Even more stuff which makes neanderthal like us, such as a cave with instances of funeral art (intentional positioning of stones). Moreover, there is a new kid in town: Denisovans, Check them out!
The big change is the discovery of Denisovans, and more and more elements which prove how close we are to our Neanderthal cousins, as well as what we owe them.
I'm living in Meerbusch near Düsseldorf...the Neanderthal is only a few kilometers away. I love this part of nature very much, it's wonderful to be in this part of small canyon...you can sense this place is a very special one. ❤❤❤ & I'm glad to hear that their genoms are helping us to level up 😅
Worry not, it is well on its way. This programme is the fundation for current research, it will help you understand more uptodate stuff, and you will see how we are rehabilitated. By the way: I have Denisovan and Neanderthal...do check the denisovans out! :)
You can't just post a 10 year old documentary in a field that's been rapidly evolving in that time frame and expect this to be of any value. If anything I think this would almost qualify as misinformation.
If you knew anything about the subject, you would know that this documentary is in fact very valuable, as it presents the basis on which all current work is stemming from. If you do not know all of that, you will struggle to understand the latest research. See it like: the science you do in high school is not cutting edge, but, while some elements have been discarded and replaced, as no longer held true, it still provides the basis for further studies. If you want to know more, look up Denisovans. :)
I think it would be fine *if* the date was clearly stated. Much like David Attenborough's _Life on Earth_ is now very outdated in places but still worth watching. The problem here is that the date isn't given so people might run across the documentary, see the 2024 upload date, and think it was current.
It was a fascinating surprise to find my genetics test results listed Neanderthal at 1.4%. As this has proven a common result for so many, they obviously were intigrated not wiped out.
Mine is apparently a bit more than average. I know I'm tempting fate, but me & my siblings seem to have a robust immune system. Are you & yours the same ?
@nutcracker2916 Let's see now: I've made it to age 70 in mostly one piece, having survived the communicable ailments common to my generation. Had Covid-19 twice and have had worse common colds. Once before and even after vaccination. If this is due to my Neanderthal great - X granny or papaw, bless them.
I agree. Also, they endured for about 400 000 years. We have barely reached 200 000, and by the look of it might not make it much longer if we keep on wrecking the conditions that make the earth inhabitable!
Apparently I have an higher than average DNA percentage of Neanderthal . But my cynical side thinks that, had they had the technical "intelligence" no doubt they'd behave no differently than modern day homo sapiens.
This is a very old documentary, Svante Paabo got the Nobel prize for technique for extracting dna, so people should look for one of his newer lectures. A lot have changed since this was filmed.
not true. depending on how one perceives time this doc. was released recently or long ago. so while you might perceive this documentary as very old, others including myself do not. as far as I am concerned this documentary was released today, which is my truth. no offence but you need to check your privilege in these situations because opinions stated as fact is completely dangerous. thanx and have a good day. -jared caine
@@donut5143 I read it not as an opinion but as an advice to people like you who find this interesting. Look for Svante's newer lectures - there are many on TH-cam - and update your knowledge. I can add that Svante Paabo's lectures also contains a good deal of humour
@@donut5143 Its a Sunday and I must admit I do love a little debate, and since you opened that door, let me pay my respect and give you my view. While I appreciate the philosophical perspective on time and perception, I believe it's important to clarify a few points: 1. The age of a documentary, like this one which was released in 2013, is measured objectively based on the universally accepted calendar system.( Gregorian for most of us). This is not a matter of perception but a factual statement. 2. For effective communication, we rely on a common understanding of time. Referring to the release date of a documentary is a standard practice and essential for clarity. 3. My statement about the documentary being old is based on its release date, which is a fact, not an opinion. It's crucial to differentiate between subjective opinions and objective facts. 4. While individual perceptions about a documentary's relevance may vary, this does not alter the factual date of its release. Subjective views don't negate objective facts. 5. Equating the stating of factual information with privilege undermines rational discourse. Facts, especially verifiable ones like publication dates, are foundational to constructive conversations. So thus I think I will conclude that while personal perceptions are subjective, objective facts, such as a documentary's release date, remain constant and are crucial for clear communication.
You are not entirely wrong, but none of the facts in this documentary have been proven wrong, moreover, it is the basis of all the work which is currently done, so you'd struggle to understand the lates research if you did not know that. It also explains really well how we got there. Most recent docs do not have the space to retrace the fubasics of modern ancient DNA genetics+Neanderthal science, and could thus be very hard to follow. :)
Excellent point: this document is still very valuable because it gives us the basics for all current studies. Current studies do not have the space to summarise where they stem from, and are thus extremely difficult to understand unless you watch such a doc first. It is like wanting to be a writer in a foreign language without learning it first! :) @@donut5143
For the sake of accuracy, they should've had a black dude representing homo sapiens. When humans first appeared in Europe out of Africa, they were dark skinned. Also, the neanderthal should've been much fairer with blonde and even red hair, having persisted in ice age Europe for almost 400,000 years.
Agreed. That always shocks me, and it also shocks me when our ancestors are shown as dishevelled and hairy all over. the most ancient human depctions we have show people with neat hairstyles. They had jewellery...They cared. You have to make an effort to seduce a neanderthal or a sapiens!
@@annepoitrineau5650 As inaccurate as it may seem, our deep past shows us that we were indeed hairy all over and dishevelled as we came from Chimps. We then evolved slowly into a more cultured species. I am very happy to know that modern tech has allowed us to be more accurate about our understanding of how we came to be. And how Neanderthals are a part of every human alive today. I don't like it when scientists call it "inter-breeding". Certainly, over 10 thousand years, we just didn't get together just for breeding. In order for Neanderthals to disappear in the way they did, homo-sapiens had to have actually lived with Neanderthals over many hundreds or even thousands of years. Living with them as a community and as families for generations just as we do today. I find that knowledge very reassuring.
@@Yosetime but these neanderthals and homo sapiens were far removed from chimps and highly cultured. They would've looked after their appearance to be attractive to prospective mates. Neanderthal ancestry is not present in sub saharan Africans. Even though they lived alongside for thousands of years, I doubt Neanderthal - homo sapiens relations would have been very friendly as evidenced by how different human groups, though the same species, treat each other today.
@@olddog-fv2ox actually no. European light skin started to appear much later, less than 10,000 years ago, likely after farming began. Google "Cheddar man Britain". TH-cam doesn't allow sharing links here.
@@olddog-fv2oxactually no. European light skin started to appear much later, less than 10,000 years ago, likely after farming began. Google "Cheddar man Britain".
Why must every documentary feel like a true crime thing now with sudden music and mysterious cut offs? We're not simpletons who will lose interest if something dramatic isn't happening every 3 seconds, how about just presenting the information with interesting visualisations.
Maybe Neanderthal hunters gave panther paws as a gift to their loved ones? Then she kept it? Kind of like people used to carry a rabbit's foot for luck.
After seeing many remains of early Danes here in Danmark, I have been curious about why both the men and women had more prominent brow ridges. Being in Northern Europe, just maybe the Danes have a little more Neanderthal DNA. At any rate I find this research very interesting.
At the time ‘modern’ humans were no more modern than their Neanderthal contemporaries and we have no idea at all whether they ‘were’ considered ‘primitive’ nor any reason to imagine they were. They were undoubtedly well adapted to prevailing environmental conditions. All humans originated in and dispersed from Africa and populated Eurasia over a relatively short time
Interesting that N-man made pitch glue from rolls of birch bark (Eucalyptus, Poplar and others) heated to a fairly specific temperature. Native Americans also made bark fuel oil in the exact same way. And it was VERY close to today's kerosine, just burned dirtier. Then once we had actual containers, the amount of fuel oil that can be extracted from a few barks like birch is surprising. You can replicate the process in your back yard with a clean paint tin with lid, some birch bark and a fire.
Even if old, I still found it fascinating. Gooe to kmow they were not massacred to extinction but interbred with modern humans and contributed useful genes.
Now that Neanderthals are closely linked with Europeans, the narrative has changed saying they were intelligent 😂😂😂 Well Africans, we are proud to be Homo Sapiens 👏
No, they didn't die before they were 30. You're conflating life expectancy at birth with life expectancy at 20. They lived to around 60-70. If they made it to 30, they'd likely live to 60.
Well, it was said poorly. “Most Neanderthals were dead by around 30” isn’t entirely wrong. Most Neanderthals born had died before they were 30, but a vast amount of those were Neanderthals who died before age 5. An average expected mortality rate means that 50% of a population died at or before that age, and that 50% lived past that age. If we assume an average age of death at around 25 years old, then most Neanderthals would have died by age 30; however, it would be statistically possible that the majority of Neanderthals who lived past age 5 could have gone on to live into their 40s or 50s. And remember, if a majority lived into their 40s or 50s, that necessarily means that a minority would have lived past their 50s and into their 60s (and perhaps even later).
they probably were. Early humans are often representes in films/images as dishevelled, but even the earliest figurrines/statues we have found show them with very neat hairstyles. Which were in fact essential iin order to control parasites. Also, since they cared about shells and jewellery, it is fair to assume they cared about their looks. You do not get to seduce a Sapiens or a Neanderthal unless you look your Sunday's best :)@@reb2322
Yes, one of the problems of Neanderthals (as has been discovered recently) is that they had high infant and mother mortality. Sapiens have higher mother/infant mortality than say, cats, apes or hedgehogs, but they did better than Neanderthals were doing by the time we arrived on the scene. @@DneilB007
Absolutely. We know now that the past reconstructions were biased and derogatory. In fact, if you want to have an idea of what they looked like, google Suella Braverman. She has a neanderthal face (on a very Sapiens body as she is slim and long limbed)@@marcusfridh8489
This is incredibly interesting....l believe Europeans also inherented their hairyness from our Neth ançestors....Aisians are quite hairless in comparison ....
17:08 I reckon they discovered and salvaged that glue from a big bushfire at start, and then they probaly cottoned on, to how they have to make it with fire and then they started evolving right there when they harnessed the heat to make that glue.
They always had fire. Just like modern humans have. It's wasn't harnessed by either but inherited from an earlier common ancestor and what do you mean they started to evolve right there??? They died out other than a little inbreeding so I reckon you reckon wrong
@@NeilEvans-xq8ik I wonder what came first tools or heated food, cos they didn't need to know how to cook, they just had to eat, animals that have been cooked from a bush fire.
@@RAPINCITE tools !!! Obviously chimps use tools but don't ping their food. A rock for smashing bones is a tool but the important thing is you need a tool to start a fire and heat your food
Neathandrals diets and locations of migration. Have got alot to do with everything. Weather in different areas is what gives colour to our skins. So imagine what else the weather does to us after time. To help us evolve.
Sapiens at that time were recently arrived from Africa, they had African treats, black skin, African hair. The makers know that, and still sapiens here had straight hair and white skin….. I wonder why😂
The survived in an ice age world for 300.000 years, while we in modern socaity cant even survive a power outage and functioning running water for a week. So who is really the primitive ones?
Wish they would explain how Neanderthals survived ''at least 300,000 years'' in Europe, with such small populations and individual life expectancy only 25 - 35 years. That just doesn't seem possible
just because the life expectancy was maybe those ages doesnt mean they all died at those ages. fertility in homo sapiens neanderthal should start at about around humans.
Average is a very misleading number. Babies and small children died like flies up until about 100 years ago. So you have a huge number dieing before the age of 6 but also many people aged 50 to 60 and you end up with an average of 25 to 30 which represents nobody.
Yeah, based upon some research coming out, their birch chemistry to attach their crude stone spear heads to their spears. It became like a cement. Homo Sapiens only got it right so far to use string. Also their brain weight is equal to ours if not better. They were wiped out by volcanic activity. The remnant slowly interbred with sapiens
Of course we could not have hunted them to extinction. The area settled both by Sapiens and Neanderthals was huge, and the population numbers were small. The fact they bumped into each other was a miracle, and they did it, predictably, in the middle east bottleneck out of Africa, but once they did, of course we mated with them! Also, when I checked the numbers, the idea we had out-competed them was a little arrogant. Neanderthals "disappeared" after existing for about 400 000 years ago. We Sapiens have so far only existed for about 200 000. What with the way we are destroying the conditions that make this planet inhabitable, we might not make it to 400 000 years. In which case, Neanderthal will have out-competed us in terms of endurance. At least, when they departed, the cousins left a planet that was hospitable. It is my contention that Neanderthals succumbed to climate change (as did several cultures in the course of history), and we will too, except that, this time, we created the change of climate.
That is not a reasonable theory. If Neanderthals mastered their environment for nearly 400 thousand years during the harshest of climates such as an Ice Age, then certainly a climate event did not suddenly kill them. We know that sapiens and Neanderthals lived in the same areas for about 10 thousand years. That's a long time. It's ridiculous to think that they never ran across each other. If Sapiens travelled all the way out of Africa, they certainly could cover a great deal of land in little Europe. Of course they came across each other everywhere. And over time, lived with them as families and communities in order to survive. In fact, the sapiens, coming from a very hot environment, would have appreciated the skills and knowledge of the Neanderthals to learn how to survive in such cold conditions and to defeat diseases that were new to them. In your comment you are saying that Neanderthals mated with Sapiens but then went extinct due to climate change. You can't have both scenarios. They did not become extinct at all. They are still here. Living in all of us in some percentage of our DNA. They were absorbed into us due to living together as families for a very long time. But I do agree that modern humans are indeed making Earth uninhabitable. Which means we are the most stupid of all the species that have ever lived. No species has ever killed the thing that is keeping them alive. Yet, here we are. Dumber than a sack of potatoes.
I recently read a controversial book ‘Them and Us’ I believe that casts a whole new idea that the entire subject may be wrong. Suggesting that they were in fact the dominant nocturnal hunter and we were their main prey. Anyone know if this theory has any merit?
That's insane and without any real proof. In that case, we could find actual human bones with the rest of the hunted animals, and never, let me repeat, never happened in more than 150 years of digging the Neanderthals sites. We found in some cases, that they killed and eated other N individuals, probably fougth for a territory, and we know that they had a high endogame problem and a very low number of population when the actual humans reached Europe. The Maths and genetics shows us that's the most possible scenario was that the mixed of the young and fertil N with the actual humans stop the flux of mixture btw pure N, and bc the mixed children were way more healthy than the pure N children, they were absorbed by Denisovans and specially, the actual humans. We are a mixture of species. The pure Sub-Saharian Africans don't have D or N DNA, but they has others mixes with another species that we can't identify yet (with phisical evidences).
For those who are interested, in the 11 years since this doco came out, we learned of the Denisovans, which were the sister species to Neanderthals and most likely the origin of the Neanderthal DNA in people of Asian descent. We've also learned that there was a previous migraine of modern humans out of Africa sometime between 340,000 and 100,000 years ago which interbred with Neanderthals, completely replacing their Y chromosome with the human Y chromosome which explains why even though modern humans have Neanderthal DNA we did not inherit their mitochondrial DNA nor their Y chromosome. DNA testing has also given us some insights into what Neanderthal social groups may have been like, with females remaining within their natal group and males leaving to join other groups, again explaining why no modern humans have inherited Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA which is only passed on from the mother.
Keep in mind, however, the Population statistics at the time? Our "Intelligence" is really a consequence of population growth, Team Work & Socialization. Cromagnon Man might have been slightly more Intelligent, perhaps using Calendars to engage in Farming, though not much more in fact. Possibly, population growth influenced communication & idea exchange.
Cro Magnon people didn't farm, the agriculture reached Western Europe in the Neolithic age, around 7500 years ago. Cro Magnon culture desapeared with the final of the Ice Age, 10000 years ago.
There is a risk that we could " kill of" each other ,look what happened to the native people of America 80 percent were killed in Central and South America due to smallpox .There had only gone ca 500 years between contact Europeans and their population, but this was in what is today Canada and maybe the Northern USA.
OK, Neanderthals did not create works of art that survived. But perhaps paintings and sculptures were less important to them than, for example, a song that enabled them to memorise 10 generations of their ancestors and all their living relatives. Or their art was the painting of their bodies, or complicated rituals, or something else entirely. By the way, it is striking that the shamanic tradition of h. sapiens differs greatly depending on whether they had contact with the Neanderthals or not. And denissovians changed the shamanic tradition even more. Their weapons seem to me like traditional Japanese teacups, rough and crude at first glance, the beauty only reveals itself at second glance and deep contemplation. And I can't believe that they didn't wear functional clothing; they survived several cold periods, which would have killed them without good clothing.
If modern humans and Neanderthals interbreed on a large scale would that suggest the necessity of communication? So Neanderthals must have had some ability to speak and a higher intelligence.
one question: You said our species arrived 40000 yrs ago in Europe. as you know, Australian aborigines arrived Australia before 55000 yrs ago. Then you are saying aborigines are not modern human?
No, both early European homo sapiens and early Australian homo sapiens came out of Africa, both are the same species. They simply arrived on these continents at different times in history.
We have to stop doing this to ourselves. I mean, 150 years of studying these species and we always reveal the next "new" study as gospel...until the next one emerges as the new gospel. How much stock do we put into the work of a guy who's been smashing rocks together for 6 YEARS to try and mimic primitive tools? I like the discoveries absent of any explanation whatsoever. Like where the Sapiens came from.
Though we are edging into the new linguistic dark age of pronouncing any word any way you want-[after all everyone is correct} the word is neander TAL.
It is likely that at least some DNA attributes we consider "human" came from Neanderthal and/or other near-human species with whom we interbred. But we simply don't know which ones.
Wasn't it discovered that Neanderthals actually did make art? They buried their dead which which was known, but art was supposedly a recent discovery yet here they're saying no art. I don't havee an exact source
Humans came out of Africa and so why do we not show Neanderthal Africans running about and competing? Have we not found skulls that are the equivalent of Neanderthals and also more modern Africans that were not quite modern? Africans became fully modern as did the other human s around the world, so have we found the different stages in Africa? Cynthia Allen-McLaglen
Since the fusion of chromosome 2 and 3 , some 7 million years ago . All subsequent bi-pedal apes with 23 pairs of chromosomes have been able to interbreed. The reason being that the F1 (Offspring) has 23 full pairs. unlike examples like the mule where it is missing one of the chromosomes to make a complete set. Therefore we are all sub-species of the same species . Given that our species in known for travelling and surviving along coastlines and rivers and taking into consideration the time scales and environmental changes , there are probably several more sub-species that we havent found yet. Also the idea of a large swathe of people moving into europe 40k ago , or even 2 waves , seems unlikely. The way we , and apes work is we splinter off and start new groups . So it would initially have been small groups of 3 and 4 lads . Probably over a span of 50,000yrs . Gradually meeting and mixing with all kinds of bipeds. And finally, you speak of Neanderthals as if they are one group, but it is well documented that there were significantly different groups , Eastern and Western being the more well known 2. If they were one group initially the assumption must be that genetic drift caused the distinct differences . Or a maybe it is that they interbred with Denisovans, Errectus and whatever other hominins and hybrids were available to contribute to the gene pools creating the different groups that are clustered under the neanderthal umbrella. Remembering that the primary instincts of all mammals is to eat, crap, sleep and breed. ( and try and stay alive) . Too many scientists look at these groups from the past with a modern mentality perspective. Im not suggesting they were dumb or basic, but that they focused on the 4/5 priorities of life and that they didnt have the benefit of thousands of years worth of civilization
Very interesting and well presented, there are holes in the science that can be filled today 2023, and should be updated, however that does not detract from what ha been discovered. I have 4% neanderthal in my genetics. I am strongly Irish in my makeup but have have lots of others such as 1% Jewish. Vive la differance !
WTFPBS? Cite the original release date of your video PROMINANTLY. Just because you're on youtube doesn't mean you *have to* drop all rules of academic decorum.
Not stating the original date (2013) in the description isn't acceptable imo.
It's ridiculous how outdated this is
@@jillianwarriner8730why? Did I just wast my time?
Yeah this turned it off for me, a lot has been done since 2013 and even the intro sounds incorrect of the actual state of the field
This is so old a neanderthal production team presented it
Lol reading this comment has saved my watching it! I thought I recognised the title!
I look it up and realize this documentary is from 2013. I have seen many docs but wonder what precisely has been learned over the last 11 years.
there is a LOT to cover since then - thanks tho for the research. Gonna skip this one then 🙄
Read Kindred by Rebecca Wragg Sykes
The speed of science, sir.
not a discovery, but since then, svante paabo got a nobel price
he wrote a book on his team's work and it's a very good read
Even more stuff which makes neanderthal like us, such as a cave with instances of funeral art (intentional positioning of stones). Moreover, there is a new kid in town: Denisovans, Check them out!
Wow. Just realised the documentary is 11 years old. So much have changed
Including that Svante Pääbo has got the Nobel Prize, for his genetic decoding of the neanderthal dna
The big change is the discovery of Denisovans, and more and more elements which prove how close we are to our Neanderthal cousins, as well as what we owe them.
@@marcusfridh8489 32:51 27:51
They were around for 400,000 years.
Not so dumb I’d say.
Let’s see how long we are here .
we are 350,000y old. they only beat as by 50,000 not much different from us.
@@A.D.540 Modern humans have been around for about only 150,000 years.
Marjorie Taylor Greene is that old?
I'm living in Meerbusch near Düsseldorf...the Neanderthal is only a few kilometers away. I love this part of nature very much, it's wonderful to be in this part of small canyon...you can sense this place is a very special one.
❤❤❤
& I'm glad to hear that their genoms are helping us to level up 😅
*The Neanderthals are named after the place where their remains were first discovered, i.e. in Neanderthal, Germany.
As a Neanderthal's descendant, I petition for the restoration of our ancestors' fair name.
As a neanderthal decendant myself i am joining you
Worry not, it is well on its way. This programme is the fundation for current research, it will help you understand more uptodate stuff, and you will see how we are rehabilitated. By the way: I have Denisovan and Neanderthal...do check the denisovans out! :)
Are you from Tuscany😅
My mother in law was a pure breed
Yah!!! the nerds won over in evolution!!!
You can't just post a 10 year old documentary in a field that's been rapidly evolving in that time frame and expect this to be of any value. If anything I think this would almost qualify as misinformation.
If you knew anything about the subject, you would know that this documentary is in fact very valuable, as it presents the basis on which all current work is stemming from. If you do not know all of that, you will struggle to understand the latest research. See it like: the science you do in high school is not cutting edge, but, while some elements have been discarded and replaced, as no longer held true, it still provides the basis for further studies. If you want to know more, look up Denisovans. :)
hey, the guy did what you said could not be done. I'm impressed. I was looking for even older documentaries with more made up facts though.
I think it would be fine *if* the date was clearly stated. Much like David Attenborough's _Life on Earth_ is now very outdated in places but still worth watching. The problem here is that the date isn't given so people might run across the documentary, see the 2024 upload date, and think it was current.
The actor playing the neanderthal man is magnus carlsen
It was a fascinating surprise to find my genetics test results listed Neanderthal at 1.4%. As this has proven a common result for so many, they obviously were intigrated not wiped out.
They were partially integrated but mostly wiped out. That's why such small amounts of their genetic heritage remains.
Mine is apparently a bit more than average. I know I'm tempting fate, but me & my siblings seem to have a robust immune system. Are you & yours the same ?
@nutcracker2916 Let's see now: I've made it to age 70 in mostly one piece, having survived the communicable ailments common to my generation. Had Covid-19 twice and have had worse common colds. Once before and even after vaccination. If this is due to my Neanderthal great - X granny or papaw, bless them.
Other theory says that sapiens did bring with them new virus and bacterial diseases, so neanderthals immunology sistem wasn't ready to fight it.
im so glad they were more intelligent than we are, they didn't destroy our earth , we have.
I agree. Also, they endured for about 400 000 years. We have barely reached 200 000, and by the look of it might not make it much longer if we keep on wrecking the conditions that make the earth inhabitable!
Their brain was an average of two lemon sizes bigger than homosapiens according to recent anthropology
Apparently I have an higher than average DNA percentage of Neanderthal . But my cynical side thinks that, had they had the technical "intelligence" no doubt they'd behave no differently than modern day homo sapiens.
This is from 2013 but I'll give it go. Though I suspect some of the information has been updated since this.
Interesting in a big way, I hope there will be a follow up program more recent than this one. Thank you.
th-cam.com/video/juyvnVL6V7g/w-d-xo.htmlsi=MyYoPZpztoW_SUoN
I watched it all and now I find out that it's 11 years old. Looking forward to the new one.
th-cam.com/video/juyvnVL6V7g/w-d-xo.htmlsi=MyYoPZpztoW_SUoN
This 2013 documentary haven't aged as well as the Neanderthals.
This is a very old documentary, Svante Paabo got the Nobel prize for technique for extracting dna, so people should look for one of his newer lectures. A lot have changed since this was filmed.
not true. depending on how one perceives time this doc. was released recently or long ago. so while you might perceive this documentary as very old, others including myself do not. as far as I am concerned this documentary was released today, which is my truth. no offence but you need to check your privilege in these situations because opinions stated as fact is completely dangerous. thanx and have a good day.
-jared caine
@@donut5143 I read it not as an opinion but as an advice to people like you who find this interesting. Look for Svante's newer lectures - there are many on TH-cam - and update your knowledge. I can add that Svante Paabo's lectures also contains a good deal of humour
@@donut5143 Its a Sunday and I must admit I do love a little debate, and since you opened that door, let me pay my respect and give you my view.
While I appreciate the philosophical perspective on time and perception, I believe it's important to clarify a few points:
1. The age of a documentary, like this one which was released in 2013, is measured objectively based on the universally accepted calendar system.( Gregorian for most of us). This is not a matter of perception but a factual statement.
2. For effective communication, we rely on a common understanding of time. Referring to the release date of a documentary is a standard practice and essential for clarity.
3. My statement about the documentary being old is based on its release date, which is a fact, not an opinion. It's crucial to differentiate between subjective opinions and objective facts.
4. While individual perceptions about a documentary's relevance may vary, this does not alter the factual date of its release. Subjective views don't negate objective facts.
5. Equating the stating of factual information with privilege undermines rational discourse. Facts, especially verifiable ones like publication dates, are foundational to constructive conversations.
So thus I think I will conclude that while personal perceptions are subjective, objective facts, such as a documentary's release date, remain constant and are crucial for clear communication.
You are not entirely wrong, but none of the facts in this documentary have been proven wrong, moreover, it is the basis of all the work which is currently done, so you'd struggle to understand the lates research if you did not know that. It also explains really well how we got there. Most recent docs do not have the space to retrace the fubasics of modern ancient DNA genetics+Neanderthal science, and could thus be very hard to follow. :)
Excellent point: this document is still very valuable because it gives us the basics for all current studies. Current studies do not have the space to summarise where they stem from, and are thus extremely difficult to understand unless you watch such a doc first. It is like wanting to be a writer in a foreign language without learning it first! :) @@donut5143
For the sake of accuracy, they should've had a black dude representing homo sapiens. When humans first appeared in Europe out of Africa, they were dark skinned. Also, the neanderthal should've been much fairer with blonde and even red hair, having persisted in ice age Europe for almost 400,000 years.
Agreed. That always shocks me, and it also shocks me when our ancestors are shown as dishevelled and hairy all over. the most ancient human depctions we have show people with neat hairstyles. They had jewellery...They cared. You have to make an effort to seduce a neanderthal or a sapiens!
@@annepoitrineau5650 As inaccurate as it may seem, our deep past shows us that we were indeed hairy all over and dishevelled as we came from Chimps. We then evolved slowly into a more cultured species.
I am very happy to know that modern tech has allowed us to be more accurate about our understanding of how we came to be. And how Neanderthals are a part of every human alive today. I don't like it when scientists call it "inter-breeding". Certainly, over 10 thousand years, we just didn't get together just for breeding. In order for Neanderthals to disappear in the way they did, homo-sapiens had to have actually lived with Neanderthals over many hundreds or even thousands of years. Living with them as a community and as families for generations just as we do today. I find that knowledge very reassuring.
@@Yosetime but these neanderthals and homo sapiens were far removed from chimps and highly cultured. They would've looked after their appearance to be attractive to prospective mates.
Neanderthal ancestry is not present in sub saharan Africans.
Even though they lived alongside for thousands of years, I doubt Neanderthal - homo sapiens relations would have been very friendly as evidenced by how different human groups, though the same species, treat each other today.
@@olddog-fv2ox actually no. European light skin started to appear much later, less than 10,000 years ago, likely after farming began.
Google "Cheddar man Britain". TH-cam doesn't allow sharing links here.
@@olddog-fv2oxactually no. European light skin started to appear much later, less than 10,000 years ago, likely after farming began.
Google "Cheddar man Britain".
graphic depictions of neanderthals has evolved dramatically over the last 150 years
Why must every documentary feel like a true crime thing now with sudden music and mysterious cut offs? We're not simpletons who will lose interest if something dramatic isn't happening every 3 seconds, how about just presenting the information with interesting visualisations.
Shush it's good
I like that saying humans can get use to anything, these neathandrals are testament to that saying.
most current man has niandrathal genes.. I think I spell it wrong but then I looked at your spelling heheh
@@grummbunger my bad, thanks for the heads up👍👌
@@RAPINCITE all good you should have seen what i was typing for it hahhhahha
Maybe Neanderthal hunters gave panther paws as a gift to their loved ones? Then she kept it? Kind of like people used to carry a rabbit's foot for luck.
Yea and maybe penguins give walrus tesicals to their children to play marbles with 🤣🤣
Thanks for posting
Great documentary. Thanks!
A very Good Video 👌🏻👍🏻
After seeing many remains of early Danes here in Danmark, I have been curious about why both the men and women had more prominent brow ridges. Being in Northern Europe, just maybe the Danes have a little more Neanderthal DNA. At any rate I find this research very interesting.
There were ice in scandinavia Then noone lived that far north
Lets not forget. Language isn't bound to verbal communication exclusively!
At the time ‘modern’ humans were no more modern than their Neanderthal contemporaries and we have no idea at all whether they ‘were’ considered ‘primitive’ nor any reason to imagine they were. They were undoubtedly well adapted to prevailing environmental conditions. All humans originated in and dispersed from Africa and populated Eurasia over a relatively short time
i feel like i was just schooled about the science behind the Jean M Auel books.
Interesting that N-man made pitch glue from rolls of birch bark (Eucalyptus, Poplar and others) heated to a fairly specific temperature. Native Americans also made bark fuel oil in the exact same way. And it was VERY close to today's kerosine, just burned dirtier. Then once we had actual containers, the amount of fuel oil that can be extracted from a few barks like birch is surprising. You can replicate the process in your back yard with a clean paint tin with lid, some birch bark and a fire.
Just realised watching this I’m 80 percent Neanderthal 😊
right there with you lucifer bro
Even if old, I still found it fascinating. Gooe to kmow they were not massacred to extinction but interbred with modern humans and contributed useful genes.
How do you know? Perhaps they hunted and raped modern human females and that’s how they left their genetic marks upon us?
There are few still left here and there 😂
Yup - I dated one, hehehe!
Excelente documentário! Obrigado!
What a breathtaking film! 👍🔥
When will people realize that we are ALL THE SAME.. HUMANS
i bet they didn;t know they were different from modern humans.....we only know about this because of science.
Now that Neanderthals are closely linked with Europeans, the narrative has changed saying they were intelligent 😂😂😂 Well Africans, we are proud to be Homo Sapiens 👏
I didnt know neanderthals recorded their bench press statistics
Homo Erectus left Africa ,iam not exactly sure when, but before the Sapiens. We believe that the Neandethal are descendents from them.
If they read the latest comments they may update the correct year it was actually made because a lot has been learnt since then.
Nice photo of my cousin.
I think they are still around they are our leaders
They did not seem to go for dictatorships...
My question is where did neanderthals get the jelly beans?
The "out of Africa" theory has been disproven. The earliest ancestors of Europeans have been found IN EUROPE.
😁. 2%
Why an 'ancient body painting kit' in stead of writing tools? @36:00
Within 5 minutes I've learned how much a Neanderthal could bench-press.. god bless American documentaries.
Where do those dates come from?? Na it's closer to them living 20 thousand years up to 3000 years ago!!!
Long live the scientific method ❤
No, they didn't die before they were 30. You're conflating life expectancy at birth with life expectancy at 20. They lived to around 60-70. If they made it to 30, they'd likely live to 60.
Well, it was said poorly. “Most Neanderthals were dead by around 30” isn’t entirely wrong. Most Neanderthals born had died before they were 30, but a vast amount of those were Neanderthals who died before age 5.
An average expected mortality rate means that 50% of a population died at or before that age, and that 50% lived past that age. If we assume an average age of death at around 25 years old, then most Neanderthals would have died by age 30; however, it would be statistically possible that the majority of Neanderthals who lived past age 5 could have gone on to live into their 40s or 50s. And remember, if a majority lived into their 40s or 50s, that necessarily means that a minority would have lived past their 50s and into their 60s (and perhaps even later).
And they must likely were more physically attractive than we expect them to be
they probably were. Early humans are often representes in films/images as dishevelled, but even the earliest figurrines/statues we have found show them with very neat hairstyles. Which were in fact essential iin order to control parasites. Also, since they cared about shells and jewellery, it is fair to assume they cared about their looks. You do not get to seduce a Sapiens or a Neanderthal unless you look your Sunday's best :)@@reb2322
Yes, one of the problems of Neanderthals (as has been discovered recently) is that they had high infant and mother mortality. Sapiens have higher mother/infant mortality than say, cats, apes or hedgehogs, but they did better than Neanderthals were doing by the time we arrived on the scene. @@DneilB007
Absolutely. We know now that the past reconstructions were biased and derogatory. In fact, if you want to have an idea of what they looked like, google Suella Braverman. She has a neanderthal face (on a very Sapiens body as she is slim and long limbed)@@marcusfridh8489
Indigenous Australians were here 60 thousand yrs ago, oldest living culture in the world. So I dunno bout this timeline.
UgLug taught lots of the technique to his son and his cousin.
This is incredibly interesting....l believe Europeans also inherented their hairyness from our Neth ançestors....Aisians are quite hairless in comparison ....
...Good to know....
Denisovans are awesome
17:08 I reckon they discovered and salvaged that glue from a big bushfire at start, and then they probaly cottoned on, to how they have to make it with fire and then they started evolving right there when they harnessed the heat to make that glue.
They always had fire. Just like modern humans have. It's wasn't harnessed by either but inherited from an earlier common ancestor and what do you mean they started to evolve right there??? They died out other than a little inbreeding so I reckon you reckon wrong
I think they mean that they evolved culturally, by developing the knowledge of these materials and the technology they produced from them.
@@NeilEvans-xq8ik yeah makes sense what your saying. This topic makes me think about all sorts stuff.
@@NeilEvans-xq8ik I wonder what came first tools or heated food, cos they didn't need to know how to cook, they just had to eat, animals that have been cooked from a bush fire.
@@RAPINCITE tools !!! Obviously chimps use tools but don't ping their food. A rock for smashing bones is a tool but the important thing is you need a tool to start a fire and heat your food
Perhaps we should all see the Neanderthalers museum, I already did twice. Darwins theory is confirmed.
10 years old docu
So what? Doesn't mean it's not useful. You watched it didn't you? Don't be rude.
I bet Nthals were *less* savage than us and that is one reason they went extinct. I have thought that for decades.
Neathandrals diets and locations of migration. Have got alot to do with everything. Weather in different areas is what gives colour to our skins. So imagine what else the weather does to us after time. To help us evolve.
My ex said she was getting good at it, maybe you should have interviewed her...
Sapiens at that time were recently arrived from Africa, they had African treats, black skin, African hair. The makers know that, and still sapiens here had straight hair and white skin….. I wonder why😂
Same as they paint jesus White with blueish eyes...
I am less convinced that they were primitive than that we are conceited.
The survived in an ice age world for 300.000 years, while we in modern socaity cant even survive a power outage and functioning running water for a week. So who is really the primitive ones?
Is it possible piggments was used to make tatoo?
Wish they would explain how Neanderthals survived ''at least 300,000 years'' in Europe, with such small populations and individual life expectancy only 25 - 35 years. That just doesn't seem possible
Perhaps they stumbled across a field of wild spinach; the forerunners of Popeye!
just because the life expectancy was maybe those ages doesnt mean they all died at those ages. fertility in homo sapiens neanderthal should start at about around humans.
Average is a very misleading number. Babies and small children died like flies up until about 100 years ago. So you have a huge number dieing before the age of 6 but also many people aged 50 to 60 and you end up with an average of 25 to 30 which represents nobody.
Technically there is more Neanderthal DNA alive now then 40,000 years ago.
Probaly breeding like rabbits in caves.
I’ve worked with many Neanderthals
This is ancient news!
Yeah, based upon some research coming out, their birch chemistry to attach their crude stone spear heads to their spears. It became like a cement. Homo Sapiens only got it right so far to use string. Also their brain weight is equal to ours if not better. They were wiped out by volcanic activity. The remnant slowly interbred with sapiens
Homo sapiens spear heads were prettier but not stronger or sharper and broke on impact easier
Of course we could not have hunted them to extinction. The area settled both by Sapiens and Neanderthals was huge, and the population numbers were small. The fact they bumped into each other was a miracle, and they did it, predictably, in the middle east bottleneck out of Africa, but once they did, of course we mated with them! Also, when I checked the numbers, the idea we had out-competed them was a little arrogant. Neanderthals "disappeared" after existing for about 400 000 years ago. We Sapiens have so far only existed for about 200 000. What with the way we are destroying the conditions that make this planet inhabitable, we might not make it to 400 000 years. In which case, Neanderthal will have out-competed us in terms of endurance. At least, when they departed, the cousins left a planet that was hospitable. It is my contention that Neanderthals succumbed to climate change (as did several cultures in the course of history), and we will too, except that, this time, we created the change of climate.
That is not a reasonable theory. If Neanderthals mastered their environment for nearly 400 thousand years during the harshest of climates such as an Ice Age, then certainly a climate event did not suddenly kill them. We know that sapiens and Neanderthals lived in the same areas for about 10 thousand years. That's a long time. It's ridiculous to think that they never ran across each other. If Sapiens travelled all the way out of Africa, they certainly could cover a great deal of land in little Europe. Of course they came across each other everywhere. And over time, lived with them as families and communities in order to survive. In fact, the sapiens, coming from a very hot environment, would have appreciated the skills and knowledge of the Neanderthals to learn how to survive in such cold conditions and to defeat diseases that were new to them. In your comment you are saying that Neanderthals mated with Sapiens but then went extinct due to climate change. You can't have both scenarios. They did not become extinct at all. They are still here. Living in all of us in some percentage of our DNA. They were absorbed into us due to living together as families for a very long time. But I do agree that modern humans are indeed making Earth uninhabitable. Which means we are the most stupid of all the species that have ever lived. No species has ever killed the thing that is keeping them alive. Yet, here we are. Dumber than a sack of potatoes.
I recently read a controversial book ‘Them and Us’ I believe that casts a whole new idea that the entire subject may be wrong. Suggesting that they were in fact the dominant nocturnal hunter and we were their main prey. Anyone know if this theory has any merit?
That's insane and without any real proof.
In that case, we could find actual human bones with the rest of the hunted animals, and never, let me repeat, never happened in more than 150 years of digging the Neanderthals sites.
We found in some cases, that they killed and eated other N individuals, probably fougth for a territory, and we know that they had a high endogame problem and a very low number of population when the actual humans reached Europe. The Maths and genetics shows us that's the most possible scenario was that the mixed of the young and fertil N with the actual humans stop the flux of mixture btw pure N, and bc the mixed children were way more healthy than the pure N children, they were absorbed by Denisovans and specially, the actual humans. We are a mixture of species. The pure Sub-Saharian Africans don't have D or N DNA, but they has others mixes with another species that we can't identify yet (with phisical evidences).
For those who are interested, in the 11 years since this doco came out, we learned of the Denisovans, which were the sister species to Neanderthals and most likely the origin of the Neanderthal DNA in people of Asian descent. We've also learned that there was a previous migraine of modern humans out of Africa sometime between 340,000 and 100,000 years ago which interbred with Neanderthals, completely replacing their Y chromosome with the human Y chromosome which explains why even though modern humans have Neanderthal DNA we did not inherit their mitochondrial DNA nor their Y chromosome. DNA testing has also given us some insights into what Neanderthal social groups may have been like, with females remaining within their natal group and males leaving to join other groups, again explaining why no modern humans have inherited Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA which is only passed on from the mother.
Keep in mind, however, the Population statistics at the time? Our "Intelligence" is really a consequence of population growth, Team Work & Socialization. Cromagnon Man might have been slightly more Intelligent, perhaps using Calendars to engage in Farming, though not much more in fact. Possibly, population growth influenced communication & idea exchange.
Cro Magnon people didn't farm, the agriculture reached Western Europe in the Neolithic age, around 7500 years ago. Cro Magnon culture desapeared with the final of the Ice Age, 10000 years ago.
Very cool.
If we were to time travel back, would we infect the population with the viruses we carry, or would we get sick from the ancient viruses?
There is a risk that we could " kill of" each other ,look what happened to the native people of America 80 percent were killed in Central and South America due to smallpox .There had only gone ca 500 years between contact Europeans and their population, but this was in what is today Canada and maybe the Northern USA.
OK, Neanderthals did not create works of art that survived. But perhaps paintings and sculptures were less important to them than, for example, a song that enabled them to memorise 10 generations of their ancestors and all their living relatives. Or their art was the painting of their bodies, or complicated rituals, or something else entirely. By the way, it is striking that the shamanic tradition of h. sapiens differs greatly depending on whether they had contact with the Neanderthals or not. And denissovians changed the shamanic tradition even more.
Their weapons seem to me like traditional Japanese teacups, rough and crude at first glance, the beauty only reveals itself at second glance and deep contemplation. And I can't believe that they didn't wear functional clothing; they survived several cold periods, which would have killed them without good clothing.
Ofcrures they could communicate! How else could they survive the animals and the environment! Sometimes I feel likes scientists lag comme sense!
If modern humans and Neanderthals interbreed on a large scale would that suggest the necessity of communication? So Neanderthals must have had some ability to speak and a higher intelligence.
Jones Jennifer Davis Sandra Miller Sarah
East Africa and South India.
This documentary has a 100% same genes with his old Neanderthal brother from 13🤠
one question: You said our species arrived 40000 yrs ago in Europe.
as you know, Australian aborigines arrived Australia before 55000 yrs ago.
Then you are saying aborigines are not modern human?
No, both early European homo sapiens and early Australian homo sapiens came out of Africa, both are the same species. They simply arrived on these continents at different times in history.
We have to stop doing this to ourselves. I mean, 150 years of studying these species and we always reveal the next "new" study as gospel...until the next one emerges as the new gospel. How much stock do we put into the work of a guy who's been smashing rocks together for 6 YEARS to try and mimic primitive tools? I like the discoveries absent of any explanation whatsoever. Like where the Sapiens came from.
Though we are edging into the new linguistic dark age of pronouncing any word any way you want-[after all everyone is correct} the word is neander TAL.
Ok Karen.
Ok Karen.
@@sutherlandshots2954
The difference between us is not very far ...@@sutherlandshots2954
okay karen./@@sutherlandshots2954
The last 200 years has been a decline into dark age of humanity
It is likely that at least some DNA attributes we consider "human" came from Neanderthal and/or other near-human species with whom we interbred. But we simply don't know which ones.
I was here.
Wasn't it discovered that Neanderthals actually did make art? They buried their dead which which was known, but art was supposedly a recent discovery yet here they're saying no art. I don't havee an exact source
neden siliyorsunuz
How would they know that neanderthals could bench press 300 to 500 lbs???? They must have been quiet strong no doubt but that sounds so absurd....
We were using pitch for a similar purpose. And making similar stone tools. This documentary is unscientific.
They’re still in Australia.
Wow! That's a statement and a half! Racist much!
Humans came out of Africa and so why do we not show Neanderthal Africans running about and competing? Have we not found skulls that are the equivalent of Neanderthals and also more modern Africans that were not quite modern? Africans became fully modern as did the other human s around the world, so have we found the different stages in Africa? Cynthia Allen-McLaglen
I have friends looking similar.
Sasquatch also contributed to their demise, saw them as a walking pile of meat
wouldn't the paws come off in snares ?
Kinda wondering if they have ever found Neanderthals with human DNA.
The Neanderthals were more mixed with Denisovans, but yes, in the last ones they has different Y cromosome and ARN than the oldest ones.
Do you condemn Humans
Both my parents are from Tuscany and according to 23and me my Neanderthal DNA is about average as all other people on their database
Fun fact, Tuscany and sardinia also has the dna closest to Oetzi the ice man
Yes, it is the DNA of the first wave of farmers from Anatolia. @@marcusfridh8489
They are NOT extinct...small populations persist to this day in 2024..Caucasus Mountains
Since the fusion of chromosome 2 and 3 , some 7 million years ago . All subsequent bi-pedal apes with 23 pairs of chromosomes have been able to interbreed. The reason being that the F1 (Offspring) has 23 full pairs.
unlike examples like the mule where it is missing one of the chromosomes to make a complete set.
Therefore we are all sub-species of the same species .
Given that our species in known for travelling and surviving along coastlines and rivers and taking into consideration the time scales and environmental changes , there are probably several more sub-species that we havent found yet.
Also the idea of a large swathe of people moving into europe 40k ago , or even 2 waves , seems unlikely.
The way we , and apes work is we splinter off and start new groups . So it would initially have been small groups of 3 and 4 lads . Probably over a span of 50,000yrs . Gradually meeting and mixing with all kinds of bipeds.
And finally, you speak of Neanderthals as if they are one group, but it is well documented that there were significantly different groups , Eastern and Western being the more well known 2. If they were one group initially the assumption must be that genetic drift caused the distinct differences . Or a maybe it is that they interbred with Denisovans, Errectus and whatever other hominins and hybrids were available to contribute to the gene pools creating the different groups that are clustered under the neanderthal umbrella.
Remembering that the primary instincts of all mammals is to eat, crap, sleep and breed. ( and try and stay alive) .
Too many scientists look at these groups from the past with a modern mentality perspective. Im not suggesting they were dumb or basic, but that they focused on the 4/5 priorities of life and that they didnt have the benefit of thousands of years worth of civilization
Very interesting and well presented, there are holes in the science that can be filled today 2023, and should be updated, however that does not detract from what ha been discovered. I have 4% neanderthal in my genetics. I am strongly Irish in my makeup but have have lots of others such as 1% Jewish. Vive la differance !
I'm Native O🙌❣️🌳Loveless Life. Love Demon😍💯
First 5 minutes is total speculation on what was happening ~50 thousand yrs ago.
WTFPBS? Cite the original release date of your video PROMINANTLY. Just because you're on youtube doesn't mean you *have to* drop all rules of academic decorum.
How does a neanderthal-sapiens offspring skull looks like?