I'm going to run off the bolded because 'and all the others' isn't very descriptive.

Short answer: Yes.

now from what i understand, most people of african orgin dont have neanderthal DNA, is there a known reason for this?

Pressures (be they environmental or social) would have cause migration and, inevitably, pockets of that specie living in different areas.

So if there aren't any Neanderthals living in your area, then you're not going to see that genetic material in their offspring.

then how can we assume they are the same species if they dont even have the same descendants?

Wait, what?

They all diverged from the same ancestor.

Just because they all don't live in the same environment doesn't mean that they are a different specie.

maybe I don't know, that is way above my pay grade. But as far as I know the whole Neanderthal thing is kind of messy and not really resolved yet.

so what it looks to me is that you have Homo heidelbergensis that was all over the place. in europe this guy evolved into neaderthals, in africa he evolved in to homo sapiens, and in asia he evolved into denisova hominins.

In asia the neanderthals and denisovas likely mated so when the homo sapiens left africa, they mated with neaderthals in europe, and neaderthal/denisova cross breeds in asia.

so id say all in all, theres Homo sapiens, with in that there should be In my opinion homo sapiens sapiens as evolved in africa from Homo heidelbergensis, the homo sapein neanderthal as evolved in europe from Homo heidelbergensis, and the homo sapein denisovan as evolved from the Homo heidelbergensis in asia.

now per this we have the homo sapein sapiens as the pure form of people from african orgin, but then we have nothing for the neaderthal/sapien breed or the neaderthal/sapein/denisovian breed.

so IMO, same species, sure, same subspecies, not quite.

I have a big one and i'm not black.

species is a word.
if u define it loosely we are 1 species
if u define it strictly we are not 1 species

elaborate?