reply to post by dragnik
we have found flutes made by them implying music. Houses implying that they settled down so they may have had rudimentary agriculture. Graves, which
imply that they had SOME belief concerning the dead. Symbolic ornaments which could imply religion. Signs that they hunted specific birds for
feathers, not meat so that implies symbolic or decorative arts as well as personal vanity. They fashioned things out of wood, pegs, hooks, ect. They
were PROFICIENT artisans of wood and other softer materials.
They made hammers, and when they would make a flint instrument they would look for the precise place to hit the core material to get the best pieces,
so they in essence mined their flint material, they did not just grab what ever stones were available.
They fished, used arrows, had as good if not better spears and weapons than us. They passed on their traditions and talents SOMEHOW. This implies
complex communication. They also survived for at least 200 thousand years in some of the harshest climates around. Advancing glaciers and then
receding glaciers, so they adapted from vegetarian gathering diets to meat and hunting. We have only been around 100 thousand years I think the
official information says. We have only tried our luck in harsh climates the last 50 thousand years. They did it for 200 thousand years! They were
VERY adaptive and innovative.
They also lived in groups of 12 or less. This implies they interchanged partners for reproduction with other small groups. Perhaps they had a sense of
family and they stayed in extended family units until they started their own, like modern day humans.
They cared for their injured. They usually suffered multiple fractures and broken bones when they were in "hunting" mode as glacial periods advanced
and would FIGHT with their prey head on. Stabbing at it up close and personal.
They would get injured allot. So the others would care and feed the injured while they healed and during old age.
That is huge. It implies a societal structure with roles in which those not producing COULD be afforded care and food. It also makes them sentimental
beings implying altruistic thought and emotions. Perhaps even tradition and teaching in keeping the old alive as long as possible and in their groups
There has even been evidence of amputations of severe injuries! We used to say they were cannibals and that they would butcher each other, but this
was probably attempts to correct broken bones and other such severe injuries. They probably just performed crude surgery to fix these injuries since
they did have places they would intelligently divide up successful hunts and butcher the animal in precise ways and portions. There is no reason they
would cut a guys arm off for example and not eat the rest of him, butchering his body the same way they would prey in their hunting tradition.
As far as high tech stuff no....BUT I want you to think about what you would do if you found a 200 old hammer...rusted chunk of crap. Would you keep
it? Use it?
If you found something shiny and nice you would sell it off, and if it was incredible the best price would be paid by the leader or government of your
area. Possibly you would gift it to the king or shaman for his grace.
That object, shiny technological thing would end up melted down when that area is conquered or raided for its base elements.
Also the 30th generation of neanderthals that never grew up with the technology we would be talking about would not even know the function of it
anymore or need it so they may be as eager to have it decorate a cave or sacred burial chamber of their founders as we would take a sword and bury it
with a warrior or perhaps a terracotta army full of chariots and other marvels with a ruler like that one in China....or the pharaohs belongings with
him for the after life....
why would you keep a pen? think about it. Why would you keep an old VHS tape? or a cassette player?
Would you store those things away for posterity?
So why would a civilization keep its nick-nacks and everyday items preserved for us to find? If you were in survival mode, would you keep your Iphone
as is, or would you break it for the glass so you could cut meat? or would you keep a sacred screw driver or use it to pick ice until it broke?
There MAY be somethings fossilized in sediments we have not even thought to dig to find evidence of past civilizations since we think Life could not
have existed then. Also the earth´s crust is constantly renewing itself so everything eventually turns to magma.
Neanderthal fossils suggest that they must have endured a lot of pain. “When you look at adult Neanderthal fossils, particularly the bones of
the arms and skull, you see [evidence of] fractures,” says Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at WashingtonUniversity in St. Louis. “I’ve yet to
see an adult Neanderthal skeleton that doesn’t have at least one fracture, and in adults in their 30s, it’s common to see multiple healed
fractures.” (That they suffered so many broken bones suggests they hunted large animals up close, probably stabbing prey with heavy spears—a risky
tactic.) In addition, fossil evidence indicates that Neanderthals suffered from a wide range of ailments, including pneumonia and malnourishment.
Still, they persevered, in some cases living to the ripe old age of 45 or so.
Perhaps surprisingly, Neanderthals must also have been caring: to survive disabling injury or illness requires the help of fellow clan members,
paleoanthropologists say. A telling example came from an Iraqi cave known as Shanidar, 250 miles north of Baghdad, near the border with Turkey and
Iran. There, archaeologist Ralph Solecki discovered nine nearly complete Neanderthal skeletons in the late 1950s. One belonged to a 40- to 45-year-old
male with several major fractures. Ablow to the left side of his head had crushed an eye socket and almost certainly blinded him.
The bones of his right shoulder and upper arm appeared shriveled, most likely the result of a trauma that led to the amputation of his right
His right foot and lower right leg had also been broken while he was alive. Abnormal wear in his right knee, ankle and foot shows that he suffered
from injury-induced arthritis that would have made walking painful, if not impossible. Researchers don’t know how he was injured but believe that he
could not have survived long without a hand from his fellow man.
The typical Neanderthal tool kit contained a variety of implements, including large spear points and knives that would have been hafted, or set in
wooden handles. Other tools were suitable for cutting meat, cracking open bones (to get at fatrich marrow) or scraping hides (useful for clothing,
blankets or shelter). Yet other stone tools were used for woodworking; among the very few wooden artifacts associated with Neanderthal sites are
objects that resemble spears, plates and pegs.
I take a palm-size, D-shaped flint out of a bag. Its surface is scarred as though by chipping, and the flat side has a thin edge. I readily imagine I
could scrape a hide with it or whittle a stick. The piece, Maureille says, is about 60,000 years old. “As you can see from the number of lithics
we’ve found,” he adds, referring to the crates piling up in his office, “Neanderthals were prolific and accomplished toolmakers.”
Most researchers agree that Neanderthals were skilled hunters and craftsmen who made tools, used fire, buried their dead (at least on occasion), cared
for their sick and injured and even had a few symbolic notions. Likewise, most researchers believe that Neanderthals probably had some facility for
language, at least as we usually think of it.
It’s not far-fetched to think that language skills developed when Neanderthal groups mingled and exchanged mates; such interactions may have been
necessary for survival, some researchers speculate, because Neanderthal groups were too small to sustain the species. “You need to have a breeding
population of at least 250 adults, so some kind of exchange had to take place,” says archaeologist Ofer Bar-Yosef of Harvard University. “We see
this type of behavior in all hunter-gatherer cultures, which is essentially what Neanderthals had.”
Riel-Salvatore identified projectile points, ochre, bone tools, ornaments and possible evidence of fishing and small game hunting at Uluzzian
archeological sites throughout southern Italy. Such innovations are not traditionally associated with Neanderthals, strongly suggesting that they
evolved independently, possibly due to dramatic changes in climate. More importantly, they emerged in an area geographically separated from modern
"My conclusion is that if the Uluzzian is a Neanderthal culture it suggests that contacts with modern humans are not necessary to explain the origin
of this new behavior. This stands in contrast to the ideas of the past 50 years that Neanderthals had to be acculturated to humans to come up with
this technology," he said. "When we show Neanderthals could innovate on their own it casts them in a new light. It `humanizes' them if you
over the past couple decades hints that Neanderthals were savvier than previously thought have surfaced, however. Pigment stains on shells from
Spain suggest they painted, pierced animal teeth from France are by all appearances Neanderthal pendants. The list goes on. Yet in all of these cases
skeptics have cautioned that the evidence is scant and does not establish that such sophistication was an integral part of the Neanderthal gestalt.
The cutmarked bones from Gibraltar as well as bird remains from other sites could force them to rethink that view. In a paper published September 17
in PLOS ONE, paleontologist Clive Finlayson of the Gibraltar Museum, Rosell, a zooarchaeologist at Rovira I Virgili University in Tarragona, Spain,
and their colleagues report on their analyses of animal remains from 1699 fossil sites in Eurasia and north Africa spanning the Pleistocene epoch.
Their results show that Neanderthals across western Eurasia were strongly associated with corvids (ravens and the like) and raptors (vultures and
their relatives) — more so than were the anatomically modern humans who succeeded them.
The Neanderthals seem unlikely to have hunted these birds for food. People today do not eat corvids or raptors. Moreover, if the Neanderthals did hunt
the birds for food, one would expect to see signs of butchery on those bones linked to fleshy parts of the bird, such as the breastbone. Yet the
team’s study of the bird bones from the Gibraltar sites found the cutmarks on wing bones, which have little meat — a sign that the Neanderthals
targeted the birds for their feathers rather than their meat.
Here is an excellent resource and similar theory to mine. The writer fails to make a connection of neanderthals to the biblical nephilim as he
insisted IMO. HE did however provide an excellent break down of neanderthals. He did not really explain how the nephilim would have been neanderthals
except for saying that they were a hybrid species and so neanderthals MIGHT be one as well.
The evidence does not support such an idea since they were in fact capable of reproduction unlike other hybrids like mules and such. I dont think he
is entirely wrong though. I make a similar case for primitive forms of man not being entirely and uniformly primitive and in fact being mentioned in
the stories our cultures have come to credit with having human characters but MAY be much older and about proto man. That these stories being passed
down from them along with our skills and traditions which we inherited from them directly by interbreeding and cultural diffusion into our species or
simply by cultural exchange.
A speculative research paper examining current evidence available on Neanderthal man with comparison to references in early manuscripts of the
Nephilim an ancient race of half-breed humans. The argument is presented that the scientific facts verify that the Neanderthal were in fact one and
the same as the ancient warrior race the Nephilim. It is here proposed that an examination of the evidence and facts currently available on
Neanderthal man reveal that they could well have been a race of half-breed humans referred to in some of the earliest manuscripts found as the
edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)