I think I've recovered enough from whatever I had to make this post, and not have it involve half-delerious ramblings.
I will continue to assert that no matter what small evolutionary squabbles occur between subspecies, we must look at the big picture, as my opponent
has so ably pointed out.
The real question at hand is not which species outlasts the other, and for how long, rather, the question is whether or not these two species can
coexist in their sentience for any extended period of time. As it was seen with the episode between Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal, the latter was cleaned
from the face of europe in a mere few centuries, the blink of an eye in the grand scheme of evolution. Obviously I would not be alone in asserting
that this could definitely NOT be considered coexistence for the purpose of Mutual benefit.
While I'm on the subject, I feel I must address the 'rules' of species' interaction, especially in humans and other primates. Through studies of
the great apes, and chimps, we have discovered quite a bit about the 'Three F's' of human interaction. It's quite bewildering to know that every
human reaction is based on pure animal instinct. These three f's stand for Fight, Flight, or Fornicate. These are the only three basic animal
responses to an unexpected stimulus.
With this in mind, one must consider what was going through the minds of less evolved human beings, such as Neanderthal man, when he saw something
similar to him, that posed a great threat upon his land, his hunting grounds, etc. The most obvious F to choose from would be Fight, as according to
several observed tendencies in nature regarding the encroachment of dangerous competition.
So, all of this in mind, one must consider the odds that two species could evolve to any sort of higly intelligent being, simply because one would
inevitably kill the other off, well before either could begin amassing proper technology. It's just the way the world works. Survival of the fittest
prevails in the end. One species of intelligent life evolving to any significant point is difficult enough without competition attempting to literally
destroy them at every turn.
The example I presented, of the reactions between Neanderthal, and Cro-Magnon man is simply a microcosm of the entire issue. It is entirely safe to
assume that all such unexpected interactions can lead to the same or similar results, as can be observed in nature with less intelligent
I feel I must remind everyone once more that no matter how evolved, and brilliant we think we are...we're still just as much of slaves to our natural
instincts as our pets....and in such a situation as species of intelligent life competeing for the same land, resources, and other such perks, that
natural instinct is to fight, and kill, until the competition is gone.
I leave you with this, a graph showing very clearly the influence of instinct on various forms of life...