And it likely was not very pretty.
Happy New Year to all the ScienceFreeps and non-science Freeps!
I don't think this guy gets out very much... I've been meeting Neanderthals for quite some time now...
Meega, Nala Kweesta!
At least the phrase "Knuckle-draggin' neanderthal" might still be accurate for use as an analogy !!
There is nothing really inconsistent in this reconstructed Neanderthal that has not been seen often on x-rays at any major medical institution. So, either we still have these Neanderthals walking the streets today, or some of us have a lot of Neanderthal in our blood.
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
And it likely was not very pretty.
Actually, it may have been rather unremarkable.
I read a statistical observation by someone, who pointed out that if every time two populations encounter each other, one of them incurs a decrease in population relative to the other, it can be statistically proven (given equal reproductive rates on the part of the two species) that one of them will eventually become extinct. (It does seem sort of intuitively obvious...).
The point was that it would not have required open warfare and genocide by the Cro-Mags (damn good band, btw) of the Neanderthals - just one more dead Neanderthal per normalized time period than dead Cro-Mags, overall - a good maxim to keep in mind today, when pursuing the global extermination of Islam...
Recent studies of neanderthal DNA turned up the result that neanderthal DNA is "about halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee", and that there is no way we could interbreed with them or be descended from them via any process resembling evolution. That says that anybody wishing to believe that modern man evolved has to come up with some closer hominid, i.e. a plausible ancestor for modern man, and that the closer hominid would stand closer to us in both time and morphology than the neanderthal, and that his works and remains should be very easy to find, since neanderthal remains and works are all over the map. Of course, no such closer hominid exists; all other hominids are much further from us than the neanderthal.
An evolutionist could try to claim that we and the neanderthal both are descended from some more remote ancestor 200,000 years ago, but that would be like claiming that dogs couldn't be descended from wolves, and must therefore be descended from fish, i.e. the claim would be idiotic.
That leaves three possibilities: modern man was created from scratch very recently, was genetically re-engineered from the neanderthal, or was imported from elsewhere in the cosmos.
The idea of modern man evolving is not tenable.
Neanderthals used to be drawn and painted as ape-men. More recent scientific reconstructions show them to be closely related to us, but definitely another species as opposed to another race:
Jay Matternes' reconstructions of neanderthals.
How about "Alley Oop"
This side-by-side graphic comparison is a prime example of the unprofessionalism that dominates the whole paleontologist dream factory.
What are the first "contrasts" that strike the eye?
1. The bone color. The modern is depicted as off-white, the neanderthal is decked in markedly different yellow. In other domains of human endeavor, this would be called "deceit."
2. Height. The neanderthal is depicted at 5'4", the modern as 6'0". Why 6'0"? Modern well-fed man has a wide range of heights, and in the centuries before the 20th, 5'4" was probably exactly average for a male. Again, these depictions are about dreams, foundation grants and reputations, not about facts.
Beyond this, the current variants of the human family are widely varied. Just go to the beach sometime in a racially diverse area and take note of the wide variation in "upper leg to lower leg" ratios or the differing pelvic structures of different races and nationalities. Combining this with the lack of actual Neanderthal material, this seems to be a report angling for more funding, nothing more.