First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Neanderthals, what evolution was aiming at producing ?
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 6/23/09
Could it be, that evolution was aiming to produce neanderthals, not homo-sapiens, but instead homo-sapiens was just a branch off species ? While neanderthals were supposed to have been the ones to have taken our place ? Apparently neanderthals were highly intelligent and good at communication just like homo-sapien is.



New research published in the August, 2006 journal Current Anthropology by Neandertal and early modern human expert, Erik Trinkaus, Ph.D., professor of anthropology at Washington University in St. Louis, suggests that rather than the standard straight line from chimps to early humans to us with Neandertals off on a side graph, it's equally valid, perhaps more valid based on the fossil record, that the line should extend from the common ancestor to the Neandertals, and Modern Humans should be the branch off that.

Trinkaus has spent years examining the fossil record and began to realize that maybe researchers have been looking at our ancient ancestors the wrong way.

Trinkaus identified fossil traits which seemed to be genetic markers - those not greatly influenced by environment, life ways and wear and tear. He was careful to examine traits that appear to be largely independent of each other to avoid redundancy.

"I wanted to see to what extent Neandertals are derived, that is distinct, from the ancestral form. I also wanted to see the extent to which modern humans are derived relative to the ancestral form," Trinkaus says. "What I came up with is that modern humans have about twice as many uniquely derived traits than do the Neandertals.

"In the broader sweep of human evolution," says Trinkaus, "the more unusual group is not Neandertals, whom we tend to look at as strange, weird and unusual, but it's us - Modern Humans."

The most unusual characteristics throughout human anatomy occur in Modern Humans, argues Trinkaus. "If we want to better understand human evolution, we should be asking why Modern Humans are so unusual, not why the Neandertals are divergent. Modern Humans, for example, are the only people who lack brow ridges. We are the only ones who have seriously shortened faces. We are the only ones with very reduced internal nasal cavities. We also have a number of detailed features of the limb skeleton that are unique."

Trinkaus admits that every paleontologist will define the traits a little differently. "If you really wanted to, you could make the case that Neandertals look stranger than we do. But if you are reasonably honest about it, I think it would be extraordinarily difficult to make Neandertals more derived than Modern Humans."



Neandertals, the 'stupid' cousins of modern humans were capable of capturing the most impressive animals. This indicates that Neandertals were anything but dim. Dutch researcher Gerrit Dusseldorp analysed their daily forays for food to gain insights into the complex behaviour of the Neandertal. His analysis revealed that the hunting was very knowledge intensive.

Although it is now clear that Neandertals were hunters and not scavengers, their exact hunting methods are still something of a mystery. Dusseldorp investigated just how sophisticated the Neandertals' hunting methods really were. His analysis of two archaeological sites revealed that Neandertals in warm forested areas preferred to hunt solitary game but that in colder, less forested areas they preferred to hunt the more difficult to capture herding animals.

The Neandertals were not easily intimidated by their game. Rhinoceroses, bisons and even predators such as the brown bear were all on their menu. Dusseldorp established that just as for modern humans, the environment and the availability of food determined the choice of prey and the hunting method adopted. If the circumstances allowed it, Neandertals lived in large groups and even the most attractive and difficult to catch prey were within their reach.

Coordination and communication

Although herding animals are difficult to surprise and isolate, many such game lived on the open steppes. This large supply attracted large groups of Neandertals. That the Neandertals were capable of hunting down such elusive game demonstrates that they had good coordination skills and could communicate well with each other.

Each prey has a specific cost-benefit scenario. For example, game that are more difficult to catch yield more calories and have a more usable, thick fleece. Dusseldorp used these data to examine the Neandertal's preferences. He also analysed the prey of hyenas in the same manner. Hyenas were important competitors of Neandertals as they had a similar dietary pattern.

Dusseldorp demonstrated that Neandertals, thanks to their intelligence, even surpassed hyenas at capturing the strongest game. All things being considered, the Neandertals were skilled and highly intelligent hunters. So the idea that Neandertals were brute musclemen can be dismissed.

This study was part of NWO project "Thoughtful Hunters? The Archaeology of Neandertal Communication and Cognition." Dusseldorp is continuing his research with a postdoc position in Johannesburg. There he shall focus on the modern humans that evolved in Africa.


So it appears that modern humans were not supposed to be the end result of evolution, but neanderthals were apparently.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060908093606.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090514084115.htm
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/23/09

Allhailodin wrote:

Could it be, that evolution was aiming to produce neanderthals, not homo-sapiens, but instead homo-sapiens was just a branch off species ? While neanderthals were supposed to have been the ones to have taken our place ? Apparently neanderthals were highly intelligent and good at communication just like homo-sapien is.



New research published in the August, 2006 journal Current Anthropology by Neandertal and early modern human expert, Erik Trinkaus, Ph.D., professor of anthropology at Washington University in St. Louis, suggests that rather than the standard straight line from chimps to early humans to us with Neandertals off on a side graph, it's equally valid, perhaps more valid based on the fossil record, that the line should extend from the common ancestor to the Neandertals, and Modern Humans should be the branch off that.

Trinkaus has spent years examining the fossil record and began to realize that maybe researchers have been looking at our ancient ancestors the wrong way.

Trinkaus identified fossil traits which seemed to be genetic markers - those not greatly influenced by environment, life ways and wear and tear. He was careful to examine traits that appear to be largely independent of each other to avoid redundancy.

"I wanted to see to what extent Neandertals are derived, that is distinct, from the ancestral form. I also wanted to see the extent to which modern humans are derived relative to the ancestral form," Trinkaus says. "What I came up with is that modern humans have about twice as many uniquely derived traits than do the Neandertals.

"In the broader sweep of human evolution," says Trinkaus, "the more unusual group is not Neandertals, whom we tend to look at as strange, weird and unusual, but it's us - Modern Humans."

The most unusual characteristics throughout human anatomy occur in Modern Humans, argues Trinkaus. "If we want to better understand human evolution, we should be asking why Modern Humans are so unusual, not why the Neandertals are divergent. Modern Humans, for example, are the only people who lack brow ridges. We are the only ones who have seriously shortened faces. We are the only ones with very reduced internal nasal cavities. We also have a number of detailed features of the limb skeleton that are unique."

Trinkaus admits that every paleontologist will define the traits a little differently. "If you really wanted to, you could make the case that Neandertals look stranger than we do. But if you are reasonably honest about it, I think it would be extraordinarily difficult to make Neandertals more derived than Modern Humans."




Neandertals, the 'stupid' cousins of modern humans were capable of capturing the most impressive animals. This indicates that Neandertals were anything but dim. Dutch researcher Gerrit Dusseldorp analysed their daily forays for food to gain insights into the complex behaviour of the Neandertal. His analysis revealed that the hunting was very knowledge intensive.

Although it is now clear that Neandertals were hunters and not scavengers, their exact hunting methods are still something of a mystery. Dusseldorp investigated just how sophisticated the Neandertals' hunting methods really were. His analysis of two archaeological sites revealed that Neandertals in warm forested areas preferred to hunt solitary game but that in colder, less forested areas they preferred to hunt the more difficult to capture herding animals.

The Neandertals were not easily intimidated by their game. Rhinoceroses, bisons and even predators such as the brown bear were all on their menu. Dusseldorp established that just as for modern humans, the environment and the availability of food determined the choice of prey and the hunting method adopted. If the circumstances allowed it, Neandertals lived in large groups and even the most attractive and difficult to catch prey were within their reach.

Coordination and communication

Although herding animals are difficult to surprise and isolate, many such game lived on the open steppes. This large supply attracted large groups of Neandertals. That the Neandertals were capable of hunting down such elusive game demonstrates that they had good coordination skills and could communicate well with each other.

Each prey has a specific cost-benefit scenario. For example, game that are more difficult to catch yield more calories and have a more usable, thick fleece. Dusseldorp used these data to examine the Neandertal's preferences. He also analysed the prey of hyenas in the same manner. Hyenas were important competitors of Neandertals as they had a similar dietary pattern.

Dusseldorp demonstrated that Neandertals, thanks to their intelligence, even surpassed hyenas at capturing the strongest game. All things being considered, the Neandertals were skilled and highly intelligent hunters. So the idea that Neandertals were brute musclemen can be dismissed.

This study was part of NWO project "Thoughtful Hunters? The Archaeology of Neandertal Communication and Cognition." Dusseldorp is continuing his research with a postdoc position in Johannesburg. There he shall focus on the modern humans that evolved in Africa.


So it appears that modern humans were not supposed to be the end result of evolution, but neanderthals were apparently.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060908093606.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090514084115.htm



I can tell you why.. I to have studied up on this topic.

In the end the Humans happen to be faster at breading, and do to this humans Out number the Neanderthal.
Another factor was tha agression factor. It has been shown that humans are more prone to killing for other factors other than For food. So do to this agression the humans are able to kill neanderthals off who did not kill for sport or prejadist like the humans.

So it was the darker side that lead the humans to overthrow the Neanderthal.


Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 6/23/09
Yeah, evolution's faulty like that.
1696 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Brisbane, Australia
Offline
Posted 6/23/09
evolution is the survival of the fittest
the fact that they didnt survive ment......
well that they werent fit to surivive on this planet
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/23/09

Daniel9878 wrote:

evolution is the survival of the fittest
the fact that they didnt survive ment......
well that they werent fit to surivive on this planet



Evolution has nothing to do with Survival of the fittest.
Evolution is just the changes the accur over time.

'Anyhow the fact is Neanderthals was smarter, cold take the weather better, and stronger than Homo Sapians. So what was so fit about humans that we won out? As I pointed out the more evil of the two races won in the end... So as you can see Evil does win in the long run.
4980 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / ireland
Offline
Posted 6/24/09
I read in a book that neanderthals were cannibals and killed each other.Now we may not be much better but we Usually dont eat each other.
5229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

Darkphoenix3450
'Anyhow the fact is Neanderthals was smarter, cold take the weather better, and stronger than Homo Sapians. So what was so fit about humans that we won out? As I pointed out the more evil of the two races won in the end... So as you can see Evil does win in the long run.


We're evil just because we screw like rabbits?

Evolution wasn't aiming for anything, it is not a sentient being or force so it cannot choose to "aim" anything. It just happens.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

Cuddlebuns wrote:


Darkphoenix3450
'Anyhow the fact is Neanderthals was smarter, cold take the weather better, and stronger than Homo Sapians. So what was so fit about humans that we won out? As I pointed out the more evil of the two races won in the end... So as you can see Evil does win in the long run.


We're evil just because we screw like rabbits?

Evolution wasn't aiming for anything, it is not a sentient being or force so it cannot choose to "aim" anything. It just happens.


No because they kill for fun, they kill over stupid things. Unlike other Human like races the Homo Sapains are cold blooded killers, they did not kill out of need of clothing and food, but did it for the sport of it. That was the main factor other than there child birth, was there blood thirsty acts of Vilence.

18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

miserykitsune wrote:

I read in a book that neanderthals were cannibals and killed each other.Now we may not be much better but we Usually dont eat each other.


'What book was that? Because its 190% wrong... ' I like to know what book it was.
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/24/09 , edited 6/24/09
Im sure there was some interbreeding between neanderthal and cro magnon. This most likely happened till they died out. Disgusting really. What was evolution aiming for???? I have no idea..... I get lost around homo erectus. Listen to darkphoenix. By the look of his avi He might know a little on the subject. We just adapted to our enviroment. I remember a documentary that said the human race as an outcome of evolution was not very likely. So if we all died out, humans may not be the outcome of evolution millions of years after our extinction..
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


Daniel9878 wrote:

evolution is the survival of the fittest
the fact that they didnt survive ment......
well that they werent fit to surivive on this planet



Evolution has nothing to do with Survival of the fittest.
Evolution is just the changes the accur over time.

'Anyhow the fact is Neanderthals was smarter, cold take the weather better, and stronger than Homo Sapians. So what was so fit about humans that we won out? As I pointed out the more evil of the two races won in the end... So as you can see Evil does win in the long run.


No arguments here.... But im sure the neanderthals died out because they were a migratory primate that were out hunted and out traveled by cromagnon. Neanderthals diet consisted of about 80% protien which they could not obtain during the rise of modern man. A big part of thier down fall was a surprisingly goofy thing: Thier shorter legs made them move slower and they were less able to endure the migratory lifestyle in the time of the better adapted cro-magnon.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09 , edited 6/24/09

openmindedatheist wrote:

Im sure there was some interbreeding between neanderthal and cro magnon. This most likely happened till they died out. Disgusting really. What was evolution aiming for???? I have no idea..... I get lost around homo erectus. Listen to darkphoenix. By the look of his avi He might know a little on the subject. We just adapted to our enviroment. I remember a documentary that said the human race as an outcome of evolution was not very likely. So if we all died out, humans may not be the outcome of evolution millions of years after our extinction..

There is evidence that has shown that Homo sapain and Neanderthal could not breed with each-other.

I have did two reports on this topic as well. One of them can be found in the Crunchyroll ED...



http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-466759/what-is-evolution/

4980 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / ireland
Offline
Posted 6/24/09 , edited 6/24/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


miserykitsune wrote:

I read in a book that neanderthals were cannibals and killed each other.Now we may not be much better but we Usually dont eat each other.


'What book was that? Because its 190% wrong... ' I like to know what book it was.


WAIT,that was the wrong one,it was actually horrible histories,the horrible history of the world
1696 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Brisbane, Australia
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


Daniel9878 wrote:

evolution is the survival of the fittest
the fact that they didnt survive ment......
well that they werent fit to surivive on this planet



Evolution has nothing to do with Survival of the fittest.
Evolution is just the changes the accur over time.

'Anyhow the fact is Neanderthals was smarter, cold take the weather better, and stronger than Homo Sapians. So what was so fit about humans that we won out? As I pointed out the more evil of the two races won in the end... So as you can see Evil does win in the long run.


the fact that we won ment that we were the PRODUCT of evolution
evolution has EVERYTHING to do with survival of the fittest
survival in the enviroment they are in

Evolution is the effect of natural selection

















3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


openmindedatheist wrote:

Im sure there was some interbreeding between neanderthal and cro magnon. This most likely happened till they died out. Disgusting really. What was evolution aiming for???? I have no idea..... I get lost around homo erectus. Listen to darkphoenix. By the look of his avi He might know a little on the subject. We just adapted to our enviroment. I remember a documentary that said the human race as an outcome of evolution was not very likely. So if we all died out, humans may not be the outcome of evolution millions of years after our extinction..

There is evidence that has shown that Homo sapain and Neanderthal could not breed with each-other.

I have did two reports on this topic as well. One of them can be found in the Crunchyroll ED...



http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-466759/what-is-evolution/



I've heard different things from diffrent geneticists. Interbreeding does not seem all that possible......... But i've heard of some accredited scientists swear up and down that interbreeding between neanderthal and modern man was possible and in some cases nessacery. I'm not 100% either way though. Not really my hot button.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.