3 ms·

> Being perhaps a little smarter doesn't mean you win the evolutionary game. There are so many factors at play. Considering most human groups have a % of Neand

> Being perhaps a little smarter doesn't mean you win the evolutionary game. There are so many factors at play. Considering most human groups have a % of Neanderthal DNA, they didn't exactly lose... Based on the % of Neanderthal vs. Sapien DNA, it seems Neanderthals were simply outnumbered.

hrimfaxi 6mo ago
What does it mean to lose evolutionarily if not be outnumbered?
- tsunamifury 6mo ago
  Ants won over humans? Worms?
  - hrimfaxi 6mo ago
    When you are in direct competition? I should have said outcompeted, which in this case I think outnumbered is a fair proxy.
- dismalaf 6mo ago
  Are numbers everything? Are sardines more evolved than whales? Anyhow, the traditional view is that Neanderthals were brutes who were actually out-competed and killed off by Sapiens. The more realistic view considering the evidence is that Neanderthals were much closer to Sapiens, equally or even more sophisticated, but less numerous, and thus their contribution to our DNA is smaller than Sapiens. But do keep in mind the Neanderthals live on because Europeans and Asians are all part Neanderthal.
  - junofan 6mo ago
    I think especially given TFA and our inferred history with them that they were terrifying apex predators who occasionally raped human women. I don’t much believe the friendly smiling museum depictions that have lately become fashionable. Their eyes alone would have made them something you didn’t want to run into at night.
    - dismalaf 6mo ago
      > TFA and our inferred history with them that they were terrifying apex predators All humans are. Neanderthals, Sapiens, modern humans, we are all apex predators. > occasionally raped human women The article doesn't suggest that. While it's plausible, there's also evidence of Sapien/Neanderthal cooperation and mingling: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/04/260412071005.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/04/260412071005.h... And lets not forget that all hominins fight amongst themselves, rape each other, etc... The assumption that Neanderthals were particularly brutish is just that, an assumption.
      - card_zero 6mo ago
        There is however a suggestion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Interbreeding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Interbreeding > According to Svante Pääbo, it is not clear that modern humans were socially dominant over Neanderthals, which may explain why the interbreeding occurred primarily between Neanderthal males and modern human females. Unless read as suggesting "Neanderthal males were hugely charismatic"?
        pegasus 6mo ago
        ...or "Neanderthal males were huge, thus charismatic" :)
        dismalaf 6mo ago
        In current-day interracial dating dynamics there are preferred race and gender combos and this is shown through lots of statistics. The answer isn't necessarily rape...
    - opan 6mo ago
      Are there any good illustrations showing how much bigger their eyes were compared to modern humans? Is it really significant? I'm having trouble finding anything that makes it clear.
    - nobodyandproud 6mo ago

hrimfaxi 6mo ago

What does it mean to lose evolutionarily if not be outnumbered?

tsunamifury 6mo ago
Ants won over humans? Worms?
- hrimfaxi 6mo ago
  When you are in direct competition? I should have said outcompeted, which in this case I think outnumbered is a fair proxy.
dismalaf 6mo ago
Are numbers everything? Are sardines more evolved than whales? Anyhow, the traditional view is that Neanderthals were brutes who were actually out-competed and killed off by Sapiens. The more realistic view considering the evidence is that Neanderthals were much closer to Sapiens, equally or even more sophisticated, but less numerous, and thus their contribution to our DNA is smaller than Sapiens. But do keep in mind the Neanderthals live on because Europeans and Asians are all part Neanderthal.
- junofan 6mo ago
  I think especially given TFA and our inferred history with them that they were terrifying apex predators who occasionally raped human women. I don’t much believe the friendly smiling museum depictions that have lately become fashionable. Their eyes alone would have made them something you didn’t want to run into at night.
  - dismalaf 6mo ago
    > TFA and our inferred history with them that they were terrifying apex predators All humans are. Neanderthals, Sapiens, modern humans, we are all apex predators. > occasionally raped human women The article doesn't suggest that. While it's plausible, there's also evidence of Sapien/Neanderthal cooperation and mingling: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/04/260412071005.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/04/260412071005.h... And lets not forget that all hominins fight amongst themselves, rape each other, etc... The assumption that Neanderthals were particularly brutish is just that, an assumption.
    - card_zero 6mo ago
      There is however a suggestion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Interbreeding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Interbreeding > According to Svante Pääbo, it is not clear that modern humans were socially dominant over Neanderthals, which may explain why the interbreeding occurred primarily between Neanderthal males and modern human females. Unless read as suggesting "Neanderthal males were hugely charismatic"?
      - pegasus 6mo ago
        ...or "Neanderthal males were huge, thus charismatic" :)
      - dismalaf 6mo ago
        In current-day interracial dating dynamics there are preferred race and gender combos and this is shown through lots of statistics. The answer isn't necessarily rape...
  - opan 6mo ago
    Are there any good illustrations showing how much bigger their eyes were compared to modern humans? Is it really significant? I'm having trouble finding anything that makes it clear.
  - nobodyandproud 6mo ago