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 1
Mario Dantas

Neanderthal, Olmec, Sykes and Heyerdahl

22 posts in this topic

20120205-Sapiens_neanderthal_comparison.jpg

Abstract

Many morphological features of the Pleistocene fossil hominin Homo neanderthalensis, including the reputed large size of its paranasal sinuses, have been interpreted as adaptations to extreme cold, as some Neanderthals lived in Europe during glacial periods. This interpretation of sinus evolution rests on two assumptions: that increased craniofacial pneumatization is an adaptation to lower ambient temperatures, and that Neanderthals have relatively large sinuses. Analysis of humans, other primates, and rodents, however, suggests that the first assumption is suspect; at least the maxillary sinus undergoes a significantreduction in volume in extreme cold, in both wild and laboratory conditions. The second assumption, that Neanderthal sinuses are large, extensive, or even ‘hyperpneumatized,’ has held sway since the first specimen was described and has been interpreted as the causal explanation for some of the distinctive aspects of Neanderthal facial form, but has never been evaluated with respect to scaling. To test the latter assumption, previously published measurements from two-dimensional (2D) X-rays and new three-dimensional (3D) data from computed tomography (CT) of Neanderthals and temperate-climate EuropeanHomo sapiens are regressed against cranial size to determine the relative size of their sinuses. The 2D data reveal a degree of craniofacial pneumatization in Neanderthals that is both commensurate with the size of the cranium and comparable in scale with that seen in temperate climate H. sapiens. The 3D analysis of CT data from a smaller sample supports this conclusion. These results suggest that the distinctive Neanderthal face cannot be interpreted as a direct result of increased pneumatization, nor is it likely to be an adaptation to resist cold stress; an alternative explanation is thus required.

Keywords

  • Homo neanderthalensis;
  • Craniofacial pneumatisation;
  • Paranasal sinuses;
  • Environmental adaptation

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248410002198

I have been wanting to discuss many issues here at UM but, unfortunately, without a doubt i was misinterpreted at first, so i will try to start again, hopefully with more luck!

So here is, more or less, the question and hopefully a discussion...

Why are there Neanderthals only in Europe, and why are they not cold adapted?*

*Warning- this is a genuine attempt to discuss about an idea. If by any means you disrespect my persona i will leave this place for good!

Regards,

Mario Dantas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Recently, as many of you might know, Brian Sykes in his book “The Seven Daughters of Eve” (2001, ISBN 0-393-02018-5) scientifically proved Heyerdahl´s theory of a South American diaspora to Polynesia to be wrong. DNA analyses proved that the genetic heritage of the Polynesians was Asian (more specifically Chinese), and not the other way around...

Could Asians have arrived to the Americas and Polynesian islands in some other way (and not e.g. the Behring strait?)

An east/west direction through the Pacific (from Asia to America) is clearly apprehended. Why didn´t people migrate the other way around (America/Asia)?

Why are there Pyramids in South America and Egypt? or why Olmecs and Africans seem to be ethnically alike? There seems to be a reason for this to have happened...

Edited by Mario Dantas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

elsevier.gif

The Neanderthal face is not cold adapted

  • Todd C. Raea, REcor.gif, REemail.gif,
  • Thomas Koppeb,
  • Chris B. Stringerc

  • a Centre for Research in Evolutionary Anthropology, Department of Life Sciences, Roehampton University, Holybourne Avenue, London SW15 4JD, United Kingdom
  • b Institut für Anatomie und Zellbiologie, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt Universität Greifswald, Friedrich-Loeffler-Str. 23c, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
  • c Department of Palaeontology, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom

Abstract

Many morphological features of the Pleistocene fossil hominin Homo neanderthalensis, including the reputed large size of its paranasal sinuses, have been interpreted as adaptations to extreme cold, as some Neanderthals lived in Europe during glacial periods. This interpretation of sinus evolution rests on two assumptions: that increased craniofacial pneumatization is an adaptation to lower ambient temperatures, and that Neanderthals have relatively large sinuses. Analysis of humans, other primates, and rodents, however, suggests that the first assumption is suspect; at least the maxillary sinus undergoes a significantreduction in volume in extreme cold, in both wild and laboratory conditions. The second assumption, that Neanderthal sinuses are large, extensive, or even ‘hyperpneumatized,’ has held sway since the first specimen was described and has been interpreted as the causal explanation for some of the distinctive aspects of Neanderthal facial form, but has never been evaluated with respect to scaling. To test the latter assumption, previously published measurements from two-dimensional (2D) X-rays and new three-dimensional (3D) data from computed tomography (CT) of Neanderthals and temperate-climate EuropeanHomo sapiens are regressed against cranial size to determine the relative size of their sinuses. The 2D data reveal a degree of craniofacial pneumatization in Neanderthals that is both commensurate with the size of the cranium and comparable in scale with that seen in temperate climate H. sapiens. The 3D analysis of CT data from a smaller sample supports this conclusion. These results suggest that the distinctive Neanderthal face cannot be interpreted as a direct result of increased pneumatization, nor is it likely to be an adaptation to resist cold stress; an alternative explanation is thus required.

Keywords

  • Homo neanderthalensis;
  • Craniofacial pneumatisation;
  • Paranasal sinuses;
  • Environmental adaptation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently, as many of you might know, Brian Sykes in his book “The Seven Daughters of Eve” (2001, ISBN 0-393-02018-5) scientifically proved Heyerdahl´s theory of a South American diaspora to Polynesia to be wrong. DNA analyses proved that the genetic heritage of the Polynesians was Asian (more specifically Chinese), and not the other way around...

Could Asians have arrived to the Americas and Polynesian islands in some other way (and not e.g. the Behring strait?)

An east/west direction through the Pacific (from Asia to America) is clearly apprehended. Why didn´t people migrate the other way around (America/Asia)?

Why are there Pyramids in South America and Egypt? or why Olmecs and Africans seem to be ethnically alike? There seems to be a reason for this to have happened...

The Bering Strait hasn't been the sole route used to explain the immigration of peoples into the Americas in quite some time. Evidence also suggests that some followed the southern parts of the ice sheet, via boat, on their way into the Americas.

Considering that there were no people of any species within the Americas before the earliest ancestors of Native Americans, why would they need (or even want) to migrate back into Asia. Particularly when they had a completely uninhabited western hemisphere to discover and use all for their own.

Why shouldn't pyramids exist in Egypt and South America. It's the easiest structure to engineer. Wide at the base, tapering at the top. Also, can you show something more useful, like dna studies, to show an actual ethnic connection. Just because the carved Olmec heads and Africans share some features does not mean they are ethnically connected.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Neanderthals didn't live only in Europe.

And maybe they were covered in a thick fur? Who knows.

neanderthals.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So here is, more or less, the question and hopefully a discussion...

Why are there Neanderthals only in Europe, and why are they not cold adapted?*

*Warning- this is a genuine attempt to discuss about an idea. If by any means you disrespect my persona i will leave this place for good!

Regards,

Mario Dantas

From what I've read, the nasal adaptation was only one of many clues that neanderthals were cold adapted. They were also shorter, and stockier, to conserve core heat better. I believe the same was said of the brain. It was bigger, not for better processing, but to have more mass, to hold more heat and thus to operate better in cold environments.

An east/west direction through the Pacific (from Asia to America) is clearly apprehended. Why didn´t people migrate the other way around (America/Asia)?

...

Why are there Pyramids in South America and Egypt? or why Olmecs and Africans seem to be ethnically alike? There seems to be a reason for this to have happened...

I'm going to side with Cormac, pyramids are easy to invent, just like spears, tents, clothing, rope, and pack animals. There is not reason to believe that pyramids built in the Americas are directly related to Egypt.

I also would agree that there is no reason that the newly minted Americans would have migrated backward. With fresh territory in front and population preasures behind, going back would have been crazy.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've read, the nasal adaptation was only one of many clues that neanderthals were cold adapted. They were also shorter, and stockier, to conserve core heat better. I believe the same was said of the brain. It was bigger, not for better processing, but to have more mass, to hold more heat and thus to operate better in cold environments.

I'm going to side with Cormac, pyramids are easy to invent, just like spears, tents, clothing, rope, and pack animals. There is not reason to believe that pyramids built in the Americas are directly related to Egypt.

I also would agree that there is no reason that the newly minted Americans would have migrated backward. With fresh territory in front and population preasures behind, going back would have been crazy.

I agree with most of what you say. I think it is possible that some "back-tracked". People tend to discuss in terms of the whole. There is no reason that all would turn around and "run back home", but there's a good chance there were many groups who decided to explore back the way they came.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of what you say. I think it is possible that some "back-tracked". People tend to discuss in terms of the whole. There is no reason that all would turn around and "run back home", but there's a good chance there were many groups who decided to explore back the way they came.

It's possible, but since there's no genetic evidence suggesting a back migration of said peoples then anyone who may have "explored back the way they came" would likely have not been of a sizeable enough population to have left a genetic footprint of their passing. Which means we'll likely never know about them.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think sexual selection could have played a large role. In another species of human, Homo sapiens sapiens, a lot of attraction to males can be attributed to facial structure, and, particularly, the shape of the jaw. Giraffe's evolved their necks with a large sexual attraction component, and, as such, possess necks in greater proportionate length in the male gender. Females still have long necks, but not to the same extent at all, the difference in length is significant, and exists because long necks was a male sexual trait. I think that the jaw structure of Neanderthals was the same, an exaggeration of male traits in order to promote one's masculinity, which, as a side effect, also modifies female skulls towards the same traits, though less intensely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

cormac mac airt,

The Bering Strait hasn't been the sole route used to explain the immigration of peoples into the Americas in quite some time. Evidence also suggests that some followed the southern parts of the ice sheet, via boat, on their way into the Americas.

Considering that there were no people of any species within the Americas before the earliest ancestors of Native Americans, why would they need (or even want) to migrate back into Asia. Particularly when they had a completely uninhabited western hemisphere to discover and use all for their own.

Why shouldn't pyramids exist in Egypt and South America. It's the easiest structure to engineer. Wide at the base, tapering at the top. Also, can you show something more useful, like dna studies, to show an actual ethnic connection. Just because the carved Olmec heads and Africans share some features does not mean they are ethnically connected.

You are correct in thinking that way, but i “suspect” there is more to this whole story than is apparent. I believe that the Neanderthal subject is not well known, especially when such scientific proof arises and literally blows apart many “old” school Anthropology, genetics, etc, etc:

Max Planck Institute - Department of Human Evolution 3 April, 2012

• For more than a century it was assumed (with conviction!) that

Neanderthals had larger facial sinus when compared to modern

humans.

• For more than a century it was assumed that this was an

adaptation to cope with cold climate. The Neanderthal face is not cold adapted

• In mammals leaving in cold environment the opposite pattern is

observed (i.e. smaller sinus)

• The same is true for rats artificially raised in cold laboratories

• Think in Eskimo cranium (opposite bauplan of a Neanderthal)

• The very assumption that Neanderthals has larger sinus has never

being quantitatively addressed.

http://www.eva.mpg.de/evolution/staff/strauss/pdf/Strauss%202012%20-%20Journal%20Club%20March

OlmecheadMNAH.jpg

Can we deny that African traits are alike those of Olmecs? How many ethnic groups with such traits are found in our planet? But let us also forget about the pyramids and migratory (drifts) for a moment. I really am not discussing their obvious similarity. My point being that, on the contrary, i think the so called Neanderthals to be the Olmec proper. Olmec colossal heads have many interesting features such as huge lips and noses, and ...crossed eyes:

All of the Olmec colossal heads depict mature men with fleshy cheeks, flat noses and eyes that tend to be slightly crossed.

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

fig2-22.jpg

Comparison of four views of a modern human skull with a Neanderthal skull cast. Reprinted, with permission, from Kelso, A. J. Physical anthropology. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co.; 1970.

Abramelin,

The Neanderthals didn't live only in Europe.

And maybe they were covered in a thick fur? Who knows.

I was aware that Neanderthal were equally found in the Middle east regions, but the fact is that none was found in America, nor Asia and only a very few in Africa, or middle east, if you prefer. This is suggesting some sort of a reduced and confined location.

Regarding thick fur covering their body to justify the fact that they had larger paranasal sinuses, etc, etc, does not hold water in my view. Genetics always taught us that physiognomic traits are environmentally related, and that the broader the lips and nose, the better the heat would be dissipated, and that the darker the skin, the sunnier climate, etc. Neanderthal´s theory is, in my view, a contradiction in terms of genetic evolution.

DieChecker,

From what I've read, the nasal adaptation was only one of many clues that neanderthals were cold adapted. They were also shorter, and stockier, to conserve core heat better. I believe the same was said of the brain. It was bigger, not for better processing, but to have more mass, to hold more heat and thus to operate better in cold environments.

That was surely a "scientific mistake". Many of these theories are now completely disproved (e.g. once it was said that Neanderthals could´t speak). But you can draw your own conclusions.

Druidus-Logos,

I think sexual selection could have played a large role. In another species of human, Homo sapiens sapiens, a lot of attraction to males can be attributed to facial structure, and, particularly, the shape of the jaw. Giraffe's evolved their necks with a large sexual attraction component, and, as such, possess necks in greater proportionate length in the male gender. Females still have long necks, but not to the same extent at all, the difference in length is significant, and exists because long necks was a male sexual trait. I think that the jaw structure of Neanderthals was the same, an exaggeration of male traits in order to promote one's masculinity, which, as a side effect, also modifies female skulls towards the same traits, though less intensely.

True, it is almost sure that they cultivated beauty and health, as well as we humans, but i think (if i understood you correctly) that the most influential aspect for Neanderthal´s huge face and body sturdiness comes from a hot environment, opposite to that which is currently assumed. Neanderthals seem to have been very well adapted to a hot and humid climate. In my opinion, Neanderthal genetics would not develop such large traits (compared to humans) just for the sake of “masculinity” alone, there has to be another better explanation....

Regards,

Mario Dantas

Edited by Mario Dantas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was surely a "scientific mistake". Many of these theories are now completely disproved (e.g. once it was said that Neanderthals could´t speak). But you can draw your own conclusions.

Regards,

Mario Dantas

You have got to be kidding?? The well known fact that heavier animals with less surface area retain heat better is not a mistake. It's a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cormac mac airt,

You are correct in thinking that way, but i “suspect” there is more to this whole story than is apparent. I believe that the Neanderthal subject is not well known, especially when such scientific proof arises and literally blows apart many “old” school Anthropology, genetics, etc, etc:

http://www.eva.mpg.de/evolution/staff/strauss/pdf/Strauss%202012%20-%20Journal%20Club%20March

OlmecheadMNAH.jpg

Can we deny that African traits are alike those of Olmecs? How many ethnic groups with such traits are found in our planet? But let us also forget about the pyramids and migratory (drifts) for a moment. I really am not discussing their obvious similarity. My point being that, on the contrary, i think the so called Neanderthals to be the Olmec proper. Olmec colossal heads have many interesting features such as huge lips and noses, and ...crossed eyes:

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

fig2-22.jpg

Comparison of four views of a modern human skull with a Neanderthal skull cast. Reprinted, with permission, from Kelso, A. J. Physical anthropology. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co.; 1970.

~SNIP~

I believe that until you have something substantial and verifiable, scientifically speaking, that negates what I've posted previously then what you suspect is irrelevant to the discussion.

I've known native people from Guatemala and such that have similar features to the Olmec heads and they are definitely NOT African by any stretch of the imagination. Nor would anyone from the Americas and in this case the Olmec be of Neanderthal origin since there isn't a shred of evidence that there were ever hominids in the western hemisphere prior to ancestral Native Americans. Without evidence to support your suspicions they're not much better than a bedtime story.

BTW, since the study of genetics and particularly archaeogenetics is a more recent area of study calling anything regarding it "old school" is rather meaningless.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this is of help (alas, a video with a computer voice):

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, afro-centism is attempting to rob the american natives of their history. it is my opinion that heanderthals evolved larger nasal capacities to help cool the cranium as they were out of africa as every other hominid was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

DieChecker,

You have got to be kidding?? The well known fact that heavier animals with less surface area retain heat better is not a mistake. It's a fact.

You speak like it is a fact that Neanderthals were well adapted to cold climate. I am sorry if i did not understand what you meant! All i am trying to say is that Neanderthal could have been the Olmec. The Olmec´s face has undeniable similar characteristics with Neanderthal´s (grosso modo).

cormac mac airt,

I believe that until you have something substantial and verifiable, scientifically speaking, that negates what I've posted previously then what you suspect is irrelevant to the discussion.

I've known native people from Guatemala and such that have similar features to the Olmec heads and they are definitely NOT African by any stretch of the imagination. Nor would anyone from the Americas and in this case the Olmec be of Neanderthal origin since there isn't a shred of evidence that there were ever hominids in the western hemisphere prior to ancestral Native Americans. Without evidence to support your suspicions they're not much better than a bedtime story.

BTW, since the study of genetics and particularly archaeogenetics is a more recent area of study calling anything regarding it "old school" is rather meaningless.

GeowareNAmericaAtlanticEuropeMap.jpg

“Atlantis” is said to have been in front of the the strait of Gibraltar, and from exactly that region eastwards, we know that there were Neanderthals thriving. Almost at a same parallel as Mexico city.

Why shouldn’t Neanderthals face be adapted to the environment in which they were found (Europe and the Middle East)?

Why Neanderthals and Olmec are found very close, in the opposite sides of north Atlantic coast? (i read somewhere that the last Neanderthal disappeared on the coast of Portugal)

Why do they share so many facial characteristics (Olmecs and Neanderthals)? I hope you can agree with me that there are, at least, some similarities...

I do not want this discussion to become a (negative) racial thing, although i believe everybody is entitled to an opinion.

I have to ask you, is it not true that DNA analyses have proved that all humans have a considerable percentage of Neanderthal “blood”? Furthermore, is it really known what happened to Neanderthals, or where did they come from, or how did they communicate with each other?

To me there is considerable lack of scientific knowledge regarding the Neanderthal, from the starting point, to the finishing line. The article above “Why is Neanderthal´s face not cold adapted” is giving weight to a new substitute explanation. I think i have to speak about Atlantis, but i will wait...

Abramelin,

Thanks for posting the video, one should always have in mind other opinions and genuinely consider their possible trueness. There is no “nationalism” attached to my recent post “Neanderthal, Olmec, Sykes and Heyerdahl”. And i acknowledge that i could be wrong!

Sykes claims that sometimes there are more differences between individuals within same ethnic group, than between individuals from different ethnic groups. The video proves that there are indeed very different people within Native Americans. All humans came from a same “source”, correct? Why are we denying our African heritage? This is, at least, what science believes to be the truth. Again, i would like to emphasize that it is not my intention to hurt anybody´s feelings, nor campaign for anything, but the facts.

pbarosso,

yes, afro-centism is attempting to rob the american natives of their history. it is my opinion that heanderthals evolved larger nasal capacities to help cool the cranium as they were out of africa as every other hominid was.

That is not true, where did you get that idea from? Why do you even say something like that?

But have you read the abstract? Is it Afro centrist as well? I wonder why the heck did Neanderthals need to cool their brains in a already cold weather? No offense, but i don´t think you are being reasonable...

Regards,

Mario Dantas

Edited by Mario Dantas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You speak like it is a fact that Neanderthals were well adapted to cold climate. I am sorry if i did not understand what you meant! All i am trying to say is that Neanderthal could have been the Olmec. The Olmec´s face has undeniable similar characteristics with Neanderthal´s (grosso modo).

No, the Neanderthal couldn't have since they were extinct by c.39,000 BC while the earliest immigrants into the Americas didn't get here until around 25,000 years later.

Why shouldn’t Neanderthals face be adapted to the environment in which they were found (Europe and the Middle East)?

Who says they weren't considering that their remains were found south of the glacial line and from the Middle East to Spain. There's no reason to believe that they had to be any more adapted to the cold than Homo sapiens sapiens.

Why Neanderthals and Olmec are found very close (latitude) in the north Atlantic coast?

(i read somewhere that the last Neanderthal disappeared on the coast of Portugal)

This just goes to show that you've never paid attention to a map as Portugal lies at approximately 40 degrees North latitude which aligns with the southern part of Pennsylvania and Central Ohio. Neither of which is anywhere near where the Olmec lived.

I have to ask you, is it not true that DNA analyses have proved that all humans have a considerable percentage of Neanderthal “blood”? Furthermore, is it really known what happened to Neanderthals, or where did they come from, or how did they communicate with each other?

No, you've misunderstood what the DNA studies have said, which is that Eurasians (and not Sub-Saharan Africans) appear to share 1% - 4% of their DNA with Neandertals but there is even some debate about that. Except for the communication issue, yes we know from the available evidence what happened to them and where they originated from. Neither of which has anything to do with the Olmec or even the Western Hemisphere.

To me there is considerable lack of scientific knowledge regarding the Neanderthal, from the starting point, to the finishing line.

To me there is considerable lack of Mario Dantas' knowledge regarding the Neanderthal, from start to finish. Just because you don't understand what actually is known doesn't give you license to make it up as you go along.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DieChecker,

You speak like it is a fact that Neanderthals were well adapted to cold climate. I am sorry if i did not understand what you meant! All i am trying to say is that Neanderthal could have been the Olmec. The Olmec´s face has undeniable similar characteristics with Neanderthal´s (grosso modo).

Ah. I see now what you are getting at. I think I would disagree. Neanderthals had long faces and the olmec statues show round wide heads with short faces. Neandethals had a high bridged nose, where the olmec statues have squashed noses. I think the Easter Island statues have more in common with Neanderthals then the olmecs.

Why Neanderthals and Olmec are found very close, in the opposite sides of north Atlantic coast? (i read somewhere that the last Neanderthal disappeared on the coast of Portugal)

There are manatees off the Atlantic coast, but none off the European coast. There is an Ocean seperating the two continents last time I checked.

I would say that due to the glacial highs and lows over the last million or so years, that there have been several times where beings such as Homo Erectus could have come into the Americas and could possibly have formed up a population there. But, I think that all DNA analysis done of all the Mesoamerican peoples so far have shown they were standard human stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Atlantis6.jpg

Cormac,

No, the Neanderthal couldn't have since they were extinct by c.39,000 BC while the earliest immigrants into the Americas didn't get here until around 25,000 years later.

Can we be 100% sure that in fact Neanderthal´s were extinct in 39.000 years BC (and not later?), and Asian only got into the Americas around 25.000 BC? The period we are speaking of is the very ending of the Pleistocene, and there are so many theories against scientific "Status Quo", that if i was in your place, i would take it with a grain of salt, meaning that we cannot be absolutely sure, especially when the subject (end of Neanderthals/rise of Humans) is far from being well known.

I stated before that i would have to talk about this subject (Neanderthals/Olmecs) with relation to Atlantis. The fact that Plato tells us that a huge island stood in front of the straits of Gibraltar (roughly 10.000 years ago) could be an indication that a different civilization existed in the Atlantic at the mouth of the Mediterranean, and somehow managed to move into Europe and the Middle East? How coincidental is it that at the very end of the Pleistocene, Neanderthal becomes extinct, Plato´s Atlantis disappears, Homo Sapiens Sapiens is born, etc, etc, not to mention radical global sea level rise and megafauna extinctions as well.

When you said: "Who says they weren't considering that their remains were found south of the glacial line and from the Middle East to Spain. There's no reason to believe that they had to be any more adapted to the cold than Homo sapiens sapiens." That is the whole point of the arcticle... do you doubt for one minute that this article is the proof that in fact Neanderthals were NOT cold adapted? I ask where did they come from?

"This just goes to show that you've never paid attention to a map as Portugal lies at approximately 40 degrees North latitude which aligns with the southern part of Pennsylvania and Central Ohio. Neither of which is anywhere near where the Olmec lived."

I have to disagree, Portugal is about 40º N, while Mexico is 19º N, you do the math, never said they were exactly at the same latitude...

"No, you've misunderstood what the DNA studies have said, which is that Eurasians (and not Sub-Saharan Africans) appear to share 1% - 4% of their DNA with Neandertals but there is even some debate about that. Except for the communication issue, yes we know from the available evidence what happened to them and where they originated from. Neither of which has anything to do with the Olmec or even the Western Hemisphere."

You got me there... too much information, and so little time to read! Yes i have to agree that "residual" Neanderthal DNA was found in greater number in Eurasians "and not as much n sub-saharan Africans", but i still insist that the point was that there is, at least, "some" Neanderthal genetic affinity with us humans, be it Africans, Europeans or Asians:

Neanderthal genetic differences to humans must therefore be interpreted within the context of human diversity.

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

The results show that the genomes of non-Africans (from Europe, China and New Guinea) are closer to the Neanderthal sequence than are those from Africa.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8660940.stm

Like so many of the best stories the saga of Neanderthal began with a chance discovery. In 1848, a strange skull was discovered on the tiny military outpost of Gibraltar. When it was first revealed, it confounded everyone who saw it. There was no doubt it was human, but it also had the heavy features of an ape.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/neanderthal_trans.shtml

Neanderthals had to capture enough calories to stay warm, without at the same time expending too many calories. And this was an expensive body type that we're talking about. Very muscular, very active kind of body, requiring a lot of calories.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/neanderthal_trans.shtml

The traditional view of Neanderthals is one where they're thuggish, brutish, strong, powerful, had to be in order to survive in the harsh environment. The question we need to ask ourselves is, is this view correct? Or have we been missing something about the Neanderthals and their essence or their nature?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/neanderthal_trans.shtml

The first thing that really grabs your attention I think is its size, it's much bigger, and significantly so than the normal modern human homo sapien's brain.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/neanderthal_trans.shtml

Measuring the volume of our Neanderthal's brain shows it to be twenty percent bigger than the average for a modern human.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/neanderthal_trans.shtml

The second thing you can tell about it is the shape of the frontal lobe is really absolutely no different than what you find in the modern homo sapien's. So the prefrontal portions that are supposed to be dealing with very complex cognitive functioning, and so forth, are thereabout identical between Neanderthals and modern homo sapiens. So this I think should lead to the idea that basically their cognitive abilities are the same as our own.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/neanderthal_trans.shtml

Sorry for bothering you with details, but they are perhaps the proof that, awkwardly, in nearly Arctic cold conditions, there lived a portentous kind of “super” primates, one that could crush one’s throat with his bear hands. Neanderthals could easily cause havoc in human settlements, while they were in small groups. I suspect whatever humans met Neanderthals saw them as a threat and managed to terminate them.

Again i ask what ecosystem allowed Neanderthal´s to build such an “athletic” physical completion? I doubt Eskimos or Scandinavians are to grow that sturdily just because they live in a cold weather. About the absence of Neanderthals vestiges in the “new world”, all i can say is that i think a “bridge” existed between the two sides of the Atlantic.

To me there is considerable lack of Mario Dantas' knowledge regarding the Neanderthal, from start to finish. Just because you don't understand what actually is known doesn't give you license to make it up as you go along.

I am no expert, but i understand that there are many loose ends with relation to Neanderthals and their origins. Coincidentally, Plato also refers to the mysterious island of Atlantis and how their people got into a war with those within the pillars of Hercules, and how afterwards they got swallowed by the earth and water:

This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island.

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html

Atlantis%2520Iberia.jpg

Regards,

Mario Dantas

Edited by Mario Dantas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Can we be 100% sure that in fact Neanderthal´s were extinct in 39.000 years BC (and not later?), and Asian only got into the Americas around 25.000 BC?

We know that that's what the evidence shows concerning the Neandearthal's and your date of 25,000 BC is wrong. More like circa 15,000 BC.

How coincidental is it that at the very end of the Pleistocene, Neanderthal becomes extinct, Plato´s Atlantis disappears, Homo Sapiens Sapiens is born, etc, etc, not to mention radical global sea level rise and megafauna extinctions as well.

This is not mix-n-match. The timeline doesn't support your contention as Neanderthal's went extinct c.39,000 BP, the end of the Pleistocene is c.12,000 BP, Plato's Atlantis "disappears" c.9600 BC, Homo sapiens sapiens originates c.100,000 BP and global sea level rises until c.5500 BC.

I ask where did they come from?

Africa

I have to disagree, Portugal is about 40º N, while Mexico is 19º N, you do the math, never said they were exactly at the same latitude...

21 degrees (approx. 1300 miles) distance isn't remotely "close" by any meaningful definition.

You got me there... too much information, and so little time to read! Yes i have to agree that "residual" Neanderthal DNA was found in greater number in Eurasians "and not as much as in sub-saharan Africans", but i still insist that the point was that there is, at least, "some" Neanderthal genetic affinity with us humans, be it Africans, Europeans or Asians:

Yet it should NOT be misconstrued as showing a direct relationship between Neanderthal's and the Olmec like you are trying to do.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose I could see some resemblance between the Olmec and Neaderthals, but how would the Neanderthals get to the Americas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. I see now what you are getting at. I think I would disagree. Neanderthals had long faces and the olmec statues show round wide heads with short faces. Neandethals had a high bridged nose, where the olmec statues have squashed noses. I think the Easter Island statues have more in common with Neanderthals then the olmecs.

DieChecker,

Firstly, let me apologize for answering this late, i have been ill...

Neanderthal´s real face could have had a thick muscle tissue, covering their skull (he who had genetically grown such muscular body should have also pretty "meaty" faces). The word "Olmec" is supposed to mean rubber ball or head, and a reference to their known "chubby" faces, and football (but that is just my opinion). You are, nevertheless, always entitled to have your own opinions! I am just stating coincidental characteristics between the two.

Large eyes, large nose, and a large mouth are characteristics of the Neanderthal, moreover, a larger skull (the Olmec colossal heads?) was also characteristic. It is likewise known that all Olmec colossal heads present the eyes slightly crossed. I ask you to analyse the huge orbits, nasal cavity and mouth of the Neanderthal and Olmec posted below:

OlmecHead.gif

woman-skull_000013073601XSm_620x350_620x350.jpg

I hope you cannot deny that there is in fact some similarities!

Regards,

Mario Dantas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno Mario, the person in tnat second picture's nose is pointier and her lips less full then the Omec head in tne first picture. I can't really see what you're point is.

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 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.