Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Judi Lynn

(162,491 posts)
Sat Dec 3, 2022, 10:36 PM Dec 2022

How different the world would look now if Neanderthals had won

For 99% of the last million years of our existence, people rarely came across other humans

ByPenny Spikins, University of York
07:00, 20 NOV 2022

In evolutionary terms, the human population has rocketed in seconds. The news that it has now reached 8 billion seems inexplicable when you think about our history.

For 99% of the last million years of our existence, people rarely came across other humans. There were only around 10,000 Neanderthals living at any one time. Today, there are around 800,000 people in the same space that was occupied by one Neanderthal. What’s more, since humans live in social groups, the next nearest Neanderthal group was probably well over 100km away. Finding a mate outside your own family was a challenge.

Neanderthals were more inclined to stay in their family groups and were warier of new people. If they had outcompeted our own species (Homo sapiens), the density of population would likely be far lower. It’s hard to imagine them building cities, for example, given that they were genetically disposed to being less friendly to those beyond their immediate family.

The reasons for our dramatic population growth may lie in the early days of Homo sapiens more than 100,000 years ago. Genetic and anatomical differences between us and extinct species such as Neanderthals made us more similar to domesticated animal species. Large herds of cows, for example, can better tolerate the stress of living in a small space together than their wild ancestors who lived in small groups, spaced apart. These genetic differences changed our attitudes to people outside our own group. We became more tolerant.

More:
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/how-different-world-would-look-25559371

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

BigmanPigman

(52,340 posts)
3. I was watching a Cash Cab rerun from 2003
Sat Dec 3, 2022, 10:56 PM
Dec 2022
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year

and the question was "What is the population of the world?". The correct answer was 6.4 billion. I said "WOW!" when I learned of. DU the other day that it is 7,800,000,000 my mouth dropped open. We can NOT realistically sustain this way I this planet for much longer.

relayerbob

(7,055 posts)
6. So now we know where the GQP gets their genes
Sat Dec 3, 2022, 11:27 PM
Dec 2022

Definitely from the shallow end of the gene pool

mopinko

(71,911 posts)
8. my son always said- it would be a better world
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 01:10 AM
Dec 2022

if we had descended from gorillas instead of chimps.
hard to argue, except that controlled violence is home sapiens secret sauce.
the world's worst invasive species.

Random Boomer

(4,263 posts)
13. Ouch. Another science fairy died today when you said that.
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 11:42 AM
Dec 2022

Humans did not descend from chimps.

At one point approximately 6 million years ago, we shared a common aoe ancestor. We went one way, and they went another, eventually ending up as chimps.

GreenWave

(9,325 posts)
9. Yet we have a small % of our genes from Neanderthals.
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 07:47 AM
Dec 2022

"Lucy! You got some 'splaining to do!" (Leakey's Lucy, )

This shows that perhaps opposites do attract! There is another problem in that Neanderthals congregated in Southern Italy. Then one day a supervolcano did them in. (At least in that area.)

I wonder if Sapiens met Floresiensis. Do we truly have all the facts in on that one? To do so we need to establish the realm of Gigantopithecus. No small task since folks around that region use its bones and when dissolved... So my question for anthropology would be:

Did humans fail to compete with the much larger Gigantopithecus and the only way to survive was get little quick, a.k.a. Floresiensis?

marble falls

(62,403 posts)
10. The secret is: high level reproduction, with becoming too widely spread out to fail. Two things ...
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 08:07 AM
Dec 2022

... Neanderthal did not accomplish.

GreenWave

(9,325 posts)
11. Ah my long term memory betrays me.
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 09:50 AM
Dec 2022

IIRC, neanderthals had many stillbirths with the baby's head being too large to birth. The mother would also die this way. Perhaps this view has changed in time?

marble falls

(62,403 posts)
16. Hadn't heard that, but there is no doubt a lot of species evolve themselves into a literal dead end.
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 03:15 PM
Dec 2022

stopdiggin

(12,943 posts)
12. interesting. intriguing. but have to say also fairly speculative.
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 11:30 AM
Dec 2022

genetic changes that led to social behaviors - that led in turn to increased populations and densities? Isn't just as likely that the population increases came first - and that social cohesion developed as a result? Sapiens had an inherent 'herd' instinct, that neanderthalensis somehow lacked? Neanderthal more wary, sapiens more 'tolerant?' Evidence?

What we really know is that homo sapiens 'replaced' neanderthal - and we're not even entirely sure that this was by 'out competing' them, with some combination of superior skills, intelligence or adaptation - deliberate extermination (as somewhat common among species competing for resource and territory) - or whether neanderthal, as some evidence suggests, might not have been in the end stages of a natural decline and extinction, when sapiens arrived on the scene.

Random Boomer

(4,263 posts)
14. Look up the theories and research on humans as a self-domesticated species
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 11:50 AM
Dec 2022
Isn't just as likely that the population increases came first - and that social cohesion developed as a result? Sapiens had an inherent 'herd' instinct, that neanderthalensis somehow lacked? Neanderthal more wary, sapiens more 'tolerant?' Evidence?

There are a constellation of both behaviors and body changes that are common to all domesticated species, and it's been proposed that humans also share those traits, as do bonobos. Domestication lowers in-group aggression, making cooperation easier. That cooperation and social cohesion easier, which in turn reinforces selection for less aggressive individuals (since they are disruptive to the success of the group).

In a stressed environment, humans may have had just enough of an edge to survive adverse and changing conditions.

Buckeye_Democrat

(15,058 posts)
15. I've often joked with people that I'm not...
Sun Dec 4, 2022, 12:02 PM
Dec 2022

... fully domesticated yet. Lol!



I was expelled from PRE-SCHOOL for running home (about three miles away), after Mom left me alone with the other kids who seemed like idiots to me. Then the pre-school teacher told my mother over the phone that I'd NEVER do well in school, yet I was always one of the best students in later years... after finally accepting elementary school as a boring part of my life, and my urge to escape subsided. Then I was later gung-ho about school, when it FINALLY got interesting with science and more advanced math classes.

I think people are still slowly evolving, mostly from the selective pressures of society as a whole.

It honestly wouldn't surprise me if autism is indeed more prevalent now, given the pressures of division-of-labor where the hyper-focused on a particular activity tend to excel.





Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Anthropology»How different the world w...