It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Neandertals and Modern Humans Coexisted?

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Point I'm making is that typically attracted to their own ethnicity. And I think they did not interbreed, but it's not set in stone I agree.

This is hardly worth an argument.




posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by the_watcher
 


I recommend a book by Stephen Quayle called, "Giants-Master Builders of Prehistoric and Ancient Civilizations". You can find it at www.prophecyinthenews.com. Look to your lower left where it says Books and Bibles and click on all available titles. It is listed alphabetically, so you will have to go to about page 4 to see the title and click on. This book shows pictures and gives historical and archeological evidence of their existence.

Also, if you research on line you can find some interesting stories or proof of giant bones and history that will shock you such as ancientx.com



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander As a side note (but on topic), some of you might want to check out a movie called The 13th Warrior that was based on Michael Crichton's novel Eaters of the Dead.


Yes, very cool movie about interaction between different peoples. As to the thread, latest word is that neanderthal and modern humans did co-exist for a while...perhaps 30,00 years? Google Erik Trinkaus for the best information available.

I believe that the current thought is that homo sapiens neanderthalis didn't make the evolutionary cut because they lacked the adaptability to survive the climatic change of the last ice age...but correct me if I'm wrong.

[edit on 26-9-2008 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 





I believe that the current thought is that homo sapiens neanderthalis didn't make the evolutionary cut because they lacked the adaptability to survive the climatic change of the last ice age...but correct me if I'm wrong.


Actually, one of the latest theories that has taken hold is documented in the August 2007 National Geographic:
news.nationalgeographic.com...

Odd Skull Boosts Human, Neandertal Interbreeding Theory

Brian Handwerk
for National Geographic News
August 2, 2007

A human skull from a Romanian bear cave is shaking up ideas about ancient sex.

The Homo sapiens skull has a distinctive feature previously found only in Neandertals, providing further evidence of interbreeding between the two species, according to a new study.

The human cranium was found during World War II mining operations in 1942, in a cave littered with Ice Age cave bear remains.

Recently the fossil was radiocarbon dated to 33,000 years ago and thoroughly examined, revealing the controversial anatomical feature.

The otherwise human skull has a groove at the base of the back of the skull, just above the neck muscle, that is ubiquitous in Neandertal specimens but has never been seen in the remains of a modern human, argues study leader Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri.

"I was frankly quite surprised to see it when I was looking at the specimen," Trinkaus said. "My first reaction was, that shouldn't be there."

Writing in the August issue of Current Anthropology, Trinkaus and his colleagues say that the skull supports interpretations of other remains found in France, Romania, and the Czech Republic that also have "archaic" or unusual features suggesting interbreeding.

Archaeological evidence shows that humans and Neandertals (often spelled Neanderthals) both lived in Europe for several thousand years after the arrival of modern humans about 35,000 years ago. (Learn more about human migrations.)

But the relationship between the two species is hotly debated.

Many researchers believe that modern humans killed off or simply outcompeted Neandertals until the latter went extinct.

Trinkaus and others, however, have suggested that Neandertals became absorbed into Homo sapiens. (Related: "Neandertals, Modern Humans Interbred, Bone Study



As for those that state that Evolution is a fact, that is not true. Evolution is a theory, much as our concept of relativity is a theory. In both cases, there has been some evidence that pieces of the theory SEEM to fit. However, there is also data and evidence that do NOT fit the theory. There has never been convincing evidence that a "missing link" exists from non-human to human. Man's knowledge of science IS evolutionary, that is, as more evidence is produced, theories are modified, confirmed, put on hold, or dis-proven.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


Just out of curiosity, what exactly would you classify as a clear link for evolution?
THere a re a large number of progressively more human-like hominid fossils, which leads to the two main branches which were Neanderthal and Cro Magnon.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by RuneSpider
 




THere a re a large number of progressively more human-like hominid fossils, which leads to the two main branches which were Neanderthal and Cro Magnon.

Actually, that is not true. Many of the supposed pre-cursors to man turn out to be either hoaxes, such as Piltdown man and Nebraska man, or misinterpretation of the fragments, attributing them to human like, when in reality they are more ape-like.
Well, then , you say that is ok, because man came from ape. But you see, Evolutionists can't have it both ways. On one hand, when those that do not believe in evolution ask the evolutionists, if man came from ape, then why are there still apes around, evolutionists reply that man didn't come from ape, they both "evolved" from some earlier common creature. Thus, evolutionists contradict themselves when they try to connect early ape-like creatures to man.
In order for Science to be true science, you cannot use arguments such as "we found creatures that resemble mankind in some way. That is, of course, ludicrous. By that argument, you could say that we evolved directly from trilobites because the both are alive, have some internal organs, etc. In science, "close" is not good enough. After all, for centuries man believed that the sun revolved around the earth. You could "fit" much of what they observed to that theory, even though some of the explanations, such as the retrograde movement of the planets should have been a clue! Even Einsteins' theory of Relativity had a very rough road to refinement, with many of the aspects he had included in 1905, turned out to be eventually disproven.




top topics
 
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join