Neanderthals
Neanderthals
There is general prevailing view that Neanderthals of ancient origin were primitives of doubtful intelligence and not of direct decent to homo-sapiens. They were, from limited anthropological evidence, of stout build, of short powerfully muscular structure and hirsute with a possible reddish to blond hue.
Neanderthals came into prominence some 400K years ago and had a range that appears to have covered most of Europe. They were adaptive to the harsh climate of the time going through a number of ice glaciations and surviving. The anthropology records offer very little clear understanding of where they came from, what social order they established, level of intelligence or communicative ability. All that is known about them comes from very poor samples of residue anatomy from which it is taken that they where not a forerunner of modern man but a separate sub class that had little relevance to homo sapiens.
What seems not to be disputed is that they had a long period of dominance, which for some reason came to an abrupt end within a matter of some 10-20K years and may have coincided with the rise of homo saps some 40K years ago. A number of unsupported argument have been put forward to account for their demise from climatic change, biological deficit, disease, resource competition from the expanding homo saps in resource acquisition to controversially, eradication; what might now be called ethnic cleansing! What is in no doubt is that they died out and left little residue to indicate that they put up a fight and that they where, as it stand just now, not direct ancestors to modern humans. They are in genealogy terms considered a step up from apes, an evolutionary dead end.
What about a different view.
They survived 400K+ years, considerably longer than homo saps have so far achieved without the sophistication of created artefacts. They were sentient enough to move with the environment changes of the times to match the flow of the ice glaciations to survive the harsh conditions. They had some indication of a respect for death and buried their dead; this implies an emotive drive not the action of a non-thinking ape.
They trailed exploration into unknown areas over a vast distance perhaps opening an easy way for the new usurpers. That they may have left depiction of animal representation in caves shows imaginative and visual create-ability consistent with a cognitive process and had a cranial and possibly a brain dimension larger than today’s human. They used and may have developed tools some time before homo out of Africa.
Given the harsh condition of their time it would have been a necessity to work together as a group for survival. Their stout build and slow supposed mobility nature would have helped conserved energy rather like large animals in cold climates do. Due to their long existence and evidential vocal bone structure they may have had a mode of sound communication that had a pictorial base representing their surroundings but more importantly their visual imagery and learned environmental experience could have developed a much greater use of perceptive senses like sight, sound, hearing, smell, ‘sense’ of direction and possibly a telesenses attributes.
With such small social numbers and ‘slow’ breeding ability in a low environmental penetration era, there may have been no pressures to inter compete for resources and therefore they may also have not been overtly aggressive in attitude; In essence they had achieved a stable adaptive condition that did not require rapid social or physical adaptations other than what have might have transpired through environmental genetic modification to their physiology. They probably had attained a stable situation that could have carried on for many more tens of thousands of years providing time to gain knowledge of more conceptual things. However it was not to be, given their low numbers and perchance peaceful conditioning, why they died out is open to debate but opinion proposes, just based on their long tenure, that they were in some respects superior to the expanding homo saps yet lacked the murderous gene. Perhaps despite superior ‘human’ attributes, in the face of the overwhelming borgitis, resistance was futile.
One prevailing idea for their demise is that homo saps ‘out of Africa’ in being more adaptive, resourceful, more successful at breeding and ‘intelligent’, out- competed the Neanderthals on territorial and resource issues, pushing then to marginal zones. They may have also not been inured to new diseases spread with the new saps or given the innate aggressiveness of homo saps they may have simply succumbed to conflict to be driven out of their long standing productive areas. Looking different would not have helped either. There is an additional idea that some interbreeding may have taken place, this is not taken seriously but given the statute that some modern human have, it is not inconceivable that some trace of Neanderthals may still exist. Would it be useful if this were the case?
At one time, up to today, it was assumed that the state of humans had change little over 30/50k years in that the human’s body had not developed in evolutionary term significantly over that period. The reason for this was largely due to the desire of social anthropologist to map man as a fully formed unchanged creature. Recent studies have found this is not the case and that over a short period of time some genetic changes have taken place in some distinct cultures (Moken children –Andaman Sea, learned skill or genetics?) and some 7% of genome has been subject to recent change. It is assumed that these genetic variations are as a result of fortuitous breeding where the environmental conditions favour one gene attribute variation over others leading to a common genetic string of a sap group.
Although the environment, health and economic pressures now no doubt do have an impact as in selective breeding there are occasions when a chance genetic change is made and this is generally noticed as a clear mental, physical, physiological ‘fault’. It is still assumed that the human condition is largely as a result of adaptations to the environment as in the survival of the fittest and that the host has very little actual affect on the direction of these adaptations, if this is wholly the case then with the ability of humans to medically avoid survival of natural weeding; they may have already weakened a large part of the breeding stock.
On a positive note occasionally there might be some advantage of an unguided fortuitous genetic leap that could shape the human biology not so far seen however this may not be the whole story; it is quite likely that another factor could be made to work.
The human body is a biological wonder it is composed of an amalgamation of living cells that are arranged according the DNA genetic make up of the species with the later addition of bacteria, viruses and micro organism, some helpful some less so.
All life in whatever form seeks to survive and the smallest have an amazingly fast adaptability but what triggers the adaptation process? It is not enough to just consider that the weakest perish from environ change, or fast life cycle something occurs in the DNA of the life that changes the makeup and a part of the gene structure that creates an adaptation which it try’s in the changed environ to test if it works. The way these cells adapt may work at a pace that mimics the slow environ change sufficient to preserve the life form to allow continuity and further adaptations that can pass unnoticed? This might be natural state of affairs yet it may seem unlikely but apart from the adaptation response to environmental change there is also a subtle coordination organism group response that brings forward life form change. This type of change can be made deliberate by the life form if it seeks a creative opportunistic niche that provides a much greater opportunity to survive.
It is not impossible that man could generate an adaptation without the need to insert genetic engineered gene if it wanted to bring about a new advantageous trait. To do this would require that application of will on conscious level to act on the cell gene structure to message the gamete and zygote with a slighting different gene structure for the new adaptation required. It may not be necessary to know what to change only to know what the end result should be. If humans were to be aware that they were reaching an evolutional synchronicity epoch that required a change in their psyche or become extinct what effect would the spirit of man be to generate a change? Where there a will there’s a way?
At the moment humans are experimenting with gene therapy – genetic engineering and the interpretation of DNA gene sequence all to improve crop and animal production and correct defect in humans. What effect this invasive adaptations will have is not know and likewise how the overall organism effects its own change to these ‘artificial’ changes is indefinite. Whether this leads to a brave new world of better and superior saps without the psyche is doubtful but the efforts and achievements to date continue to support the created view that saps are the fittest pinnacle of evolutionary achievement.
The continuing arguments on the superiority of homo saps compared to any earlier humanoid bipedal strain is tenuous and may stem from the discourse that wants to separate man from its animal heritage, to place modern man in a separate and entirely different stream of development than Neanderthals or apes and to make the understanding of the evolution of modern homo saps secure and special.
Although the succession of species is an interesting conundrum, what may be debatable is modern mans ability to survive for a similar period of time. There is an proposition that goes, disengaging mans ability to manufacture notwithstanding its amassed aggregated knowledge, its depleting physical resources, less robust stature and weakened genetic configuration; it will less able to adapt to rapid environ change. Indeed there may well be a degenerative process under way now. For a species like the Neanderthals to disappear relatively suddenly taken over by the horde of ‘modern’ homo saps would be like a similar experience to having the current humans population overridden by a new superior creature or artificial creation like a virus AI. Any contenders?
© Renot 11.2007
There is general prevailing view that Neanderthals of ancient origin were primitives of doubtful intelligence and not of direct decent to homo-sapiens. They were, from limited anthropological evidence, of stout build, of short powerfully muscular structure and hirsute with a possible reddish to blond hue.
Neanderthals came into prominence some 400K years ago and had a range that appears to have covered most of Europe. They were adaptive to the harsh climate of the time going through a number of ice glaciations and surviving. The anthropology records offer very little clear understanding of where they came from, what social order they established, level of intelligence or communicative ability. All that is known about them comes from very poor samples of residue anatomy from which it is taken that they where not a forerunner of modern man but a separate sub class that had little relevance to homo sapiens.
What seems not to be disputed is that they had a long period of dominance, which for some reason came to an abrupt end within a matter of some 10-20K years and may have coincided with the rise of homo saps some 40K years ago. A number of unsupported argument have been put forward to account for their demise from climatic change, biological deficit, disease, resource competition from the expanding homo saps in resource acquisition to controversially, eradication; what might now be called ethnic cleansing! What is in no doubt is that they died out and left little residue to indicate that they put up a fight and that they where, as it stand just now, not direct ancestors to modern humans. They are in genealogy terms considered a step up from apes, an evolutionary dead end.
What about a different view.
They survived 400K+ years, considerably longer than homo saps have so far achieved without the sophistication of created artefacts. They were sentient enough to move with the environment changes of the times to match the flow of the ice glaciations to survive the harsh conditions. They had some indication of a respect for death and buried their dead; this implies an emotive drive not the action of a non-thinking ape.
They trailed exploration into unknown areas over a vast distance perhaps opening an easy way for the new usurpers. That they may have left depiction of animal representation in caves shows imaginative and visual create-ability consistent with a cognitive process and had a cranial and possibly a brain dimension larger than today’s human. They used and may have developed tools some time before homo out of Africa.
Given the harsh condition of their time it would have been a necessity to work together as a group for survival. Their stout build and slow supposed mobility nature would have helped conserved energy rather like large animals in cold climates do. Due to their long existence and evidential vocal bone structure they may have had a mode of sound communication that had a pictorial base representing their surroundings but more importantly their visual imagery and learned environmental experience could have developed a much greater use of perceptive senses like sight, sound, hearing, smell, ‘sense’ of direction and possibly a telesenses attributes.
With such small social numbers and ‘slow’ breeding ability in a low environmental penetration era, there may have been no pressures to inter compete for resources and therefore they may also have not been overtly aggressive in attitude; In essence they had achieved a stable adaptive condition that did not require rapid social or physical adaptations other than what have might have transpired through environmental genetic modification to their physiology. They probably had attained a stable situation that could have carried on for many more tens of thousands of years providing time to gain knowledge of more conceptual things. However it was not to be, given their low numbers and perchance peaceful conditioning, why they died out is open to debate but opinion proposes, just based on their long tenure, that they were in some respects superior to the expanding homo saps yet lacked the murderous gene. Perhaps despite superior ‘human’ attributes, in the face of the overwhelming borgitis, resistance was futile.
One prevailing idea for their demise is that homo saps ‘out of Africa’ in being more adaptive, resourceful, more successful at breeding and ‘intelligent’, out- competed the Neanderthals on territorial and resource issues, pushing then to marginal zones. They may have also not been inured to new diseases spread with the new saps or given the innate aggressiveness of homo saps they may have simply succumbed to conflict to be driven out of their long standing productive areas. Looking different would not have helped either. There is an additional idea that some interbreeding may have taken place, this is not taken seriously but given the statute that some modern human have, it is not inconceivable that some trace of Neanderthals may still exist. Would it be useful if this were the case?
At one time, up to today, it was assumed that the state of humans had change little over 30/50k years in that the human’s body had not developed in evolutionary term significantly over that period. The reason for this was largely due to the desire of social anthropologist to map man as a fully formed unchanged creature. Recent studies have found this is not the case and that over a short period of time some genetic changes have taken place in some distinct cultures (Moken children –Andaman Sea, learned skill or genetics?) and some 7% of genome has been subject to recent change. It is assumed that these genetic variations are as a result of fortuitous breeding where the environmental conditions favour one gene attribute variation over others leading to a common genetic string of a sap group.
Although the environment, health and economic pressures now no doubt do have an impact as in selective breeding there are occasions when a chance genetic change is made and this is generally noticed as a clear mental, physical, physiological ‘fault’. It is still assumed that the human condition is largely as a result of adaptations to the environment as in the survival of the fittest and that the host has very little actual affect on the direction of these adaptations, if this is wholly the case then with the ability of humans to medically avoid survival of natural weeding; they may have already weakened a large part of the breeding stock.
On a positive note occasionally there might be some advantage of an unguided fortuitous genetic leap that could shape the human biology not so far seen however this may not be the whole story; it is quite likely that another factor could be made to work.
The human body is a biological wonder it is composed of an amalgamation of living cells that are arranged according the DNA genetic make up of the species with the later addition of bacteria, viruses and micro organism, some helpful some less so.
All life in whatever form seeks to survive and the smallest have an amazingly fast adaptability but what triggers the adaptation process? It is not enough to just consider that the weakest perish from environ change, or fast life cycle something occurs in the DNA of the life that changes the makeup and a part of the gene structure that creates an adaptation which it try’s in the changed environ to test if it works. The way these cells adapt may work at a pace that mimics the slow environ change sufficient to preserve the life form to allow continuity and further adaptations that can pass unnoticed? This might be natural state of affairs yet it may seem unlikely but apart from the adaptation response to environmental change there is also a subtle coordination organism group response that brings forward life form change. This type of change can be made deliberate by the life form if it seeks a creative opportunistic niche that provides a much greater opportunity to survive.
It is not impossible that man could generate an adaptation without the need to insert genetic engineered gene if it wanted to bring about a new advantageous trait. To do this would require that application of will on conscious level to act on the cell gene structure to message the gamete and zygote with a slighting different gene structure for the new adaptation required. It may not be necessary to know what to change only to know what the end result should be. If humans were to be aware that they were reaching an evolutional synchronicity epoch that required a change in their psyche or become extinct what effect would the spirit of man be to generate a change? Where there a will there’s a way?
At the moment humans are experimenting with gene therapy – genetic engineering and the interpretation of DNA gene sequence all to improve crop and animal production and correct defect in humans. What effect this invasive adaptations will have is not know and likewise how the overall organism effects its own change to these ‘artificial’ changes is indefinite. Whether this leads to a brave new world of better and superior saps without the psyche is doubtful but the efforts and achievements to date continue to support the created view that saps are the fittest pinnacle of evolutionary achievement.
The continuing arguments on the superiority of homo saps compared to any earlier humanoid bipedal strain is tenuous and may stem from the discourse that wants to separate man from its animal heritage, to place modern man in a separate and entirely different stream of development than Neanderthals or apes and to make the understanding of the evolution of modern homo saps secure and special.
Although the succession of species is an interesting conundrum, what may be debatable is modern mans ability to survive for a similar period of time. There is an proposition that goes, disengaging mans ability to manufacture notwithstanding its amassed aggregated knowledge, its depleting physical resources, less robust stature and weakened genetic configuration; it will less able to adapt to rapid environ change. Indeed there may well be a degenerative process under way now. For a species like the Neanderthals to disappear relatively suddenly taken over by the horde of ‘modern’ homo saps would be like a similar experience to having the current humans population overridden by a new superior creature or artificial creation like a virus AI. Any contenders?
© Renot 11.2007
posted by Renot at 4:25 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home