« Genocidal race war | Main | Elena Kagan: not much to complain about »

May 10, 2010

Comments

The fact that no Neanderthal mtDNA has been found in humans could simply mean that they were either not adaptive or disappeared by chance when none of the women carrying Neanderthal mtDNA had daughters. Some ancient humans whose genomes have been studied carry mtDNA that does not exist in contemporary populations.

A gang of weaker animals can overpower a lone stronger animal. I think I've known quite a few who'd relish the challenge!

You don't think maybe they just seduced them with Game?

We've already established that men can find cats attractive, so I suppose one species of hominid could find another attractive. The V seem to find humans attractive.

[HS: Cats are attractive not in a sexual way, but in a way that they give you affection without expecting you to converse with them.]

Maybe Neanderthals were like modern Indian and Chinese. They drowned their daughters in the local pond, then poached the human population for brides for number one son.

"The Neanderthals were way stronger than us..."

The word "us" is misguided here.

"If Neanderthals ate other Neanderthals, then they would certainly eat Homo sapiens."

If the out-of-Africa Homo sapiens could interbreed with the Neanderthals, then I don't see a problem with calling the two populations subspecies (or races) of the same species. It seems that the Neanderthals were a type of Homo sapiens.

Someone on iSteve has brought up an apparent problem with the idea that Neanderthal men could have had kids with out-of-Africa women. Neanderthals were quite literally big-boned and thick-skulled. Women have trouble giving birth as it is. Giving birth to a hybrid that is more robust and has a larger cranium than what a woman's birth canal was evolved to handle would have been problematic.

*Yawn. Old news.

Anyone interested in this should check out ThemandUs.org. Danny Vendramini is miles ahead of the MSM on this stuff.


"The Neanderthals were way stronger than us..."

You mean, "We were way stronger than us."

Judith Harris has argued that we ate the Neandertals because they were hairy:
http://judithrichharris.info/n2a/medhyp.htm

Hawks & Cochran (who were already pushing the introgression meme before this bombshell) think the reason we don't have their mtDNA is selection against it. We don't have evidence of receiving their Y-chromosomes either.

Two words: gang bang.

We coulda raped them.

It's now coming out that the study showing neanderthal admixture in humans is not as strong as originally thought:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/

So, which race of people will eventually become the Morlocks and who will become the Eloi? According to the Time Machine, all of the white, middle class people obsessed with "safety" became the disgusting Morlocks while the poor people who couldn't find shelter became the sheepish Eloi.

Was Wells just being politically correct?

I suspect that the rape went both ways, but the results above can be attributed to the fact that the baby usually stays with the woman. If a Neanderthal man raped a human woman, the baby would be raised as a human, interbreed with other humans, and become our ancestor. If a human man raped a Neanderthal woman, the baby would be raised as a Neanderthal, so when the Neanderthals went extinct, their line petered out.

I suspect that they looked like brutes to us, and we looked like children to them.

Lions and tigers can interbreed, but ligers are much easier produced than tigons. Maybe there were similarities with neanderthals. And canibalism seems pretty common in hungry humans, too.

The thing about Neanderthal women riping a homo sapien sapien male apart is nonsense.

Man can raid Neanderthals because they had superior communication ability and weapons, not because of brute strength. Men were killing bears, mammoths, lions, etc. All far stronger and vicious, animals that can kill you in seconds if you approach them the wrong way.

Also, keep in mind Archaic man was stronger than men today, much more stocky. I understand that Neanderthals were stronger, but Neanderthal female to human males...uhm...

The average male/female strength ration is about 3 to 1 to 4 to 1 ratio.

So that means if the average man can lift 150lbs, the average woman can lift only 50lbs to 37.5lbs.

The average Neanderthal male can lift 270lbs

The average Neanderthal woman, if the ratio was the same as modern man would be 90lbs to 67.5lbs.

That is a strong woman, but she can still be handled, sorry.

Even if a Neanderthal was 80% stronger than a modern man at that time period (time period is key) then the average Neanderthal woman.

Also archaic man was shorter but stronger than modern man so I'm thinking he could definitely man-handle a Neanderthal woman, it would be like an adult man manhandling a 13 year old boy...not as easy as a woman, but still doable.

Also the issue, as was brought up, of Neanderthal males impregnating modern human females. There were no C-sections back then and I doubt a Neanderthal kid would fit easily through a modern human woman's birth canal, unless Neanderthals were born about the same size as modern humans and diverged during childhood dramatically.

It is more likely the MtDNA and Y Chromosomes were breaded out overtime as so few of them were absorbed into the Eurasian gene pool.

[HS: Head size is the issue, and we have no way of knowing the size of a neanderthal infant's head compared to a cro-magnon infant's head. They probably were about the same size.

Neanderthals were a very different sub-species than cro-magnons. It seems quite likely to me that a neanderthal woman would be far stronger than a cro-magnon man. All you have to do is compare the fossil bones to see that neanderthal women had bigger bones than cro magnon men.]

John:

"I suspect that the rape went both ways, but the results above can be attributed to the fact that the baby usually stays with the woman. If a Neanderthal man raped a human woman, the baby would be raised as a human, interbreed with other humans, and become our ancestor. If a human man raped a Neanderthal woman, the baby would be raised as a Neanderthal, so when the Neanderthals went extinct, their line petered out."

Uhm...maybe, probably not. These were hunter-gather clans, most of them males were related. It would make good sense to me (considering what we know about early recorded human history) that a female who was raped might be honor killed, kicked out of the clan, her half-breed child stoned to death (if he stood out easily), drowned, etc.

Human males don't tend to like competition, it is not unusual, when dealing with humans, on up until early modern times to kill or marginalize all the males and rape/concubine, force marry the females of another group. Male children of the other group were often killed, castrated, enslaved (worked to death), etc.

'Giving birth to a hybrid that is more robust and has a larger cranium'

We don't know enough about the fetal (half)-Neanderthal morph to say whether this would have actually been a problem. Given the relatively small genetic distance it's entirely possible that most of the differences in skull shape, bone density and so on were a result of differences in later-life development. Dogs of different breeds are quite similar at birth.

Reminds me of the scene from "Quest for Fire" where hottie Homo Sapien Rae Dawn Chong is rescued from Neanderthals just before being eaten. The Neanderthals are distracted... they are busy carving up and eating another other woman. What a movie!

By far, the smartest evolutionary strategy is to team up with all of your brothers and cousins, attack a weaker group, kill all the men, kill all the boys, and capture the women and girls.

Immediately have as many children as possible with the women. As the girls reach puberty, have as many children as possible with them as well.

Train your sons, nephews, and grandsons to repeat this process over and over again, as aggressively and persistently as possible.

Through this method, Genghis Khan produced millions of progeny to carry his DNA forward. In fact if you google it, you will see that 16 million people alive today are descended from him.

The logic of impregnating hundreds of women, and then insuring that each of your sons and grandsons in turn impregnates hundreds of women,is inescapable. For the life of me I can't understand why this genetic imperative has been shed by 99% of the wealthy and powerful men alive today.

In the ways that really matter, Genghis Khan and the others of his ilk behaved in a much more rational manner than the elite men of today.

Last I saw, Neanderthals' heads were smaller than modern man's at birth. Neanderthals grew faster during childhood than HSS. If it's true, HSS mothers might have had an easier time giving birth to hybrids than to full cro-magnon babies.

There's an article somewhere with a reconstruction of a Neanderthal female's pelvis. It's based on a male's, and pelvic architecture in Neanderthals might be more sexually dismorphic. If neanderthal's didn't run much, there'd be less pressure for narrow pelvises.

'In fact if you google it, you will see that 16 million people alive today are descended from him.'

You mean him or his brothers or cousins, right?

Are women biologically programmed to reward cruelty, evil and domination?
Of course any complaints that girls go for bad boys and jerks instantly labels one a nice guy beta males. To the extent that it is possible, I actually consider myself somewhat of an impartial outside observer. I was an omega jerk in JR and high school, and to an extent my whole psycho personality, worked and I had girls literally chasing me. A lot of it might have been self-delusion but some measures were objective. After that I was in nearly complete isolation in college. So I've never played the role of the bitter nice guy. I have NEVER done anything nice for a girl or anyone my entire life! So I think I have some claim to impartiality, and my position that my deep depression and heart anguish is purely on a metaphysical level.

I read a lot of PUA seduction Game literature. At first my logic was it pays to learn all tools of rhetoric, persuasion and oratory even if I intended to put it to different uses than PUA.

Anyway to put it at its simplest. In cavemen times women were just plaything rape slaves for the strongest ape. And that is what evolutionary psychology in chimpanzee and gorilla behavior proves. Now there might have been some brave women who defended their freedom to the death, but their selfish genes were lost to history. And the genes that all modern women have inherited is those who submit to the cruelest caveman with biggest club.

I don't know for me it is pretty hellish to live in a world where all men are sadists and all women are masochists.

According to PUA science male physical attractiveness barely matters at all, the only thing women find attractive is brute domination and sadism.

For the last year I've completely cut myself off from humanity. Who wants to live in a world of pure evil? Only evil is rewarded! Cruelty is the only virtue. What good is morality and ethics?

So I'd like an outside opinion do you feel that women are biologically programmed to reward cruelty, evil and domination?

Does the dating world going back to the new paleolithic age make life worthless?
Murdoch's theoretical journal which is the official ideology of America and thus the entire world has endorsed the evopsych worldview: The New Dating Game | The Weekly Standard

Now I'm sure no one will believe me, but this is NOT about me being a single virgin loser guy who can't get a date. More its about what kind of world we live in where evil is always rewarded. I can't live in a universe like that. Why bother to get a job and support oneself and live in brutal ruthless dog eat dog world of evil? My parents are going to throw me out in August since I wont get a job or school.

Its true I've always been kind of an anti-sexual puritan but evopsych just makes it more vicious. The Darwinian-Nietzschean struggle for existence means eat or be eaten, kill or be killed, harm or be harmed. I wish simply to neither dominate nor be dominated. But that is far too much to ask in this world on both counts.

I have no harmed anyone, except maybe my parents. My dad says I should be "altrusitic" and recover for my mom's sake.

First off my parents committed a massive injustice on me by bringing me into this cruel world just to satisfy that monster gene- Moloch.

Second them keeping me alive, is just their genes following their selfish interest to reproduce. I represent a major investment in their genes survival. My fall means a major decrease in their genese reproducing. So that is all there is to their so-called generosity to me. The longer they keep me fed, the longer the opportunity there is for me to pass their genes on. Granted thats a pretty miniscule chance for grandkids hiding and crying in the basement, but its higher than the chances if I starved on the street.

So what gratitude should I have to the selfish gene? The "altruism" in feeding and housing me is just the flip side of the selfishness of birthing me into an incredibly hellish universe.

Humanity wants to drive itself off a cliff. I listed my objections. Much wiser men than me have listed them in thick textbooks. Humanity wont listen to the wise men and certainly not to me. So fine. I have said my peace. Let humanity drive off the cliff, but I want no part in the adventure.

I feel nothing for disgust for humanity. But thats what the Darwinian struggle for existence. Brutality is the only virtue. I'm what the Nazis would call life unworthy of life. Even if your content to be a lifelong virgin girls rewarding "bad boy" traits still affects the world you live in. I could not be more repulsed by humanity which is why I have cut myself off in complete isolation for nearly a year now. Would life be better, and free of despair if I saw other humans as unthinking moving objects instead of minds ?

From studying evopsych I have grown deeply disturbed and hateful of humanity. A bunch of sadistic beasts, red in tooth and claw, angling for domination. I wish to never see another human being ever again. I've cut myself off for over a year hiding in the basement till my parents throw me out.

Maybe it be better if I was unaware of humans possessing other minds. If I viewed them as rocks, chairs, hurricanes, viruses. Then I would have no more hate towards victimizers and sympathy towards victims than I hate cancer or a hurricane. Or pity for a dead tree. Just look at humans as moving objects on the landscape.

Would that make things better?

Well in essence this IS about relationships. That is where evolutionary psychology is most obvious in daily life. While it is true I have no human relations, I'm still affected by the sexual stock market, the same way someone who owns no stock can be ruined by a crash.

Psychologists are humans like the rest of us, driven by the reptilian urges for sex and power and domination. There career choice is just there way of gaining domination in the Darwinian game. So I don't see therapists as some elite priestly caste free from evopsych. I don't want to be "fixed" into better being able to play the evolutionary game.

Since everyone here accepts the basic premises of evopsych, I ask how do YOU folks deal with it? Or do you all just accept the game, and try to be the winner? IF thats the case, then maybe your right and there can not be any dialogue between me and humanity.

I don't understand how the rest of humanity can endure such a world and assume its because they must ALL be blood-thirsty vampires themselves.

Although why glorify women as the victims? According to evopsych even when given freedom they will reward cruelty.

So there are no victims in this monstrous world just wolves eating wolves.

How do you endure this world? And what is your advice for me?

What good would having a girlfriend do me? Is the chimpanzee in me supposed to rejoice that as low as I may be in the hierarchy, I still have someone below me who I can hurt, torment, dominate and abuse?


I have no problem being driven out of the sexual marketplace. The problem is what "service" are we competing for? And it seems in the sexual market it is who can be the most brutal and cruel. Evopsych says getting a girlfriend comes down to demonstrating cruelty, domination, brutality, and sadism.


That is all I see in male-female relations and PUa science backs up my personal observations.

lol @ CC's comment

I would guess that while neanderthal males found homosapien females attractive, homosapien males probably didn't find neanderthal females very attractive. Hominid males tend to find more evolved females attractive and more primitive females less attractive. For example, black men love to rape white women, whereas white men and specialy east asian men almost never rape black females because they aren't really that attracted to them. Interestingly women find more attractive primitive features in males, and so many white women have secret dreams with black males but almost never with chinese males.

"Anyway to put it at its simplest. In cavemen times women were just plaything rape slaves for the strongest ape."

In Sophocles' Ajax, I remember that one of Ajax's "spear brides" admitted that she resented Ajax for kidnapping her and making her his rape thing, but ultimately he was the only she had left and grew attached to him.

Rob, here's the article with the reconstructed Neanderthal pelvis: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/23/9125.full

Their pelvises were similar in overall size to ours, but the baby corkscrews out of the birth canal in a different way. Both species had a difficult time with birth, just as we do today.

"How do you endure this world? And what is your advice for me?"

Find a career that you enjoy. You don't have to worry about whether it benefits humanity. Find something that gives your life meaning as an individual. With luck, you may meet some people you do like. Nobody says you have to like everyone.

In following up my original comment, see this very on-point post from John Hawks:
http://johnhawks.net/node/2592

This other post seems relevant to Dieneke's critique:
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal_dna/african-population-structure-neandertal-mixture-2010.html

I have serious doubts about the possibility of any Eurasian-Neanderthal admixture.

Humans and Neanderthals broke off from a common ancestor over 600,000 years ago. They were separated for for such an extended period of time that it is very questionable whether they would have been genetically similar enough to have produced healthy offspring.

"I have no problem being driven out of the sexual marketplace. The problem is what "service" are we competing for? And it seems in the sexual market it is who can be the most brutal and cruel. Evopsych says getting a girlfriend comes down to demonstrating cruelty, domination, brutality, and sadism.


That is all I see in male-female relations and PUa science backs up my personal observations."

Wow. I'm sorry you see the world so bleakly. There is something to evo-psych but it's not as if we are merely slaves to biology. Come on man, you KNOW you are exaggerating. If not, then I suggest get out of the ghetto and hang out with some normal people. But I think you are misinterpreting your own observations to fit into some weird schema that justifes your lack of success in the dating marketplace.

'For the life of me I can't understand why this genetic imperative has been shed by 99% of the wealthy and powerful men alive today.'

Because people aren't stupid and most of the time someone who behaves in the sociopathic manner you describe will be killed by other men (like the guys whose women he proposes to grab, who in your narrative outnumber our wannabe Mr Big a hundred to one...). And/or ostracized by women, for that matter, if he doesn't actually have the force of arms to carry out his plan.
The other issue is that natural selection does not have unlimited design space to make men and women different. Remember, all we have to work with to differentiate men and women is a bit of code on the Y chromosome. Thus a lot of traits (and variation in same) that might be beneficial for male reproductive success will only be selected for to a limited degree, or not at all, if it's not on the Y chromosome and it interferes with female fitness. In the case of your proposed example, these really aggressive men might tend to have really aggressive daughters who were less than stellar at actually rearing children.

'Evopsych says getting a girlfriend comes down to demonstrating cruelty, domination, brutality, and sadism. '

This is stupid. Notice all the people running around who are not cruel, brutal, sadistic and so on? Where did their dads come from, Mars? To quote Neal Stephenson:

'Like every other creature on the face of the earth, Godfrey was, by birthright, a stupendous badass, albeit in the somewhat narrow technical sense that he could trace his ancestry back up a long line of slightly less highly evolved stupendous badasses to that first self-replicating gizmo--which, given the number and variety of its descendants, might justifiably be described as the most stupendous badass of all time. Everyone and everything that wasn't a stupendous badass was dead.'

Kindness, generosity, and a sense of fairness are not some freak accident of evolution: they are also part and parcel of our genetic success (aka stupendous badassery). Just because you've become disillusioned with the vanilla view of human nature and uncovered some ugly truths is no reason to swing to the opposite extreme.

HS, there's also evidence of wonderful homo sapiens eating the evil Neanderthals.

Am I the only one who giggles seeing "archaic homo" in print?

Sheila, if Neanderthal babies had relatively smaller heads at birth, its likely that hybrid infants would have smaller heads than pure HSS infants. Giving birth to a hybrid baby might have been easier on an an HSS woman than a normal infant.

TUJ, other mammals have fertile hybrids after longer separations.

Dragon Horse, isn't the best evidence that female Neanderthal's hunted big game too? The m/f strength difference was probably smaller in Neanderthals if they did.

[HS: Neanderthals were 100% meat eaters, so likely both sexes hunted, similar to how both sexes of most predatory animals hunt.]

Female chimpanzees do not usually hunt:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7988169.stm

"I would guess that while neanderthal males found homosapien females attractive, homosapien males probably didn't find neanderthal females very attractive. Hominid males tend to find more evolved females attractive and more primitive females less attractive. For example, black men love to rape white women, whereas white men and specialy east asian men almost never rape black females because they aren't really that attracted to them. Interestingly women find more attractive primitive features in males, and so many white women have secret dreams with black males but almost never with chinese males."

What an ignorant statement. Some how you believe that blacks are primitive. There is no 'actual' proof that this is true, this is an ignorant and false statement. This goes to show how brainwashed people really are. I have seen some unintelligent statements on this site but this one takes the cake. I am not black, I'm just appalled at this statement.

The comments to this entry are closed.