Who is the real modern man

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by timojin, Mar 15, 2017.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    21,523
    Is this how you normally address women?

    Because it's not working for you.

    I believe I provided you with that information, with links.

    Did you not understand any of it? What part of it did you not understand?

    The current theory is Neanderthals and possibly another hominid species or maybe even more.

    Why do you ask?

    Why do you think they were all white? Their genes suggest they came in a range of variation of skin tones, including dark skin. In fact, human skin tones also changed depending on the climate over the course of several generations. The same would have applied to Neanderthals.

    Homo sapiens did not develop paler skin until around between 12,000 and 8,000 years ago for the most part, long after the Neanderthals became extinct.. Those who lived in areas that we now know as Sweden and Norway, for example, may have developed paler skin a bit earlier than that for obvious reasons. But again, long after Neanderthals became extinct.

    Pale skin is an adaptation to the climate. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Why?

    Because they live close to the equator?

    How long have they been living there? I want you to consider how many thousands of years, the climate of South America and compare it to the climate of Central and Southern Africa, for example. If you look at the untouched tribes of South America, their skin colour is not white or pale. Adaptations like that take thousands of years, timojin. If you consider how long it took homo sapiens in Europe and Asia to adapt, considering how long they have been there, and then they migrated to the America's and how long ago that was, after adapting to the European and North Asian climate, why do you think they would suddenly be black again after being in the America's for what is technically a fairly short space of time?

    Do you mean "race"?

    You seem to be arguing from a standpoint that "modern man" is when their skin colour became white or pale or when they migrated out of Africa. That is how you are coming across.

    "Modern man" is referred to as 'modern man', because we are the latest and last model of humans. If Neanderthals were the surviving species of humans, they would be referred to as "modern man".

    And "modern man" did not come about with the migration out of Africa. "Modern man" came about at our earliest evolution in Africa around 200,000 or so years ago, when our species first evolved from our ancestors.

    Skin colour is merely an adaptation to the environment, which takes thousands of years, as we have seen in Europe and elsewhere. Nothing more, nothing less.

    No, Neanderthals were not all white or pale. Their genetic markers indicate that their skin colour varied, again, that would be an adaptation depending on where they were living for generations and thousands of years. And Neanderthals did not exist solely in Europe, but also across a lot of the Asian continent as well.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,542
    Yes, we've known that for a very long time. The fact that almost all humans (who do not live in Africa) have telltales of Neanderthal DNA makes it obvious.
    By now, virtually every human population has had its DNA analyzed. The people we call "Eskimos" are not a single tribe or community. Their ancestors came over from Asia along various different routes, at different times--just like the native people we call "Indians" or "Native Americans" who live almost everywhere in North and South America and the nearby islands.
    I don't understand your reasoning. The genes for skin color are easily mutated, so as people move from a sunny region to one with a darker sky, or vice versa, enough of the population has mutated DNA to keep the community alive, even if many of the members die of sunburn.

    All you have to do is take a good look at the very dark-skinned Bengalis and the very light-skinned Lithuanians. They are closely related, as can be discovered by studying their languages. Both set out from a place in India about 2,500 years ago. The people who moved north ended up with white skin, and the ones who moved south are now dark-skinned.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,801

    That seems a bit of a stretch there dad.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,347
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2017
  8. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,280
    What is the difference in human, between Neanderthal and so called modern man from Africa
    Both were hunters , The one Neanderthal evolved in cold climate and the modern in hot climate. Both human interbreed , so why we make a difference between them ?
     
  9. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    50,652
    There's no evidence of that.
     
  10. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,280
    How come they found the bone residues of a human 400 000 +++ in Portugal and there is an Heidelberg man also which is even older .
    How do you think they appeared there before the man from Africa started to migrate into Levant ?
     
  11. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    50,652
    They evolved in Africa and left before our species did.
     
  12. Janus58 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,733
    There were two waves of migration from Africa. Both occurred during periods when climatic changes opened up migration routes through Northern Africa. After the first wave, the migration routes closed again, isolating the two populations which led to different evolutionary paths. It wasn't until much later that things changed again to allow a second migration which then encountered the descendants of the first wave.
     
  13. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    50,652
    There were plenty of hominid species in Africa, they could very well have diverged there.
     
  14. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,280

    They could , but my problem is why call, them modern man, Give it back 15 year , Neanderthal was considered as a primitive savage and now he is ok, and impregnated the modern women and was proud long time ago on this forum and other that I am descendant of Neanderthal and so are you.
     
  15. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    50,652
    Modern man and primitive savages are the same thing. The difference isn't DNA, it's technology and culture.
     
  16. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,542
    The Neanderthals never invented the technology of agriculture: neither animal husbandry nor the farming of edible plants. This is what held them back in the hunter-gatherer stage of progress.

    And, of course, Neanderthals and modern Homo sapiens are absolutely NOT the same thing. We belong to two different species. When the two species encountered each other in Europe, all evidence seems to support the hypothesis that they recognized each other's differences as extremely useful, and lived more-or-less in peace.

    For example, the Neanderthals were larger so they could take down bigger game; whereas the sapiens were buoyant, so they could dive into the rivers and come home with a basket of fish.
     
  17. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    50,652
    Yeah, but they weren't dumb. If we showed them how to do it, they could have learned just as well as anybody.

    My point was that the common meaning of the phrase "primitive savages" meant people just like us genetically, but of a different culture.
     
  18. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,542
    Of course... with the caveat that their physiology is a bit different from sapiens physiology. There were activities that they could not perform as well as our species, and of course vice versa. I've already pointed out that the articulation in their arms made it impossible to wield a bow and arrow, and also that their considerably greater density would make it dangerous to try to work in a lake or river.
    Yes, and (at least here in the USA) it is most commonly directed at our Native people. By the time the European destroyers arrived, the Native people of North America had already developed both agriculture (domesticated turkeys and cultivated plants of several species) and commerce (communities trading with each other).

    And of course the people further south (the Maya in Central America and the Inca in South America) had already begun building cities and trading empires.
     

Share This Page