Neanderthal... New studies suggests they were more like us then we thought/think.

Hi ATS

I'd like to present to you all a couple of articles about the Neanderthal species.

As we all probably know Neanderthal was a humanoid, and considered to be a dumb down version of ourselves, or modern humans.
You can say that 4 % of human DNA coming originally from Neanderthal man, was quite a surprise.

Most people living outside Africa can trace up to 4% of their DNA to a Neanderthal origin, a consequence of interbreeding between the two groups after the great migration from the contintent.

Read all about that here : Source.

Neanderthals have been developing complicated tools for themselves without the need of any contact with modern man. According to the following article :

"Basically, I am rehabilitating Neanderthals," said study author Julien Riel-Salvatore. "They were far more resourceful than we have given them credit for." Riel-Salvatore's research is based on seven years of studying Neanderthal sites throughout Italy, with special focus on the vanished Uluzzian culture.

Source.

Even the way they got extinct is now questioned as they now found a reason tha suggest it could be because of volcanic eruptions in Europe. Unfortunately Neanderthal did not survive, unlike modern man.

Catastrophic volcanic eruptions in Europe may have culled Neanderthals to the point where they couldn't bounce back, according to a controversial new theory.

Modern humans, though, squeaked by, thanks to fallback populations in Africa and Asia, researchers say.

Source.

If these theories and studies are correct.... We are in fact witnessing history being rewritten.

How cool is that !

I think this is very interesting and I wanted to present this new info about Neanderthal man.
I believe that if Neanderthal man was indeed more like modern man, they coulkd have had a bigger role in human evolution then we think they did.

Exciting... IMO

Anyway...

Enjoy and have a nice day !

~ Sinter

reply to post by Sinter Klaas

If these theories and studies are correct.... We are in fact witnessing history being rewritten.

Hiya Sinter,

History is always being re-written...whether people realise it or not doesn't change the fact.

Knowledge of Neanderthal culture has increased year after year for some time. Only recently, it was 'known' that there was no inter-breeding and here we are discussing the ~4% Neanderthal DNA in some populations of humans.

Years ago, they were depicted in the popular press as sub-human apes lacking any culture or influence on our society. Now we know they buried their dead and looked after the weaker members.

reply to post by Kandinsky


Hi Kandinsky.

I know, that's why I think it is so awesome.

Everyday there are discussions about science disregarding stuff because it would shake our world.
I'd say that 4% qualifies , yet here it is for everybody that's interested. Apparently ground shaking stuff does get out there.
Maybe science does not do what it's so often blamed for... ( disregarding evidence )

I know I've been an easy victim... But the more I learn the less ( some ) stuff stays a conspiracy.
It does make it a little less exciting, but exciting nonetheless.
Anyway...

I just think all these new discoveries are a sign of us living in some truly amazing times, and I simply love it.

Thanks for posting

well I'm into Neanderthals
I've always been a proponent of the we did not interbreed with them

so I will say this how could we intermingle with them and have surviving DNA lines if
they were wiped out by a Volcano and we are only here because Europe was repopulated from others who came after the big V?

I still think our ancestors drove them to extinction in that through warfare and through the accidental just taking all the best hunting and maybe disease and who knows

I think Read more than once that all Neanderthal bones that we have, have serious fractures many of which would have been life threatening and most Neanderthal people had several of these types of injuries

I hold a theory that they had a culture that included some fool hardy dangerous elements of proving their worth by impossible feats of strength and bravery possibly this suicidal tendency and the appearance of our type people combined to bring about their extinction?

I think it is current scientific fashion to make them too much like us and we have gone to far the other way I don't think they were just like us . They looked different they acted different and thought different. I think that their fundamental hard wiring was enough unlike ours to make true integration between them and us almost impossible

that's just me my theory. I think they were amazing I would love to have met them. good post!

reply to post by MrsBlonde

I've always been a proponent of the we did not interbreed with them

It gets kind of hard to explain the 4 % then doesn't it ? Either we inter mingled or we raped their women. Or the raped ours of course.

so I will say this how could we intermingle with them and have surviving DNA lines if
they were wiped out by a Volcano

Not every single one had to die from the volcan blasts you know. Unfortunately when there are only a hundred left the chances are a 100 isn't gonna make it. Unless they were absorbed into a human group....


Disease goes both ways and hunting as well . They needed to eat and they were not vegetarians to my knowledge

I still think our ancestors drove them to extinction

You can think all you like. The article suggests otherwise and they apparently found the evidence to support it.


Well... you know .

It seems that our old theories and ideas are to be rewritten because of the new evidence.
Where do you build your theory on ? I mean it is kind of strange to dismiss new evidence so easily. Don't you think ?



Thank you for posting

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
reply to post by MrsBlonde

 

Unless they were absorbed into a human group....

This has been a long standing belief of mine. I've noticed a large number of people with "European" heritage that have much more pronounced brow ridges than would be symetrical to the rest of their features. It's not so hard to assume after the denigration of the population that the further evolved human group would absorb them and their cultural aspects into it's ranks.

blah.

Sorry if it's jumbly, first post in about a year...
=P

reply to post by coven


I think you are right.

Neanderthal was not regarded to get absorbed into th modern human groups as the differences were just to big.
Evidently the differences are smaller then we thought they were, making this scenario more likely.

Another option could be that modern man and Neanderthal survived these volcanic disasters by working together.
What is not that far fetched at all since humans tend to work with a lot of animals to reach their goals.

Even when there were only a few Neanderthal left.... They would make a valuable ally. Especially when they had a common goal.

I remain hesitant I would love to think that we carry them into the future with our genes but their is mounting evidence that not just Neanderthals but whole lines and races of modern people have been entirely wiped out of the gene pool

OTZI the iceman has no genetic tie to modern humans even though he was one and neither does the Kenniwick man or a man recently found in Greenland

many finds of ancient humans have no genetic link to people living today .What happened to them where did they go?

supposedly one in 200 of us are direct decedents of Genghis Khan! We share 2% of our DNA with great apes and I think we can all agree that the difference between us and them precludes
any kind of cultural assimilation

I think these kinds of studies are pc science I 've noticed that in any given era science just tells us what we want to hear . I think Neanderthals were magnificent for their differences not their similarities They were way smarter than us but somehow it didn't help them . Also they were never at anytime in their history very numerous under a million .I think the fact that they never had a large representative population has something to do with whatever happened t them

reply to post by MrsBlonde


It's OK to remain hesitant. No problem at all.

As for that 4 %.... I believe they are talking about actual genetic trade marks like a pale skin and red her or something. We share our genetics with any other organism aroun the world.

They did have a larger brain, but do you think they were actually a lot smarter ?

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
reply to post by MrsBlonde

 

It's OK to remain hesitant. No problem at all.

As for that 4 %.... I believe they are talking about actual genetic trade marks like a pale skin and red her or something. We share our genetics with any other organism aroun the world.

They did have a larger brain, but do you think they were actually a lot smarter ?

True Sinter but their own studies showed that even though they had red hair the genes for it are not where ours are in other words their type of red hair was a completely different genome that ours!!

intelligence has different expressions and uses based on species. I'm not sure if using ourselves as the pinnacle of intelligence is a good thing ,since as a species we don't live up to our so called intelligence. I'll give you and example ,The Native tribes of Papua new Guinea are just about as primitive as human culture can get in this epoch and to top it all of rather than advancing culturally they have regressed! They don't even know how to make stone tools anymore. Soooo ,I've noticed that without a worldwide trade net work or (possible Alien intervention) we lose cultural ground. I dunno how smart they were in comparison to us but they were comparably as intelligent as us but probably valued certain forms of it over others like we do.

What is intelligence?

reply to post by MrsBlonde


Please forgive me for my late reply. every time I was going to something came up.

You ask The question. I've answered it before . I think animal intelligence can not be compared with human intelligence. The arrogance is repulsive. T many people think that its it's our way or the highway.

I disagree.

I didn't know that about the hair. Can you post a link for me ?

by all means my good man

The team produced a DNA sequence from the fragmented Neanderthal MC1R gene to make a modified copy they could study in a test tube, the researchers said. This allowed the team to determine that the gene produced the same level of the chemical melanin as in people with red hair and light skin. The variation itself was different than in modern humans but the result was the same.

form this article
www.dhamurian.org.au...

yeah basically finding out they were white(I KNEW THAT)means we have to be related to them and somehow turn them into a branch of Homosapiens ! I swear I think Science is as broken as Politics

The latest studies published suggest something we thought, not possible pretty much is now forever confronting our notion of being so special and advanced to be unique.

I found source that studies proved they were overwhelming right handed. Which is a sign of the ability to speak.
They also suggested making notes, and wanted to look good.

Which basically makes the as intelligent as modern man. There brains were even the size,

However my sources I read in written in English vanished. Except for may Dutch few.
I am a bit frustrated by the time I just spend ending up without including the sources.

So You have to believe me if I tell you I'll will post them when I find them again.

The argument for them not being as sophisticated was because they lived in smaller groups. Large groups will ask more subtlety to live together.

Anyway. Unless you are African, you are Neanderthal too.

reply to post by MrsBlonde


Basically we have pigment handicap, that made it easier to absorb sunlight in the northern parts of the world.
To bad that it increases the chance sun burn and cancer.

reply to post by Kandinsky


Yeah and that 4% may be more since we have about half of the Neanderthal genome to account for still. I think we will find we share much more than that. In fact, it is my belief that they contributed greatly to our evolutionary development and taught us more than older scholars will like to accept.

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


and that is it really. We ARE Neanderthal.

reply to post by MrsBlonde


I hold that HSS brought with him diseases that Neanderthal had no defense against, that and superior numbers and perhaps better technology and organization meant their slow decline and absorption.

reply to post by tadaman


What I found the articles I wasn't looking, but I did read them all.

They explained that because of the eruption of the Super volcano Toba, now known as lake Toba.
They found the remains of humans underneath the a layer of ash, that was linked to Toba. The humans did not have any genes found in modern man. They identified Neanderthals, Denovan, and homo erectus I though, nut sure about the last one.

Modern man must have showed up after the Toba event.

They explained that humans left Africa several times. They linked the first humans that showed up in Europe as much as 800.000 years ago but I thought 120000 years ago Europe will be home to Neanderthal and they will also asian variety, then evidence suggest that homo erectus evolved in Europe/ Asia and the Denovans were also found in the region. I guess the European homo erectus, might originally be from that first wave of early man.

That modern man had to wait before showing up in the northern regions. Would make them one of 5 hominide species, but they will have to share so much similarities for them to interbreed, they should at least be able to identify and communicate in my opinion. After they left Africa there have not been unique modern mans genes that survived after that time.

The oldest humans are found in Africa and African people do not share Neanderthal genes.
This suggest that modern man got their genes by interbreeding all other early humans and the years they evolved separate from each other have probably been an amazing advantage as modern man would probably would benefit the genetic variety from the species. They might have become immune for disease they did not have in Africa etc

They link I have that suggest right handed Neanderthal hinting to the ability to speak . it gets me to a page of a University in Kansas.
Link is to show my problem with all my first links as well.

They suggest that the decline of Neanderthal might have been caused because the lived in smaller groups. Modern took over the region and they interbred there way out and also found something about volcanic activity be a cause that isolated and eventually caused them to disappear.
The same thing happened with the Denovans they did leave evidence of their ancestry in Papuan people.

Modern man benefit from interbreeding and you can find traces of all eurly man back in all modern man.
Ecept the Africans they never walked around with Neanderthal. That they do not have the unique genes probably means the got visited by the early humans that left and returned. The extinction of Neanderthal before they could mingle in Africa, should suggest the events to come close to what really happened.

Next to the other arguments of their decline they were also adapted to the cold and the end of the ice age, probably made it harder for them to survive as easy as others.

I wrote it all from what I read yesterday and could still find in sources written in my own language.
I hope i didn't Made to many mistakes, but don't shoot me for it please.

I don't want to turn this into some sort of racial debate, but geography and timescale comes into this a lot.

There is evidence to suggest that humans and Neanderthals met in what is now Persia, as you probably know this has amazing collations between the first human civilizations too. I suspect that when the ice sheets decended during the last ice-age, the Neanderthals moved south around the same time our human ancestors were heading north.

Long story short, Europeans and Asians are a combination of Neanderthal and Human, and I would say probably accounts for the different genotypes.

Think about it, if Neanderthal and Humans were close enough to produce live young (which this study seemed to verify) then they were not a separate species (it would be like a domesticated cat breeding with a wildcat for instance.)
Therefore Neanderthals had to have much the same generic sequence as humans did at the time too anyway - so are Europeans and Asians really 4%? Or is the percentage much higher?

And if the percentage of genetics are much closer, is it political correctness that prevents this discussion?

reply to post by BinxieTrollestia


You are right. only European Neanderthal got divided into an Asian Neanderthal. That might cause some differences.

You don't have to political correct. The evidence shows that there are no longer other species of hominid around.
Genetic evidence shows that modern man is what is left of all other species and the original modern man is no longer unique. Cause they have come together in almost every combination. So it seems.

All sub species that left Africa around 120.000 ago,like Neanderthal were already homo sapiens. Jusl like modern man was around 65.000 years ago was.

You could conclude that even the sub species were as much human as the first That left Africa, only their isolated existence and environment caused them to evolve the differences for becoming a sub species. I like the idea they also got back together providing the genetic material, that might have made our survival as a species get a better chance.

The argument for being less sophisticated as other humans is that Neanderthal never lived in large communities but only in small groups. The advantage of a perfected social life including communication. in large groups is logical.
It is also observed behavior in the wild, where large groups of monkeys are a lot better capable in their social capability then monkeys living in smaller groups.

PS

This means that every racist is actually an idiot, to make them have there reasons to blame it on the differences . They show that it's actually making them look less intelligent for thinking anything to be better in their "hominid stupid" behavior to be prejudge mental and intolerant towards others. Maybe a side effect of receiving the largest Neanderthal genetic influence then others that so not think it's scary to live in large groups or different people

I'm sorry for enjoying this part, but I've never understood, what causes people to think they are better or are not amused by differences of others. I still don't. I like them in people they create cool changes in behavior, and differences will give a physical identity that isn't the same... What if we all looked alike ? Wouldn't that suck.

Edit: For a species that divides into several sub species, genetic similarity should not be a problem. Only if these subspecies also divide. the genetic variety has to be comparable . We've observed what that means in hybrid offspring from a species withe same ancestor, but have evolved into different looking animals.
Or got created by man, that brought the two species together.
A horse and a donkey can produce offspring, but the hybrid a mule has got to much genetic variety, it causes problems and they are almost always infertile, and some rare cases the offspring from that did get together never survived a full pregnancy.
We crossed some of the big cats. And tiger and lion will produce a liger and these are much larger then their parents even, there has been at least one documented case where I liger produced offspring. All hybrid cats have been kept in captivity
The hybrid species we know about and our experience in experiments and genetic understanding, Are proof that any interbreeding would be very successful to survive more the a couple generations, if they are to genetically.different. When the same species divide and split up and come back together, isn't much of a problem and will probably will only benefit the survival of a species by the variety some altered genetic make up will offer when it's added to the the rest of the surviving humans. What makes our physical differences, that can look so different it's hard not thinking that we are a separate race, but if the combinations of interbreeding created the variety that evolved for life in another climate, make us look different as group that is the last combination of a region where differences didn't survive in others as they might slightly have some more genes that are the original genetic variety that evolved in isolation of the others. That;s why it might seem a logical conclusion that African man is black and all other are skin color have a different amount of pigment that causes the skin to be protected from the sun. And why this pigment comes from a genetic mutation that causes less sun light to get blocked, which is a problem when you live in a region with less sunlight.

I really like these subjects, sorry for my adding all extra material...

edit on 6/15/2013 by Sinter Klaas because: To add why interbreeding, would become a problem with veriety of different material causing infutility.