Ambiadvantageous mutations

The geno/phenotypic differences between the two known lineages of “archaic” humans (so called) and the lineage of “modern humans” almost surely contributed to how the archaic lineages went extinct (while the lineage of modern humans prevailed and is on the whole still lengthening).

Having evolved big brains/heads (Neanderthals had on average bigger brains than their contemporary and today's modern humans) in combination with pelvic bones suited to well balanced and highly adaptive bipedalism caused the three distinctly different races of humans to have a hard time to be born (pass through a thereby almost too narrow birth canal) was compensated for by an increased neoteny (more so in modern humans than in Neanderthals); The by our evolution increased neoteny meant a longer lasting and greater self-helplessness/vulnerability and an increased chance of early on ending up under postnatal SHI-type threats and to incur and accumulated corresponding CURSES

A most typical ambiadvantageous (and pleiotropic) mutation in our recent phylogeny (from about the time since our lineage split from that of our chimpanzee cousins) was one that not only conferred an enhanced the capacity to cope with SHI threats come CURSES but that also conferred an increased capacity (relative to the capacity of Neanderthals' and Denisovans') to adaptively reroute the primarily insidious (threatening) excitatory messages produced by CURSES into Opportunity taking language-function-assisted behaviors (actentions), and that on top of it all supplemented the synaptic sequestration (the specific/synaptic hibernation or SH) of the insidious threat posed by excitatory messages generated by SHI threats and by CURSES. 

It is ÆPT to think that some ambiadvantageous mutations that occurred in the modern human lineage but not in the lineage of the Neanderthals and Denisovans may have conferred extra ‘EAVASIVE (psychobehavioral) traits for resisting’ depression (or prevent listlessness) caused by an accumulation of consciously replayable memories of adverse circumstances and by accumulated CURSES [i.e. implicit memories caused (put) by circumstantial threats of SHI type].

Our ancestors that were so called "modern humans" and their likewise ambiadvantageous mutation carrying and expressing fellow sept (or extended family group) members were, compared to their contemporary archaic humans, more inclined and capable of staunchly (more fanatically) carry out opportunity exploiting collective endeavors, may have been the result of such momentous (selective sweep causing) "ambiadvantageous[ly adaptive] mutations.

The main cause of the demise of the “archaics” is highly likely to have involved them having lacked such an extra adaptive edge — one provided by an Evolved Ambiadvantageous[ly adaptive] Verbal (language function assisted) Actention (selection serving) System involving (amongst much else but here highly instructive and helpful to be able to include) Various Endo{genous}opiated; or by abbreviation: "the archaics" were not as EAVASIVE as were the modern human ancestors of the extended family groups to which our modern human ancestors belonged.  

It most obviously also involved that they were being murderously raided and usurped by modern humans whose phenotype reflected these kinds of mutations significantly more so than did the phenotype of these so called "archaic" but not at all necessarily less intelligent Neanderthals and Denisovans. 

The discovered admixture of archaic (specifically Neanderthal and Denisovan) DNA in current non-African people bears a highly plausible witness to that our main male common ancestor’s of today's non-Africans did also bride-steal from Neanderthals and Denisovans. 

While it is conceivable, and a much more cozy and comforting thought, that romantic mixing of these lineages of humans also did occur the above interpretation of how our some of our main common ancestors added adaptive-enough sequences of DNA (from Neanderthals or Denisovans) to the genomes of today's non-Africans cannot be cogently refuted. 

To not accept the above as an approximate description of an 'anthropic evolutionary psychology type' truth will be impossible for anyone who is suitably science-factually informed and percEPTive while also not too infected by the virus of social and political correctness, or by the corrupting social value of virtue-signaling.

IOW: Anyone who disagrees is by ÆPT definition inEPT.😎