Posted on 07/25/2007 3:31:25 PM PDT by blam
Chance and isolation gave humans elegant skulls
24 July 2007
NewScientist.com news service
Only chance kept us from looking like our crag-browed Neanderthal cousins. A statistical analysis suggests that the skull differences between the two species stems not from positive natural selection but from genetic drift, in which physical features change randomly, without an environmental driving force.
Some anthropologists had put the cranial differences down to natural selection arising from Neanderthals' use of their teeth as tools, for instance, or from modern humans' speech. To test if genetic drift could have been responsible instead, Timothy Weaver of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues compared 37 measurements of the skulls of various modern human populations with those of Neanderthals. After a comparison of the mean divergence between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals and the mean divergence among groups of modern humans, they conclude that genetic drift is responsible (Journal of Human Evolution, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2007.03.001).
The development of culture weakened the influence of the environment upon both Neanderthals and modern humans, says Weaver. But ultimately the two species drifted apart genetically when they became isolated from each other.
(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...
GGG Ping.
Hahahahahaahahahahahhaahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Color me skeptical.
Maybe some thing this is dumb, but......has anyone else noticed that Hillary has an unusual shape to her head? Or maybe her helmet type hair style just causes an optical illusion.
A robust australopithecine, maybe?
“..Elegant Skulls”
Who are we to judge our skulls as elegant? If Neanderthal had survived they would have opined that Homo Sapiens had a featureless cranium.
(Geico "caveman") Why, that's *so* obvious even a Homo Sapiens would get it...
the infowarrior
I have handled several thousand human skulls, most of the major fossil specimens (as casts), and a large assortment of primates and other critters. I like them all!
Good for you. That's a healthy view.
Welcome to anthropology, the softest of the soft, soft, sciences.
Have to disagree with you here. Anthropology is traditionally broken up into four disciplines: cultural anthropology, linguistics, physical anthropology, and archaeology.
The latter two are not "soft" in any respects. I split my Ph.D. between the two and I can assure you this.
Perhaps you are thinking of the soft aspects of anthropology, along with sociology, psychology, theology and those other squishy subjects?
The Neandertal EnigmaFrayer's own reading of the record reveals a number of overlooked traits that clearly and specifically link the Neandertals to the Cro-Magnons. One such trait is the shape of the opening of the nerve canal in the lower jaw, a spot where dentists often give a pain-blocking injection. In many Neandertal, the upper portion of the opening is covered by a broad bony ridge, a curious feature also carried by a significant number of Cro-Magnons. But none of the alleged 'ancestors of us all' fossils from Africa have it, and it is extremely rare in modern people outside Europe." [pp 126-127]
by James Shreeve
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Yeah, I noticed that too, its all those years of wind pressure forcing the pointy hat down on her head as flies to meetings of the coven.
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.