Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Were the Neanderthals Our Ancestors?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Vetinari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, June 15th, 2012 @ 04:40 AM
    Subrace
    Other
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    Lovecraftian
    Posts
    244
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Post Modern humans did not come from Neanderthals

    A study of the skulls of Neanderthals, comparing them to early and modern humans, has concluded the ancient group is unlikely to have been the ancestor of modern humans.

    Scientists have long debated whether modern people are related to Neanderthals - the powerful hunters who dominated Europe for 100,000 years before dying out on the arrival of modern humans.

    The new study, led by anthropologist Katerina Harvati of New York University, measured 15 standard landmarks on the face and skull of Neanderthals, early modern humans, current humans as well as other primate species.

    The results were published in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    The study found that the differences measured between humans and Neanderthals were significantly greater than those found between subspecies of any single group, indicating Neanderthals were not a subspecies of humans.

    In addition, the difference was as great or greater than that found between closely related primate species, such as humans, gorillas and chimpanzees.

    Harvati says the analysis "cannot completely rule out" a relationship between humans and Neanderthals, but it strongly suggests they are separate species.




    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3431609.stm

    http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm...ceanddiscovery

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-nss012204.php

    http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs...anderthal.html

  2. #2
    Disinterested
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, September 13th, 2005 @ 09:17 PM
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Gender
    Politics
    Folkish
    Posts
    1,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: Modern humans did not come from Neanderthals

    Quote Originally Posted by Vetinari
    A study of the skulls of Neanderthals, comparing them to early and modern humans, has concluded the ancient group is unlikely to have been the ancestor of modern humans.

    Scientists have long debated whether modern people are related to Neanderthals - the powerful hunters who dominated Europe for 100,000 years before dying out on the arrival of modern humans.

    The new study, led by anthropologist Katerina Harvati of New York University, measured 15 standard landmarks on the face and skull of Neanderthals, early modern humans, current humans as well as other primate species.

    The results were published in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    The study found that the differences measured between humans and Neanderthals were significantly greater than those found between subspecies of any single group, indicating Neanderthals were not a subspecies of humans.

    In addition, the difference was as great or greater than that found between closely related primate species, such as humans, gorillas and chimpanzees.

    Harvati says the analysis "cannot completely rule out" a relationship between humans and Neanderthals, but it strongly suggests they are separate species.

    A difference in craniometry doesn't neccessarily reflect a decrease in fertility.

    Modern sapiens are more distinct from each other, physically, than animals are that have been placed in different genera.

    I think all that Harvati has shown, is that most European genes are from a population that migrated into Europe.

  3. #3
    Member Triglav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, April 25th, 2006 @ 12:24 PM
    Subrace
    Arya/Paleoeuropeidal (norda) :D
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    European Union
    Gender
    Politics
    Fairness
    Posts
    2,407
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post In Depth - Were the Neanderthals Our Ancestors?

    "slavic" languages are absolutely arteficial (Read "slawenlegende"). The "glagolica", invented by a bunch of monks, is nothing but an ancient esperanto, creating new words, definitions and alphabet out of regional slangs.

    The craddle of European Civilization comes from the North. All blond people originate from the north. So if you see a blond-blue eyed Slovene, Russian, Czech, Polak ect., you can be 100% sure that his ancient ancestors originated from "Germanics" (Germanic = Nordic).
    "slovenja" was the settelment of the Langobards = Germanics/Teutons. "Poland" of the Goths and East-Vandals ect. ect. What do "slavs" tell us about their origin?
    Some silly story that they originate from some swamps in the east and popped out of no where into history.

    So you see my dear "Gorostan" [=Triglav], you are in reality a "Germanic" indoctrinated with panslav propaganda and historic fantasy stories. ~Dr. Brandt, former TNP and Skadi member

  4. #4
    Member Triglav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, April 25th, 2006 @ 12:24 PM
    Subrace
    Arya/Paleoeuropeidal (norda) :D
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    European Union
    Gender
    Politics
    Fairness
    Posts
    2,407
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Neanderthals 'not close family'

    Neanderthals 'not close family'

    By Paul Rincon
    BBC News Online science staff


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3431609.stm


    The Neanderthals were not close relatives of modern humans and represent a single species quite distinct from our own, scientists say.

    3D comparisons of Neanderthal, modern human and other primate skulls confirm theories that the ancient people were a breed apart, the researchers report.

    Others claim Neanderthals contributed significantly to the modern gene pool.




    Researchers compared 3D coordinates on more than 1,000 skulls



    The researchers superimposed the 3D coordinates, or landmarks, from nearly 1,000 primate skulls. The picture shows coordinates on the La Chapelle-aux-Saints Neanderthal skull.



    Details of the research are published in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    "If we accept that Neanderthals were not the same species, what we're really saying is they did not contribute at all to modern human populations and in particular modern Europeans," co-author Dr Katerina Harvati of New York University, US, told BBC News Online.


    Ancestral contribution

    Researchers collected data on 15 standard "landmarks", or features, on over 1,000 primate skulls. Computer software transformed this data into sets of 3D coordinates for each skull and then superimposed all these sets on top of one another.

    Using statistical analysis, they compared differences between modern human and Neanderthal skulls with those found between and within 12 primate species.

    The results support the view that Neanderthals were indeed a distinct species.

    However, other researchers view Neanderthals as a sub-species or population of Homo sapiens that passed on genes to modern humans either by evolving into them or by interbreeding with them.



    Neanderthals seem to have been a species distinct from our own.
    A TV reconstruction of what Neanderthals may have looked like:






    Evolving hypothesis

    The new research shows that differences between Neanderthals and the modern human populations studied are smallest in early Europeans.

    Dr Harvati believes this has little significance because the distance is only slightly smaller than that between Neanderthals and living humans.

    But John Hawks, assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, US, disagrees: "It does perhaps suggest that they have some characteristics in common," he said.

    "It really is an impressive collection of work," said Dr James Ahern of the University of Wyoming.

    But Dr Ahern added that, while the Neanderthal specimens used in the study are all male, several of the early modern Europeans the authors compare them with are female skulls.

    "We know that males and females differ greatly in their anatomy, and males will look more archaic than females.

    "Because of this, I think the difference they observe between the Neanderthals and the Upper Palaeolithic sample is exaggerated," he explained.

    "My own view is that the rate of evolutionary change was great enough that when we compare samples we are going to find that they were different because of the time," said Dr Hawks.

    "[Neanderthals] existed at an earlier time and hadn't yet acquired all the characteristics that we have today."


    'Lost genes'

    This view is at odds with the single origin, or Out of Africa 2, theory, which postulates that all living humans expanded from a single, small population that evolved in Africa more than 150,000 years ago.

    As modern humans left their African homeland, they replaced "archaic" humans living in other parts of the world.

    Neanderthals appeared in Europe around 190,000 years ago, characterised by a stocky physique ideal for conserving heat in an Ice Age climate.

    Shortly after modern humans arrived in Europe 35,000 years ago, Neanderthals disappear from the fossil record.

    Studies of mitochondrial DNA from Neanderthal bones also suggest they had little affinity to modern populations.

    But some researchers believe this does not exclude the possibility that interbreeding occurred.

    Dr Magnus Nordborg, of Lund University in Sweden, has calculated that even if Neanderthals had comprised 25% of the population after merging with modern humans, their DNA might be impossible to detect today.



    THE NEANDERTHALS



    - The name means 'Man from the Neander Valley'
    - These human 'cousins' lived 190,000-28,000 years ago
    - They lived in Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East
    - Skulls had large noses and prominent brow ridges
    - Body shape was stocky and muscular
    - If interbreeding with Homo sapiens occurred it was limited
    "slavic" languages are absolutely arteficial (Read "slawenlegende"). The "glagolica", invented by a bunch of monks, is nothing but an ancient esperanto, creating new words, definitions and alphabet out of regional slangs.

    The craddle of European Civilization comes from the North. All blond people originate from the north. So if you see a blond-blue eyed Slovene, Russian, Czech, Polak ect., you can be 100% sure that his ancient ancestors originated from "Germanics" (Germanic = Nordic).
    "slovenja" was the settelment of the Langobards = Germanics/Teutons. "Poland" of the Goths and East-Vandals ect. ect. What do "slavs" tell us about their origin?
    Some silly story that they originate from some swamps in the east and popped out of no where into history.

    So you see my dear "Gorostan" [=Triglav], you are in reality a "Germanic" indoctrinated with panslav propaganda and historic fantasy stories. ~Dr. Brandt, former TNP and Skadi member

  5. #5
    Disinterested
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, September 13th, 2005 @ 09:17 PM
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Gender
    Politics
    Folkish
    Posts
    1,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: Neanderthals 'not close family'

    Quote Originally Posted by Triglav
    Neanderthals 'not close family'

    By Paul Rincon
    BBC News Online science staff


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3431609.stm


    The Neanderthals were not close relatives of modern humans and represent a single species quite distinct from our own, scientists say.

    3D comparisons of Neanderthal, modern human and other primate skulls confirm theories that the ancient people were a breed apart, the researchers report.

    Others claim Neanderthals contributed significantly to the modern gene pool.




    Researchers compared 3D coordinates on more than 1,000 skulls



    The researchers superimposed the 3D coordinates, or landmarks, from nearly 1,000 primate skulls. The picture shows coordinates on the La Chapelle-aux-Saints Neanderthal skull.



    Details of the research are published in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    "If we accept that Neanderthals were not the same species, what we're really saying is they did not contribute at all to modern human populations and in particular modern Europeans," co-author Dr Katerina Harvati of New York University, US, told BBC News Online.


    Ancestral contribution

    Researchers collected data on 15 standard "landmarks", or features, on over 1,000 primate skulls. Computer software transformed this data into sets of 3D coordinates for each skull and then superimposed all these sets on top of one another.

    Using statistical analysis, they compared differences between modern human and Neanderthal skulls with those found between and within 12 primate species.

    The results support the view that Neanderthals were indeed a distinct species.

    However, other researchers view Neanderthals as a sub-species or population of Homo sapiens that passed on genes to modern humans either by evolving into them or by interbreeding with them.



    Neanderthals seem to have been a species distinct from our own.
    A TV reconstruction of what Neanderthals may have looked like:






    Evolving hypothesis

    The new research shows that differences between Neanderthals and the modern human populations studied are smallest in early Europeans.

    Dr Harvati believes this has little significance because the distance is only slightly smaller than that between Neanderthals and living humans.

    But John Hawks, assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, US, disagrees: "It does perhaps suggest that they have some characteristics in common," he said.

    "It really is an impressive collection of work," said Dr James Ahern of the University of Wyoming.

    But Dr Ahern added that, while the Neanderthal specimens used in the study are all male, several of the early modern Europeans the authors compare them with are female skulls.

    "We know that males and females differ greatly in their anatomy, and males will look more archaic than females.

    "Because of this, I think the difference they observe between the Neanderthals and the Upper Palaeolithic sample is exaggerated," he explained.

    "My own view is that the rate of evolutionary change was great enough that when we compare samples we are going to find that they were different because of the time," said Dr Hawks.

    "[Neanderthals] existed at an earlier time and hadn't yet acquired all the characteristics that we have today."


    'Lost genes'

    This view is at odds with the single origin, or Out of Africa 2, theory, which postulates that all living humans expanded from a single, small population that evolved in Africa more than 150,000 years ago.

    As modern humans left their African homeland, they replaced "archaic" humans living in other parts of the world.

    Neanderthals appeared in Europe around 190,000 years ago, characterised by a stocky physique ideal for conserving heat in an Ice Age climate.

    Shortly after modern humans arrived in Europe 35,000 years ago, Neanderthals disappear from the fossil record.

    Studies of mitochondrial DNA from Neanderthal bones also suggest they had little affinity to modern populations.

    But some researchers believe this does not exclude the possibility that interbreeding occurred.

    Dr Magnus Nordborg, of Lund University in Sweden, has calculated that even if Neanderthals had comprised 25% of the population after merging with modern humans, their DNA might be impossible to detect today.



    THE NEANDERTHALS



    - The name means 'Man from the Neander Valley'
    - These human 'cousins' lived 190,000-28,000 years ago
    - They lived in Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East
    - Skulls had large noses and prominent brow ridges
    - Body shape was stocky and muscular
    - If interbreeding with Homo sapiens occurred it was limited

    I posted the pdf of this.

    She didn't prove anything about neanderthals being a species, but there was an interesting tree of human races. Iberomaurusians and Negritos formed a group. And it is obvious from it, that races of moderns are as distinct as subspecies in other primates.

  6. #6
    Member Triglav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, April 25th, 2006 @ 12:24 PM
    Subrace
    Arya/Paleoeuropeidal (norda) :D
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    European Union
    Gender
    Politics
    Fairness
    Posts
    2,407
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: Neanderthals 'not close family'

    Quote Originally Posted by atlanto-med
    I posted the pdf of this.
    Sorry, I knew I had read that before.

    She didn't prove anything about neanderthals being a species, but there was an interesting tree of human races. Iberomaurusians and Negritos formed a group. And it is obvious from it, that races of moderns are as distinct as subspecies in other primates.
    URL please?
    "slavic" languages are absolutely arteficial (Read "slawenlegende"). The "glagolica", invented by a bunch of monks, is nothing but an ancient esperanto, creating new words, definitions and alphabet out of regional slangs.

    The craddle of European Civilization comes from the North. All blond people originate from the north. So if you see a blond-blue eyed Slovene, Russian, Czech, Polak ect., you can be 100% sure that his ancient ancestors originated from "Germanics" (Germanic = Nordic).
    "slovenja" was the settelment of the Langobards = Germanics/Teutons. "Poland" of the Goths and East-Vandals ect. ect. What do "slavs" tell us about their origin?
    Some silly story that they originate from some swamps in the east and popped out of no where into history.

    So you see my dear "Gorostan" [=Triglav], you are in reality a "Germanic" indoctrinated with panslav propaganda and historic fantasy stories. ~Dr. Brandt, former TNP and Skadi member

  7. #7
    Disinterested
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, September 13th, 2005 @ 09:17 PM
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Gender
    Politics
    Folkish
    Posts
    1,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: Neanderthals 'not close family'

    Quote Originally Posted by Triglav
    URL please?

    You can find it on Skadi under the Neanderthal section. Look for "Neanderthals and diversity and relationships of modern races".
    Last edited by morfrain_encilgar; Sunday, May 2nd, 2004 at 08:36 PM.

  8. #8
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, September 5th, 2008 @ 06:36 AM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Posts
    4,096
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    17
    Thanked in
    16 Posts

    Post Re: Neanderthals 'not close family'

    Many species of old world monkeys are so similar that it is very, very hard to tell them apart from only a skeleton. There is a continuous range of variation in size, for instance between macaques and baboons even though their pigmentation may be quite different. Yet, macaques and baboons are two seperate genera. Humans are also somewhat hard to tell apart using only a skeleton and they are dissimilar as to pigment, but they are classified as the same species, even where each inhabits a seperate continent. (This is not the case with Macaca and Papio.) In other words, just looking at the skeleton and the geographical distribution, there is more reason to give a sub-species designation to the major human races than to give species let alone genus designations to some old world monkeys.

Similar Threads

  1. The Neanderthals Were Mariners
    By Storm Saxon in forum History
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Tuesday, March 6th, 2012, 07:05 PM
  2. Neanderthals Vs Humans?
    By Roderic in forum Anthropogeny & Ethnogenesis
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, September 19th, 2011, 03:58 AM
  3. Neanderthals Were Omnivorous
    By Hamrammr in forum Archaeology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Tuesday, December 28th, 2010, 07:46 AM
  4. Neanderthals were 'adults by 15'
    By Triglav in forum Paleoanthropology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sunday, May 2nd, 2004, 05:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •