Neanderthal Theory

Post Reply New Topic

I have the conviction that within the syndrome
is a group of people descended from
populations at least pre-Indo-European.

All modern people are, by definition, descended from prehistoric people. What is the special significance of this fact? Are you saying that autistic people are genetic throwbacks to prehistoric brains, like chickens being born with teeth or snakes with limbs? I don't think there's any evidence of prehistoric people generally having autistic behaviors or tendencies. I don't understand this "theory".

I don't like the word 'throwback' being used about neanderthals. I don't believe Homo Sapiens are the special apex of some wonderful thing, I believe we are a temporary adaptation to changing conditions. Also, there's some scholars who believe the Neanderthalis were actually significantly 'better' than 'us' in many ways.

We all have a common ancestry, this
fact does not contradict what I say.

I am a very acute observer, and after
reading and pondering I came to the
conclusion that within the syndrome is a
group of people with traits converging.

You distorted my words using the
example of chicken ...

Okay, any serious geneticist or evolutionary scientist knows that evolution in no way proceeds from "worse" to "better" and that all current and past species are adaptations to specific, contemporary, temporary environments; there's no such thing as an "apex" of evolution in any case. "Throwback" means a characteristic that's inbedded in the genetic code but normally no longer expressed, suddenly being expressed when those inactive genes are turned on. There is no value judgment in having a throwback characteristic; it's neither "better" nor "worse" though it could be adaptive or nonadaptive (or even both at the same time).

It's extremely difficult to have a scientific discussion when the proposed theory is not explained sufficiently. You need to explain the details of the theory that Aspergians share traits in common with Neanderthals, how you propose that such traits survived intact in modern humans but are only expressed at very low rates, and why they show up in all human populations instead of being restricted to very particular genetically isolated groups. The only way I can think of for such primitive traits to show up at a constant low rate in modern populations is the "genetic throwback" explanation, in which all humans possess primitive, inactive Aspergian genes that are for some reason turned on in certain individuals.

If you have a different or a better explanation, please propose it. If you don't have a thorough enough understanding of genetics/evolution to propose possible mechanisms, then it isn't an evolutionary theory, it's conjecture. Theories require possible mechanisms to be proposed which can be disproved or substantiated with evidence. Conjecture, on the other hand, doesn't require any explanations nor evidence--all it requires is saying you think something and insisting on it.

It should be easy to test. I believe the latest research in indicating that Neanderthal genes appear in most of humanity. But Africans and a few other sub-groups do not have those genes. If the incidence of autism is different between the two, then you would at least establish a correlation.

actually i think the amount of people sharing neanderthal genes on the planet is something between 1 and 4% ,and only people of european descent. well read this,the guy knows more than i do but i really like this theory i find it weirdly romantic...
http://www.neanderthalproject.com/?paged=2

Two issues.

1) the relationship between Neanderthals and modern humans.
2) What the above has to do with living people on the Austism Spectrum.

There were running debates for decades about question (1) with some scientists saying that Neanderthals, and other archiac humans directly evolved into us modern humans ( so we are all just improved versions of neanderthals).

The other theory being that modern-type people sprang from one area of the globe and fanned out -and then drove the archiac hominids like the neanderthals to extinction and then became us.
In this case then the Neanderthals would be a seperate entity from us, and not just an earlier version of us.

Those two theories are not totally mutually exclusive-both camps of scientists had heretics who admitted to some truth in the other theory.

As evidence accumulated it became clear that Neanderthals died out abruptly in Europe and were repleced by fully evolved modern humans coming from the east. So atleast in Europe the Neanderthals could not have "become" Cromagnons- they were replaced by fully evolved anatomically modern cromagnons.

Finally it became manifest that the modern type people came out of africa-invaded the northern climes, fanned out, and competed with the locals like Homo Erectus in China and the Neanderthals in western Asia and Europe.

So the "fanning out theory" (now called "the out of Africa theory")was proven to be either right- or mostly right.

We are either completely desended from these african invaders, or we are mostly descended from them. there may have been a little heavy petting going on between groups before one triumphed.

It turns out some living people (like ozzy osborne) do have some slender slices of neanderthal DNA. So there was some mating going between the neanderthals and moderns before the neanderthals were completely erased from the map.

Only a few people have this DNA and even they have very little of it.

So does this rare Neanderthal genetic heritage have anything to with autism?

Ozzy Osborn is dyslexic but not autistic.

Maybe. Maybe not.

The Neanderthals had exactly the same cranial capacity as their anatomically modern rivals the Cromagnon men (the ancestors of modern europeans). Both Neanderthals and Stone Age Cromagnons had about five percent MORE brain capacity on average than you and I ( we lost a little brain capacity since the stone age).

So Neanderthals werent dummies. But they probably did differ in behavior from anatomical moderns. Principly they probably were not as good at creating alliances with neighboring tribes for the purposes of trade, politics, and war.

So - maybe the Neanderthals lacked social skills- and might have been "autistic" in behavior. Its not impossible.

As someone above said, there is one way to begin testing the theory.

People with neanderthal genes tend to be (where youd expect them to be) in areas that were once inhabited by Neanderthals: Europe, and to some extent Asia.

So youd expect to find AS and autism to be more common among Europeans and Asians then among subsaharan Africans. Whether that is in fact the case or not I dont know.

Most people of Euro-Asian descent are not "pure" homo sapians genetically speaking, we are in fact a share both homo sapien and neanderthal DNA. People of African descent do not share this hybrid DNA as much. Genetically speaking Euro-asians have a 50% homo sapien and 50% Neanderthal DNA makeup.

What happened was Neanderthals were common throughout Europe and Asia, and intermingled with early homo sapiens. Basically they ended up sleeping with each other. Instead of Homo-sapiens wiping out Neanderthals, what actually happened is the two species merged in these regions and that is why Neanderthals slowly disappeared. This same level of interspecies integration did not happen nearly as often or at all in parts of Africa because Neanderthals were largely a species on the European sub-continent. This is why it is theorized why autism spectrum disorders are more pervasive amoung Asian and European populations, and much less pervasive among those with African descent, because the genetic code for Autism may be contained in the Neanderthal part of the genetic makeup. That's the theory as it relates to autism.

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic ... ith_humans