Mysterious species buried their dead and carved symbols 100,000 years before humans

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I am sure the various parts of the brain interpret. and, of course, some brains can be off kilter, or lean on logic that a person thinks is reasonable or accepted by them but not by others.

In other words, you already know what you think, so don't have to bother learning anything from the experts. Got it.

 

[YoursTrue]

In other words, you already know what you think, so don't have to bother learning anything from the experts. Got it.

I know that some scientists conjecture and some people believe whatever they say as truth.

 

[YoursTrue]

You said: "That's ok for you if you do not equate life with energy and spirit."

I didn't invent the word "equate." and I did say that life uses energy. So what are you arguing about?

What are you arguing about? The word equate?

 

[YoursTrue]

Mostly by statistical analyses of the genomes of living people. You don't need any archaeological DNA at all. And it wouldn't help as DNA degrades very fast. We can't extract readable DNA from anything older than about 1.5 million years at the best of conditions. There are methods to deduce some functions of older DNA by analyzing peptides produced by the DNA but they are vague.
The ages of mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam are determined by the diversity and the known mutation rate. The mutation rate is not very precise so the estimated age of Eve and Adam come with a wide margin of error.
It has very little to do with archaeology so countering a post about genomics with one about archaeology, like @SDavis did raises the question if they know what they are talking about.

The "Neanderthal era" overlaps widely with the "sapiens era".
Btw.: the hybridization of sapiens with Neanderthalensis is a factor in the determination of the age of the most recent common ancestors and here we needed ancient DNA as no living Neanderthals are known.

You see? That's the answer!!

 

[YoursTrue]

Is this introspection?

A personal attack on the OP?

You are free to ignore it and continue in your denial elsewhere. Don't you all claim that when you are told others aren't interested, you just toddle off.

You can always just associate with others of your faith group that have chosen to believe what the group elders claim God has told them and close your eyes to the knowledge and experience that others find in what God has created.

You have made it clear that no evidence or understanding will persuade you. What else is there?

I have no interest in an engagement with someone that comes with a closed mind and simply repeats mantras in response to everything they were told not to believe or else.

So far, by the way, what I have learned is a bunch of fanciful conclusions based on presumed evidence.

 

[ChristineM]

well anyway plants and humans have dna. Since others here seem to know more about evolution than I do, I'll leave it up to experts here to say how closely connected plants and humans are in the evolutionary process. (still laughing out loud a little bit.)

Don't laugh, it seems you are 35% daffodil.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I know that some scientists conjecture and some people believe whatever they say as truth.

Yeah, but the truth is that you are the wrong "I", I am the right one and I know that as I, so you are the wrong one. That is how simple it is for I. I am the right one!!!

 

[Zwing]

You can't really have life without -- energy.

This is true in more ways than one. “Life” depends upon either external or internally produced energy for its continuance. Flora depend upon energy from the sun, which is directly used to maintain life, while fauna depend upon energy produced from the metabolism of objects external to themselves, food products, the energy being produced within the organism, for the maintenance of life. In the case of fauna, the energy produced by metabolism is in the form of organic molecules such as adenosine triposphate, which are readily broken down to release energy.

Precisely what the particular type of thing that what we call “life” is should be remembered in these types of discussions. The word “life”, being a deverbal noun, obscures the fact that there is no thing in nature which can be called life; life refers not to a thing, but to a set of circumstances. It is not a discrete thing which is had by an organism; there is no particular thing called “life” which is within a living organism. Rather, “life” is a type of syndromic representation describing a set of biological processes which occur within an object which we call “living” or “alive”. When those biological/ physiological processes cease, then that object is no longer alive, but is dead. This fact of what “life” really refers seems to give lie to the a literal interpretation of Genesis 2:7, wherein it is asserted that God “breathed the breath of life” into “Adam’s” nostrils, for there is no thing to be called “life” which could be exhaled, or otherwise breathed.

 

[Brickjectivity]

What does burial of the dead imply for this species? Does it mean that they thought of a world beyond this one?

Personally I do not believe so. I also don't believe that all the ancient statues of naked women suggest matriarchy and matrilineal religion. Both seem to be wishful thinking to me.

 

[The Hammer]

Being Neanderthals lived between 40,000-130,000 years ago, only being able to go back 60,000 years for the Y-halogroup doesn't make sense to me. Neanderthals where interbreeding with humans before that.

"The Neanderthals have a long evolutionary history. The earliest known examples of Neanderthal-like fossils are around 430,000 years old. The best-known Neanderthals lived between about 130,000 and 40,000 years ago, after which all physical evidence of them vanishes."

Who were the Neanderthals?

Explore facts about these extinct humans, from looks to lifestyle and abilities.

www.nhm.ac.uk

As some of the first bands of modern humans moved out of Africa, they met and mated with Neandertals about 100,000 years ago

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

While that is true that we know about those interbreeding events between us and Neanderthals. This doesn't mean we can trace the Chromosomes back that far. Especially, the Y-chromosome, which deteriorates faster than the X.

 

[YoursTrue]

This is true in more ways than one. “Life” depends upon either external or internally produced energy for its continuance. Flora depend upon energy from the sun, which is directly used to maintain life, while fauna depend upon energy produced from the metabolism of objects external to themselves, food products, the energy being produced within the organism, for the maintenance of life. In the case of fauna, the energy produced by metabolism is in the form of organic molecules such as adenosine triposphate, which are readily broken down to release energy.

Precisely what the particular type of thing that what we call “life” is should be remembered in these types of discussions. The word “life”, being a deverbal noun, obscures the fact that there is no thing in nature which can be called life; life refers not to a thing, but to a set of circumstances. It is not a discrete thing which is had by an organism; there is no particular thing called “life” which is within a living organism. Rather, “life” is a type of syndromic representation describing a set of biological processes which occur within an object which we call “living” or “alive”. When those biological/ physiological processes cease, then that object is no longer alive, but is dead. This fact of what “life” really refers seems to give lie to the a literal interpretation of Genesis 2:7, wherein it is asserted that God “breathed the breath of life” into “Adam’s” nostrils, for there is no thing to be called “life” which could be exhaled, or otherwise breathed.

It's true that a plant dies without water. Most plants, anyway. Maybe there are plants that don't need water, you think?

 

[YoursTrue]

While that is true that we know about those interbreeding events between us and Neanderthals. This doesn't mean we can trace the Chromosomes back that far. Especially, the Y-chromosome, which deteriorates faster than the X.

I was reading about this and again, the question comes up, what DNA is examined, and what dating methods are used and how much of the remains do they use to say, hey look, we found a bone that looks like it resembles a human!!

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah, but the truth is that you are the wrong "I", I am the right one and I know that as I, so you are the wrong one. That is how simple it is for I. I am the right one!!!

Lol ty.

 

[YoursTrue]

Don't laugh, it seems you are 35% daffodil.

Maybe. Daffodil tea is supposed to be good for you. Maybe better than coffee. Maybe. But I like coffee.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Lol ty.

I think what the world is and that is how the world is and since you think differently you are not a part of world. See, it is easy to think about the world.

 

[The Hammer]

I was reading about this and again, the question comes up, what DNA is examined, and what dating methods are used and how much of the remains do they use to say, hey look, we found a bone that looks like it resembles a human!!

I couldn't begin to explain the osteology that goes into determining bones. I had to take a 6 months course on it, but I'm not instructor. But it relies on multiple variables and measurements.

The DNA is trickier as e have to find preserved tissue, which does not hang around long typically, outside of specific circumstances.

 

[ChristineM]

Maybe. Daffodil tea is supposed to be good for you. Maybe better than coffee. Maybe. But I like coffee.

What!!! No laugh... I am shocked, shocked i tell you.

I'm going to have to have a cup of coffee to get over the shock

 

[YoursTrue]

What!!! No laugh... I am shocked, shocked i tell you.

I'm going to have to have a cup of coffee to get over the shock

Lol. Enjoy.

 

[YoursTrue]

I couldn't begin to explain the osteology that goes into determining bones. I had to take a 6 months course on it, but I'm not instructor. But it relies on multiple variables and measurements.

The DNA is trickier as e have to find preserved tissue, which does not hang around long typically, outside of specific circumstances.

Yes, and very few articles have precise details about their summations.

 

[YoursTrue]

I couldn't begin to explain the osteology that goes into determining bones. I had to take a 6 months course on it, but I'm not instructor. But it relies on multiple variables and measurements.

The DNA is trickier as e have to find preserved tissue, which does not hang around long typically, outside of specific circumstances.

I was truly thinking of seeing if I can take a course with an instructor who does more than pointing to links.