Clearly I need to break this down in to very simple terms, since people think they understand my post and clearly don't and are labeling me 'bodly moronic' because of their own misunderstanding.
One person speculated that a mythical story might be evidenced by this finding, that the Denisovans might have been the civilizing divines spoken of in legend. Another person said, wouldn't it be the Sapiens that were divine? I called out my own anti-colonial bias, recognizing that my frame has me inclined to believe the first framing ('denisovians were the divines in the legend'), and then speculated that there's a spectrum of opinions one could have and which group you label 'divine and civilizing' and the other 'not-divine and un-civilized' depends on your own biases.
But go on and downvote me and call me names because you've misunderstood my point.
One person speculated that a mythical story might be evidenced by this finding, that the Denisovans might have been the civilizing divines spoken of in legend. Another person said, wouldn't it be the Sapiens that were divine? I called out my own anti-colonial bias, recognizing that my frame has me inclined to believe the first framing ('denisovians were the divines in the legend'), and then speculated that there's a spectrum of opinions one could have and which group you label 'divine and civilizing' and the other 'not-divine and un-civilized' depends on your own biases.
But go on and downvote me and call me names because you've misunderstood my point.