Comments by "Dr. Ian Plect" (@Dr.IanPlect) on "When We Met Other Human Species" video.

There's no basis to think so whatsoever.
3
@kens97sto171 "Based on what?" - Given that there isn't the slightest indication of either having existed in modern times or even extant, THAT equates with 'no basis'! If there's no evidence of it for either Denisovans or Neanderthals, that's what 'no basis' means! 'No basis' doesn't mean 'impossible', just that there's no reason (which means evidence) to think so! "We don't even know what they looked like" - Not so for Neanderthals, there's plenty of fossil evidence to go on "There could be a small population" - evidence required; no basis "Or a concentration of descendants that bred with us but that have a higher percentage of their original DNA. We find that with Neanderthal DNA. Some places there's more of it than in other places." - Yes, I entirely agree; there ARE populations of us with higher numbers of genes from both Denisovans and Neanderthals. In the case of Denisovans, some subpopulations' members have upto 5% Denisovan genome. ------------- Summary; a basis for other humans still living requires evidence, and there is none; that's what no basis means.
3
@kens97sto171 "Then we're just fighting over semantics." - nonsense; you are throwing out baseless comments about populations/individuals of extinct taxa possibly still living, my point is it's baseless because there's no evidence to support it "My point is that there could be a population somewhere even if we don't have any proof of it" - that's just a baseless comment, evidence is what matters "Just like we believed the Coelacanths, and several other animals that we believed went extinct the same time as the dinosaur. There wasn't any basis to believe they still existed." - there's a gigantic difference! Ocean living fish are difficult to find, populations/individuals of other hominids living on land is much easier to discover! "Until of course we inconveniently discovered them" - 'inconveniently'? tripe; them being thought extinct then found living wasn't an 'inconvenience! "That's my point. Just because we haven't found them doesn't mean that they aren't there someplace. I have no idea. I'm just saying perhaps I'm a little more open-minded than you are" - you haven't a clue what you're talking about; this isn't about me being less openminded, I'm just commenting on your mumblings! EVIDENCE is what matters "Something desperately lacking in modern scientists" - Now you're being pathetic -------------- SAME summary; your empty rambling is useless; evidence is what counts.
3
Yes
3
Just don't wrongly state you're a hybrid, as many think this means!
1
Yes, having some of their genes is irrelevant.
1
"I guess Neanderthals and Denisovans have just been sucked in to our gene pool. We mixed. So there is no "pure" Neanderthal or Denisovan left." - well, as they're both extinct, that's of course the case. But addressing what you actually mean... - ...of course there were many individuals of the 2 that didn't interbreed with us, and so many have none of our genes
1
@sc8307 "We are the hybrid relatives. I have 1.4% Neanderthal DNA. Some people can have as much as 4%." - nonsense; that isn't what defines a hybrid
1
@sc8307 "According to Merriam-Webster "an offspring of two animals or plants of different subspecies, breeds, varieties, species, or genera" Please tell me what your definition is and why MW is wrong." ---------- There is an important distinction to be made that means we are not Neanderthal hybrids, but you need to attempt to see it yourself (I think with a prompt from me, the realisation made for yourself will be more satisfying than me just stating it). That is what point 2. discusses below. 1. First; you are incorrect in saying MW is wrong, it isn't but more info will clarify what a hybrid is, the next point is about that. 2. Consider what you've missed in your statement "We are the hybrid relatives. I have 1.4% Neanderthal DNA. Some people can have as much as 4%." Compare that to what your own source states "an offspring of two animals or plants of different subspecies, breeds, varieties, species, or genera" - do you see a distinction?
1