reply to post by nenothtu
Yes your last paragraph put it quite well. Star.
To me, it;s a merger of sorts of both. But I tend to view it all as the difference between linear thinking, and exponential thinking.
Allow me to explain.
Two species can be equally intelligent, but think differently. Hell, this even allows for one species to be more intelligent, but slower at getting to
a level of advancement than less intelligent species. It's strange, but the idea is in the data.
Basicially, Humans show up about 50,000 years ago, and then all of the sudden there's an exponeential explosion, and literally, 20,000, 10,000, 5,000,
2,500, etc etc years, something major happens.
So what I see is more or less, many intelligent humans, perhaps as intelligent as us, across the globe for hundreds of thousands of years, but they
did not have exponenetial thinking. Man did, and in our conquest of the globe, I suspect we gobbled up anything compatible.
Of course, being the scientific minded person, the only way to know for sure that those traits from neanderthals and others that are in man are from
crossbreeding, is that we would first have to see if the traits are in the common ancestor. I've not really seen this done so far, so I'd be happy to
have data on it from you if you have it.
That's mainly the reason why I view the out of Africa theory as correct. because mankind seems to have simutaneously reached this apex of exponential
thought within a few thousand years across the globe, after having been a linearly thinking creature for many eons.
BTW, this idea between exponential and linear thought has far reaching consequences if true. It means technically, aliens could be less intelligent
than us. but more stable than us as a species. It means that we may meet something more intelligent than us one day, but thinks linearly, and thus
still in the cave when we find them. Interesting thought.
edit on 27-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)