Many of us are part caveman, according to an analysis of Neanderthal genes, which were sequenced for the first time in a recent study.
The Neanderthal genome offers further evidence that this ancient hominid species mated and interbred with the ancestors of modern humans, scientists say.
"The Neanderthals are not totally extinct," said study leader Svante Pääbo of the Max-Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. "In some of us they live on a little bit."
In fact, between 1 percent and 4 percent of some modern humans' DNA came from Neanderthals, who lived between about 130,000 and 30,000 years ago, the researchers report today.
The Neanderthals are the ones who want to fight, they want to have power, they want to control. These individuals, as we look around today, could logically be what made them go extinct; having yet to evolve from these primitive traits. Remember, there are only 1 - 4 percent of humans who still have primitive traits, one’s they are holding onto and exercising daily. e.g. hate crime (a Muslim ban), removal of civil liberties and of course, bullying with lack of empathy for human dignity.
If the entire clan or group of Neanderthals were constantly clashing, of course they will die out. Social harmony is what makes for Egyptian societies lasting thousands of years.
Reasoning is an advance trait Homo sapiens possessed, which also included empathy, morality and justice to name a few. These are traits the Neanderthals lacked and thus died out. Alternatively, they could actually still be here, they just evolved skulls more like ours, where science can't discern the differences after we mated.
Whichever it is, a certain species of human dying out will not happen today, because if you have enough green paper, you will survive. Let alone, reproducing, creating exact copies of what could be the problem we are seeing in society. The desire for power and control, usually relates to a lot of green paper.
Always being the boss or owner doesn’t exactly teach good morals or ethics, neither does coming up from the bottom walking over people on the way up.
This, of course, is only one logical speculation from observing humankind’s behaviors to the point they’ve evolved into today, 2017.
“Morality did not evolve to promote universal cooperation”
I have a fairly robust immune response to book-marketing hype, but in this case it’s showing no signs of activity. The well-documented human knack for bigotry, conflict, and atrocity must have something to do with the human mind, and relevant parts of the mind are indeed coming into focus—not just thanks to the revolution in brain scanning, or even advances in neuroscience more broadly, but also thanks to clever psychology experiments and a clearer understanding of the evolutionary forces that shaped human nature. Maybe we’re approaching a point where we can actually harness this knowledge, make radical progress in how we treat one another, and become a species worthy of the title Homo sapiens.
Both Bloom and Greene evince concern for the human predicament; both authors would like to do something about it; and both have ideas about what that something should be. But only Greene’s book brings the wordmessianic to mind. His concern is emphatic, his diagnosis precise, and his plan of action very, very ambitious. The salvation of humankind is possible, but it’s going to take concerted effort. Greene offers readers “the motivation and opportunity to join forces with like-minded others,” the chance to support what he calls a “metamorality.” And as this metamorality spreads, we can expect to solve problems on both the domestic and international fronts, bringing reason to discussions about abortion and gay rights; calming tensions between India and Pakistan, Israel and Palestine; and so on.
I like ambition! And I’m fine with a bit of messianism, because the intense tribalism we’re seeing, domestically and internationally, does suggest that we may be approaching a point of true planetary peril. I agree with Greene that the situation calls for dramatic action—action on a scale that could bring a kind of transformation of human consciousness. But I think the transformation Greene has in mind, though appealing, isn’t the really urgent one. I think his diagnosis gives short shrift to the part of human psychology that has most condemned us to conflict.
Eiluned Pearce and Robin Dunbar of Oxford University recently worked with Stringer and compared the skulls of 32 Homo sapiens and 13 Neanderthals, finding the latter had eye sockets that were significantly larger. These larger eyes were an adaptation to the long, dark nights and winters of Europe, they concluded, and would have required much larger visual processing areas in Neanderthal skulls.
By contrast, modern humans, from sunny Africa, had no need for this adaptation and instead they evolved frontal lobes, which are associated with high-level processing. "More of the Neanderthal brain appears to have been dedicated to vision and body control, leaving less brain to deal with other functions like social networking," Pearce told BBC News.