Public Lecture: Reconstructing ancient human history from DNA

[@KipIngram]

I'm about halfway through this video as I type this, but I just want to thoroughly laud Dr. Siepel for a remarkably clear and cogent presentation of this complex material. Clearly there is enough deep detail for us to get entirely lost in, but he's doing a fantastic job of focusing us in on the key salient aspects. I've known about this kind of work for a long time, but only in a very vague way, and I feel like he is helping me have a much deeper understanding. Very, *very* well done, sir - thanks so much!

[@danielgregg2530]

Hear, hear !

[@KipIngram]

Just. Splendid. This represents science at its best. I'm so impressed.

[@danielgregg2530]

Great talk ! There is so much crap on the internet anymore -- especially from people who are supposed to be educated professionals -- but this talk shows what a decent scientific talk actually looks like (and, traditionally, typically was in the 20th century).

[@sudhakarreddy1453]

This is the way I wish I can communicate Science with the not so much enlightened people Well done Sir

[@terryhebert1567]

What a brilliant speaker ! Hope to more from you Adam.

[@jonecp1]

Interesting and informative free public lecture

[@TheWalrusWasDanny]

Great lecture...thanks!! Danny

[@susanbroadstreet7077]

Good content, good speaker

[@ezzovonachalm7534]

How can mitochondria contain DNA since they are anucleated cells ? Is this imported travelling DNA of the sort of cDNA ( circulating DNA from e.g. tumours ?)

[@spatrk6634]

mitochondria has a small amount of their own DNA. This genetic material is known as mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA

[@ReverenXero]

@48:54 I think I know what that initial "Alien DNA" thing he points out is really about. There is a mystery among anthropologists regarding about 13-15% of the population. With possible explanations ranging from a statistical stroke of luck, or something that even today would be called impossible or crazy talk. This graph (if I am correct) actually pushes credibility to that crazy talk.

[@mafuaqua]

great talk, thanks for publishing!

[@blazingstar9638]

Excellent

[@caseyjude5472]

Thanks for posting, I enjoyed this lecture!

[@philnel7516]

Modern humans are homosapiens? Homoerectus excluded? Homoerectus and Neanderthals? So much seems missing. Does the gnome sequencing point to chromosome variations/adaptions? So many unknowns. Agree with comments pointing to crazy talk!!

[@gorillaguerillaDK]

Modern human = Homo sapiens sapiens Just because there’s a small percentage of other Homo groups spread in various part of the population, doesn’t make these parts of the population anything but Homo sapiens sapiens. What actually is the most interesting thing to find out in the future, and a very interesting debate, is more like if we should really view Homo neanderthalis as a Homo sapiens neanderthalis

[@michaels4255]

@@gorillaguerillaDK I assumed Modern Human could also include "Anatomically Modern Humans" which can include very early sapiens, including 200,000 kya or more. I don't think that Hn should be Hsn because the Hn mtDNA does not cluster as close to to living humanity as the various sapiens populations/races (which already differ from one another more than dogs/wolves/coyotes/jackals which we think of as separate species) dispersed around the world cluster with each other. That would indicate that a separate species category is warranted. Also, if the science hasn't changed on me, the last I read is that Hn DNA that survives in the sapiens genome is not spread randomly throughout the sapiens genome but is found in certain regions, while it is missing from other regions, which suggests it has been purged from these other regions due to detrimental effects. While not a completely effective barrier to genetic introgression, it is strong enough that it says to me, "different species." It has become fashionable in the last 20 years to emphasize the similarities between Neanderthalensis and Sapiens, and while this may have begun as a rational corrective to older Neanderthal stereotypes, I think it is in danger of going too far.

[@bobcharlie2337]

Very good, very interesting.

[@Andrea-br4gv]

How are these discovering applied to help humans today,2019? How often did women developed breaststroke cancer prior to A. Wilsons findings 1934? Why have breast and ovarian cancer increased more recently? Why do humans develop many new diseases?

[@Mishn0]

Because they're less likely to die of something else like starvation or typhus before they had a chance to develop cancer.

[@rstevewarmorycom]

Generic Breaststroke cancer???? Hahahahahah! They haven't increased. They don't, we just learn more about the diseases that wee always there!!

[@michaels4255]

@@Mishn0 Yes, but I would bet that these disease increases still hold after controlling for age. There are two not mutually exclusive reasons I would hypothesize for this. One is changes in lifestyles that are out of synch with our evolved nature. The other is that we have become much better than earlier generations at reducing childhood mortality, and consequently more random mutations get passed on as mutational load rapidly increases.

[@SideWalkAstronomyNetherlands]

meanwhile in the last three years we moved on a bit more... more fossils, more genetics, more data..old show...

[@rickfucci4512]

"only plausible explanation" is too strong a statement for open science...

[@Seawolfaka]

Very interesting to see that when a white man gets called what he actually is out of Africa or the black man thinks about the fact that the white man came out of Africa damn that’s some crazy shit😎😎😎😎 love my people. We are all out of Africa.

[@michaels4255]

Getting out of Africa has been great for most of us, but not as good for Australian Aborigines, who would have done better to venture farther north. Of course, nobody knew that back then. I sometimes wonder what the next 50,000 years will bring, especially once fossil fuels are exhausted and the world begins to "get bigger" again. Will new human species begin to develop?

[@pepitosinaga]

Kk

[@Brynnium]

TDS.

[@wandaalexander1972]

So I guess its OK when O'BIDEN coarsens the dialogue by challenging a voter to a fight at a rally. Politics in a science video? Ok then...bye bye.

[@OspreyFlyer]

Stop making sense and providing contradictory evidence, that is not acceptable regarding a science lecture!

[@vanderdole02]

??? Nothing wrong with Biden...he's your countries best chance to return to civility and the rule of law, away from utter barbarism..

[@wandaalexander1972]

@@vanderdole02 Maybe that's your opinion so that China can continue to get rich off of the backs of Americans, eh? Well, WE don't need YOU or your OPINIONS! SO GET LOST!

[@jeffwalker1322]

@@vanderdole02 Why are you even listening to this video ? You are obviously a moron.

[@bibia666]

The orange-utan does coarsen any and everything all the time and much worse!!! Parkland 5!!! Multiple times he cheated on his spouses!! Calling others rapists! There are to many examples of donald (the orange-utan) bringing us and the world down. And he loves dictators like Kim, Xi and Putin! Greetings bibia.

[@executivesteps]

Probably a pretty good presentation ruined by a persistent “uhh” or “um” at the beginning of almost every sentence. Unwatchable!