Shouldn't Neanderthal be black?

reply to post by ArtemisE

Actually the whole concept of Neanderthal is unreasonable...

There is a very good reason for this as well.

This whole Neanderthal thing is a complete fabrication....

This is the reason WHY so many scientists are even in doubt as to the nature of evolution.

Java Man, Neanderthal Man, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Peking Man and East Africa Man were ALL frauds.

"The model of human prehistory built-up by scholars over the past two centuries is sadly and completely wrong, and a deliberate tool of disinformation and mind control. ...they demonstrate a systematic destruction of proofs that show another reality than that the official story. Falsifications and even destruction of such proofs has been common for more than two hundred years." LINK

History of modern man unravels as German scholar is exposed as fraud

It appeared to be one of archaeology's most sensational finds. The skull fragment discovered in a peat bog near Hamburg was more than 36,000 years old - and was the vital missing link between modern humans and Neanderthals.

However, the professor's 30-year-old academic career has now ended in disgrace after the revelation that he systematically falsified the dates on this and numerous other "stone age" relics.

Yesterday his university in Frankfurt announced the professor had been forced to retire because of numerous "falsehoods and manipulations". According to experts, his deceptions may mean an entire tranche of the history of man's development will have to be rewritten.

Flamboyant anthropologist falsified dating of key discoveries

"There was the Piltdown man fraud, there was the Orce man fraud, there was The Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis: or the Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor, which turned out to be a fraud, and a big embarrasment for National Geographic Magazine.

There was the Nebraska man fraud, there was the Java man fraud, there was the Neanderthal man fraud. This could go on and on, and the reason for this, is because as soon as they think they found the missing link, the Evolutionist bring out their big brass marching band. Yet as soon as they find out that the evidence in question is a fraud, everything is hushed up, and you never hear any more about it. Which leaves everyone thinking they have the theory nailed down.

About every few years they come out with the new missing link, only to find out the link is either another species or a fraud. And this happens over, and over, and over, and almost no one ever questions this, and joe public just believes what ever the news media tells them.

What part of Evolution is a lie?

"...many Neanderthal fossils have been tampered with to support the theory of evolution.

One of the many fraudulent things that people have done to the Neanderthal skulls is to reconstruct the lower jaw in a forward protruding position.

This is based on the preconceived notion, that Neanderthal was dimwitted, and ape-ish. The jaw is purposely manipulated to look this way in reconstruction’s, because that is how some ape jaws are aligned.

Of the thousands of people who have seen Neanderthal skulls in a museum, I wonder how many of them knew the jaw had been altered?

Neanderthal fraud discovered

reply to post by Murgatroid


The whole idea of all the scientists hiding the truth to push the status quo is ridiculous. Anyone who found real proof for or against would be rich and famous. Now all the scientists being wrong is plausible, but a conspiracy there all turning down money and fame too hold up is just illogical.

P.s. The reason the fake scientists who push such almost always religious theories arnt rich and famous is because there wrong lol

reply to post by ArtemisE


Be cautious friend, while I lean toward your views in many ways, Science can appear very much like a religion if you aren't doing the experiments yourself to prove hypothesis.

ArtemisE
Considering we all came out of Africa and the latest discovery, I heard about atleast, puts pale skin at less then 8,000 years old. ( they found a dark skinned, blue eyed" caveman" in Europe that dated to 7,000 years ago.

Am not real sure about that claim. Can't see why living in the Ice Age prior to this everyone would have dark skin, unsuited to those conditions. It doesn't make a lot of sense that your Nordic types would evolve selectively pale skin for a climate that receded in those regions comparitively little.

reply to post by ArtemisE


I feel it's mankind's Own interpretation of one's self ...

You see what you 'want to'..

???

Murgatroid
reply to post by ArtemisE

 

Actually the whole concept of Neanderthal is unreasonable...

There is a very good reason for this as well.

This whole Neanderthal thing is a complete fabrication....

This is the reason WHY so many scientists are even in doubt as to the nature of evolution.

Java Man, Neanderthal Man, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Peking Man and East Africa Man were ALL frauds.

Well . . . when you back up your claims with old angelfire sites and hipforums . . . who can really argue. Solid logic. Never mind, being wrong and not knowing the difference between misidentification and "hoax" . . . but, what should you expect from someone that gets their science info from christian apologetics. So, let's look at reality.

Neanderthal . . . no hoax and well established evidence. Please educate yourself on morphology between species.

Java Man . . . is no hoax. It's a homo erectus erectus.

Peking Man . . . is no hoax. It's homo erectus pekinensis.

Nebraska Man is no hoax. It's a prehistoric ape. Hesperopithecus haroldcookii.

Although the identity of H. haroldcookii did not achieve general acceptance in the scientific community, and the purported species was retracted half a decade after the original article had been published by Osborn, creationists have promoted the episode as an example of the scientific errors that can undermine the credibility of paleontology and hominid evolution theories, and how such information is peer reviewed or accepted as mainstream knowledge. These arguments often exaggerate the wide acceptance of Nebraska man as hominid fossil.

East Africa Man? . . . No such discovery made. At least not under that moniker . . .

Piltdown Man . . . You finally get one right!! Yahoo! However, no paleoanthropologist has claimed any other than that fact. And, it's been know to be a forgery since the early 50's and suspect well before that . . . So, did you learn about Piltdown as a student in the 30's/40's or from an apologetic website?

The great thing about the one forgery . . . science got it right and shamed the careers of those responsible. When do we see religion correct itself through rigorous self-inspection? Has the christian community denounced the Turin Shroud? How about any other religious relic or miracle . . . There was actually more evidence for a real piltdown man than for any of that bunk.

hexillion

ArtemisE
Considering we all came out of Africa and the latest discovery, I heard about atleast, puts pale skin at less then 8,000 years old. ( they found a dark skinned, blue eyed" caveman" in Europe that dated to 7,000 years ago.

Am not real sure about that claim. Can't see why living in the Ice Age prior to this everyone would have dark skin, unsuited to those conditions. It doesn't make a lot of sense that your Nordic types would evolve selectively pale skin for a climate that receded in those regions comparitively little.

I don't think you fully appreciate the time scale involved . . . It's a much shorter scale back to the beginning of civilization than the amount of time our ancestors "adjusted" to the last ice age.

ETA - Not only the time scale, but population size would have been much smaller, so changes/mutations would have a greater effect and spread very quickly.

Because I love the point about the great apes being white underneath. Could we have gone from dark to lite more then once? We're talking about atleast 3 or 4 hundred thousand years at least. Might we have popped back and forth.

reply to post by solomons path

And, it's been know to be a forgery since the early 50's and suspect well before that . . .

Exactly.

The book The Piltdown Fantasy by Francis Vere, published in 1955 by Cassel and Company, London, relates the whole silly story.

For those who came in late, Piltdown Man was a hoax that started in the early 1900's. 'Someone' planted some bones (an Apes tooth and jaw, and a human cranium) in an old gravel strata and between 1908 and 1912 these bones were discovered. Vere's idea is that the hoaxer (either practical joker or with a personal grudge against the discoverer, Dawson) thought that the ruse would be quickly discovered, but when the X-ray of the tooth was misread he planted pieces of the same bone two miles away (thus Piltdown I and Piltdown II). Surely the 'discoverers' should have realized then that they were being taken for a ride?

Yes they should have, but perhaps they were just caught up in too much wishful thinking, or just taking too long to come to the obvious conclusion. Whatever it was, the excitement over the finds was mainly in the public arena, the press was always much quicker to identify these obscure bones as 'the missing link', than any scientist, including the discoverers.

And by 1913 the press was already more interested in the pending war than in some 'silly missing link'. It was a lot easier to just stick the whole thing into the drawer and forget it ever happened. It remained forgotten until 1939 when he was pulled out of the drawer again by an ardent supporter. By 1943 it was denounced as a fake, and in 1950 it was proved that the jaw was modern and had been modified.

No, Neanderthal left Africa way before our ancestors. They evolved outside of Africa while we were still there. We only met up with them after our Adam/Eve line left Africa.

Also dark furred primates have white skin underneath. They need the hair for sun protection. As we lost our hair our skin became darker to compensate. Then after leaving Equatorial Africa our skin lighted due to less sun and the need for vitamin D absorption.

These days under normal DNA test we find that Caucasians carry the majority of the Neanderthal genes. Once Neanderthals left Africa and became white, they didn't flow back into Africa. When our line went into Eurasia and encountered them we were probably much darker than them.

No, we don't all partake in the out of africa theory, nor do all scientists. Also, we didn't evolve from cave men. Intelligent design took place and genetic labs. There were many different models of mankind.

But humans have always had different groups here, from natives/asian, to black and white. There are different cosmic groups here.

www.burlingtonnews.net...

This site has in depth articles on many finds.

reply to post by Murgatroid


The only thing correct about ancient man in your post is that Piltdown man was a fake. All the other variants of humanity existed. There is no scientific doubt about it.

reply to post by Unity_99


In science a theory is better then a fact...

Some people are pale and some dark is a fact.

The out of Africa theory, as you called it. Is a collection of facts that lead to a conclusion. A common misinformation tactic used by Intellegent design frauds.... And yes there frauds. Not one of them came to believe in ID thru science, or even from the not understood parts of evolution. They all had a personal spiritual awakening outside of the lab. Then try and force there beliefs into what we know about the natural world.

The amount of scientists who buy into ID is minuscule. 85% of all nobel prize winning scientists are athiest. Most of the remaining are agnostic. Which I don't find religious...just open minded.

The footprints of humans with Dino's were carved, prob by the ID idiot who found them.

The bacteria tail that gets a lot of press because it's too complicated to evolve. Is a stinger if you remove one protien. So not to complex. No independent thinker has ever come to believe in religion due to the facts. That's why you need faith.

Some questions about Neanderthals....

Does Neanderthal DNA contain the DNA of the Mitochondrial Eve from Africa 200,000 years ago?

and...

What are theories why Neanderthal never seemed to get into Africa?

Neanderthal has been found as close as Spain and the Middle East, but not in Africa.

What prevented Neanderthal from entering Africa?

solomons path




Neanderthal . . . no hoax and well established evidence. Please educate yourself on morphology between species.

Java Man . . . is no hoax. It's a homo erectus erectus.

Peking Man . . . is no hoax. It's homo erectus pekinensis.

Nebraska Man is no hoax. It's a prehistoric ape. Hesperopithecus haroldcookii.

Although the identity of H. haroldcookii did not achieve general acceptance in the scientific community, and the purported species was retracted half a decade after the original article had been published by Osborn, creationists have promoted the episode as an example of the scientific errors that can undermine the credibility of paleontology and hominid evolution theories, and how such information is peer reviewed or accepted as mainstream knowledge. These arguments often exaggerate the wide acceptance of Nebraska man as hominid fossil.

East Africa Man? . . . No such discovery made. At least not under that moniker . . .

Piltdown Man . . . You finally get one right!! Yahoo! However, no paleoanthropologist has claimed any other than that fact. And, it's been know to be a forgery since the early 50's and suspect well before that . . . So, did you learn about Piltdown as a student in the 30's/40's or from an apologetic website?

The great thing about the one forgery . . . science got it right and shamed the careers of those responsible. When do we see religion correct itself through rigorous self-inspection? Has the christian community denounced the Turin Shroud? How about any other religious relic or miracle . . . There was actually more evidence for a real piltdown man than for any of that bunk.

Absolutely correct. And anyway, the link to the German hoax, had nothing to do with the crtique of Neanderthal per se, it was the hoaxed idea that, the professor's skull was intended to promote the idea that Humans and Neanderthals lived side by side at some point in time. As far as I know, the thinking is still that they did, and that the professor just cocked things up laterally, for no good reason.

I don't care whether Neanderthals were black, white, brown, red, green or cerise.

What does it matter?

I find it quite bizarre that humans are obsessed with skin colour. You never see dogs caring about it ..... Though I accept that on average dogs are quite a bit more intelligent than humans ....

And surely hair or eye colour is just as much an issue?