The Neanderthal--a comprehensive introduction to the fossil record

page: 4
62
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


How can Dinosaurs have been the most successful species?

And what's all of this about destruction? For every bad thing about humans, there is a good things alongside it.

If you hate your species so much, you might as well have been born as a monkey - maybe you'd like being experimented on for the next new drug and having little to no "rights"?




posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by HelenConway
 


It does not take one human to build an aeroplane, let alone invent it. Human invention is not only limited to one individual - the great thing about human progress is that it is a result of great collaboration.

And for every bad thing about humans, there is a good thing alongside it.

The fact of the matter is that, many do not realise that they are Homo Sapiens Sapiens and are in fact very intelligent - but lots of factors would encroach upon our higher powers for example, environmental, malnutrition, poor diet, passivity and whatnot. Moreover, the potential of every human is great but things always stifle it.


Oh really well only about 1 % of humanity is reponsible for about 90% of the inventions. That is true.
What have you invented ?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by HelenConway
 


How can Dinosaurs have been the most successful species?

And what's all of this about destruction? For every bad thing about humans, there is a good things alongside it.

If you hate your species so much, you might as well have been born as a monkey - maybe you'd like being experimented on for the next new drug and having little to no "rights"?


I was born an ape - so were you.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


I take pride in my humanity. I take pride that I am Homo Sapiens Sapiens. I take pride in what we have built and feel that we should advance faster and greater. I relish learning about discoveries and history and everything (even about past species of men). But if I were a monkey, could I sit quietly and read Nietzsche and ponder upon his writings? Could I recite Shakespeare and act out his plays? Could sit upon my chair and imagine myself travelling through space and time?

Many humans today cannot take time, or are inhibited, in exploring this great brain of ours. I do not take pride in my parentage - I take pride in my species, regardless of the "evil" that goes on and has gone on and will go on.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


And had the other 90% not existed, do you think a society would exist in order to facilitate the inventions of the 1%? Do you think that societies are built upon just a few people? Do you think the United States was built up by a handful of people? Do you think the British Empire was propped up by a handful of people? Who built the bridges? Constructed the roads? Built the houses? The ships? Who contributed to their building? Assisted inventors? Who got up every morning, went to work and worked hard and maintained the existence of society?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


Certainly a greatly superior ape. Again, I'd ask you to consider what types of things you do as a human and what, for example, a gorilla or a chimp does. Remember, this complex and large frontal lobe is especially what distinguishes us.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens
 


We're not talking about gorillas or chimps, are we? PLEASE, move on. You've stated your case and position. There is no reason for you to keep spamming my thread with your ideologies. We're here to discuss the fossil record.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


But European and Asians are not Neanderthal, you're Homo Sapiens Sapiens with a little Neanderthal DNA within alongside Homo Erectus DNA and others. How can it account for a more robust immune system - so you have a better immune system than say, Africans or Iranians? I think you might be on the wrong track there.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


But you and the other person keep mentioning "ape".



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


have you heard about cattedown man ? Discovered in Plymouth in the 1800s. it had the oldest skull in europe I believe - but no evidence of neanderthal has been discovered in Britain yet, yet we would have been attached to Spain and France in years gone by, where most of the discoveries occured.

The skull was destroyed or partially destroyed in the blitz I think - but the bone caves still exist but are hidden by the sea.. Although they have built an oil refinery on one of them !


www.devonkarst.org.uk...

[ sorry you will have to google link does not work.]
edit on 3-3-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


Nobody is saying that Homo Sapiens Sapiens was the sole intelligent creature - but he certainly is now.

I certainly agree that there were past species of men - paleontology and whatnot shows this. But the fact of the matter is that, who came out on top? We did. Homo Sapiens Sapiens.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


I genuinely didn't understand what that chap was saying.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by HelenConway
 


Certainly a greatly superior ape. Again, I'd ask you to consider what types of things you do as a human and what, for example, a gorilla or a chimp does. Remember, this complex and large frontal lobe is especially what distinguishes us.


Which was extant in Neanderthal as well. Nobody here is saying chimps and humans are equal in intelligence. We're saying that Neanderthal is so little different that it amounts to the same species. If you met a Neanderthal on the subway you might think him a trifle odd, but give him a shave and a haircut and he is well within human variation. There is no evidence that Neanderthal is any sense "dim witted." None at all. His projectile points were every bit as advanced as Cro Magnon. His rituals to bury the dead should make you think twice about his thinking skills.

Quite frankly I do not see any evidence of advanced knowledge in paleo-anthropology on your part. You seem to simply want to remain chauvinistic in your approach. Beyond Anthro 101 I doubt if you've studied the issue much. You're thinking represents the 19th century Great Chain of Being approach with Homo sapiens proudly sitting atop the heap. Most all anthropologists got off that train in the early 20th century.

One of the most interesting things to happen to anthropology in the last fifty years is the complete corroboration of DNA to the fossil record, which has also grown by leaps and bounds. To have these two completely disparate sciences verify each other is astounding and something we simply did not have fifty years ago. It turns out that the story of human evolution is much richer and more robust than we could possibly have imagined. Thanks, OP, for this thread. I'm sorry we have a couple of trolls who are trying to derail it.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


Look, I'm as much interested in all of these excellent matters as you are - and I am sure that many thousands of years ago, Homo Sapiens Sapiens was not the only intelligent human. However, I do maintain that, right now, Homo Sapiens Sapiens is the sole dominant and intelligent species.

The thing is, I just got the vibe that many here were belittling their own species and were glorifying the Neanderthals a bit - the fact of the matter is, as a human being (Homo Sapiens Sapiens), you have more in favour with your fellow humans, than a Neanderthal (who, BTW is extinct, apart from some trace DNA in some ethnic groups of Homo Sapiens Sapiens).



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I also never claimed that Neanderthals were dim-witted - science knows that to not be true now. That is simply an outdated stereotype.

But the fact of the matter is that, the Neanderthal was assimilated into Homo Sapiens Sapiens.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Wow. What an awesome thread. It's so informative and well put together, that, at first glance, one might be tempted by the assumption that it was drafted by a person possessing intelligence equal to that of a Neanderthal! Upon closer inspection, however, we can see that it is riddled with the hallmarks of homo sapien involvement...


Still a great thread... for a human, that is...



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by 3n19m470
 


I realise that you may be joking; but I do hope that you don't actually think that the Neanderthal was cleverer than Homo Sapiens Sapiens? I mean, sure he had some differing features, but although they possessed brains as large or larger than ours, the shapes of their fossilized skulls indicate that Homo Sapiens Sapiens has slightly larger frontal lobes. Physically, of course, the Neanderthal was superior to us. But brains....

Source:

Why Humans Prevailed over Neanderthals



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Just look around. It's very clear to me that the two species intermingled over the years. Just look around the planet and you'll see remnants of the Neanderthal gene everywhere, probably even in your neighborhood.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by 3n19m470
 


I realise that you may be joking; but I do hope that you don't actually think that the Neanderthal was cleverer than Homo Sapiens Sapiens? I mean, sure he had some differing features, but although they possessed brains as large or larger than ours, the shapes of their fossilized skulls indicate that Homo Sapiens Sapiens has slightly larger frontal lobes. Physically, of course, the Neanderthal was superior to us. But brains....

Source:

Why Humans Prevailed over Neanderthals


I think your right. Common sense ruled. That's why they find Neanderthal remnants closer to water holes and Homo sapiens remnants father away, often on high ground. Yes, the homo sapiens had to walk father for water but he wasn't being eaten by large animals coming to watering hole either...





new topics
top topics
 
62
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum