|
The Evolution of Man
|
 (11-17-2016, 11:35 PM)Vinay Wrote: Don't think Neanderthals used fire.In cold areas wood wont burned easily without fuels (chemicals). It is thought that they may of had some control over fire http://www.colorado.edu/today/2011/03/14...researcher But it's not easy to create a fire, even the Masaai Tribe had problems making one while I was there, they eventually did of course but it was no easy task. They'd need to be inside a cave or somewhere the wind will be blocked to have any hope of doing so in a colder climate. It'd be much easier in hot, dryer climates obviously.  (11-17-2016, 11:49 PM)Pckts Wrote:Don't trust everything written in a journal/net.(11-17-2016, 11:35 PM)Vinay Wrote: Don't think Neanderthals used fire.In cold areas wood wont burned easily without fuels (chemicals). "Archaeologists consider the emergence of stone tool manufacturing and the control of fire as the two hallmark events in the technological evolution of early humans.While experts agree the origins of stone tools date back at least 2.5 million years in Africa, the origin of fire control has been a prolonged and heated debate!!" Liked these two points... As i said before  Timeline Million yrs  *This image is copyright of its original author https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution Good read... It also emphasis Homo erects divided into two sects Homo sapiens (Blacks---South Asians ----East Asians) and Neanderthals  (11-17-2016, 09:45 PM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:(11-16-2016, 06:14 PM)parvez Wrote: There are some chances of mutations that may have occured during the evolution of ancient man to modern one. Otherwise it is really hard to have achieved that much intelligence in only around 100000 years or so. I think the non-Homo Sapien admixture to the Eurasians (especially Europeans) had some significant mental and slight physical defects such as the development of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and obesity-linked diseases. This is not due to either the Neanderthal or the modern human, but because of the admixture between the two (~2-8% of Neanderthal in modern Europeans), so it is not that minimal. Africans, on the other hand, never had any of the aforementioned conditions until the Eurasians intermixed.
And for those who keep stating that Neanderthals were fat...they certainly were not, not like modern humans. They were certainly stocky, but also quite muscular in their frame similar to that of a shorter Olympic wrestler.
Neither pure Sapiens or Neanderthals carried those aforementioned diseases, but it was created as a side effect of interbreeding for their modern hybrid offspring. Because with the re-combination of the genomes, everything can happen, either positive or negative.
BTW, here is a good document about the interaction between the modern human species and other archaic human species.
99% sites of Neanderthals are found in Europe.One recent study on Neanderthals and wolves.
As the thankful time of year arrives, I think wolves deserve our thanks. With the help of wolves, early humans improved their hunting skills and out competed Neanderthals. Ancient wolves were generous enough to share their hard-earned kills and brave enough to make a leap of friendship with humans.  *This image is copyright of its original author Scientists estimate that Neanderthals had dominated the European continent for more than 200,000 years. Our ancestors reached Europe about 45,000 years ago, and within just 5,000 years Neanderthals had disappeared. Some experts believe that climate change caused their demise. =================== Even today only one Neanderthal race oops Whites consider domesticated wolves (dogs) as some type of demigods and mans best friend. Dogs according to races Yellow-Asians == Yummy meat Brown- Indians/ME ==Dirty and Scrap eaters Blacks-Africans == Some times food and dirty White-Europeans == Literally worships them 2. Almost 30% whites are FAT today (FAT in Yellow,Brown and Black races is 10% Max.... Majority Yellow lives in cold areas and they are not poor).Hence my theory Neanderthal == Whites is proved. 
"Dogs according to races
Yellow-Asians == Yummy meat Brown- Indians/ME ==Dirty and Scrap eaters Blacks-Africans == Some times food and dirty White-Europeans == Literally worships them" You're so off base its ridicolous. Never once in africa did I see the mistreatment of dogs, never once in thailand did I see the mistreatment of dogs. In SOME parts of asia, africa, India etc. Dogs are mistreated, same as the US. That certainly doesn't mean ALL. "2. Almost 30% whites are FAT today (FAT in Yellow,Brown and Black races is 10% Max.... Majority Yellow lives in cold areas and they are not poor).Hence my theory Neanderthal == Whites is proved. "I have got to ask, why don't you do research before you make these claims? In the US Overweight and Obesity Rates for adults by Race/Ethnicity White 63% Black 72% Hispanic 70% Pacific Islander 37% American Indian 68% Other 61% http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/adu...imeframe=0 Obesity has far more to do with excess resources than Ethnicity. In some poorer countries, of course their overweight rate will be higher than in places where food is easily obtainable. Now if you're talking about fat distribution, it does differ between races "The Nurses Health Study, for example, tracked patterns of weight gain and diabetes development in 78,000 U.S. women, to see if there were any differences by ethnic group. (1) All women were healthy at the start of the study. After 20 years, researchers found that at the same BMI, Asians had more than double the risk of developing type 2 diabetes than whites; Hispanics and blacks also had higher risks of diabetes than whites, but to a lesser degree. Increases in weight over time were more harmful in Asians than in the other ethnic groups: For every 11 pounds Asians gained during adulthood, they had an 84 percent increase in their risk of type 2 diabetes; Hispanics, blacks, and whites who gained weight also had higher diabetes risks, but again, to a much lesser degree than Asians. Several other studies have found that at the same BMI, Asians have higher risks of hypertension and cardiovascular disease than their white European counterparts, and a higher risk of dying early from cardiovascular disease or any cause. (2–4) Researchers are still teasing out why Asians have higher weight-related disease risks at lower BMIs. One possible explanation is body fat. When compared to white Europeans of the same BMI, Asians have 3 to 5 percent higher total body fat. (5) South Asians, in particular, have especially high levels of body fat and are more prone to developing abdominal obesity, which may account for their very high risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. (6,7) In contrast, some studies have found that blacks have lower body fat and higher lean muscle mass than whites at the same BMI, and therefore, at the same BMI, may be at lower risk of obesity-related diseases. (8,9) (Keep in mind, though, that in the U.S., the prevalence of obesity is higher in non-Hispanic blacks than in non-Hispanic whites, so the overall burden of obesity-related diseases is still higher in this group. Read more about obesity trends in the U.S. and other countries.)" https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-pre...ease-risk/ In regards to Neanderthal Why Am I Neanderthal? When our ancestors first migrated out of Africa around 60,000 years ago, they were not alone. At that time, at least two other species of hominid cousins walked the Eurasian landmass—Neanderthals and Denisovans. As our modern human ancestors migrated through Eurasia, they encountered the Neanderthals and interbred. Because of this, a small amount of Neanderthal DNA was introduced into the modern human gene pool. Everyone living outside of Africa today has a small amount of Neanderthal in them, carried as a living relic of these ancient encounters. A team of scientists comparing the full genomes of the two species concluded that most Europeans and Asians have between 1 to 2 percent Neanderthal DNA. Indigenous sub-Saharan Africans have none, or very little Neanderthal DNA because their ancestors did not migrate through Eurasia. On one level, it’s not surprising that modern humans were able to interbreed with their close cousins. According to one theory, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and all modern humans are all descended from the ancient human Homo heidelbergensis. Between 300,000 to 400,000 years ago, an ancestral group of H. heidelbergensis left Africa and then split shortly after. One branch ventured northwestward into West Asia and Europe and became the Neanderthals. The other branch moved east, becoming Denisovans. By 130,000 years ago H. heidelbergensis in Africa had become Homo sapiens. Our modern human ancestors did not begin their own exodus from Africa until about 60,000 years ago, when they expanded into Eurasia and encountered their ancient cousins. The revelation that our ancient ancestors mated with one another could help explain one of the great mysteries in anthropology: Why did the Neanderthals disappear? After first venturing out of Africa, Neanderthals thrived in Europe for several hundred thousand years. But they mysteriously died out about 30,000 years ago, roughly around the same time that modern humans arrived in Europe. Some scientists have suggested modern humans out-competed or outright killed the Neanderthals. But the new genetic evidence provides support for another theory: Perhaps our ancestors made love, not war, with their European cousins, and the Neanderthal lineage disappeared because it was absorbed into the much larger human population. Even though Neanderthals and Denisovans are both extinct, modern humanity may owe them a debt of gratitude. A 2011 study by Stanford University researchers concluded that many of us carry ancient variants of immune system genes involved in destroying pathogens that arose after we left Africa. One possibility is that these gene variants came from other archaic humans. https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/
Neanderthal Genes for Red Hair and More...
Red-Headed Neanderthals Ancient DNA has been used to show aspects of Neanderthal appearance. A fragment of the gene for the melanocortin 1 receptor (MRC1) was sequenced using DNA from two Neanderthal specimens from Spain and Italy, El Sidrón 1252 and Monte Lessini (Lalueza-Fox et al. 2007). Neanderthals had a mutation in this receptor gene that has not been found in modern humans. The mutation changes an amino acid, making the resulting protein less efficient. Modern humans have other MCR1 variants that are also less active resulting in red hair and pale skin. The less active Neanderthal mutation probably also resulted in red hair and pale skin, as in modern humans. The specific MCR1 mutation in Neanderthals has not found in modern humans (or occurs extremely rarely in modern humans). This indicates that the two mutations for red hair and pale skin occurred independently and does not support the idea of gene flow between Neanderthals and modern humans. Pale skin may have been advantageous to Neanderthals living in Europe because of the ability to synthesize vitamin D.  *This image is copyright of its original author This reconstruction of a male Neanderthal by John Gurche features pale skin, but not red hair. Neanderthals, Language and FOXP2 The FOXP2 gene is involved in speech and language (Lai et al. 2001). Changes in the FOXP2 gene sequence led to problems with speech, oral and facial muscle control in modern humans with a mutation in the gene. It impairs language function. Modern humans and Neanderthals share two changes in FOXP2 compared with the sequence in chimpanzees (Krause et al. 2007). Neanderthals may also have their own unique derived characteristics in the FOXP2 gene that were not tested for in this study. The human FOXP2 gene is on a haplotype that was subject to a strong selective sweep. A haplotype is a set of alleles that are inherited together on the same chromosome. The researchers then tried to determine how the FOXP2 variant came to be found in both Neanderthals and modern humans. One scenario is that it could have been transferred between species via gene flow. The researchers do not think this is likely since there is no evidence indicating that gene flow has occurred. Another possibility is that the derived FOXP2 was present in the ancestor of both anatomically modern Homo sapiens and Neanderthals with the selective sweep that made it prevalent occurring after the divergence between the groups. A third scenario, which the authors think is most likely, is that the changes and selective sweep occurred before the divergence between the populations. ABO Blood Types and Neanderthals The gene that produces the ABO blood system is polymorphic in humans. Various selection factors may favor different alleles, leading to the maintenance of distinct blood groups in modern human populations. Though chimpanzees also have different blood groups, they are not the same as human blood types. While the mutation that causes the human B blood group arose around 3.5 Ma, the O group mutation dates to around 1.15 Ma. Lalueza-Fox and colleagues (2008) tested whether Neanderthals had the O blood group. They found that two Neanderthal specimens from Spain probably had the O blood type, though there is the possibility that they were OA or OB. Though the O allele was likely to have already appeared before the split between humans and Neanderthals, it could also have arisen in the Neanderthal genome via gene from modern humans. Bitter Taste Perception and Neanderthals Like some modern humans, some Neanderthals were able to taste bitter substances. Some items that taste bitter may be toxic in large quantities so the ability to taste bitter substances may have protected hominins from accidental poisoning. Some of these bitter chemicals are found in vegetables. For instance, humans vary in their ability to perceive a bitter substance similar to that found in Brussels sprouts, broccoli and cabbage. The ability to taste bitter substances is controlled by a gene, TAS2R38. Some individuals are able to taste bitter substances, while others have a different version of the gene that does not allow them to taste bitter items. Possession of two copies of alleles associated with tasting bitter substances gives the individual greater perception of bitter tastes than the heterozygous state, in which individuals have one tasting allele and one non-tasting allele. Two copies of a non-tasting allele leads to inability to taste bitter substances. A Neanderthal from El Sidrón, Spain, was sequenced for the TAS23R38 gene. They found that this individual was heterozygous and thus was able to perceive bitter taste, although not as strongly as a homozygous individual with two copies of the tasting allele would be able to (Lalueza-Fox et al. 2009). Since the Neanderthal sequenced was heterozygous, the two alleles (tasting and non-tasting) were probably both present in the common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans. Though chimpanzees also vary in their ability to taste bitterness, their abilities are controlled by different alleles than those found in humans, indicating that non-tasting alleles evolved separately in the hominin lineage. Microcephalin and Archaic Hominins The microcephalin gene relates to brain size during development. A variant of this, haplogroup D, may have been positively selected for in modern humans – and may also have come from an interbreeding event with an archaic population (Evans et al. 2006). Mutations in microcephalin cause the brain to be 3 to 4 times smaller in size. All of the haplogroup D variants come from a single copy that appeared in modern humans around 37,000 years ago. However, haplogroup D itself came from a lineage that had diverged from the lineage that led to modern humans around 1.1 million years ago. Although there was speculation that the Neanderthals were the source of the microcephalin haplogroup D (Evans et al. 2006), the Neanderthal DNA recently sequenced does not contain the microcephalin haplogroup D (Green et al. 2010). The Relationship between Modern Humans and Neanderthals The relationship between modern humans and archaic hominins, particularly Neanderthals, has been the subject of much debate. While the idea that modern humans originated in Africa and spread out to other parts of the world (Out of Africa) is widely accepted, several scenarios have been proposed to account for the replacement of archaic hominin populations. Under strict replacement, modern humans did not interbreed with the archaic populations as they expanded their geographic range. In less strict scenarios, admixture between the populations occurred, but in small amounts, with the bulk of modern human ancestry tied to Africa. The multiregional hypothesis holds that hominin populations in Eurasia and Africa were held together by gene flow. Fossil and genetic evidence supports an African origin for Homo sapiens. Mitochondrial DNA shows differences between Neanderthals and modern humans. Neanderthal mtDNA also differed from that of anatomically modern Homo sapiens from the same time period. Proponents of multiregional and admixture models argue that these results are consistent with African origin for modern Homo sapiens, but do not explicitly rule out admixture between modern humans and archaic populations (Templeton 2007, Relethford 2008). Neanderthal genetic sequences introduced into the human genome may have been subsequently lost through genetic drift (Relethford 2001), while similarities between modern Europeans and Neanderthals, which would be expected if Neanderthals and modern humans interbred while in Europe, could have been lost due to gene flow between modern humans from different regions. Various analyses have examined the amount of Neanderthal contribution to modern human mtDNA. One analysis was unable to find positive evidence for interbreeding, but could not rule out a small genetic contribution (Serre et al. 2004). Other researchers (Plagnol and Wall 2006, Wall et al. 2009) looked at the pattern of variation in modern human DNA to determine whether modern humans mixed with more ancient populations. Their recent models are consistent with between 1-4% archaic-modern admixture in European and American populations, and 1.5% admixture in East Asian populations. Nested clade phylogenetic analysis shows evidence of three expansions out of Africa at 1.9 Ma, 650,000 years, and 130,000 years, which is consistent with the admixture between ancient and modern populations rather than complete replacement (Templeton 2002, 2005, 2007). Other researchers contend that factors such as population structure within Africa could have preserved old haplotypes and produced the pattern found in the nested clade analysis (Satta and Takahata 2002). Though it is difficult to prove or quantify admixture, small amounts of interbreeding were supported by a variety of analyses. However, the substantial differences between Neanderthal and modern human mtDNA is consistent with large-scale replacement and some amount of interbreeding between modern and archaic populations. Interbreeding between archaic and moderns may have involved different species of archaic hominins, including populations in Africa, Asia and Europe. The draft sequence of the Neanderthal genome provides more evidence that interbreeding between Neanderthals and modern humans may have occurred. It showed more similarities between non-African modern humans and Neanderthals than between African modern humans and Neanderthals. This difference between regions is consistent with interbreeding between Neanderthals and the ancestors of Eurasian modern humans before they branched off into regional groups. Approximately 1 to 4% of non-African modern human DNA is shared with Neanderthals. Sequencing the Complete Neanderthal Mitochondrial Genome After successfully sequencing large amounts of DNA and devising strategies to deal with potential contamination, a team led by Svante Pääbo from the Max Planck Institute, reported the first complete mtDNA sequence for a Neanderthal (Green et al. 2008). The 0.3 gram sample was taken from a 38,000 year old Neanderthal from Vindija Cave, Croatia. Complete Neanderthal mtDNA sequences give researchers more information about the relationship between modern humans and Neanderthals, as well as information about Neanderthal population size. The complete mtDNA sequence shows that Neanderthals were outside the range of modern human mtDNA variation. Researchers compared the mtDNA sequence with that of modern humans. They compared sequence changes that resulted in nonsynonymous amino acid changes with synonymous changes. They found a larger number of nonsynonymous changes in the Neanderthal lineage, possibly implying that Neanderthals had a small population size with weaker purifying selection (Green et al. 2008).  *This image is copyright of its original author Later, Svante Pääbo’s lab sequenced the entire mitochondrial genome of five Neanderthals (Briggs et al. 2009). Sequences came from two individuals from the Neander Valley in Germany, Mezmaiskaya Cave in Russia, El Sidrón Cave in Spain and Vindija Cave in Croatia. Though the Neanderthal sample comes from a wide geographic area, the Neanderthal mtDNA sequences were not particularly genetically diverse. The most divergent Neanderthal sequence came from the Mezmaiskaya Cave Neanderthal from Russia, which the oldest and eastern-most specimen. To look at whether age or geographic location contributed to genetic differences, the team sequenced part of the DNA of another Mezmaiskaya Cave Neanderthal that dated to 41,000 years ago. This more recent specimen grouped with the other Neanderthals, possibly showing that age was the cause of the sequence differences (Briggs et al. 2009). Other studies show the existence of eastern, western and southern groups of Neanderthals (Fabre et al. 2009). On average, Neanderthal mtDNA genomes differ from each other by 20.4 bases and are only 1/3 as diverse as modern humans (Briggs et al. 2009). The low diversity might signal a small population size, possibly due to the incursions of modern humans into their range (Briggs et al. 2009).  *This image is copyright of its original author Sequencing the Neanderthal Nuclear Genome Recently, there have been efforts to sequence Neanderthal nuclear genes. Two studies, one by Svante Pääbo’s team and one by Edward Rubin, have sequenced large amount of Neanderthal nuclear DNA using different methods. Their results were announced in 2006. Given their success in sequencing some nuclear DNA, both labs launched projects to sequence the entire Neanderthal genome. Nuclear genomic sequences from Neanderthals show differences between modern humans and Neanderthals, and illustrate aspects of Neanderthal biology. One Million Base Pairs of the Neanderthal Sequence Svante Pääbo’s team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany announced the sequencing of one million base pairs of nuclear DNA of a Neanderthal specimen in 2006 (Green et al. 2006). After a long search for specimens with a sufficient amount of undamaged DNA to sequence and for the ones with the least evidence of contamination, they focused on Vindija 80, a Neanderthal discovered in Croatia in 1980 that is approximately 38,000 years old. They estimated that 7.9% of the changes in human DNA compared with that of the chimpanzee occurred after the split with Neanderthals. They dated the split between the ancestors of modern humans and Neanderthals to 465,000 to 569,000 years ago. They also found that the effective population size of the Neanderthals was small. Their success in sequencing this amount of DNA indicated that a large-scale project to sequence the Neanderthal genome is possible. Rubin's Neanderthal Nuclear DNA Edward Rubin’s team from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California also sequenced Neanderthal nuclear DNA (Noonan et al. 2006). They sequenced about 65,000 base pairs from the 38,000 year old Vindija, Croatia specimen. The technique used here produces a copy of the Neanderthal sequence that can be retained forever, reducing the need for repeated destructive sampling. The DNA is then cloned in bacteria. The average split time between the Neanderthal and modern human populations was around 370,000 years ago. They used the sequence to look at the possibility of interbreeding between Neanderthals and moderns. Admixture would be seen as derived alleles that are found in Neanderthals and in low frequencies among modern humans. They did not detect this in their sample. A simulation to test the Neanderthal contribution to the human genome found a 0% chance of Neanderthal input with a 0% to 20% confidence range. With this data, the authors cannot definitively rule out admixture (Noonan et al. 2006). Some aspects of the two sets of nuclear DNA do not fit together, possibly because of contamination and sequencing errors, especially in the Green et al. (2006) study (Wall and Kim 2007). This has led the researchers to develop new methods of detecting and preventing contamination to ensure that only ancient DNA is being sequenced. A Draft Sequence of the Neanderthal Genome In 2010, Svante Pääbo’s lab announced a draft sequence of the Neanderthal genome (Green et al. 2010). This new study has produced evidence consistent with interbreeding between Neanderthals and anatomically modern Homo sapiens and points to aspects of the human genome that may have changed since the split between humans and Neanderthals. DNA was extracted from three Neanderthal bones from Vindija Cave, Croatia. By comparing sequences from their mtDNA and their nuclear DNA, scientists determined that the three bones came from different individuals, although two of them might be related on their mother’s side. The researchers used several methods to ensure that the DNA they were sequencing was derived from the Neanderthal specimens rather than from contamination by modern humans in the lab. The Neanderthal sequence was compared to those of five modern humans from France, China, Papua New Guinea, as well as Africans from the San and Yoruba groups. Tests indicated that Neanderthals shared more derived alleles with non-African modern humans than with African modern humans. They compared parts of the Neanderthal genome with pairs of modern humans. While the European and Asian pairs had similar amounts of derived material compared with the Neanderthal, Neanderthals had more similarities with non-African humans than with Africans. The simplest explanation for these results is gene flow from Neanderthals into modern humans. Gene flow could also have occurred from modern humans into Neanderthals. Interbreeding events between Neanderthals and modern humans might be obscured if the modern human population was large. Neanderthals have contributed approximately 1% to 4% to the genomes of non-African modern humans. This evidence of interbreeding sheds light on how we think of the expansion of modern humans out of Africa. It refutes the strictest scenario in which anatomically modern humans replaced archaic hominins completely without any interbreeding. However, even with some interbreeding between moderns and archaic hominins, most of our genome still derives from Africa. The data also points to the time when interbreeding might have taken place. Since the Neanderthal DNA was equally related to that of the modern samples from France, China and Papua New Guinea, admixture between moderns and Neanderthals must have occurred before the Eurasian populations split off from each other. Remains of both modern humans and Neanderthals dating to around 100,000 years ago have been found in the Middle East. A few interbreeding events during this period could have produced the results found in this study. The sequence of our close hominin relative also shows us how humans are unique. Researchers found 78 sequence differences that would have affected proteins in which Neanderthals had the ancestral state and modern humans had a newer, derived state. Five genes had more than one sequence change that affected the protein structure. These proteins include SPAG17, which is involved in the movement of sperm, PCD16, which may be involved in wound healing, TTF1, which is involved in ribosomal gene transcription, and RPTN, which is found in the skin, hair and sweat glands. Scientists do not know the function of the CAN15 protein, which was also one of the differences. Other changes may affect regulatory regions in the human sequence. Some changes are in regions that code for microRNA molecules that regulate protein manufacture. The comparison also pointed out regions that might have been under positive selection in modern humans. Though some of the genomic areas that may have been positively selected for in modern humans may have coded for structural or regulatory regions, others may have been associated with energy metabolism, cognitive development and the morphology of the head and upper body. more articles here http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/gene...erthal-dna
It depends, the Neanderthal species was also constituted by several races.
Those lived in Europe might be lightly pigmented, while those lived in Middle East and outside of Europe might have darker complexion.
@Pckts
You're so off base its ridicolous. Never once in africa did I see the mistreatment of dogs, never once in thailand did I see the mistreatment of dogs. In SOME parts of asia, africa, India etc. Dogs are mistreated, same as the US. That certainly doesn't mean ALL. Iam talking about general perception, culture and values not about mistreatment .Even cows are mistreated and butchered(In many states it is legal and so-many illegal slaughter houses) in India.But general perception about Cow is Holy- and Dog is dirty. I have got to ask, why don't you do research before you make these claims? In the US Overweight and Obesity Rates for adults by Race/Ethnicity White 63% Black 72% Hispanic 70% Pacific Islander 37% American Indian 68% Other 61%  *This image is copyright of its original author Japan and South koreans income is nearly equal to White West.
Another theory of mine in regards of human evolution relates to psychopathy.
Unlike in apes or other primates, humans seemed to have developed extremely higher rates of psychopathy within a population number. I think this is due to humans facing predators, large and small, throughout their expansion. Activating one's survival instincts for a prolonged period of time (in fear of being stalked or attacked) can have a devastating impact on the brain; these impacts include carelessness about other life forms, greater sudden physical retaliation, extreme self-importance, and a few other factors. For some, psychopathy became a way of life, and this trait transfused into some modern humans. Psychopathy is also linked to a greater "survival instinct" in some humans with the trait, granting them greater "flight-or-fight" responses to threats. Gorillas and chimpanzees rarely have to worry about leopard attacks, and thus do not have the need to fear for their life (if at all). Their greatest enemy is an intruding male of their species, and they don't seem to have as great self-importance in their behavior: silverback gorillas put their family first when attacked by a leopard, while humans seem to follow the rule of "every man/couple for his/their own". Back then, humans (even lone ones) seemed to be more prone to physical retaliation when a predator attacks, compared to a primate that prefers to escape (except if in groups) when a leopard attacks. So, to summarize, hominids have a greater "survival instinct" than non-hominid primates due to the constant fear of predators, especially in open and non-forested environments (where humans lived the most).  (12-04-2016, 06:40 AM)Polar Wrote: Unlike in apes or other primates, humans seemed to have developed extremely higher rates of psychopathy within a population number. I think this is due to humans facing predators, large and small, throughout their expansion. Activating one's survival instincts for a prolonged period of time (in fear of being stalked or attacked) can have a devastating impact on the brain; these impacts include carelessness about other life forms, greater sudden physical retaliation, extreme self-importance, and a few other factors. For some, psychopathy became a way of life, and this trait transfused into some modern humans. Psychopathy is also linked to a greater "survival instinct" in some humans with the trait, granting them greater "flight-or-fight" responses to threats. I would have to say the opposite on the bolded. Those seem to the instincts of all life. Pass on its genes and all else does not matter. Humans have the potential to go beyond that, which makes us odd. 
I suppose neanderthals are those who have failed in the evolution. I mean they evolved in different way, must have had or developed more thought provoking or differently thinking brain. But too much of it must have had him failed during the course of evolution. Homosapiens though mated with them must have outsmarted or capitalized on them and evolved what we are today.
Another theory on human evolution regarding hand usage.
Primates are known to be less accurate than us in regards to throwing motions and lessened dexterity. Humans have less muscles in their fingers (barely at all), and primates tend to have more muscles within their distal joints. This definitely could contribute to greater grip strength (for body size) in primates, and in return, less accuracy in dexterity when it comes to manipulating an object. However, their grips are probably more coordinated than ours (we don't swing through branches like they do), so when it comes to building weapons with slow precision we win. When it comes to making a fast, split-second decision in forcefully-grabbing a stationary object without manipulation, primates rule. Not to mention, primates might have a microscopic muscular advantage over us which makes their muscle fibers much stronger than ours. Again, this is just a personal theory. Anyone have any thoughts about this? I will look into further research regarding the evolution of both primate and human hand structure. 
Going back to posts #20, #30, #31, and #32, Humans began as members of the animal kingdom - according to science. Ever since the first Neanderthal fossils were discovered, artists have been portraying them barefoot and wearing heavy furs draped over their shoulders as if this would keep a man from freezing to death in arctic conditions. No artifacts have been unearthed to prove that Neanderthal protected himself from the elements with adequate clothing.
Keep in mind that humans are animals and subject to the same laws of science. Even elephant species adapted to the freezing Ice Age conditions. Vinay says that Neanderthals were neither fat nor hairy. By what fossil remains do we come to such a conclusion? My theory: Neanderthal man was adapted to the cold biologically with his obvious short stout body and not so obvious extra layers of fat and more hair than a mountain gorilla. We must also consider that tanning hides is not a simple task. It takes a certain amount of science to achieve this. http://www.onagocag.com/tann.html |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |