"I'll have the arugula salad with the mango salsa...and the waitress."
Posted on 02/26/2006 3:25:01 AM PST by Pharmboy
Hmmm...if they had advanced weaponry as pictured and they looked like that, they would have had to carry many clips to keep those Cro magnons away.
He probably came to America for that smile. Some ortho made a pretty penny.
Again, you presented the DNA argument as and end all pillar of truth, but it cannot even stand rudimentary questions.
You didn't anwer one of them.
What Neanderthal DNA looks like? How it was collected? How did you arrived at the notion that this DNA sample is what you say it is? Where have you obtained this DNA?
I've seen that picture about 40 or 50 times on here and just now realized that the gun has a laser sight on it and that she is wearing a necklace and wristwatch but it takes a lot of intense concentration to be able to see them.
The key, dear SkyPilot, is to continue reading past that right-up-front sentence to the point where the questions are answered.
"It's so simple,even a caveman could do it"and the cameraman,who just happens to be a caveman,gets offended.Ha ha.Good stab at political correctness if there ever was one.
Color me confused. IIRC, when I was in school Neanderthals were considered a sub-species, not a separate species, which meant interbreeding was possible and likely. Even if a time split between the two groups made interbreeding unlikely (which one of my old profs argued would have made the Nees a separate species), what physiological difference/s could there have been in the Nees that would have made a union between members of the two groups sterile? I thought the Nees were considered a sub-species?
How would you know? Your questions make clear you've never read one.
PS. Also the fact that Neanderthal & Cro-Magnon were contemporaries added to the reasons why they were thought sub-species, and to be sure, still are in a sense. Or, to be more precise, their status is currently indecisive between a sub-species or a fully distinct species. However, one thing that is now much, much clearer that it was just a decade ago is that Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon behavior was far more different than had been thought the case. The Neanderthal had inferior tools, inferior weapons, inferior artistry, etc.
"The fact that neanderthals disappear in Europe, about the same time as modern Homo sapiens appear, could be used as evidence to support the replacement hypothesis. However, not all the evidence, however, supports the Replacement Hypothesis in Europe. In 1998 at the Lagar Velho site in Portugal, the remains of a child, aged 3-1/2 to 5 years was found that apparently shows a "mixing" of Neanderthal and Modern human traits. The skull of this specimen has a pronounced chin, which is a hallmark of modern homo, however, post-cranially, the boy's bones were quite robust, and he was barrel chested and had short lower limbs, all of which are cold adaptations which characterized Neanderthal. "From here.
If we did not, in fact, interbreed with them, it might have been a chromosomal incompatability (the evidence is the last common ancestor we shared with them lived between 500,000 and 850,000 years ago) or an anatomic issue.
I can read just fine; I simply cannot always make sense of incomprehensible gibberish. However, although whatever it is you're trying to say now is incoherent, I will add that the prevailing view for a good while has been that Neanderthals were fully replaced - not assimilated - by early modern humans. Now, perhaps you read something about Neanderthals back in the 1950s or whatever that you think is relevant, but the fact of the matter is that the items you think should be blazing across every news daily, TV show, and iPod worldwide have been scientific CW for years now.
It is human nature to jump into theories well before the dust of evidences settles, and that nature goes back to when the first blade of grass popped forth.
It's worth noting that the Lagar Velho fossil and what it signifies has been the subject of acrimonious scientific debate.
Does it really matter if the Neanderthals interbred with us or not?
We are what we are.
We've inherited genes from the earliest life-forms. We've got little bacteria in our cells that hitched a ride 1 billion years ago. We share 96% of our DNA with the chimpazees and more with the bonobos.
I'm sure Neanderthals were very closely related to us but they are gone now and it makes no difference at all whether a few interbred with us or not.
What is more interesting is how did they survive in Ice Age Europe through two different 100,000 year Ice Ages. It couldn't have been much fun.
As is much in paleoanthropology...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.