1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Were the Neanderthals the Nephilim?

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by me1, Dec 12, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

  2. Random

    Random Well-Known Member

    What do you mean "Were"?
  3. hammockmonkey

    hammockmonkey Well-Known Member

    My major problem with this article is that it does not use any archaeological evidence. The one use of "archaeologists" is also wrong.

    I would also like to point out this, most archaeologists are giant nerds. We love Sci-Fi, fantasy, whatever. We dig it, I've yet to meet an archaeologist who doesn't. We'd love nothing more than to prove that extraterrestrials have had contact with us in the past. That'd be the greatest accomplishment fucking ever. Either no contact has been made, or no evidence of this contact is present. Please, no links about Egyptian pyramids being aliens please? I don't have the sanity for this anymore.

    Neanderthals, archaeologically, tactically, were retarded. They did not take advantage of terrain, and if homo sapiens did not interbreed with Neanderthals because we couldn't or because their women were butt ugly, we certainly wide them out. Homo sapien sites throughout Europe were in the high grounds, while Neanderthal sites were in caves.

    I'm done here. I . . . I can post more now maybe later.
  4. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    I am making the assumption that they no longer exist, hence the use of the term 'were'. Have you personally seen any Neanderthals lately? No funny comments, please!
  5. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    According to the article (i haven't personally surveyed the evidence spoken of) Neanderthals were adept tool/weapon makers, created musical instruments and demonstrated a comprehension of death and a respect for their deceased, etc. Where is the evidence that they were 'retarded' as you suggest?
  6. levitated-one

    levitated-one Well-Known Member

    Lol..Neanderthals were bigger than homo sapien.. Many creatures that are big and clumsy during ancient time extincted..like dinasours..

    So perhaps it's because of their size, that you suggest they might be nephilims?
  7. HappyAZaClaM

    HappyAZaClaM Guest

    ..........ok, no

    no funny comments? what possible funny comment could be
    derived from the afore texted text? are you implying there
    'may' be neaderthals living amoungst us? maybe right here on
    the SF forum? I don't see anything funny about that.
  8. bleach

    bleach Well-Known Member

    Going by comparative biology of neanderthal vs. modern human skulls, they had a smaller prefontal lobe of their brains. Prefontal lobe is associated with advanced cognitive functions so by homo sapien standards they may well have been retarded.
  9. Lovecraft

    Lovecraft Well-Known Member

    There's an article about how the Earth we are on is the Earth from the bible!

    Think of how big the bible is and how vague. If you spout random crap, sooner or later you will, by chance, spout a fact. In much the same way, if you write a large enough book, there will be a fact or two in there sooner or later.
  10. hammockmonkey

    hammockmonkey Well-Known Member

    No, they don't sight any archaeological evidence to support those claims.

    Neanderthals were tool makers and weapon makers, and there are questions about their cognitive abilities. But the article doesn't cite anything to support its claims

    The one reference to archaeologists is about dating the Great Sphinx of Egypt before the pyramids, which is somewhat disputed but generally agreed upon that they were begun around around the same time with the Sphinx being started slightly later than the Great pyramids at Giza.

    I'm sorry that I used such a poor word it was in bad taste as they say.

    What I meant was strategically homo sapiens were smarter. By using terrain to our advantage we either killed the neanderthals pretty easily or we interbreed with them. This is a huge question in paleoanthropology what happened to the neanderthal. There is some good evidence that suggests interbreeding, mostly I believe in the European populations. I can try and get some sources but it'd have to be after christmas.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 14, 2008
  11. bhawk

    bhawk Well-Known Member

    there has been skeletons found that have hinted at the possibility of us having interbred with neanderthals, wouldnt seem to weird since beastiality was common place too so shagging something half human would be a welcome break from the cattle:biggrin:
    homo sapiens were (not so sure about nowadays) much more adaptably which was gave us the upper hand.
    if neanderthals were more skilled in other ways it may well have been most beneficial to intermingle and share skills and over time interbreeding would occur.
    Also please remember the bible also talks about talking snakes.... untill i see one id rather believe what science shows us
  12. Random

    Random Well-Known Member

    So you ask me a question and then beg me not to answer it?
  13. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    No, they dont, you're right. But i have read about Neanderthals from other sources making these same claims pertaining to the treatment of their deceased, invention and utilisation of tools etc, including somewhat poignantly, sewing needles, which do not suggest 'retardedness' at all. Now, obviously repetition of a falsehood does not transform it into truth. But, presumably these claims (on anthropological sites) are not without substance and are based upon observable evidence. Anthropologists, like all groups of people, are prone to making up wild and fantastical explainations to suit their own personal biases. But these reside largely in the realm of interpretations, which are based upon, and moulded to suit, the pre-existing suppositions of the beholder. Not, pure observations, such as the very existance of the burial site, or bone instrument, themselves. I haven't personally surveyed the evidence, so for all i know it may not even exist! haha. It either does or it does not. I made no claims that the author of the article -had- produced references. I only stated that the article made claims.

    No, it doesn't, it makes claims. But other sources relating to anthropology make these same observations of -presumedly- real evidence, pertaining to burial sites and tools, musical instruments, etc, that have been found. If they belonged to Neanderthals then it would suggest that they were not so 'retarded' as some would have it.

    The article suggests that the Sphinx is -older- than the pyramids as you point out in the opening line. You then go on to claim that the opposite is true. Do you have a source for this assertion? The article attempts to account for the weathering of the Sphinx, something that apparently is not observable on the pyramids. I have never been to Egypt and consequently do not know whether there is any such effect on the Sphinx. For all i know the Sphinx might not even exist and Egypt may be no more real than the land of Narnia. But, if the Sphinx does exist and if it shows weathering which is not present on the pyramids then clearly the two entities have not both existed for the same length of time in the same geographical location...unless there are some pretty localized weather phenomena existing in that region. Also, one would struggle to explain this weathering effect if the sphinx had been built more recently, rather than it being older than the pyramids.

    Apology accepted.


    How would one 'use terrain' to ones 'advantage' in the process of 'interbreeding' with a competitor? I am sure the more imaginative can conjure up their own images here!

    If it is a 'huge question' then the implication is that a definitive answer, providing one exists, is currently unknown. The position's put forward, conjecture. Consequently, the above about tactical superiority and 'killing off' a competitor are pure speculation and should not be presented as fact.

    This contradicts your above musings about tactical supremacy bringing about the demise of the 'retarded' Neanderthals.

    I shall enjoy reading those, thank you.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2008
  14. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    I begged only that i be spared sarcasm. I invite an answer to the question so long as it be a simple 'yes' or 'no'.
  15. hammockmonkey

    hammockmonkey Well-Known Member

    The weathering on the sphinx is thought to be caused by sand abrasion and not by water erosion which is what is argued for the sphinx to be older than the pyramids.

    All we can say about the neandethals is that they are now extinct. The question is whether homo sapiens killed them, a disease that did not affect homo sapiens wiped them out, homo sapiens out competed them for resources, or we interbreeded with them. You are right, we don't know what exactly happened though, again we have the outcome: no more neanderthals.

    Now, as for use of terrain the primary sites archaeologists find neanderthal remains is in caves, and other lowland areas. Contemporaneous homo sapien sites tend to be in elevated positions with good views of the landscape. Being in the high position is tactically the better position to be in. If there was competition between neanderthals and homo sapiens, which there is evidence of, tactically homo sapiens had the superior positions.

    How could you use terrain to your advantage for interbreeding? Simple, the breeding wasn't consensual and one side kidnapped the other.

    There also is some evidence that neanderthals and homo sapiens interbreeded. The ideas of conflict and interbreeding are not mutually exclusive. We are talking about large populations covering large areas of terrain with different social groups that were also in competition with each other. They are not homogenous groups battling it out for one winner.
  16. HappyAZaClaM

    HappyAZaClaM Guest

    I think he were talkin ta me, but too polite to mention me by name :laugh:

    it really does seem a little unfair to me. "seen any neanderthals lately?"

    "well...........I wasn't GONNA mention it, but as you've brought it up anyway, I don't see the harm..." :unsure:

    and so on etc..

    bit of a setup with a disclaimer if ya ask me.
  17. HappyAZaClaM

    HappyAZaClaM Guest

    "the 'retarded' Neanderthals" oh man, what a great name for a band!
  18. HappyAZaClaM

    HappyAZaClaM Guest

    shagging something half human huh? I hadn't realized you and my ex wife
    were aquainted. how is she anyway? yeah anyway, cattle can be a right
    buggar. teachin em ta back up to a boulder and such. guess that explains
    gettin married..that and about a gallon of Jim beam, if memory serves.......
  19. HappyAZaClaM

    HappyAZaClaM Guest

    sorry :blink:

    moving along now, as this does seem a serious debate. just a bit o' fun
    and I'm on me way
  20. Random

    Random Well-Known Member

    I cannot help but be sarcastic when asked if I've seen any Neanderthals around. Of course, you must have seen it coming.

    I don't know how smart they are but I hear they're good at dodging shoes.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.