Guest Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 Why does it matter who was dominant? What you have is us. The best genetic combinations survived. Working in OB, I'm sure there were many instances where the inbreeding was incompatible with life, probably a lot of RH factor incidents that caused the mixed child to abort, or the surviving child to be infertile, who really knows? There are so many things that could have happened to cause the vast majority of Neanderthal genes to not be expressed or carried on that aren't even related to the numbers for each population that existed at that time. Neanderthals lived with Cro Magnons for 30-50,000 years so if they were killing them they certainly took their time doing it. This is not promoting any religion over another in any way but simply repeating what one Jewish archaeologist has theorized. There is a theory that the Nephilim referred to in the torah, bible, and koran is the word they used for Neanderthal back in the day in Israel. The word "giant" was a Greek mistranslation because they did not have an exact word to fit the Aramaic version of nephilim. There is a reference to large eyes in the story of Lamech and Bat-Enosh in the Apocryphon. Lamech came home after being away for a while and found that Bat-Enosh had a baby while he was away. Lamech suspected the baby of being Nephilim because his eyes were "like the sun" and the child was pale. That child grew up to be Noah. This is not proof of anything, but just an interesting coincidence since the Neanderthal were in the middle east and the only other humanoid known to co-exist with Cro-Magnon. It does give an ancient historical reference for an "other" recognition between two populations. Supposedly, the flood killed most of the Nephilim (ice age melt?). How many times has the victor, whether by their own efforts or sheer luck, rewritten history to justify the demise of the loser? As for the art work, if you go back to the first page of this thread I posted an article related to autism but it also addresses the lack of artistic ability indicated by the brain structure and lack of archaeological evidence for intricate Neanderthal art works.It doesn't mean they didn't draw at all, they just didn't have the talent. But guess where musical ability came from? If the brain structure is any indication of where a person's strengths lie, we got that from our Neanderthal relatives. Music requires mathematical ability, evidently that was one of their strong points and their is archaeological evidence for this as they have found flutes among the Neanderthal remains and no where else.I can't see something looking like this guy's portrayal of Neanderthals sitting by a fire composing sonatas on a flute.
Huntster Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) Huh. Randomly baddish link there Hunster. I clicked it, and was kinda sad you posted it. If we empower all of us then it's not really applicable at all, is it. It's just when some but not all get to be really real humans, like acknowledged as real human people that this sort of thing can take place. It's like a thing. I don't understand that at all. Hard to counter without violating forum guidelines but I just want you to think, really really really really think, about the primary cause of this kind of bad behavior. Yeah, the book is political, and would thus be a banned discussion. Too bad, that. The reason I linked it was because it demonstrates exactly what I've been writing on this thread: The human population decreases as one gets further from the equator, and mass invasions from the south are recurring events in human history. Edited January 9, 2011 by Huntster
Huntster Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 Neanderthals lived with Cro Magnons for 30-50,000 years so if they were killing them they certainly took their time doing it. Humans have lived with sasquatches for a long time, too, and we appear to be taking our sweet time killing them off, as well. Apparently, it isn't so much a goal as a simple result of circumstances.
norseman Posted January 9, 2011 Admin Posted January 9, 2011 Humans have lived with sasquatches for a long time, too, and we appear to be taking our sweet time killing them off, as well. Apparently, it isn't so much a goal as a simple result of circumstances. *slaps forehead* And gee, raping, murdering, pillaging and plundering isn't apart of that equation........is it? Sure, you've got Ostman getting kidnapped, and Fred Beck's cabin getting smashed, but the vast majority of it? It's a competition of RESOURCES!
norseman Posted January 9, 2011 Admin Posted January 9, 2011 The human population decreases as one gets further from the equator, and mass invasions from the south are recurring events in human history. It took ten to fifteen THOUSAND years for Homo Sapiens to supplant Neanderthals in Europe. That's not exactly what I would call a "mass invasion". I realize that Caesar vs. the Barbarians type conflicts sell books and draw heavy interest, but nothing like that really happened. Yes, it's fairly abrupt for the fossil record (especially when looking at the entire span of the Neanderthal species), but no D day invasions here.
norseman Posted January 9, 2011 Admin Posted January 9, 2011 Just like today...........but that's another story, isn't it? Yes it is! It's a completely different story, as I just stated? Ten to fifteen thousand years is the time line it took for Homo Sapiens to supplant Neanderthals in Europe. Let's see, Columbus discovered the Americas in 1492, so we can expect the Europeans to fully reign the Americas in the year..........11,492 or 16,492 AD........take your pick. Not exactly the stuff of western dime store novels and NP theory is it!?
Huntster Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 Huntster, on 08 January 2011 - 07:50 PM, said:Humans have lived with sasquatches for a long time, too, and we appear to be taking our sweet time killing them off, as well. Apparently, it isn't so much a goal as a simple result of circumstances. *slaps forehead* And gee, raping, murdering, pillaging and plundering isn't apart of that equation........is it? *slaps face* Yes, it is so reported. Did you miss it? It is at the scale that I note with Neanderthal and Cro Magnon. Neanderthal/Bigfoot at low densities, Cro Magnon/Homo at high densities. Neanderthal/Bigfoot of the northern latitudes, Cro Magnon/Homo at the southern latitudes. Neanderthals/Bigfoot more vulnerable in warm climes, Cro Magnon/Homo in warmer climes. Sure, you've got Ostman getting kidnapped, and Fred Beck's cabin getting smashed, but the vast majority of it? It's a competition of RESOURCES! No s**t. Even today, it's a "competition of resources". I've got plenty. You?
Huntster Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 Huntster, on 08 January 2011 - 07:33 PM, said:The human population decreases as one gets further from the equator, and mass invasions from the south are recurring events in human history. It took ten to fifteen THOUSAND years for Homo Sapiens to supplant Neanderthals in Europe. That's not exactly what I would call a "mass invasion". 1) Ten to fifteen thousand years? Says who? I suspect it was a lot longer than that. 2) Again, you confuse "mass" with "recurring", "regular", "further from the equator", etc. 3) It appears that you're desperate and grasping at straws. I suggest slowing down and thinking. I realize that Caesar vs. the Barbarians type conflicts sell books and draw heavy interest, but nothing like that really happened. It is happening now. Before your very eyes (if you're looking). The barbarians are invading Rome today.
Huntster Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 Huntster, on 08 January 2011 - 04:53 PM, said:Just like today...........but that's another story, isn't it? Yes it is! It's a completely different story, as I just stated? No, you didn't just state it. Ten to fifteen thousand years is the time line it took for Homo Sapiens to supplant Neanderthals in Europe. Reference, please. This request for a reference from you is getting too regular without an adequate response. No citations appear to come from you. Please provide adequate references for your words, please. Let's see, Columbus discovered the Americas in 1492, so we can expect the Europeans to fully reign the Americas in the year..........11,492 or 16,492 AD........take your pick. I don't need to "pick". I can refer to History 101. Europeans "fully reigned" the Americas no less than 400 years after your beloved "science" claims they got here. Not exactly the stuff of western dime store novels and NP theory is it!? Not exactly, but closer to reality than you'll apparently ever realize.
Guest Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 Well for what it is worth those Neanderthal genes are probably being phased out even as we speak considering what a melting pot the world has become. Evolution isn't a static situation. So it is what is is. Those few Neanderthal genes, when not expressed abnormally in cases such as autism, allowed us to develop modern technology and advance in the sciences. It was the Cro Magnon genes that added the better abilities for adaptation and flexibility for future planning that made those advances work for us as a society. As I see it, we got the best of both worlds, or the best combination that allowed us to get where we are today. Just because Cro Magnon genes make up 96% of our genome doesn't mean they were better or dominant, just that circumstances were right in the world at the time for those genes to survive. If we had continued to live in an icey world it might have turned out differently than what we have today. I don't think either species had a corner market on what we now consider to be antisocial behavior. We are trying to judge ancient cultures by our own cultural filter and making a judgement of good, better, best that I don't think is warranted. Unfortunately, I hate it that there is a developing trend towards this kind of insinuation of designating one group as better or superior than the other. That is why I do not buy into the NP theory as it continues the belief that Neanderthals were in some ways less than human. To me they were just a different variety if human, obviously, the DNA analysis of the Neanderthal genome shows that. It also shows that some of the Neanderthal were light skinned and red headed so would have looked nothing like this guy's monster. Their eyes may have been larger and better adapted to twilight, I can see that being so, but the slanted pupil, come on now....that isn't necessary to have good night vision. All you need for that is more rods and cones in your eyes. If there is any validity to those ancient stories that eventually got translated and mentioned in the religious texts, they do mention the Elohim (neanderthal?) marrying human women and the result being the Nephilim( hybrids?) which ended up being heroes and great warriors. I guess the hybrids would have been great if you combined the best traits of both Neanderthal and Cro Magnon. At any rate, I think Vendramini is borrowing a theme from these ancient legends that may reflect a racial memory of the demise and absorption of a different humanoid line. He is rehashing this legend through the filter of modern day culture and terminology, based on a very weak fossil record, adding a more horrific spin to it, to sell his theory. As it stands, we have no proof that either the legend or modern day interpretation of what the genetic record might indicate is in fact how it really happened. Either way, what does the NP theory have to do with Sasquatch other than a superficial resemblance of Vendramini's rendition of what a Neanderthal looked like?
Guest Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 We and our genes are in a constant state of change, but that doesn't mean we're losing neanderthal components. The claim that ADHD is neanderthal related may have some merit, but we should keep in mind that some aspects of ADHD have been beneficial to humans. Instead of seeing those with ADHD of being strapped with a deficiency could be seen as blessed with a special kind of mentality that actually adds to ones success in some contexts, pastoral lifestyles for instance, and presumably hunting societies as well. This has actually been seen in Kenyan pre-industrial pastoralists. Attention deficit only becomes a disorder when it is a problem and it's really only a problem in most instances for our modern lifestyles.
Guest Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I don't know about that Dog, maybe I should have worded it differently. I guess a better way of putting it is as time goes by we will become more diluted, since Asians only carry the 1-2% of the Neanderthal genes, and Caucasians carry the 4% rather than saying that we will lose the genes eventually. There has obviously been some dilution along the way or we would all have the same amount. At what point do the genes become non coding DNA that doesn't express at all in any form since research shows that these Neanderthal genes are related to schizophrenia, autism, eating disorders, and possibly other conditions we don't know about yet? Not all Caucasians and Asians have these problems. When non coding DNA does reanimate it can cause diseases like muscular dystrophy. Is this what is happening with our residual Neanderthal genes? Are we in the process of those genes becoming relics or non coding DNA? That's beyond my knowledge level and I don't think I've ever heard anyone ask the question. It's only been 30,000 years since the Neanderthal have completely disappeared so that really isn't that long of a time span for only 4%, at the most, to be present in modern day humans. I don't disagree with you on the ADHD at all, Dog, but I can also see autism and other major problems being an abnormal expression in modern day humans that was once probably a milder beneficial trait in Neanderthal. If bigfoot has Neanderthal traits they are probably a hybridization like we are, maybe with a different set of traits that were inherited than we have, would be my guess. It would account for why they live so differently, seem very intelligent, yet lack what we consider to be implements for survival( or so it seems at this point). Neanderthals had a lot more in common with Cro Magnon man, than not, when you look at the archaeological record. I don't think you could say the same for bigfoot and modern man. It makes me wonder if there physical appearance is a superficial resemblance that aids in their survival in some way. Does bipedalism necessarily lead to "humanism", for lack of a better word, or is that just another theory?
norseman Posted January 10, 2011 Admin Posted January 10, 2011 Either way, what does the NP theory have to do with Sasquatch other than a superficial resemblance of Vendramini's rendition of what a Neanderthal looked like? ]I think you have hit the nail on the head. I do not believe that Sasquatch and Neanderthals are related in any way, other than they are both primates.
Guest Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I started the thread thinking they were a relic Neanderthal population, but after reading everything on various threads and cross referencing with the actual literature, I've changed my mind. I think bigfoot stands alone and is not like any of our so called ancestors or present day primates given what very, very little we know about them.
norseman Posted January 10, 2011 Admin Posted January 10, 2011 I started the thread thinking they were a relic Neanderthal population, but after reading everything on various threads and cross referencing with the actual literature, I've changed my mind. I think bigfoot stands alone and is not like any of our so called ancestors or present day primates given what very, very little we know about them. Despite NP theory, genetics shows us that part of the Homo Sapiens population carries some Neanderthal genes (except Africans). Which means that we are closely enough related that we could interbreed. With that stated I think that if people were seeing Neanderthals in the woods we would be getting reports of fur clad hillbillies and not a bipedal ape. Add to that Neanderthals use of fire and tool making? People would be seeing them as fellow humans, and not something else. That's just my .02 cents.
Recommended Posts