(June 11, 2012 at 6:12 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Someone who specializes in population genetics for example would tell you that the HN is far less represented genetically than HSS. A person who specializes in the tools of the time would tell you that HSS tools triumphed completely over HN's. A cultural anthropologist might suggest that we know very little about HN culture as opposed to the massive amount of knowledge we have regarding HSS culture.
Evolution is only concerned with survival of your genes. If your culture conqueors the world but you die without issue, you remain the grand loser.
If there were 1 Neaderthal and 1,000,000 HSS and they interbreed. If that neaderthal's genetic line survives to today, but lineage of half of the 1,000,000 HSS dies out, then the 1 Neaderthal is the winner, at least half of the HSS were losers, and that 1 Neaderthal is arguably fitter than the average of the 1,000,000 HSS, despite the fact that the total gene pool still has more HSS contribution than HN contributions.
Now you see the issue with "grand winner" from Darwinian point of view?
