had children and so and so on, but it's also possible all that happened, but no trace is left in modern humans. If there is any traces, they aren't common enough to have shown up yet. A rare gene here and there that's not yet been sequenced. When personal sequencing is cheap enough to be done for personalized medicine, that's when a few genes might turn up. But it is possible we might hit the jackpot with a mitochondria (a maternal line).</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapedo \ _child [ wikipedia.org ] The two species lived side by side long enough that mating ( and rapes ?
) must have happened .
It is quite possible this was often enough , and the species close enough , that a fertile off spring was born .
It 's also quite possible these fertile hybrids had children and so and so on , but it 's also possible all that happened , but no trace is left in modern humans .
If there is any traces , they are n't common enough to have shown up yet .
A rare gene here and there that 's not yet been sequenced .
When personal sequencing is cheap enough to be done for personalized medicine , that 's when a few genes might turn up .
But it is possible we might hit the jackpot with a mitochondria ( a maternal line ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapedo\_child [wikipedia.org]
 
The two species lived side by side long enough that mating (and rapes?
) must have happened.
It is quite possible this was often enough, and the species close enough, that a fertile off spring was born.
It's also quite possible these fertile hybrids had children and so and so on, but it's also possible all that happened, but no trace is left in modern humans.
If there is any traces, they aren't common enough to have shown up yet.
A rare gene here and there that's not yet been sequenced.
When personal sequencing is cheap enough to be done for personalized medicine, that's when a few genes might turn up.
But it is possible we might hit the jackpot with a mitochondria (a maternal line).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892143</id>
	<title>Clan</title>
	<author>JustOK</author>
	<datestamp>1256653380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean M. Auel</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean M. Auel</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean M. Auel</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895179</id>
	<title>Re:Most likely</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1256733600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but it <b>may or may not</b> have been consensual.</p></div><p>"May or may not"?</p><p>"Your honor, the jury has come to a verdict that the accused may or may not be guilty."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but it may or may not have been consensual .
" May or may not " ?
" Your honor , the jury has come to a verdict that the accused may or may not be guilty .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but it may or may not have been consensual.
"May or may not"?
"Your honor, the jury has come to a verdict that the accused may or may not be guilty.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891879</id>
	<title>Re:Genesis 6</title>
	<author>D Ninja</author>
	<datestamp>1256650860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hm...very interesting take on that.  I'm actually going to do some research and see what else is out there regarding the Nephilim.  One translation of the name means "giant" or "strong men" which Neanderthals could have easily appeared to be.</p><p>As you said, amusing to speculate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hm...very interesting take on that .
I 'm actually going to do some research and see what else is out there regarding the Nephilim .
One translation of the name means " giant " or " strong men " which Neanderthals could have easily appeared to be.As you said , amusing to speculate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hm...very interesting take on that.
I'm actually going to do some research and see what else is out there regarding the Nephilim.
One translation of the name means "giant" or "strong men" which Neanderthals could have easily appeared to be.As you said, amusing to speculate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455</id>
	<title>Wonder how they will work this out...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But wouldn't that mean that if they did actually produce offspring then by the definition they aren't separate species? I am betting they won't ever make the claim that they had offspring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But would n't that mean that if they did actually produce offspring then by the definition they are n't separate species ?
I am betting they wo n't ever make the claim that they had offspring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But wouldn't that mean that if they did actually produce offspring then by the definition they aren't separate species?
I am betting they won't ever make the claim that they had offspring.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891955</id>
	<title>Re:Genesis 6</title>
	<author>dgatwood</author>
	<datestamp>1256651400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you mean that the sons of God were homo sapiens, the daughters of men were the neanderthals (or vice versa), and that the Nephilim were their offspring.  And that's quite plausible.  There's probably a great deal of factual ancient human history in those early books of the Bible, but they are almost utterly indecipherable because of the primitive understanding of the authors and the generations of degradation through oral tradition....  Our history rapidly converges to factual as the generations progress and humanity becomes more educated on the whole.  Even still, when you look at today's scientific papers in ten thousand years, they will read like those early books of the Bible read today.  Food for thought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you mean that the sons of God were homo sapiens , the daughters of men were the neanderthals ( or vice versa ) , and that the Nephilim were their offspring .
And that 's quite plausible .
There 's probably a great deal of factual ancient human history in those early books of the Bible , but they are almost utterly indecipherable because of the primitive understanding of the authors and the generations of degradation through oral tradition.... Our history rapidly converges to factual as the generations progress and humanity becomes more educated on the whole .
Even still , when you look at today 's scientific papers in ten thousand years , they will read like those early books of the Bible read today .
Food for thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you mean that the sons of God were homo sapiens, the daughters of men were the neanderthals (or vice versa), and that the Nephilim were their offspring.
And that's quite plausible.
There's probably a great deal of factual ancient human history in those early books of the Bible, but they are almost utterly indecipherable because of the primitive understanding of the authors and the generations of degradation through oral tradition....  Our history rapidly converges to factual as the generations progress and humanity becomes more educated on the whole.
Even still, when you look at today's scientific papers in ten thousand years, they will read like those early books of the Bible read today.
Food for thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899053</id>
	<title>So Did They Breed?</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1256752080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Did they breed?<br>I look around at the ridged unibrows, apelike features, big feet, bad postures and basic thought processes of those around me and I have all doubt removed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did they breed ? I look around at the ridged unibrows , apelike features , big feet , bad postures and basic thought processes of those around me and I have all doubt removed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Did they breed?I look around at the ridged unibrows, apelike features, big feet, bad postures and basic thought processes of those around me and I have all doubt removed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894599</id>
	<title>This has all happened before...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256727840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And it will all happen again.</p><p>[Cue hindu prayer theme music]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And it will all happen again .
[ Cue hindu prayer theme music ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it will all happen again.
[Cue hindu prayer theme music]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891965</id>
	<title>Despite It's Unsavory Title... Eaters of the Dead</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1256651460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Despite it's unsavory title, the exploits and travels of Ahmad ibn Fadlan suggest the wild Eaters Of The Dead were in fact Neanderthals who survived to live and pillage amongst "modern" Vikings. Somewhere in the appendix it was posited Neanderthals may not have died off, but instead melded with modern homo sapiens. Good read.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite it 's unsavory title , the exploits and travels of Ahmad ibn Fadlan suggest the wild Eaters Of The Dead were in fact Neanderthals who survived to live and pillage amongst " modern " Vikings .
Somewhere in the appendix it was posited Neanderthals may not have died off , but instead melded with modern homo sapiens .
Good read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite it's unsavory title, the exploits and travels of Ahmad ibn Fadlan suggest the wild Eaters Of The Dead were in fact Neanderthals who survived to live and pillage amongst "modern" Vikings.
Somewhere in the appendix it was posited Neanderthals may not have died off, but instead melded with modern homo sapiens.
Good read.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541</id>
	<title>Humans</title>
	<author>tool462</author>
	<datestamp>1256648640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Humans have had sex with anything that has a hole.  The real question is with what frequency and what success.  If there were hybrid human-neanderthal babies running around, that would be interesting.  It would also explain the existence of 4chan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans have had sex with anything that has a hole .
The real question is with what frequency and what success .
If there were hybrid human-neanderthal babies running around , that would be interesting .
It would also explain the existence of 4chan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans have had sex with anything that has a hole.
The real question is with what frequency and what success.
If there were hybrid human-neanderthal babies running around, that would be interesting.
It would also explain the existence of 4chan.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892415</id>
	<title>Re:Proclivities</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256655900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since Hetero means different i would say they were heterosexual extremists.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since Hetero means different i would say they were heterosexual extremists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since Hetero means different i would say they were heterosexual extremists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891715</id>
	<title>And in other scientific news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Scientists today announced recent evidence suggests beer was invented by Cro-magnon man.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Scientists today announced recent evidence suggests beer was invented by Cro-magnon man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Scientists today announced recent evidence suggests beer was invented by Cro-magnon man.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897075</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Much of the mythology you allude to is more easily and simply explained as a recognition and fear of the unknown, stemming back to when one's neighbors twenty miles away were an anathema to us. You don't need to look back 50,000 years to interaction with Neanderthals to find plenty of instances in which wildly different cultures clash, and in so doing demonize or mythologize one another. A bit of time with Livy or Herodotus can produce all kinds of "factual" assertions that there be monsters over the horizon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Much of the mythology you allude to is more easily and simply explained as a recognition and fear of the unknown , stemming back to when one 's neighbors twenty miles away were an anathema to us .
You do n't need to look back 50,000 years to interaction with Neanderthals to find plenty of instances in which wildly different cultures clash , and in so doing demonize or mythologize one another .
A bit of time with Livy or Herodotus can produce all kinds of " factual " assertions that there be monsters over the horizon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Much of the mythology you allude to is more easily and simply explained as a recognition and fear of the unknown, stemming back to when one's neighbors twenty miles away were an anathema to us.
You don't need to look back 50,000 years to interaction with Neanderthals to find plenty of instances in which wildly different cultures clash, and in so doing demonize or mythologize one another.
A bit of time with Livy or Herodotus can produce all kinds of "factual" assertions that there be monsters over the horizon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891461</id>
	<title>Brewery?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably the same brewery that allow one man to use his goat when felling the urge!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably the same brewery that allow one man to use his goat when felling the urge ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably the same brewery that allow one man to use his goat when felling the urge!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899807</id>
	<title>Re:Did humans and Neanderthals interbreed?</title>
	<author>robajob</author>
	<datestamp>1256755080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You, sir, are my new hero, even though you posted a funnier version of what I was about to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You , sir , are my new hero , even though you posted a funnier version of what I was about to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, sir, are my new hero, even though you posted a funnier version of what I was about to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892001</id>
	<title>Re:Wonder how they will work this out...</title>
	<author>izomiac</author>
	<datestamp>1256651940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Species can be defined in four ways (IIRC).  The biological species concept is just one of them, although probably the least arbitrary.  It's rather interesting, since human classification of animals into species doesn't seem to vary much by culture (e.g. isolated jungle tribes generally group them the same way the modern world does).  The problem is scientifically validating the classification since it's more semantics than anything.  The lack of gene transfer between species is about the only biological distinction, but even that isn't absolute.  There is the rare fertile mule, for example.  Viruses can also transduct genetic material between hosts, perhaps different species, although that would be rare and even more rarely heritable.<br> <br>
Basically, there is little chance that Humans and Neanderthals will be called the same species because that's not how they are popularly viewed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Species can be defined in four ways ( IIRC ) .
The biological species concept is just one of them , although probably the least arbitrary .
It 's rather interesting , since human classification of animals into species does n't seem to vary much by culture ( e.g .
isolated jungle tribes generally group them the same way the modern world does ) .
The problem is scientifically validating the classification since it 's more semantics than anything .
The lack of gene transfer between species is about the only biological distinction , but even that is n't absolute .
There is the rare fertile mule , for example .
Viruses can also transduct genetic material between hosts , perhaps different species , although that would be rare and even more rarely heritable .
Basically , there is little chance that Humans and Neanderthals will be called the same species because that 's not how they are popularly viewed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Species can be defined in four ways (IIRC).
The biological species concept is just one of them, although probably the least arbitrary.
It's rather interesting, since human classification of animals into species doesn't seem to vary much by culture (e.g.
isolated jungle tribes generally group them the same way the modern world does).
The problem is scientifically validating the classification since it's more semantics than anything.
The lack of gene transfer between species is about the only biological distinction, but even that isn't absolute.
There is the rare fertile mule, for example.
Viruses can also transduct genetic material between hosts, perhaps different species, although that would be rare and even more rarely heritable.
Basically, there is little chance that Humans and Neanderthals will be called the same species because that's not how they are popularly viewed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337</id>
	<title>Isn't</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256647620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this where ginger people came from?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this where ginger people came from ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this where ginger people came from?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894623</id>
	<title>Of course they did.</title>
	<author>Timosch</author>
	<datestamp>1256727960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and I still have my doubts that they've become extinct at all. When I look around me, I can't help but come to the conclusion that they still live among us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and I still have my doubts that they 've become extinct at all .
When I look around me , I ca n't help but come to the conclusion that they still live among us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and I still have my doubts that they've become extinct at all.
When I look around me, I can't help but come to the conclusion that they still live among us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891485</id>
	<title>WELL</title>
	<author>JeanBaptiste</author>
	<datestamp>1256648220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i did briefly date this one girl in high school.... i was pretty drunk and.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i did briefly date this one girl in high school.... i was pretty drunk and.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i did briefly date this one girl in high school.... i was pretty drunk and.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891471</id>
	<title>Another example</title>
	<author>Dyinobal</author>
	<datestamp>1256648160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just another example of rule 34.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another example of rule 34 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another example of rule 34.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891905</id>
	<title>Gaius in the last episode of Battlestar was right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256651040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just saying....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just saying... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just saying....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895309</id>
	<title>This story posted in the wrong section?</title>
	<author>Fantastic Lad</author>
	<datestamp>1256734500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I right-clicked the properties for the little icon of the golden statue from <i>Raiders of the Lost Ark.</i>  Here's what came back. . .</p><p>"//slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=<b>idle</b>"</p><p>Thought the mis-spelling was cute.</p><p>And yes, it takes a certain kind of curiosity to check these things.</p><p>(Sorry.)</p><p>-FL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I right-clicked the properties for the little icon of the golden statue from Raiders of the Lost Ark .
Here 's what came back .
. .
" //slashdot.org/index2.pl ? fhfilter = idle " Thought the mis-spelling was cute.And yes , it takes a certain kind of curiosity to check these things. ( Sorry .
) -FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I right-clicked the properties for the little icon of the golden statue from Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Here's what came back.
. .
"//slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=idle"Thought the mis-spelling was cute.And yes, it takes a certain kind of curiosity to check these things.(Sorry.
)-FL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892101</id>
	<title>Not a creationist.</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1256653020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just for the record, I'm not a creationist, except in the sense that I believe that God created the Universe <i>ex nihilo.</i>  In the words of John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1, ""For, to my mind, this is a certain principle, that nothing is here treated of but the visible form of the world. He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just for the record , I 'm not a creationist , except in the sense that I believe that God created the Universe ex nihilo .
In the words of John Calvin , commenting on Genesis 1 , " " For , to my mind , this is a certain principle , that nothing is here treated of but the visible form of the world .
He who would learn astronomy , and other recondite arts , let him go elsewhere .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just for the record, I'm not a creationist, except in the sense that I believe that God created the Universe ex nihilo.
In the words of John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1, ""For, to my mind, this is a certain principle, that nothing is here treated of but the visible form of the world.
He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896553</id>
	<title>Mod parent back up!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256741760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not offtopic. That's downright funny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not offtopic .
That 's downright funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not offtopic.
That's downright funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891413</id>
	<title>Oeuf Corse !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256647980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Modern Man has sex with anything from goats, dolphins, and flies to machines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Modern Man has sex with anything from goats , dolphins , and flies to machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Modern Man has sex with anything from goats, dolphins, and flies to machines.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899141</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256752440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not everybody, as far as i know this is only common in Europe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not everybody , as far as i know this is only common in Europe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not everybody, as far as i know this is only common in Europe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895683</id>
	<title>its not much of a stretch</title>
	<author>emagery</author>
	<datestamp>1256737740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... given that recent sequencing of the h.neanderthalensis' genome showed them to be predominantly redheads and blondes... and those same hair colors are only native to h.sapiens whose ancestry hails from the one region where the two species mappably coexisted?  Yes, that makes no sense at all</htmltext>
<tokenext>... given that recent sequencing of the h.neanderthalensis ' genome showed them to be predominantly redheads and blondes... and those same hair colors are only native to h.sapiens whose ancestry hails from the one region where the two species mappably coexisted ?
Yes , that makes no sense at all</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... given that recent sequencing of the h.neanderthalensis' genome showed them to be predominantly redheads and blondes... and those same hair colors are only native to h.sapiens whose ancestry hails from the one region where the two species mappably coexisted?
Yes, that makes no sense at all</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892111</id>
	<title>Re:Humans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256653140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Humans have had sex with anything that has a hole. The real question is with what frequency and what success. If there were hybrid human-neanderthal babies running around, that would be interesting. It would also explain the existence of 4chan.</p></div></blockquote><p>As an official representative of the Neanderthal Anti-Defamation League, I must insist that you cease and desist in this derogatory comparison of our highly evolved Neanderthal friends and the uncultured apes from 4chan.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans have had sex with anything that has a hole .
The real question is with what frequency and what success .
If there were hybrid human-neanderthal babies running around , that would be interesting .
It would also explain the existence of 4chan.As an official representative of the Neanderthal Anti-Defamation League , I must insist that you cease and desist in this derogatory comparison of our highly evolved Neanderthal friends and the uncultured apes from 4chan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans have had sex with anything that has a hole.
The real question is with what frequency and what success.
If there were hybrid human-neanderthal babies running around, that would be interesting.
It would also explain the existence of 4chan.As an official representative of the Neanderthal Anti-Defamation League, I must insist that you cease and desist in this derogatory comparison of our highly evolved Neanderthal friends and the uncultured apes from 4chan.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897319</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1256744820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you haven't yet, you should read <i>Eaters of the Dead</i> by Michael Crichton. Imagine the Beowulf epic, but Grendel is a Neanderthal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have n't yet , you should read Eaters of the Dead by Michael Crichton .
Imagine the Beowulf epic , but Grendel is a Neanderthal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you haven't yet, you should read Eaters of the Dead by Michael Crichton.
Imagine the Beowulf epic, but Grendel is a Neanderthal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894227</id>
	<title>wondering,</title>
	<author>Nicolas MONNET</author>
	<datestamp>1256721360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who created god? Is it turtles all the way?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who created god ?
Is it turtles all the way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who created god?
Is it turtles all the way?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892997</id>
	<title>TINA'S HERE...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256661420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WE'RE GETTING BACK TOGETHER!</htmltext>
<tokenext>WE 'RE GETTING BACK TOGETHER !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WE'RE GETTING BACK TOGETHER!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891685</id>
	<title>C'mon, the Bible told us this long ago...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Genesis 6: "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose... There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Genesis 6 : " And it came to pass , when men began to multiply on the face of the earth , and daughters were born unto them , that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair ; and they took them wives of all which they chose... There were giants in the earth in those days ; and also after that , when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men , and they bare children to them , the same became mighty men which were of old , men of renown .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Genesis 6: "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose... There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29946048</id>
	<title>If any viable offspring resulted</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257084840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>then they were the same species</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then they were the same species</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then they were the same species</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892069</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>RazorSharp</author>
	<datestamp>1256652660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's always good to try something new. Plus, I bet they'd be wild in the sack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's always good to try something new .
Plus , I bet they 'd be wild in the sack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's always good to try something new.
Plus, I bet they'd be wild in the sack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892079</id>
	<title>Re:We can finally explain wherefore Celtic people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256652780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are!</i></p><p>Darn right. When I'm naked, I kind of look a little <i>too</i> much like a 6'5" orangutan/caveman hybrid for it to be coincidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are ! Darn right .
When I 'm naked , I kind of look a little too much like a 6'5 " orangutan/caveman hybrid for it to be coincidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are!Darn right.
When I'm naked, I kind of look a little too much like a 6'5" orangutan/caveman hybrid for it to be coincidence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898953</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1256751600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many people looked at the neanderthal photo attached to this article and thought to themselves, "Yeah, I'd hit that!"?</p></div><p>me.   twice even.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many people looked at the neanderthal photo attached to this article and thought to themselves , " Yeah , I 'd hit that ! " ? me .
twice even .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many people looked at the neanderthal photo attached to this article and thought to themselves, "Yeah, I'd hit that!"?me.
twice even.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893003</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>Libertarian001</author>
	<datestamp>1256661480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you implying that I RTFA?  You must be new here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you implying that I RTFA ?
You must be new here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you implying that I RTFA?
You must be new here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893261</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>Michael Woodhams</author>
	<datestamp>1256664780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>All the published studies looking for this introgression have been based on neanderthal mDNA.</i></p><p>There is this one (citation follows.) It is based purely on the pattern of variation within modern humans - it does not rely on ancient DNA. The Neandertal DNA project should conclusively confirm or refute the hypothesis that the gene came from Neandertals (although it may have come from H. erectus instead.) (There is one earlier similar paper from about 2002 I think, but I found it unconvincing and I can't be bothered finding it.)</p><p>doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606966103 Evans et al. "Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage" Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. <b>103</b> 18178 (2006)</p><p>Abstract</p><p>At the center of the debate on the emergence of modern humans and their spread throughout the globe is the question of whether archaic Homo lineages contributed to the modern human gene pool, and more importantly, whether such contributions impacted the evolutionary adaptation of our species. A major obstacle to answering this question is that low levels of admixture with archaic lineages are not expected to leave extensive traces in the modern human gene pool because of genetic drift. Loci that have undergone strong positive selection, however, offer a unique opportunity to identify low-level admixture with archaic lineages, provided that the introgressed archaic allele has risen to high frequency under positive selection. The gene microcephalin (MCPH1) regulates brain size during development and has experienced positive selection in the lineage leading to Homo sapiens. Within modern humans, a group of closely related haplotypes at this locus, known as haplogroup D, rose from a single copy 37,000 years ago and swept to exceptionally high frequency (70\% worldwide today) because of positive selection. Here, we examine the origin of haplogroup D. By using the interhaplogroup divergence test, we show that haplogroup D likely originated from a lineage separated from modern humans 1.1 million years ago and introgressed into humans by 37,000 years ago. This finding supports the possibility of admixture between modern humans and archaic Homo populations (Neanderthals being one possibility). Furthermore, it buttresses the important notion that, through such adminture, our species has benefited evolutionarily by gaining new advantageous alleles. The interhaplogroup divergence test developed here may be broadly applicable to the detection of introgression at other loci in the human genome or in genomes of other species.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the published studies looking for this introgression have been based on neanderthal mDNA.There is this one ( citation follows .
) It is based purely on the pattern of variation within modern humans - it does not rely on ancient DNA .
The Neandertal DNA project should conclusively confirm or refute the hypothesis that the gene came from Neandertals ( although it may have come from H. erectus instead .
) ( There is one earlier similar paper from about 2002 I think , but I found it unconvincing and I ca n't be bothered finding it .
) doi : 10.1073/pnas.0606966103 Evans et al .
" Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage " Proc .
Nat. Acad .
Sci. 103 18178 ( 2006 ) AbstractAt the center of the debate on the emergence of modern humans and their spread throughout the globe is the question of whether archaic Homo lineages contributed to the modern human gene pool , and more importantly , whether such contributions impacted the evolutionary adaptation of our species .
A major obstacle to answering this question is that low levels of admixture with archaic lineages are not expected to leave extensive traces in the modern human gene pool because of genetic drift .
Loci that have undergone strong positive selection , however , offer a unique opportunity to identify low-level admixture with archaic lineages , provided that the introgressed archaic allele has risen to high frequency under positive selection .
The gene microcephalin ( MCPH1 ) regulates brain size during development and has experienced positive selection in the lineage leading to Homo sapiens .
Within modern humans , a group of closely related haplotypes at this locus , known as haplogroup D , rose from a single copy 37,000 years ago and swept to exceptionally high frequency ( 70 \ % worldwide today ) because of positive selection .
Here , we examine the origin of haplogroup D. By using the interhaplogroup divergence test , we show that haplogroup D likely originated from a lineage separated from modern humans 1.1 million years ago and introgressed into humans by 37,000 years ago .
This finding supports the possibility of admixture between modern humans and archaic Homo populations ( Neanderthals being one possibility ) .
Furthermore , it buttresses the important notion that , through such adminture , our species has benefited evolutionarily by gaining new advantageous alleles .
The interhaplogroup divergence test developed here may be broadly applicable to the detection of introgression at other loci in the human genome or in genomes of other species .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the published studies looking for this introgression have been based on neanderthal mDNA.There is this one (citation follows.
) It is based purely on the pattern of variation within modern humans - it does not rely on ancient DNA.
The Neandertal DNA project should conclusively confirm or refute the hypothesis that the gene came from Neandertals (although it may have come from H. erectus instead.
) (There is one earlier similar paper from about 2002 I think, but I found it unconvincing and I can't be bothered finding it.
)doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606966103 Evans et al.
"Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage" Proc.
Nat. Acad.
Sci. 103 18178 (2006)AbstractAt the center of the debate on the emergence of modern humans and their spread throughout the globe is the question of whether archaic Homo lineages contributed to the modern human gene pool, and more importantly, whether such contributions impacted the evolutionary adaptation of our species.
A major obstacle to answering this question is that low levels of admixture with archaic lineages are not expected to leave extensive traces in the modern human gene pool because of genetic drift.
Loci that have undergone strong positive selection, however, offer a unique opportunity to identify low-level admixture with archaic lineages, provided that the introgressed archaic allele has risen to high frequency under positive selection.
The gene microcephalin (MCPH1) regulates brain size during development and has experienced positive selection in the lineage leading to Homo sapiens.
Within modern humans, a group of closely related haplotypes at this locus, known as haplogroup D, rose from a single copy 37,000 years ago and swept to exceptionally high frequency (70\% worldwide today) because of positive selection.
Here, we examine the origin of haplogroup D. By using the interhaplogroup divergence test, we show that haplogroup D likely originated from a lineage separated from modern humans 1.1 million years ago and introgressed into humans by 37,000 years ago.
This finding supports the possibility of admixture between modern humans and archaic Homo populations (Neanderthals being one possibility).
Furthermore, it buttresses the important notion that, through such adminture, our species has benefited evolutionarily by gaining new advantageous alleles.
The interhaplogroup divergence test developed here may be broadly applicable to the detection of introgression at other loci in the human genome or in genomes of other species.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891625</id>
	<title>Neanderthals had sex with humans...</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1256649240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and Rush Limbaugh was the result?</htmltext>
<tokenext>and Rush Limbaugh was the result ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and Rush Limbaugh was the result?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893103</id>
	<title>Re:Oeuf Corse !</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1256662620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flies? Can you explain the logistics of that one?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flies ?
Can you explain the logistics of that one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flies?
Can you explain the logistics of that one?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893203</id>
	<title>Mitochondrial evidence</title>
	<author>wonkavader</author>
	<datestamp>1256664000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mitochondrial evidence conclusively proves this isn't so.  Never, not once, did a Neanderthal ever get his/her genes in the modern pool.</p><p>I think that means mitochondrial evidence is crap.</p><p>How did we get to look so different in so little time?  Why do Neanderthals found in China has a bump on the top of the head that is common now in modern humans found in China and not common in non-China-area Neanderthals nor non-China-area modern humans?  (This is a trivial-sounding example, but it's supposedly pretty easy to see in the remains.)</p><p>Why didn't any Ns get domesticated/preserved?  Why isn't there one single place somewhere where MH didn't go but Ns did, even though Ns had so much longer than MHs to move around, and N remains are found pretty far and wide.</p><p>I just don't buy the mitochondrial proof that Ns didn't mate with MHs ever.  Maybe they're right, but its not intutive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mitochondrial evidence conclusively proves this is n't so .
Never , not once , did a Neanderthal ever get his/her genes in the modern pool.I think that means mitochondrial evidence is crap.How did we get to look so different in so little time ?
Why do Neanderthals found in China has a bump on the top of the head that is common now in modern humans found in China and not common in non-China-area Neanderthals nor non-China-area modern humans ?
( This is a trivial-sounding example , but it 's supposedly pretty easy to see in the remains .
) Why did n't any Ns get domesticated/preserved ?
Why is n't there one single place somewhere where MH did n't go but Ns did , even though Ns had so much longer than MHs to move around , and N remains are found pretty far and wide.I just do n't buy the mitochondrial proof that Ns did n't mate with MHs ever .
Maybe they 're right , but its not intutive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mitochondrial evidence conclusively proves this isn't so.
Never, not once, did a Neanderthal ever get his/her genes in the modern pool.I think that means mitochondrial evidence is crap.How did we get to look so different in so little time?
Why do Neanderthals found in China has a bump on the top of the head that is common now in modern humans found in China and not common in non-China-area Neanderthals nor non-China-area modern humans?
(This is a trivial-sounding example, but it's supposedly pretty easy to see in the remains.
)Why didn't any Ns get domesticated/preserved?
Why isn't there one single place somewhere where MH didn't go but Ns did, even though Ns had so much longer than MHs to move around, and N remains are found pretty far and wide.I just don't buy the mitochondrial proof that Ns didn't mate with MHs ever.
Maybe they're right, but its not intutive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441</id>
	<title>Proclivities</title>
	<author>Whiteox</author>
	<datestamp>1256648040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Neanderthals "Had Sex" With Modern Man</p></div><p>So does that mean they are gay or bisexual?<br>Just askin'</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Neanderthals " Had Sex " With Modern ManSo does that mean they are gay or bisexual ? Just askin '</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neanderthals "Had Sex" With Modern ManSo does that mean they are gay or bisexual?Just askin'
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893037</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't</title>
	<author>Hashi Lebwohl</author>
	<datestamp>1256661840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know, but I have to say that the icon for this story probably represents the look our ancestors had whilst receiving some neanderthal loving.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , but I have to say that the icon for this story probably represents the look our ancestors had whilst receiving some neanderthal loving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, but I have to say that the icon for this story probably represents the look our ancestors had whilst receiving some neanderthal loving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891875</id>
	<title>Sure they did,,,</title>
	<author>HazMat 79</author>
	<datestamp>1256650860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>some of their offspring played on the O-line when I played football in high school.</htmltext>
<tokenext>some of their offspring played on the O-line when I played football in high school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some of their offspring played on the O-line when I played football in high school.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891451</id>
	<title>What a troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only evidence of that would be if the DNA shows that the offspring contributed to our DNA, which he hasn't shown yet. He may as well have said we're desended from aliens, and he's now looking for evidence of that in our DNA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only evidence of that would be if the DNA shows that the offspring contributed to our DNA , which he has n't shown yet .
He may as well have said we 're desended from aliens , and he 's now looking for evidence of that in our DNA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only evidence of that would be if the DNA shows that the offspring contributed to our DNA, which he hasn't shown yet.
He may as well have said we're desended from aliens, and he's now looking for evidence of that in our DNA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894979</id>
	<title>Did humans and Neanderthals interbreed?</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1256731860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <b>LASCAUX TESCAUX, Town Centre,</b> Saturday night &mdash; Modern humans and Neanderthals had sex across the species barrier, according to Professor Svante Paabo, a political scientist researching the British National Party.

</p><p>Prof Paabo will shortly publish his analysis of the entire Neanderthal genome, using DNA retrieved from fossils. He aims to compare it with the genomes of modern humans, chimpanzees and neo-Nazis to work out where it all went horribly wrong.

</p><p>"What I'm really interested in is, did they have children back then? And did these children go on to form the English Aborigine population of 17,000 years ago? And did their pamphlets make any more sense back then, and when did they introduce a football game to their regular Saturday bloodbaths?"

</p><p>Such an answer might ease the controversy over recent contradictory discoveries. Some specimens seem to have both modern human and Neanderthal features, some even managing to string words into apparent sentences on <i>Question Time</i>. Some cave paintings of the time appear to be condemnations of "mud people," particularly smart and beautiful ones who patronise them in public appearances.

</p><p>"I used to believe Neanderthals were primitive," said Professor Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum, "but in the last ten to fifteen thousand years before they died out, around thirty thousand years ago, they were leaving behind complicated bead designs that appear from other cave paintings to translate, as far as we can work out, to 'Fuck off you brain-dead fascist wanker.'"

</p><p> <i>Illustration:</i> <a href="http://notnews.today.com/2009/10/28/did-humans-and-neanderthals-interbreed/" title="today.com">A failed genetic experiment, pictured here on BBC Question Time</a> [today.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LASCAUX TESCAUX , Town Centre , Saturday night    Modern humans and Neanderthals had sex across the species barrier , according to Professor Svante Paabo , a political scientist researching the British National Party .
Prof Paabo will shortly publish his analysis of the entire Neanderthal genome , using DNA retrieved from fossils .
He aims to compare it with the genomes of modern humans , chimpanzees and neo-Nazis to work out where it all went horribly wrong .
" What I 'm really interested in is , did they have children back then ?
And did these children go on to form the English Aborigine population of 17,000 years ago ?
And did their pamphlets make any more sense back then , and when did they introduce a football game to their regular Saturday bloodbaths ?
" Such an answer might ease the controversy over recent contradictory discoveries .
Some specimens seem to have both modern human and Neanderthal features , some even managing to string words into apparent sentences on Question Time .
Some cave paintings of the time appear to be condemnations of " mud people , " particularly smart and beautiful ones who patronise them in public appearances .
" I used to believe Neanderthals were primitive , " said Professor Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum , " but in the last ten to fifteen thousand years before they died out , around thirty thousand years ago , they were leaving behind complicated bead designs that appear from other cave paintings to translate , as far as we can work out , to 'Fuck off you brain-dead fascist wanker .
' " Illustration : A failed genetic experiment , pictured here on BBC Question Time [ today.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> LASCAUX TESCAUX, Town Centre, Saturday night — Modern humans and Neanderthals had sex across the species barrier, according to Professor Svante Paabo, a political scientist researching the British National Party.
Prof Paabo will shortly publish his analysis of the entire Neanderthal genome, using DNA retrieved from fossils.
He aims to compare it with the genomes of modern humans, chimpanzees and neo-Nazis to work out where it all went horribly wrong.
"What I'm really interested in is, did they have children back then?
And did these children go on to form the English Aborigine population of 17,000 years ago?
And did their pamphlets make any more sense back then, and when did they introduce a football game to their regular Saturday bloodbaths?
"

Such an answer might ease the controversy over recent contradictory discoveries.
Some specimens seem to have both modern human and Neanderthal features, some even managing to string words into apparent sentences on Question Time.
Some cave paintings of the time appear to be condemnations of "mud people," particularly smart and beautiful ones who patronise them in public appearances.
"I used to believe Neanderthals were primitive," said Professor Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum, "but in the last ten to fifteen thousand years before they died out, around thirty thousand years ago, they were leaving behind complicated bead designs that appear from other cave paintings to translate, as far as we can work out, to 'Fuck off you brain-dead fascist wanker.
'"

 Illustration: A failed genetic experiment, pictured here on BBC Question Time [today.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893313</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't</title>
	<author>Profane MuthaFucka</author>
	<datestamp>1256665740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know, but I'm pretty sure this is where Daryl Hannah came.</p><p><a href="http://flightline.highline.edu/videogame/Videogame\%20Sexual\%20Conundrum/cap001.bmp" title="highline.edu" rel="nofollow">http://flightline.highline.edu/videogame/Videogame\%20Sexual\%20Conundrum/cap001.bmp</a> [highline.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , but I 'm pretty sure this is where Daryl Hannah came.http : //flightline.highline.edu/videogame/Videogame \ % 20Sexual \ % 20Conundrum/cap001.bmp [ highline.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, but I'm pretty sure this is where Daryl Hannah came.http://flightline.highline.edu/videogame/Videogame\%20Sexual\%20Conundrum/cap001.bmp [highline.edu]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892819</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>lwsimon</author>
	<datestamp>1256659200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that's from "The Quest for Fire" - actually kinda a hot movie, in a 14-year-old-overactive-hormones kinda way.</p><p>The girl spends most of the movie trying to keep her legs together<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that 's from " The Quest for Fire " - actually kinda a hot movie , in a 14-year-old-overactive-hormones kinda way.The girl spends most of the movie trying to keep her legs together : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that's from "The Quest for Fire" - actually kinda a hot movie, in a 14-year-old-overactive-hormones kinda way.The girl spends most of the movie trying to keep her legs together :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895851</id>
	<title>Someone with more Bio Knowledge please educate me</title>
	<author>Veretax</author>
	<datestamp>1256738640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But if two speicies can procreate are they really different species?  Or is it whether the offspring can reproduce with each other that makes them the same species?  (For some reason I'm remined of mules is it?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>But if two speicies can procreate are they really different species ?
Or is it whether the offspring can reproduce with each other that makes them the same species ?
( For some reason I 'm remined of mules is it ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if two speicies can procreate are they really different species?
Or is it whether the offspring can reproduce with each other that makes them the same species?
(For some reason I'm remined of mules is it?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891343</id>
	<title>humans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256647620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Humans... so easy, a caveman can do them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans... so easy , a caveman can do them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans... so easy, a caveman can do them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29943302</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257106860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Everybody's folk tales, national epics, fairy tales, religious scriptures, myths and legends--they've all got these sorts of references. It's interesting just to speculate on where and how "we" (humanity collectively) came up with all this wonderful stuff. I've always thought at least some of it must have had to do with our Neanderthal connections--whatever those turn out to be.</p></div><p>You know that that same logic would lead you to believe that our modern sci-fi has something to do with our extra-terrestrial connections.  Or perhaps you could put it all down to vivid human imagination.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody 's folk tales , national epics , fairy tales , religious scriptures , myths and legends--they 've all got these sorts of references .
It 's interesting just to speculate on where and how " we " ( humanity collectively ) came up with all this wonderful stuff .
I 've always thought at least some of it must have had to do with our Neanderthal connections--whatever those turn out to be.You know that that same logic would lead you to believe that our modern sci-fi has something to do with our extra-terrestrial connections .
Or perhaps you could put it all down to vivid human imagination .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody's folk tales, national epics, fairy tales, religious scriptures, myths and legends--they've all got these sorts of references.
It's interesting just to speculate on where and how "we" (humanity collectively) came up with all this wonderful stuff.
I've always thought at least some of it must have had to do with our Neanderthal connections--whatever those turn out to be.You know that that same logic would lead you to believe that our modern sci-fi has something to do with our extra-terrestrial connections.
Or perhaps you could put it all down to vivid human imagination.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893511</id>
	<title>Re:Why wouldn't they? We sure would.</title>
	<author>Rick Bentley</author>
	<datestamp>1256668620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wal-mart nothing.  Ever see a Scottish Sheep Farmer?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wal-mart nothing .
Ever see a Scottish Sheep Farmer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wal-mart nothing.
Ever see a Scottish Sheep Farmer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893535</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>turtleshadow</author>
	<datestamp>1256668980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok so we can test out if there was an inflow to the Human line but what about us to them? Also genetic tests tell us nothing about specific human choices.</p><p>Civilization is based upon nations grafted upon clans which are rooted in the patrimony/matrimony lines of female and male beings that had male and females that also lived to reproduce. These are variables no scientist can account for in a broad hypothesis.  I don't buy it was random sexual success leading to how now we are rational and by choice reproduce. Modern humanity as a species, we consciously/deliberately no longer  follow the basic rules of Darwin's theory. If we willingly can break out from the theory it can't be a law.</p><p>Human procreation includes Intellect / Will as a component over the long run. Its not just raw instinct. If protomankind whoever are making beads they  were first making choices on spouses. Given this component of choice it ought to be asked.</p><p>Did humans make neanderthals go up a genetic dead end.<br>Perhaps we passed onto their offspring the "thing" which caused them to stop reproducing or desire to reproduce or to not adapt quickly to changing climate/food challenges; depressed ability to develop/control emotions, dulled their Intellect and Will, etc... \_It may not be fully genetic.\_<br>Did humans survive at their expense? I mean did we get the "thing" needed for us to reproduce faster/more often successfully; ovulation out of tune to the seasons, an intellectual gift/survivable leg up such as a clan/family environment from them? \_Again It may not be fully genetic.\_</p><p>If we sent them up a  dead  end it is very telling to us about our own sexuality, the need for discernment of our spouses in a family history context and not an individualistic way.</p><p>Ultimately we have to deal with mutations of gender which affect the entire species wide system of human reproduction - to put it P.C. way. It also remains to be seen if science's sterile critique will flinch when  one person has to tell another person, they have not the natural right to have children or worse not even an inalienable right to be alive or to be a parent. How much of humanity is culled by abortion and population control efforts every year? It is quite possible we have already altered if not eliminated our species future.  In Ray Bradbury's "sound of thunder" it was a butterfly. Why Isn't a rational human being so much more? In H.G. Wells time machine the Morloks hunt and eat the Eloi. That is another outcome as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok so we can test out if there was an inflow to the Human line but what about us to them ?
Also genetic tests tell us nothing about specific human choices.Civilization is based upon nations grafted upon clans which are rooted in the patrimony/matrimony lines of female and male beings that had male and females that also lived to reproduce .
These are variables no scientist can account for in a broad hypothesis .
I do n't buy it was random sexual success leading to how now we are rational and by choice reproduce .
Modern humanity as a species , we consciously/deliberately no longer follow the basic rules of Darwin 's theory .
If we willingly can break out from the theory it ca n't be a law.Human procreation includes Intellect / Will as a component over the long run .
Its not just raw instinct .
If protomankind whoever are making beads they were first making choices on spouses .
Given this component of choice it ought to be asked.Did humans make neanderthals go up a genetic dead end.Perhaps we passed onto their offspring the " thing " which caused them to stop reproducing or desire to reproduce or to not adapt quickly to changing climate/food challenges ; depressed ability to develop/control emotions , dulled their Intellect and Will , etc... \ _It may not be fully genetic. \ _Did humans survive at their expense ?
I mean did we get the " thing " needed for us to reproduce faster/more often successfully ; ovulation out of tune to the seasons , an intellectual gift/survivable leg up such as a clan/family environment from them ?
\ _Again It may not be fully genetic. \ _If we sent them up a dead end it is very telling to us about our own sexuality , the need for discernment of our spouses in a family history context and not an individualistic way.Ultimately we have to deal with mutations of gender which affect the entire species wide system of human reproduction - to put it P.C .
way. It also remains to be seen if science 's sterile critique will flinch when one person has to tell another person , they have not the natural right to have children or worse not even an inalienable right to be alive or to be a parent .
How much of humanity is culled by abortion and population control efforts every year ?
It is quite possible we have already altered if not eliminated our species future .
In Ray Bradbury 's " sound of thunder " it was a butterfly .
Why Is n't a rational human being so much more ?
In H.G .
Wells time machine the Morloks hunt and eat the Eloi .
That is another outcome as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok so we can test out if there was an inflow to the Human line but what about us to them?
Also genetic tests tell us nothing about specific human choices.Civilization is based upon nations grafted upon clans which are rooted in the patrimony/matrimony lines of female and male beings that had male and females that also lived to reproduce.
These are variables no scientist can account for in a broad hypothesis.
I don't buy it was random sexual success leading to how now we are rational and by choice reproduce.
Modern humanity as a species, we consciously/deliberately no longer  follow the basic rules of Darwin's theory.
If we willingly can break out from the theory it can't be a law.Human procreation includes Intellect / Will as a component over the long run.
Its not just raw instinct.
If protomankind whoever are making beads they  were first making choices on spouses.
Given this component of choice it ought to be asked.Did humans make neanderthals go up a genetic dead end.Perhaps we passed onto their offspring the "thing" which caused them to stop reproducing or desire to reproduce or to not adapt quickly to changing climate/food challenges; depressed ability to develop/control emotions, dulled their Intellect and Will, etc... \_It may not be fully genetic.\_Did humans survive at their expense?
I mean did we get the "thing" needed for us to reproduce faster/more often successfully; ovulation out of tune to the seasons, an intellectual gift/survivable leg up such as a clan/family environment from them?
\_Again It may not be fully genetic.\_If we sent them up a  dead  end it is very telling to us about our own sexuality, the need for discernment of our spouses in a family history context and not an individualistic way.Ultimately we have to deal with mutations of gender which affect the entire species wide system of human reproduction - to put it P.C.
way. It also remains to be seen if science's sterile critique will flinch when  one person has to tell another person, they have not the natural right to have children or worse not even an inalienable right to be alive or to be a parent.
How much of humanity is culled by abortion and population control efforts every year?
It is quite possible we have already altered if not eliminated our species future.
In Ray Bradbury's "sound of thunder" it was a butterfly.
Why Isn't a rational human being so much more?
In H.G.
Wells time machine the Morloks hunt and eat the Eloi.
That is another outcome as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894087</id>
	<title>Re:Isn't</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1256762640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. Neanderthals did have red hair, and did inhabit the same regions where modern ginger people come from - but it is already established that the gene which gives them red hair is completely different from the one that causes red hair in humans.</p><p>The above post is not at all offtopic, its a valid question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
Neanderthals did have red hair , and did inhabit the same regions where modern ginger people come from - but it is already established that the gene which gives them red hair is completely different from the one that causes red hair in humans.The above post is not at all offtopic , its a valid question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
Neanderthals did have red hair, and did inhabit the same regions where modern ginger people come from - but it is already established that the gene which gives them red hair is completely different from the one that causes red hair in humans.The above post is not at all offtopic, its a valid question.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29900249</id>
	<title>Eeeewwwwww</title>
	<author>realsilly</author>
	<datestamp>1256756820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thought of that just grosses me out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thought of that just grosses me out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thought of that just grosses me out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703</id>
	<title>Genesis 6</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1256649720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them,  2 the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose.  3 Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred twenty years."  4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown.   (Genesis 6.1-4 NRSV)</p></div></blockquote><p>I've always sort of nursed a theory... that maybe Adam and Eve were Homo Sapiens and the Nephilim were Neanderthals.  Or something like that.  The idea is that Eden was a separate creation from Earth, and that on earth evolution really DID take place... but that after the Fall god turned man out of Eden into the earth.</p><p>Absurd of course, and could never be proven.  But amusing to speculate.</p><p>Let the flames begin!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When people began to multiply on the face of the ground , and daughters were born to them , 2 the sons of God saw that they were fair ; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose .
3 Then the Lord said , " My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever , for they are flesh ; their days shall be one hundred twenty years .
" 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans , who bore children to them .
These were the heroes that were of old , warriors of renown .
( Genesis 6.1-4 NRSV ) I 've always sort of nursed a theory... that maybe Adam and Eve were Homo Sapiens and the Nephilim were Neanderthals .
Or something like that .
The idea is that Eden was a separate creation from Earth , and that on earth evolution really DID take place... but that after the Fall god turned man out of Eden into the earth.Absurd of course , and could never be proven .
But amusing to speculate.Let the flames begin !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them,  2 the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose.
3 Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred twenty years.
"  4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them.
These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown.
(Genesis 6.1-4 NRSV)I've always sort of nursed a theory... that maybe Adam and Eve were Homo Sapiens and the Nephilim were Neanderthals.
Or something like that.
The idea is that Eden was a separate creation from Earth, and that on earth evolution really DID take place... but that after the Fall god turned man out of Eden into the earth.Absurd of course, and could never be proven.
But amusing to speculate.Let the flames begin!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894011</id>
	<title>Rape.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256761380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups."</p><p>It wouldn't have been alcohol or any other chemical social lubricant.</p><p>Inter-species sex, back then, would have come in the form of rape.</p><p>To those saying "if it exists, human will have sex with it" are forgetting that most of that is due to the porn industry.  Women generally don't want to have sex with horses for free.  Pay them a few thousand dollars, and their viewpoint changes.  I doubt the porn industry was booming 30,000 years ago.  Rape, however, was in its prime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups .
" It would n't have been alcohol or any other chemical social lubricant.Inter-species sex , back then , would have come in the form of rape.To those saying " if it exists , human will have sex with it " are forgetting that most of that is due to the porn industry .
Women generally do n't want to have sex with horses for free .
Pay them a few thousand dollars , and their viewpoint changes .
I doubt the porn industry was booming 30,000 years ago .
Rape , however , was in its prime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups.
"It wouldn't have been alcohol or any other chemical social lubricant.Inter-species sex, back then, would have come in the form of rape.To those saying "if it exists, human will have sex with it" are forgetting that most of that is due to the porn industry.
Women generally don't want to have sex with horses for free.
Pay them a few thousand dollars, and their viewpoint changes.
I doubt the porn industry was booming 30,000 years ago.
Rape, however, was in its prime.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891713</id>
	<title>They Still Do</title>
	<author>Kenshin</author>
	<datestamp>1256649840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They still do. Just go to any college bar and see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They still do .
Just go to any college bar and see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They still do.
Just go to any college bar and see.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896549</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256741760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a very compelling theory that Autism is a Neanderthal genetic marker coming up in HSS, due to Hybridization.<br>Read the articles in the link, they are<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. VERY interesting, especially if you are or know someone who is Autistic.</p><p>http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a very compelling theory that Autism is a Neanderthal genetic marker coming up in HSS , due to Hybridization.Read the articles in the link , they are .. VERY interesting , especially if you are or know someone who is Autistic.http : //www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a very compelling theory that Autism is a Neanderthal genetic marker coming up in HSS, due to Hybridization.Read the articles in the link, they are .. VERY interesting, especially if you are or know someone who is Autistic.http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898563</id>
	<title>I thought this was proven?</title>
	<author>ex\_ottoyuhr</author>
	<datestamp>1256749860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't we already have examples of skeletons that are mixtures of Neandertal and Cro-Magnon features?</p><p>Also note that Cro-magnons had skull shapes somewhat similar to Neandertals (prognathous, low-browed, pronounced eyebrow ridges), although they had larger cranial capacity than contemporary H. S. sapiens; and they had the same kind of stature as Neandertals. Intermarriage/interbreeding between the two species would not have been inconceivable, and would not have needed all that much alcohol.</p><p>As to inter-fertility, isn't it genus, not species, that tends to be the barrier?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't we already have examples of skeletons that are mixtures of Neandertal and Cro-Magnon features ? Also note that Cro-magnons had skull shapes somewhat similar to Neandertals ( prognathous , low-browed , pronounced eyebrow ridges ) , although they had larger cranial capacity than contemporary H. S. sapiens ; and they had the same kind of stature as Neandertals .
Intermarriage/interbreeding between the two species would not have been inconceivable , and would not have needed all that much alcohol.As to inter-fertility , is n't it genus , not species , that tends to be the barrier ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't we already have examples of skeletons that are mixtures of Neandertal and Cro-Magnon features?Also note that Cro-magnons had skull shapes somewhat similar to Neandertals (prognathous, low-browed, pronounced eyebrow ridges), although they had larger cranial capacity than contemporary H. S. sapiens; and they had the same kind of stature as Neandertals.
Intermarriage/interbreeding between the two species would not have been inconceivable, and would not have needed all that much alcohol.As to inter-fertility, isn't it genus, not species, that tends to be the barrier?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891463</id>
	<title>Newsworthy Research?</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1256648160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are people out there curing disease and moving industries. But this guy gets all the air time? I'm reminded of James Woods in the film True Crime, playing a hard nosed newspaper editor, uttering the sage words: "People want to read about sex organs and blood.". This is clearly a mantra that applies to science stories as well as any others. And we wonder why science is held in such low regard by many.</p><p>Science journalism, despite all it protestations, is not that beneficial to society or scientists. It's just regular journalism with a different topic and is better avoided by all serious people and scientists alike. Get thee to a blog.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are people out there curing disease and moving industries .
But this guy gets all the air time ?
I 'm reminded of James Woods in the film True Crime , playing a hard nosed newspaper editor , uttering the sage words : " People want to read about sex organs and blood. " .
This is clearly a mantra that applies to science stories as well as any others .
And we wonder why science is held in such low regard by many.Science journalism , despite all it protestations , is not that beneficial to society or scientists .
It 's just regular journalism with a different topic and is better avoided by all serious people and scientists alike .
Get thee to a blog .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are people out there curing disease and moving industries.
But this guy gets all the air time?
I'm reminded of James Woods in the film True Crime, playing a hard nosed newspaper editor, uttering the sage words: "People want to read about sex organs and blood.".
This is clearly a mantra that applies to science stories as well as any others.
And we wonder why science is held in such low regard by many.Science journalism, despite all it protestations, is not that beneficial to society or scientists.
It's just regular journalism with a different topic and is better avoided by all serious people and scientists alike.
Get thee to a blog.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891861</id>
	<title>What about non PC results?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256650680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Supposing the results of this kind of research indicate human evolutionary and/or developmental possibilities which don't sit well with the Racial and Cultural Sensitivity Police?</p><p>Would Paabo think it important enough to destroy his career by publishing the findings anyway, or would he quite understandably practice a bit of self-censorship?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supposing the results of this kind of research indicate human evolutionary and/or developmental possibilities which do n't sit well with the Racial and Cultural Sensitivity Police ? Would Paabo think it important enough to destroy his career by publishing the findings anyway , or would he quite understandably practice a bit of self-censorship ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Supposing the results of this kind of research indicate human evolutionary and/or developmental possibilities which don't sit well with the Racial and Cultural Sensitivity Police?Would Paabo think it important enough to destroy his career by publishing the findings anyway, or would he quite understandably practice a bit of self-censorship?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891631</id>
	<title>Re:Humans</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1256649300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.mail-archive.com/osint@yahoogroups.com/msg07485.html" title="mail-archive.com">Yep</a> [mail-archive.com].</p><p><div class="quote"><p>two Jordanians were evacuated home with injured penises after attempting sexual intercourse with goats.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep [ mail-archive.com ] .two Jordanians were evacuated home with injured penises after attempting sexual intercourse with goats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep [mail-archive.com].two Jordanians were evacuated home with injured penises after attempting sexual intercourse with goats.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891487</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>n0tWorthy</author>
	<datestamp>1256648280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... that explains a lot! I think many of my nearest cubicle in-duh-viduals may have a lot of Neanderthal DNA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... that explains a lot !
I think many of my nearest cubicle in-duh-viduals may have a lot of Neanderthal DNA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that explains a lot!
I think many of my nearest cubicle in-duh-viduals may have a lot of Neanderthal DNA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893291</id>
	<title>I've said this for years...</title>
	<author>Vitriol+Angst</author>
	<datestamp>1256665260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... you know how frustrating it is, to have the answers. To know that Neanderthals got busy but nobody would listen?</p><p>All those theories about superior intelligence -- how good is that when Brother Bicep can lift a Car and your superior intelligence is being able to count to 12 -- two more digits than your fingers. It's not like you invented a Kolishnikoff or fire yet.</p><p>&gt;&gt; But seriously, I can tell you now EXACTLY why the weaker ancestors of us replaced the Neanderthal (yes, they had sex, but the Neanderthal "trait" was selected out over time). Our species took over about two major ice ages ago. If you look how relatively weak we are pound for pound with other great apes it seems obvious; Humans have a lower metabolism so that we don't starve to death on low calorie diets. We can eat anything and survive where most any mammal our size can not.</p><p>It wasn't speech, or brains, or nice hair -- it was BECAUSE we were weaker and could starve well.  A Neanderthal with the strength of a Gorilla probably ate 4 times as much as our ancestors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... you know how frustrating it is , to have the answers .
To know that Neanderthals got busy but nobody would listen ? All those theories about superior intelligence -- how good is that when Brother Bicep can lift a Car and your superior intelligence is being able to count to 12 -- two more digits than your fingers .
It 's not like you invented a Kolishnikoff or fire yet. &gt; &gt; But seriously , I can tell you now EXACTLY why the weaker ancestors of us replaced the Neanderthal ( yes , they had sex , but the Neanderthal " trait " was selected out over time ) .
Our species took over about two major ice ages ago .
If you look how relatively weak we are pound for pound with other great apes it seems obvious ; Humans have a lower metabolism so that we do n't starve to death on low calorie diets .
We can eat anything and survive where most any mammal our size can not.It was n't speech , or brains , or nice hair -- it was BECAUSE we were weaker and could starve well .
A Neanderthal with the strength of a Gorilla probably ate 4 times as much as our ancestors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... you know how frustrating it is, to have the answers.
To know that Neanderthals got busy but nobody would listen?All those theories about superior intelligence -- how good is that when Brother Bicep can lift a Car and your superior intelligence is being able to count to 12 -- two more digits than your fingers.
It's not like you invented a Kolishnikoff or fire yet.&gt;&gt; But seriously, I can tell you now EXACTLY why the weaker ancestors of us replaced the Neanderthal (yes, they had sex, but the Neanderthal "trait" was selected out over time).
Our species took over about two major ice ages ago.
If you look how relatively weak we are pound for pound with other great apes it seems obvious; Humans have a lower metabolism so that we don't starve to death on low calorie diets.
We can eat anything and survive where most any mammal our size can not.It wasn't speech, or brains, or nice hair -- it was BECAUSE we were weaker and could starve well.
A Neanderthal with the strength of a Gorilla probably ate 4 times as much as our ancestors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892027</id>
	<title>What mystery?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256652300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no mystery. Paleolithic cultures (and most since) were polygynous. A few powerful men had all the women, leaving large numbers of randy young men without mates. The obvious solution was "hunting parties." (That's why the 72 virgins)</p><p>One interesting and relevant finding not involving neandertals is in neolithic DNA; in many cases the Y chromosome is neolithic, but the mitochondrial DNA is mesolithic. Bands of neolithic bachelors raiding mesolithic villages, killing the males and keeping the females would have that effect. It's not an over-the-top guess that something like that could link paleolithic men with neandertal women.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no mystery .
Paleolithic cultures ( and most since ) were polygynous .
A few powerful men had all the women , leaving large numbers of randy young men without mates .
The obvious solution was " hunting parties .
" ( That 's why the 72 virgins ) One interesting and relevant finding not involving neandertals is in neolithic DNA ; in many cases the Y chromosome is neolithic , but the mitochondrial DNA is mesolithic .
Bands of neolithic bachelors raiding mesolithic villages , killing the males and keeping the females would have that effect .
It 's not an over-the-top guess that something like that could link paleolithic men with neandertal women .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no mystery.
Paleolithic cultures (and most since) were polygynous.
A few powerful men had all the women, leaving large numbers of randy young men without mates.
The obvious solution was "hunting parties.
" (That's why the 72 virgins)One interesting and relevant finding not involving neandertals is in neolithic DNA; in many cases the Y chromosome is neolithic, but the mitochondrial DNA is mesolithic.
Bands of neolithic bachelors raiding mesolithic villages, killing the males and keeping the females would have that effect.
It's not an over-the-top guess that something like that could link paleolithic men with neandertal women.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891803</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256650320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or perhaps it took a combination of <a href="http://fandomania.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/fathersday1.jpg" title="fandomania.com" rel="nofollow">proto-modern human and CYLON genes</a> [fandomania.com].</p><p>So say we all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and CYLON genes [ fandomania.com ] .So say we all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and CYLON genes [fandomania.com].So say we all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891415</id>
	<title>Yes they did: they're called Rush Limbaugh</title>
	<author>gapagos</author>
	<datestamp>1256647980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And of course its evil twin Glen Beck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And of course its evil twin Glen Beck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And of course its evil twin Glen Beck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893133</id>
	<title>Re:And in other scientific news</title>
	<author>Col Bat Guano</author>
	<datestamp>1256663040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and champagne was invented by pro-magnum man.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and champagne was invented by pro-magnum man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and champagne was invented by pro-magnum man.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892975</id>
	<title>hey if the were good enough for the sons of god</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256661000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Genesis 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.</p><p>seems like this wasn't the only inter species breeding that was going on</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Genesis 6 : 1 And it came to pass , when men began to multiply on the face of the earth , and daughters were born unto them , 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair ; and they took them wives of all which they chose .
3 And the LORD said , My spirit shall not always strive with man , for that he also is flesh : yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years .
4 There were giants in the earth in those days ; and also after that , when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men , and they bare children to them , the same became mighty men which were of old , men of renown.seems like this was n't the only inter species breeding that was going on</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Genesis 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.seems like this wasn't the only inter species breeding that was going on</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</id>
	<title>This is important</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue of introgression (gene flow from neanderthals to modern humans) is hugely important. It's a lot more important than the curiosity or oddity the Times article makes it out to be.</p><p>All the published studies looking for this introgression have been based on neanderthal mDNA. Since it doesn't undergo recombination, it's not a good marker, and the negative results so far are predictable and do not preclude gene flow. It'll be interesting to see Paabo's results. He's been working on getting nDNA data from neanderthal remains for a while now, and perhaps this is a hint that he's found some introgression.</p><p><b>Why it's important:</b></p><p>The small picture of why it's important is it would substantially redefine our family tree. We could refine our primate phylogeny.</p><p>The bigger, more hazy, and potentially earthshaking picture of why this could be important is that it doesn't take many viable pairings to get genes from one gene pool to another, and these genes could have been very important to our development. Modern humans and neanderthals were under many of the same environmental stresses but likely developed different adaptions to them. This includes behavior and cognition genes. As Stringer points out in the article, "in the last 10,000-15,000 years before they died out, around 30,000 years ago, Neanderthals were giving their dead complex burials and making tools and jewellery, such as pierced beads, like modern humans.&rdquo; Proto-modern humans were smart. But neanderthals were also smart, potentially in different and complimentary ways. And perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal genes to truly make the modern human mind. Our brains could be an example of 'hybrid vigor' on a grand scale.</p><p>So the big question mark is whether, given we can determine gene flow, if this hypothetical combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal cognitive adaptions could have led to the cultural explosion of ~30-50 thousand years ago. The biology is plausible and the timing's right. The data's still out, but it's coming in. Odder hypotheses have come true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue of introgression ( gene flow from neanderthals to modern humans ) is hugely important .
It 's a lot more important than the curiosity or oddity the Times article makes it out to be.All the published studies looking for this introgression have been based on neanderthal mDNA .
Since it does n't undergo recombination , it 's not a good marker , and the negative results so far are predictable and do not preclude gene flow .
It 'll be interesting to see Paabo 's results .
He 's been working on getting nDNA data from neanderthal remains for a while now , and perhaps this is a hint that he 's found some introgression.Why it 's important : The small picture of why it 's important is it would substantially redefine our family tree .
We could refine our primate phylogeny.The bigger , more hazy , and potentially earthshaking picture of why this could be important is that it does n't take many viable pairings to get genes from one gene pool to another , and these genes could have been very important to our development .
Modern humans and neanderthals were under many of the same environmental stresses but likely developed different adaptions to them .
This includes behavior and cognition genes .
As Stringer points out in the article , " in the last 10,000-15,000 years before they died out , around 30,000 years ago , Neanderthals were giving their dead complex burials and making tools and jewellery , such as pierced beads , like modern humans.    Proto-modern humans were smart .
But neanderthals were also smart , potentially in different and complimentary ways .
And perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal genes to truly make the modern human mind .
Our brains could be an example of 'hybrid vigor ' on a grand scale.So the big question mark is whether , given we can determine gene flow , if this hypothetical combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal cognitive adaptions could have led to the cultural explosion of ~ 30-50 thousand years ago .
The biology is plausible and the timing 's right .
The data 's still out , but it 's coming in .
Odder hypotheses have come true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue of introgression (gene flow from neanderthals to modern humans) is hugely important.
It's a lot more important than the curiosity or oddity the Times article makes it out to be.All the published studies looking for this introgression have been based on neanderthal mDNA.
Since it doesn't undergo recombination, it's not a good marker, and the negative results so far are predictable and do not preclude gene flow.
It'll be interesting to see Paabo's results.
He's been working on getting nDNA data from neanderthal remains for a while now, and perhaps this is a hint that he's found some introgression.Why it's important:The small picture of why it's important is it would substantially redefine our family tree.
We could refine our primate phylogeny.The bigger, more hazy, and potentially earthshaking picture of why this could be important is that it doesn't take many viable pairings to get genes from one gene pool to another, and these genes could have been very important to our development.
Modern humans and neanderthals were under many of the same environmental stresses but likely developed different adaptions to them.
This includes behavior and cognition genes.
As Stringer points out in the article, "in the last 10,000-15,000 years before they died out, around 30,000 years ago, Neanderthals were giving their dead complex burials and making tools and jewellery, such as pierced beads, like modern humans.” Proto-modern humans were smart.
But neanderthals were also smart, potentially in different and complimentary ways.
And perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal genes to truly make the modern human mind.
Our brains could be an example of 'hybrid vigor' on a grand scale.So the big question mark is whether, given we can determine gene flow, if this hypothetical combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal cognitive adaptions could have led to the cultural explosion of ~30-50 thousand years ago.
The biology is plausible and the timing's right.
The data's still out, but it's coming in.
Odder hypotheses have come true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891597</id>
	<title>Wikipedia has citations</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Men\_with\_micropenis.jpg" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">J.delanoy is a neanderthal</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>J.delanoy is a neanderthal [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>J.delanoy is a neanderthal [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892207</id>
	<title>Sure why not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256654040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People have been known to have sex with different species...for instances...  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17726206/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have been known to have sex with different species...for instances... http : //www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17726206/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have been known to have sex with different species...for instances...  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17726206/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896499</id>
	<title>Pervs?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1256741520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups...<br>Really, a great mystery, let me help you solve it, how about the same reason people has sex with animals, or children, because they are perverts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups...Really , a great mystery , let me help you solve it , how about the same reason people has sex with animals , or children , because they are perverts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;What remains a mystery is what Paleolithic brewery provided the catalyst for these stone age hook-ups...Really, a great mystery, let me help you solve it, how about the same reason people has sex with animals, or children, because they are perverts?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891779</id>
	<title>Finally</title>
	<author>lawnboy5-O</author>
	<datestamp>1256650200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Definitive proof that we co mingled with other hominid species, and may the the melting-pot remains....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Definitive proof that we co mingled with other hominid species , and may the the melting-pot remains... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Definitive proof that we co mingled with other hominid species, and may the the melting-pot remains....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29900531</id>
	<title>Early Modern Woman: So easy, even a caveman can</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256757840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>do her!</p><p>Thank you, I'll be here all week.</p><p>Try the dinosaur steak. And tip the waitstaff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do her ! Thank you , I 'll be here all week.Try the dinosaur steak .
And tip the waitstaff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>do her!Thank you, I'll be here all week.Try the dinosaur steak.
And tip the waitstaff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891549</id>
	<title>Too bad there's no evidence.</title>
	<author>Perp Atuitie</author>
	<datestamp>1256648700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This guy is "sure" they screwed, but presents nothing but his surety. There's apparently not the slightest evidence that this is more than a fantasy, however cool a brain-vid it might paint. So the story is that he's going to look some more for evidence that they not only screwed but bred. Maybe after he figures that out there will actually be a story. A pixel is a terrible thing to waste.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy is " sure " they screwed , but presents nothing but his surety .
There 's apparently not the slightest evidence that this is more than a fantasy , however cool a brain-vid it might paint .
So the story is that he 's going to look some more for evidence that they not only screwed but bred .
Maybe after he figures that out there will actually be a story .
A pixel is a terrible thing to waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy is "sure" they screwed, but presents nothing but his surety.
There's apparently not the slightest evidence that this is more than a fantasy, however cool a brain-vid it might paint.
So the story is that he's going to look some more for evidence that they not only screwed but bred.
Maybe after he figures that out there will actually be a story.
A pixel is a terrible thing to waste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893263</id>
	<title>No Sh*&amp; Sherlock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256664780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Proof of where Britney Spears genes originated</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Proof of where Britney Spears genes originated</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Proof of where Britney Spears genes originated</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892067</id>
	<title>This is why so many species of humans</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1256652660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Spammers
</p><p>
Stoners
</p><p>
Couch Potatos
</p><p>
Windows users
</p><p>
Bean counters
</p><p>
Lawyers
</p><p>
Salesmen
</p><p>
N00bs
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spammers Stoners Couch Potatos Windows users Bean counters Lawyers Salesmen N00bs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Spammers

Stoners

Couch Potatos

Windows users

Bean counters

Lawyers

Salesmen

N00bs
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891751</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1256650080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To me it becomes less interesting when you consider that diverging species start as one.  During generations when a species is bifurcating, cross-breeding must normal initially, then become less potent over successive generations until finally it is practically impossible.  So the question isn't whether this happens, only how long the separation takes - <i>how much</i> the genomes may differ before they cannot mix.
<p>
Secondly, genomes are not stationary over time, so the "modern" humans that may have interbred with neanderthals may have had trouble interbreeding with us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To me it becomes less interesting when you consider that diverging species start as one .
During generations when a species is bifurcating , cross-breeding must normal initially , then become less potent over successive generations until finally it is practically impossible .
So the question is n't whether this happens , only how long the separation takes - how much the genomes may differ before they can not mix .
Secondly , genomes are not stationary over time , so the " modern " humans that may have interbred with neanderthals may have had trouble interbreeding with us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me it becomes less interesting when you consider that diverging species start as one.
During generations when a species is bifurcating, cross-breeding must normal initially, then become less potent over successive generations until finally it is practically impossible.
So the question isn't whether this happens, only how long the separation takes - how much the genomes may differ before they cannot mix.
Secondly, genomes are not stationary over time, so the "modern" humans that may have interbred with neanderthals may have had trouble interbreeding with us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891789</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>lawnboy5-O</author>
	<datestamp>1256650260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its a Huge factoid to uncover - Raindance has it cornered.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a Huge factoid to uncover - Raindance has it cornered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a Huge factoid to uncover - Raindance has it cornered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892847</id>
	<title>Re:Wonder how they will work this out...</title>
	<author>artsrc</author>
	<datestamp>1256659500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>The best definition of species is evolving:<br><br>http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2009/2682256.htm<br><br>On the other hand I don't think Neanderthals were a different species.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best definition of species is evolving : http : //www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2009/2682256.htmOn the other hand I do n't think Neanderthals were a different species .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best definition of species is evolving:http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2009/2682256.htmOn the other hand I don't think Neanderthals were a different species.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895919</id>
	<title>Galactrica</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Duh, obviously its the crew from Galactica intermingling with the neanderthals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Duh , obviously its the crew from Galactica intermingling with the neanderthals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Duh, obviously its the crew from Galactica intermingling with the neanderthals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896583</id>
	<title>Re:Why wouldn't they? We sure would.</title>
	<author>AniVisual</author>
	<datestamp>1256741880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Pardon my poor knowledge of American culture. I gather from your post that a Wal-mart is a place like a brothel where there are holes everywhere and people can be seen... humping them. Like lavatories out in the open and their glory holes? Ahh... I understand now. Thank you. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pardon my poor knowledge of American culture .
I gather from your post that a Wal-mart is a place like a brothel where there are holes everywhere and people can be seen... humping them .
Like lavatories out in the open and their glory holes ?
Ahh... I understand now .
Thank you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Pardon my poor knowledge of American culture.
I gather from your post that a Wal-mart is a place like a brothel where there are holes everywhere and people can be seen... humping them.
Like lavatories out in the open and their glory holes?
Ahh... I understand now.
Thank you. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898377</id>
	<title>Users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now we know where users came from</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we know where users came from</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we know where users came from</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893229</id>
	<title>It would seem more accurate to suggest...</title>
	<author>penguinstorm</author>
	<datestamp>1256664300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>modern women had sex with neanderthals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>modern women had sex with neanderthals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>modern women had sex with neanderthals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893639</id>
	<title>Re:New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>SoUnDsLiKeWhEn</author>
	<datestamp>1256670240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe not the two in the background but the one in the foreground at least once.</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe not the two in the background but the one in the foreground at least once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe not the two in the background but the one in the foreground at least once.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893863</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256673060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal genes to truly make the modern human mind.</p></div><p>According to Wikipedia, "Neanderthal fossils have to date not been found in Af[r]ica."</p><p>Does that mean that Africans don't have modern human minds?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal genes to truly make the modern human mind.According to Wikipedia , " Neanderthal fossils have to date not been found in Af [ r ] ica .
" Does that mean that Africans do n't have modern human minds ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And perhaps it took a combination of proto-modern human and neanderthal genes to truly make the modern human mind.According to Wikipedia, "Neanderthal fossils have to date not been found in Af[r]ica.
"Does that mean that Africans don't have modern human minds?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891727</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1256649900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Modern humans and Neanderthals were so different, how likely is it that fertile offspring could have been born?</p><p>If it is not likely, could horizontal gene transfer have been a factor?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Modern humans and Neanderthals were so different , how likely is it that fertile offspring could have been born ? If it is not likely , could horizontal gene transfer have been a factor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Modern humans and Neanderthals were so different, how likely is it that fertile offspring could have been born?If it is not likely, could horizontal gene transfer have been a factor?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893739</id>
	<title>Caveman Rape?</title>
	<author>cyberzephyr</author>
	<datestamp>1256671740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't think of another reason the "Caveman" had sex with a Homosapien.  Please give me another answer other than juicy females that could be taken advantage of in "Caveman" days by a Caveman could be taken by cavemen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't think of another reason the " Caveman " had sex with a Homosapien .
Please give me another answer other than juicy females that could be taken advantage of in " Caveman " days by a Caveman could be taken by cavemen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't think of another reason the "Caveman" had sex with a Homosapien.
Please give me another answer other than juicy females that could be taken advantage of in "Caveman" days by a Caveman could be taken by cavemen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891977</id>
	<title>Weird sex indeed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256651580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Combine thes with the evidence that modern man <b>ate</b> some of the last Neanderthals, and it really gets kind of creepy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Combine thes with the evidence that modern man ate some of the last Neanderthals , and it really gets kind of creepy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Combine thes with the evidence that modern man ate some of the last Neanderthals, and it really gets kind of creepy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892321</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>mikael</author>
	<datestamp>1256655000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some <a href="http://healthmad.com/conditions-and-diseases/human-brain-parasites-worms-and-other-parasites-of-the-human-brain/" title="healthmad.com">parasites</a> [healthmad.com] which make their way into the human brain and form cysts. If one of these forms next to the pituitary gland, that will force the person to grow taller than average. I always wondered whether these giants weren't simply a biblical city that had a parasite problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some parasites [ healthmad.com ] which make their way into the human brain and form cysts .
If one of these forms next to the pituitary gland , that will force the person to grow taller than average .
I always wondered whether these giants were n't simply a biblical city that had a parasite problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some parasites [healthmad.com] which make their way into the human brain and form cysts.
If one of these forms next to the pituitary gland, that will force the person to grow taller than average.
I always wondered whether these giants weren't simply a biblical city that had a parasite problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29900983</id>
	<title>Modern man denied it thus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256759820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did not have sex with that (Neanderthal) woman.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did not have sex with that ( Neanderthal ) woman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did not have sex with that (Neanderthal) woman.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891987</id>
	<title>What the troll did to the princess in his cave</title>
	<author>viking80</author>
	<datestamp>1256651760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do not need any DNA analysis to figure that out. What do you think the troll did to the captured the princess, once he took her back to his mountain cave? And they did not call it the Stockholm syndrome if she ever was freed; it was called bergtatt (literally: taken into the mountain) or bewitched.</p><p>Unfortunately, the history is told by the winner; It would have been interesting to hear these fairytales as told by the Neanderthals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do not need any DNA analysis to figure that out .
What do you think the troll did to the captured the princess , once he took her back to his mountain cave ?
And they did not call it the Stockholm syndrome if she ever was freed ; it was called bergtatt ( literally : taken into the mountain ) or bewitched.Unfortunately , the history is told by the winner ; It would have been interesting to hear these fairytales as told by the Neanderthals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do not need any DNA analysis to figure that out.
What do you think the troll did to the captured the princess, once he took her back to his mountain cave?
And they did not call it the Stockholm syndrome if she ever was freed; it was called bergtatt (literally: taken into the mountain) or bewitched.Unfortunately, the history is told by the winner; It would have been interesting to hear these fairytales as told by the Neanderthals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892171</id>
	<title>Re:We can finally explain wherefore Celtic people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256653680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wherefore they are <a href="http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm" title="rdos.net" rel="nofollow">carrotheads</a> [rdos.net], you mean.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wherefore they are carrotheads [ rdos.net ] , you mean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wherefore they are carrotheads [rdos.net], you mean.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095</id>
	<title>Re:For in those days</title>
	<author>beadfulthings</author>
	<datestamp>1256652960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't even have to confine yourself to scriptural references. Everybody's mythology is chock-full of references to "others"--titans or giants, elves, dwarves, fairies or Shining Folk, really beautiful people or really ugly ones, people with supernatural or "different" powers, people who forced humans to mate with them or were forced by humans. Everybody's folk tales, national epics, fairy tales, religious scriptures, myths and legends--they've all got these sorts of references. It's interesting just to speculate on where and how "we" (humanity collectively) came up with all this wonderful stuff. I've always thought at least some of it must have had to do with our Neanderthal connections--whatever those turn out to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't even have to confine yourself to scriptural references .
Everybody 's mythology is chock-full of references to " others " --titans or giants , elves , dwarves , fairies or Shining Folk , really beautiful people or really ugly ones , people with supernatural or " different " powers , people who forced humans to mate with them or were forced by humans .
Everybody 's folk tales , national epics , fairy tales , religious scriptures , myths and legends--they 've all got these sorts of references .
It 's interesting just to speculate on where and how " we " ( humanity collectively ) came up with all this wonderful stuff .
I 've always thought at least some of it must have had to do with our Neanderthal connections--whatever those turn out to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't even have to confine yourself to scriptural references.
Everybody's mythology is chock-full of references to "others"--titans or giants, elves, dwarves, fairies or Shining Folk, really beautiful people or really ugly ones, people with supernatural or "different" powers, people who forced humans to mate with them or were forced by humans.
Everybody's folk tales, national epics, fairy tales, religious scriptures, myths and legends--they've all got these sorts of references.
It's interesting just to speculate on where and how "we" (humanity collectively) came up with all this wonderful stuff.
I've always thought at least some of it must have had to do with our Neanderthal connections--whatever those turn out to be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894535</id>
	<title>epiphany!!</title>
	<author>Ben1220</author>
	<datestamp>1256726460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just had an epiphany!!

This... explains... everything!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just had an epiphany ! !
This... explains.. .
everything ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just had an epiphany!!
This... explains...
everything!!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892713</id>
	<title>complete conjecture</title>
	<author>dAzED1</author>
	<datestamp>1256658420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this were an anthropologist saying it were true pre-proof, then that would at least mean something perhaps.  But...a geneticist?  Since he as yet has zero evidence at all - hasn't even started the research - why is he saying this in such a way that he "knows" anything?  He's supposed to base what he knows on dna analytics.  Leave the sociology to the sociologists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this were an anthropologist saying it were true pre-proof , then that would at least mean something perhaps .
But...a geneticist ?
Since he as yet has zero evidence at all - has n't even started the research - why is he saying this in such a way that he " knows " anything ?
He 's supposed to base what he knows on dna analytics .
Leave the sociology to the sociologists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this were an anthropologist saying it were true pre-proof, then that would at least mean something perhaps.
But...a geneticist?
Since he as yet has zero evidence at all - hasn't even started the research - why is he saying this in such a way that he "knows" anything?
He's supposed to base what he knows on dna analytics.
Leave the sociology to the sociologists.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896465</id>
	<title>Re:We can finally explain wherefore Celtic people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256741400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are!</i></p><p>Most, but not all <a href="http://www.nba.com/celtics/roster/hangin/" title="nba.com" rel="nofollow">Celtics</a> [nba.com] are African descent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are ! Most , but not all Celtics [ nba.com ] are African descent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At last we can explain wherefore Celtic people are who they are!Most, but not all Celtics [nba.com] are African descent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891679</id>
	<title>Re:Proclivities</title>
	<author>FlyingSquidStudios</author>
	<datestamp>1256649600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They were definitely all homos.<br> <br> <br>Homo Neanderthalenses that is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were definitely all homos .
Homo Neanderthalenses that is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were definitely all homos.
Homo Neanderthalenses that is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733</id>
	<title>New slashdot poll</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1256649960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many people looked at the neanderthal photo attached to this article and thought to themselves, "Yeah, I'd hit that!"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many people looked at the neanderthal photo attached to this article and thought to themselves , " Yeah , I 'd hit that !
" ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many people looked at the neanderthal photo attached to this article and thought to themselves, "Yeah, I'd hit that!
"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29907259</id>
	<title>Err, Yeah Right</title>
	<author>fmhuff</author>
	<datestamp>1256758680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So this is the new science. Fire the dumb down cannon Mr. Spock.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So this is the new science .
Fire the dumb down cannon Mr. Spock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this is the new science.
Fire the dumb down cannon Mr. Spock.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503</id>
	<title>For in those days</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was this odd quote someone showed me once from some book of the Bible (have to say in advance, I'm not a Bible studier, so I know not where it came from):</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; For in those days there were giants in the earth,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; and they bred with the son of man...</p><p>Of course the Bible scholars will surely weigh in here and call me names and "educate me", but one wonders if ancient verbal histories might have more to them than it first seems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There was this odd quote someone showed me once from some book of the Bible ( have to say in advance , I 'm not a Bible studier , so I know not where it came from ) :     For in those days there were giants in the earth ,     and they bred with the son of man...Of course the Bible scholars will surely weigh in here and call me names and " educate me " , but one wonders if ancient verbal histories might have more to them than it first seems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was this odd quote someone showed me once from some book of the Bible (have to say in advance, I'm not a Bible studier, so I know not where it came from):
    For in those days there were giants in the earth,
    and they bred with the son of man...Of course the Bible scholars will surely weigh in here and call me names and "educate me", but one wonders if ancient verbal histories might have more to them than it first seems.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902135</id>
	<title>Re:Humans</title>
	<author>DinDaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1256721900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if it didn't already have a hole?</p><p>American Pie, hmmmm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if it did n't already have a hole ? American Pie , hmmmm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if it didn't already have a hole?American Pie, hmmmm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891425</id>
	<title>Case closed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256647980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever been to a frat party?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever been to a frat party ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever been to a frat party?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891835</id>
	<title>if by neanderthals you mean black athletes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256650500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if by neanderthals you mean black athletes</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if by neanderthals you mean black athletes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if by neanderthals you mean black athletes</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892613</id>
	<title>Re:Why wouldn't they? We sure would.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256657700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems like an appropriate place to put this:<br><a href="http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/" title="peopleofwalmart.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/</a> [peopleofwalmart.com]</p><p>I only recently discovered this site.  I'm sure it gets old fast, but it's definitely pretty entertaining for a little while.</p><p>(Actually, now that I think about it, I probably found out about it because of someone else posting it here.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like an appropriate place to put this : http : //www.peopleofwalmart.com/ [ peopleofwalmart.com ] I only recently discovered this site .
I 'm sure it gets old fast , but it 's definitely pretty entertaining for a little while .
( Actually , now that I think about it , I probably found out about it because of someone else posting it here .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like an appropriate place to put this:http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/ [peopleofwalmart.com]I only recently discovered this site.
I'm sure it gets old fast, but it's definitely pretty entertaining for a little while.
(Actually, now that I think about it, I probably found out about it because of someone else posting it here.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892273</id>
	<title>Re:This is important</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256654700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nostradamus predicted this too...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nostradamus predicted this too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nostradamus predicted this too...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892521</id>
	<title>Word.</title>
	<author>jennyfever</author>
	<datestamp>1256656860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Neanderthals and modern (wo)man?  Sounds like college everywhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Neanderthals and modern ( wo ) man ?
Sounds like college everywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neanderthals and modern (wo)man?
Sounds like college everywhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891435</id>
	<title>Beer!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Helping ugly people have sex since 30,000 BCE!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Helping ugly people have sex since 30,000 BCE ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Helping ugly people have sex since 30,000 BCE!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894407</id>
	<title>Re:What a troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256723940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it would be like saying we had sex with aliens and compared their DNA to ours to see if we had offspring. Please reread the article. He has a complete  neanderthal genome or two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it would be like saying we had sex with aliens and compared their DNA to ours to see if we had offspring .
Please reread the article .
He has a complete neanderthal genome or two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it would be like saying we had sex with aliens and compared their DNA to ours to see if we had offspring.
Please reread the article.
He has a complete  neanderthal genome or two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892217</id>
	<title>sorry cannot resist</title>
	<author>Korbeau</author>
	<datestamp>1256654100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your mother is so old that the Neanderthals had sex with her!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your mother is so old that the Neanderthals had sex with her !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your mother is so old that the Neanderthals had sex with her!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892147</id>
	<title>If the Neanderthals had sex with mankind!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256653380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there's nothing holding me back, I just have to leave my apartment<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there 's nothing holding me back , I just have to leave my apartment : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there's nothing holding me back, I just have to leave my apartment :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891593</id>
	<title>Tough break for white people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're part neanderthal?  Kinda hard to convince the world we are the master race when we alone are half breeds with a non-verbal dumbass species...shit... we're the INFERIOR race!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're part neanderthal ?
Kinda hard to convince the world we are the master race when we alone are half breeds with a non-verbal dumbass species...shit... we 're the INFERIOR race ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're part neanderthal?
Kinda hard to convince the world we are the master race when we alone are half breeds with a non-verbal dumbass species...shit... we're the INFERIOR race!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895169</id>
	<title>Re:Jurassic Park redux</title>
	<author>Jugalator</author>
	<datestamp>1256733540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hey, I can't have sex with you, you're obviously a different species! Probably they thought to themselves, Two arms, two legs, looks about right, the bits are in the right places, why not?</p></div><p>Actually, given human psychology, I wouldn't be surprised if neanderthals were kept as sex slaves. H. Sapiens were after all more intelligent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , I ca n't have sex with you , you 're obviously a different species !
Probably they thought to themselves , Two arms , two legs , looks about right , the bits are in the right places , why not ? Actually , given human psychology , I would n't be surprised if neanderthals were kept as sex slaves .
H. Sapiens were after all more intelligent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, I can't have sex with you, you're obviously a different species!
Probably they thought to themselves, Two arms, two legs, looks about right, the bits are in the right places, why not?Actually, given human psychology, I wouldn't be surprised if neanderthals were kept as sex slaves.
H. Sapiens were after all more intelligent.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891615</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892283</id>
	<title>Of course Neanderthals did it with Modern Man!</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1256654820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, you'd think it was OBVIOUS if you ever saw Jack Thompson!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , you 'd think it was OBVIOUS if you ever saw Jack Thompson !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, you'd think it was OBVIOUS if you ever saw Jack Thompson!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891459</id>
	<title>Photographic proof...</title>
	<author>Nick Driver</author>
	<datestamp>1256648100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.terroristplanet.com/kahlidmuhammad1.jpg" title="terroristplanet.com" rel="nofollow">... of their descendants right here.</a> [terroristplanet.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... of their descendants right here .
[ terroristplanet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... of their descendants right here.
[terroristplanet.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892387</id>
	<title>Finally an explanation of Obama's heritage!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256655540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>LOLZ finally, I know where Obama came from!</htmltext>
<tokenext>LOLZ finally , I know where Obama came from !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOLZ finally, I know where Obama came from!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891683</id>
	<title>Re:Proclivities</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1256649660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It means that some modern humans, much like the fabled Captain Kirk, engaged in beastiality. Sex outside your species is sex outside your species, no matter how closely related the other species is. Gender has nothing to do with species...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It means that some modern humans , much like the fabled Captain Kirk , engaged in beastiality .
Sex outside your species is sex outside your species , no matter how closely related the other species is .
Gender has nothing to do with species.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It means that some modern humans, much like the fabled Captain Kirk, engaged in beastiality.
Sex outside your species is sex outside your species, no matter how closely related the other species is.
Gender has nothing to do with species...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893685</id>
	<title>Re:Jurassic Park redux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256670900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>People have sex across interspecies barriers all the time; animal, vegetable, mineral, it doesn't matter.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I'm sure there's a pumpkin involved in Rush Limbaugh's lineage.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People have sex across interspecies barriers all the time ; animal , vegetable , mineral , it does n't matter .
I 'm sure there 's a pumpkin involved in Rush Limbaugh 's lineage .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have sex across interspecies barriers all the time; animal, vegetable, mineral, it doesn't matter.
I'm sure there's a pumpkin involved in Rush Limbaugh's lineage.
   
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891615</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902901</id>
	<title>The important question is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256725860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Was it considered bestiality?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was it considered bestiality ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was it considered bestiality?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693</id>
	<title>Why wouldn't they? We sure would.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you been in a Wal-mart? People will hump anything with a hole. It seems to me that if you can show that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens/Erectus were in the same place at the same time that you'd need extraordinary proof that they didn't have sex.</p><p>Offspring's a much harder question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you been in a Wal-mart ?
People will hump anything with a hole .
It seems to me that if you can show that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens/Erectus were in the same place at the same time that you 'd need extraordinary proof that they did n't have sex.Offspring 's a much harder question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you been in a Wal-mart?
People will hump anything with a hole.
It seems to me that if you can show that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens/Erectus were in the same place at the same time that you'd need extraordinary proof that they didn't have sex.Offspring's a much harder question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29903977</id>
	<title>old news;-)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256731800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>read about it in clan of the cave bear...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>read about it in clan of the cave bear.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>read about it in clan of the cave bear...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891569</id>
	<title>Most likely</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, they most likely had sex, but it may or may not have been consensual.  It's likely that humans and neanderthals fought at some point, and part of war has pretty much always been having your way with the women on the losing side.  I'm not condoning this, just pointing out the obvious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , they most likely had sex , but it may or may not have been consensual .
It 's likely that humans and neanderthals fought at some point , and part of war has pretty much always been having your way with the women on the losing side .
I 'm not condoning this , just pointing out the obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, they most likely had sex, but it may or may not have been consensual.
It's likely that humans and neanderthals fought at some point, and part of war has pretty much always been having your way with the women on the losing side.
I'm not condoning this, just pointing out the obvious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896035</id>
	<title>Neanderthal Parallax</title>
	<author>SuiteSisterMary</author>
	<datestamp>1256739540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Came for the references to Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax.  Left sad.  Hugo winner, fer chrissakes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Came for the references to Robert J. Sawyer 's Neanderthal Parallax .
Left sad .
Hugo winner , fer chrissakes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Came for the references to Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax.
Left sad.
Hugo winner, fer chrissakes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894673</id>
	<title>I seem to recall</title>
	<author>GrandTeddyBearOfDoom</author>
	<datestamp>1256728440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Watching some kind of video documentary on the subject at a friend's party where the sound engineer forgot to unmute the narrator track.</p><p>That said, I maybe had a little too much to drink.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Watching some kind of video documentary on the subject at a friend 's party where the sound engineer forgot to unmute the narrator track.That said , I maybe had a little too much to drink .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watching some kind of video documentary on the subject at a friend's party where the sound engineer forgot to unmute the narrator track.That said, I maybe had a little too much to drink.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902833</id>
	<title>Re:Why wouldn't they? We sure would.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256725500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmm, I must be shopping in the wrong aisles at my Wal-mart!  Where's all this humping going on, way back in Automotive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm , I must be shopping in the wrong aisles at my Wal-mart !
Where 's all this humping going on , way back in Automotive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm, I must be shopping in the wrong aisles at my Wal-mart!
Where's all this humping going on, way back in Automotive?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893639
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892613
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893863
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891879
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29943302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902833
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891679
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29900531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_1853237_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892997
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896257
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895649
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894407
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893045
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892079
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893203
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893133
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897103
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891713
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891569
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29895179
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891499
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892095
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897075
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29899141
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29943302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29897319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894011
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891549
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891679
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892415
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891485
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891593
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891879
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892101
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894227
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891955
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891463
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29894087
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29902833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29896583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892613
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893511
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892143
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29898953
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29900531
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891343
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891717
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893279
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29892001
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_1853237.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29891413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_1853237.29893103
</commentlist>
</conversation>
