It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Neanderthals were more advanced than us. THEY were one of the megalithic cultures of the remote past

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 03:35 AM
I wanted to address the subject mentioned before about the vocal tracts of Neanderthals not being like ours and so not being able to have complex language.

Three decades ago, the team of Prof Philip Lieberman, of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, inferred that Neanderthal speech did not have the subtlety of modern human speech.
Some researchers attacked this finding, citing archaeological evidence of an oral culture and even errors in Prof Lieberman's original vocal tract reconstruction.

The linguist teamed with Prof McCarthy to simulate Neanderthal speech based on new reconstructions of the Neanderthal vocal tract, based on three 60,000-year old fossils from France.
"We are really saying that Neanderthals spoke, just a bit differently than we do," he says.

Neanderthals may well have had a more limited vocal repertoire than modern humans "but there are many modern languages that use only 20 per cent of the sounds that human speech could produce, so if the Neanderthal way of life required complex language, their brains could certainly have evolved to allow this.

Using methods of manufacture dating back more than a million years, he fashioned weapons, probably hunted in packs and buried his dead.

His big brain may have been an adaptation to language, says Prof Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St Louis.

"Ultimately what is important is not the anatomy of the mouth but the neuronal control of it."

Last year, researchers discovered that Neanderthals shared a version of a gene called FOXP2 with humans.
People missing a copy of FOXP2 suffer from language and speech disorders, and humans have a version of the gene that is different from other animals – including chimpanzees, our nearest relatives.

So I am not going to say that they sang opera, BUT that should not disqualify them from having a language of their own. They were genetically prepared for complex speech. They also have many signs of a complex society which would demand complex forms of language. Even today, citing the article, there are languages that only use 20% of our capable sound range. Neanderthals lacked the ability to make quantal vowels which are a significant part of our languages but percentage wise not a staggering portion of them. This being the supposed deficiency should then not really even factor in when determining if complex language had been developed by them. We should then explore WHAT TYPE of complex language could they have had since some MUST have existed based off archaeological finds.

Also, it has been documented, as I mentioned earlier of races of giants making "buzzing" sounds. it could be that earlier forms of man had a different syntax of language than our own which used less vowels than us. Their brains could have compensated for the mechanical lack of range we enjoy, AND still had very complex forms of language.

King Og of Bashan was the last survivor of the giant Rephaites.

the term " Rephaites" means buzzing, or those who make buzzing sounds....

The area of Moab at Ar, (the region East of the Jordan) before the time of Moses, was also considered the land of the Rephaites. Deuteronomy 2:18-21 refers to the fact that Ammonites called them "Zamzummim", which is related to the Hebrew word זמזם, which literally translates into "Buzzers", or "the people whose speech sounds like buzzing." In Arabic the word زمزم (zamzama) translates as "to rumble, roll (thunder); murmur". As per Deut 2:11, the Moabites referred to them as the Emim

edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 03:37 AM
I wanted to post a comment based on your title only, then held back for the read, this is brilliant and highly possible.

You op are an interesting read for sure, am going to check out the other thread now.

Wanted to add further that their counterparts to today who evolved themselves off world are a smaller version but just as clever, strong and (I really want to say) gentlemanly x to me that is extremely important.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 03:41 AM

Sorry, I'm not touching that.

I'll read the rest of this thread instead

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 03:43 AM

Originally posted by CrimsonMoon
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

Maybe they had bigger brains and were a lot stronger. So what?

Our women are WAY better looking than theirs

Goodness NO you dient!!!!

I'm leaving this thread all together I don't trust myself.

chow, spelit how you likeit

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:22 AM
reply to post by generik

so I wanted to sit with your post and reply with something since you really hit home to what I was reffering to about ancient people knwoing about other races of men. Sometimes they may have been known as "nations" or "kingdoms" of men. I think this is huge. Why not say just nations? why nations of MEN, connotating a sort of difference from the bible characters and these other nations of men.

Seven nations — There were ten in Genesis 15:19-21. But this being some hundreds of years after, it is not strange if three of them were either destroyed by foreign or domestick wars, or by cohabitation and marriage united with, and swallowed up in the rest.

Genesis 15:19-21
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
19 the Kenite and the Kenizzite and the Kadmonite 20 and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Rephaim 21 and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Girga#e and the Jebusite.”

Kenizzite Perizzite, just saying those names makes your tongue *buzz....

And as you mentioned they were not just militarily "strong", mighty, they were stronger then them physically. Rephaims were giants, like many of the other "nations" of men in the bible..This reference to size may imply simply a reference to physical strength as well. "they are as strong as giants", implying they are somehow related.

1 " And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech."
Every human on the earth at this time spoke the same language. All people shared the same skin color, and there was no division among men by race (color) or language.

2 " And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there."

3 " And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter."
This again reaffirms the idea that men could build great structures from the very beginning of time.

So I suggest that the division came MUCH later in time after the deluge and that many biblical accounts, like the building of the tower of babel for example happened BEFORE it, when a global culture similar in speech and genetic make up dominated the world. Later, out of necessity cross breading happened and the divisions multiplied amongst this culture. Primarily their mixing their blood lines with the "savage" humans, (us) which they taught many things necessary for complex society. Prometheus stealing the fire of the gods, just to name one instance of mythology alluding to this fact. There is no short supply of cultures across the world being taught by the "gods" what THEY knew. This sounds like an advanced culture being diffused into another more primitive culture to me.

Something else to consider is that we should not apply our modern definition of "race" to these peoples.
Imagine if every RACE as we knew it was in a set geographical location and was genetically different. They would be identified by their feudal loyalty, hence the NATION of such and such. It would not take into account that they were a separate set of people, or actual separate species of men. That much would be implied by it being common knowledge.

edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:23 AM
They were so great indeed that we the small, weak and stupid human being killed them off.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:35 AM
reply to post by zonetripper2065

we didnt kill them off..

We lost most of our population during the last ice age. We were reduced to a few thousand. That could be luck on our part...right place and time...

these things happen in nature....entire species die off in a few years or abruptly so in a few moments regardless of intelligence or strength...

edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:38 AM

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
Just curious, where did you get your information? By all physical evidence, Neanderthals had a smaller brain cavity thus a smaller brain. They died out before the time of the megalithic constructions we have found "to this point in time". Not to say they were not builders, we know they were artists (cave paintings).

There is still debate and dispute as to whether modern man carries Neanderthal genes. It is possible that the two species intermingled and bred but there is something evidence of that. Cro-magnon's were the superior species and that is a huge part of why the neanderthal died out. If we look at all the species on a timeline, there were actually bigger and stronger versions...Homo Heilderbergensis for instance...that was one big and tough mofo...but he did not have the brain power to overcome so he died out.

If we are going to agree with natural selection, the most advanced and evolved species remains...and that would be Homo Sapien sapien (kinda stupid, I know). They say our next step of evolution will be homo superior but I don't see that happening. Natural selection has been circumvented by technology. We no longer adapt to our environment, we adapt the environment to suit us. That is actually pretty damned amazing.

I sometimes wish we would allow natural selection to take place. I wish we would let the stupid people kill themselves off and remove them from the gene pool. We need to start a campaign to go into every public restroom and remove the sticker from the continuous feed cloth hand towels that reads "do not hang from towel by neck"...I say we let the stupid people do that if they so choose to do so...gotta get rid of stupid somehow.


Here is a very slick little website from the Smithsonian. I find it very useful and hope you all enjoy it as well.

ETA second comment...

At this point in time (though the site is less than 10% excavated) Gobekli-Tepe is 12,000 years old...which still makes it the oldest megalithic structures we have discovered to this point. Not to say as they unearth more the timeline will be pushed back...but there is nothing at this point reaching back 20 to 30 thousand years....that is false info.

Human timeline
edit on 1/21/2013 by Jeremiah65 because: added link

edit on 1/21/2013 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)

H. heidelbergensis had a larger brain-case — with a typical cranial volume of 1100–1400 cm³ overlapping the 1350 cm³ average of modern humans — and had more advanced tools and behavior, it has been given a separate species classification. Male heidelbergensis averaged about 5 ft 9 in (1.75 m) tall and 136 lb (62 kg). Females averaged 5 ft 2 in (1.57 m) and 112 lb (51 kg).

This is on Wiki, Heidelbergensis.


1,200–1,900 cm3 (73–116 cu in) skull capacity
Both had larger skull capacity than modern humans, and yet we are the prevalent species. I'm not sure brain capacity is the soul reason for either species extinction. We like to think of ourselves as intelligent, resilient, and capable of overcoming any obstacle, what difference does this capacity give us that they wouldn't have had themselves.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:40 AM
reply to post by Hijinx

we are just here. That could be happen-stance that we survived and they didnt....

and the story suggests that is what happened. We found entire cities and structures in place in south america and just moved in....possibly else where as well. We then interbred with what ever survived.
edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:50 AM

Originally posted by Kandinsky
They died out some 40kya and megaliths didn't appear until 34 thousand years later....30 if we include Gobekli Tepe.

That's the old info most mainstream discovery / research, it gets outdated with new discoveries.

The date for the Neanderthal 'demise' has been brought closer by discoveries going on in Croatia, to 20kya - 25kya.

In reality, 'pure blood' Neanderthals didn't really die out as such, with increasing evidence being found that points to them simply amalgamating their DNA with our branch of the family, over the course of many thousands of years.

Interbreeding with our distant ancestors' branch of the species produced what we call humanity today, although like we're finding in modern genetics, there are occasional 'throwbacks' or recessive traits that appear in people today.

Some even speculate that isolated and remote pockets of mostly Neanderthal type beings (probably with a % of 'our' DNA) are responsible for Bigfoot legends and sightings.

Either way, it's no speculation that we all have a small % of Neanderthal DNA today, so there's the proof for widespread social contact between us during our development.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 05:05 AM
also worth mentioning , and going back to what I said earlier about Einsteins brain....

Scientists are currently interested in the possibility that physical differences in brain structure could determine different abilities. One part of the operculum called Broca's area plays an important role in speech production. To compensate, the inferior parietal lobe was 15 percent wider than normal. The inferior parietal region is responsible for mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement.

so with 15 larger parietal lobes we get an Einstein, who curiously had a smaller language center.....kind of like the neanderthal having less developed vocal chords...from OUR point of view

I am not going to say that I think they might have had other forms of communication, but maybe vibrating flesh and bone are not the end all be all forms of communication between sentient beings....maybe an advanced brain has other mediums to work with......wink wink....

edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 05:40 AM
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

Could it be possible that we survived an extinction level event that killed off the Neanderthal population which was the more advanced form of sentient life on earth at the time? It is entirely possible for a biological threat to kill off our entire species and leave only primates to take our place
They were capable of art, tool making, probably had language and also music. Everything we attribute to modern humans may have come from them. OR they may have shared with us in an act of conformity.
Also, it has been documented, as I mentioned earlier of races of giants making "buzzing" sounds. it could be that earlier forms of man had a different syntax of language than our own which used less vowels than us. Their brains could have compensated for the mechanical lack of range we enjoy, AND still had very complex forms of language. 

Curse in the law:
All thy trees and fruit of thy land shall the locust consume. Deuteronomy 28:42

Hebrew tslatsal: cymbal
Original Word: צְלָצַל
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Short Definition: cymbal
I. [צִלְצָל] noun [masculine] :whirring, buzzing
צֶלְצְלִים noun masculine plural :musical instrument of percussion, cymbals (WITH CLASHING SOUND

Paul, describing speaking in tongues:

"IF I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal." 1 Corinthians 13:1

What are tongues?

"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not". 1 Corinthians 14:22

The Holy Spirit can speak through the speaking of tongues.....but, if charity is not present, it is as those "buzzing giants". Charity, often translated as love, is

Charity is patient, charity is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Charity does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

It is way more than what man defines as "love" today. Today man is actively redefining love based on feelings and senses...if it feels right it must be good and love, if it tolerates good and evil it must be "good". This is erroneous because evil becomes redefined as good. As speaking in tongues rampages through Pentecostal and charismatic churches, mistaken for the Holy Spirit, what we are witnessing is just another form of mind emptying eastern meditation that is sweeping the rest of the nations. 

You wrote

They were capable of art, tool making, probably had language and also music. Everything we attribute to modern humans may have come from them. OR they may have shared with us in an act of conformity.

1 + 1 = 2
The last civilisation was destroyed in the flood because they were continually doing evil. Today, the love of evil and wickedness  is increasing along with those things you mention. The "buzzing" is increasing. Music today is often described as 'hypnotic'....speaking images abound which transfix us....intelligence and knowledge is valued as the be and end all of man, to the extent that some replies to your post about wiping out the "stupid" amongst us should be seen as symptomatic of cold-heartedness and ruthlessness. Buzzing/clanging symbols with lack of charity as defined by God....those "buzzing Rephaites" are already back in droves....this is what was destroyed in the who were proud, arrogant, puffed up with knowledge, easily angered, untrustworthy, lovers of wickedness, cold-hearted...just as those posters exhibited ...they view mankind's value based on perceived "intelligence". God considers these posters as FOOLS for exalting human intelligence and knowledge, jam packed with outright lies, over and above the truths and wisdom of God. They exhibit the traits of Nazism and communist thinking, beast like behaviour not befitting a creation of God nor reflective of their Creator.

I know that you look to some scripture, but turn your attention towards your Creator. He has all of this to share with you, and it will bring you to His truth. The fact that Godless scientists want to produce a Neanderthal should not surprise us....the fact that the President of Iran stepped up to the UN podium and declared that his 'Imam Mahdi' will come to open the gates of science and knowledge to revert the children of Adam back to their innate nature...should alarm you. The fact that pyramid symbology is everywhere today should tell you that man is descending into the condition of the Pre-flood world... It should lead you to humility and a recognition that in this world, lies are truths, and therefore you cannot discern between thoses lies and truths without the spirit of truth within you.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 06:13 AM
reply to post by WhoKnows100


well. star for effort man.

The thing is I am a little wise to the lie of benevolent brain washing. I am not implying that you are doing such or that you are offering that. I believe your intentions to be honest.


I will not deny my natural state, my human nature, so as to feel better for myself or allow others to get off easy for not at least trying to be better people.

I think we all have to come face to face with our REAL selves and confront our demons. We can not simply say we are the lowest form of life and it is all beyond and above us. No.

While I can agree with you that the perversion of the world as it stands will almost definitely contribute to any demise we might suffer, we can not simply undo civilization. Lets also not fool ourselves, THAT is what it would take to be perfect little love machines.

Perfect peace and harmony would only be achieved by withdrawing from the cities, turning everything off and returning to animal nature. No math, science, medicine, nothing. Not even written religion.

Just pure beings existing. Since that is an impossibility to even those that would propose it I suggest just being honest with yourself. Your true you usually does not lead you down the path of evil. Our natural tendency is to live. Simply live.

We kill out of anger, envy or strategy of selfish ends. We steal for the same reasons, and lie for those as well.

An animal knows what we call GOD instinctively. His actions are pure and not motivated by "evil".

I agree we are returning to the antediluvian world in a way. But that is inevitable. What we must do is learn to cut through the lies and pretenses of our conditioned state and learn to see our world and our selves with what to us are new eyes, but really are our REAL eyes.

I find scripture interesting and at times moving. BUT it is applied in a limiting fashion by its absoluteness which does not even allow for us to take into account centuries of mistranslations, deliberate butcherings, or errors like marginalia being excluded or included erroneously.

it is all a window. We are the door. Everything in the holy books is within us....

everything else is some one else´s tool, for good or bad as their heart decides....

edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 06:47 AM

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle

I have an idea... some overzealous neanderthal decided that they needed a slave race, so at their technological peak they genetically modified themselves to produce a series of workers "bees," aka homo erectus, which were segregated from society. Then some other overzealous neanderthal decided it wasn't "politically correct" to treat those poor homo erectus like thinking animals and developed a new world order platform that guilted all the other neanderthals into integration via multiculturalism. After this happened, during the "greed driven phase" where less than 1% of the neanderthals owned 75% of the world's wealth, the neanderthals poluted the planet through rampant production, consumerism and social programming. Eventually, their banking system collapsed after the other 99% of the neanderthals took up arms to eliminate the 1%. But it was too late and the consistent destruction of the environment by the 1% brought on an early ice-age which killed off the neanderthals, leaving only a couple of thousand homo erectus in the tropics, who were busy making frozen "Parquali Daquiries" and knock-off T-shirts for their masters to the north.

History repeats ;-)

Sounds about right.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

I have never tried to think in such a way. Interesting.
Some remains of their artifacts should, than, exist, somewhere?
Scripts, or material goods, maybe some high-tech? I am asking it seriousely, I am on this world from 1965, only...

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:50 PM

Originally posted by zonetripper2065
They were so great indeed that we the small, weak and stupid human being killed them off.

That's right, and now we can kill ourselves off with our own stupidity.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:52 PM
There are so many other ways to express communication besides speech. I wouldn't at all be surprised if they also used telepathic communication as well.

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:59 PM
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 until death.

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 forearm.

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 humans.

"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 will."

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 Nephilim.

edit on 22-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 02:31 PM
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

I completely agree. We repeatedly find out that modern man is not at all the "highly evolved" and "noble" animal we believe we are. Our ancestors (long long distant) probably came to the planet and left again many times over the history of the planet, if they created megalithic pre-history structures and societies it would be easy to assume they had achieved a different type of technological framework than anything like what we think early humans had.

Nice thought...

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 02:53 PM

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Kandinsky

But how sure can we be of those dates?

If your game is to question dates, then how do you know the dates for Neanderthals?

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
Up until, well i was going to say a decade ago but even now people deny the water erosion on the Egyptian structures suggesting a dense jungle environment like South America.

Given the boring fact that no such evidence exists suggesting anything like that, perhaps you should reword this as "Even today, people are completelty blank-slate ignorant about Egypt."

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
There are south American structures that are in Oral tradition described as having preexisted the cultures that we say built them.

Please point one out, rather than simply making dishonest claims.

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
What about the submerged structures like the one off Japan that we have yet to date?
The ones under water around Malta and great britain...ect.

There is no "stucture" off the coast of Yonaguni. In the Med. and surrounding areas, there are many. It's called subduction. So what?

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
We have to be conservative with our faith in our ability accurately date ancient structures, NOT with our open mindedness to theories of the possible dates being much farther back into antiquity.

We have to be open minded enough to recognize that both megalithic structures and Neanderthal works and remains have been dated using the exact, same methods, and intelligent enough to realize that this means you can't question the dates if they are both wrong the same way.


top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in