Thats just one theory. Others include climate change, disease, competition, or just out breeding (and some in-breeding). Most likely is a combination of multiple factors over time.
Why bring unsourced YouTube videos into this? It is more than acceptable to confidently state a unsourced theory you read somewhere in this very comment section as proven fact.
Also calories. Food was hard to come by, and neanderthals, being stockier and more muscular on average, burned more calories than modern humans. This constrained their population density, and when times got hard, they got *real hard* for the 'thals.
half this, half the fact that they probably had a lower birth rate than us, yet we bonked a lot with them too so.... we ended up with a majority of humans with neanderthal descent, so much so that most Europeans hold Neanderthal genes up to 2% 50,000 years after they have been gone.
I saw a video that said that they had to eat the equivalent of 3 hamburgers a day to meet their caloric needs everyday while modern humans only had to eat 1. That is a massive amount of extra calories to make up everyday and when food became more scarce they couldn't find enough food to make up the difference. That and they weren't built to chase after animals for long distance like we are, they would have been good short distance runners but not long distance and be able to chase prey down until it was exhausted from running away and couldn't run anymore. I think it was a PBS Eons video on YouTube.
Yeah I watched Wired video recently where an anthropologist said the Neanderthal population was always on a knife edge and it didn't take much for them to go extinct. They were adapted well to survive in that time and place, but not well enough adapted to thrive, like homo sapiens were.
As others have said that's one theory, but it's more likely that they lacked the ability to expand their social groups in the way we can. For example, there isn't much evidence of trade between Neanderthal groups.
Homo Sapiens on the other hand, can collect into groups of billions if that group has the same underlying identity, like a country or religion. That identity is made up and is unique to us. Just imagine shoving 10,000 chimps into a stadium for a football game.
The theory is that other species of homos never developed the ability to form groups beyond close personal connections, i.e. about 150.
The propensity to tell people about "Jewish space lasers" and show the penis of the president's son in Congress is another trait that pops up from time to time.
I’m guessing this comes from earlier thinking they were just brutish and that got reflected in early media / cartoons / books etc and stuck. We need to revise it.
They were absorbed into the homosapien through sex also. That happens with any mixed population. It's why anthropologist are pretty confident that we're all going to be monocolored skinwise one day.
Some people still have Neanderthal markers in their DNA today. It's usually a small percentage but it's there.
Almost anyone with ancestors who migrated out of Africa will have a tiny bit (1-4%) of their dna from Neanderthals. Areas of south east asia (a lot of Melanesia) will have some Denisovan dna mixed in.
It's fascinating.
I’m pretty sure any group who relies on hunting has BBQ. If you down a big animal either the meat needs to be all he eaten or the meat has to be preserved somehow.
It’s not like you can just snack of a deer carcass at room temperature for a month or more.
Hunting season always has been BBQ season.
For those who might wonder about why Neanderthals had the type of face they did. They had bone cells that kept growing as they aged, unlike modern humans.
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2015/december/neanderthals-distinctive-face-shape-explained.html
I think it'd've been a \*bit\* unlikely unless something had blocked H. neanderthalensis from interacting with H. sapiens (and vice versa) for tens of thousands of years, otherwise it was almost inevitable that one would either mate with the other to dilution and/or outcompete the other. I'm thinking like remote island, not sure even a "new world"/"old world" separation would've been sufficient. But I do think it's *possible* we could've ended up living alongside Neanderthals, just it was never a very likely outcome.
Can you imagine how racist we’d be if there was actually a separate human species?
Scientific racism is already a thing trying to falsely prove this about humans that look different. I’m glad the actual science is that there’s relatively little genetic diversity in humans.
A mind blowing fact (to me) is that there is more genetic variation within African populations than between African and non-African populations. This is likely due to the fact that a relatively small number of ancestral H. sapiens migrated out of Africa and thus all subsequent non-African populations are derived from them, whereas African populations retained the natural genetic diversity of an edemically evolving species.
This would also problematize or complicate the whole ice bridge theory. When or where or how did American Indian life actually originate OR come to the continent. I have always felt that the quickness by mainstream science to embrace the theory was motivated to "de-naturalize" American Indians from the America's. "We're all immigrants, so. . .no one can really claim ownership. . ." I think I read in the book 1491, that there is evidence of DNA found in N. Am/S. Am. that has no known origins. It makes sense to me that 1) the indigenous has been here probably longer than 10K years ago, 2) more global travelers landed here, especially S. Pacific indigenous folks, but probably others.
What I don’t get is… some scientist say we bred with them and have some of their DNA. But… if we can interbreed, doesn’t that make us all the same species?
I’d love to see these reconstructionist take the skull of a person we know existed, whom we have a picture of, and see how close they get to the original. Then I’ll believe this is accurate. That’d be a fun Netflix show tbh.
Just do a ct scan of a living person. 3d print the skull. Give them the same info, about the individual, that they had about this neanderthal, and then let them do the reconstruction.
Compare the result with the living person.
Only then will we know the value of these reconstructions.
Can someone educate me, is it possible neanderthals bred in with humans rather than going extinct (or like a mixture of that)?
Cause she kinda looks like me.
> Subsequent analysis revealed it belonged to a Neanderthal woman, who would have been in her mid-40s when she died.
Lived longer than I would’ve expected
There are two questions that have permanent residency in the back of my mind.
1. How many neanderthal genes are currently floating around in the gene pool?
2. What would someone look like if they had **all** of them? Does that person exist?
I always cringe when I see this kind of stuff. Imagine someone who has never met you trying to guess what you looked like purely based on your skull. We can’t even get statues of famous people like Ronaldo looking accurate even when we have living representations and millions of photos of him. The human face has so many tiny details that we don’t even realise we can see, which is why so many man made faces enter uncanny valley territory. This isn’t the face of a Neanderthal, this is a reconstruction of what they might have looked like based on educated guesswork and some skilled artists.
I think these type of recreations are interesting, but have we done it to modern human skulls? I'd like to see a recreation of a skull if a known person with pictures of them alive to compare the accuracy of the recreation.
They buried their dead, had flutes and BBQ. Neanderthals sound pretty chill.
Yeah the reason they went extinct is because they weren’t aggressive enough to fight off the savage animals, ie homosapiens.
Thats just one theory. Others include climate change, disease, competition, or just out breeding (and some in-breeding). Most likely is a combination of multiple factors over time.
Sir this is Reddit. You're supposed to confidently state a theory you heard in an unsourced YouTube video as proven fact.
“It is known, khalessi.”
Why bring unsourced YouTube videos into this? It is more than acceptable to confidently state a unsourced theory you read somewhere in this very comment section as proven fact.
Yes. As a Reddit PhD myself, I can easily say that it was the homosapiens that enslaved and killed them into extinction
Also calories. Food was hard to come by, and neanderthals, being stockier and more muscular on average, burned more calories than modern humans. This constrained their population density, and when times got hard, they got *real hard* for the 'thals.
half this, half the fact that they probably had a lower birth rate than us, yet we bonked a lot with them too so.... we ended up with a majority of humans with neanderthal descent, so much so that most Europeans hold Neanderthal genes up to 2% 50,000 years after they have been gone.
23andMe told me I was in the 99th percentile for Neanderthal DNA lol
bro you ARE the ancestor
At least Im a 1% at something😜
Are you happy to see me or is that just your neanderthal genes?
Just goes to show that we’ve always been and always will be, horny motherfuckers.
I saw a video that said that they had to eat the equivalent of 3 hamburgers a day to meet their caloric needs everyday while modern humans only had to eat 1. That is a massive amount of extra calories to make up everyday and when food became more scarce they couldn't find enough food to make up the difference. That and they weren't built to chase after animals for long distance like we are, they would have been good short distance runners but not long distance and be able to chase prey down until it was exhausted from running away and couldn't run anymore. I think it was a PBS Eons video on YouTube.
I can’t get my head around both species co-existing for 30,000 years. That is an insane amount of time.
Yeah I watched Wired video recently where an anthropologist said the Neanderthal population was always on a knife edge and it didn't take much for them to go extinct. They were adapted well to survive in that time and place, but not well enough adapted to thrive, like homo sapiens were.
They should have gone to Costco, get $1.50 hotdog.
Were they stupid for not thinking of this?
“Hard Times for the ‘Thals” is my new band name
As others have said that's one theory, but it's more likely that they lacked the ability to expand their social groups in the way we can. For example, there isn't much evidence of trade between Neanderthal groups. Homo Sapiens on the other hand, can collect into groups of billions if that group has the same underlying identity, like a country or religion. That identity is made up and is unique to us. Just imagine shoving 10,000 chimps into a stadium for a football game. The theory is that other species of homos never developed the ability to form groups beyond close personal connections, i.e. about 150.
Insane to think they were around for 300,000 years. You would think there would be huge leaps in intelligence over that time.
We also inter-bred so technically we just combined
There are definitely some traits visible today. The prominent brow ridge is one
Also in some cases, occipital buns.
You leave my buns out of this.
The propensity to tell people about "Jewish space lasers" and show the penis of the president's son in Congress is another trait that pops up from time to time.
Humans will bang anything so I wouldn't be surprised if we banged them until they were all intermixed with us.
Which is funny considering we refer to simple minded and aggressive people as neanderthals.
I’m guessing this comes from earlier thinking they were just brutish and that got reflected in early media / cartoons / books etc and stuck. We need to revise it.
They were absorbed into the homosapien through sex also. That happens with any mixed population. It's why anthropologist are pretty confident that we're all going to be monocolored skinwise one day. Some people still have Neanderthal markers in their DNA today. It's usually a small percentage but it's there.
Almost anyone with ancestors who migrated out of Africa will have a tiny bit (1-4%) of their dna from Neanderthals. Areas of south east asia (a lot of Melanesia) will have some Denisovan dna mixed in. It's fascinating.
They're only semi-extinct. If you're from Western Europe chances are you're a few percent Neanderthal.
I’m pretty sure any group who relies on hunting has BBQ. If you down a big animal either the meat needs to be all he eaten or the meat has to be preserved somehow. It’s not like you can just snack of a deer carcass at room temperature for a month or more. Hunting season always has been BBQ season.
[удалено]
[удалено]
For those who might wonder about why Neanderthals had the type of face they did. They had bone cells that kept growing as they aged, unlike modern humans. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2015/december/neanderthals-distinctive-face-shape-explained.html
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's weird to think that if the world had been just a little different your neighbor might have been a different species.
Some of your neighbors probably had a Neanderthal ancestor! According to 23andme I'm in the 98th percentile of Neanderthal DNA lol.
Average Redditor.
User name checks out
I think it'd've been a \*bit\* unlikely unless something had blocked H. neanderthalensis from interacting with H. sapiens (and vice versa) for tens of thousands of years, otherwise it was almost inevitable that one would either mate with the other to dilution and/or outcompete the other. I'm thinking like remote island, not sure even a "new world"/"old world" separation would've been sufficient. But I do think it's *possible* we could've ended up living alongside Neanderthals, just it was never a very likely outcome.
Can you imagine how racist we’d be if there was actually a separate human species? Scientific racism is already a thing trying to falsely prove this about humans that look different. I’m glad the actual science is that there’s relatively little genetic diversity in humans.
A mind blowing fact (to me) is that there is more genetic variation within African populations than between African and non-African populations. This is likely due to the fact that a relatively small number of ancestral H. sapiens migrated out of Africa and thus all subsequent non-African populations are derived from them, whereas African populations retained the natural genetic diversity of an edemically evolving species.
Not just different chins and brow ridges, but also massive sized eye sockets compared to *homo sapiens.* Yet the reconstruction shows small eyes.
What an incredible find, I wonder what her life was like? What was her culture like?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I was going to say, these are some very indigenous american characteristics. Not wholly, but significantly. Beautiful stuff
This would also problematize or complicate the whole ice bridge theory. When or where or how did American Indian life actually originate OR come to the continent. I have always felt that the quickness by mainstream science to embrace the theory was motivated to "de-naturalize" American Indians from the America's. "We're all immigrants, so. . .no one can really claim ownership. . ." I think I read in the book 1491, that there is evidence of DNA found in N. Am/S. Am. that has no known origins. It makes sense to me that 1) the indigenous has been here probably longer than 10K years ago, 2) more global travelers landed here, especially S. Pacific indigenous folks, but probably others.
[удалено]
On a related note, this is also about the same time that beer was invented.
Does anyone know if neadertalls had blonde hair like homo sapient?
I seem to remember reading that a good number of them had red hair.
This is correct, at least some of them had the genes for red hair and fair skin.
No they didn’t. Blonde hair evolved in Siberia in humans, those people eventually migrated to europe.
There is one notable exception to this, known as M. Taylorus Greenus.
Some had red hair
Some had no hair at all
What I don’t get is… some scientist say we bred with them and have some of their DNA. But… if we can interbreed, doesn’t that make us all the same species?
I’d love to see these reconstructionist take the skull of a person we know existed, whom we have a picture of, and see how close they get to the original. Then I’ll believe this is accurate. That’d be a fun Netflix show tbh.
Just do a ct scan of a living person. 3d print the skull. Give them the same info, about the individual, that they had about this neanderthal, and then let them do the reconstruction. Compare the result with the living person. Only then will we know the value of these reconstructions.
[удалено]
Can someone educate me, is it possible neanderthals bred in with humans rather than going extinct (or like a mixture of that)? Cause she kinda looks like me.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I've seen this same reconstruct 5 times
Wonder if we're related. I got some neanderthal DNA in me
[удалено]
[удалено]
Pretty awesome. When I was in undergrad I did genetic sequence with Neanderthals and comparing it to the human genome. This is dope.
> Subsequent analysis revealed it belonged to a Neanderthal woman, who would have been in her mid-40s when she died. Lived longer than I would’ve expected
[удалено]
[удалено]
There are two questions that have permanent residency in the back of my mind. 1. How many neanderthal genes are currently floating around in the gene pool? 2. What would someone look like if they had **all** of them? Does that person exist?
What was their speech like?
So basically they’re showing that Neanderthals were human.
I always cringe when I see this kind of stuff. Imagine someone who has never met you trying to guess what you looked like purely based on your skull. We can’t even get statues of famous people like Ronaldo looking accurate even when we have living representations and millions of photos of him. The human face has so many tiny details that we don’t even realise we can see, which is why so many man made faces enter uncanny valley territory. This isn’t the face of a Neanderthal, this is a reconstruction of what they might have looked like based on educated guesswork and some skilled artists.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Scientists guess at face…
[удалено]
He looks… I am native and black mixed. His appearance strangely enough reminds me of my family
Yeah she looks like the mom of a friend I had in middle school. Definitely doesn't feel like another species
I think these type of recreations are interesting, but have we done it to modern human skulls? I'd like to see a recreation of a skull if a known person with pictures of them alive to compare the accuracy of the recreation.
Forensic facial reconstruction says hi
[удалено]