Mr Darwin begs to differ
OK, Neaderthal Man, if you're so hard, why are you dead? Nah, nah ni nah naaah!
An anthropologist has described modern man as “the sorriest cohort of masculine Homo sapiens to ever walk the planet”, with even Arnold Schwarzenegger at his muscular peak no match for a Neanderthal woman in the arm-wrestling stakes. According to Peter McAllister, in Manthropology: the Science of Inadequate Modern Man, so …
OK, Neaderthal Man, if you're so hard, why are you dead? Nah, nah ni nah naaah!
Blimey! Not to pick a fight with myself or anything, but the article was about Neanderthal Woman, the correct spelling of Neaderthal was at the top of the comments page, and of course all Neanderthals are dead because they don't live for thousands of years. I think the word I was grasping for, and failing pathetically to find, is "extinct".
Three errors in one sentence. Perhaps the Prof was right and I *am* the most pathetic specimen of manhood ever to walk the Earth.
Brains in jars, and remote controlled robot servants. It's the way forward.
So what? They might of been stronger & faster etc..but we live longer, are smarter, can enjoy abstract concepts like art and philosphy and not worry about getting eaten. (Well almost).
Why hunt an animal with nothing but a spear if you can farm them and kill as required? Or go out with a gun and shoot said animal from 500 meters away? All the strength and speed is worthless against firearms...
...we'll see how long they last scaling a fast growing web app when there's no hardware budget.
Study finds men are evil/bad/stupid/lazy/incompetent/blablabla. I bet the fatties mentioned in the article about hate crimes are getting a kick out of this one.
"His footprints, preserved in the soft mud, show he was sprinting at 37 km/h - not as fast as Bolt's top speed of 42 km/h, but without the benefit of "spiked shoes, a special track, a strict training regime, and money and glory to spur him on"
Perhaps for balance we should put a sabre-toothed tiger behind Mr Bolt and see how fast he goes then.
Judging by the article, it seems that at least one Nearderthal survived until the modern age. I just question myself why is he writing pseudo science articles instead of winning gold medals at Olympic Games.
Paris because she would love a marathon of armwrestling with Usain Bolt
Tell you what, lets settle this once and for all with a race:
First one to the moon and back wins
Kilometres and hours hadn't been invented 20,000 years ago,
... Anywhere he wants to!
He also wouldn't just win an arm wrestling contest, if he wanted to he'd go home with your whole arm.
But, like this whole article, so what??
Try shoot arrows, fire guns.
So Is this anthropologist male or female and why are they big on comparison? Situation creates specialisaltion, most of which are evolutionary dead ends or are diluted back into the gene pool.
...compared to just about any critter out there weighing in at more than about 50 pounds.
We'll never, EVER be able to compete on the physiological plane with Nature. We'll always end up in the soup pot.
But put a bunch of us in a gang, throw in a brainiac or two, and look out nature!
A chick that can open jam jars herself!
Neaderthals had a poor grasp of punctuation, capitalisation and spelling as well....
Yeah, but could she use a cellphone?
Klingon women… mmmm…
"For example, I don't believe you can accurately calculate how fast someone was running from some ancient footprints."
And I don't believe you have ever heard of biophysics, and how they estimate these things.
Granted, there is sure quite some guesstimating involved, depending on the circumstances -- you have to know how long the legs are -- but it's hardly rocket science. If the individual was shorter than estimated, then the calculation will have underestimated the speed, for example.
"But do we use our brains more than our ancestors?"
I would hope so but would not want to bet money... :-)
"i also suggest that maybe a modern 10 year old would happily outwit a fully grown adult from that era?"
Maybe, maybe not. But I'd say the 10 year old would happily outwit the fully grown adult (?) who wrote your post...
Can any of them surf the net with 1 hand a perform the cheerfull 5 knuckle shuffle with the other?
Sure she could beat some chumps in arm werstling, but how does she compare with this chick?
Perhaps our ancient cousins would have done better against malaria and other assorted ills had they been able to mix a proper gin and tonic. Here's a pint to our work harder not smarter brethren.
and other mammals that we are not in family with. The Neanderthals, were not members of Homo Sapiens.
In fact the current theory on the extinction of Homo Neanderthalensis is that they were all eaten by the superior (thanks to brains, not muscles) Homo Sapiens. Brains rule.
Modern men are useless compared to their evolutionary ancestors.
Apes can out-climb men, shrews can out-burrow them (and see better in the dark). Fish can easily out-swim modern men and stay underwater for longer. The further back you go the worse it gets. I don't know why we bothered to evolve. I mean, just look at what we've lost.
If the Rwandans were able to jump so damn high in the past, why aren't they doing it now? It's not like they've gone soft due to their modern, cushy standard of living.
He must be feeling inferior to his fellow men, to take such a stab instead of just accepting the obvious, that it would be a gross waste of resources to build up one's body when there isn't so much hard labor to do anymore.
Note he never even mentioned what their average broadband connection speed was. ;)
He was a body builder. Not the same thing. Let's talk about football ( American) players or even Sumo wrestlers. Let's do a match there. Oh year, in the States here we do mega marathons, 100 miles in 24 hours. One Doctor in Dallas does one a month.
The responses above are a fascinating example of what happens when the male ego is threatened.
Chill out, guys.
Is clearly "equating physical fitness to manliness is idiotic", as it's clear that evolution is harshly selecting against it. Most of the really strong and tough species of the Earth are extinct, and our own species has been losing the trait really quickly.
"Chaps are then reminded that a Roman soldier was able to march one-and-a-half marathons in a single day"
One-and-a-half-marathons? Luxury! We used to have to get out of the lake at three o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of hot gravel, go to work at the mill every day for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would beat us around the head and neck with a broken bottle, if we were LUCKY!
Mine's the one with the Barnsley Chronicle in the pocket
The Neanderthal race was pushed to extinction by Homo Sapien - (yes, that would be us, we are all Homo Sapiens).
It is well documented that the Neanderthals were much stronger with more muscle mass, denser bones and a greater ability to survive in harsher climates. But our ancestors kicked their asses with their bigger brains, adaptability and advanced toolage.
So the article is correct in some ways, Neanderthals were stronger than Homo Sapiens, but it didn't stop us kicking their asses 50 thousand years ago and it certainly wouldn't stop us now.
Incidentally - It is thought that some Neanderthal women were accepted into Homo Sapien tribal units for baby making reasons (the good looking ones anyway). You can still see the Neanderthal DNA surfacing and affecting the features of some people today.
"Sure our kids would probably be healthier being sent to the communal school to live for 7 years emulating Sparta's happy training combination of starvation, abuse and buggary - but they'd probably live a longer and happier life playing nintendo and eventually becoming corporate lawyers (though probably no less evil)"
Exactly. ROFLMAOOLetc kthxbye.
I'll not deny the capability of a modern 12 year old to walk a marathon, but did they do it in armour, carrying their weapons and shield and then build a fortified camp at the end of the day before repeating the exercise the following day.
In prehistoric times, nature surely would have favoured the strongest, fastest and most ruthless humans with the great majority of the weak/unlucky dying before reproduction. In the past 10K years we have organised into highly advanced societies, and developed sophisticated technologies, including effective medical care and pretty much anyone can live long enough to reproduce. In fact the richest, most sophisticated nations reproduce the least! I figure human evolution is taking a break, favouring lazy slobs for the time being until the next pandemic/asteroid/world war/climate change thins things out. It'll be the IT bods who figure out how to put the world back together again.
Off to the supermarket to stock up on baked beans...
Neanderthal woman dared to even challenge him to arm-wrestling, so he wiped out the entire species. Ergo, humans are better.
No Chuck Norris icon? Grenade...because he uses them instead of chillis.
"Incidentally - It is thought that some Neanderthal women were accepted into Homo Sapien tribal units for baby making reasons (the good looking ones anyway). You can still see the Neanderthal DNA surfacing and affecting the features of some people today."
whilst I appreciate this is a humours remake, just in case anyone thinks it could be true ... it is 100% certain that modern homo sapiens DNA contains no connection to Neanderthal DNA. We are *not* descended from them. As has been pointed out we're more like cousins to them.
"... start your son firing arrows from galloping horses ..."
Would someone point out to Mr. Haines (and innumerable others) that you SHOOT arrows - you do not fire them. You FIRE a gun only because in the early days of guns you had to apply fire to the gunpowder to make it work. Nobody ever applied fire to an arrow unless it was specifically a fire arrow, and then only to the other end.
This is not really news..... I'm a modern gal and I can nearly wup alot of modern men. Manual labor should be part of everyone's life. Merci
What, when male egos are threatened they start spouting facts? Actually, I suppose rational argument is another of those stupid, pointless things that as a species we shouldn't have bothered with, not when we could have picked bigger muscles from the Spore creature creation screen instead.
No-one's disputing that Neanderthal physiology may have given them stronger arms than us, or that Roman military training gave their soldiers endurance that we haven't. What people are disputing, correctly, is that this is a bad thing and we should all feel ashamed.
McAllister's position is no different from a very regressed bully who walks up to people and goes "Hur hur hur, I've got bigger muscles than you". And gets constantly beaten up because having big muscles is not the same as being able to fight (as the Neanderthals would tell you, if they weren't extinct).
A lot of people here are mistaking average life expectancy with the age that most adults die. They are entirely different. People in ancient times routinely live in to their 60s and 70s.
Some years ago I read that the average lifespan of a Roman citizen circa 1AD was 21 years. Did this mean that a lot of people were dying around 21? No, most people who survived childhood made it in to their 60s. The difference is infant mortalty. Almost all of the advancement made in human lifespan has been by severely reducing infant mortality.
I'd like to see the face of a Para or Marine that was told he isn't capable of doing 39 miles in a day with full combat bergen.
Is this book actually available anywhere? It doesn't appear to be on Amazon?
As several have noted Neanderthal man ( woman ) was a different species and would have been completely swatted by a gorilla, or a chimpanzee for that case. I note from elsewhere on the net that "whupping Arnie" involved the Neanderthal being trained to modern standards, fed on a modern diet and then taking advantage of shorter levers to win the arm wrestle despite having smaller muscles. Still, never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
The tall ( sorry ) tales about the Tutsi leaping 2.5m+ are just silly. The world high jump record a hundred years ago was under 2m. If the Tutsi could really do this jump they would have been shipped off to Europe by their Colonial "betters" to demonstrate their party piece. Probably followed by the abolition of the high jump as a competitive event as it was clearly not a fit pursuit for white men. There are so many holes in this idea that I could write a book but surely sexual selection would ensure that Tutsi men would gradually get shorter. It's got to be easier for a 1.5m tall man to jump 1.5m than a 2.5m man to jump 2.5m. Since the Tutsi are IIRC among the tallest groups on Earth that doesn't seem very likely.
Which comes on the question of the kit carried by Roman soldiers, Medieval Knights and modern combat troops. And our jury says " the same". For the past 2,000 years or so soldiers have carried the same weight and slogged about the same distance per day. It seems quite likely that Homo Sapiens basic ability hasn't changed much in the past 50,000 years.
There can be no doubt that most people worked physically harder in the past and the typical level of strength and fitness was greater. The price was paid in crippled joints and years of pain starting in the early thirties.
On the other hand Homo Sapiens a few tens of thousands of years ago were ( I suspect ) just as intelligent as they are in the present day.
The whole premise of the book, that modern man is a degraded form of humanity is, ridiculous. People are people, good, bad and, mostly, indifferent just as they always have been.
The truth is out there.
"The most impressive track in terms of speed is T8. These footprints are 295 mm long
and 100 mm wide; the estimated height of the person who made the tracks is 1.94 ±
0.15 m (~ 6.4 ft), close to that of the T1 individual. The tracks indicate that this
individual was running the fastest of any person at the site. Pace length increases from
1.8 to 1.9 m over 11 m, indicating acceleration, and speed is estimated at ~ 20 km hr -1."
20 kph is a hell of a lot slower than Bolts 42 kph. If my math is correct that's a bit under 6 m/s. As a wimpy 49 year old I can do that easily for a short distance, say a quarter of a mile.
Clearly I am some kind of superman being able to beat these prehistoric athletes at my advanced age.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018