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.

 

Cannibal Humans Ate Neanderthals Into Extinction

page: 6
5
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by punkinworks09Interstingly enough the earliest recorded possible domesticated canine come from a neanderthal site in spain and is about 125K years old.


That is interesting. Modern thought says dogs probably domesticated us, instead of the other way around. Scavanging out of the refuge pits surrounding human settlements they ended up breaking away from wolves and becoming tame on their own. Or they might say they finally taught stone age humans to feed them more and shelter them.




posted on May, 21 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty
I'd really like to think that this was done out of desperation as there was no other food source available.
Still grotesque but understandable.


It's pretty typical for primitive tribes to eat their enemies not for food, but to acquire their spirit. Or maybe it's a final form of domination.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   


An intereting note on cave paintings, apparently MANY of them were actually pornographic little drawings of females with huge breasts and genetalia, likely drawn by adolescent homosapien males. But the history books typically ignore those drawings and focus on the animals instead.
reply to post by Sonya610
 

On a tour of SW France at Lascaux
I remember seeing many large animals and some men depictions. The men were depicted with sizable erections. I wouldn't have noticed but the female tour guide pointed it out and it was sort of an "oh my moment"! The "men" were more like stick figures.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sonya610

Modern thought says dogs probably domesticated us, instead of the other way around. Scavanging out of the refuge pits surrounding human settlements they ended up breaking away from wolves and becoming tame on their own. Or they might say they finally taught stone age humans to feed them more and shelter them.


Interesting but sounds like a dog lovers fantasy notion.

Table scraps from humans who had the benefit of weapons gets the ball rolling. Sometimes even an abundance of food and a breakthrough concept in the animal kingdom - it's transportable.

Notably few depictions of dogs in cave drawings. Somewhat more socialized than other animals and recognized a good thing when they saw it. A guaranteed food source.

How frequently they ended up in the role of cattle is up for speculation.


Mike



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Interesting but sounds like a dog lovers fantasy notion.


You seem to have a great knack for being condescending, huh? You just naturally assume my statements were fantasy? Based on what exactly?

Scientists now believe wolves started scavenging around human refuge piles, and eventually the a sub-species was formed because the most tame wolves got the best scraps first. Their wild brothers/sisters kept hunting. Eventually it caused not only a change in temperament but physical changes as well, such as shortened jaw.

Dogs did not come from one or two "tame wolves" but from a diverse population. Wolves are fearce unpredictable animals even when handraised and they would not likely have been "caught and forced" to live with humans, even if humans at the time thought it would be "fun" to raise fearsome predators.


Tamed Wolves Do Not Produce Tame Offspring!

It seems very unlikely that the humans of 15,000 years ago (Mesolithic period; the time when it is believed dogs truly came into being) had the time or the intelligence to invest in a selective breeding program that aimed for a tamer wolf! The people of that period would have been too busy grappling with the basics of everyday survival: finding food, keeping warm and keeping safe. And on the rather implausible chance that they did have both the time and smarts to invest in such a breeding program there is not a shred of evidence that supports the likelihood that those people had a large enough tame-wolf population to embark on such a program.

Furthermore those folks would have had another problem on their hands; the fact that taming an individual animal does not automatically result in tame offspring even over a span of several generations. Modern day wolf researchers are well aware that tame wolves behave nothing like dogs and retain many of the characteristics undesirable in a domesticated animal; namely independence and wariness of people.

When a tame wolf gives birth, it produces naturally wild offspring which is in stark contrast to the offspring of dogs which are inherently tame right from the get go! If a wolf pup from a tamed individual is not socialized by humans before its eyes open that animal will have problems dealing with people; the same is not true of dogs even for much older puppies of several months! In other words, the taming of individual animals does not bestow genetic modification upon its offspring even over a span of many generations. Simply put, the idea that people from the Mesolithic period tamed the wolf and gradually transformed it into the domesticated dog seems to rest on very shaky ground indeed!



www.buzzle.com...

[edit on 21-5-2009 by Sonya610]



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sonya610

Originally posted by mmiichael
Interesting but sounds like a dog lovers fantasy notion.


You seem to have a great knack for being condescending, huh? You just naturally assume my statements were fantasy? Based on what exactly?

Scientists now believe wolves started scavenging around human refuge piles, and eventually the a sub-species was formed because the most tame wolves got the best scraps first. Their wild brothers/sisters kept hunting.



Looking back, you're right. Accept my apology.

In mild defense I did get annoyed when I thought I was introducing cutting edge and controversial new thinking on Neandertalis, and it got summarily dismissed.

Much goes on in the field that does not immediately hit the Internet.


Mike



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 


From your source...


Simply put, the idea that people from the Mesolithic period tamed the wolf and gradually transformed it into the domesticated dog seems to rest on very shaky ground indeed!


Hmmmm!

I raised a coyote which is simply a small wolf spp. And I worked with and cared for many supposedly full wolves during my many long years as a veterinarian. Most of the wild canines I worked with were rather lovable and predictable. Another percentage of them weren't. And I DO NOT recommend anyone adopting a wolf or coyote BUT they can be rather nice pets.

The one I found licked your face, enjoyed being petted, came when called, learned SIT quickly but unfortunately ate the chickens so had to go. But otherwise was very close to a dog!

I would assume that ancient man happened upon orphened baby wolves from time to time (as I did) adopted then, cared for them as humans do and found them quite pleasant to have around. The wolves would have domesticated to the humans and been protective to them, as well, as wolves naturally do. From then on it would have been a selective process for the humans to breed only the ones they liked best, were the most docile, loving, cutest, etc.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 04:28 AM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 



Hey

uhhm did you get into the main cave ??? I only saw the "copy" for the masses. I saw those erection depections to but i've seen not a single depection of Venuslike drawings in the upper paleolithic art i have seen.


Do you have any quality pictures left ? My house burned down on 24/12/2007 (Chrismas eve) and i lost a treasure on pictures from France,Germany,Spain,...

I've been to dozens of caves all over EU since i used to travel for free in the whole EU and had a girlfriend thats all over those things.

I'm visiting alot of those places again this holiday armed with a decent digital camera i'm intending to make some "higher" quality pictures then i find online. Since every picture i find seems to be grainy, dated, everything we could avoid with current HD-tech. (seems to me ppl. prefer to take pictures more of buckets and brooms in HD then from art of our heritage....)

If anyone knows where to find high quality pictures of Paleolithic art please post your links here or if you don't want them spread across the globe PM me

Thx in advance



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by plumranch
I would assume that ancient man happened upon orphened baby wolves from time to time (as I did) adopted then, cared for them as humans do and found them quite pleasant to have around.


Orphaned baby wolves younger than 9 days old? Needing to be bottle fed every 4 hours around the clock?

Ancient man did NOT have domesticated cows for milk, and they sure couldn't go to the store and buy Esbilac. I suppose they could just ask one of the women to breast feed the pups instead. If that was the case it must have happened more than a few times to create a tame dog population over the millenia.

Modern man is typically afraid of wolves (unless they have a high powered gun). You can be sure ancient man was much more aware of the big bad beasties that roamed the woods and would make a snack out of them, or their small children. Modern humans also keep tigers and lions as pets, oh and crocodiles too, do you think ancient man would do that? THey knew what it was like to be EATEN by predators, they were less likely to see them as cute and cuddly pets.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 


Originally posted by Sonya610
I suppose they could just ask one of the women to breast feed the pups instead.



Although not as common as in the past, some Dani women still breast-feed hungry piglets if the sow is no where to be found.
www.nytimes.com...


I'm certain breast milk was not used exclusively for infants. It was probably utilized in many ways.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Morningglory
I'm certain breast milk was not used exclusively for infants. It was probably utilized in many ways.


Yes but the piglets are livestock, they have value and they will be used or sold. I am sure if the MAN wants to see his livestock survive, he will tell the females to do whatever it takes and they will do it.

That is different than deciding to feed wild animals to keep as "pets", especially wild animals that have been known to snatch and eat small children (and I am quite sure the wolves back then wouldn't hesitate to snack on humans if the need arose).



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 



Originally posted by Sonya610
Scavanging out of the refuge pits surrounding human settlements they ended up breaking away from wolves and becoming tame on their own.


I am simply suggesting that it's possible a lone wolf hanging around a camp could have died having pups. Maybe the people had gotten use to that particular wolf and didn't feel so threatened by the pups. Maybe as you said the wolf simply incorporated us into their pack. A woman providing breast milk could form a strong bond with a young pup.

Certainly a hunter could see the value in wolves. Especially those lone wolves who might have been hanging around. Possibly bringing home kills to share with the pack. Just the alarm sound of their bark would have been something to consider.

Although the dog is man's best friend it's possible woman domesticated them.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Morningglory
Just the alarm sound of their bark would have been something to consider.

Although the dog is man's best friend it's possible woman domesticated them.


Yes and no doubt as some wolves started to regularly hang around the camp sites the warning signs were useful. However DOGS bark, wolves do not. Dogs have developed a much louder and more obvious way of communicating things simply because they had to communicate with humans. Wolves communicate amongst themselves in a much more subtle way. But wolves are very WILD, even when raised by modern humans that understand canine psychology and the necessity of lots of handling etc...

Dogs were the first ever domesticated animal. Before cattle or sheep or any others that would have seemed far more "useful". I don't see why people need to believe they took wolves and MADE them domesticated, instead of accepting that the two species found a synchronicity thousands of years ago and developed a mutually beneficial relationship of their own free will.

Why is it a bad thing if wolves chose to domesticate themselves? Because we did not instigate it?

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Sonya610]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   


But wolves are very WILD, even when raised by modern humans that understand canine psychology and the necessity of lots of handling etc...
reply to post by Sonya610
 

Wolves as companion animals USED to be very popular up here. They are illegal now but you still see them around, people simply call them dogs not WOLVES.
I have seen and cared for literally hundreds of wolves through the years. Maybe they act a little more skittish and I tend to want to muzzle them but wolves generally cannot be distinguished readily from dogs. There is simply no dependable uniform distinguishing characteristic. I used to just ask the owner. Sometimes owners would be truthful, sometimes not. It's similar to the pitbull issue. Wolves have a longer nose? They howl? They have a distant stare? They don't bark? Dogs have all those characters.

Ancient man IMHO would have had a strong impetus to have a canine around camp for protection, sounding the alarm when preditors or enemies are approaching and finding and capturing animal food sources. There simply is nothing like having a dog around camp even as a diversion to intruders.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
The most likely explanation i find is tribal warfare. In some ancient tribes i guess it was the custom to eat the deceased for whatever reason.

Doesnt mean that this happened all over.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by plumranch
Wolves as companion animals USED to be very popular up here. They are illegal now but you still see them around, people simply call them dogs not WOLVES.

I have seen and cared for literally hundreds of wolves through the years. Maybe they act a little more skittish and I tend to want to muzzle them but wolves generally cannot be distinguished readily from dogs. There is simply no dependable uniform distinguishing characteristic.


Maybe this is a communication issue. It started off with a comment that said "a dog lovers fantasy" now it has turned in defense of wolves.

I like the idea that wolves/dogs chose to hang out with humans. It is not in any way a slight against the wolfe. Wolves are brilliant animals.

But let us go back 14,000 years. Sheesh let us go back 100 years, how many humans would be capable of handraising a wolfe pup and turning it into a companion animal? Now lets go back to the cave man who hasn't domesticated ANY animals and ask why would they want to choose a pedator?

I prefer to go with the modern scientific evidence that says wolves started to hang around human campsites and they slowly CHOSE to become companions to humans. By their own will.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
damn tatse like chicken



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   
google Nephilim and Giants in the Bible...its supports this.....they were half Angelic and human.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sonya610

Maybe this is a communication issue. It started off with a comment that said "a dog lovers fantasy" now it has turned in defense of wolves.

I like the idea that wolves/dogs chose to hang out with humans. It is not in any way a slight against the wolfe. Wolves are brilliant animals.

... lets go back to the cave man who hasn't domesticated ANY animals and ask why would they want to choose a pedator?

I prefer to go with the modern scientific evidence that says wolves started to hang around human campsites and they slowly CHOSE to become companions to humans. By their own will.



Hey, talk about communication issue. I used the phrase "dog lover's fantasy" and even apologized if it gave offense. I love dogs and have had them most of my life.

As humans lived longer and were able to transmit cumulative knowledge better than wolves, I think it's far more likely they made the decision to keep the wolves around as they could be useful. And I'm afraid it might be true also, that they were a back-up movable cattle in hard times.

And again, the wolves to become dogs were made an offer they couldn't resist - free food and relief from the relenting survival requirements most animals go through all their lives.

A wolf/dog could have the equivalent of extended childhood where they could play and be fed all their lives.

Mike



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 





Now lets go back to the cave man who hasn't domesticated ANY animals and ask why would they want to choose a pedator?


If you are a human hunter why would you want to domesticate a cow? The only useful species to domesticate would be a fellow hunting species like a canine, feline, etc. Modern man may fear wolves but I can assure you that wolves are one of the lesser species to fear if you live in the wild. Fear bears and large cats first.

If an ancient man came upon a baby orphaned canine as would have often happened they may well have put 2 and 2 together and thought they could raise this thing and it could be useful. BTW, all canines are born with a compliment of immune components and don't need early mother's milk (as calves need colostrum). So any high protein source would work well and the pup would have been easily nurished.

Hunter gatherers would have naturally chosen a hunting spp. to domesticate as later humans chose swine, cattle, horses as they became more sedentary farming types.



From HowStuff Works:
Although the oldest fossils of a domesticated dog are from a 14,000-year-old dog grave, DNA evidence suggests dogs diverged from wolves much earlier than that (with estimates ranging from 15,000 to more than 100,000 years ago) [source: Wade]. Regardless, historians agree that humans domesticated dogs before any other animal -- making dog man's oldest friend, if not his best.


So canines may well have been domesticated very early in the modern man period!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join