Skip to comments.
How Neanderthals met a grisly fate: devoured by humans
Guardian ^
 | 5/17/09
 | Robin McKie
Posted on 05/17/2009 3:55:56 AM PDT by LibWhacker
A fossil discovery bears marks of butchering similar to those made when cutting up a deer
One of science's most puzzling mysteries - the disappearance of the Neanderthals - may have been solved. Modern humans ate them, says a leading fossil expert. 
The controversial suggestion follows publication of a study in the Journal of Anthropological Sciences about a Neanderthal jawbone apparently butchered by modern humans. Now the leader of the research team says he believes the flesh had been eaten by humans, while its teeth may have been used to make a necklace.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: cannibalism; devoured; dietandcuisine; epigraphyandlanguage; godsgravesglyphs; humans; marysettegast; neandertal; neandertals; neanderthal; neanderthals; platoprehistorian
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
 first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next  last
To: wardaddy
    "see 24...lol "Funny, funny. 
 
41
posted on 
05/17/2009 10:57:45 PM PDT
by 
blam
 
To: LibWhacker
    Great, first Humans ate the competition, now we're eating up the planet.
 Damn you sail humans! Damn you.
42
posted on 
05/17/2009 11:00:34 PM PDT
by 
MaxMax
(America's population is 304-Million. Obama must punish America for the other 4.7 Billion)
 
To: Drammach
43
posted on 
05/18/2009 3:12:26 AM PDT
by 
Lonesome in Massachussets
(AGWT is very robust with respect to data. All observations confirm it at the 100% confidence level.)
 
To: LibWhacker; SunkenCiv; Lonesome in Massachussets
    Guess all those references to the *cannabalistic* tendencies of the Aztec/Mayan civilizations should be squealched.
U8it2 <}:~)
 
44
posted on 
05/18/2009 4:25:16 AM PDT
by 
wolfcreek
("unnamed "right-wing extremist")
 
To: LibWhacker
    What? No bone wear? Did they find any bones worn out on the ends where they were boiled away being cooked?
Secondary confirmation is necessary. /S
 
45
posted on 
05/18/2009 5:09:45 AM PDT
by 
bert
(K.E. N.P.   +12 .   Crucify ! Crucify ! Crucify him!!)
 
To: Cheburashka
    Because people are basically good? Capitalism makes people do bad thing? Western civilization is bad, and these were innocent tribal people?
That’s why :(
 
46
posted on 
05/18/2009 5:45:28 AM PDT
by 
chesley
("Hate"  --  You wouldn't understand; it's a leftist thing)
 
To: LibWhacker
    But... but... the Left insists that early humans were gentle vegetarians living in harmony with the land and their environment. I’m so confused!
 
To: Lonesome in Massachussets
To: wolfcreek
    Nope, now they’re *fair game*. :’)
 
49
posted on 
05/18/2009 9:01:11 AM PDT
by 
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
 
To: SunkenCiv
    Aw, geez, Mom, we're having Neanderthal again tonight??
50
posted on 
05/18/2009 12:17:29 PM PDT
by 
colorado tanker
("Lastly, I'd like to apologize for America's disproportionate response to Pearl Harbor . . . ")
 
To: SunkenCiv; blam; thefactor
    There's not been much of a doubt in my mind that this is exactly what happened. Richard Alexander, emeritus anthro prof at UMich has said that other humans were man's greatest environmental challenge. I believe he is right.
This illustrates his point in that when H. sapiens were hunting meat on the tundra, who was the easiest to catch and kill?
51
posted on 
05/18/2009 12:26:51 PM PDT
by 
Pharmboy
(Who ever thought we would long for the days of the Clinton administration...)
 
    devoured by humans  
  And we wonder why we can not find big foot.
 
52
posted on 
05/18/2009 1:12:23 PM PDT
by 
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric cartman voice*  'I love you guys')
 
To: colorado tanker; Pharmboy
    If these guys are wrong, they’ll have to eat cro-
magnon that is!
 
53
posted on 
05/18/2009 1:29:48 PM PDT
by 
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
 
To: LibWhacker
    There we have it. Neanderthals evolved with a gene that made them scrumptious and tasty. So we ate them all.
To: SunkenCiv
55
posted on 
05/18/2009 1:56:48 PM PDT
by 
colorado tanker
("Lastly, I'd like to apologize for America's disproportionate response to Pearl Harbor . . . ")
 
To: Pharmboy; SunkenCiv
    "This illustrates his point in that when H. sapiens were hunting meat on the tundra, who was the easiest to catch and kill? "Ah, tundra, the only word from my mother's people (Skolt Sami) that has made it outside the tundra region in far northwestern Europe.
"Skolt Sami (sääˊmǩiõll) is a Finno-Ugric, Sami language spoken by approximately 400 speakers in Finland, mainly in Sevettijärvi, and approximately 2030 speakers of the Njuõˊttjäuˊrr (Notozero) dialect in an area surrounding Lake Lovozero in Russia."
So, what does that have to do with Neanderthals, you say. I don't know...I just don't think I'll have a better opportunity to pass that information on than now.
BTW, I'm also keeping my eyes open for casino opportunities in Finland, half of me is a persecuted minority.
 
56
posted on 
05/18/2009 2:35:41 PM PDT
by 
blam
 
To: blam
    The closest thing you’ll see to casino opportunities in Finland *may* be wagering on whether you’ll see casino, well, anyway... ;’)
Excellent use of that opportunity to pass on that info though.
 
57
posted on 
05/18/2009 5:54:48 PM PDT
by 
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
 
To: blam
    Glad to have given you a chance to give us the origin of that--now that you mention it--interesting word.
And you realize, of course, that our Rb1 ancestors likely dined on Neandertals. Tastes like chicken...
58
posted on 
05/18/2009 7:48:16 PM PDT
by 
Pharmboy
(Who ever thought we would long for the days of the Clinton administration...)
 
To: Pharmboy
    "And you realize, of course, that our Rb1 ancestors likely dined on Neandertals." I'm still not convinced that we're not some part Neanderthal.
 
59
posted on 
05/18/2009 7:50:45 PM PDT
by 
blam
 
To: blam
    Well, the genes do not support that...the key is whether the matings would ever leave viable offspring. Based on man’s sexual proclivities, I do not doubt that couplings took place. But, did they lead anywhere??
 
60
posted on 
05/18/2009 8:02:00 PM PDT
by 
Pharmboy
(Who ever thought we would long for the days of the Clinton administration...)
 
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
 first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next  last
    Disclaimer:
    Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
    posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
    management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
    exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson