Neanderthal and homo sapiens both evolved from an earlier ancestor, probably homo erectus. They are both human, but each is a sub-species of homo, so you have homo neanderthalensis, and homo sapiens. And it is possible that they did interbreed.
What a bunch of lies.... Ive seen quite a few humans that look like Neanderthals... just because a person has.... large facial features... dosent make them a diff species. Charlie Murphy is a perfect example of someone who looks like a Neanderthal
We asians believe the neanderthals are barbarians evolved in america and now currently neanderthal dna are all in america for the southeast side are mordern human dna without neanderthal asians are evolved from russia near there where mordern humns start
@SharinganBoy9899 That's not accurate. Neanderthals evolved in Europe & modern humans mated with them in the middle east making both modern Europeans & Asians.
This video is outdated. Research now shows Asians and Europeans posses Neanderthal DNA and Africans do not. I'm sure some people will have a meltdown, just try to keep in mind science is about truth, not proving that any people are more than or less than.
@rockstotheoff No, right in the beginning the video very clearly states "humans" came out of Africa and evolved into Neanderthals. This argument has since proven to be incorrect. Neanderthals have no connection with Africa, they never lived in Africa, and they never evolved from Africans. SOME Africans who left Africa mated with Neanderthals. Science identifies distinctions that may seem pickey to others, because it's goal is truth.
@rockstotheoff I put the word "humans" in quotes, not to be disrespectful, but because I have heard some scientists call the humans who came from Africa to Europe "Homo Sapiens" and some have called them "Homo Sapiens Sapiens". And since both those terms describe two different species, I just try to keep it simple and use the term "Humans".
I believe that the most unintelligent species of human is the American. We are fat, lazy, Mcdonalds-eating, retarded and overall, a pathetic breed of homo sapien.
@nuclearmaster2 Neanderthal and homo sapiens are both separate branches of human. Modern (homo sapiens) man did not evolve from Neanderthal, they both evolved from an earlier common ancestor, probably homo erectus. They are like cousins, not direct descendants.
In the May 2010 paper comparing modern Eurasians DNA to NM, it was also stated that NM is 12.7 percent "ancestral" (i.e. 6,35 percent ape-like) None of this ape-like stuff shows up in modern Eurasians, so we must conclude that NM was the hybrid result of human males with Eurasian DNA mating with a more ape-like species (e.g. Denisova).
Although Homo sapiens(modern humans)share obvious external,genetic,and histric bonds to apes such as gorillas, gibbons, orangutans and chimpanzees, there has never been a discovery of a "missing link." On the contrary, fossil documentation suggests that current humans have developed from a classification of hominid quite separately from modern ape species.
@sybo59 I know EXACTLY what I am talking about monkery!
It is YOU that does not know what he is talking about because without a certain level of expertise in genetics you are cleverly led like sheep to believe that Neanderthal is our closest relative!
In YOUR case that is TRUE because you are the OFFSPRING of this ape along with Denisova
The fact REMAINS that Neanderthal is more distant to homo-sapien than a Chimp and Denisova is more distant than Neanderthal
@shea333 Yyou must ALSO remember that there is a THIRD species that must be added into the equation! 42 chromosome monkey (RH Factor) 48 cHROMNOSOME APE (NEANDERTHAL) AND THE 46 CHROMOSOME homo-sapien. So you possess the DNA of humans, apes AND Monkeys! Perhaps it is that trifecta that allows you to reproduce! And why does it matter anyway? Neanderthal is more distant to homo-sapien than either a Gorilla or a chimp! Are Gorillas a seperate species? How about Chimps? please accept your ancestry!
@shea333 That was a nice try however if you cross a horse with a donkey you produce a mule! Horses and donkeys are two separate species. Your desperation is so obvious!
@xCraiig Modern Europeans have a MINIIMUM of 4 % DNA from Neanderthals while Asians possess1-2 % Neanderthal DNA because white Europeans brought this DNA there as they have to ALL OTHER populations EXCEPT for Central Asia which is the ancestral homeland of the white man. Please stop trying to pass your paternal lineage on to other populations! Be proud of your monkey and ape DNA! and embrace the fact that Neanderthal was your father! Its why whites share O% ancestral DNA with East Asians
@adirtuval Monkeys are a different species and you interbred with them so recently that you still have simian blood flowing through your reprobate veins! (RH factor) If you are offended at Neanderthal being called a seperate species I am sorry that you feel that way, however Neanderthal is MORE distant from homo-sapien than a Chimpanzee! It is even more distant from homo-sapien than a Gorilla. So unless you are prepared to call chimps or Gorillas Human, then Neanderthal was a seperate species
@MsBlackmagic13 How could it be "we" who interbred with them when it was us who was the offspring of said relationship. Wouldnt it be "you" who who fked the "monkey"?? hahaha, I call dumbo on your simpleton ass.
@xCraiig Whites originate and devolved in Central Asia. The indigenous people of Europe were black Africans (grimaldi man) with ZERO% neanderthal DNA cro-Magnon man was ALSO black african with ZERO% Neanderthal DNA. If you are interested in the origins of white people, I strongly suggest that you take a LONG look at Kazakhstan, Krgyzstan,Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan! but if you did that the world would know how you monkeys devolved by mating with apes and monkeys now wouldnt we?
Homo-sapien did NOT evolve from Neanderthals LOL Neanderthal was a 48 chromosome ape just like a Chimpanzee or a gorilla! However Homo-Sapien is genetically closer to both the Chimpanzee and Gorilla than it is to Neanderthal! Neanderthal is more distant to Homo-sapien than either a Chimp or a Gorilla, but Neanderthal did interbreed with white people in central asia and it was this Ape DNA along with monkey DNA (rhesus factor) that created the white man! It is a well gaurded secret!
@MsBlackmagic13 Yeah, that's true the White race originated in Europe with the Cro magnon's that mixed with the Neanderthals who had much larger brains, today the average White and Asian man has 2-4% Neanderthal DNA which explains why their IQ is greater than Humans that didn't interbreed with Neanderthals!
"They were driven forth from among men, /.../ To dwell in the cliffs of the valleys, in caves of the earth, and in the rocks. /.../ They were children of fools, yea, children of base men: they were viler than the earth."
Amazing how they can turn contrived fiction into science in the eyes of the trusting spectators. To these people, a theory based on presuppositions is proven fact. Do you atheists even hear how they write it on your nose without backing it up? "This happened, and this, and this..."
Could you point me to the research articles that argue this point i.e. that Sapiens preferentially inhabited the hills and Neanderthals the valleys. I'm kind of skeptical...
@Frantzu Well we have their genome...we know they are reproductively compatible with at least one species (or were 30k years ago)... theres nothing stopping us from reproducing them by creating a neanderthal clone.... or more likely a neanderthal human hybrid.
It'd just be expensive... another investment by humanity in a vain attempt to stroke its ego...but it'll happen...probably in the the next decade.
Now if we end up with a neanderthal baby with an IQ of 180 what then?
We have legends of Ogres, dwarfs, giants, and wild men throughout human lore and tradition. I am of the opinion some of these stories were based off live encounters between homo sapiens, and the various other human races and species of man who shared this orb with us in the dawn time of yore.
@UserNamei5 Your information is incorrect. There were Neanderthals living in what is now the Middle East also. When modern humans left Africa, they interbred with these Middle East Neanderthals 45,000-80,000 years ago -- which is why EVERYONE in the world, except West Africans (whose ancestors never left Africa), has between 1-4% of Neanderthal DNA.
Imagine if the skeleton of Nicolai Valuev were found in a remote cave in Russia. Along side stone tools and bear teeth. He'd be hailed as the newest edition of our ancient Neanderthal fore bearers.
@rephaim23 it doesn't work like that... several examples need to be found to confirm the species is a new one... and to confirm it is not for example just the male counterpart to a previous female example.
Plus we have techniques for extracting ancient DNA now. Plus Nicolai Valuev wasn't alive 40k years ago...and I'm sure his DNA is perfectly human...
If it looks like a man, walks and hunts like a man.... It's a man. Same applies to ducks... Calling it anything different borders on racism... And we've had enough of that.
@rephaim23 If its not got human DNA its certainly not human... Neanderthals had distinct DNA from other hominids... they were different... in DNA, in size, morphology etc...
They were not a different race (subspecies) they were a different species. One with a very small ability to breed with early homo sapiens... in the same way grey wolves bred with jackals to produce red wolves... well Caucasians are the equivalent of red wolves in that analogy... and black Africans are grey wolves.
No, the Neanderthal people were part of our human ancestry, just a different branch, they intermarried with us also. They were about as different from us as an Aborigine is to a Englishman. "Homo" means human or earthly one in Latin. Just as there are different species within the genus of Douglas fir which grow to different height and shapes, there were different species within the genus of Man, who had different localized physical characteristics.
@rephaim23 neanderthals were a 'lot' more different than any two subspecies of human today... all humans on this planet differ at the most extreme by about 0.4% in protein coding DNA...
Neanderthals would exceed the 1.2% mark. They were separated from our ancestors in Africa by 300k years... at least.
By the time we bred with them their isolation had altered their DNA considerably.. Producing offspring was probably a rare event, it was also likely most of those offspring were sterile..
@rephaim23 "I'd be willing to bet we have people today who match that 1.2% mark."
Good luck finding them... the fact is if any person deviated above the 0.4% then they just wouldn't be human...they'd be classified as something else...
But hey,look there are hominids alive right now...150k of them, that do in fact deviate by about 2% if that's any good to you... we call them Pan by genus! Its not the same 2% that the neanderthals and Homo sapiens are distinguished by... but there y'go!
@rephaim23 Also as far as being the same Genus goes ...yes all 'homo' species are indeed from the same genus...hence the classification....(and it is a classification).
Then again all canids are the same genus too... Which groups Nyctereutes procyonoides into the same genus as the Canis Lupus...
I think you are trying to apply black and white logic to something that can only give you shades of gray! If we include all Hominini in the word 'human' then Neanderthals were human.
@UserNamei5 So yer not hidin ... U li´l mama´s boy posin as a warrior , I coul take u down wid one hand tied behind my back . NAW, wid TWO hands tied behind my back . U tiny assfuckin punk .
@UserNamei5 Who did u call a degenerate , u fuckin half-wit homo ? People like u , hidin behind a pc screen , disgust me . Creep back under da slimy rock where u came from , u flamin asshole !
because 7665319987114578088764 years and few hours ago the the male humanoid elephant had a doggie style sex with a male humanoid ant and thus the space time program "Y" caused a shift in the sea balance "F" which is the result of the evolution word "FUCK YOU" ,
you can see the Animated doggie style sex between the male Elephant and Ant at BBC, CNN, FOX Bull-shit news channels coz they tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
@ti3nt Contrary to that idea (and as it turns out genetically) black Africans are the only race that DO NOT have any neanderthal DNA... maybe you'd like to revise your racist remark now that you have more information?
We do have a name for neanderthal progeny that survived until today...we call them Caucasian and Asian. I'm one of those myself... but I manage to be one without also being a racist cock sucking motherfucker!
There have been probably hundreds of types of humanoid species on this earth which have gone extinct, and we are just now trying to piece the puzzle together.
Whole races have gone extinct in the past few thousand years. They found bones, and hair with DNA that matches no modern populations in North America. whole lineages wiped out. Of course Neanderthals were our ancestors, they were as viable as elephants and mammoths. They were just another extinct race of human.
The truth is, science is trying so hard to come off as "politically correct" when they shoud just be blunt and say that different species of man existed and cross bred, and that's why different races and offshoots today have their differences. Some still have the genes of an earlier primitive form.
@rephaim23 Its also unlikely that homo neanderthalis was the only other species of human like hominid... we just haven't found the other types in the same time period.
There were after all several exits from Africa...from an earlier african migration leading to homo erectus progeny it was so widespread with such a large population across Asia and Russian and even on the Indian subcontinent It'd stretch credulity to assume they did not diversify.
@rephaim23 All humans have the genetics of their ancestors... thats how gene duplication works.... In the case of black africans they primarily only have homo sapien DNA... in the case of all other races there is homo neanderthalis DNA and probably some homo Heidelbergis DNA in there too..
Incidentally Neanderthals are commonly accepted as being brighter and more advanced technologically than homo sapiens. Theres no evidence this makes a species more 'advanced' whatever that means?
if homo sapiens evolution took millions of years for us to look like this today, is the evolution still ongoing? will we look something different millions of years from now? Anyone?
@kickitable "is the evolution still ongoing" As long as organisms reproduce, evolution goes on.
"will we look something different millions of years from now" That's almost certain. Consider this... There have been several migration waves in our history. Tribes of people settled down in several places. For many generations, thus thousands of years, there was very little - if any - contact between them. The result: blacks, caucasian, asians, aboriginals,... And that's only a couple millenia.
All organisms evolve to cope with their environment. So when environments stop changing evolution becomes static. This does happen, e.g. sharks have lived with the same environmental pressure for many many millions of years the only thing that has changed in real terms (despite some notable diversity) is their size.
Humans are gluttons for punishment, we insist on living in places we really shouldn't In such cases evolution accelerates.
mainland europe supports hundreds of million people now and most of the diverse wildlife and plants are extinct. surely there was more than enough room for both species, unless some bottleneck catastrophic event happened that made the neanders go extinct.
@haleygoeswhoohoo That's a common misconception. I thought the same thing once too. Actually, Neanderthals were our "first cousins" in the tree of life who had settled Europe before Sapiens had got there. Sapiens didn't not descend from them, but there is plenty of evidence to indicate that Europeans had inter-bread with them at some point. This may actually explain a few things peculiar to the European branch of humanity.
@haleygoeswhoohoo (Also) I went through the same thing once, as an ex-Christian. Don't worry about what you're just now learning. In fact I envy you, because you have world of discovery ahead of you. And trust me, as someone who's been there, it's going to be beautiful.
@haleygoeswhoohoo As jesse allready explained, neanderthals are our cousins. We share an ancestor. There is indeed reason to believe that neandertals and sapiens have interbread, which could explain a few things that are quite unique to the european genus, like red hair and freckles - perhaps even blonde hair.
But I don't know if this has been conclusively proven. A comparative DNA analysis would be needed.
And indeed: the journey you are on will be quite extra ordinary, enjoy it.
@ScientificBob ur welcome... Paabo's work has since been superceded by others...but as far as I know his original paper is still on NCBI and it a free download... although I might be wrong since I just ask a colleague in the biology dept. to download whatever I want (perk of the job) the extraction method was a work of genius... adn I might add not bad for a biologist. biologists are clearly not as dumb as I thought... (snigger, strokes ego)
What happened essentially was that two distinct groups separated and then recombined after 300k ... only those left behind in Africa still have the original uncombined DNA....
Firstly we did breed with them...so they are not truly extinct...as a subspecies their DNA is still knocking about... assuming you are not from Africa they are in you!
We also do share a common ancestor with them.
This is a common phenomena...
For example the red wolf, the gray wolf and the coyote share a common ancestor. but oddly enough the red wolf exists solely because its ancestors (gray wolf) bred with coyotes successfully.
@haleygoeswhoohoo However even if they were a direct ancestor... then it is more than likely they would be extinct anyway... animals go extinct when they can no longer compete for resources and reproduce in their environment... in these cases if they cannot adapt...then they go extinct.
But most species even modern humans have subspecies.... so although one entire group might die out...others will simply be left with yet more resources to exploit now that the competition is gone.
I know that I am a sinner and need Your forgiveness. I believe that You died on the cross for my sins and rose from the grave to give me life. I know You are the only way to God. So now I want to quit disobeying You and start living for You. Please forgive me, change my life and show me how to know You. In Jesus' name. Amen.
@JamesRideout123 I love how you try to mesh Sumerian mythology, demonology, and Biblical scripture together with absolutely no reason to believe those three things are related. I gotta admire how you treat that as fact. Keep up the good work. We need conspiracy theorists in the world, builds character.
"hey were demonic hualfhuman/halfdemon inbreds. This is why God had his flood."
that doesn't of course explain why theres a huge amount of empty space being filled with trash in your mind where a certain amount of education should reside.....
could I suggest reading a book? Despite what you are told it won't lead to you being a raving atheist...just to you being better educated.
It´s a moot point whether Neanderthals went extinct really : BETWEEN THREE TO FIVE PERCENT of modern man´s genes ( except from African peoples ) come from Neanderthals . So , in a sense most of us are ´neanderthaloids ´. End of story .
@Hemulen40 Those genes may come from our common ancestor, and not directly from Neanderthals. Neaderthals were a separate and distinct species that could not interbreed and produce fertile off-spring with Homo sapiens.
@Hemulen40 First, Neanderthals are classified as a separate species and what I just stated is the definition of a species. Second, Neanderthals probably diverged well before Homo erectus meaning they would not have been able to interbreed with Homo sapiens. At least 200,000 years separates the two species and most likely that is a far too conservative estimate. I suspect that Neanderthals, just like all the indiginous Homo sapien tribes that remained isolated for thousands of years,
@edwardschlosser1 That's wrong for a start. Scientists have discovered in the last few years that Sapiens and Neanderthals definately interbred as all people of Europe and Asia share as much as 5% of their DNA with Neanderthal man. Furthermore it his hypothesised now that Homo sapiens developed immunity from diseases that existed in Europe from interbreeding with Neanderthals, so it probably wasn't specifically disease that killed them either.
@edwardschlosser1 "Neanderthals are classified as a separate species and what I just stated is the definition of a species" Your defenition is wrong. The scope of species doesn't end at being able to breed with fertile offspring. It's true that it will often be the case, but not necessarily. It's NOT part of the definition. Just like the term "planet", it's pretty "open". It's just a human invented word to allow for grouping. But the breeding thing alone isn't always enough.
@edwardschlosser1 Since they did breed with homo sapiens your argument falls apart just there.
Next you are trying to argue a case for either/or... or black v's white...in an area of biology that contains only shades of gray....
Separate distinct species can interbreed... its not common but it does happen. Clearly it needs to happen before the ability of DNA to combine with another species has not exceeded a critical mass...and thats different for every species.
@Hemulen40 Contracted diseases from the Homo sapiens that their immature immune systems could not handle. Most American Indians did not die from conflicts with Europeans. Estimates as high as 90% exist for their demise due to diseases their immature, isolated immune systems could not fight off. This has been repeated in all contacts with isolated tribes of our own species. It is not too far off to believe that this probably doomed the Neanderthal.
@edwardschlosser1 Well , Im not gonna argue all this : What it boils down to is , that we define the words ´ going extinct ´, ´die out ´ in quite different ways ... P.S. the 5-6 % of our genes that we do share with the Neanderthals of yore, seem in high degree to govern our BRAIN FUNCTIONS , our way of thinking & our emotions . Now , how is that for ´going extinct ´ .... / Peace & all the best , bro . I have no more time for this discussion .
@Eddtastic100 erm... thats not what the DNA map of both species says...both species are distinct...that is accurate... but as it turns out we did mate...and produce offspring...and those offspring now constitute 80% of the human population.
If you'd like to know more about that please see research completed at the Max Planck institute by Svante Pääbo et al in 2006 and subsequent research. Both Genomes have been mapped in the past decade.
@Hemulen40 Well if you are not going to define extinction as the opposite of extant... then essentially an ostrich is a dinosaur and therefore they are not extinct either...
Which is technically true I suppose... of course there are no extant species of dinosaur...which is where I'd draw my definition of extinct.
@MumblingMickey Hiya , Mickey , good to hear from Ireland !/ Ye´ve made a number of good posts here , but basically, I have no more time for dis discussion , since most of us actually AGREE. Seems we´re just mincin words, really. / All da best from Sweden !
@Hemulen40 That hypothesis was proven wrong by gene analysis. It showed the Neanderthals were too different from humans. There are as many difference in genetic structure as chimps.
i know,i know, i know a chimp jumped a whale five million years ago, they had a chale and it evolved to modern human,casue there bones look someewhat like ours, and ya know what, there is nothing to say it didnt happen,except dna evidence,and the same evidence says we are neandrathal and more related to them than chimps, see human genome project, you can call whom ever what ever
all you are doing is proving how closed minded some people truly are,right.
sorry dna is really hard to question,no matter what you think the fossils says.dna is legal documentation also, it says many humans are more related to neandrathals than chimps,meaning our dna matches neandrathals better than a chimp,as far as fossils go we could be related to whales as they have bones like ours also.
we each have a right to believe what we wish,and frankly this is hogwash!
@john17972 Not all humans show genetic heritage of neanderthals. Mostly it is Europeans. But it does lend support to the intermixing theory (without ruling out competition).
@Adriangrosvenor you would say that, even though your Bible is full of contradictions, makes no sense (plants created before light??)....i hate people and their ignorance. i'm SURE these people devote their entire lives to extensive scientific research just to "make this shit up". go back to the middle ages.
@transtlantic achilles197474 is still correct. Their brains were larger by volume. He never said that this meant they were more intelligent. Take it easy on him.
take it easy on a dumbfuck who believes in a literal interpretation of the bible? achiles is incorrect. you clearly are taking my reply and his claim out of context.
@transtlantic achilles said neanderthals had larger brains than humans. On average this is true. 1,200–1,900 cc compared to 1,100-1,850 cc. Not much of a difference, but one nonetheless. Therefore his statement was correct. As for taking your reply out of context, there is no context. You didn't write a book, a paper or even a letter. Your reply is whole on its own and just a few characters long. Go learn what 'out of context' means before you declare it.
@ianman6 idiot...i never said different. how am i saying other wise with my post? are you mentally challenged?
therefore his statement in context means jak shit. the whales have larger brains than the Homo sapiens. what the fuck is your problem? can you understand the meaning of context?
@transtlantic Ok, here's the whole convo as context. Achilles makes a CORRECT STATEMENT about the respective brain sizes of neanderthal and h. sapiens. You reply like an asshole, though your statement that this does not indicate greater intelligence is correct. However, your tone was unwarrented and achilles never said (though he may have been implying) that brain size = intelligence. I neutrally sort fact from assholeness and your response is to increase your asshole level. Good job.
@transtlantic "i reply like an asshole? how so? i never said his comment was wrong." Go back and read! Your posts are littered with ad hominem attacks. Even your reply to me was harsh. This is simply uncivil, regardless of how silly achilles' beliefs are. But what did I do to incur your wrath? I sincerely apologize for setting you off :S. Otherwise we agree on content so I have no quarrel with you. I'm all for a little creationist bashing, but holy moly man!
@transtlantic My problem was with your unwarrented ad hominem attack, that's all. I simply said to take it easy. You, in turn, not only call him a dumbfuck but accuse me of being retarded? I think you're the one with the problem. I have the whole convo in front of me, start to finish. Your claims of being taken 'out of context' are without merit. Idiot. (You like being called names).
@transtlantic Oh excuse me for not looking at both your channels and following the exchanges you've had since you met. Clearly that's the real context for you. No, I'm not going to promote creationism. I will promote the fact that you are, indeed, an asshole. Count the number of 'moron', 'idiot', and other appelations in your post. You ARE attacking my personal character as the basis for my argument, ergo your ad hominem procedure. Have fun arguing on YouTube like a champion!
well i think you are the asshole here. you come here and say that i was claiming that achiles was wrong. when i clearly never said such. then you go on and on about me stating the obvious fact that you are an idiot.
attacking your personal character? lol... how is that an ad hominem?
well, i guess i will have to take the time to teach you, you mental midget.
here:
"is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise"
@transtlantic "by your failed logic of what is an ad hominem, you would be doing an ad hominem." Yes, I've decided to respond in kind.
"thanks for proving that you truly are a mental midget, retard" I had to lower myself to properly communicate on your level, since you were clearly struggling with comprehension.
@transtlantic You know the sad part is in terms of content I am in agreement with you. Your style of discourse is what is deplorable. You give rationalists a bad name. People like you give reason to creationists for thinking atheists and adherants to science and evolution are assholes.
"what is deplorable"? no one forced you to read what i post. plus... you had to admit in the end that the content of what i post is right. lol
rationalists a bad name? yeah, you sure showed that i am a rationalist. because you sure aren't one. you showed to be a failure in basic logic.
all dumb kids think educated people are assholes. well.... without the humility of being a student, they will never want to learn. so fuck them, let them stay as the good janitors that they are.
@ianman6 In what way am I not a rationalist? And my 'admission at the end' wasn't a caveat: I never disagreed with your content to begin with. Judging by the quality of your responses (both in terms of nuance and basic English proficiency) I'm afraid I will retract my statement that you are a rationalist. "All dumb kids think educated people are assholes" -> Rational claim? Not by a long shot. I realize you are educated, but are clearly guided by emotion. That is PRECISELY the opposite of reason
don't understand your remark. Did i call you a moron?
btw... i noticed you don't use many technical terms. And some wrong stuff.
"All organisms evolve to cope with their environment. So when environments stop changing evolution becomes static"
1) organisms evolve, period.
2) "static"? lolol you are just ignoring sympatric speciation and the FACT that mutations occur introducing novel changes even without environmental change, ignorance of sexual selection, etc.
@ianman6 Neanderthals were more intelligent as it turns out... their tool making was well above their homo sapien counterparts, where similar they were better constructed.
But intelligence or even dexterity is not necessarily an advantage when considering if a particular species is adapted to its environment...
Clearly if we were to write out the pros and cons of one against the other the neanderthals would lose... because history just dictated they did!
@MumblingMickey Neanderthals had been developing technology for millennia before homo sapiens arose. They had a head start. You can't expect a nascent species to come with 'built-in' tool making abilities. Homo sapiens' natural ability to do so, however, was superior as they eventually developed better tools than neanderthal ever did. Intelligence and dexterity confer an obvious advantage, I don't know why you would say otherwise. Smarter, better at manipulation. Advantage. History IS evolution.
@ianman6 They also did have not only a larger cranial capacity but the DNA we share is known to control gamete and sperm production (SPAG17) other coding covers skin production, hair and nails,
other difference include the coding for the protein PCD16 involved in auto-immune and healing ... and there is a lot of evidence from Paabo that some of the sequences code for metabolism and cognitive development.
Given the way things panned out Its almost certain they passed on cognitive capacity.
Neanderthal and homo sapiens both evolved from an earlier ancestor, probably homo erectus. They are both human, but each is a sub-species of homo, so you have homo neanderthalensis, and homo sapiens. And it is possible that they did interbreed.
8698gil 1 month ago
What a bunch of lies.... Ive seen quite a few humans that look like Neanderthals... just because a person has.... large facial features... dosent make them a diff species. Charlie Murphy is a perfect example of someone who looks like a Neanderthal
dlferich 1 month ago
@dlferich what the fu... theres a Fat person in my school called charlie murphy :O
TheFilthyLummox 1 month ago
We asians believe the neanderthals are barbarians evolved in america and now currently neanderthal dna are all in america for the southeast side are mordern human dna without neanderthal asians are evolved from russia near there where mordern humns start
SharinganBoy9899 1 month ago
@SharinganBoy9899 you are wrong, entirely.
guidi2005 2 weeks ago
@SharinganBoy9899 That's not accurate. Neanderthals evolved in Europe & modern humans mated with them in the middle east making both modern Europeans & Asians.
KenMacMillan 2 weeks ago
This video is outdated. Research now shows Asians and Europeans posses Neanderthal DNA and Africans do not. I'm sure some people will have a meltdown, just try to keep in mind science is about truth, not proving that any people are more than or less than.
uberhandle 1 month ago
@uberhandle Isn't that exactly what the video states? It says that Neanderthals were found in Europe, whereas Sapiens were from Africa.
rockstotheoff 1 month ago
@rockstotheoff No, right in the beginning the video very clearly states "humans" came out of Africa and evolved into Neanderthals. This argument has since proven to be incorrect. Neanderthals have no connection with Africa, they never lived in Africa, and they never evolved from Africans. SOME Africans who left Africa mated with Neanderthals. Science identifies distinctions that may seem pickey to others, because it's goal is truth.
uberhandle 4 weeks ago
@rockstotheoff I put the word "humans" in quotes, not to be disrespectful, but because I have heard some scientists call the humans who came from Africa to Europe "Homo Sapiens" and some have called them "Homo Sapiens Sapiens". And since both those terms describe two different species, I just try to keep it simple and use the term "Humans".
uberhandle 4 weeks ago
nope they are called homothals or neandersaps
bobodd5 1 month ago
I believe that the most unintelligent species of human is the American. We are fat, lazy, Mcdonalds-eating, retarded and overall, a pathetic breed of homo sapien.
I bet neanderthals are smarter than us...
nuclearmaster2 1 month ago
yes
bobodd5 1 month ago
Aren't humans evolved from neanderthals?
nuclearmaster2 1 month ago
@nuclearmaster2 Neanderthal and homo sapiens are both separate branches of human. Modern (homo sapiens) man did not evolve from Neanderthal, they both evolved from an earlier common ancestor, probably homo erectus. They are like cousins, not direct descendants.
8698gil 1 month ago
In the May 2010 paper comparing modern Eurasians DNA to NM, it was also stated that NM is 12.7 percent "ancestral" (i.e. 6,35 percent ape-like) None of this ape-like stuff shows up in modern Eurasians, so we must conclude that NM was the hybrid result of human males with Eurasian DNA mating with a more ape-like species (e.g. Denisova).
Mdebacle 2 months ago
Hahahaha. she said 'sapien'.
quidnick 2 months ago 4
@quidnick haha
Shift4chizzle 2 months ago
Although Homo sapiens(modern humans)share obvious external,genetic,and histric bonds to apes such as gorillas, gibbons, orangutans and chimpanzees, there has never been a discovery of a "missing link." On the contrary, fossil documentation suggests that current humans have developed from a classification of hominid quite separately from modern ape species.
westcherryhills 2 months ago
@sybo59 I know EXACTLY what I am talking about monkery!
It is YOU that does not know what he is talking about because without a certain level of expertise in genetics you are cleverly led like sheep to believe that Neanderthal is our closest relative!
In YOUR case that is TRUE because you are the OFFSPRING of this ape along with Denisova
The fact REMAINS that Neanderthal is more distant to homo-sapien than a Chimp and Denisova is more distant than Neanderthal
MsBlackmagic13 2 months ago
@shea333 Yyou must ALSO remember that there is a THIRD species that must be added into the equation! 42 chromosome monkey (RH Factor) 48 cHROMNOSOME APE (NEANDERTHAL) AND THE 46 CHROMOSOME homo-sapien. So you possess the DNA of humans, apes AND Monkeys! Perhaps it is that trifecta that allows you to reproduce! And why does it matter anyway? Neanderthal is more distant to homo-sapien than either a Gorilla or a chimp! Are Gorillas a seperate species? How about Chimps? please accept your ancestry!
MsBlackmagic13 3 months ago
@MsBlackmagic13 "Neanderthal is more distant to homo-sapien than either a Gorilla or a chimp!"
You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
sybo59 3 months ago
@shea333 That was a nice try however if you cross a horse with a donkey you produce a mule! Horses and donkeys are two separate species. Your desperation is so obvious!
MsBlackmagic13 3 months ago
@xCraiig Modern Europeans have a MINIIMUM of 4 % DNA from Neanderthals while Asians possess1-2 % Neanderthal DNA because white Europeans brought this DNA there as they have to ALL OTHER populations EXCEPT for Central Asia which is the ancestral homeland of the white man. Please stop trying to pass your paternal lineage on to other populations! Be proud of your monkey and ape DNA! and embrace the fact that Neanderthal was your father! Its why whites share O% ancestral DNA with East Asians
MsBlackmagic13 3 months ago
@adirtuval Monkeys are a different species and you interbred with them so recently that you still have simian blood flowing through your reprobate veins! (RH factor) If you are offended at Neanderthal being called a seperate species I am sorry that you feel that way, however Neanderthal is MORE distant from homo-sapien than a Chimpanzee! It is even more distant from homo-sapien than a Gorilla. So unless you are prepared to call chimps or Gorillas Human, then Neanderthal was a seperate species
MsBlackmagic13 3 months ago 3
@MsBlackmagic13 How could it be "we" who interbred with them when it was us who was the offspring of said relationship. Wouldnt it be "you" who who fked the "monkey"?? hahaha, I call dumbo on your simpleton ass.
YamaKazoo 1 month ago
@xCraiig Whites originate and devolved in Central Asia. The indigenous people of Europe were black Africans (grimaldi man) with ZERO% neanderthal DNA cro-Magnon man was ALSO black african with ZERO% Neanderthal DNA. If you are interested in the origins of white people, I strongly suggest that you take a LONG look at Kazakhstan, Krgyzstan,Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan! but if you did that the world would know how you monkeys devolved by mating with apes and monkeys now wouldnt we?
MsBlackmagic13 3 months ago
If Homo Sapiens and Neaderthals could reproduce togther , why are they different species ?
adirtuval 3 months ago
@adirtuval That depends upon whether or not the offspring can reprocuce. If it can not reproduce then the two species are seperate.
shea333 3 months ago
"..-Then, almost 30,000 years ago, the neanderthals became extinct" haha I wonder why :) why didnt they just say we killed them tho?
iSkyttens 3 months ago
Homo-sapien did NOT evolve from Neanderthals LOL Neanderthal was a 48 chromosome ape just like a Chimpanzee or a gorilla! However Homo-Sapien is genetically closer to both the Chimpanzee and Gorilla than it is to Neanderthal! Neanderthal is more distant to Homo-sapien than either a Chimp or a Gorilla, but Neanderthal did interbreed with white people in central asia and it was this Ape DNA along with monkey DNA (rhesus factor) that created the white man! It is a well gaurded secret!
MsBlackmagic13 3 months ago
@MsBlackmagic13 Yeah, that's true the White race originated in Europe with the Cro magnon's that mixed with the Neanderthals who had much larger brains, today the average White and Asian man has 2-4% Neanderthal DNA which explains why their IQ is greater than Humans that didn't interbreed with Neanderthals!
xCraiig 3 months ago
@MsBlackmagic13 That is so stupid.
8698gil 1 month ago
Oh wow. How did I know there would be buybull thumpers spamming this video?
BackInTheCage 4 months ago
Job 30, KJV Bible:
"They were driven forth from among men, /.../ To dwell in the cliffs of the valleys, in caves of the earth, and in the rocks. /.../ They were children of fools, yea, children of base men: they were viler than the earth."
joroma77 4 months ago
Amazing how they can turn contrived fiction into science in the eyes of the trusting spectators. To these people, a theory based on presuppositions is proven fact. Do you atheists even hear how they write it on your nose without backing it up? "This happened, and this, and this..."
joroma77 4 months ago
where did modern humans come from? Watch Battlestar Gallactica for the answer :
w1rosado 4 months ago
Homo sapiens* not Homo Sapiens
orgasplosion 4 months ago
Could you point me to the research articles that argue this point i.e. that Sapiens preferentially inhabited the hills and Neanderthals the valleys. I'm kind of skeptical...
AlloBruxelles 5 months ago
some of those neandies survived and settled in my front house
lotorobly 5 months ago
If you needed a mate, you'd just go next door LOL
DevilSlayer911 6 months ago
@Frantzu Well we have their genome...we know they are reproductively compatible with at least one species (or were 30k years ago)... theres nothing stopping us from reproducing them by creating a neanderthal clone.... or more likely a neanderthal human hybrid.
It'd just be expensive... another investment by humanity in a vain attempt to stroke its ego...but it'll happen...probably in the the next decade.
Now if we end up with a neanderthal baby with an IQ of 180 what then?
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
We have legends of Ogres, dwarfs, giants, and wild men throughout human lore and tradition. I am of the opinion some of these stories were based off live encounters between homo sapiens, and the various other human races and species of man who shared this orb with us in the dawn time of yore.
rephaim23 6 months ago
The Homo Floresiensis just shows us how much WE DON'T KNOW, compared to what is possible, and probably in the past.
rephaim23 6 months ago
@UserNamei5 Your information is incorrect. There were Neanderthals living in what is now the Middle East also. When modern humans left Africa, they interbred with these Middle East Neanderthals 45,000-80,000 years ago -- which is why EVERYONE in the world, except West Africans (whose ancestors never left Africa), has between 1-4% of Neanderthal DNA.
BloodofPatriots 6 months ago
Imagine if the skeleton of Nicolai Valuev were found in a remote cave in Russia. Along side stone tools and bear teeth. He'd be hailed as the newest edition of our ancient Neanderthal fore bearers.
rephaim23 6 months ago
@rephaim23 it doesn't work like that... several examples need to be found to confirm the species is a new one... and to confirm it is not for example just the male counterpart to a previous female example.
Plus we have techniques for extracting ancient DNA now. Plus Nicolai Valuev wasn't alive 40k years ago...and I'm sure his DNA is perfectly human...
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
If it looks like a man, walks and hunts like a man.... It's a man. Same applies to ducks... Calling it anything different borders on racism... And we've had enough of that.
rephaim23 6 months ago
@rephaim23 If its not got human DNA its certainly not human... Neanderthals had distinct DNA from other hominids... they were different... in DNA, in size, morphology etc...
They were not a different race (subspecies) they were a different species. One with a very small ability to breed with early homo sapiens... in the same way grey wolves bred with jackals to produce red wolves... well Caucasians are the equivalent of red wolves in that analogy... and black Africans are grey wolves.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
It's all a semantics game.
rephaim23 6 months ago
@UserNamei5
No, the Neanderthal people were part of our human ancestry, just a different branch, they intermarried with us also. They were about as different from us as an Aborigine is to a Englishman. "Homo" means human or earthly one in Latin. Just as there are different species within the genus of Douglas fir which grow to different height and shapes, there were different species within the genus of Man, who had different localized physical characteristics.
rephaim23 6 months ago
@rephaim23 neanderthals were a 'lot' more different than any two subspecies of human today... all humans on this planet differ at the most extreme by about 0.4% in protein coding DNA...
Neanderthals would exceed the 1.2% mark. They were separated from our ancestors in Africa by 300k years... at least.
By the time we bred with them their isolation had altered their DNA considerably.. Producing offspring was probably a rare event, it was also likely most of those offspring were sterile..
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@MumblingMickey
Yeah right. Give me a 200 year old Aborigine skull with Acromegaly, a shovel, and drop me off in central Germany.
When the archaeologists find this I am fully confident they'll declare they found a new species of Homo.
I'd be willing to bet we have people today who match that 1.2% mark.
Remember "Homo Gardarensis" ?
rephaim23 6 months ago
@rephaim23 "I'd be willing to bet we have people today who match that 1.2% mark."
Good luck finding them... the fact is if any person deviated above the 0.4% then they just wouldn't be human...they'd be classified as something else...
But hey,look there are hominids alive right now...150k of them, that do in fact deviate by about 2% if that's any good to you... we call them Pan by genus! Its not the same 2% that the neanderthals and Homo sapiens are distinguished by... but there y'go!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@rephaim23 Also as far as being the same Genus goes ...yes all 'homo' species are indeed from the same genus...hence the classification....(and it is a classification).
Then again all canids are the same genus too... Which groups Nyctereutes procyonoides into the same genus as the Canis Lupus...
I think you are trying to apply black and white logic to something that can only give you shades of gray! If we include all Hominini in the word 'human' then Neanderthals were human.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@UserNamei5 So yer not hidin ... U li´l mama´s boy posin as a warrior , I coul take u down wid one hand tied behind my back . NAW, wid TWO hands tied behind my back . U tiny assfuckin punk .
Hemulen40 6 months ago
@UserNamei5 Who did u call a degenerate , u fuckin half-wit homo ? People like u , hidin behind a pc screen , disgust me . Creep back under da slimy rock where u came from , u flamin asshole !
Hemulen40 6 months ago
Homo Sapiens = homo sexual ,
because 7665319987114578088764 years and few hours ago the the male humanoid elephant had a doggie style sex with a male humanoid ant and thus the space time program "Y" caused a shift in the sea balance "F" which is the result of the evolution word "FUCK YOU" ,
you can see the Animated doggie style sex between the male Elephant and Ant at BBC, CNN, FOX Bull-shit news channels coz they tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
shadow19831 6 months ago
wtf, I fought neanderfalls was still alive today with us. I fink they are called niggers.
ti3nt 7 months ago
@ti3nt That's very nice of you to compliment "niggers" on having a larger cranium capacity than modern day homo sapiens.
LolEvilFishy 6 months ago
@ti3nt Contrary to that idea (and as it turns out genetically) black Africans are the only race that DO NOT have any neanderthal DNA... maybe you'd like to revise your racist remark now that you have more information?
We do have a name for neanderthal progeny that survived until today...we call them Caucasian and Asian. I'm one of those myself... but I manage to be one without also being a racist cock sucking motherfucker!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
There have been probably hundreds of types of humanoid species on this earth which have gone extinct, and we are just now trying to piece the puzzle together.
Whole races have gone extinct in the past few thousand years. They found bones, and hair with DNA that matches no modern populations in North America. whole lineages wiped out. Of course Neanderthals were our ancestors, they were as viable as elephants and mammoths. They were just another extinct race of human.
rephaim23 7 months ago
LoL.
The truth is, science is trying so hard to come off as "politically correct" when they shoud just be blunt and say that different species of man existed and cross bred, and that's why different races and offshoots today have their differences. Some still have the genes of an earlier primitive form.
rephaim23 7 months ago
@rephaim23 And which ones would they be?
BloodOfRayne 6 months ago
@BloodOfRayne
European whites and non Africans. The share more DNA with Neanderthals than any other race.
rephaim23 6 months ago
@rephaim23 Its also unlikely that homo neanderthalis was the only other species of human like hominid... we just haven't found the other types in the same time period.
There were after all several exits from Africa...from an earlier african migration leading to homo erectus progeny it was so widespread with such a large population across Asia and Russian and even on the Indian subcontinent It'd stretch credulity to assume they did not diversify.
What we do know is they didn't last!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@rephaim23 So what do the rest share their DNA with?
BloodOfRayne 5 months ago
@rephaim23 All humans have the genetics of their ancestors... thats how gene duplication works.... In the case of black africans they primarily only have homo sapien DNA... in the case of all other races there is homo neanderthalis DNA and probably some homo Heidelbergis DNA in there too..
Incidentally Neanderthals are commonly accepted as being brighter and more advanced technologically than homo sapiens. Theres no evidence this makes a species more 'advanced' whatever that means?
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
these stuff r interesting.
101Duli 7 months ago
if homo sapiens evolution took millions of years for us to look like this today, is the evolution still ongoing? will we look something different millions of years from now? Anyone?
kickitable 7 months ago
@kickitable "is the evolution still ongoing" As long as organisms reproduce, evolution goes on.
"will we look something different millions of years from now" That's almost certain. Consider this... There have been several migration waves in our history. Tribes of people settled down in several places. For many generations, thus thousands of years, there was very little - if any - contact between them. The result: blacks, caucasian, asians, aboriginals,... And that's only a couple millenia.
ScientificBob 7 months ago
@kickitable " is the evolution still ongoing? "
All organisms evolve to cope with their environment. So when environments stop changing evolution becomes static. This does happen, e.g. sharks have lived with the same environmental pressure for many many millions of years the only thing that has changed in real terms (despite some notable diversity) is their size.
Humans are gluttons for punishment, we insist on living in places we really shouldn't In such cases evolution accelerates.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
Homo sapiens have outgrown their use. Gotta make way for the homo superior!
jessemaurais 8 months ago
compete with the sapiens?
how many neanders were there?
mainland europe supports hundreds of million people now and most of the diverse wildlife and plants are extinct. surely there was more than enough room for both species, unless some bottleneck catastrophic event happened that made the neanders go extinct.
obaidCarkey 8 months ago
@obaidCarkey We use resources differently now... so a few acres can support a hundred times the population now as it did then.
Also the environment changed.
Next, fitness for a purpose is not constrained to being stronger or brighter... (incidentally neanderthals were both when compared to homo sapiens).
Odds are they just couldn't compete with both homo sapiens AND the sudden change in the environment. Essentially it comes down to infant mortality.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
im confused...i thought neanderthals eventually evolved into us today..then how can they have become extinct??
(dont laughu, im a recent ex-christian so im trying to learn about all of this :))
haleygoeswhoohoo 8 months ago
@haleygoeswhoohoo That's a common misconception. I thought the same thing once too. Actually, Neanderthals were our "first cousins" in the tree of life who had settled Europe before Sapiens had got there. Sapiens didn't not descend from them, but there is plenty of evidence to indicate that Europeans had inter-bread with them at some point. This may actually explain a few things peculiar to the European branch of humanity.
jessemaurais 8 months ago
@haleygoeswhoohoo (Also) I went through the same thing once, as an ex-Christian. Don't worry about what you're just now learning. In fact I envy you, because you have world of discovery ahead of you. And trust me, as someone who's been there, it's going to be beautiful.
jessemaurais 8 months ago
@haleygoeswhoohoo As jesse allready explained, neanderthals are our cousins. We share an ancestor. There is indeed reason to believe that neandertals and sapiens have interbread, which could explain a few things that are quite unique to the european genus, like red hair and freckles - perhaps even blonde hair.
But I don't know if this has been conclusively proven. A comparative DNA analysis would be needed.
And indeed: the journey you are on will be quite extra ordinary, enjoy it.
ScientificBob 7 months ago
@ScientificBob "But I don't know if this has been conclusively proven. A comparative DNA analysis would be needed."
Completed 5 years ago by Svante Paabo... all races with the exception of most black africans share 'neanderthal only' DNA...
So we did produce offspring with them...and those offspring constitute most of the worlds population.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@MumblingMickey Ha, good to know. Thanks for the name as well, gives me something to read. :-)
ScientificBob 6 months ago
@ScientificBob ur welcome... Paabo's work has since been superceded by others...but as far as I know his original paper is still on NCBI and it a free download... although I might be wrong since I just ask a colleague in the biology dept. to download whatever I want (perk of the job) the extraction method was a work of genius... adn I might add not bad for a biologist. biologists are clearly not as dumb as I thought... (snigger, strokes ego)
MumblingMickey 5 months ago
@ScientificBob essentiall both statements are tryue..
'We share a common ancestor with neanderthals'...
and also' Neanderthals are our ancestors...'
Both of those are accurate.
What happened essentially was that two distinct groups separated and then recombined after 300k ... only those left behind in Africa still have the original uncombined DNA....
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@haleygoeswhoohoo Funnily enough both statements are true.
Firstly we did breed with them...so they are not truly extinct...as a subspecies their DNA is still knocking about... assuming you are not from Africa they are in you!
We also do share a common ancestor with them.
This is a common phenomena...
For example the red wolf, the gray wolf and the coyote share a common ancestor. but oddly enough the red wolf exists solely because its ancestors (gray wolf) bred with coyotes successfully.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@haleygoeswhoohoo However even if they were a direct ancestor... then it is more than likely they would be extinct anyway... animals go extinct when they can no longer compete for resources and reproduce in their environment... in these cases if they cannot adapt...then they go extinct.
But most species even modern humans have subspecies.... so although one entire group might die out...others will simply be left with yet more resources to exploit now that the competition is gone.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dear Lord Jesus,
I know that I am a sinner and need Your forgiveness. I believe that You died on the cross for my sins and rose from the grave to give me life. I know You are the only way to God. So now I want to quit disobeying You and start living for You. Please forgive me, change my life and show me how to know You. In Jesus' name. Amen.
bass109 8 months ago
But they say Homo Erection is the father of homo orgasm.
tybash 8 months ago
ofer bar yosef,respect hes israeli lol
GTXMAN 9 months ago
jewish homo
Clyde200k 9 months ago
These were Annunaki or Giants of old. They were not humans. They were demonic hualfhuman/halfdemon inbreds. This is why God had his flood.
JamesRideout123 9 months ago
@JamesRideout123 I love how you try to mesh Sumerian mythology, demonology, and Biblical scripture together with absolutely no reason to believe those three things are related. I gotta admire how you treat that as fact. Keep up the good work. We need conspiracy theorists in the world, builds character.
lolwut9790 9 months ago
@lolwut9790 Describing a religious nutcase as a conspiracy theorist is a bit generous. At least conspiracy theories are theoretically possible.
Shiftee88 8 months ago
@JamesRideout123 Tinfoil hat alert.
ScientificBob 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JamesRideout123
"hey were demonic hualfhuman/halfdemon inbreds. This is why God had his flood."
that doesn't of course explain why theres a huge amount of empty space being filled with trash in your mind where a certain amount of education should reside.....
could I suggest reading a book? Despite what you are told it won't lead to you being a raving atheist...just to you being better educated.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
It´s a moot point whether Neanderthals went extinct really : BETWEEN THREE TO FIVE PERCENT of modern man´s genes ( except from African peoples ) come from Neanderthals . So , in a sense most of us are ´neanderthaloids ´. End of story .
Hemulen40 9 months ago 11
@Hemulen40 Those genes may come from our common ancestor, and not directly from Neanderthals. Neaderthals were a separate and distinct species that could not interbreed and produce fertile off-spring with Homo sapiens.
edwardschlosser1 8 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 Not interbreed ? Says who ? That´s never been proven .
Hemulen40 8 months ago
@Hemulen40 First, Neanderthals are classified as a separate species and what I just stated is the definition of a species. Second, Neanderthals probably diverged well before Homo erectus meaning they would not have been able to interbreed with Homo sapiens. At least 200,000 years separates the two species and most likely that is a far too conservative estimate. I suspect that Neanderthals, just like all the indiginous Homo sapien tribes that remained isolated for thousands of years,
edwardschlosser1 8 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 That's wrong for a start. Scientists have discovered in the last few years that Sapiens and Neanderthals definately interbred as all people of Europe and Asia share as much as 5% of their DNA with Neanderthal man. Furthermore it his hypothesised now that Homo sapiens developed immunity from diseases that existed in Europe from interbreeding with Neanderthals, so it probably wasn't specifically disease that killed them either.
cardwitch91 7 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 "Neanderthals are classified as a separate species and what I just stated is the definition of a species" Your defenition is wrong. The scope of species doesn't end at being able to breed with fertile offspring. It's true that it will often be the case, but not necessarily. It's NOT part of the definition. Just like the term "planet", it's pretty "open". It's just a human invented word to allow for grouping. But the breeding thing alone isn't always enough.
ScientificBob 7 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 Since they did breed with homo sapiens your argument falls apart just there.
Next you are trying to argue a case for either/or... or black v's white...in an area of biology that contains only shades of gray....
Separate distinct species can interbreed... its not common but it does happen. Clearly it needs to happen before the ability of DNA to combine with another species has not exceeded a critical mass...and thats different for every species.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@Hemulen40 Contracted diseases from the Homo sapiens that their immature immune systems could not handle. Most American Indians did not die from conflicts with Europeans. Estimates as high as 90% exist for their demise due to diseases their immature, isolated immune systems could not fight off. This has been repeated in all contacts with isolated tribes of our own species. It is not too far off to believe that this probably doomed the Neanderthal.
edwardschlosser1 8 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 Well , Im not gonna argue all this : What it boils down to is , that we define the words ´ going extinct ´, ´die out ´ in quite different ways ... P.S. the 5-6 % of our genes that we do share with the Neanderthals of yore, seem in high degree to govern our BRAIN FUNCTIONS , our way of thinking & our emotions . Now , how is that for ´going extinct ´ .... / Peace & all the best , bro . I have no more time for this discussion .
Hemulen40 8 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 "Those genes may come from our common ancestor, and not directly from Neanderthals."
Yeah but the common ancestor doesn't have these allelles... the common ancestor is still knocking about y'know!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@Hemulen40 Yea.. most of the Homo Sapiens 40, 000 years ago probably mated with some Neanderthals.
Somzae 7 months ago
@Hemulen40 no we had distinct genes! we could not breed and although we may have been related we never shared a neanderthals genes
Eddtastic100 7 months ago
@Eddtastic100 erm... thats not what the DNA map of both species says...both species are distinct...that is accurate... but as it turns out we did mate...and produce offspring...and those offspring now constitute 80% of the human population.
If you'd like to know more about that please see research completed at the Max Planck institute by Svante Pääbo et al in 2006 and subsequent research. Both Genomes have been mapped in the past decade.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@Hemulen40 That has to be confirmed yet!
Popperite 6 months ago
@Hemulen40 Wrong, we are not Neanderthaloids, some people interbreed with them.
gregrutz 6 months ago
@Hemulen40 Well if you are not going to define extinction as the opposite of extant... then essentially an ostrich is a dinosaur and therefore they are not extinct either...
Which is technically true I suppose... of course there are no extant species of dinosaur...which is where I'd draw my definition of extinct.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@MumblingMickey Hiya , Mickey , good to hear from Ireland !/ Ye´ve made a number of good posts here , but basically, I have no more time for dis discussion , since most of us actually AGREE. Seems we´re just mincin words, really. / All da best from Sweden !
Hemulen40 6 months ago
@Hemulen40 That hypothesis was proven wrong by gene analysis. It showed the Neanderthals were too different from humans. There are as many difference in genetic structure as chimps.
TRYCLOPS1 4 months ago
@TRYCLOPS1 Dat´s a shitload of bollocks ! Basta ! / Not gonna discuss wid da likes of u .
Hemulen40 4 months ago
@Hemulen40 Huh?
TRYCLOPS1 4 months ago
LMAO at creationists!! bible hahahahaha, idiots
51m0n77 9 months ago 5
@51m0n77 The bible is full of shit!
watchinglosersagain 6 months ago
@watchinglosersagain indeed!
51m0n77 6 months ago
lol homos
theend1245 9 months ago
homo....
lordapekx 9 months ago
we are aliens
fletchernibiru 9 months ago
DOUBLE RAINBOW
yeaitwasme 9 months ago
Cylons, we are all cylons. XD
PrettyTigerlilly 9 months ago
i know,i know, i know a chimp jumped a whale five million years ago, they had a chale and it evolved to modern human,casue there bones look someewhat like ours, and ya know what, there is nothing to say it didnt happen,except dna evidence,and the same evidence says we are neandrathal and more related to them than chimps, see human genome project, you can call whom ever what ever
all you are doing is proving how closed minded some people truly are,right.
no book written has the full truth
woodtowl1 10 months ago
sorry dna is really hard to question,no matter what you think the fossils says.dna is legal documentation also, it says many humans are more related to neandrathals than chimps,meaning our dna matches neandrathals better than a chimp,as far as fossils go we could be related to whales as they have bones like ours also.
we each have a right to believe what we wish,and frankly this is hogwash!
woodtowl1 10 months ago
Who the hell let the self important big babies on this forum?
restlesspride666 10 months ago
@Darkness0111 our entire solar system will be gone in 9999999999999999999999999 years. Probably the entire universe too.
cam33metallica666 10 months ago
Comment removed
john17972 10 months ago
@john17972 Not all humans show genetic heritage of neanderthals. Mostly it is Europeans. But it does lend support to the intermixing theory (without ruling out competition).
ianman6 10 months ago
A war of that would decide who would take the throne as rule the world. Humans won its pretty cool to think that is why we are here.
LordHannigan 10 months ago
Novel about an alternative view of evolution see video book trailer
dltanner99 11 months ago
garbage
Adriangrosvenor 11 months ago
@Adriangrosvenor you would say that, even though your Bible is full of contradictions, makes no sense (plants created before light??)....i hate people and their ignorance. i'm SURE these people devote their entire lives to extensive scientific research just to "make this shit up". go back to the middle ages.
peppermint23 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A novel about an alternative view of evolution see video book trailer
dltanner99 11 months ago
is that guy a robot. Wow how wev changed
2TWISTEDBALLS 11 months ago
Neanderthals had larger brains than homo sapiens, larger, in fact, than modern man.
achilles197474 11 months ago
@achilles197474
that means jack shit. the whales have larger brains than the Homo sapiens. you clearly are ignorant of basic neurobiology.
transtlantic 11 months ago
@transtlantic achilles197474 is still correct. Their brains were larger by volume. He never said that this meant they were more intelligent. Take it easy on him.
ianman6 10 months ago
@ianman6
take it easy on a dumbfuck who believes in a literal interpretation of the bible? achiles is incorrect. you clearly are taking my reply and his claim out of context.
transtlantic 10 months ago
@transtlantic achilles said neanderthals had larger brains than humans. On average this is true. 1,200–1,900 cc compared to 1,100-1,850 cc. Not much of a difference, but one nonetheless. Therefore his statement was correct. As for taking your reply out of context, there is no context. You didn't write a book, a paper or even a letter. Your reply is whole on its own and just a few characters long. Go learn what 'out of context' means before you declare it.
ianman6 10 months ago
@ianman6 idiot...i never said different. how am i saying other wise with my post? are you mentally challenged?
therefore his statement in context means jak shit. the whales have larger brains than the Homo sapiens. what the fuck is your problem? can you understand the meaning of context?
transtlantic 10 months ago
@transtlantic Ok, here's the whole convo as context. Achilles makes a CORRECT STATEMENT about the respective brain sizes of neanderthal and h. sapiens. You reply like an asshole, though your statement that this does not indicate greater intelligence is correct. However, your tone was unwarrented and achilles never said (though he may have been implying) that brain size = intelligence. I neutrally sort fact from assholeness and your response is to increase your asshole level. Good job.
ianman6 10 months ago
@ianman6 i reply like an asshole? how so? i never said his comment was wrong.
tone was unwarrented? lol...who the fuck cares?
my response said nothing wrong and i just pointed out to another dumbfuck cretard that brain size does not equal to greater intelligence.
and you got it! did you know that he didn't get it?
the dumbfuck still thinks that brain size of the neaderthal is evidence against evolution! lol
transtlantic 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@transtlantic "i reply like an asshole? how so? i never said his comment was wrong." Go back and read! Your posts are littered with ad hominem attacks. Even your reply to me was harsh. This is simply uncivil, regardless of how silly achilles' beliefs are. But what did I do to incur your wrath? I sincerely apologize for setting you off :S. Otherwise we agree on content so I have no quarrel with you. I'm all for a little creationist bashing, but holy moly man!
ianman6 10 months ago
@transtlantic My problem was with your unwarrented ad hominem attack, that's all. I simply said to take it easy. You, in turn, not only call him a dumbfuck but accuse me of being retarded? I think you're the one with the problem. I have the whole convo in front of me, start to finish. Your claims of being taken 'out of context' are without merit. Idiot. (You like being called names).
ianman6 10 months ago
@ianman6 i did no ad hominem, you moron. ad hominem is when you use the opponents character as a counter argument. i did no such thing, moron.
"to take it easy"? why?
accuse you? i am starting to think you are retarded.
context because this video is not, OBVIOUSLY, the only video me an achelies have been exchanging comments.
SO YES; you are an idiot!
any other thing? or you going to promote creationism too?
transtlantic 10 months ago
@transtlantic Oh excuse me for not looking at both your channels and following the exchanges you've had since you met. Clearly that's the real context for you. No, I'm not going to promote creationism. I will promote the fact that you are, indeed, an asshole. Count the number of 'moron', 'idiot', and other appelations in your post. You ARE attacking my personal character as the basis for my argument, ergo your ad hominem procedure. Have fun arguing on YouTube like a champion!
ianman6 10 months ago
@ianman6
well i think you are the asshole here. you come here and say that i was claiming that achiles was wrong. when i clearly never said such. then you go on and on about me stating the obvious fact that you are an idiot.
attacking your personal character? lol... how is that an ad hominem?
well, i guess i will have to take the time to teach you, you mental midget.
here:
"is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise"
transtlantic 10 months ago
@ianman6
example of an ad hominem: ""You can't believe Jack when he says the proposed policy would help the economy. He doesn't even have a job.""
how is this parallel to what i did? you dumbfuck.
ad hominem would be if i said: you are wrong because you are an idiot.
i just said you are an idiot. i never said you were wrong.
now fuck off, you mental midget.
transtlantic 10 months ago
@ianman6
"i will promote the fact that you are, indeed, an asshole"
by your failed logic of what is an ad hominem, you would be doing an ad hominem.
lol...thanks for proving that you truly are a mental midget, retard.
transtlantic 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@transtlantic "by your failed logic of what is an ad hominem, you would be doing an ad hominem." Yes, I've decided to respond in kind.
"thanks for proving that you truly are a mental midget, retard" I had to lower myself to properly communicate on your level, since you were clearly struggling with comprehension.
ianman6 10 months ago
@transtlantic You know the sad part is in terms of content I am in agreement with you. Your style of discourse is what is deplorable. You give rationalists a bad name. People like you give reason to creationists for thinking atheists and adherants to science and evolution are assholes.
ianman6 10 months ago
@ianman6
"what is deplorable"? no one forced you to read what i post. plus... you had to admit in the end that the content of what i post is right. lol
rationalists a bad name? yeah, you sure showed that i am a rationalist. because you sure aren't one. you showed to be a failure in basic logic.
all dumb kids think educated people are assholes. well.... without the humility of being a student, they will never want to learn. so fuck them, let them stay as the good janitors that they are.
transtlantic 10 months ago
@ianman6 In what way am I not a rationalist? And my 'admission at the end' wasn't a caveat: I never disagreed with your content to begin with. Judging by the quality of your responses (both in terms of nuance and basic English proficiency) I'm afraid I will retract my statement that you are a rationalist. "All dumb kids think educated people are assholes" -> Rational claim? Not by a long shot. I realize you are educated, but are clearly guided by emotion. That is PRECISELY the opposite of reason
ianman6 10 months ago
@transtlantic " i did no ad hominem, you moron"
yes that is an comma in there...so I think this is what I can use as the definition of an oxymoronic statement...
ITs also a pretty funny one... given the denial and confirmation of opposites are separated by one word!
I can only assume this was deliberate...or fueled by beer and wine!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@MumblingMickey
don't understand your remark. Did i call you a moron?
btw... i noticed you don't use many technical terms. And some wrong stuff.
"All organisms evolve to cope with their environment. So when environments stop changing evolution becomes static"
1) organisms evolve, period.
2) "static"? lolol you are just ignoring sympatric speciation and the FACT that mutations occur introducing novel changes even without environmental change, ignorance of sexual selection, etc.
come on....
transtlantic 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@transtlantic
"organisms evolve, period."
No they don't they evolve in relation to the selective pressure of environmental change. Things don't change in any system without a catalyst.
" "static"? lolol you are just ignoring sympatric speciation ... "
Try not to educate someone on dynamic systems who has spent 23 years studying and working with dynamic systems..
". i noticed you don't use many technical terms."
Yes and it often gives me a headache to do that!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@ianman6 Neanderthals were more intelligent as it turns out... their tool making was well above their homo sapien counterparts, where similar they were better constructed.
But intelligence or even dexterity is not necessarily an advantage when considering if a particular species is adapted to its environment...
Clearly if we were to write out the pros and cons of one against the other the neanderthals would lose... because history just dictated they did!
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@MumblingMickey Neanderthals had been developing technology for millennia before homo sapiens arose. They had a head start. You can't expect a nascent species to come with 'built-in' tool making abilities. Homo sapiens' natural ability to do so, however, was superior as they eventually developed better tools than neanderthal ever did. Intelligence and dexterity confer an obvious advantage, I don't know why you would say otherwise. Smarter, better at manipulation. Advantage. History IS evolution.
ianman6 6 months ago
@ianman6 They also did have not only a larger cranial capacity but the DNA we share is known to control gamete and sperm production (SPAG17) other coding covers skin production, hair and nails,
other difference include the coding for the protein PCD16 involved in auto-immune and healing ... and there is a lot of evidence from Paabo that some of the sequences code for metabolism and cognitive development.
Given the way things panned out Its almost certain they passed on cognitive capacity.
MumblingMickey 6 months ago
@achilles197474 yes but the they had less neurons
PHDcsfan 11 months ago
Im half Alien half Neanderthal and Chuck Noris is my uncle.....
mrtundra45 1 year ago
@mrtundra45 then we must be related
666lonny666 1 year ago
@666lonny666 Chuck? ...;)
mrtundra45 1 year ago
The Dare Island Enigma is a novel concerning an alternative view of evolution see video book trailer
dltanner99 1 year ago