Homo sapiens apparently are not the only species of humans that have evolved past the primate stage. I read in a french science magazine that the homo neanderthalis had the same evolutions that homo sapiens have over the big primates. However they apparently were not as adequate to survival as our species were and went extinct.

Is that accurate ? If it is, it would be evidence that God did not create us as the only "chosen" species.

Has it been determined that they actually died out, or is it possible that the neanderthal 'genes' became less prevalent. I'm not entirely convinced that the two species didn't interbreed.
''Chosen'' for what?

I have a great article on Neanderthals and their extinction but it's in Dutch. I'd have to look it up and translate a bit.

Didn't homo sapiens do for home neanderthals? (technical speak pplz )

(March 31, 2010 at 5:07 pm)RedFish Wrote: Has it been determined that they actually died out, or is it possible that the neanderthal 'genes' became less prevalent. I'm not entirely convinced that the two species didn't interbreed.
''Chosen'' for what?

There is no neanderthal genes in Homo Sapiens in the sense you used that phrase.

However, hominini and early chimpanzees exchanged DNA up to a few thousand years after both split. Goes to show hybrid vigour is hard to remove.

But it's estimated that we shared up to 95-99/cent of our genes with them, and their 'dying out' has still not been conclusively proved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal See the bit on Interbreeding Hypotheses. Don't know what it's like where you live, but here you'll find no end of 'neanderthals' roaming the street of a weekend. I thought alcohol 'turned back the clock', as it were.
I'm all for hybrid vigour..

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...220321.htm

Quote:Although the reality of this 'Ebro Frontier' pattern has gained wide acceptance since it was first proposed by Professor Zilhão some twenty years ago, two important aspects of the model have remained the object of unresolved controversy: the exact duration of the frontier; and the causes underlying the eventual disappearance of those refugial Neanderthal populations (ecology and climate, or competition with modern human immigrants).

The article is a bit short and doesn't go into much detail, but it is quite recent.

(April 1, 2010 at 12:14 am)RedFish Wrote: But it's estimated that we shared up to 95-99/cent of our genes with them, and their 'dying out' has still not been conclusively proved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal See the bit on Interbreeding Hypotheses. Don't know what it's like where you live, but here you'll find no end of 'neanderthals' roaming the street of a weekend. I thought alcohol 'turned back the clock', as it were.
I'm all for hybrid vigour..

You share something like 45% of your fucking genes with a goddamn mushroom. Your statement is painfully unaware that unless the similarities is 99.999% or so, it simply doesn't work.

mtDNA has shown that humans rarely to never interbred with the developed buggers. Read the fucking paper:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob...1ff0e394fb

You can believe you are "45% mushroom" if you want to Syn...that's your choice. I'll believe the truth though; that we were all created by a loving God.

Wow, a bit insulting in your response, but par for the course. Do you drink? Alcohol I mean. I've read the paper, and it's not actually disproving anything I 'postulated'. They admit to their potential for inaccuracy, and the level of 'assumption' made. Almost to never is close enough for me, I mean no-one alive today was actually there, were they?
You be 45% mushroom, makes no difference to me. I see the reconstructed face, and a person, therefore a relative. Closer than a fkn bonobo anyway.