 |
reply posted on 27-2-2008 @ 05:06 PM by mojo4sale
|
reply to post by okitasan
That was something that i found interesting about the Neandertals, their brain capacity was as large or larger than our own yet they are extinct.
Perhaps the size of your brain doesnt necesarily equate to successful evolution or survival.
Crocodiles and sharks are a prime example of a creature with a much smaller brain than our own but have been around a hell of a lot longer than us.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 28-2-2008 @ 01:58 AM by Dark_Ace
|
Why did the Neanderthals disappear?
becuase they werent smart enought to survive
animals are because of instinct
we have no instinct like baby turtles do when the born and stuff
so it is harder for Neanderthals to survive
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 28-2-2008 @ 03:00 AM by mojo4sale
|
Originally posted by Dark_Ace
Why did the Neanderthals disappear?
becuase they werent smart enought to survive

Well i dont think thats quite right.
Firstly their brain capacity was larger than our own.
Secondly if the ice age had of persisited/lasted longer then it is more than likely that we would be the extinct species and not them.
That doesn't make them stupider only unluckier.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-3-2008 @ 04:19 PM by mojo4sale
|
Did Neandertal
die off because of cannibalism and transmissible spongiform encephalopathies?
 TSEs are also known as prion diseases, a communicable disease where the infectious agent is a malformed protein that replicates by imprinting and
transforming other proteins. Most TSEs manifest in the host’s neurological tissues because he or she ate infected nervous tissue. Ultimately, the
host’s tissues degenerate and lead to serious problems, most often death. In anthropology, one form of TSEs has been well documented, the spread and
eradication of kuru in the Fore from Papua New Guinea.
Links to the paper are on this page as well as information about the author and other related topics. You need to register to view the full article
but it is free or you can just read the summary.
Maybe the Neandertals are the archetype Zombie, brainsss...brainssss.
If they did in fact have larger brains than us the reason may have been so that they could feed the whole family.
{edit to add this link} Article: dsc.discovery.com/news
[edit on 1/3/08 by mojo4sale]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 5-3-2008 @ 04:38 PM by mojo4sale
|
edit sorry i was trying to copy some links and ive triple posted somehow. LOL.
[edit on 5/3/08 by mojo4sale]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 5-3-2008 @ 04:39 PM by mojo4sale
|
edit sorry i was trying to copy some links and ive triple posted somehow.
Again.
[edit on 5/3/08 by mojo4sale]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 5-3-2008 @ 04:45 PM by mojo4sale
|
edit sorry i was trying to copy some links and ive triple posted somehow. My Bad.
[edit on 5/3/08 by mojo4sale]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 20-3-2008 @ 03:45 PM by mojo4sale
|
 you'd think after a couple of years i'd have the posting thing figured out.
Some recent articles:
www.independent.co.uk
 Academic interest in what are being described as drowned Stone Age hunting grounds is likely to increase dramatically after the discovery of 28
Neanderthal flint axes on the sea bed off the East Anglian coast.
 Detailed archaeological research at the bottom of the North Sea would be likely to solve a host of Stone Age mysteries. It should help establish
when Britain was recolonised by humans after a 100,000-year uninhabited period. It may also reveal for the first time the full technological
capabilities of Neanderthal Man, because preservation on and in the sea bed is extremely good. Wooden, stone and bone implements have almost certainly
survived.
palaeoblog.blogspot.com
 New research adds to the evidence that chance, rather than natural selection, best explains why the skulls of modern humans and ancient
Neanderthals evolved differently. The findings may alter how anthropologists think about human evolution.
 "A take-home message may be that we should reconsider the idea that all morphological (physical) changes are due to natural selection, and
instead consider that some of them may be due to genetic drift," Weaver said. "This may have interesting implications for our understanding of human
evolution."
Here's the abstract from pnas
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 02:46 AM by Swingarm
|
If you read lloyd pye's book "everything you know is wrong", you might say there still here in the the form of big foot etc.
[edit on 23-6-2008 by Swingarm]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 03:26 PM by ArMaP
|
reply to post by Swingarm
In that case there should be remains of Neanderthals on the places where Bigfoot, etc. can be found (if we can consider that they were ever found), or
at least evidences of evolution between Neanderthals and Bigfoot.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 03:47 PM by Swingarm
|
I think he actually says there hominoids. It's an intersting book I read some time ago. He covers this point you raise in the book just can't
remeber what he said. Anyone else? He ends with alot of sitchins ideas of aliens (anunaki) mating with hominoids and thats why we just appear out of
no where.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 03:53 PM by Swingarm
|
 In his nonfiction work he focuses on aspects of cryptozoology, especially hominoid cryptids such as bigfoot and yeti. Pye developed these themes
in Everything You Know Is Wrong, in 1998. Here he claims that these animals are Earth's only indigenous bipedal primates, and that early fossil
hominoids such as Neandertals and Australopithecines are not intermediates in human evolution.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |