Yet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
Nature article, behind a pay wall
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature18291.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/05/the-astonishing-age-of-a-neanderthal-cave-construction-site/484070/
Quote
A Shocking Find In a Neanderthal Cave In France
A rock structure, built deep underground, is one of the earliest hominin constructions ever found.
| May 25, 2016
| Science
In February 1990, thanks to a 15-year-old boy named Bruno Kowalsczewski, footsteps echoed through the chambers of Bruniquel Cave for the first time in tens of thousands of years.
The cave sits in France's scenic Aveyron Valley, but its entrance had long been sealed by an ancient rockslide. Kowalsczewski's father had detected faint wisps of air emerging from the scree, and the boy spent three years clearing away the rubble. He eventually dug out a tight, thirty-meter-long passage that the thinnest members of the local caving club could squeeze through. They found themselves in a large, roomy corridor. There were animal bones and signs of bear activity, but nothing recent. The floor was pockmarked with pools of water. The walls were punctuated by stalactites (the ones that hang down) and stalagmites (the ones that stick up).
Some 336 meters into the cave, the caver stumbled across something extraordinary—a vast chamber where several stalagmites had been deliberately broken. Most of the 400 pieces had been arranged into two rings—a large one between 4 and 7 metres across, and a smaller one just 2 metres wide. Others had been propped up against these donuts. Yet others had been stacked into four piles. Traces of fire were everywhere, and there was a mass of burnt bones.
These weren't natural formations, and they weren't the work of bears. They were built by people.
Recognizing the site's value, the caver brought in archaeologist Francois Rouzaud. Using carbon-dating, Rouzaud estimated that a burnt bear bone found within the chamber was 47,600 years old, which meant that the stalagmite rings were older than any known cave painting. It also meant that they couldn't have been the work of Homo sapiens. Their builders must have been the only early humans in the south of France at the time: Neanderthals.
The discovery suggested that Neanderthals were more sophisticated than anyone had given them credit for. They wielded fire, ventured deep underground, and shaped the subterranean rock into complex constructions. Perhaps they even carried out rituals; after all, there was no evidence that anyone actually lived in the cave, so what else were the rings and mounds for?
Rouzaud would never know. In April 1999, while guiding colleagues through a different cave, he suffered a fatal heart attack. With his death, work on the Bruniquel Cave ceased, and its incredible contents were neglected. They've only now re-entered the limelight because Sophie Verheyden went on holiday.
A life-long caver, Verheyden works at the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, where she specializes in stalagmites. She treats them as time capsules, using the chemicals within them to reconstruct the climate of past millennia. So when she learned about Bruniquel Cave, while visiting the region on holiday and seeing a display at a nearby castle, she had only one thought: Why hadn't anyone dated the broken stalagmites themselves?"
She knew that Rouzaud's date of 47,600 years was impressive but suspect. Carbon-dating is only accurate for samples younger than 50,000 years, so the Bruniquel material was hitting the technique's limits. They could well have been much older. To get a better estimate, Verheyden assembled a team including archaeologist Jacques Jaubert and fellow stalagmite expert Dominique Genty. In 2013, they got permission to study the site and crawled into it themselves. "I'm not very big, and I had to put one arm before me and one behind to get through," says Verheyden. "It's kind of magical, even without the structures."
After drilling into the stalagmites and pulling out cylinders of rock, the team could see an obvious transition between two layers. On one side were old minerals that were part of the original stalagmites; on the other were newer layers that had been laid down after the fragments were broken off by the cave's former users. By measuring uranium levels on either side of the divide, the team could accurately tell when each stalagmite had been snapped off for construction.
Their date? 176,500 years ago, give or take a few millennia.
"When I announced the age to Jacques, he asked me to repeat it because it was so incredible," says Verheyden. Outside Bruniquel Cave, the earliest, unambiguous human constructions are just 20,000 years old. Most of these are ruins—collapsed collections of mammoth bones and deer antlers. By comparison, the Bruniquel stalagmite rings are well-preserved and far more ancient.
And if Rouzaud's work made it unlikely that modern humans built the rings, Verheyden's study grinds that possibility into the dust. Neanderthals must have been responsible. There simply wasn't any other hominin in that region at that time.
Why did they build the rings and mounds? The structures weren't foundations for huts; the chamber contains no stone tools, human bones, or any other sign of permanent occupation, and besides, why build shelter inside a cave? "A plausible explanation is that this was a meeting place for some type of ritual social behavior," says Paola Villa from the University of Colorado Museum.
"When you see such a structure so far into the cave, you think of something cultural or religious, but that's not proven," adds Verheyden. Indeed, despite some fanciful speculations about cave bear cults, no one really knows.
Nor is it clear how the Neanderthals made the structures. Verheyden says it couldn't have been one lone artisan, toiling away in the dark. Most likely, there was a team, and a technically skilled one at that. They broke rocks deliberately, and arranged them precisely. They used fire, too. More than 120 fragments have red and black streaks that aren't found elsewhere in the chamber or the cave beyond. They were the result of deliberately applied heat, at intensities strong enough to occasionally crack the rock. "The Neanderthal group responsible for these constructions had a level of social organization that was more complex than previously thought," the team writes.
These discoveries are part of the Neanderthals' ongoing rehabilitation. Since their discovery, scientists have tried to understand why they died out and we did not, with the implicit assumption that they were inferior in some important way. Indeed, to describe someone as a Neanderthal today is to accuse them of unsophisticated brutishness.
But we now know that Neanderthals made tools, used fire, made art, buried their dead, and perhaps even had language. "The new findings have ushered a transformation of the Neanderthal from a knuckle-dragging savage rightfully defeated in an evolutionary contest, to a distant cousin that holds clues to our identity," wrote Lydia Pyne in Nautilus.
And now, we have Bruniquel Cave with its structures that are unprecedented in their complexity, antiquity, and depth within the darkness. We know that 400,000 years ago, some ancient hominins chucked their dead into a cave at Sima de los Huesos, but there's no evidence of the careful constructions in Bruniquel. There's evidence of painting and sculpture within caves, but none older than 42,000 years. There are signs that Neanderthals used caves, but nothing to suggest that they frequently ventured deeper than sunlight.
"I think we have several lines of evidence showing that the cognitive abilities and behaviors of Neanderthals were complex," says Marie Soressi from Leiden University. "But we had no direct evidence of their ability to build. That changes the picture for me. It's puzzling to find such structures so deep inside the cave."
To solve these puzzles, Verheyden wants to start cutting into the cave's floor. It has been covered by layers of calcite, which may conceal specimens that hint at the chamber's purpose. Verheyden also notes that the entrance they've been using cannot possibly have been the only one. "We're crawling through this small thing and there are bear hollows in the cave. I don't think the bears went in that way!" she says. "There must have been some other passage that collapsed."
She's going to find it.
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Comparing them to the Byzantine Empire is rather unfair don't you think? They should be compared to the contemporary H. Sapiens populations, and there they seem completely equivalent.
CaveDeMoney
Arse, somebodies found my ancestral bat cave. :mad:
Mole People!
Pretty cool. Soon being called a Neanderthal will be a compliment, though it probably already is a step up for some people. ;)
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
:lol: You beat Tim. Congrats.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 26, 2016, 02:06:51 AM
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Comparing them to the Byzantine Empire is rather unfair don't you think? They should be compared to the contemporary H. Sapiens populations, and there they seem completely equivalent.
Neanderthals were around since about 350 000 to 600 000 years. Modern humans, 200 000 years or so (give or take a few millenias).
What have the Neanderthals done in 150 000 - 400 000 years and what have the humans done in 200 000 years.
I don't think they had similar cognitive habilities, given the difference in how both species evolved and adapted to their environment.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 26, 2016, 02:06:51 AM
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Comparing them to the Byzantine Empire is rather unfair don't you think?
Yes - the article suggests the Neanderthals may have been quite culturally sophisticated. They should not be insulted by comparison to the ridiculous and decadent Byzantines.
Of course the real irony of Brain's comment is that Scandinavians likely have among the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry of all modern humans.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:48:57 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 26, 2016, 02:06:51 AM
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Comparing them to the Byzantine Empire is rather unfair don't you think?
Yes - the article suggests the Neanderthals may have been quite culturally sophisticated. They should not be insulted by comparison to the ridiculous and decadent Byzantines.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:51:48 AM
Of course the real irony of Brain's comment is that Scandinavians likely have among the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry of all modern humans.
:thumbsup:
Are the Mole People blind albinos? Do they use echolocation? :unsure:
And, are they mad at our underground nuclear test? :(
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:51:48 AM
Of course the real irony of Brain's comment is that Scandinavians likely have among the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry of all modern humans.
I am strong, like a man should be. :cool:
Neanderthals are a social construct.
Do Neanderthals get their own bathrooms?
Quote from: lustindarkness on May 26, 2016, 12:49:01 PM
Do Neanderthals get their own bathrooms?
Only the Neanderthals in North Carolina.
Apparently, they make up a large block of voters there. :hmm:
Quote from: derspiess on May 26, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Neanderthals are a social construct.
Encino Man maybe.
Oh "social", nm.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:48:57 AM
They should not be insulted by comparison to the ridiculous and decadent Byzantines.
The Neanderthals smashed stalagmites, the Byzantines smashed icons. The Stalagmitoclasts they were called.
Quote from: Valmy on May 26, 2016, 01:19:29 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:48:57 AM
They should not be insulted by comparison to the ridiculous and decadent Byzantines.
The Neanderthals smashed stalagmites, the Byzantines smashed icons. The Stalagmitoclasts they were called.
In response, their leader was later nicknamed "Throg Coprolitenymus" by the Stalagmitdules.
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Neanderthal's get no respect. They are like the Mexicans of the Homo genus.
Quote from: 11B4V on May 26, 2016, 01:51:16 PM
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Neanderthal's get no respect. They are like the Mexicans of the Homo genus.
Now now, no need for insults, Neanderthals are not that bad.
Quote from: lustindarkness on May 26, 2016, 01:55:55 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on May 26, 2016, 01:51:16 PM
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Neanderthal's get no respect. They are like the Mexicans of the Homo genus.
Now now, no need for insults, Neanderthals are not that bad.
For one, there were no sunglasses to tempt them.
I'm a bit skeptical. If this is true, then Neanderthals had behavioral modernity over 100,000 years before modern humans. If that was true, why didn't Neanderthals spread across the globe and out compete homo sapiens?
Quote from: Razgovory on May 26, 2016, 02:17:29 PM
I'm a bit skeptical. If this is true, then Neanderthals had behavioral modernity over 100,000 years before modern humans. If that was true, why didn't Neanderthals spread across the globe and out compete homo sapiens?
WC isn't the only way to play.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:51:48 AM
Of course the real irony of Brain's comment is that Scandinavians likely have among the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry of all modern humans.
Actually, East Asians have slightly more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans.
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal-dna/neandertal-sex-acts-beyond-counting-2016.html
QuoteWe have a fairly clear idea of what fraction of the ancestry of today's people came from Neandertals; this fraction was around about 2% for most people worldwide, a bit more for many of the populations of East Asia, and very little for most populations of sub-Saharan Africa today. Vernot and colleagues' new paper (Science 10.1126/science.aad9416) helps to confirm that the elevation of Neandertal genetic similarity among East Asian populations is the result of additional mixture that does not characterize the ancestry of today's western Eurasian populations.
Actually Timmy, he said Scandinavians.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 26, 2016, 06:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:51:48 AM
Of course the real irony of Brain's comment is that Scandinavians likely have among the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry of all modern humans.
Actually, East Asians have slightly more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans.
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal-dna/neandertal-sex-acts-beyond-counting-2016.html
QuoteWe have a fairly clear idea of what fraction of the ancestry of today's people came from Neandertals; this fraction was around about 2% for most people worldwide, a bit more for many of the populations of East Asia, and very little for most populations of sub-Saharan Africa today. Vernot and colleagues' new paper (Science 10.1126/science.aad9416) helps to confirm that the elevation of Neandertal genetic similarity among East Asian populations is the result of additional mixture that does not characterize the ancestry of today's western Eurasian populations.
Always knew something was off with them.
Who knew Neaderthals were so good at math and anime.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 26, 2016, 06:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:51:48 AM
Of course the real irony of Brain's comment is that Scandinavians likely have among the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry of all modern humans.
Actually, East Asians have slightly more Neanderthal DNA than Europeans.
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal-dna/neandertal-sex-acts-beyond-counting-2016.html
QuoteWe have a fairly clear idea of what fraction of the ancestry of today's people came from Neandertals; this fraction was around about 2% for most people worldwide, a bit more for many of the populations of East Asia, and very little for most populations of sub-Saharan Africa today. Vernot and colleagues' new paper (Science 10.1126/science.aad9416) helps to confirm that the elevation of Neandertal genetic similarity among East Asian populations is the result of additional mixture that does not characterize the ancestry of today's western Eurasian populations.
There were always neanderthals in Eastasia.
We have some failed archaeologists here, we should have a megathread :hmm:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 25, 2016, 11:45:05 PM
Yet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
Between being "not as dumb as we tought" and "not cognitively inferion to hs", there's a huge margin, don't you think?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:48:57 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 26, 2016, 02:06:51 AM
Quote from: The Brain on May 26, 2016, 01:07:58 AM
"Throg build fire! Throg smash stalagmite! Or is it stalactite? Throg can never remember! Anyway, Throg pile!"
Yeah not cognitively inferior at all. It's fucking Hagia Sophia is what it is.
Comparing them to the Byzantine Empire is rather unfair don't you think?
Yes - the article suggests the Neanderthals may have been quite culturally sophisticated. They should not be insulted by comparison to the ridiculous and decadent Byzantines.
Them's fighting words Minsky. :mad:
#ByzantoFourtysomething
Quote from: viper37 on May 27, 2016, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 25, 2016, 11:45:05 PM
Yet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
Between being "not as dumb as we tought" and "not cognitively inferion to hs", there's a huge margin, don't you think?
There's no evidence that the H. sapiens of the time where any more advanced.
You can spell it out, homo.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 28, 2016, 01:00:31 AM
Quote from: viper37 on May 27, 2016, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 25, 2016, 11:45:05 PM
Yet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
Between being "not as dumb as we tought" and "not cognitively inferion to hs", there's a huge margin, don't you think?
There's no evidence that the H. sapiens of the time where any more advanced.
There arent any Neanderthals around, so ...........
Quote from: Barrister on May 27, 2016, 10:36:09 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 26, 2016, 09:48:57 AM
Yes - the article suggests the Neanderthals may have been quite culturally sophisticated. They should not be insulted by comparison to the ridiculous and decadent Byzantines.
Them's fighting words Minsky. :mad:
#ByzantoFourtysomething
:secret: Jews hate the Byzantine Empire.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 28, 2016, 01:00:31 AM
Quote from: viper37 on May 27, 2016, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 25, 2016, 11:45:05 PM
Yet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
Between being "not as dumb as we tought" and "not cognitively inferion to hs", there's a huge margin, don't you think?
There's no evidence that the H. sapiens of the time where any more advanced.
they arrived later. Look at what they did in the same time frame as the Neanderthals.
Quote from: 11B4V on May 28, 2016, 02:23:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 28, 2016, 01:00:31 AM
Quote from: viper37 on May 27, 2016, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 25, 2016, 11:45:05 PM
Yet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
Between being "not as dumb as we tought" and "not cognitively inferion to hs", there's a huge margin, don't you think?
There's no evidence that the H. sapiens of the time where any more advanced.
There arent any Neanderthals around, so ...........
They could have gone extinct for numerous reasons aside from intelligence.
And they're not really extinct since their genetic lineage lives on in ours.
That like saying the dinosaurs are extinct because their lineage lives on in chickens :unsure:
Quote from: HVC on May 29, 2016, 08:44:39 AM
That like saying the dinosaurs are [not]extinct because their lineage lives on in chickens :unsure:
I assume you meant to write not extinct above?
Yes, since birds are dinosaurs, saying dinosaurs are not extinct is completely correct.
More specatacular Neanerthal finds! As a fan of archaeology, what a time to be alive! :w00t:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23230934-800-cave-fires-and-rhino-skull-used-in-neanderthal-burial-rituals/
Quote
This Week
28 September 2016
Cave fires and rhino skull used in Neanderthal burial rituals
By Richard Gray
BURNING through the darkness, the fires would have lit up the cave around where the young child lay.
The remains of a series of small fires discovered within a dolomite hillside 93 kilometres north of Madrid, Spain, could be the first firm evidence that Neanderthals held funerals.
The blackened hearths surround a spot where the jaw and six teeth of a Neanderthal toddler were found in the stony sediment. Puzzlingly, within each of these hearths was the horn or antler of a herbivore, apparently carefully placed there. In total, there were 30 horns from aurochs and bison as well as red deer antlers, and a rhino skull nearby.
Archaeologists believe the fires may have been lit as some sort of funeral ritual around where the toddler, known as the Lozoya Child, was placed around 38,000 to 42,000 years ago.
Enrique Baquedano, director of the Regional Archaeological Museum of Madrid, and his colleagues described the discoveries at the meeting of the European Society for the study of Human Evolution in Madrid on 16 September. They think the cave may have been used by Neanderthals as a specific place to mourn and remember the dead.
Baquedano said the position of the remains and stone tools found at the site, known as Des-Cubierta Cave, do not appear to be arranged as we would expect if it had been a dwelling. "They may therefore have been of ritual or symbolic significance."
Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London said there have been previous suggestions that Neanderthals may have dug graves for their dead and some graves of babies at sites in Syria and Israel include the remains of animal horns – but the new discovery seems far more deliberate.
"It's certainly difficult to explain the presence of the horns, and that of a rhino skull, without invoking the agency of Neanderthals," he said.
Quote from: Maladict on May 27, 2016, 02:26:50 AM
We have some failed archaeologists here, we should have a megathread :hmm:
Good thing they have the law and teaching English to fall back on
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 10, 2016, 12:00:55 AM
Quote from: Maladict on May 27, 2016, 02:26:50 AM
We have some failed archaeologists here, we should have a megathread :hmm:
Good thing they have the law and teaching English to fall back on
I forgot about that thread. :blush:
I just did a quick search for Neanderthals and found this thread.
Pagan swine got what was coming to 'em
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 10, 2016, 12:04:09 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 10, 2016, 12:00:55 AM
Quote from: Maladict on May 27, 2016, 02:26:50 AM
We have some failed archaeologists here, we should have a megathread :hmm:
Good thing they have the law and teaching English to fall back on
I forgot about that thread. :blush:
I just did a quick search for Neanderthals and found this thread.
Oh, and FYI with regard to the OP comment you made
QuoteYet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
This is a truism, because neanderthals
were homo sapiens.
Quote from: grumbler on October 10, 2016, 12:20:39 PM
This is a truism, because neanderthals were homo sapiens.
No, you aren't.
Quote from: grumbler on October 10, 2016, 12:20:39 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 10, 2016, 12:04:09 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 10, 2016, 12:00:55 AM
Quote from: Maladict on May 27, 2016, 02:26:50 AM
We have some failed archaeologists here, we should have a megathread :hmm:
Good thing they have the law and teaching English to fall back on
I forgot about that thread. :blush:
I just did a quick search for Neanderthals and found this thread.
Oh, and FYI with regard to the OP comment you made
QuoteYet more evidence that Neanderthal were not cognitively inferior to Homo Sapiens.
This is a truism, because neanderthals were homo sapiens.
I agree, but not everyone classifies them that way. I've seen them classified as H. neanderthalis. I've also seen them classified as H. sapiens, but a different sub-species, H. sapiens neanderthalis (with modern humans being H. sapiens sapiens).
When people say Homo sapiens they are commonly understood to be referring to homo sapien sapien. grumbler's just tiny boating again.
"Tiny boating?" Is that a Portagee thing?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 10, 2016, 04:53:26 PM
"Tiny boating?" Is that a Portagee thing?
It referred to a thread where he argued for pages about the definition of a "pestache" (or something to that effect) and whether or not the definition meant tiny boat. It was classic grumbler.
Quote from: dps on October 10, 2016, 04:27:07 PM
I agree, but not everyone classifies them that way. I've seen them classified as H. neanderthalis. I've also seen them classified as H. sapiens, but a different sub-species, H. sapiens neanderthalis (with modern humans being H. sapiens sapiens).
Insofar as I know, H. sapiens neanderthalis is the current biological designation, and has been for a couple of decades. Thus, they are homo sapiens, just a different subspecies than h.s.s.
Quote from: HVC on October 10, 2016, 04:41:47 PM
When people say Homo sapiens they are commonly understood to be referring to homo sapien sapien. grumbler's just tiny boating again.
When you are writing in a scientific sense, common definitions as defined by Portuguese are to be eschewed.
Quote from: HVC on October 10, 2016, 04:57:15 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 10, 2016, 04:53:26 PM
"Tiny boating?" Is that a Portagee thing?
It referred to a thread where he argued for pages about the definition of a "pestache" (or something to that effect) and whether or not the definition meant tiny boat. It was classic grumbler.
:lol: No, that's not at all what the debate was about, but I'll leave you to your amusing delusions.
Quote from: grumbler on October 10, 2016, 05:20:03 PM
Quote from: HVC on October 10, 2016, 04:41:47 PM
When people say Homo sapiens they are commonly understood to be referring to homo sapien sapien. grumbler's just tiny boating again.
When you are writing in a scientific sense, common definitions as defined by Portuguese are to be eschewed.
Canadian :contract: :P
Quote from: grumbler on October 10, 2016, 05:21:36 PM
Quote from: HVC on October 10, 2016, 04:57:15 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 10, 2016, 04:53:26 PM
"Tiny boating?" Is that a Portagee thing?
It referred to a thread where he argued for pages about the definition of a "pestache" (or something to that effect) and whether or not the definition meant tiny boat. It was classic grumbler.
:lol: No, that's not at all what the debate was about, but I'll leave you to your amusing delusions.
It's ok, memory is one of the first things to go with advanced age, so don't feel too bad :console:
Sadly the debate is before 2009 so we don't have it on record. Grumbler pretended not to understand something for some sort of rhetorical trick (you know routine). It concerned a type of ship (the meaning made obvious from context), and Grumbler would go on about it being a "light" or "dark" x. Eventually, Grumbler admitted to understanding the English language and simply complained the sentence did not use "dispatch ship".
Quote from: Razgovory on October 10, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
Sadly the debate is before 2009 so we don't have it on record. Grumbler pretended not to understand something for some sort of rhetorical trick (you know routine). It concerned a type of ship (the meaning made obvious from context), and Grumbler would go on about it being a "light" or "dark" x. Eventually, Grumbler admitted to understanding the English language and simply complained the sentence did not use "dispatch ship".
Never happened then. A pigment of your imagination.
Quote from: 11B4V on October 10, 2016, 05:45:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 10, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
Sadly the debate is before 2009 so we don't have it on record. Grumbler pretended not to understand something for some sort of rhetorical trick (you know routine). It concerned a type of ship (the meaning made obvious from context), and Grumbler would go on about it being a "light" or "dark" x. Eventually, Grumbler admitted to understanding the English language and simply complained the sentence did not use "dispatch ship".
Never happened then. A pigment of your imagination.
Raz only imagines in black and white.
Quote from: 11B4V on October 10, 2016, 05:45:58 PM
Never happened then. A pigment of your imagination.
I did complain that the author of an English-language wiki article used the (Spanish or French, can't remember which) word "petaches" (or some word very close to that) when the term in English is "dispatch boats," but the long debate was about whether or not the Armada could have accomplished its mission in 1588. Malthus, I believe, was the one arguing that it could not, and I argued that it could.
Sad to see HVC admitting that he is too old to remember that debate, but I guess time will catch up with all of us some day. His admission actually clears up a number of questions that I had. :P
But you'll at least admit I'm Canadian right? :D
Quote from: HVC on October 10, 2016, 06:11:56 PM
But you'll at least admit I'm Canadian right? :D
I'll "admit" that you are whatever you say you are. Even if you say you are handsome. :D
It's the internet.
Nobody would claim to be Canadian that wasn't.
Quote from: grumbler on October 10, 2016, 05:19:05 PM
Quote from: dps on October 10, 2016, 04:27:07 PM
I agree, but not everyone classifies them that way. I've seen them classified as H. neanderthalis. I've also seen them classified as H. sapiens, but a different sub-species, H. sapiens neanderthalis (with modern humans being H. sapiens sapiens).
Insofar as I know, H. sapiens neanderthalis is the current biological designation, and has been for a couple of decades. Thus, they are homo sapiens, just a different subspecies than h.s.s.
This ebbed and flowed rather strongly over the last few decades as the lumpers and splitters warred, and was trending strongly in favor of seperate species until the release of the DNA evidence which was a K.O. victory for the lumpers.
I confess:
I went back in time and exterminated the Neanderthals.