Guest Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) I heard reported that Cro magnons painted really really big cave murals.......... Yup, and Neanderthals painted nothing, well maybe a big red dot. Oh, there is no argument here, this is scientific data. Neanderthal is well studied. I don't consider posting information so freely and easily available as winning an argument. I was going of common sense and logic/reason, and apparently high IQ relatively speaking. This data on Neanderthal is overwhelming. If a person is completely irrational, or has some kind of other issues, they would keep spouting inane nonsense of how Neanderthal is the same as Modern humans from ONE ridiculous paper from an unqualified undergrad with an agenda that is not even his. Flat Earthers do exist, as do Unicorn people. Total moronic brute, known for years and years, but there is a push for nonsense in the University system. I will look into it more if the Unicorn people keep posting, maybe. Sorry bout the large fonts, some people have trouble reading the smaller stuff, so I have to point out the obvious. But if they are the Unicorn believing types, well, yea, large aint gonna do it. I want public apologies also, no PM's! Edited May 26, 2014 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 Oh, sorry, this is the article with the moronic clown idiot undergrad, or ? Whatever. He is making wild statements, and combined with the nonsensical "New-Age" physical description shown in the beginning of this post (the 'Amish' Neanderthal, totally inaccurate and silly, New-age) totally outrageous! I was mixing the 2 posts up. I'm not buying the cat-eyed ape thing or defending it. But we are all educated now and up to date I suspect. I'll take $20.00 paypal if you don't want to publicly apologize BTW. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/apr/30/neanderthals-not-less-intelligent-humans-scientists Oh, sorry, this is the article with the moronic clown idiot undergrad, or ? Whatever. He is making wild statements, and combined with the nonsensical "New-Age" physical description shown in the beginning of this post (the 'Amish' Neanderthal, totally inaccurate and silly, New-age) totally outrageous! I was mixing the 2 posts up. I'm not buying the cat-eyed ape thing or defending it. But we are all educated now and up to date I suspect. I'll take $20.00 paypal if you don't want to publicly apologize BTW My view includes this but also holds that the knowledge gained works both ways. For instance, if my current avitar represents what a bigfoot looks like, then we would not find a gorilla or chimp underneath it's skin. I do not think we can guess how hairy they were or the exact color of their skin. The article posted up thread seems to say that Neanderthals are thought to have worn wraps of animal skin. Is there any actual evidence they wore anything as clothing? I've heard they've been found buried with certain items that would indicate ceremony but nothing of manufactured clothing. I would think they would have to have clothing in those weather conditions. But I see where you are going. Covered in hair? LoL, They could make spears and other tools so they could make clothing I would recon. . http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/apr/30/neanderthals-not-less-intelligent-humans-scientists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) Wilma was a redhead, and therefore of more direct Neanderthal descent. Mary Ann or Ginger? Answer: Jeanie! lol, +1 for the comic relief. & agreed on Jeanie between those 3 back in the day , but imo "wonder woman" hands down over them and fwiw, I have to agree any facial reconstruction based on skeletal features would be at best an educated guess. and that based on my lack of "faith" ( as previously mentioned) that science is infallible. not to mention the possibility of being manipulated to support previous theories/status quo. Edited May 26, 2014 by Doc Holliday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 Wonder Woman's appeal had nothing to do with her hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) I say comparatively because they are a lower species with differing brain functions, so you cannot make apples to apples comparison, as "Mental retardation" in humans is rated around 65 IQ I believe. Thuggish and Brutish have been correct all along, despite the wishful thinking of unimaginative, and most likely academically UNDESERVED grad students. Edited May 27, 2014 by WV FOOTER Edit Objectionable material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 Whooooshhhh........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Norton Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) Cuckoo. Cuckoo. Really, that is rather disturbing. Edited May 26, 2014 by Stan Norton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 We can't discount the influence of funding sources for this type of research either. It's a fact that study conclusions often reinforce the points the funding agency is attempting to promote. So long as researchers are dependent on third party funding their findings will not be truly independent, if they want continued funding, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Norton Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 Ah yes. I had forgotten about the grand conspiracy involving academic institutions across the globe to promote Neanderthals as close relatives of humans for their own evil ends. Silly me. Have I entered The Twilight Zone perchance? Is there some plan to purposefully ignore all scientific research just because that is what wacky countercultural warriors should do? Where does this all end? Please. Tell me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Neanderthal_Parallax Not that strange of an idea for thal's to have evolved like us, but with differences, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted May 26, 2014 Admin Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) Stan, nobody is saying Bigfoot is a neanderthal, but to insist on the fiction that the look of a commissioned sculpture from the artists below is beyond question is silly, just as preposterous as Wag's position. Wait, I see the museum has taken down the page of the artists with their charming pic (Alfons and Adrie Kennis). :lol: It looks like mods took down their pic I posted here also. Even the google cache doesn't have the pic! they must of delivered a cease and desist order or something... wow! Wonder why? anyway, for the record, the page they took down stated: --------The models were made by the Dutch duo, Alfons and Adrie Kennis, in their studio in the Netherlands for our next major exhibition, Britain: One Million Years of the Human Story, opening here on 13 February. The Kennis brothers specialise in creating scientifically accurate sculptures of ancient humans and animals. The specially commissioned models blend scientific and aesthetic interpretation uniquely. They pose proudly, faces full of character - and some speculation as to which famous personalities might have been the inspiration - and are sure to attract attention when they take pride of place in the exhibition gallery. No worries, there are plenty of other pics of the charming twins... ahhh, they're so playful those twins, their scientific accuracy must be beyond question. Stan, I'm not entirely sure and since you (or your wife) is the expert, does DNA analysis reveal: 1) skin color 2) eye color 3) hair length / body hair coverage 4) intelligence 5) body fat Edited May 27, 2014 by gigantor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 I'm one word gig ? Yes! Your genetic code makes you, you. Chimps have genes that shut off over hair growth on the scalp while we don't. Everything that makes a species unique is there in code. In fact there is no scientific reason why we cannot clone a Neanderthal.......only morality stands in the way. Dinosaurs yes? Absolutely, we cannot say for sure what color they were, etc... Of course they have been gone too long and we do not possess any Jurassic species genome. Neanderthals and wooly mammoths have only been gone in a evolutionary nlink of the eye so to speak by comparison! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Ah yes. I had forgotten about the grand conspiracy involving academic institutions across the globe to promote Neanderthals as close relatives of humans for their own evil ends. Silly me. Have I entered The Twilight Zone perchance? Is there some plan to purposefully ignore all scientific research just because that is what wacky countercultural warriors should do? Where does this all end? Please. Tell me. You have to read what I post and the links, not just my amazing insight. The link and the headline, is that Neanderthal is the same as modern humans, oh, they were a bit stockier, but in all, the same. Then I posted where it has been shown....well, read my posts, illumination is sure to come. I've already listed one link, and the picture of the 'nice old human' Neanderthal is yet another. Not a conspiracy, but yet another 'trend' in academia. I would be happy to continue the discussion in an open manner in the Tar-Pit, but I would just be rehashing information already posted. This is like, the earth is ROUND, not flat level information. There is no mystery here, there actually yet again, IS NO DEBATE. There is no argument. The scientific data is already there, for decades. Neanderthals were brutish, stupid thugs in comparison to humans. In comparison to Chimps they were 'modern humans' to a degree. So now your saying, Neanderthals are NOT like humans? Again, yes, Coo-Coo, as I have stated all along. Although I was theorizing off the top of my head, the scientific body of work out there on Neanderthal confirms the old stereoypes of them being dumb brutes, and if you haven't read what was posted on how and why they are dumb brutes, or can't find the link, or figure out google, then you are left in the dark. No need to try to be derogatory. This is very simple. All the information is here. What questions does anyone still have about them being 'THE SAME' as modern humans, as is being stated by the undergrad in the posted link? Why does an Undergrad from a 'goofy' University (Which hired Ward Churchil as a 'Native American) who ignores the current level of scientific Anthropological data have any pull over serious Anthropological institutions? Unicorns. Let me know if I can help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 These facts that you are pointing out about Neanderthals, Wag, are they at all like the bigfoot "facts" in your signature line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 (edited) OK. Folks? NOT OK! to argue that Neandertal = sasquatch. NOT. NOTHING backs it up. (And yes, although I've seen a few saying it's not happening, it is. The relict Neandertal thing comes up, actually, way too much.) This is what has kept scientists away from this topic: all the unfounded speculation with nothing to back it up that seems to fill any intellectual vacuum. Edited May 27, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts