norseman Posted May 16, 2018 Admin Share Posted May 16, 2018 https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/neanderthal-big-eyes/ Bigger eyes and a bigger visual cortex. While still being a trichromatic ape. Today studies find Scandinavians have bigger eyes and bigger cortexes than people from Micronesia. Albeit by a much smaller margin when compared to Neanderthals. If Sasquatch is real? Presumably it would also have larger eyes and visual cortex. A handy adaptation if your ancesotrs hung out in Siberia to Beringia to North America. And now lives in dark forests. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagniAesir Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 If you are correct, bigger eyes also help nocturnal animals. Another handy adaption to stay out of humans way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Thanks for sharing. Didn't work out so good for them. No longer here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 17, 2018 Admin Author Share Posted May 17, 2018 45 minutes ago, Patterson-Gimlin said: Thanks for sharing. Didn't work out so good for them. No longer here. But they are. They live on in all European and Asian populations to this day. 50 minutes ago, MagniAesir said: If you are correct, bigger eyes also help nocturnal animals. Another handy adaption to stay out of humans way Possibly. Neanderthals could not see as well as an owl in the dark. But they saw much better in the dark than their African cousins. In the end we are all products of our environment. The amazing thing to me.... Imagine the hundreds of thousands of years eeking out an existence in ice age Europe. Dark, cold, brutal..... Not fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Technically you are correct. Yes very brutal. No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 17, 2018 Admin Author Share Posted May 17, 2018 46 minutes ago, Patterson-Gimlin said: Technically you are correct. Yes very brutal. No thanks. Ahhhhh! Your just the man to wrestle a wolly rhino! We’d send you in first....I’d back you up.......I promise! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 I would trust you to take him out for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Oh sure, you two take out the beast while it 's busy eating its lunch.........ME! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegrassfoot Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 If Neanderthals had a relative advantage in low light vision, it certainly could have rapidly evolved into "superhuman" night vision if forced into a nocturnal lifestyle by competition from other hominids. I'm blown away by the fact that blue eyes in humans are thought to have originated in one individual only 6,000-10,000 years ago. And blue eyes are for the most part recessive (complicated, but taken as a whole, generally recessive). And furthermore, blue eyes don't even have a definitive selective advantage (maybe an advantage at attracting mates, or maybe a byproduct of fairer skin and the advantage of synthesizing Vitamin D in northern latitudes fair skin provides). If any hominid was forced into a nocturnal lifestyle, the selective pressure for improved low light vision could make that trait evolve at an astounding rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 17, 2018 Admin Author Share Posted May 17, 2018 45 minutes ago, Bluegrassfoot said: If Neanderthals had a relative advantage in low light vision, it certainly could have rapidly evolved into "superhuman" night vision if forced into a nocturnal lifestyle by competition from other hominids. I'm blown away by the fact that blue eyes in humans are thought to have originated in one individual only 6,000-10,000 years ago. And blue eyes are for the most part recessive (complicated, but taken as a whole, generally recessive). And furthermore, blue eyes don't even have a definitive selective advantage (maybe an advantage at attracting mates, or maybe a byproduct of fairer skin and the advantage of synthesizing Vitamin D in northern latitudes fair skin provides). If any hominid was forced into a nocturnal lifestyle, the selective pressure for improved low light vision could make that trait evolve at an astounding rate. Blue eyes do have advantages and disadvantages. https://www.theodysseyonline.com/20-small-tattoos-big-meanings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 ^ I missed the part about blue eyes but got some new ideas for my next tattoo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted May 17, 2018 BFF Patron Share Posted May 17, 2018 11 hours ago, norseman said: But they are. They live on in all European and Asian populations to this day. Possibly. Neanderthals could not see as well as an owl in the dark. But they saw much better in the dark than their African cousins. In the end we are all products of our environment. The amazing thing to me.... Imagine the hundreds of thousands of years eeking out an existence in ice age Europe. Dark, cold, brutal..... Not fun. From what I could find the last ice age lasted about 100,000 years. That put the Neanderthal right in the middle of it. You are right about eking an existence, especially in Europe which has a lot of mountainous regions. Perhaps Neanderthal was successful because it was well adapted to the ice age conditions. Once the ice age ended, perhaps modern humans were, better adapted for the warmer weather and they prevailed. These climate change fanatics better be careful what they wish for. There is a lot of evidence it does not take much to trigger an ice age. And the onset can happen in a couple of decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 17, 2018 Admin Author Share Posted May 17, 2018 19 minutes ago, SWWASAS said: From what I could find the last ice age lasted about 100,000 years. That put the Neanderthal right in the middle of it. You are right about eking an existence, especially in Europe which has a lot of mountainous regions. Perhaps Neanderthal was successful because it was well adapted to the ice age conditions. Once the ice age ended, perhaps modern humans were, better adapted for the warmer weather and they prevailed. These climate change fanatics better be careful what they wish for. There is a lot of evidence it does not take much to trigger an ice age. And the onset can happen in a couple of decades. Absolutely. As the Earth warmed it opened the door for Homo Sapiens to enter Europe. Homo Sapiens were better adapted to a warmer climate. I would suppose the fauna and flora began to change as well. The special adaptations Neanderthals developed were nullified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted May 19, 2018 BFF Patron Share Posted May 19, 2018 (edited) On 5/17/2018 at 9:44 AM, Bluegrassfoot said: If Neanderthals had a relative advantage in low light vision, it certainly could have rapidly evolved into "superhuman" night vision if forced into a nocturnal lifestyle by competition from other hominids. I'm blown away by the fact that blue eyes in humans are thought to have originated in one individual only 6,000-10,000 years ago. And blue eyes are for the most part recessive (complicated, but taken as a whole, generally recessive). And furthermore, blue eyes don't even have a definitive selective advantage (maybe an advantage at attracting mates, or maybe a byproduct of fairer skin and the advantage of synthesizing Vitamin D in northern latitudes fair skin provides). If any hominid was forced into a nocturnal lifestyle, the selective pressure for improved low light vision could make that trait evolve at an astounding rate. The long and the short of it is, if Neanderthal were selected for low light vision, evolution says changes can occur much more rapidly if some other mutation was hyperadaptive. Night vision could have been selected for, if you shared your den with a cave bear or saber toothed tiger it would sort of be a no-brainer. If Sasquatch was a soul survivor it could happen. Yes, quite the stretch, but so are some of these recent co-human archaeological discoveries of recent import https://www.livescience.com/46662-early-humans-evolving-traits-revealed.html And along the lines of this discussion in a forum.... I still believe that environmental stress has caused particular groups of humans to adapt radically and quickly. I'm thinking of H. Ergaster who arrived in Europe via Gibralter around 700,000 ya. Pretty quickly he became known as H. Heidelbergensis and later H. Neandertal. That reminds me of the "junk" DNA Cog was discussing in another post. He feels, from his research, that "junk" DNA, or mutagens/ transposons, may have enabled the very rapid adaptations of Homo in the past, when facing radical climate changes. Built in variability/ adaptability? http://archaeologica.boardbot.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1158 So what would Sasquatch do in our new three season modern climate? Morsels for thought?! Edited May 19, 2018 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted May 19, 2018 BFF Patron Share Posted May 19, 2018 On 5/16/2018 at 9:08 PM, norseman said: The changing climate going onto the last ice age was likely the evolutionary driver that pushed humans out of previous ecological niches. Ice ages tie up a lot of water and force previously fertile treed savannas into arid grass lands. Deserts increase or form in mid latitudes during ice ages simply because of the water tied up in glaciation and thick ice caps. . A niche species, that is a tree or forest dweller is tied to the location. Humans ventured out and traveled, taking advantage of their adaptive diet and efficient bipedal walk to find better locations to live. . Just the fact that humans are erect most of the time, puts them above most grasses and able to see predators at a distance. BF on the other hand seems tied to forested areas, which come under much stress during major climate changes. Perhaps they were better suited for the ice age forests than they are now? Certainly anything that impacts forests are likely to impact their habitat. Human logging being the largest factor presently at play. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts