Re: Oldest Musical Instrument (Warning: non-Biblical thread)

Matt Giwer wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Larry Caldwell <firstnamelastinit...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

jte...@xxxxxxxxx (JTEM) says...

Personally, the very idea that archaic "moderns" didn't
interbreed with Neanderthals is idiotic. The morphological
evidence alone is a no brainer.
The genetic evidence so far points the other way.

Ironically, it doesn't.

There is no "Set in stone" way the DNA /Should/ look if
there had been interbreeding. Secondly, the theories on
which the DNA interpretations are based are just plain
wrong. In other words: They assume that if interbreeding
took place it would have occurred in Europe, when in
actuality archaic types & Neanderthals would have first
met & interbred in north Africa and the middle east.

I have not researched this matter. However it was published some five years ago and so far I have not heard of a refutation of the data it was based upon. *_I have no problem with it either way._* I only observe the publication was made, the data was made public and still no refutation of the data or the criteria by the professionals which would include people not involved in anthropology at all but solely involved in human genetics. If you have heard of a technical refutation please post the URL. Again, I have no interest either way.

So, if there was a genetic contribution from Neanderthals,
it was already there BEFORE archaic "moderns" reached
Europe.

Archaic humans are not us. And this difference is one of the most neglected areas I can imagine. Look at the skulls. They are not us. I would like to see the same genetic test on their remains. Heidelberg remains were replaced by our remains about the time the Ice Age was breaking up. I assume entry from Asia via the Fulda Gap in Germany as our genes indicate very few ancestors.

As to the lack of interest, how in the hell did we completely replace them as a phenotype? (Cue Hollywood for the mutual destruction of Neanderthal and Heidelberg in a titanic battle leaving the world open for humans a la Lord of the Rings.)

If you want to talk about Bias/Agenda: Never during my
lifetime has the consensus been that Neanderthals
interbred with so-called "Moderns" -- even going back long
before the supposed DNA existed, and even though the
morphological evidence is literally a slam-dunk.

That is not clear. The assumption of when HN appeared (HSN if you are politically correct) is about 300kybp in Northern Africa while HS (HSS if you insist) was about 150kybp in South Africa. While there is obviously a connection it was more than 300kybp. So far no variation of HS or HN has been found between the two geographic areas.

Add to this HN appears to have entered Europe from Gibraltar despite it being impossible and HS entered first into Asia and then into Europe and the interbreeding opportunities appear exceedingly minimal.

Again, no. You simply quite too soon, and possibly
misunderstood what the earliest evidence for spiritual
thought is (prepared burials, not paintings or carvings).
For some definitions of spiritual thought.

Without a written message telling us flat-out that they
had spiritual beliefs, the best we can ever say is that
we BELIEVE they had spiritual beliefs based on the
evidence. And amongst that evidence is the prepared
burials/grave goods.

Of course I agree here. The most obvious thing is if you toss dead Uncle Fred out of the cave he stinks and attracts predators. So the body has to be gotten rid of. If eating it is out then there is cremation and burial. The choice might have been seasonal. But if they caught on to the smell attracting the predators then burial with flowers in hopes of masking the smell is sort of obvious.

Burial with things used in life might be an indication of a belief in an afterlife but one has to ask if that alone constitutes spiritual. My mother buried my father with the rosary he always used. That does not mean she thought he would need it in the afterlife. She did it because it was always with him. So also can we look at tools used in life. It was not that they were believed needed in an afterlife but simply they were precious to the person while alive.

A great aunt I never knew was buried with Violets because her name was Violet. As far as I know the family was Church of England.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Oldest Musical Instrument (Warning: non-Biblical thread)
    ... interbreed with Neanderthals is idiotic. ... The genetic evidence so far points the other way. ... They assume that if interbreeding ... thought is (prepared burials, not paintings or carvings). ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Oldest Musical Instrument (Warning: non-Biblical thread)
    ... interbreed with Neanderthals is idiotic. ... The genetic evidence so far points the other way. ... They assume that if interbreeding ... we BELIEVE they had spiritual beliefs based on the ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Oldest Musical Instrument (Warning: non-Biblical thread)
    ... interbreed with Neanderthals is idiotic. ... The genetic evidence so far points the other way. ... They assume that if interbreeding ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Neanderthals distinct from us
    ... Scientists studying the DNA of Neanderthals say they can find no evidence ... that this ancient species ever interbred with modern humans. ... Neanderthal DNA in our genome today, thanks to interbreeding. ... But Professor Paabo's team have found no evidence for this. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • New Scientist: The Neanderthal within
    ... find the remains of an early modern human - Neanderthals were thought to be ... was the product of long and extensive interbreeding between early Europeans ... it played an important role in our evolution. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)