The Old World is a reference to those parts of Earth known to Europeans before the voyages of Christopher Columbus; it includes Europe, Asia and Africa.
So what drove them to extinction?
From what I have read extreme changes in the climate seems to be the most popular theory, but seeing as how Neanderthals had been around for hundreds of thousands of years I don’t see how climate changes could be directly responsible. They must have survived through extremes of temperature at both ends of the scale countless times.
There doesn’t appear (so far) to be any evidence of aggression between the two races. The facts unearthed at this time all point to them having lived side by side for thousands of years. If not in harmony then at least tolerant towards each other.
Diseases are said to have started with the domestication of animals. Does this include trapping? Even today natives will drive mobs of wild animals into large traps. Could Cro-Magnon have utilised this technique? By doing this they could have stayed in an area for longer. There would have been plenty of raw material for diseases, over time, to grow in. It could have been thousands of years before someone looked over at his mate Uugh and said, “Do you think it might be a good idea to not kill all of them at once? We have them fenced in.”
Given that the population of HSS probably exceeded 500,000 individuals by 40,000bce, it is most likely that they just moved into Europe as well as other places and simply took over all the better hunting and living locations over time. The population of HN in Eurasia has been estimated at 15,000 at most - no contest.
There is no evidence of violence between the two groups so it's most probable that HSS bred HN out of existence. Adult males will screw damn near anything and HN females would be fair game for over-active libidos.
the University of Leeds has ruled out one of the competing theories -- catastrophic climate change -- as the most likely cause.
HNS maintained a range from the Middle East to the Crimea and all across Europe from Germany to Southern Iberia. Even if we grant that they developed some traits as a response to cold weather, how cold could it have gotten in Israel or Anatolia....or Lusitania?
Now, in relation to the quote above. What does climate change really mean? In a nutshell....it either got warmer or cooler but HNS has already shown that it was adapted well enough to thrive in the warm dry climates of the M/E and the cold climate of Germany. I mean, our own HSS racial pride aside, what more does HNS have to do to show that they were capable of adapting to conditions?
Okay. Rant over.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
In a nutshell....it either got warmer or cooler but HNS has already shown that it was adapted well enough to thrive in the warm dry climates of the M/E and the cold climate of Germany. I mean, our own HSS racial pride aside, what more does HNS have to do to show that they were capable of adapting to conditions?
Min, there is absolutely no evidence to demonstrate that HN could not flourish in warm or cold environments and, as such, they were quite well adapted. They had lived at least 200,000 years during wild fluctuations in Eurasian climates so I don't really know what kind of "genius" would come up with that type of argument. It's frikken myopic stupidity.
Nobody is willing to admit that HN was probably more intelligent than HSS, and that they were simply outnumbered by a bunch of over-sexed hunters who couldn't manage to stay in one spot very long. Our ancestors were probably the ADHD version of Dennis the Menace on growth hormone. "Og, just leave them alone, protect the women, and they'll get bored with this valley in a few months and move on. We'll clean up all the garbage after they leave."
Hi Pat, I've noticed that being said by others, including John Hawks. Do you know who did this study and what criterion they used?
Beags, I'll work up some references for you. The standard numbers I have seen so far vary from 8,000 to 15,000 HNs for all of Eurasia when HSS shows up. HSS population studies are more developed, but this entire area is fascinating with no easy answer to: Why did the HSS population rapidly expand after 50,000bce while HN remained static? So far, there is no clearcut answer.
I know but they keep trotting out this 'climate change' rationale. One variant I saw was that HNS was adapted to hunting in dense forests and when the climate changed they couldn't hunt without all that 'cover.'
I doubt that there was ever that kind of forest in Palestine...or Southern Spain. It's a hard subject to find information on but,
Since the Middle Pleistocene the southern Negev has been characterized by gypsic and salic soils typical of an extremely arid climate, while the calcic soils detected in the Red Units point to a semi-arid climate. This indicates a gradual transition from more humid conditions in the Early Pleistocene to the present extreme aridity.
The Early Pleistocene ended c 781,000 BC which is a bit too early to have impacted HNS.
I just wish they'd stop trotting out the politically correct concept of climate change as an explanation for everything.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
Digit wrote:I'd like to know where they get these numbers from though, the basis for the calculations.
Roy.
That's where I'm coming from also Roy. But Pat, I just wondered if you had something on file. Don't do a search on my account. I don't want anyone doing something that I can do for myself. But thanks.
I've used Neanderthal population density as keywords but so far haven't found what I need.
I know but they keep trotting out this 'climate change' rationale. One variant I saw was that HNS was adapted to hunting in dense forests and when the climate changed they couldn't hunt without all that 'cover.'
I doubt that there was ever that kind of forest in Palestine...or Southern Spain. It's a hard subject to find information on but,
Since the Middle Pleistocene the southern Negev has been characterized by gypsic and salic soils typical of an extremely arid climate, while the calcic soils detected in the Red Units point to a semi-arid climate. This indicates a gradual transition from more humid conditions in the Early Pleistocene to the present extreme aridity.
The Early Pleistocene ended c 781,000 BC which is a bit too early to have impacted HNS.
I just wish they'd stop trotting out the politically correct concept of climate change as an explanation for everything.
I agree Min. Climate change as an extinction factor has never made any sense to me. Early humans only went about the business of exploiting their environment. That's how they made their living. So.. the environment must have an abundance of available food. In freezing conditions, the animals would migrate away. Ergo, so did the humans.
I can readily see a culture or civilization vanishing due to climate change, but not the gene pool.
I can readily see a culture or civilization vanishing due to climate change, but not the gene pool.
Yes...exactly. Even a prolonged drought/famine doesn't kill EVERYONE. But there are plenty of examples in which civilizations have collapsed because of those factors.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
Obviously climate change had nothing to do with their extinction.
If it were a disease of some sort then it would have to of taken quite some time to exterminate them all, otherwise there would be piles of bones (mass graves?) scattered all over the place.
Bred out of existence? Makes sense. Any genetic traits that could have been passed on would have been bred out long ago.
We were also told by reputable historians that the Indian population of the Americas was low and scattered before Columbus. That idea is not holding up and it was only 500 years ago.
Population estimates for agricultural areas are based on the percentage of land devoted to farming and residential areas and even so fluctuate widely. Finkelstein, for example, estimates the population of early 8th century Judah at 20-40,000. Low, yes. But it includes a 100% margin of error rate as well.
What could we reasonably expect to find as indications of HG existence in a given area?
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
