The possible AS - Neanderthal link...

Page 2 of 3 [ 46 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

01 May 2009, 7:21 pm

chawieman wrote:

I would argue the case but really I don't feel a need to when there are people bashing it who completely misunderstand it and have not even read it.

Here's the problem -- you haven't even bothered to present your side. I don't feel a need to rebut arguments that haven't even been made.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

chawieman
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 49

01 May 2009, 7:32 pm

Here if you can't be bothered to read the link then read my posts in this thread - all of them please.

AS and other type of humans

ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

01 May 2009, 8:52 pm

chawieman wrote:

Here if you can't be bothered to read the link then read my posts in this thread - all of them please.

AS and other type of humans

you cant present yourself as the bearer of all truth, because you have read "all of" a study. human genetics is not understood completely, and even less are human species relations. you simply cannot claim to know how it all works, when you'd be the only one on the planet to know this.

science itself is a work-in-progress. to be absolute about scientific research, especially based on ONE (whole) article, is weak, and total bluntness is how a scientist discredits himself. show some humility when posting big facts, especially about human species relations.

use words, such as "may" a lot.

_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''

chawieman
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 49

01 May 2009, 9:04 pm

Well Zegh8578 the neanderthal theory is comprised of many different studies, not just one. And total bluntness is how Sir Isaac Newton presented his theories. And he was not usually wrong.
Also, have you read the theory Zegh? Or are you just making a random statement opposing/advising me?

claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

01 May 2009, 9:04 pm

chawieman wrote:

Here if you can't be bothered to read the link then read my posts in this thread - all of them please.

AS and other type of humans

I only read a small amount of the theory, but did read the link to the other thread. It seems at the end you were willing to concede to the fact that belief in this theory is based on faith...you even compared it to belief in God. I also have beliefs based on faith, which I compare to God, but I see no need to be insulting to someone who would disagree with something unknowable.

Last edited by claire-333 on 01 May 2009, 9:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

01 May 2009, 9:05 pm

chawieman wrote:

yes, i am being randomly defiant.
have fun being isaac newton.

_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

01 May 2009, 9:22 pm

chawieman wrote:

Here if you can't be bothered to read the link then read my posts in this thread - all of them please.

AS and other type of humans

I looked at it. The thing about this theory is that it has multiple flaws, but when these are pointed out, you come up with a counterargument that depends on still more speculation.

Like epicycles and phrenology, it's a very complex theory that has been altered over and over to fit reality. That's not what a true theory generally looks like. A true theory tends to be simple, but explain things well. This doesn't look simple, and it doesn't seem to fit reality well.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

01 May 2009, 9:29 pm

claire333 wrote:

chawieman wrote:

Here if you can't be bothered to read the link then read my posts in this thread - all of them please.

AS and other type of humans

Claire, (pardon the thread interruption, all) is the little striation around your blue eye 8s and 4s?

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

01 May 2009, 9:32 pm

sinsboldly wrote:

Claire, (pardon the thread interruption, all) is the little striation around your blue eye 8s and 4s?

Merle

It is supposed to be a snowflake, but now that you mention it...

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

01 May 2009, 10:10 pm

claire333 wrote:

sinsboldly wrote:

Claire, (pardon the thread interruption, all) is the little striation around your blue eye 8s and 4s?

Merle

It is supposed to be a snowflake, but now that you mention it...

ouinon showed me a great little help, use your ctrl key while tapping your + key and it enlarges the page. That's how I saw the 8 and 4s!

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

01 May 2009, 10:59 pm

Redbus wrote:

So I'm sure most of you have heard about this. I personally find it hard to believe. I mean seriously, if the aspie gene is essentially 'neanderthal intelligence' as I have heard, how could a race of aspies be technologically bested by a race of NT's? We're like the Japanese in this regard, able to focus ourselves intently on something to a higher extent than a NT, which means more specialisation and thus a more effective technological improvement. Heck, I've seen several times, intellectuals who actually go so far as to praise AS as one of the major reasons we've reached the technological level we have.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't a superior race thread, but you've got to admit that theres some unbelievability about this. I saw a documentary, that claimed that NT's outcompeted Neanderthals in battles due to having throwing spears VS regular spears =/

What does WP think?

WP thinks its pseudoscience and bona fide, grade A Bullsh1t. :mrgreen:

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

02 May 2009, 12:55 am

chawieman, many of us have a great deal of interest in the Neanderthals. I'm certainly one of them.

Look at someones and take note of their post count. Consider that RDOS-the aspie who created the aspie test- also wrote that 'theory'. You can be certain that a multitude of us are familiar with it. To be blunt, Sir Newton, we have read it.

The problem is that there are not the right commonalities of genetics to suggest any trace of Neanderthal in modern humanity, and there is not enough genetic markers in autistic spectrumites to suggest we are different from regular folks. Otherwise there would be an autism genetic test. Right?

I personally think it much more likely that there were other arms of humanity alongside Neanderthal and Cro-Magnons. I'm not the first to suggest it, but the person that did was careful to point out that there is not a lick of evidence that way either.

It was pure speculation, considered "not unprobable", but without any evidence.

Current thinking is that the Neanderthals were not homogeneous as a group. That is, some of them did not interbreed with others. It also stands to reason that the same would be true of Cro-Magnons.

There are only two extant sources of Neanderthal DNA. That is not enough to suggest that those two individuals were anything like the other Neanderthals.

It is far more likely that significant strains of humanity have left no physical evidence, or it is indistinguishable from that of Cro-Magnon or Neanderthal. As a whole, ALL humans of the time led pretty similar lives.

_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 May 2009, 1:42 am

Fuzzy wrote:

See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 205049.htm

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

02 May 2009, 2:24 am

Sand wrote:

See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 205049.htm

Thanks Sand.

_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

02 May 2009, 8:52 am

chawieman wrote:

Well I take it none of you guys have actually read the theory, since you all misunderstand it and discredit it on so many levels?

The "theory" can be dismissed out of hand without having to read much specific on it because geneticists are already quite confident that Neanderthals did not contribute to the modern human gene pool. Any other arguments, whatever they may be, are irrelevant.

Quote:

Yeah, so if you want read the entire thing and if there is anything you don't understand or don't find credible you can PM me or we can debate in this thread. Pretty much every comment that has been made in this thread is completely wrong and displays a lack of knowledge of the the theory and how it is a strong possibility.

It was excessively long, and the writing quality was miserable. I highly doubt anyone on here is going to bother reading it unless you provide some sort of summary of it. In any case, the theory is not a strong possibility at all, because as I've said, Neanderthals almost certainly did not contribute to the human genome.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

02 May 2009, 9:24 am

Orwell wrote:

Neanderthals almost certainly did not contribute to the human genome.

I have always understood that anthropologists were not certain if neanderthals died out, were killed by cro-magnons, or absorbed into cro-magnon society. Perhaps I am mistaken in that noone knows?

Page 2 of 3 [ 46 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Jump to:

The possible AS - Neanderthal link... Post Reply New Topic

The possible AS - Neanderthal link...