Neanderthals ‘had sex’ with modern man

People will screw anything that has a hole. You think ugly makes a difference? Horse, pig, dog, chicken, car exhaust pipes, vacuum cleaner, TREE KNOT.

[edit on 2009/10/29 by Aeons]

reply to post by Silcone Synapse

---

holy cow, that's a face only a mother could love.

[edit on 2009/10/29 by Aeons]

So, you've run into my family. Be nice now...the women are all attractive but we're way stronger than you suspect.



Yep. Looks like my Dad and Uncles.

[edit on 2009/10/29 by Aeons]

I recall this being proposed several years ago, and a study was done on the skulls.

There were some 13-15 pointed differences between Neanderthal skulls and modern skulls. The most significant differences were in the nasal cavity.

Indications were that there were greater similarities between Neanderthals and chimpanzees than Neanderthals and modern man.

This transitional crap that keeps being introduced is difficult to swallow.

If you look at the state of art aircraft in 1909, then in 1929, then 1939, and up to 2009, you'll see a natural progression.

We don't have that in the fossil record where Neanderthal/Modern transitional species would indicate interbreeding.

Zero evidence, and just a couple genomes can be a big difference.

I've recently picked up an interesting book on H. Neanderthalensis which covers newer research that Neanderthals and modern man may have spent a greater length of time interacting with one another, here is a chapter excerpt:



Neanderthals Revisited: New Approaches and Perspectives

So man may have entered Europe earlier than thought, and both species may have had contact and interaction earlier and longer than previously thought, with the final presence of Neanderthals in Europe occurring later (about 25000 BC). However this book, from what I've gathered, does not indicate any interbreeding, or contributions to human DNA from Neanderthals.

Yes, you are missing something: Moderns didn't descend from Neanderthal.

Moderns and Neanderthals had a common ancestor, but they evolved along different 'branches' from that common ancestor, and more or less in parallel.

Edit: sorry, I see that you have already been answered.

[edit on 29/10/2009 by rnaa]

Ginger gene has been connected as being a possible contribution to the human gene pool from Neanderthal. mtDNA haplogroup X has also been theorized to potentially be a Neanderthal heritage. High functioning Aspies (Aspergers) have a theory that the condition might be connected to Neanderthal.

www.gnxp.com...

The diversity found in the European populace cannot be explained by the current model. However, if you took into account that there were other branches and isolated twigs of the more advanced homo species in various areas....and that the homo sapiens migrating would have had varied amounts of interaction (sexual) with those groups, you could easily account for it.

Asians would have more cross-back with earlier, and then climatically isolated early Cro-Magnon. Europeans would have more interaction (and probably more sustained interaction) with Neanderthal.

Most game during the successive ice ages moved West to East and then West to East. Isolated early Cro-Magnon or late Erectus would have followed this pattern. And then been cut off to develop on their own. In Asia. When the next wave of homo came through, they would have been absorbed. (Probably not nicely.)


While the multiple points of origin theory doesn't get a lot of respect, the fact remains that people in South America were Cro-Magnon. People in Africa were Cro-Magnon. Without any replacement, both groups proceeded to develop into modern humans in very similar ways. No replacement necessary.


One forum has a discussion on this - but I have read it elsewhere as well -
The posit that the cultures with women who have most often been in more gender egalitarian societies might be connected with Neanderthal. That Homo Sapiens have developed more gender disparity, while Neanderthal was more gender equal.

[edit on 2009/10/30 by Aeons]

No no you get this..... an earlier poster mentioned, Nikolai Valuev
Another picture: img2.blogcu.com...


I think Neanderthals are still with us today in some genetic form that is diluted in our gene pool. The genes of Neanderthals and modern humans are more closely related than chimps and humans, and that would make interbreeding very possible, in the end they became us.



[edit on 30-10-2009 by imitator]

This is covered by the Bible

God made man, pure man............ the devils angels, then took the daughters of man and then corrupted the pureness of man.

Untill Noah and his few were the only ones left, so then God wiped the world clear. But considering angels can't die on earth they of course weren't killed off but set back...and returned.

So basically unless you have clear and uninterrupted blood lines to the few on the Ark then you have corrupted DNA...including me.

reply to post by 297GT

---

What does the ark and the bible have to do with this? Noah lived within walking distance of every species on the planet and stuck them on a boat including the Neanderthals?

reply to post by Phlegmi

---

Not going to argue with you, do some reading or not and keep believing what you want, choice is yours and no amount of to and fro-ing from me is going to change your mind. That ball is entirely in your court.

You just compared a humanoid whos DNA is very similar to ours, to a sheep?

Do you consider yourself intelligent ?

Why is it highly doubtful?

Please give your reasons.

So I suppose you know Neanderthals well enough to believe they did NOT also want to have sex with Modern Humans?

Giggity...

Giggity...

He's making commentary on the usual course of human interaction with new groups.

Kill the men, the old, the infirm, and the children, take the girls and women, rape them, get babies on them.

Even if they are less fertile, only a few being capable of it would be enough. Girl children are treated the same, and probably live short lives. Boys are carefully selected, and the strong used. Most probably don't make it to adulthood, and if they do they don't make it far. Sexual encounters by them are limited to their breathern, and those children receive the same treatment. Read - the males don't bred "up." Unless they distinguish themselves.

In just a few generations you could almost severely limit the Y-chromosone contribution, and if enough girls are badly treated and only their cross bred sons and daughters survive after a couple of generations, the most likely contribution to the genes will come from the surviving males - which will wash out the mtDNA haplogroups assuming that they don't share many of the same basic mtDNA as we do.

[edit on 2009/11/3 by Aeons]

reply to post by Aeons

---

Neanderthals and Modern Humans lived in Europe together for about 20,000 years. It's not really analogous to Europeans colonists driving away the aboriginal Americans.

I do think its likely that the "overthrow" of Neanderthals by Modern humans was often violent, but I see no reason to assume that Modern Humans were the lone aggressor and Neanderthals were some sort of innocent victim.

If there was violence, don't you think it is equally possible that the Neanderthals felt threatened and initiated the violence towards the Modern Humans simply to "defend their territory". This happens all the time in nature, so why not with the Neanderthals? I'm not saying this definitely happened, but it is just as equally possible as Modern Humans being the initiator of aggression.

Back to what I said before: What evidence do we have that would make people think that Neanderthals would not be as equally likely to 'have sex' with Modern Humans as Modern Humans were to 'have sex' with Neanderthals?

it is a distinction without difference.

I think there is a difference. In the animal world, there is usually an "initiator" of a sexual act. In the human animal (like many other animals), that initiator is usually the male.

The question could then be asked:
if there was sexual contact between Neanderthals and Modern Humans, then were MORE modern human males initiating that contact with Neanderthal females, or were MORE Neanderthal males initiating the sex with Modern females, or was it equally divided among both species.

The point I was making in my reply to the post by 'operation mindcrime' is that he made it sound like Modern Humans were by and large the sexual aggressor (even making it sound a little like Modern Humans basically "raped" Neanderthals) based on what he knows about the aggressiveness of us Modern Humans. I'm simply saying that we have no way of knowing that, because we don't know that much about Neanderthals. Neanderthals could have been equally (or more) aggressive.

By the way, there may have been sexual contact, but that doesn't mean they successfully interbred.


[edit on 11/3/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Twenty years ago when I was doing research in Portugal I remember speaking with Portuguese anthropologists about remains that had been found where the skeletal structure showed clear Neanderthal features mixed with those of homo sapiens sapiens. At least that is how I remember it. It was big news in the Lusophone world, but I don't recall it being translated into English or appearing in the English-language press. Perhaps that information is now available on the net.

You are apparently a male.