Community | August 25, 2008 | 31 comments

Neanderthals weren't as stupid as many believe

source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/why-neanderthal-man-may-not-have-been-as-stupid-as...

Image
rwylie
Most (ignorant but well meaning) people consider Neanderthal man, who lived up until around 25,000 years ago, to have been little more than a dumb cousin of homo sapiens (us).

However, studies of the stone instruments made by Neandethals indicates that despite their extinction (or perhaps sexual absorbtion into our species), their tools were just as effective as those of our ancestors.
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Green,   Earth and Science,   3 more
  2. tags:
    News,  News and Politics,  Green,  Earth and Science,  7 more
  3.     
    |

31 comments // Neanderthals weren't as stupid as many believe

  • oliholmes
  • b2
  • crob80227
  • b2
    • 0
      b2  

    • i think its fair to say that your response provides very strong evidence that Neandertals not only were real, but have survived into the present day and are using the internet.

    • 3 years ago
  • crob80227
    • 0
      crob80227  

    • Excuse me? Hate to burst your bubble but Neanderthals never existed! It was all a hoax created by liberals and homosexuals to turn us away from God and into a life of sin.

      The liberal bias on Current is getting more and more extreme.

      I'm going to watch Fox News where I can my information directly without having it pass through the liberal filter.

    • 3 years ago
  • Social_Fuzz
    • 0
      Social_Fuzz  

    • Some of you must have been out on the piss and bunmped into this guy in this England football shirt.

      He shouts something that vaugley resembles language at you, then shambles off to hunt and gather a chicken kebab and an ugly girl at last orders.

    • 3 years ago
  • curiousG
    • 0
      curiousG  

    • they had no real written history ... so how can progression and intellegence me measured by their tools or evidence of their tools. if we dont know what went on during their time how can we judge their intellegence ... invent a time machine and then i'll make my decision

    • 3 years ago
  • b2
    • 0
      b2  

    • As i'm surprised to learn, most people don't seem to know that the Neandertal brain was measurably and significantly larger than ours. there is NO evidence that they were either smarter or dumber, or more or less able to communicate. their remains do seem to indicate that they were less into art and ritual than earlier us, but that's not the same as dumber.
      there are even some hypotheses that attribute their extinction to that large brain--more infant and maternal mortalities in particular due to complications at birth.
      this would mean we out-survived them for reasons seemingly opposite our usual self-flattering stories.
      but they are stories, needless to say--we don't really know if they were geniuses simply gentler than their newer rivals (us), or had heads too large for safety, or maybe just needed some nutrients that became less available as the climate changed (yes, it did that, too). we don't know.
      lots of not very bright creatures have survived for much longer than we have--the most obvious examples being the survivors from the dinosaur age like sharks and horseshoe crabs (who actually pre-date dinosaurs).
      evolution does NOT mean that those who arrive later are 'superior' to those who went before.

    • 3 years ago
  • asherp
    • 0
      asherp  
    • b2:

      Intelligence takes a long time to develop, and a lot of investment from parents and community in resources and time.

      It's really more of an evolutionary risk than anything.

      Which is why fungus were among the first living things on land, and will be the last, long after we're gone.

    • 3 years ago
  • Wetdog
    • 0
      Wetdog  
    • b2:

      I've had a LOT of people tell me that dogs cann't talk. Dogs can talk just fine, it is the people who tell me that dogs cann't talk who cann't understand what they are saying. Because THEY don't listen.

    • 3 years ago
  • bansheewail
  • purplefox
  • Argon18
    • 0
      Argon18  

    • That article only measures them by a tool making ability, not by psychological development which was the difference between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons.

      It's a relative comparison since Neanderthal were smarter and had more abilities than their ancestors since they could make tools to hunt with, but less than their descendants who learned how to communicate and grow food

      In the Geico commercials, they obviously have as much development as any one else since even cavemen would need it to use a web site. It's more like saying even the Polish can do it.

    • 3 years ago
  • LadyHegg
  • asherp
    • 0
      asherp  
    • Argon18:

      Neanderthal are actually believed to be a separate race of humanoid apes.

      Interesting, no? That evolution wouldn't produce a proto-human ape once, but a few times over?

      Like how Dolphins and Whales were both separate species of land mammals that evolved into similar beings.

    • 3 years ago
  • LadyHegg
  • Jimmy_Underdog
  • Nephwrack
  • knightlynight200
  • aferraro
  • asherp
  • MarshallsCarousel
  • Adumbration
    • 0
      Adumbration  

    • The thing is, though, that the Cro-Magnon was able to overcome the Neanderthal due to better communicatory skill. Not so much better tools.

    • 3 years ago
  • miss_niss
    • 0
      miss_niss  
    • Adumbration:

      Assuming they were actually 'overcome' and not 'absorbed', inferior communication skills is only one possible explanation, inability to adapt to climatic change is another for example.

      Personally, I just think Neanderthals need a better publicist. I don't think the recent study that showed Neanderthals had red hair really helped, poor rangas.

    • 3 years ago
  • erikjh1972
  • Adumbration
  • asherp
  • kewal91
  • neocongo
  • imagism31
more from Community:
from the community

top videos