Scientists Plan to Rebuild Neanderthal Genome

[SmokingJacket]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/20/science/20cnd-neanderthal.html?ei=5094&en=46d052e19dc96003&hp=&ex=1153454400&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1153423084-8YSAkhtSoPNCNkHqOkuX6g

snip

The sequencing of Neanderthal DNA, long a forlorn hope, suddenly seems possible because of a combination of analytic work on ancient DNA by Dr. Paabo and a new kind of DNA sequencing machine developed by 454 Life Sciences.

Because the genome must be kept in constant repair and starts to break up immediately after the death of the cell, the DNA in Neanderthal bones exists in tiny fragments 100 or so units in length. As it happens, this is just the length that works best with the 454 machine, which is also able to decode vast amounts of DNA at low cost.

snip



:wow:

Too cool!!!

[Ian David]

1. Rebuild?

They walk among us.

[BOSSHOG]

3. Why do old bones have to be used to

research neanderthal DNA? Just grab a specimen from any flag waving fake patriot.

[Demeter]

48. Get a Sample From Dubya

Oh, you meant the Real Neanderthal?

[Gman]

29. You laugh, but...

YOu have to wonder if a German Shepard dog that exhibits wolf like mannerisms has some wolf breeding somewhere in the dogs immediate bloodline. Homo Sapiens were known to mate with Neanderthals in Europe so you've no choice but to wonder if Freepers, specifically white Eurpean-American Freepers, have Neanderthal in their immediate bloodline. Something causes their bizarre antisocial and self-destructive aggression. Perhaps this is the explanation. The Neanderthal Genome Project can prove this beyond all doubt.

[raccoon]

67. That is a terrible insult to the Neantherthals.

" you've no choice but to wonder if Freepers, specifically white Eurpean-American Freepers, have Neanderthal in their immediate bloodline. "

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[LostinVA]

70. It's so funny you said this, let me me tell you why

I cannot remember where I read it, but a few years ago I read an article kind of about what you wrote. Most of the serial murders in the world are in the US or Western European countries. The scientist who wrote this article was about to link all of the US ones to specific areas is Europe with "home grown" serial killers. His conclusions was that there was indeed a serial killer "gene," that was from some screwed up "stock" in Western Europe. I'm not remembering everything he said, nor do I necessarily agree with e everything he said, but it was very interesting and perssuasive... and ties in with your theory as well.

[Gman]

73. Some, probably pre-historic gene must drive this behavior

With the advances of science that I've kept up with for the last 25 - 30 years or so, I've come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as true free will. Considering all the biochemistry that is at work in the body, and how subtle shifts in this chemistry can be tied back to an over or underproduction of an enzyme or other chemical that drives behavior. I've come to believe that the body's hundreds of chemical processes must be completely balanced or certain undesirable conditions will exist. It is now known that a gene that is switched on or off can cause a subtle change in the body chemistry. An overabundance of a chemical can cause aggression and even sociopathy which is likely caused by a gene switched on to cause the body to go into a defensive aggressive mode probably due to some primitive geneic programming. If you accept any of this, it is a small leap to wonder if Neanderthal genes could be causing Freeper behavior.

I want to read John Dean's book for more insight as to why Freepers act in such anti-social and aggressive ways.

[LostinVA]

76. I wish I could remember where I read that article

It was very interesting and thought-provoking.

I believe his point was most Serial Killers have genetic and/or actual roots in historical German and Anglo-Saxon areas (German, England, etc.).

He was not talking about people with true mental illnesses, like Andrea Yates, and not necessarily mass murderers (like McVeigh), but true, full-blown sociopathic serial killers

Very fascinating stuff.

[alfredo]

79. John Dean is right on the money about the authoritarian

personality among bush supporters and other conservatives. Could it be an extreme example of what they used to call the "God Gene"?

I figure I am missing that gene because I cannot believe in a supreme being. It is physically impossible. My body rebels. I guess on the other end of the scale, the freeper (authoritarian) gets an unplesant visceral response if they try to think for themselves. I don't think that the God Gene or rather the Authoritarian Gene has anything to do with someone porking a Neanderthal back in pre history days.

But then who can say their descendents are not among us.

[Hosnon]

78. Hmm...I tend to agree with you on the science. However,

I think you are walking on thin ice. African-Americans surely don't like the implication they are more "ape-like" and I'm sure European-Americans would be just as offended.

[Yupster]

83. I read a year or so ago that a DNA study

had found no evidence of Neanderthal roots within Homo Sapien DNA and the sad conclusion to the study was that there was no evidence of interbreeding among Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens. I remember reading it because it was sad news that the Neanderthals may have just gone extinct completely.

[daleo]

89. There may not have been successful interbreeding

But you can bet, there were attempts. If it was possible to re-start the Neanderthal species, our inboxes would fill up with spam like the following in no time:

"Free - Neanderthal Porn!"
"Hot Neanderthal babes are waiting for your call!"

[krispos42]

92. probably bred out of the line

I mean, how far back can this DNA test go? Assuming one generation every 20 years, you wind up having 300 generations between now and the beginning of civilization. Can the DNA test detect a person who is 1/(2.037x10^90th) of a particular ethnicity?

That's 1 divided by 2,037,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, if I counted my zeros right.

Wow, it's longer than the national debt!

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000049 percent Ancient Sumerian after 300 generations.

Hmmm, of course this is just having fun with a scientific calculator. Eventually everybody winds up mating with distant relatives, so that keeps things from getting so diluted. Amusing mental exercises, though.

God I need a hobby lmao

[krkaufman]

106. I love the thought. n/t

[saskatoon]

37. only 2 pictures? where's Bushs

[Roland99]

2. Bet it will cost more than $6 million

:D

[redqueen]

4. fascinating...

with what i've read wrt: their extinction, i'd love to see more information about them

[unpossibles]

5. sweet. Now bush can complete his Snowflake Army! n/t

[C_U_L8R]

6. Just go down to the White House

they have an over-abundance

[VegasWolf]

7. I thought Bush is a carrier already. nt

[GreenPartyVoter]

8. I remember when Jurassic Park came out, the Weekly Reader

had a section about it. I aske dmy 4th graders at the time if they would close something if they could, and one said he wanted to clone cavemen so we could ask them how they lived.

This led to a very interesting discussion of nature v. nurture and whether or not cloning and _observing_ 'cavemen' would have given us an accurate picture at all.

Hope at least some of those kids grew up to be scientists. *l*

[Canuckistanian]

99. Asking cloned cavemen how they lived?

Are they like genetically predispositioned to hit rocks with other rocks? Or born knowing how to hunt Wooly Mammoths?

[krispos42]

9. They got Bush's DNA?

I'd ask how, but, eww!

[VegasWolf]

11. They got Bush's DNA off a white spot on Condi's dress. nt

[krispos42]

87. Don't these ladies own a clothes washer? lmao

It's called 'pretreating'...

[Julius Civitatus]

10. Are they trying to clone Bush in time time for the 2008 elections?

:rofl:

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. Is it that hard to find McCain a running mate?

... gotta roll your own?

:)

[Beausoleil]

13. I'll have the roast duck

with the mango salsa.

[SIU_Blue]

15. I don't have much of an appetite....

one of the best commercials in recent years.

:rofl:

[annabanana]

63. pissy caveman makes me laugh every time!. . . . . n/t

[Odin2005]

16. Those comercials are funny.

[Frank Cannon]

18. Gosh darnit, you beat me to it!

Great minds think alike, I guess.

I love those ads. Supposedly there are some more coming.

[Beausoleil]

25. I think Val Kilmer will still not be one of the "cavemen"

n/t

[Frank Cannon]

43. Val Kilmer only wishes he were one of the cavemen

Those guys in the caveman makeup are better actors than 99% of motion-picture actors today.

[WinkyDink]

51. Yeah, why don't you do a little research?

:)

[closeupready]

14. This is so great.

"If the Neanderthal genome were fully recovered, it might in principle be possible to bring the species back from extinction by inserting the Neanderthal genome into a human egg and having volunteers bear Neanderthal infants. There would, however, be great technical and ethical barriers to any such venture."

Interesting. They would probably try to do this first on other recently extinct species, such as birds (like the passenger pigeon) or insects.

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. It would be an ethical minefield

Recreate a species who are 'sort of' human, but with no existing culture for them to fit in. You wouldn't know how cruel you're being to them until they'd grown up, when they might or might not be able to convey their mental state. It's the worst idea I've ever heard of in genetics.

[closeupready]

35. Yes, good points.

I do think it would be nice to bring back, say, mammoths or dodos or passenger pigeons, though.

[reprobate]

74. How about bringing back some vertebrate Democrats?

[closeupready]

80. Yeah, but if they did that, Republicans might get mad at us,

so I guess we'll have to scratch THAT idea, we simply can NOT risk that. :sarcasm:

[SoCalDem]

44. a perfect test case for "nurture v nature"

:scared:

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. I reckon they would have no problem communicating.

Their remains indicate they were capable of speech, and their brains were 10% larger than Cro-Magnon. They survived in one of the worlds most inhospitable climates, ice-age Europe, for better than 200,000 years, while we've only been around for barely 40,000 to 90,000 depending on whose criteria you use.

If their genes have not been passed down in ours, it might not be such a bad thing to bring them back, get a fresh infusion.

[muriel_volestrangler]

75. But we don't know how intelligent they would be

Could they function as adult humans in our society? How would we, and they, feel about living with a different species, but one you have to give rights to, even if their instincts are different? How do you educate the first generation when there are no adults to use as guides? Would you have to find some sanctuary, and clone enough of them to provide a self-sustaining population and society of their own? How big would such a society be?

'A fresh infusion'? Dear god, you want us to interbreed with them? Who knows how cross breeds might be affected - subtly different enzymes that work against each other (think of blood types, for instance), skeletal problems (eg posture), not to mention the psychological effect on people who are throwbacks to a failed species.

As far as speech goes, we don't know. From the article:

The degree of resemblance between humans and Neanderthals is fiercely debated by archaeologists and even issues such as whether Neanderthals had language have not been resolved.

Dr. Paabo believes that genetic analysis is the best hope of doing so. He has paid particular attention to a gene known as FOXP2, which from its mutated forms in people seems to be involved in several advanced aspects of language. The human version of the gene differs at two sites from the chimp version. Knowing whether the sequence of the Neanderthal gene is closer to chimps or humans would help decide whether they had advanced speech like people or some lesser form of communication, perhaps without syntax.

“I suspect they had language in some form but perhaps not quite as we do it,” Dr. Paabo said. Asked if he had already had hit the FOXP2 gene in the Neanderthal sequencing done so far, he said “No, that would be just too lucky.”

[Yupster]

82. Book Recommendation

"A Different Flesh" by Harry Turtledove.

It works on the premise that the ice bridge from Asia to Alaska opened and closed 130,000 years ago instead of 30,000 years ago.

So when Columbus came to America, he found not Native Americans, but Homo Erectus.

It theorizes a whole history of the USA asking the question of hos society would treat a species that is clearly human-like, but can never reach above say a four year olds intelligence level.

Some interesting points are the large influx of Asian Indians in the early USA used to domesticate the mastodons since the Homo Erectus were unable to hunt them.

An interesting though odd read.

[krispos42]

62. Wait for the computer simulations

Presumebly, scientists are working on a way to read a DNA strand and from the information encoded in it, calculate the relative strengths and weakness of the individual as well as tendencies with some sort of computer model. Kind of like in 'Gattica', with Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman. Run the DNA through a computer and determine the probable height, weight, sex, race, features, intelligence, and areas of talent and deficit. Mental and physical illnesses may also be determined.

If the guy is going to have an IQ of 60 or 70, then it's probably not a good idea to bring them into our modern society if they are just going to be in a home for the mentally handicapped.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

72. There is no evidence that they were less intelligent than us

It sure would be nice to put that theory to bed.

[krispos42]

86. I thought they had smaller brain pans or something?

Well, I'm not a biologist. I lean towards the engineering world myself. I thought that more primitive species of man had less brains and more bone up there in the noggin? I mean, homo sapiens wiped them out, and I assume it was because we were bright enough to start using weapons and tactics and such.

Maybe I watch too much mediocre science-fiction lol

[Viva_La_Revolution]

94. read this...

http://bric.users.ftech.net/rp.no38.html

I don't necessarily subscribe to the argument that the paper makes (that the Neanderthal were in fact one and the same as the ancient warrior race the Nephilim), but it does detail new info (well, 2001) that shows how wrong we were to think they weren't intelligent.

enjoy. :)

[RaleighNCDUer]

81. To be fair, most people with a 70 IQ live independelty and hold

down jobs.

OTOH, they also vote Republican.

[krispos42]

88. group homes

My ex and my ex's mother (may Jesus call the witch and her husband back to Heaven via a flaming car wreck) both worked in homes for the mentally retarded. I don't know the specific IQ of the residents (er, excuse me, 'individuals') but many of them were very dependent.

Of course, it was a group home, and those were the pretty severe cases. Bush seems to be doing okay as long as you keep him away from pretzels, but he also has a phalanx of armed guards, so it kinda makes you wonder.

I didn't go there much because in all honesty the concept of MR gives me a BAD case of the willies. Not my cup of tea.

I'm just pointing out some potential problems with this. We won't be able to study their culture because it won't exist. We don't have a time machine, where we can send back camera-equipped probe to record and track creatures that lived in the past. They would be Neanderthals raised by modern humans. All of the ancient skills, traditions, and techniques of early tool users died millenia ago.

We could maybe do a Jurassic Park-style thing, but dinosaurs and animals rely much more on instinctive behavior than we do.

[Bullshot]

105. You're on to something, NCevil.

This may be a plot to create another race of beings that vote Republican and assure that they control things on this planet (what's left of it) indefinitely.

[raccoon]

68. If that ever happened,

"and having volunteers bear Neanderthal infants" the pro-lifers anti-abortionists would have a dying duck fit.

Then they'd have another cause to make noise about.

[Totallybushed]

17. suppose

they'll ask Karl rove for a contribution? Or maybe Cheny?

[rodeodance]

24. and DNA sample?

[Totallybushed]

55. That's what I meant.

Sorry. I guess I wasn't clear.

[progressivebydesign]

19. Been done... I saw a video of him at G8 this week. n/t

[Julius Civitatus]

34. On the downside, he chews with mouth open, grabs people without permission

and says shit often while talking to world leaders.

[VegasWolf]

20. They already have a group of mowhawked Neanderthals over at FReeks.

[rodeodance]

22. look at the questions they hope to answer:

.....Recovery of the Neanderthal genome, in whole or in part, would be invaluable for reconstructing many events in human prehistory and evolution. It would help address such questions as whether Neanderthals and humans interbred, whether the archaic humans had an articulate form of language, how the Neanderthal brain was constructed, if they had light or dark skins, and the total size of the Neanderthal population.

The project is still at an early stage but much groundwork has already been laid. Most Neanderthal bones contain no Neanderthal DNA at all, but almost all are heavily contaminated with the human DNA of the many people who handled the bones. Dr. Paabo has developed stringent methods to address this contamination problem.

Even with the DNA that is known to be ancient, some 95 percent of that in Neanderthal bones belongs to ancient bacteria, said Michael Egholm, a vice president of 454 Life Sciences. But these bacterial sequences can be recognized and discarded, Dr. Egholm said.

Because Neanderthal DNA is so scarce, Dr. Paabo and the 454 researchers developed their methods on ancient DNA from cave bears and mammoth.

[rodeodance]

23. "possible to bring the species back from extinction" well, folks--a bit

of a jump here I would say.

....If the Neanderthal genome were fully recovered, it might in principle be possible to bring the species back from extinction by inserting the Neanderthal genome into a human egg and having volunteers bear Neanderthal infants. There would, however, be great technical and ethical barriers to any such venture

[SmokingJacket]

32. Yes, a bit of a jump, indeed.

But what a great premise for a science fiction story!

[maxsolomon]

26. fine, sequence it

but for gods sake don't bring back our prehistoric mortal enemies for kicks. didn't you see the "13th Warrior"?. we killed them all for a reason: NEANDERTALS SUCK.

oh, and troglodytes are not neccessarily neandertals. that's just ignernt.

[VegasWolf]

27. Homo sapiens wipes out homo neanderthalensis and then homo sapiens

resurrects homo neanderthalensis. Wow, homo sapiens is god. But we already knew that! After all we created god in OUR image.

[Beausoleil]

28. Your subject line stands on its own!

"Homo sapiens wipes out homo neanderthalensis and then homo sapiens"

[daleo]

30. There is an assumption that Neanderthals were more savage than modern man

I am not inclined to agree. Modern man out-competed Neanderthal, one way or another, so he is probably meaner in the bone. I have a hunch that if we met Nenderthal, we would be meeting our betters.

[VegasWolf]

31. Nah, physiology shows they were far more muscular while we were smarter.

Brains over brawn. Strength vs intelligence. Republicans vs Democrats.

[daleo]

36. I have read that they actually had a larger braincase

And had surprisingly elaborate (and touching) burial ceremonies. It is possible that their intelligence was less calculating than ours. Anyway, losing to a violent crew like modern humanity almost seems like a compliment, cosmically speaking.

Cue eerie music...what if we are (gasp) the cosmic Republicans?!!

[VegasWolf]

39. LOL. That would be scary. Given the complete screwup of everything

one would think that homo sapiens is not so sapiens. Maybe homo republicanus would be more apt. Brain size usually correlates with body size. There is a strange finding in France where

<snip>
The discovery of pieces of jewellery from the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure in France has been one of the most stunning - and hotly contested - finds in the archaeology of the period of human and neanderthal coexistence. For a long time it was thought that these ornaments could not have come from neanderthals, but it has now been conclusively established that they were part of the ‘Chatelperronian’ culture, a culture distinguished by its own specific kind of stone tools that has been shown to be neanderthal.
</snip>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/learnthinkqa.shtml

So, who knows!!! Bush is definately retrograde from the species perspective. Narrow beady eyes, sloping forehead indicating low frontal cortex development, and an enlarged nose for sniffing white powder that it apparently lives on.

[daleo]

40. Those are good links

I probably still have some "Clan of the Cave Bear" fiction rattling around in my head, which may have given me an exaggerated view of Neanderthal.

But if Bush can talk, I don't see that it could be that tough for a Neanderthal. Granted, it is a stretch to call his vocalizations speech.

[AngryAmish]

41. Modern humanity much less violent than neolithic man

Something like 1-1.5% of population was violently killed each year. If this rate was present in the 20th century there would have been something like 2 billion war dead. By any reasonable standard we are less agressive now. In fact, most of our skulls are thinner and less able to take punishment compared to the dudes that wiped out the neanderthols.

[daleo]

58. I am glad we have improved

Slavery is gone too, so I guess progress is possible.

[blackhorse]

61. Heh,

perhaps there was some mixing of the two groups, and the tendencies toward liberalism we see in some people today comes from a recessive Neanderthal gene!

[SmokingJacket]

91. I think progress is pretty much inevitable.

Of course, there are long periods of going backwards....

[ozone_man]

93. That might explain a few things.

Like why our civilization is in a constant state of war, always out to screw the other culture. Maybe we should take a look at the Neanderthal design. ;)

[truth2power]

47. Oops! Parallel structure...

Brawn over brains.....Republicans vs. Democrats. :evilgrin:

Another grammar Nazi.

[VegasWolf]

52. My bad!! It was the thought...

:toast:

[truth2power]

54. I know. Just harassin' ya'! n/t

[blackhorse]

60. Thank you

The image of the Neanderthals as savage brutes is sensationalized nonsense.

The Neanderthals got wiped out by an act of genocide. WE are the descendants of the mass murderers, and still spit on the memory of those whom our "noble" ancestors exterminated. No wonder the only thing modern humanity understands is warfare and killing. THAT mentality won out long ago.

Cheers

[AngryAmish]

77. I believe the evidence suggests otherwise

"The St. Césaire 1 Neanderthal skeleton of a young adult individual is unique in its association with Châtelperronian artifacts from a level dated to ca. 36,000 years ago. Computer-tomographic imaging and computer-assisted reconstruction of the skull revealed a healed fracture in the cranial vault. When paleopathological and forensic diagnostic standards are applied, the bony scar bears direct evidence for the impact of a sharp implement, which was presumably directed toward the individual during an act of interpersonal violence. These findings add to the evidence that Neanderthals used implements not only for hunting and food processing, but also in other behavioral contexts. It is hypothesized that the high intra-group damage potential inherent to weapons might have represented a major factor during the evolution of hominid social behavior."


Neanderthals and neolithic man were both very violent. All evidence suggests that modern man has evolved into a less violent creature in recent history since a less violent creature can live in groups larger than clans and not murder each other (think cities). Asa stated above, the majority of humanity has a thinner skull than before, meaning a thick, rugged noggin is not being selected for and may even be selected against.

When the evidence is examined is truly modern man is very much less violent than before.

[blackhorse]

85. Sounds like ...

this argument is saying the slightly less adept murderer won out over a more adept murderer. Excuse the sarcasm, but <hooray!>

Much less violent? Very unsure of that. Given our consistent strife for, well, forever, that is really hard to buy.

Probably wasn't the first instance of genocide, but I strongly believe that is what happened. And I find it curious that the possibility that genocide was committed seems barely mentioned; it is almost always the suggestion that inter-breeding occurred or that the Neanderthals somehow else exited the scene without being wiped out.

I suppose I'm a skeptic, but in this instance I think science may be reluctant to brand us all the descendants of those who committed genocide. It would be a sensational accusation, and probably equally as difficult to prove that such genocide did not occur.

BH

[krispos42]

90. Development of agriculture tempered us

I think it is the development of agriculture that made us realize wanton slaugher is not the only way. Instead of fight over resources, we simply grow more resources. Villages pulling together into little communes, not having to chase herds of mammals across the prairie, that sort of thing.

It's worth discussing, at least. :-)

[blackhorse]

97. Hmm

krispos42,

That is an attractive idea (in the sense that it implies progress toward less violent behavior). But then I think about a situation such as the west overrunning the native Americans. There were incredibly abundant resources on the N American continent at that time for pre-industrial societies. And yet, the one tribe had better weapons, and used them to almost completely wipe out the others who were already there. We had had agriculture for thousands of years already, but the tribal violence urge dictated the course of events.

Cheers

[AngryAmish]

95. The bulk of the evidence is that homo sapien did wipe out the Neanderthals

Science has no problem with the idea, it is just the evidence is not air-tight.

However, there is no moral taint that descends upon us. First of all, most thinking people have great problems with guilt transcending generations (see the slavery reparations debate). Second, there may be real problems with calling it genocide. Obviously it was not planned. They may not have picked on Neanderthals more than other hominids.

I finished a great book a few weeks ago called "Before the Dawn" by Nicholas Wade. It really makes you think. It talks about a lot of the things I have been saying (and is one source so if my facts or conclusions are wrong then I guess I blame Wade!)

[blackhorse]

98. Comments

AngryAmish,

I accept the limitation science faces in that at least a fair amount of evidence would have to be accumulated before the concept of "prehistoric genocide" could be strongly advanced as a fact. My conclusion on the matter is based on the observation of modern man and knowledge of history. This isn't, as you write, air-tight proof, yet the indicators are very strong all the same. If I am wrong, then I am wrong, but I opt to retain my suspicion.

I wouldn't expect anyone today to feel guilty about it -- but I think acceptance of the concept could be very useful in a world riven by ego, arrogance, and the general presumption that Homo Sapiens is the center of all. I have no problem calling it genocide, even if it is a misuse of the word, because that word carries the proper force with which to condemn the act. Some definitions of what distinguishes genocide include "systematic" or "planned", others simply use "deliberate" -- and there is no distortion in saying that the killing off of the Neanderthals was done deliberately.

The book sounds interesting. Thank you for the reference to it.

Cheers

[Piscis Austrinus]

101. Several points - evolution does not produce "better" species per se

First... From fossil evidence - specifically, the presence of pollen found at what are believed to be Neanderthal gravesites - it appears that at least some Neanderthals decorated graves with flowers. This is hardly what one would expect from the traditional image of the Neanderthal. It might even be that our own species might have learened this practice from them.

Second... more than one scientist has argued that evolution, if valid, does not at its end produce better species; rather, it merely produces different ones. This makes a great deal of sense, as we do not live in a static world. Evolution does work on a small scale in a limited and generally unchanging environment. If you look at professional sport, for example, you see that the quality of play and the specialized skill levels required at the highest levels of competition clearly have improved over time. Anyone who has ever seen film of baseball or football players from 70 years ago can attest to this (there's no way in hell Walter Johnson threw anywhere near as well as Pedro Martinez, for example). The reason for this is simple; the general conditions of the sport generally don't change a great deal. Even then, though, differences in strategy can make significant differences in the type of player that populates the game's rosters. The huge, hulking, slow sluggers of the baseball of the 50's and 60's pretty much were gone by the late 70's, when a predisposition for speed reached the forefront. Evolution did not produce a better player, really, in that respect - only a different type.

However, living conditions on our planet are not static, and the constant disappearance of some species and conditions, coupled with the equally constant introduction of new species and conditions, results in a state in which a species may evolve in a direction that, while positive in its particular location and era, may prove in a later epoch to have been detrimental to its long-term survival. The dinosaurs are a good example of this: the conditions of their time allowed them to develop along lines which, during the period in which they flourished, made them the dominant creatures on the planet. However, as we all know, conditions did eventually change, through a combination of climactic change, continental drift, and what many believe was a titanic event that permanently changed our planet in ways that were specifically deleterious to the large reptiles. A significant drop in global temperature, for example, would have a serious effect on cold-blooded creatures. Either a titanic episode of vulcanism or an asteroidal impact could generate just such a change; there is lingering evidence that both such events - on scales unlike any we have seen - have indeed occurred in our past, and either would have been sufficient to do the job.

Third... I sometimes wonder myself whether our own species is evolving itself into just such a state... imagine a world 100 years from now in which the pace of technological advance, coupled with the damnable greed for wealth and power that infects our species, brings us to the point at which there would be no turning back. The large-scale devastation of a titanic event, or the loss or depletion of one or more resources on which we have built a dependence, might well be enough to set off a die-out unlike anything we can imagine. If this were to in fact happen, another species far down the line of time's passage might look back to our own species and find that evolution actually proved a detriment to us. If our species were to disappear, or nearly disappear, nearly 100 years from now, then in 10 million years there would likely be no more evidence of our technological achievements extant than there is of the dinosaurs' today (if it ever existed at all).

We cannot know, and probably will never know, how intelligent the last species of dinosaurs really were, and whether they might not have, through the by-products of their own intelligence, in fact lent harm rather than help to their own future prospects. If velociraptors, say, had built a civilization even only the equal of that of the ancient Egyptians or Sumerians - and there's no compelling reason to think they couldn't, except our own prejudices - then there would be absolutely no evidence left of such a civilization today, even if it had lasted 100,000 years (ten times the estimated length of our own species' emergence). Our own most durable artifacts will almost all have disappeared, or become unrecognizable, in one million years' time. A look at the artifacts of Roman civilization should make this clear - most have seriously degraded in 1/400th of that time. The tombs of the Etruscans, which were flat-roofed only 3,000 years ago, are today hillocks piled several meters high with the cosmic dustfall and volcanic detritus of less than 5,000 years. In a million years, virtually everything we have done would be buried to a depth of between 500 and 1,000 feet. Even if someone knew we might have been more than a bunch of apes, where would they look for the evidence?

Our underestimation of our predecessors is most revealing of our ignorance, and of our arrogance.

Peace
PsA

[meganmonkey]

33. I thought it said "Neanderthal GNOME"

I'm kinda bummed. That woulda been cooler :shrug:
;)

[annabanana]

64. lol!. . me too (at first glance). . . .n/t

[LostinVA]

71. I did too at first!

[xchrom]

38. that would be sooo cool -- if they could do that and bring back

the mammoth and maybe the hairy rhino --

anyway a small wish list.

[AngryAmish]

42. Giant ground sloths too

Man wiped out so much cool megafauna in the Americas when they got here.

[xchrom]

50. that would be sooo cool!

[Yupster]

102. Just finishing the book 1491

which is a good read of the most recent knowledge of pre-Columbian history and it surprised me by arguing man did not wipe out the mega-fauna of the Pleistecene.

The evidence was that at the same time the horses, camels, mammoths and sloths were wiped out, so were lots of much smaller animals and even shellfish which the humans would not have been the cause of. Also, only something like 14 of the 70 sites shows any evidence of large scale hunting while gathering is more in evidence. Don't know what's right.

I had always assumed the hunters wiped them out too.

[SoCalDem]

45. Where would they roam? Americans might like a hairy limo though

they could exhibit it on "America's Got Weirdos".

[xchrom]

49. man, send that idea to frank gehry

and he could do a fabulous homage to dada.

or on ''america's got weirdos''.

on edit -- they could probably do something in siberia -- depending who they revive.

[whistle]

53. Wow, inserting the Neanderthal genome into a human egg and

... and having volunteers bear Neanderthal infants will prove once and for all if Neanderthals were democrat or republican.

[Corgigal]

56. they are going to pay BIG money

to the woman who has to deal with labor and delivery of the Neanderthal baby.
They were much larger then "us".

[whistle]

57. I have the prefect woman for the task...reTHUGlican Karen Hughes

[undeterred]

59. from ahnold schwarzenegger?

[tom_paine]

65. Don't do it. We will just exterminate them again

The time of the coming Dark Ages and the New Age of Totalitarianism (BushPutinism) is the absolute worst time to bring back creature from the past the Busheviks will only have to kill again while they are doing the liberals (Jews, blacks, gays, other traitors).

:sarcasm:

Actually, the only point of sarcasm is that I realize gene sequencing does not by necessity imply resurrecting Neanderthals.

However, I stand by my half-joke, that to do so (if such were possible) would be a terrible mistake to bring them into our barbarous and insane world which is headed for some of the worst times in human history.

[noel adamson]

66. Not another Bush they want to create but need to expand their base in the

face of declining support.

Since Nixon the Republicans have had to turn in ernest to recruiting "aryans", pseudo religious zealots and victims of "no child left behind" and it's kindred educational hoaxes but now even those traditional base groups are not unintelligent enough and their base is shrinking again.

I never get tired of the IQ vs. education vs. how states voted in 2004 statistics; http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/US-Election-IQ2004.htm and think that the neocons are very much mindful of this as well. Though I doubt they are actually planning to insert Neanderthal dna into the current gene pool for more favorable election results (and I apologize for using this as an on ramp for my rant) I do believe they dumb down the electorate by means other than just the corporate propaganda machine and that this is a crime against humanity on a par with any other form of genocide as it was defined after WW2 when the Holocaust was still very fresh in the group consciousness;

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Perhaps it is time to consider sending educational missionaries to Mississippi and other such areas.

[raccoon]

69. Mississippi--and also the other 49. nt

[Thor_MN]

100. Holy crap, no wonder repukes call us elitist intellectuals

I've always considered it deliciously ironic that Repukes attempt to deride Dems at elitist intellectuals. I don't think they understand that their statement implies that they are dumbasses.

Back on target: I think it would be great to bring back any species from extinction.

[VegasWolf]

84. Scientists to build first Klingons. Earth will be sorry in about 300

years for this development.

[Odin2005]

96. Some people here need some misconceptions cleared up.

Intelligence is hard to define. What we do know is that we are far more creative then they were. They did not have cave art, only made tools out of wood and stone, thier tools didn't change much in thier 200,000-year existance, the "ceremonial" burial with flowers in a site in Iraq is now though to have been the result of wind-blown pollen. Modern humans seem to have a fundimental difference from other species of Homo, we have a huge amount of imagination.

[threadkillaz]

103. I'll have the roast duck with the mango salsa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_neanderthalensis

[Neshanic]

104. I'm bullish on Neanderthals, they're going places.