/sci/ - Science & Math

Is this depiction racist?

They looked like that.

Although, they may have been white instead of black, as it would blend in with the snowy backdrop.

the eyes are probably wrong

Seems like he is being contrarian to sell his books.

Sounds pretty convincing and reasonable to me.

I mean, really? A neanderthal man that's got a shaved face?

>>2737645
Native americans often don't grow much facial hair. Lack of facial hair isn't unheard of in humans.

Actually, after watching this I find it highly likely that they looked like this.

Plus, when I think of the neanderthals as fuck awesome super predators that nearly hunted us to extinction and then we turned around and killed them all, everything seems more awesome.

>>2737653
HUMANS. Anyway, the part I'm talking about starts at 1:48.

He also makes the same point with breasts. No other primates have breasts like human breasts. Why do we assume that neandertal women did?

>>2737653
Native Americans are [said to be] related to early Asian tribes (when they crossed over the Pacific during the ice age). Asians aren't very good at growing body hair and masculinity as well.

this is so completely and utterly wrong.

i know its s troll, and the guy is an idiot, but two of the most obvious problems are:

a) cite ANY legitimate source that shows neathderthals, or any other primate, have oval pupils.

the reasoning for this, based on the NP proponent claims, was "they had big eyes".

a lot of animals have very large eyes (including nocturnal primates) without having oval pupils.

they only said they had oval pupils to instill an emotional response. it does look awesome, but there is ZERO evidence for it.

b) why the fuck would they lack canines, a basic feature of even mainly herbivorous, if the NP theory is true?

>>2737666
Have you forgotten what the scientific name of Neanderthals is? Hint Homo sapiens are not the only species of humans that has existed.

>>2737666
They weren't that genetically dissimilar, viable hybrids survived and reproduced.

The comparison of the chimp and neanderthal skull really is what got me, they looked way too similar for the neanderthal to look like us.

>>2737653
Sure, HUMANS. Not Neandertals. Anyway, the part I'm talking about starts at 1:48.

He also makes the same point with breasts. No other primates have breasts like human breasts. Why do we assume that neandertal women did?

Anyway, I think he has a point but takes it too far.

>>2737678
>>2737677
Sorry for the deleted post, redirects to
>>2737685

>>2737678
>>2737684
These are both good points. The truth, as it often does, lies somewhere in the middle.

>>2737669
I think body hair is a bit like balding, if your hair is sensitive to testosterone you will go bald or grow body hair, but if it isn't, even if you have high testosterone nothing will happen.

Where the hell is he getting the idea that they are any more of a primate than we are? They are part of the Homo genus.

>>2737700
He does go too far, but he also has a point.

Facial phenotype can change a fair bit without drastic genetic change.

>>2737709
(Cont)
Oh damn, I just got to the "neandertal males hunting human females for sex" part.

That's just stupid.

>>2737693
I think the best bet in lack of other evidence is to look to the species or subspecies that the extinct creature was capable of breeding with for similarities. In that case it is us, humans.

If this was a horse no one would would have problems extrapolating from a extant species very closely related to it.

If they were 6 times as strong as us, looked like that and were predators of humans I don't see how he explains the large amount of inbreeding.

>>2737693
Yeah, they were probably alot bigger and more muscular then us and tried to hunt us, but I doubt they were covered in fur and looked so much like apes.

Probably covered in a very thin layer of fur/hair. And someone on the video's comments pointed out that the neanderthal's nasal spine would contradict a flat nose, so it would be out further.

Other than that I think that hes is right that they were stronger and better hunters and us and may even have tried to kill us all, but I doubt they looked so much like apes.

It's an ice age. What else are they going to eat on a regular basis? Eskimos eat tons of meat and lack any agriculture before intervention from western civilization.

This is a load of bollocks

>>2737716
The fact that there was neadertal-human interbreeding is the point that goes most strongly against his theory of aggressive neandartal-on-human predation. The easiest way to reconcile it without compromising the theory is to make the interbreeding nonconsensual on the human side.

But those human women with the hybrid babies have to survive and go back to a human tribe... wtf? How does that happen? They'd be eaten by the neadertals, in his picture.

Did Neanderthals wear clothes? If they did they probably had less body hair to minimize disease carrying mites and shit.

For the love of everything chan, someone shop that things face onto the "you gonna get raped" guy, so i can stop fretting about whether or not it will happen

>>2737719
The idea is that they are also chimplike, not just human-like.

5:35 into the video:

(paraphrasing)
"they didnt look like humans, so what DID they look like? well, they were primate, and as such, we expect them to look like primates (shows footage of gorillas"

derp. humans arent primates at all right? fuck this guy is dumb.

neanderthals and humans seperated quite recently compared to how far back we seperated from what became gorillas.

we EXPECT them to share some of our characteristics, seeing as they diverged so recently.

as for shaving/breasts etc. on museum exhibits, of course its exaggerated. we have an indication of what they look like, but the general public wants to know EXACTLY what they look like.

>>2737739
Neandertal lived in a much more northern latitude. It's hard for me to imagine them being mostly hairless.

>>2737746
>as for shaving/breasts etc. on museum exhibits, of course its exaggerated. we have an indication of what they look like, but the general public wants to know EXACTLY what they look like.
Being precise doesn't mean you have to be inaccurate. The anthropocentric bias (shaved faces and large breasts) isn't excusable.

>>2737673
>they only said they had oval pupils to instill an emotional response
and? the fact that he used a hollywood tactic to help garnish support for his theory means the whole idea is bullshit right?

>why the fuck would they lack canines, a basic feature of even mainly herbivorous, if the NP theory is true?
there is no indication that Neandertal man was herbivorous, and the fact that they used tools easily explains away the need for cuspid teeth.

DERPITY HERPITY DOO

Of course they didn't have eyes exactly like that you retards. Did you not hear the part where he admitted that they would obviously be a bit stylized, as we don't know what the eye would look like? He just had the CGI guy make it look like a mixture of a primates and a cats, and to give it a menacing gaze. Goddamn people, use your heads.

If they were grossly different why would either species see each other as a sexual target, sexual displays would be all wrong.

I think he just wants the troll like Neanderthals Frank Frazetta painted.

>>2737753
i know its not, i completely agree on that part.

but museums are there to make money, and i like to hope that sometimes they spark a curiosity of science i younger people.

i mean, think about it, we can be very confident in claiming that neanderthals had black skin, but no museum would ever make an exhibit look like that out of fear of claims of racism.

when money, and public interest/perception is involved, very little leeway remains.

>>2737753
Why wouldn't they have breast?
Do we know when that feature evolved in Humans? If it is related to upright posture and hiding ovulation it did probably evolve early.

>>2737758
>and? the fact that he used a hollywood tactic to help garnish support for his theory means the whole idea is bullshit right?

lets look at his idea:

>complains that museum displays use a hollywood tactic to help garnish support.

>uses a hollywood tactic to help garnish support.

hypocritical much?

modern reconstruction of neanderthals is in complete agreement. he hired someone and said "make your reconstruction look this THIS". that is hardly scientific.

>the fact that they used tools easily explains away the need for cuspid teeth.

oh, just like it took away ours too right?

>>2737790
thats how museums justify it.

although there is a case for it (especially when there could be validity to the claims humans and neanderthals were interbreeding as late as only 50,000 years ago), there isnt enough evidence to justify including it in an exhibit and letting people believe the exhibit is 100% accurate.

imo, they probably did have breasts, but the issue here comes from presenting things that arent conclusive to be undeniably true. exhibits arent scientific representations, they are models used to garner public support.

if you remember that, then there really isnt THAT much of an issue.

think abotu it, when you are making a model, you have evidence that they quite probably DID have breasts. do you give them breasts, or do you leave the women flat chested?

remember that including the breasts will also help to get people to associate with the models, thus generating more interest/money for you.

No ape that I know of has Tapetum lucidums or oval eyes, where would this come from?

CP PORN MOVIES!!!! 12-18 Yrs old Girls and Boys!!!! Save all links before 404! And download after time...!!!!

http://4p5.com/5c643
http://4p5.com/e02aa8
http://4p5.com/20fa9f
http://4p5.com/52d7b6
http://4p5.com/2c6d18
http://4p5.com/26b
http://4p5.com/d82c91
http://4p5.com/716019
http://4p5.com/ef8863
http://4p5.com/fc2
http://4p5.com/65f1a9
http://4p5.com/f32bc5
http://4p5.com/982d9e
http://4p5.com/6cbd34
http://4p5.com/eb3bcb
http://4p5.com/1eecea
http://4p5.com/3de
http://4p5.com/184882
http://4p5.com/4f
http://4p5.com/066222
http://4p5.com/09b08f
http://4p5.com/4ab678
http://4p5.com/9057b6
http://4p5.com/6a1831
http://4p5.com/afa35f
http://4p5.com/3235aa
http://4p5.com/e73f52
http://4p5.com/ecb94c
http://4p5.com/33fa08
http://4p5.com/81acfe
http://4p5.com/cd2db2
http://4p5.com/5eb667
http://4p5.com/e6
http://4p5.com/6f8221
http://4p5.com/0a5732
http://4p5.com/458f11
http://4p5.com/60ffc6
http://4p5.com/b2c872
http://4p5.com/9b3b7b
http://4p5.com/61aa41
http://4p5.com/63cbae
http://4p5.com/fc4e29
http://4p5.com/4fa8dc

Dwonload jailbait and CP Videos! No Password! No sms! Free fr All..........!!aposndpionpo

>>2737814
I wouldn't worry about museum models, I imagine they get updated with new discoveries just like dinosaur depictions do.

>>2737819
maybe i missed something, but where was the photo claiming they do have tapetum lucidums?

all the eyes in the pictures i have seen do not show reflective properties.

I think that guy watched The time machine(2002) a way too much.

>>2737832
im not concerned at all.

i, unlike most people, understand that the features shown on exhibits are mostly the "most probable" scenario, barring the obvious tweaking to cater to the public (white skin, clean shaven etc.)

>>2737768

Dolphins and dogs have both been known to try to have sex with humans, and they're nowhere near as similar to us as Neanderthals.

>>2737823
All those are larger than 100MB. Reported.

>>2737838
He claimed in the segment about hunting in the dark.

>>2737849
Most dogs won't though, same with the vast majority of animals. He is implying a wide scale persistent thing.

>>2737846
Wouldn't light skin be probable because of the need for sunlight to produce Vitamin D?

What the fuck is he talking about? Of course neanderthals looked anthropomorphic - they were human! We only separated for about half a million years ago at most. We couldn't look that much different.

>>2737866

I'm not necessarily agreeing with him that Neanderthals hunted human females specifically for sex. Just that there were probably many cases where they came upon humans - through happenstance or when hunting them for food - and decided to do some humping while they were there.

On the video the guy just said that neanderthals raped toons of human females, thats the reason why we are so jealous and feel so bad when our womanz r raped.
That was very scientific.

Is he implying humans aren't primates?

>>2737639
So you think neanderthal was clean shaven, sympathetic looking and even attractive thick browed humans?

>>2737942
Nobody in this thread is arguing that troll, they are pointing out its stupid to assume they looked like demonic chimpanzees when they are so evolutionarily close to humans.

>>2737938
no he's implying humans tend to anthropomorphize things (make things human-like to relate to them) and that maybe humans are distinct and neanderthal has more in common with every other primate.

>>2737871
possibly. depends on whereabouts in europe the neanderthal came from. they extended as far down as modern isreal iirc.

modern humans native to that area range from pale to quite dark.

of course, diet had an impact as well.

really, given the broad geography of neanderthals, it is reasonable to expect them to have a range of skin colours.

you will only ever see a white one in a museum though. that was more my issue, rather than "they all had skin as black as an african", which is completely wrong.

when i said:

>we can be very confident in claiming that neanderthals had black skin, but no museum would ever make an exhibit look like that out of fear of claims of racism.

it was a overt simplification. by black i really mean "not white", and if they ever did start making exhibits darker than they currently are, then yes, people would start claiming racism.

>>2737963
The guy who made that video is claiming they are closer to animals in a completely different genus they are less closely related to than one which they interbred with.

>>2737964
>you will only ever see a white one in a museum though

That has more to do with Neanderthals being almost entirely associated with ice age Europe than anything else.

>>2737990
i will concede to that point.

>>2737962
He made good arguments for all of the features he added. Big eyes for night vision and hunting. There is no reason to suspect you'd see the whites of their eyes like a human. They wouldn't have the same cultural values as humans, though similar. Having lots of fur makes sense instead of wearing fur clothes (they had tens of thousands of years to adapt to ice age Europe.

We tend to make them look thoughtful and gentle. There is no reason to suspect that in their personalities, especially given the evidence.

His depiction might be extreme, but that might be what's needed to push the rest of the scientific community to embrace a more realistic idea of this particular human species.

>why is "Lucy" the only humanoid primate allowed to look like a chimp/gorilla?

>>2738007
>He made good arguments for all of the features he added

>oval pupils
>reflective retinas
>zero evidence

nice try, troll.

>>2737661
human beings are frightening creatures. We were prey animals, and most animals grow different adaptations to overcome this. We didn't become poisonous or something, we became so intelligent we plotted against and hunted to extinction all of our natural predators.

Humans are pretty fucked up.

>>2737942
A good portion of humans don't have facial hair, most apes don't have facial hair and they were attractive enough to breed with humans. Sympathetic? Someone had to raise the hybrids so they weren't to inhuman.

>>2738024
this, a thousand time this.

why do peopel say shit like:

>Plus, when I think of the neanderthals as fuck awesome super predators that nearly hunted us to extinction and then we turned around and killed them all, everything seems more awesome.

ffs "the world is better if i think x, therefore i will assume x is true and ignore any evidence to the contrary".

>>2737673
>b) why the fuck would they lack canines, a basic feature of even mainly herbivorous, if the NP theory is true?

Humans are different. Unlike most predators we don't use our teeth to take an animal down. We use tools and our hands. The flat, large, and sharp teeth of neanderthal are perfect for tearing flesh off of bone held in the hand. Modern humans have to use the side of our teeth to do that. Neanderthal was better equipped at eating raw flesh this way.
Also, human species lost large canines well before Neanderthal evolved.

don't freakout about a tiny thing like pupil shape. We don't know how their pupils were shaped. I think he used some artistic merit there. He wanted to make neanderthal look more like an animal/primate than a modern human to take away the anthropomorphic effect. Slightly changing the eyes helps that concept.

>>2738060
But changing the pupil isn't supported by any of the surviving relative species.

>>2738060
you cannot be this dumb...

>The flat, large, and sharp teeth of neanderthal are perfect for tearing flesh off of bone held in the hand.
>Modern humans have to use the side of our teeth to do that.

wait... what...?

we use the side of our teeth because it has CANINES...

>>2737716
is it? sexual violence is a human trait. He's argument isn't that neanderthal isn't human, his argument is that neanderthal shouldn't be THAT closely compared with modern humans.

You need to do more research. When there is a war, there is a lot more rape. Rape is a constant factor in human conflict. In this case, why would it be different when neanderthal hunted humans for food?

It's not like there was neanderthal dating sites for mixed species couples. If they wanted human pussy, they had to rape it. Too many cultural and language barriers in place to keep them from mingling socially.

My proof? Show me one example of a human and neanderthal buried together at the same time. At best, humans were buried with dog companions, that's all.

>>2738104
show any evidence at all that your position is valid.

the onus is on you.

>>2737732
>but I doubt they were covered in fur and looked so much like apes.

Why? They lived for hundreds of thousands of years isolated in ice age Europe? Growing fur makes sense. I think clothes are distinctly a modern human cultural "thing" not a universal human need. Ethnocentrism much?
Also, what other animal, even primate wears clothes/furs?

>>2738104
How many animals rape a prey species?
If either species were too dissimilar I doubt either side would raise the rape babies. The babies wouldn't trigger a maternal drive.

>>2738135
Neanderthals were making clothing before humans were.

>>2738143
precisely.

not only that, but that it is still prevalent enough to be detectable in todays populations.

if these babies truly were fathered by a super predator like the one he depicts, there is now way that child would be able to integrate the society in such a way that it could propogate its genes.

>>2737739
I don't think there is any evidence if they wore any clothes. We know they made tools, wore jewelry, made "musical" instruments (a bird call is a hunting tool, not for jamming out tunes) and made art. But there is no fossil record for clothes. They probably didn't wear clothes. Why would they?

>>2738143
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khwjD-KVQ_Q
there you go sir

Okay, so I kinda agree with his point about anthropomorphizing and stuff... and granted we dont have any soft tissue samples... but he goes WAY too far. He uses gorillas and chimps for a model of reconstruction? Why the fuck would you do that? Seriously... What about Homo Erectus? They are much more closely related than Gorillas or Chimps.

Also he tries to argue that Neanderthals hunted early humans for sex. Yet if they were SO different like he claims, then their sexual signals wouldn't be compatible. That would be like saying a male human would find a female chimp's (since he likes using chimps so much) sexual display (enormous enflamed ass) attractive.

Also, he claims that humans hunted Neanderthals to extinction, when there is no solid evidence to back up this claim.

>>2738166
What if they kidnap humans instead of just raping.

>>2737746
>derp. humans arent primates at all right?

Humans are odd looking primates. We are bipedal, mostly lightish skinned and hairless. We have noses and bodies perfectly adapted for swimming (which is totally fucking odd for primates) and we have the longest hair on our heads.
We are agile and "pretty". It's modern humans that are atypical, why should we treat other species as if they are more like us?

>>2738188
Then that would be a very human way of taking a wife wouldn't it?

>>2738184
exepct that humans were so weak that a human female for a Neaderthal would be like a play toy for him, it doesnt matter if she is that attractive, as long as she looks close to me and its easy to get her pussy.

>>2738184

>but he goes WAY too far. He uses gorillas and chimps for a model of reconstruction? Why the fuck would you do that?

He has books to sell.

That's why he does that. He wants to create a controversy by presenting wild and sensational ideas that go against the general consensus and making the Neanderthals look as scary as possible. You don't sell books to the general public by being calm and scholarly.

>>2738210
I think you just have a fetish for women being savaged by animals.

>>2738184
exepct that humans were so weak that a human female for a Neanderthal would be like a play toy for him, it doesnt matter if she is that attractive, as long as she looks close to me and its easy to get her pussy.

>>2738196
Because they are in the same Genus as us and are "human" by definition?

>>2738196
precisely.

the changes we have made are testament to the significant gap between when we separated from the other modern primates.

we seperated from chimpanzees about 5-7 MILLION years ago, while neanderthal was still breeding with us only 50-80,000 years ago, not long before becoming extinct only 30,000 years ago.

you expect me to believe they look more like chimps (let alone gorillas)?

guess again.

>>2738196

>why should we treat other species as if they are more like us?

Because those other species are separated from us by 500,000 years of evolution, not 10 million. And we already know they were bipedal.

I'd love to see how Vendramini justifies his claims that nearly all the physical changes between humans and other apes, besides walking on two legs, have happened within the past few hundred thousand years. Unfortunately, I'd need to buy his book to find that out.

How convenient.

>>2738227
Probably one of the more unfounded and trite comments I've seen.

>>2737871
heavily furred animals and nocturnal animals/mammals don't have a problem producing vitamin D. . .

>>2738232
Lets all agree that there was alot of neanderthal to human rape back there, thats why we are so fucked up.
But neanderthals didnt look like that at all.

>>2737990
>>2737996
Modern Human Europeans =/= Neanderthals

>>2738249
no. if you want to claim mass raping, provide evidence.

>>2738266
no one ever claimed that.

>>2738022
He did have evidence for the reflective retinas. Huge fucking eyes. I bet they saw much better in the dark than modern humans. Hunting in the dark is also an advantage for many predators.

>>2737602
I dont think humans would breed with that. And if they did give birth to that, they'd kill it at birth. All and I repeat ALL non african humans have neanderthal DNA. That means this guy is full of shit and probably got his idea of back then based on some religious text and is trying to force the science to look his religious interpretation.

>>2738278
fullretard.jpg.

large eyes do not automatically means reflective retinas.

seriously....

>>2738281
to look like* his religious interpretation.

>>2738287
nah, i think its just a crackpot who saw he could make a number of strawmen and wild accusations, and then make money selling books.

>>2738267
>>rape is a common trait of primates.
>>non african humans got neanderthal genes.
>>neanderthal were much stronger than humans, making it easy to happen.
>>We didnt look so different, so the sexual appeal wasnt zero( there are even cases of human to monkey rape in some civilizatations nowdays.)
And much more if you are not satisfied

>>2738248
Can apes produce vitamin D without sun exposure?

>>2738295
Yes because if a fucking monster popped out of the woman's vagina, I'm sure the entire clan would help take care of it. And this happen consistently. AMIRITE???

>>2738298
You can ingest it. Fish have vitamin D I think.

>>2738120
show evidence that humans are rape happy during conflict and war? The Rape of Nanking and every other fucking war in human history.

If humans got knocked up by neanderthals, it was by rape.
Otherwise we'd have a lot more neanderthal traits (no one would kill the babies if it was made with consensual love) and there would be a cultural exchange, i.e. neanderthals and humans buried side by side ritualistically.

Plenty of evidence to support my points, none to support yours.

>>2738301
Not only does this monster have to pop out of a vagina, it has too survive into its teens in society and court females itself.
If they are predatory rape machines I do not think that is happening.

>>2738307
Yeah they look like a mix between the 2. So it would look like half a monster. Yep, still a monster.

>>2738301
Hybrids dont look like monsters.
Also rape was very common, and usually not related to pregnancy.

>>2738301
Hybrids dont look like monsters.
Also rape was very common, and usually not related to pregnancy

>>2738143
Lots of animals associate violence with rape. Especially so humans.

Lots of humans today raise rape babies and we have modern medical advances like abortion.

What's your point again?

>>2738308
So you anthropomorphize other species when it's convenient and you claim anthropomorphization when it's not....

I'd simply like to ask you to 'prove it'.
Prove that Neanderthals raped humans. Prove that your scenario is true.

>>2738326
That's because they don't look like the OP's pic when they get ejected.

>>2738308
Is war rape common in pre agricultural tribal societies skirmishing with their neighbors?

Another explanation for the small amount of Neanderthal traits in humans is simple population swamping.

>>2738295
thats not evidence, thats opinion.

showing that its POSSIBLE, and that something happened are two different things.

i could easily claim that african men are raping middle eastern women en masse, and i can show you that it is possible too.

does that mean that it is happening?

what you are trying to argue is unfalsifiable. i could never prove that it didnt happen, in the same way i cannot prove that russels teapot doesnt exist.

it is up to you to prove that they did rape women, in large numbers.

until then, it is a baseless assertion. nothing more.

>>2738298
yes.

>>2738326
So you use an example of a human raping a human to justify your claim that a human and non-human rape baby would be equally as viable in a society of humans...

>>2738308
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrigo_do_Lagar_Velho

If this is a hybrid what then?

>>2738308
>Otherwise we'd have a lot more neanderthal traits (no one would kill the babies if it was made with consensual love) and there would be a cultural exchange

we do have neanderthal DNA from interbreeding. no one said it was COMMON for interbreeding, just that it did happen.

again, all of this is just assertion. there is no evidence to show that neanderthals were raping humans.

your argument is based entirely on "it could have happened". you have proved nothing.

>>2738152
Where is the evidence for this clothing? They found some needles, but why assume they made anything other than shoes? I think they had fur.

In video:
"Neanderthals were primates!"
"Once you realize that Neanderthals were primates then you start to see similarities between them and other primates"

...um NO SHIT Neanderthals were primates... Guess what, Homo sapiens are primates too jackass. I guess that means we all must look a lot like "other primates". Where did you get your degree anyways? ffs...

>>2738338
ye ok fine we cannot prove it indeed.
But it is a strong possibility if you take primates behavior in consideration.

>>2738362
>strong possibility
>opinion

>>2738364
>>thats just your opnion that is my opnion man.

>>2738362
Yes let's take human behavior into account.

Look up harlequin fetus and tell me how many people would attempt to raise one? Who would raise it if it was a rape baby. Yeah shut up you're a fucking idiot.

>>2738358
From what I understand, they had needles, hole punches and scraping tools for cleaning hides. They were doing something with the tools and lived through several climatic variations. Why not clothes?

>>2738360
Also, he makes a false dichotomy later on about the amount of hair:

"Did they have hair like us? Or did they have hair like other primates?"

So there's no inbetween? They couldn't have just been like a super hairy human (see Robin Williams...)?

>>2738370
saying that something is a "strong possibility" IS an opinion.

cite a source that says it is highly probable that it happened. show me statistics.

>>2738374
>> implying that all the rape hybrid babies would look deformed.

>>2738377
And THEN... he says "well all the other animals in the area had thick fur coats (bears, lions, buffalo, etc.) so Neanderthals probably did too."

Seriously, how thin do you plan to stretch your argument? Why not look at evolutionary trends of primates and Homo sapiens instead of fucking BEARS.

>>2738381
>implying they would look identical to human-human offspring

>>2738389
>>implying i said that, instead of stating that hybrid babies dont look deformed.

>>2738405
>implying you werent saying they bear an extreme resemblence, enough to be raised as a human.

>>2738335
no evidence of "population swapping". There are no neanderthal and human side by side burials. Also there were huge cultural and language barriers. Humans have enough problems with these things, I expect it to be worse with different species.

We share a very little dna with them, meaning rape and killing most babies/pregnant females as a result. Every so often, a hybrid was able to grow up and courted/raped more humans.

>>2738378

Not the person you're responding to, but there's no hard evidence either way. All we know that humans and Neanderthals interbred and we know that this would have been either:

1)largely due to rape,
2)largely due to consensual sex or
3)due to an equal amount of rape and consensual sex

Until hard evidence arrives, and since none of those three possibilities is a default position that doesn't carry the burden of truth, all we can do when discussing which of the three is the most likely is use common sense. Common sense seems to suggest that the "interbreeding was largely due to rape" theory is the most likely.

For all you fuckers who think hybrid animals look deformed check out some real hybrid animals.
If it is possible to 2 animals to bread and have a baby, it usually dont look much different than the mother or the father.

>>2738411
>>implying that they would look deformed again without any proof, without taking in consideration that all the hybrid animals dont look so different than the mother to be considered deformed.

>>2738415

Humans have a very different idea of "deformed" when they're talking about other humans from the one they have when talking about completely different animals. We might not think there's anything wrong with the way mules look, but I imagine most humans, particularly ones that haven't grown up in politically correct societies, would think an animal that is half human and half something else was an abomination.

>>2738411
I really hope you are trolling.

>>2738415
I think people are suggesting that if Neanderthals were cannibal rape apes that their traits would make a mother likely to abandon a child. Heck you have modern parents sometimes feeling left out or something when a child inherits only visible features from one parent.

>>2738414
i know that, but these idiots are claiming that it DEFINITELY came from rape because this idiot said so.

in truth, we dont even know that we were even fighting. all we know is that neanderthals became extinct. it could very well have been climate changes, or competition that drove them to extinction.

to go so far as to make so many assumptions about the naenderthal-cro magnon interactions is just silly.

the evidence shows that neanderthals were remarkably similar to humans, and that some interbreeding occured.

that is all.

Wow... and at the end he claims that modern humans from Africa were "timid, weak, etc." and that after being raped/hunted by Neanderthals they attained "aggression, high intelligence, etc."..

Probably one of the stupidest claims in the entire movie. You're right Danny... modern humans weren't aggressive at all. In fact, all those primates coming from Africa would have been completely oblivious to predation because there obviously aren't any top predators or other extremely dangerous animals in all of Africa right? Africa is just one big happy continent full of benevolent animals. And they didn't even have decent technology at the time like the atlatls.

I could go on and on. What the fuck, how did this guy even get published? This is complete tripe and his argument/"theory" (lol) is so incredibly flimsy.

>>2738425

They would look deformed to a mother from a primitive society who was hoping for a full human, you fucking idiot. We don't say that hybrid animals look deformed because we have less of an emotional connection and we know what they're supposed to look like.

Sex is about domination as well

>>2738451
precisely. in his own video, the guy makes claims that we feel so scared at night because we were hunted by neanderthals during the night.

if neanderthals were truly as horrific to us as he makes them out to be, a child between the two species would not only look different, but would have features that clearly link it to the superpredators that were, apparently, EATING us.

>>2738437
Hell didn't they think people with downs were babies stolen by faeries and replaced with fey and shit like that.

>>2738374
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SM88sZZz2iY

Oh look, a whole fucking video of harlequin babies that have been raised into adulthood (or late childhood so far). Took me 5 seconds to look up.

And you are assuming that pre-civilization humans understand that sex/rape = baby and genetics.

Knowing the act of sex creates a baby and knowing genes from the male getting passed to a female is a very recent understanding.

>>2738464
>> implying that primitive animals were that picky.
Seriously? not even nowdays humans are that picky

>>2738425
>>2738450
they DO look different. ffs, even when you look at hybrid animals, they appear as a mix of the two parents.

look at the pic in OPs photo. if a child looked like a mixture of that and a human, it would look so far removed from being that it isnt funny.

if you think a child between THAT and a human would look anything liek a human, you are an idiot.

>>2738452

>but these idiots are claiming that it DEFINITELY came from rape because this idiot said so

No they aren't. They're using generalisations because they're in a casual debate on the internet and aren't paying close attention to their language. In such contexts, it's normal to speak in a manner that exaggerates how certain one is about something.

>>2738485
Yeah... because humans are regularly going out and raping bonobos and gorillas.

Did you have an actual argument?

>>2738378
You're a namefag. Learn your place. You are lower than interracial gay jews on the sex offender list living in a gypsy commune.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPYmarGO5jM&feature=list_related&playnext=1&list=SP848F23
68C90DDC3D
There you go for all you retards that know nothing about primate behavior

>>2738504
Thanks for contributing to the argument.

Fucking moron.

>>2738484
yay, modern day deformed children are still raised.

you obviously have no idea about ancient times. heck, even a few thousand years ago, we still had people regularly killing newborn children outright if it had any deformity at all.

>>2738413
>There are no neanderthal and human side by side burials

What percentage of the ancient human population have we unearthed? Human fossils are pretty rare aren't they and Neanderthals are not a huge part of our DNA so what are the chances we would find one of these hypothetical burials.

Many cultures killed deformed/weak babies and very recently people though you were touched by demons if you were born weird. Implying they would be that happy allowing children who look like the guys who ate half of them and raped their women 9 months ago is stretching it. And the guy has very little evidence for anything he is saying.

I just find it funny how VP stopped to post with his name, but didnt stop making stupid claims.
Also i know you are gonna say you havent done that.
You are so predictable.

>>2738565
The only stupid claims I see in this fucking thread are from people like you. VP is actually one of the more reasonable people in this thread.

People who seriously gobble up this guys' argument about Neanderthals have to be pretty fucking thick.

>>2738565
nice try troll.

"too many people are providing arguments against me, must be one guy pretending to be everyone".

its just sad how you keep doing it.

>>2738496
New York's mother looks like a hybrid between Op's pic and modern day humans.

I think any claims other than Neanderthals were culturally conservative ugly people need some evidence beyond conjecture.

>>2738498
You are trying to explain the fine details of human conversation to an aspie on the internet. That's quite a task. Sure you want to try?

>>2738619
Neanderthals =/= rednecks
lol

>>2738135
But if neanderthals wore clothing, then they wouldn't need so much hair.

And unless I'm grossly mistaken, neanderthals wore clothing.

It seems like if neanderthals were that much superior to us, we would have died out and they would still exist. But I like the theory that that we avoided being killed by them via cuteness.

Another theory suggests that humans' neotenous characteristics were an evolutionary strategy that enabled Cro-Magnons (Homo sapiens) to gain predominance over H. neanderthalensis (and possibly H. erectus and H. heidelbergensis) by appealing to these species' nurturing instincts through paedomorphic cuteness to avoid territorial aggression.

>>2738864
The second part of that is a quote from wikipedia. I forgot to greentext.

>>2738864
The neotenous features may have resulted from us domesticating ourselves. Animals we domesticate end up with those features whether we are trying for them or not.

I find the weird blend of hyper sexualization and neotony in Homo sapiens weird. large chins, large dicks, breast, no breeding cycle and so on.

>>2738894
Domesticating ourselves? Like breeding ourselves so that we're less aggressive and more suited for civilization?

>>2738937
Yeah. Perhaps behaviors that are linked to more sociability bundle with juvenile physical features. Most mammals are social while young.

>>2738956
But that would only be desirable after the Neolithic revolution, which was 10,000 years ago, and neanderthals died out 25,000 years ago.

>>2739043
not necessarily social cohesion would have been extremely important for hunting especially large mammals.

I think this thread raise a good question.
Would you fuck a neanderthal woman?

>>2739043
Keeping excess males around instead of having the most aggressive running of the weaker ones was probably important to small tribes hunting dangerous prey and skirmishing with neighbors.

It would be awesome if this were true but humans were pretty closely related to neanderthals. Neanderthals were basically the last humans to leave Africa before caucasians/mongoloids did 50000-40000 years ago and evolved in the ice age into the IQ 100 humans that constructed civilization.

>>2739082
Would you rape a neanderthal woman?
>fix'ed

>>2739082
obviously

>>2739129

A neanderthal woman would rape your babyfaced ass instead.

>>2739129
That deppends.
Is she tied down?
Cause if not, it would be like raping a tiger, she would just rip my dick off before anything happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLHY7Y9-O1E
Im just gonna leave this here for all those who doubt a human female would not feel compassion for her hybrid baby

i always figured the neanderthals were probably furred and had larger eyes, but shouldn't they be light-colored, having developed in freezing environments?

also, wasn't there supposed to be evidence that they may have actually been smarter than early humans (niggers), and that interbreeding with them produced the modern humanity (which then split into asian and european populations)?

>>2739082
Only if she lets me wash her first.

>>2739082
I imagine they would have an ugly barrel chest with no waist. A dumpy short muscle chick isn't really my thing.

I thought you were a myth.

Well, I'm not. But I will tell you something that is—the belief that human beings are kind.

No, Caesar. There are some—

Oh, a handful perhaps, but not most of them. No, they won't learn to be kind until we force them to be kind. And we can't do that until we are free.

How do you propose to gain this freedom?

By the only means left to us. Revolution.

But it's doomed to failure!

Perhaps. This time.

And the next.

Maybe.

But you'll keep trying?

You above everyone else should understand. We cannot be free until we have power. How else can we achieve it?

>>2738167
no fossil record for clothes
>expecting furs, skin, or fabric to fossilize

>>2738484
To be fair, those are kids with ichtyosis, but not harlequin type ichtyosis. Harlequin ichtyosis is fatal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichtyosis

>>2739187
It's impossible to say whether or not they were "smarter" than humans. They did have (on average) a larger brain case by volume than humans though. Their skulls were longer in the back compared to ours (sort of like an extra room attached to the back), their skulls weren't as tall as ours though, which also attributed to their sloped foreheads with prominent brow ridges. In contrast, modern humans have fairly tall heads with relatively small brow ridges.

brain size =/= intelligence though. Humans today have a wide variety of brain sizes simply due to the fact that humans vary in size considerably. Some 4ft tall guy would have a smaller brain than a 7ft tall dude, but it doesn't mean that the 7ft guy is smarter.

>>2738167
Because it's fucking cold...
Why would they have such thick fur?

>>2737743

It took me 15 minutes to do this. I think it's 15 minutes too long.

>>2739566
Because in the animal world, when it's "fucking cold" animals don't head on down to Wal-Mart for a nylon track suit. They grow fucking fur.

>>2739523
they wouldn't so why assume they were there in the first place?

Why wouldn't a mammal adapt to grow thick fur for winter protection in 500,000 years?

You're saying they can't grow an adaptation they already have.

>>2739585
Maybe people like you like to use bears and bison for models of hominid adaptability, but where I come from (scientific reason) it makes far more sense that they'd use their brains... grasping hands... tools... and skins/furs they acquire from dead animals to make clothing... also they are much more closely related to Homo sapiens than gorillas, chimps, other hairy primates.

Nice try though.

>>2739594
They have the same tools humans made to make clothing?

>>2739594
>they wouldn't so why assume they were there in the first place?
Maybe because they had the tools necessary to make said clothing? Is that such a leap of logic?

>You're saying they can't grow an adaptation they already have.
[citation needed]

>>2739618
>[citation needed]

Hey aspie, you have hair all lover your body, even in areas that appear "hairless". It's not a big leap that it grows thicker and longer to protect against cold weather in hundreds of thousands of years. Simple adaptations like that can happen fairly quickly in harsh situations. . . like an ice age.

>>2739647
Cool story bro.
Unfortunately for you, hominids during the ice age used CLOTHING to supplement their relative lack of body hair. Human hair =/= fur.

>>2739656
As a side note. You wont find a single human population living in subarctic conditions with fur. Yet they've been living there for centuries without modern day heating.

Why dont they have fur? derp de hurp

WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANYONE WANT TO CLONE SUCH HORRIBLE CREATURES?

>>2739667
Chill, bro. They're not Raptors.

>>2739667
The fuck are you even talking about.
Nobody said anything about cloning.
Further, Neanderthals were likely nothing like what this guy is spewing.

>>2739664
This is hundreds of thousands of years of adaptation compared to a few thousand years.

In short, we both don't know but we're both probably half right. Furry humans with furry clothes.

I seriously doubt the shaven white skinned model caveman from stupid documentaries and museums.

Not sure I believe this guy about the whole cannibalism thing either. There is far more evidence that they actually had burials and cared for the weak (elderly Neanderthals were found with practically no teeth, or crippled/deformed Neanderthals, etc. meaning that they would have not been able to live on their own and that other Neanderthals would have assisted them throughout their lives). The cannibalism claims are most likely due to faulty taphonomy analysis than actual cannibalism. If there was any cannibalism I'd imagine it was for more ritual purposes, or done in extremely lean times rather than a norm.

>>2739689
Well the guy does raise that one interesting point in the beginning (i.e. about anthropomorphizing). They may have had lighter skin to deal with the lack of sunlight, it's entirely possible (and probably) that they had a wider range of skin tones, especially considering that they had a decently wide range for such a long time (middle east and western asia). And they likely were fairly hairy (at least by our modern standards). Then again so were Homo sapiens. I like using Robin Williams as an example.

But there is no way that his model of what Neanderthals looked like is true. There are too many holes in his "theory" to account for all that bullshit.

>>2739689
Also, humans have been living in the arctic circle for well over 10k years. See: Beringia.

playing devil's advocate here.
Didn't homo sapiens lose their hair because hair inhibits the ability sweat? Thus creating the "slow poke" sweat machine that ran animals to death?
Neanderthal's are far less effective runners just do to their bone structure. therefore, they probably didnt use that hunting tactic, and possibly didnt lose their hair.

>>2739667
YOU REPLIED TO MY POST BEFORE I POSTED IT. I WAS GOING TO SAY WE SHOULD RESURRECT THESE GUYS AND SET THEM FREE. I'M NOT JOKING THEY'RE TOO EPIC FOR WORDS.

>>2739711
I don't think that we lost hair and gained sweat glands to hunt animals a particular way.

>>2739711
Considering that they were evolved from Homo Erectus, which by all means excelled at long distance travel (i.e. running, walking, what have you) they were likely more similar to them than other species that aren't great at running, what have you.

Their unusual adaptations (barrel chest, stocky limbs, etc.) were all derived in order to better deal with the cold and retain body head. Their stockiness also aided them against injury since they had to deal with so many dangerous prey animals.

>>2739708
10,000 years =/= 500,000 years

The effect would be very different

>>2739725
then how do you hypothesize we lost hair and gained sweat glands?

>>2739727
>well over
We don't have a specific record. It's likely they've lived there for far longer.

Also, you claim that transition from hair -> fur is relatively quick...

>>2739711
That's true as well as modern humans being well adapted to water and swimming. Hair = drag so we have less of it except for on top of our head.

The shape of our noses is a big indication of this. We have large noses with our nostrils on the bottom. It keeps water out and allows us to hold our breath underwater.

this is bullshit, they would have looked a lot more like us. you know, since we interbred with them for thousands of years and all.

>>2739748
Why damn! Actually this guys's theory proves there's truth to the Aquatic Ape Theory: our ancestors developed swimming to avoid these monsters because rivers and oceans were relatively safer for them to travel through!

>>2739777
Implying that this is what Neanderthals were actually like, thus driving early hominids towards a model of competitive exclusion...
That's one of the most moronic ideas I've ever heard of. The "aquatic ape" hypothesis would require hominids to adapt to an aquatic lifestyle far earlier than when Neanderthals evolved.

Human females evolved giant vaginae to survive the predatory rape attacks unharmed and human males therefor grew large dongs to fill the giant vagina.

>>2739777
>>2739748

too bad we are extremely inefficient swimmers

>>2739726

Good point. :)

Ancient DNA has been used to show aspects of Neanderthal appearance. A fragment of the gene for the melanocortin 1 receptor (MRC1) was sequenced using DNA from two Neanderthal specimens from Spain and Italy, El Sidrón 1252 and Monte Lessini (Lalueza-Fox et al. 2007). Neanderthals had a mutation in this receptor gene that has not been found in modern humans. The mutation changes an amino acid, making the resulting protein less efficient. Modern humans have other MCR1 variants that are also less active resulting in red hair and pale skin. The less active Neanderthal mutation probably also resulted in red hair and pale skin, as in modern humans.

The specific MCR1 mutation in Neanderthals has not found in modern humans (or occurs extremely rarely in modern humans). This indicates that the two mutations for red hair and pale skin occurred independently and does not support the idea of gene flow between Neanderthals and modern humans. Pale skin may have been advantageous to Neanderthals living in Europe because of the ability to synthesize vitamin D.

>>2739843
So Neanderthal were gingers?

You are now imagining muscular orangutans prowling the European tundra.

>>2739843
did all Neanderthals have this gene?

>>2739829
that doesnt explain why black people have allegedly bigger dicks than the rest of us.

>>2739868
And raping. It's important.

I like how this guy throws meat eating into his argument... as if that had anything to do with his stupid, inaccurate and misleading argument as to what Neanderthals probably looked like.

Guess what fuckstain, most hominids that live in the tundra eat meat. Maybe it's due to the fact that... edible plants are really hard to find when everything is frozen? Gee, what a fucking revelation.

Also, what the fuck is this shit about reflective eyes?
Just because a primates eyes are large does NOT mean they will be reflective. Look at Tarsiers for example... they have ENORMOUS eyes, they are primates, they are nocturnal. Yet they lack a tapetum lucidum due to their evolutionary heritage.

This guy draws a ridiculous, conclusion:
Large orbits + meat based diet -> nocturnal -> reflective eyes.

Congratulations, you get an A+ on jumping to insane conclusions. Maybe if he had actually spent some time studying primates and evolutionary history instead of trying to come up with some sensationalistic monster book people would take him seriously.

so i was thinking like Neanderthals had bigger brains than us and shit, and they interbreed with us and shit. and white people are smarter than black people. so like maybe neanderthals were actually smarter than us, but they died out because they were less mobile and couldnt throw spears giving us a "mechanical" advantage even if we were "weaker"

>>2740017
>racist comment
>Neanderthals can't throw spears
>Neanderthals being smarter than modern humans

0/10

>>2739911
To be honest hotter climates (Africa) require a greater ability for the body to regulate heat, and in order to do so you would generally need longer, bulkier limbs (not just dicks).

>>2740017

>>2740027
http://www.physorg.com/news151326825.html

>>2740036
That's completely the opposite of the truth...

In order to deal with hot climates, modern humans have:
1) darker skin to protect from too much absorption of UV light.
*2) long, narrow limbs in order to radiate heat.*
3) relatively less hair/fur

Stocky limbs/bodies are meant for retaining heat (necessary for cold climates). Think of it, which takes longer to freeze? A narrow, lanky limb/body? Or a thick stocky limb/body?
Which takes less time to cool? A limb/body with relatively high surface area to mass ratio? Or one with a lower ratio (indicating stockiness).

>>2740047
>Anthropologists agree, Neanderthal could throw spears short distances, but never graduated to the use of bow and arrows or spear-throwing technologies.

Nice try though.

This guy doesn't really raise one substantiated point.

>>2740069
While it is cannot be stated with absolute certainty, Neanderthal's inability or lack of interest in developing projectile weaponry may have been an important factor in his eventual demise. Scientists are uncertain as to whether modern human used bow and arrows or projectile devices against Neanderthal, but it is a distinct possibility.

>attempt to sell a book by riling shit up in the anthropological community
>ignore everything anthropology has discovered in the past 150 years

>>2740104
>implying Cro Magnon man used the bow extensively before Neanderthals were functionally extinct

Ha ha ha
This guy's such a troll
His neandertal is even stupider/more biased than the typical museum model.

Also, the last 5 or so minutes of that video was the most aggravating thing I've ever watched

>>2740104
Not entirely disagreeing with you on that point. Just saying... Neanderthals could throw. They had spears, sure. They probably threw them. What is apparent though, is that Neanderthals never progressed past the spear. They never developed things like atlatls or bows, which humans did.

Wow.

Way to attempt to reverse decades of anthropological research on Neanderthals...

This guys "ideas"/"theories" aren't new at all. This is what people thought of Neanderthals in the mid 1800s... back when Homo Neanderthalensis was first discovered. And guess what? These ideas have systematically been proven wrong over the decades in order to give us our more accurate depiction of them today.

Congratulations on demonstrating your anthropological, archeological, evolutionary and generally scientific illiteracy. Good luck with your insipid book.

>>2740017
>smarter than us

oh yeah, those neanderthals really had their shit figured out, what with their advanced societies, cures for cancer, trips to the moon etc. It's a wonder they ever died out with intelligence like that.

bampu

>>2740430
Humans didn't have any of those things at the time either.

Ok, a lot of it seems like bullshit (there is no evidence of neanderthal DNA in modern africans), but i do think there probably is a ring of truth to his statement about us assuming neanderthals looked like humans.

We lost our hair so we could cool down by sweating, a useful adaption if you need to engage in long-distance running in a hot climate.

Neanderthals were shit at running.
>http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20927984.700-youd-beat-a-neanderthal-in-a-race.html

So, either they never evolved our adaptions, or they lost them completely, coupled with their stocky bodies and superior strength (also signs of losing our running adaptions) i'd say they were probably quite hairy.
Looking at their skulls they don't seem to have had the same sexually selective pressure for neotony that we had, which is imo what kept northern humans from evolving thick body hair.

They obviously didn't have oval pupils, and there's no eivdence to suggest the sclera of their eyes weren't white (it is commonly accepted that white sclera make eye contact work much better, so if neanderthals lacked them it would mean neanderthals probably didn't have the same level of social interaction we do).

Also, there is evidence to suggest many of them had red hair and what skin was showing would have been pale.
>http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/10/071025-Neandertals-Redheads.html

I'd say the deep black hair/skin shown in his pic is unrealistic.

>>2743296
Neanderthals might have been shit at running but they evolved from a species that excelled at running. Their stockiness is simply an adaptation to cold environments. On the same token, they would've likely had long hooked noses, not open nostrils like chimps and gorillas. Long, hooked noses shaped like that help with warming the air coming into the lungs, which is extremely important, especially for protecting the lungs from damaging cold conditions. Broader, flatter noses aren't as good at doing this. It's just flat out stupid that he would use gorillas and chimps as models for their appearance rather than a species that is much more closely related (humans).

It's highly unlikely that they evolved fur. Not doubting they were exceptionally hairy by today's standards though.

Also, regarding the eyes (and meat eating):
>>2740002

But yeah, I agree, the one point that he makes about anthropomorphism is probably the only thing of worth in the whole video. They might not have looked exactly like our current day depictions (although they are far more accurate), but they sure as hell didn't look like his.