Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
The Puzzler

Stan Gooch & The Neanderthal Legacy

294 posts in this topic

Yes, at first I put it forward, then you showed me it wasn't possible because modern humans didn't have the gene

Which quite obviously shows that you didn't understand what I actually said, as I never stated that modern humans didn't have the gene. We have a variant, as in different version, of the gene which the Neanderthals do not have and therefore there is no 1-1 relationship between the two. All of which makes your mention of Neanderthals having red hair as well as modern humans (Scottish, Irish, etc.) rather meaningless.

We have it but it's altered - or is this article badly worded..?

No. But your understanding of genetics, once again, is less than adequate and ought not be utilized to make a non-existant point.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidently humour had ideas too :tu::lol:

Yes. Big ones.

For one example, I have some pretty wild ideas about H. Erectus. I obviously resent anyone pretending they "know" some bull like Puzzler posted about Erectus.

I'm just tired of repeating them. Probably that's a result of my having been here since 2006. I already posted here that I'm semi-retired from argument/discussion at this site.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some pretty wild ideas about H. Erectus.

Harte

Erectus.jpg

:w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what makes you think that the bigger the size of your brain, the more intelligent you are?

I don't think that was the assertion. Puzz is talking about the Neanderthal brain as being more receptive or designed for altered states of consciousness and the potential this has for shamanic magick. It is a really interesting idea and one I'd never given serious thought to but it may explain a lot. Imagine how far a thinking species could have got in 100,000 years if they took an entirely different direction. They may have had the intuition to commune with nature and benefit from the symbiotic relationship.

Is it then as Gooch claims that Cro Magnon spied on them and took the secrets, or did some enlightened neanderthals forsee humanity becoming the dominant species, as there world may have started to crumble for whatever reason?

Have archaeologists ever found a frozen specimen with a brain capable of analysis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have archaeologists ever found a frozen specimen with a brain capable of analysis?

No, and it's rather meaningless IMO to speculate "about the Neanderthal brain as being more receptive or designed for altered states of consciousness" as we have no actual knowledge about the Neanderthal brain and its NORMAL state of consciousness. Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, and it's rather meaningless IMO to speculate "about the Neanderthal brain as being more receptive or designed for altered states of consciousness" as we have no actual knowledge about the Neanderthal brain and its NORMAL state of consciousness. Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

cormac

Besides, the strong adaptation to a very specific environment and very specific climate (which at the end of the day most probably caused extinction) does not indicate a big affinity to anything immaterial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Big ones.

For one example, I have some pretty wild ideas about H. Erectus. *snip*

I'm just tired of repeating them.*snip*

Harte

Hi Harte, I, for one, would really like to hear some of your wild ideas about your peeps, H.Erectus ... or maybe a link to some of your past posts on the subject? Or not... whatever ya feel like .. your semi retired from this ya know ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yes. Big ones.

For one example, I have some pretty wild ideas about H. Erectus. I obviously resent anyone pretending they "know" some bull like Puzzler posted about Erectus.

I'm just tired of repeating them. Probably that's a result of my having been here since 2006. I already posted here that I'm semi-retired from argument/discussion at this site.

Harte

I didn't mention Erectus until you, I didn't even post that much about them so I'm unsure what 'crap' I said about them. I don't know much about Erectus and Erectus as far as I know is not part of this equation and that is why I really am not interested in talking about Erectus, although I know it's the only thing men want to talk about...

:P

cormac, I don't know about genetics, I don't pretend to know about genetics. I don't need your smug crap.

No, and it's rather meaningless IMO to speculate "about the Neanderthal brain as being more receptive or designed for altered states of consciousness

Trouble is, you can't DISCUSS anything - this forum has become about Proving or Disproving every topic on here, not just talking about maybe's.

Both of you two give me a headache, if you don't like my topic there's plenty of others to choose from to participate in.

I have presented this for discussion and that's all, I am not pretending I know every in and out of the theory.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

what makes you think that the bigger the size of your brain, the more intelligent you are?

Who said that? Not me if that was directed at me.

It says the cerebellum was larger and more powerful - this is not your 'whole brain' and it didn't equal intelligence as such, it equalled a better understanding of dreams.

The cerebellum… is responsible for trance states, for dreams, for telepathy, for psychic healing, for spontaneous wounds, for poltergeist phenomena, and all other such matters. It is also the source of and the impetus for religious belief.29

Here we have the anatomical/physiological explanation for the duality of human personality. The Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal brains both consisted of larger cerebrums and smaller cerebellums, but the Neanderthal brain had a much larger and more powerful cerebellum than that found in Cro-Magnons. The more developed Neanderthal cerebellum gave rise to their high civilisation of dreams.30

lightly highlighted that part - this is the bit - it's not about a bigger brain and higher intelligence, it's about the powerful cerebellum.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey puzz. Part of discussion is hearing both sides. Proving and disproving is also a part of the equation. Whether we enjoy the responses we receive or not should not detract you from conversation. So keep discussing. And learn what you can from the nay-sayers. Believe it or not the train of thought coming from them may provide alternate avenues of research. You'll learn more than from the agree'rs. All they do is nod their heads. Lol

Anyways I hope you take my words as supportive instead of just another skeptic sounding off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which quite obviously shows that you didn't understand what I actually said, as I never stated that modern humans didn't have the gene. We have a variant, as in different version, of the gene which the Neanderthals do not have and therefore there is no 1-1 relationship between the two. All of which makes your mention of Neanderthals having red hair as well as modern humans (Scottish, Irish, etc.) rather meaningless.

No. But your understanding of genetics, once again, is less than adequate and ought not be utilized to make a non-existant point.

cormac

I hate to nitpick but when people make me, well...

This is your post:

Neanderthal's red hair color has nothing to do with the red hair of modern humans.

Quote

"We found a variant of MC1R in Neanderthals which is not present in modern humans, but which causes an effect on the hair similar to that seen in modern redheads," said lead author Carles Lalueza-Fox, assistant professor in genetics at the University of Barcelona, Spain.

It appears to me that is exactly what the article stated you linked and highlighted that part of.

WHICH IS NOT PRESENT IN MODERN HUMANS.

So, yes, excuse me for not really understanding what you said. To me it sounded like you said it was not present in modern humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey puzz. Part of discussion is hearing both sides. Proving and disproving is also a part of the equation. Whether we enjoy the responses we receive or not should not detract you from conversation. So keep discussing. And learn what you can from the nay-sayers. Believe it or not the train of thought coming from them may provide alternate avenues of research. You'll learn more than from the agree'rs. All they do is nod their heads. Lol

Anyways I hope you take my words as supportive instead of just another skeptic sounding off.

Mate, thanks, with 6000 posts under my belt I'm more than able to hear both sides, I'd been gone long ago if I couldn't discuss stuff rationally.

What it is that irks me, is comments like this at me: I obviously resent anyone pretending they "know" some bull like Puzzler posted about Erectus.

Is this really necessary? maybe it's because I'm a woman and I dislike rudeness or something but I can stay here all day every day for years hearing both sides and that's fine, but it's the niggly remarks I can't stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Understood puzz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don't think that was the assertion. Puzz is talking about the Neanderthal brain as being more receptive or designed for altered states of consciousness and the potential this has for shamanic magick. It is a really interesting idea and one I'd never given serious thought to but it may explain a lot. Imagine how far a thinking species could have got in 100,000 years if they took an entirely different direction. They may have had the intuition to commune with nature and benefit from the symbiotic relationship.

Is it then as Gooch claims that Cro Magnon spied on them and took the secrets, or did some enlightened neanderthals forsee humanity becoming the dominant species, as there world may have started to crumble for whatever reason?

Have archaeologists ever found a frozen specimen with a brain capable of analysis?

That's right Slim, I knew you'd get it. It may not be true, sure, but what an idea hey?

It kinda reminds me of the OLB - yes, some newcomers took their ways and manipulated them to use them as power, then overtook them and the message of warning had always been there.

The genetic crossing of Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal produced not just (a) highly gifted individuals (the mighty men of old, the men of renown) but ( an entirely new species of human ourselves…. [T]his new product was… either entirely or very largely due to Cro-Magnon men fertilising Neanderthal women not the other way around. These offspring would have been accepted into Cro-Magnon groups…. And so Neanderthal genes were introduced into the Cro-Magnon gene pool…39

This was a radical, unconventional view to believe that Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals interbred and therefore Neanderthal genes should still be found among us. However, recent studies of the Neanderthal genome reveal that today an estimated 1% to 4% of the modern Eurasian genome appears to come from Neanderthals.40 That is, Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons must have interbred.

Were indeed the mighty men of old, the men of renown, ancient men who had made the crossover - the people who did have the small percentage of genes in Europe may have stood out as having a superior power of the mind and knowledge about ancient dream interpretations and everything else it mentions.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could actually be the Gods.

Who is Zeus, lightening and thunder, Hades, the underworld, we know they ground buried their dead, the earthquakes and power of water...?

Are we giving ourselves too much credit and our arrogance has again made us blind to the truth. The problem here is these ideas got shafted very, very early with great zeal. In the late 19th century the last thing Europeans wanted was to hear was they had Neanderthal types before them. The images drawn of them are ridiculous. I have books with information on how they refused to acknowledge the cave art as so ancient even at proper scientific meetings.

It takes time to change perceptions and also renew scientific studies into this sort of thing. It was only a few years ago they discovered we had interbred - only 1 - 4% now but what about 15,000 years ago - timeframes given for ancient cultures like Egyptians and Magis to first accumulate information of Gods, astronomy and other magical practices they continued to hold absolute rule over for thousands of years...?

25,000 years it's down to now for the last Neanderthal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hate to nitpick but when people make me, well...

That's the way I feel whenever you bring up a subject, like genetics, that you obviously don't understand in order to make a claim or otherwise imply something which has no basis in fact. If you're going to bring up genetics, you could at least make the effort to understand it. And believe me it's not always easy, nor will it happen overnight. If, on the other hand, you don't wish to deal with the genetics issue then simply don't bring it up.

So, yes, excuse me for not really understanding what you said. To me it sounded like you said it was not present in modern humans.

Understanding is the key. If you don't understand it, even on a basic level, then you're not in any position to make a meaningful argument. It's just that simple.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each day brings us closer to answers that might help unravel these ancient questions.

---------

Timeline

Skull, found in 1886 in Spy, Belgium

Frontal bone of a neanderthal child from the cave of La Garigüela

Skull from La Chapelle aux Saints1829: Neanderthal skulls were discovered in Engis, Belgium.

1848: Neanderthal skull found in Forbes' Quarry, Gibraltar. Called "an ancient human" at the time.

1856: Johann Karl Fuhlrott first recognized the fossil called "Neanderthal man", discovered in Neanderthal, a valley near Mettmann in what is now North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.

1880: The mandible of a Neanderthal child was found in a secure context and associated with cultural debris, including hearths, Mousterian tools, and bones of extinct animals.

1886: Two nearly perfect skeletons of a man and woman were found at Spy, Belgium at the depth of 16 ft with numerous Mousterian-type implements.

1899: Hundreds of Neanderthal bones were described in stratigraphic position in association with cultural remains and extinct animal bones.

1908: A nearly complete Neanderthal skeleton was discovered in association with Mousterian tools and bones of extinct animals.

1925: Francis Turville-Petre finds the 'Galilee Man' or 'Galilee Skull' in the Zuttiyeh Cave in Wadi Amud in Palestine (now Israel).

1953–1957: Ralph Solecki uncovered nine Neanderthal skeletons in Shanidar Cave in northern Iraq.

1975: Erik Trinkaus's study of Neanderthal feet confirmed they walked like modern humans.

1987: Thermoluminescence results from Israeli fossils date Neanderthals at Kebara to 60,000 BP and humans at Qafzeh to 90,000 BP. These dates were confirmed by electron spin resonance (ESR) dates for Qafzeh (90,000 BP) and Es Skhul (80,000 BP).

1991: ESR dates showed the Tabun Neanderthal was contemporaneous with modern humans from Skhul and Qafzeh.

1997: Matthias Krings et al. are the first to amplify Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) using a specimen from Feldhofer grotto in the Neander valley.[27]

2000: Igor Ovchinnikov, Kirsten Liden, William Goodman et al. retrieved DNA from a Late Neanderthal (29,000 BP) infant from Mezmaikaya Cave in the Caucasus.[28]

2005: The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology launched a project to reconstruct the Neanderthal genome.

2006: The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology announced it planned to work with Connecticut-based 454 Life Sciences to reconstruct the Neanderthal genome.

2009: The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology announced the "first draft" of a complete Neanderthal genome is completed.[29]

2010: Comparison of Neanderthal genome with modern humans from Africa and Eurasia shows 1–4% of modern non-African human genetic material is identical with Neanderthal DNA.[4][5]

2010: Discovery of Neanderthal tools far away from the influence of Homo sapiens indicate that the species might have been able to create and evolve tools on its own, and therefore be more intelligent than previously thought. Furthermore, it was proposed that the Neanderthals might be more closely related to Homo sapiens than previously thought and that may in fact be a sub species of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

...more intelligent than previously thought.

...may in fact, be a sub-species of us, homo-sapiens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's right Slim, I knew you'd get it. It may not be true, sure, but what an idea hey?

It kinda reminds me of the OLB - yes, some newcomers took their ways and manipulated them to use them as power, then overtook them and the message of warning had always been there.

The genetic crossing of Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal produced not just (a) highly gifted individuals (‘the mighty men of old, the men of renown’) but ( an entirely new species of human – ourselves…. [T]his new product was… either entirely or very largely due to Cro-Magnon men fertilising Neanderthal women – not the other way around. These offspring would have been accepted into Cro-Magnon groups…. And so Neanderthal genes were introduced into the Cro-Magnon gene pool…39

This was a radical, unconventional view – to believe that Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals interbred and therefore Neanderthal genes should still be found among us. However, recent studies of the Neanderthal genome reveal that today an estimated 1% to 4% of the modern Eurasian genome appears to come from Neanderthals.40 That is, Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons must have interbred.

Were indeed the mighty men of old, the men of renown, ancient men who had made the crossover - the people who did have the small percentage of genes in Europe may have stood out as having a superior power of the mind and knowledge about ancient dream interpretations and everything else it mentions.

I am misunderstanding the statement about a new species. I am white and am a hybrid of neanderthal dna, while a pure african is not a hybrid of any kind. (The only pure blood) yet africans and europeans are the same species homo sapien. Did I misunderstand something in your writings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the way I feel whenever you bring up a subject, like genetics, that you obviously don't understand in order to make a claim or otherwise imply something which has no basis in fact. If you're going to bring up genetics, you could at least make the effort to understand it. And believe me it's not always easy, nor will it happen overnight. If, on the other hand, you don't wish to deal with the genetics issue then simply don't bring it up.

Understanding is the key. If you don't understand it, even on a basic level, then you're not in any position to make a meaningful argument. It's just that simple.

cormac

Ok, whatever... ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am misunderstanding the statement about a new species. I am white and am a hybrid of neanderthal dna, while a pure african is not a hybrid of any kind. (The only pure blood) yet africans and europeans are the same species homo sapien. Did I misunderstand something in your writings?

The writings are from the article - it is linked on page 1 - the whole article, I have not read any thing else that that article.

I don't think it meant genetically - it seems to refer to us - we were not Cro-Magnon anymore or others - we had crossed a barrier and changed into a more modern human as such, because we were from that point, different in our minds, possibly taking on their ideas - we had come into contact with this species who taught us different things that may have advanced us....it could possibly be interpreted as.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cormac your tact may have been set aside for a moment shadowed by a personal grievance. If I may paraphrase (not trying to overstep here)

Puzz, it seems as though the genetic information you seek may be incomplete. Please research a bit more into it or ask any of us for assistance. I feel that bringing to the table a partial understanding of genetics would appear as grasping. I know you are intelligent and feel you would be able to learn the dynamics of dna, and rightly you should. Around here people will jump at any inconsistency in someone's writing and I do not want you to appear in such a light. So try to research genetics more and we can help guide you to good information. And until then set the genetics aside. It will only provide fuel for dismissal of your supposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cormac your tact may have been set aside for a moment shadowed by a personal grievance. If I may paraphrase (not trying to overstep here)

Puzz, it seems as though the genetic information you seek may be incomplete. Please research a bit more into it or ask any of us for assistance. I feel that bringing to the table a partial understanding of genetics would appear as grasping. I know you are intelligent and feel you would be able to learn the dynamics of dna, and rightly you should. Around here people will jump at any inconsistency in someone's writing and I do not want you to appear in such a light. So try to research genetics more and we can help guide you to good information. And until then set the genetics aside. It will only provide fuel for dismissal of your supposition.

It certainly is incomplete and that's why this is such an exciting topic to look into.

The red hair may not have anything to do with this gene cormac is talking about but may have come in from the 1-4% of us that still carry the Neanderthal one.

But yes, I will certainly take heed of your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am misunderstanding the statement about a new species. I am white and am a hybrid of neanderthal dna, while a pure african is not a hybrid of any kind. (The only pure blood) yet africans and europeans are the same species homo sapien.

Aus, what it boils down to is that all Eurasian descended modern humans share 1% - 4% of the same genes as Neanderthals. While African descended modern humans do not. This, in and of itself, is understandable. What is not so cut-and-dried is that the genes can be shown to be unequivocally Neanderthal in origin. This is ONLY based on genetic results taken from Neanderthals and modern humans (HSS). Due to a complete (thusfar) lack of genetic material, and therefore testing, of ancestral lines such as H. Erectus, H. Ergaster, H. Heidelbergensis, the unclassified species responsible for the Omo 1 and 2 remains, H. Sapiens Idaltu, the unclassified species known only from the Gawis cranium and the Denisovans, there is a wholly incomplete understanding of where this 1% - 4% sharing of genes originates in the big picture.

Is that as clear as mud? :lol:

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am misunderstanding the statement about a new species. I am white and am a hybrid of neanderthal dna, while a pure african is not a hybrid of any kind. (The only pure blood) yet africans and europeans are the same species homo sapien. Did I misunderstand something in your writings?

It was literal actually:

This new product was… either entirely or very largely due to Cro-Magnon men fertilising Neanderthal women not the other way around. These offspring would have been accepted into Cro-Magnon groups…. And so Neanderthal genes were introduced into the Cro-Magnon gene pool…

But I'm not sure here whether the interpretation is the knowledge came from the offspring who were part neanderthal or the Cro-Magnon took on the culture - both seem to be acceptable as what he's inferring here.

Maybe cormac could answer your question better... :w00t:

or Wiki:

Neanderthals evolved from early Homo along a path similar to Homo sapiens, both deriving from a chimp-like ancestor between five and 10 million years ago. Like H. sapiens, Neanderthals are related to Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo ergaster; the exact descent remains uncertain. The last common ancestor between anatomically modern Homo sapiens and Neanderthals appears to be Homo rhodesiensis, named after an archaic Homo sapiens fossil, Broken hill 1 (Kabwe 1) discovered in the territory of Rhodesia in 1921.

Homo rhodesiensis arose in Africa an estimated 0.7 to 1 million years ago. The earliest estimates for Homo rhodesiensis reaching Europe are approximately 800 thousand years ago when a type of human referred to as Homo antecessor or Homo cepranensis already inhabited the region[clarification needed]. These two human types may be forerunners to European Homo heidelbergensis; however, stone tools dating from 1.2 to 1.56 million years ago of an unknown creator have been discovered in south-western Europe. The evidence at the Sima de los Huesos (in the Atapuerca cave system on the Iberian Peninsula) suggests Homo heidelbergensis was already in Europe by 600,000 years ago.

Molecular phylogenetic analysis[24] suggests Homo rhodesiensis[citation needed] and Homo heidelbergensis continued to intermix until 350,000 years ago, after which they were separate species, and sometime within the last 200,000 years Homo heidelbergensis evolved into Homo neanderthalensis, the classic Neanderthal human. It appears the original Neanderthal population was, in fact, more distantly related to today's human than is Homo heidelbergensis. However, recent evidence of successful interbreeding between Neanderthals and modern humans has made that issue moot, at least insofar as some Neanderthal populations were concerned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It certainly is incomplete and that's why this is such an exciting topic to look into.

The red hair may not have anything to do with this gene cormac is talking about but may have come in from the 1-4% of us that still carry the Neanderthal one.

But yes, I will certainly take heed of your post.

The 1%-4% sharing of genes would have come from Neanderthals, but there is no reason to believe that the different versions of the MC1R genes that caused red hair in each species would have been anything other than original to them, separately.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.