It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
Look, I'm as much interested in all of these excellent matters as you are - and I am sure that many thousands of years ago, Homo Sapiens Sapiens was not the only intelligent human. However, I do maintain that, right now, Homo Sapiens Sapiens is the sole dominant and intelligent species.
).
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by HelenConway
He'd look pretty noticeable.
But modern man is advanced. Through progression in time and with an increase in knowledge and more skills, the frontal lobe is clearly more advanced than many thousands of years ago. If mankind is not at all advanced than before, then we should have had cars, trains, ships, planes and probes 40K years ago. We should have understood about the universe 50K years ago and known about gravity and understood complex mechanics and figured out that the Earth revolves around the sun.
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by HelenConway
He'd look pretty noticeable.
But modern man is advanced. Through progression in time and with an increase in knowledge and more skills, the frontal lobe is clearly more advanced than many thousands of years ago. If mankind is not at all advanced than before, then we should have had cars, trains, ships, planes and probes 40K years ago. We should have understood about the universe 50K years ago and known about gravity and understood complex mechanics and figured out that the Earth revolves around the sun.
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
Look, I'm as much interested in all of these excellent matters as you are - and I am sure that many thousands of years ago, Homo Sapiens Sapiens was not the only intelligent human. However, I do maintain that, right now, Homo Sapiens Sapiens is the sole dominant and intelligent species.
The thing is, I just got the vibe that many here were belittling their own species and were glorifying the Neanderthals a bit - the fact of the matter is, as a human being (Homo Sapiens Sapiens), you have more in favour with your fellow humans, than a Neanderthal (who, BTW is extinct, apart from some trace DNA in some ethnic groups of Homo Sapiens Sapiens).
Possible scenarios for the extinction of the Neanderthals are: Neanderthals were a separate species from modern humans, and became extinct (due to climate change or interaction with humans) and were replaced by modern humans moving into their habitat beginning around 80,000 years ago.[74] Competition with humans probably contributed to Neanderthal extinction.[75][76] Jared Diamond has suggested a scenario of violent conflict and displacement.[77] Neanderthals were a contemporary subspecies that bred with modern humans and disappeared through absorption (interbreeding theory). A Campanian ignimbrite volcanic super-eruption around 40,000 years ago, followed by a second one a few thousand years later, has been hypothesised as having contributed to the demise of the Neanderthal, based on evidence from Mezmaiskaya cave in the Caucasus Mountains of southern Russia [78][79] Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis of a specimen from Mezmaiskaya Cave is radiocarbon dated to be about 29,000 years BP and therefore from one of the latest living Neanderthal individuals. The sequence shows 3.48% divergence from the Feldhofer Neanderthal. Phylogenetic analysis places the two Neanderthals from the Caucasus and western Germany together in a clade that is distinct from modern humans, suggesting that their mtDNA types have not contributed to the modern human mtDNA pool.[35]
Originally posted by HelenConway
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
Look, I'm as much interested in all of these excellent matters as you are - and I am sure that many thousands of years ago, Homo Sapiens Sapiens was not the only intelligent human. However, I do maintain that, right now, Homo Sapiens Sapiens is the sole dominant and intelligent species.
).
Looks Like Chuck Norris!!!
www.bbc.co.uk...
This is a supposed accurate reconstruction of a neanderthal male he looks very similar to many people alive today.
I think homo sapien is more a sociological term - if the above man was alive today he would very much be considered a homo sapien.
The supposed homo sapiens alive in his day were no more advanced then he was, they both used tools, both used art, both buried their dead.
Modern man is not advanced and i have no idea why you think so.
edit on 3-3-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Hopechest
The fossil evidence shows that they were skillful, innovative, adaptive, and creative.
Apparently not enough to beat out the homosapiens. Survival of the fittest in nature is the rule.
Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by HelenConway
I take pride in my humanity. I take pride that I am Homo Sapiens Sapiens. I take pride in what we have built and feel that we should advance faster and greater. I relish learning about discoveries and history and everything (even about past species of men). But if I were a monkey, could I sit quietly and read Nietzsche and ponder upon his writings? Could I recite Shakespeare and act out his plays? Could sit upon my chair and imagine myself travelling through space and time?
Many humans today cannot take time, or are inhibited, in exploring this great brain of ours. I do not take pride in my parentage - I take pride in my species, regardless of the "evil" that goes on and has gone on and will go on.
The specific MCR1 mutation in Neanderthals has not found in modern humans (or occurs extremely rarely in modern humans). This indicates that the two mutations for red hair and pale skin occurred independently and does not support the idea of gene flow between Neanderthals and modern humans.
Source
Originally posted by IEtherianSoul9
Regarding the OP's thread, nice job on this introductory excursion into the past life of Homo neanderthalensis! However, based off of reconstructions of the Neanderthal vocal tract, it's likely that they could not have produced the full range of sounds necessary for modern speech - a capacity for language was much more restricted in Neanderthals because their basicrania has a less humped profile. They probably did not have the capacity to convey meaning through a complex language system similar to ours.
Originally posted by Hopechest
Originally posted by NarcolepticBuddha
Originally posted by Hopechest
The fossil evidence shows that they were skillful, innovative, adaptive, and creative.
Apparently not enough to beat out the homosapiens. Survival of the fittest in nature is the rule.
Read my thesis again. In fact, read the thread while you're at it. It's pretty obvious that Homo sapiens is here and that Homo neandertalensis isn't. All I did was give a brief introduction to the fossil record demonstrating that they weren't the morons some people assume they were.
The ability to wipe out an entire species is certainly a human trademark, but it in no way reflects our intelligence and capability as a species.
Thanks for your one-line post that contributes nothing to my thread.edit on 3-3-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)
They weren't that intelligent according to fossil records because they obviously weren't wiped out by disease they were wiped out by limited access to resources.
They couldn't adapt.
Homosapien took over their territory and they behaved like sheep, there is very limited evidence of warfare, basically they were never meant to progress as the other early species of humans weren't.
Natural selection.
It is akin to comparing us to apes.edit on 3-3-2013 by Hopechest because: (no reason given)