The Well-Tailored Neanderthal; Or, They Walk Among Us!

The late Pete Younger

Venerable and Missed
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
5,887
Likes
141
Points
129
Mythopoeika said:
Is challenging assumptions the same as dismissing them? I think this is more a case of challenging scientific assumptions.
Assumptions such as the out of Africa theory? maybe they were wrong about that too.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Is challenging assumptions the same as dismissing them? I think this is more a case of challenging scientific assumptions.
You’re right of course otherwise, and there’s probably no better example of this than the history of the interpretation of Neandertal remains, otherwise we’d still be stuck with some pretty weak19th century ideas about them. In fact the sort of ideas this clown seems to want to return to. The likelihood is though that legitimate challenges are going to come from those who’ve worked for years to gain an understanding of what it is they’re talking about, rather than the writer director of ‘Red heads’.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105230/

Aside from that there’s absolutely no archaeological evidence for any of this. Yes there’s evidence for Neandertals having de fleshed their own dead, but not ours, also there’s evidence to suggest that we did the same. Of course it’s possible to suggest that it was actually us that did the Neandertal de fleshing, or contra wise but as so far as it seems equally distributed I don’t think there’s any reason to.

To deal directly with your initial post; I’m not sure about the first and second point you raise as to be honest I find his wok very difficult to read for no particular reward.

As to your third point; there isn’t a similarity between the profile of the Neandertal skull with those of apes. Look here at a chimp, neandertal, gorilla and modern human.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... 9U-ahqoaHw

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... ygL2OLsxzx

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... oWJDKHM25g

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... P9DKxT57zQ

It’s clear that the two human skulls have got far more in common with each other than they with either of the apes. There’s also the question of the nasal bone. Here in yellow;

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... QI5Kv6gtzR

Vendramini says;

The shortcomings are evident when you note that the skeletal features
of chimpanzee and human noses are virtually identical (they’re both simply
cavities in the skull) and yet we have protruding noses and chimps have
flat noses. When it comes to guessing what kind of noses Neanderthals had, most scientists simply assume they would have had protrudng noses like ours


http://www.themandus.org/ebook_chapter_8.PDF

As anyone can see though the nasal bone is clearly very pronounced in both of the humans, and reduced in both of the apes. In fact in the neandertal it’s particularly pronounced. There’s also a basic biomechanical reason why the neandertal couldn’t have had flat noses. One of the functions of the nose is to warm air before it enters the lungs, particularly important in this case as they lived in a cold climate. Otherwise their core temperature would have been constantly and severely compromised. The reality is what you’d expect to find is in fact what you do find, evidence of a particularly pronounced nose.

As to his putting the neandertal skull into a chimp’s profile, quite clearly it doesn’t fit.

Lastly we do have more than their bones we have their genome, and we have archaeological remains. Neandertals are so closely related to us that it’s proposed that we’re in fact two sub divisions of the same species.
There’s a lot of more plausible, and in my opinion both more sympathetic and realistic evidence, of a continuum of human progress rather than this pretty reductive and rather crass hypothesis.


Objectively while there is nothing to recommend Vendrammi’s work, weighed against the amount of legitimate and considered work to its contrary there’s certainly a lot to condemn it.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Sorry if that sounds a bit pompous, I reads like that because I find it hard to phrase things when I'm plastered.
 

titch

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
3,187
Likes
3,545
Points
169
And if you can make that reply while drunk that shows why we are the top dogs! :D
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Not over keen myself, I do find it a bit bland. Used to drink it regularly as the only alternative was either Worthington, or similar horror, or lager. These days though we've seen the proliferation of micro beer breweries round here, more unpredictable but much more tasty.

In fact the only sure fire way to stay afloat these days seems to be a free house.
 

Zilch5

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,564
Likes
33
Points
54
Neanderthals smart enough to copy humans

Radiocarbon dates hint that human sister species was more sophisticated than previously thought.


Fossils and artefacts pulled from the Grotte du Renne cave in central France present anthropologists with a Pleistocene puzzle. Strewn among the remains of prehistoric mammals are the bones of Neanderthals, along with bladelets, bone points and body ornaments belonging to what archaeologists call the Châtelperronian culture. Such complex artefacts are often attributed to modern humans, but a new report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that Neanderthals created the objects in imitation of their Homo sapiens neighbors1.

How the Grotte du Renne deposit formed has important implications for how we view our extinct sister species. If Neanderthals left the assemblage, then they were capable of a degree of symbolic behaviour thought to be unique to humans.
More at: http://www.nature.com/news/neanderthals ... ns-1.11673
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
12,023
Likes
153
Points
114
Interesting stuff. Neanderthal gene fragments passed through the female line.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/29/fifth-neanderthals-genetic-code-lives-on-humans

Fifth of Neanderthals' genetic code lives on in modern humans

Traces are lasting legacy of sexual encounters between our direct ancestors and Neanderthals from 65,000 years ago

theguardian.com, Ian Sample, science correspondent. 29 January 2014


The last of the Neanderthals may have died out tens of thousands of years ago, but large stretches of their genetic code live on in people today.

Though many of us can claim only a handful of Neanderthal genes, when added together, the human population carries more than a fifth of the archaic human's DNA, researchers found.

The finding means that scientists can study about 20% of the Neanderthal genome without having to prise the genetic material from fragile and ancient fossils.

The Neanderthal traces in our genetic makeup are the lasting legacy of sexual encounters between our direct ancestors and the Neanderthals they met when they walked out of Africa and into Eurasia about 65,000 years ago.

The populations of both groups were likely so small that interbreeding was a rare event, but the benefits of some Neanderthal genes were so great that they spread through the population and linger on in modern non-Africans today.

Benjamin Vernot and Joshua Akey at the University of Washington in Seattle sequenced the genomes of more than 600 people from Europe and eastern Asia. They then used a computer analysis to find gene variants that bore all the hallmarks of having come from Neanderthals.

To see whether the technique worked, they checked the genes against the official Neanderthal genome, which was sequenced from fossil remnants in 2010 by researchers in Germany.

The researchers found that while most non-Africans carried 1 to 3% Neanderthal DNA, the total amount in modern humans reached about 20%. "Although Neanderthals are extinct, there's still a lot of genetic information about them floating around, in our own genomes. It's not necessarily useful in that it will cure cancer, but it helps us to learn about our history," Vernot told the Guardian. Details of the study are reported in Science.

The researchers now believe that even deeper mining of modern genomes could help to find genetic traces of other archaic humans.

In a separate study published in Nature, David Reich at Harvard University looked for Neanderthal genes in the DNA of more than 1,000 living people. He found that the Neanderthals left a mark in distinct regions of the modern human genome, but in others left no trace at all.

Many of the Neanderthal genes that live on in people today are involved in making keratin, a protein used in skin, hair and nails. Reich speculates that modern humans may have picked up Neanderthal genes that were better suited to the cold environment, perhaps because they produced more or thicker hair, or tougher skin.

More striking was that humans are missing Neanderthal DNA from many other regions of their genomes, which suggests that evolution steadily stripped the archaic DNA out until it vanished all together.

Reich found that hardly any Neanderthal genes were expressed in modern men's testes, and that the X chromosome was almost completely devoid of Neanderthal DNA. That would happen if males with Neanderthal and modern human parents were infertile, because the males would never get to pass on their single Neanderthal X chromosome.

"When Neanderthals and modern humans interbred they were actually at the edge of biological compatibility. They did interbreed, and Neanderthals left an important biological trace in modern humans, but nevertheless, the population had to sort out some problems afterwards, because certain Neanderthal variants led to reduced male fertility," said Reich. The finding suggests that most Neanderthal DNA found in humans today was passed down from females.

"Anything related to maleness in the Neanderthal has been purged from our genomes," said Chris Stringer, head of human origins at the Natural History Museum in London. "Neanderthal DNA has come down to us today, but that transmission was mainly through the female line, because the males would have been significantly less fertile, and possibly even sterile."
 

The late Pete Younger

Venerable and Missed
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
5,887
Likes
141
Points
129
It's a pity they didn't win the the dominance race, the world would probably be a better place albeit a few hundred years behind technologically speaking.
 

Kondoru

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
5,586
Likes
344
Points
164
Yes, subcutaneous fat would be fashionable.

Along with fur coats and skiing.

And people would nod their heads in agreement when you say `Im not going there, its too hot.`
 

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
28,165
Likes
13,134
Points
284
We'd all have runny noses though, so shares in tissues would go through the roof.
 

rynner2

Great Old One
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,243
Likes
8,977
Points
284
Oldest human faeces shows Neanderthals ate vegetables
By Jonathan Webb, Science reporter, BBC News

Analysis of the oldest reported trace of human faeces has added weight to the view that Neanderthals ate vegetables.
Found at a dig in Spain, the ancient excrement showed chemical traces of both meat and plant digestion.

An earlier view of these early humans as purely meat-eating has already been partially discredited by plant remains found in their caves and teeth.
The new paper, in the journal PLOS One, claims to offer the best support to date for an omnivorous diet.
Poo is "the perfect evidence," said Ms Ainara Sistiaga, a PhD student at the University of La Laguna on the Canary Islands, and the study's first author, "because you're sure it was consumed".


Ms Sistiaga and her colleagues collected a number of samples from the remnants of a 50,000-year-old campfire in the El Salt dig site, a known Neanderthal habitation near Alicante on Spain's Mediterranean coast.
A year later, the samples were analysed in a lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where Ms Sistiaga is a visiting researcher.

The team used a technique called gas chromatography to separate the chemicals bound up in the ancient samples. This was combined with mass spectrometry to figure out which molecules were present and in what quantities.
Importantly, the relative concentration of an ester called coprostanol - used to detect human sewage - suggested that several samples were in fact traces of fossilised faeces.

The faecal matter came from the very top layer of the fire remains. Ms Sistiaga explained this probably means it was left behind after the fire was extinguished, perhaps on the periphery of another nearby campfire.
"The fire was not active at the moment of the deposit - it makes sense," she said with a chuckle.

In thin sections of soil from exactly the same area, the team also identified small "coprolites" - whole pieces of fossilised poo - which showed characteristics of human faeces, including their physical structure and a high phosphate content which makes them glow under blue light.

Dated at about 50,000 years old, based on the layer in which it was found, this is the oldest human excrement ever identified. Ms Sistiaga said her samples easily pre-date other fossilised faeces, belonging to modern humans (Homo sapiens) and found in Egyptian mummies and ancient Greek latrines.

The key finding, however, came from the chemical make-up of the miniscule traces of faeces in the campfire ashes. All these samples were dominated by products of meat digestion, but one in particular showed significant amounts of plant-derived esters as well.

So although the Neanderthal's predominant food source was meat, Ms Sistiaga explained that the chemistry of her sample suggested a "significant intake of plants".

etc...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27981702
 

blessmycottonsocks

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
3,367
Likes
4,989
Points
154
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Not sure what Danny Vendramini's agenda is, but his reconstruction of the Neanderthals and his apex predator theories strike me as very far fetched and have been rejected by most anthropologists.

I mean, which do you find more credible as a 40,000 year old ancestor:


neander1.jpeg

or

neander2.jpg


(or indeed go on a date with?)

The flat gorilla-like nose in Vendramini's reconstruction is highly implausible, given the nose's function in colder climates of warming inhaled air. No primates have slitted pupils. The dark skin colour is totally wrong for northern Europe as it would be conducive to heat loss, frostbite and vitamin D deficiency. Evidence exists for Neanderthal clothing, so a thick pelt of fur seems improbable. Finally, the vicious sneer is a cheap addition merely to add weight to an otherwise discredited thesis.
 

Frideswide

Fortea Morgana :) PeteByrdie certificated Princess
Staff member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
10,300
Likes
10,787
Points
284
Location
An Eochair
The flat gorilla-like nose in Vendramini's reconstruction is highly implausible, given the nose's function in colder climates of warming inhaled air. No primates have slitted pupils. The dark skin colour is totally wrong for northern Europe as it would be conducive to heat loss, frostbite and vitamin D deficiency. Evidence exists for Neanderthal clothing, so a thick pelt of fur seems improbable. Finally, the vicious sneer is a cheap addition merely to add weight to an otherwise discredited thesis.
*applause*
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
The flat gorilla-like nose in Vendramini's reconstruction is highly implausible, given the nose's function in colder climates of warming inhaled air.
Evidence exists for Neanderthal clothing, so a thick pelt of fur seems improbable
Perhaps the constant flow of un warmed air through their tiny noses is why they had to wear clothing over their thick pelts. And the one's shown in the photos, without clothes, are just hot. Possibly because they've been chasing our ancestors around. Or maybe they lacked the technology to make quiet, stealthy, clothing (Such as the striped jumper favoured by burglars the world over), so stripped off to hunt. This maybe why we, modern humans, find rustling noises irritating. It may be race memory. Or, over sensitivity to such noises may have been a 'selected for' survival trait.

Also, I've heard that surviving Neandertals may be responsible for sasquatch sightings.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
3,367
Likes
4,989
Points
154
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Thanks!
Not sure why I've spent so much time watching Vendramini's video and reading extracts from his books, as it's clearly utter bunkum. He even claims the profile of the Neanderthal skull matches that of a chimp almost perfectly.
Again that simply does not stand up to even cursory scrutiny.

A typical Neanderthal skull is not that very different from some modern human skulls - just Google for Pintubi skull or Pintubi pics and you'll see what I mean. Had the Pintubi skull been found in 40,000 year old strata in Northern Europe it would have been classed as classic Neanderthal. Problem is, it belonged to someone who lived less than two centuries ago in New South Wales, Australia!
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
It's impossible to know where to start with this guy. Everything goes against what he says. But it appeals to some. I'm just sorry that anyone who does buy into this, is going to miss out.

Nature is far more interesting and imaginative, than he is.

Actually, and I think I'm the first to say this in this context, maybe sasquatch aren't quite as tall as they seem. But their height is distorted in the witnesses' eyes because of heat inversion. At least, that's the only plausible explanation I can think of off the top of my head.
 
Top