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

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
I must admit that I couldn't tell. So I right clicked. And neither are actual skulls. The one labelled Neandertal has been sculpted by someone called Steve Pinney, although I'm sure based on good reliable measurements. And the 'Aboriginal' skull appears to be a cast. I can't find anywhere that says where the original is.

One thing that worries me about the Aboriginal skull, is that I can't find any mention of it being discussed anywhere sound.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
3,337
Likes
4,909
Points
154
Location
Wessex and Mercia
I picked a cast of a neanderthal skull because otherwise the colouring would have given the age away. I also chose images with the two skulls displaying a roughly similar three-quarter profile. The skull on the left is from Australia, is known as the Pintubi or Pintupi skull and is around 200 years old, but demonstrates many archaic characteristics. Unfortunately such interesting topics seem to attract some nutters and get posted on dodgy web sites.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
blessmycottonsocks, I really want to thank you. Looking at the skulls I started looking around at what else the shops sold. I found this

http://www.skullsunlimited.com/record_variant.php?id=4391

I only hope they ship the UK.

Getting back to the main point though, I agree with what you're saying about just how close we are to them. I think I'd be inclined to say 'us' rather than 'them and us' as Danny Verdiamini puts it.

Funny how his initials so close to a well known medical acronym. It certainly suits his theory.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,304
Likes
2,705
Points
154
Nikolai Valuev himself looks like he could be from an earlier era, look at those brow ridges. Though probably it's some kind of pathology.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,304
Likes
2,705
Points
154
That pintubi skull is intriguing. If I had seen that in a glass case, I don't think I would have picked it as human.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Which is what you'd expect to see, given the ancient dates proposed for the Lake Mungo remains. As they'd belong to people who were far more generic than individuals among the modern populations. That is, if modern Aboriginal skulls do have uniquely notable derived changes. I haven't a clue.

I can't find anything reliable on line about any of this. Are there any pictures of the Mungo skulls, and aside from the genetics/dating studies, has any other modern work been carried out on them. And if so, how have those studies been received.

Does anyone know?
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Some sites claim Valuev has Tartar or Mongol ancestry and those ethnic groups do have Denisovan genes.
He's from St Petersburg, but as you say there is some suggestion that he's got some Tartar ancestry. Tartars are a western Asian group though. From the area which clusters in black.

The map is from here;http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(16)30247-0

But I got it from here; https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160328133514.htm

Obviously though, the Tartars are from an area which would historically have had plenty of Mongol DNA. And Mongolia is an area where Denisovan DNA is found. So yes, in that respect he might have some. But it should be remembered that the results that the map is based on, were taken from modern populations.

I'm on shaky ground with all of this to be honest. But that's how I read it.

As to the other question you put to Mungoman. Could you link to the information that makes you say that the Lake Mungo remains are more gracile than modern Aboriginals? I can't find anything. (I can't find anything definite about the PINTUBI-1 skull either)

I also can't find any consensus regarding the dates for the Lake Mungo remains. The estimates from the studies, and I could only find these on Wikipedia, seem to vary by about 40,000 years.
 
Last edited:

Mungoman

Mostly harmless...
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,393
Likes
3,811
Points
159
Location
In the Bush (Peak Hill, NSW)
The physical evidence of gracility indicated by the cranium can be found in photographs taken of the remains of Willandra Lakes Hominid III;

lm3 lateral.jpg lm3 posterior.jpg

Lateral. WLHIII ..................................... Posterior. WLHIII

There is some doubt on the aging of the remains, with different techniques indicating ages between 43,000 years and 60,000 years.

The evidence available is rather difficult to get hands on, for what reasons, they escape me.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,304
Likes
2,705
Points
154
Might it not be the same as with North America? The native people are worried it might be shown they are not the first inhabitants.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
I think that there's too little available on any of the skulls. There doesn't seem to be a formal description of the definite skull fragments, nor any a comparison between them and modern skull. The dates are not agreed on. And in fact the range given is huge. Neither does there appear to be a provenance for the cast skull. I think it's impossible to say much about them at all.

If there is any further work carried out though, and is accessible, I'd be very interested.
 
Last edited:

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,304
Likes
2,705
Points
154
Do we have any photos of skulls of modern day aborigines? I can't help but wonder if that pintubi skull is concrete evidence of living BHHs.
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
36,852
Likes
23,604
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
Do we have any photos of skulls of modern day aborigines? I can't help but wonder if that pintubi skull is concrete evidence of living BHHs.
Interestingly, it seems to be really difficult to find pictures of aborigine skulls.
It also seems to be politically incorrect to make an observation that the skull shape has many similarities with earlier versions of humanity.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
What are BHHs?

I think the issue is that photos, such as the one of the cast, do tend to end up on some pretty dodgy sites. And, are used by truly primitive humans to illustrate 'racial' differences. And not in a positive way. I've come across this while trying to find photos on line.

So, any real researcher, who'll need to get the trust and permission from the indigenous peoples in order to study them. Is unlikely to be willing to destroy their chances of doing that by publishing their material on-line. And seeing them picked apart on 'Stormfront'.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,304
Likes
2,705
Points
154
Sadly the field of comparative anatomy still suffers from the taint of how it was conducted in the early 20th century. It also seems to be liberal dogma to even claim there are no races. I read some interesting stuff on aboriginal anatomy in a book from the 60s but I haven't seen it mentioned elsewhere.

BHH is Big Hairy Hominids, isn't that the usual nomenclature?
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Yeah. It is. It's more than liberal dogma though, race is a human concept that's, as you say, got some very unsavoury implications. It's not just that though, I think the way modern thinking has gone is that in terms of hard science, it's a useless concept when dealing with such a genetically similar species. Within which the only fundamentally significant differences are transferable without needing to look beyond learned behaviour. Culture is a far better explanation and term.

As an aside, it's not just humans that this is restricted too. There's a wider debate about about over differentiation and classification across the board.

I must admit, that I didn't recognise BHH, I'd missed that. But, will be using it from now on.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
3,337
Likes
4,909
Points
154
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Must admit I wasn't familiar with the BHH term, but my agenda, if there is one beyond my natural curiosity, is not to disparage Australian aborigines (or indeed Nicolai Valuev) but to argue that we are all as close to Neanderthals as makes no difference. There is no "them and us". They were us. Just as today's aborigines, giant Russian boxers, pygmies, the Inuit, Nordics, Asians, Africans, Europeans, Amazonian natives and everyone else is us too.

A little selective breeding (stocky build of the Inuit, aboriginal brow ridges, receding chin of the English aristocracy, large Semitic nose, Celtic ginger hair etc.) could produce a very convincing Neo-Neanderthal within a few generations.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Must admit I wasn't familiar with the BHH term, but my agenda, if there is one beyond my natural curiosity, is not to disparage Australian aborigines (or indeed Nicolai Valuev) but to argue that we are all as close to Neanderthals as makes no difference. There is no "them and us". They were us. Just as today's aborigines, giant Russian boxers, pygmies, the Inuit, Nordics, Asians, Africans, Europeans, Amazonian natives and everyone else is us too.

A little selective breeding (stocky build of the Inuit, aboriginal brow ridges, receding chin of the English aristocracy, large Semitic nose, Celtic ginger hair etc.) could produce a very convincing Neo-Neanderthal within a few generations.
Well said.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
I think, that the questions that may be raised here could have wider implications. And could possibly be extended to the study of living things in general.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
Well, the idea of species mostly. As in we've tied Neandertals and Sapiens sapiens up as neat little sub species. With Denisovans as another. I'm not convinced that's right.

I know there are genetic and morphological differences, but do they really constitute that much of a difference?

The criteria for dividing up species is quite arbitrary. There's no set criteria. I think there's over division in taxonomy.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,304
Likes
2,705
Points
154
Yes, it's messy business. Some scientists think chimps should be added to the Homo family.
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
36,852
Likes
23,604
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
Must admit I wasn't familiar with the BHH term, but my agenda, if there is one beyond my natural curiosity, is not to disparage Australian aborigines (or indeed Nicolai Valuev) but to argue that we are all as close to Neanderthals as makes no difference. There is no "them and us". They were us. Just as today's aborigines, giant Russian boxers, pygmies, the Inuit, Nordics, Asians, Africans, Europeans, Amazonian natives and everyone else is us too.

A little selective breeding (stocky build of the Inuit, aboriginal brow ridges, receding chin of the English aristocracy, large Semitic nose, Celtic ginger hair etc.) could produce a very convincing Neo-Neanderthal within a few generations.
Indeed. I have even seen people native to the UK (AFAIK) who have some of these characteristics, and could almost pass as Neanderthal.
We are all a mixture, and some people may have more dominant Neanderthal DNA than others.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
3,337
Likes
4,909
Points
154
Location
Wessex and Mercia
"I have even seen people native to the UK (AFAIK) who have some of these characteristics, and could almost pass as Neanderthal."

And Ron Perlman didn't need much make-up in Quest For Fire!

image.jpeg
 
Top