RE: [asa] AIG gets it wrong again

AIG's assertion was basically that this so-called "earliest" Neandertal site
all of a sudden appears with technology of fire-building and complex
structure building. If it really did come out of nowhere, it could
challenge the assertion that these people evolved in their technology,
knowledge and language skills over thousands of years.
 
My question was, upon discovery of this site, were anthropologists
"astonished" at how these early Neandertals appear all of a sudden with
fully developed technology, contradicting their previous views of human
development? If not, and if there is actually evidence of prior history of
technology development, then the "too advanced for evolution" statement is
falsified, or at least seriously challenged.
 
Since there is evidence of earlier H. erectus finds in Europe as David
stated, another part of their assertion ("earliest sign of humans in
Europe") is falsified. Unless one makes H. erectus non-human by definition,
but that doesn't help the anti-evolutionary view which is the point of the
article.
 
 
Jon Tandy
 
 -----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:13 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] AIG gets it wrong again

It was left unstated how "Such language skill and technological know-how
doesn't fit with evolutionary ideas about Neandertals". That is a very
broad assertion which isn't explained. Do the archaeologists or
anthropologists themselves acknowledge this as a piece of data which
contradicts previously held ideas? Or is this statement simply wishful
thinking?

Neanderthals and technology would not contradict evolution,
but there are differing opinions about how close to the
modern human the Neanderthals are even amongst anthropologists.
Currently, analysis of mtDNA supports them being rather distant.
Nevertheless, mtDNA may not be telling the whole story.

My own opinion is that they were not so different. There
is even some hint that the blond/red hair and blue eyes are
a remnant of the Neanderthals in the European population.
For the record, my ancestors are mostly English and Scotish.

At any rate, if Neanderthals were intelligent and capable
of doing everything a modern human can do, it does not contradict
evolution in any way. It only says something about the
history of fossil man.

Wayne

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Aug 8 13:25:14 2006