> As Tattersall and Schwartz note in a commentary in the same issue of
> PNAS (p 7117 - 7119) , many of the features that Duarte et al
> advocate as indicating hybridism are in fact highly variable in
> H. sapiens and in H. neanderthalensis - "there is nothing about the
> craniodental elements thus far know and described that would be
> unusual for a Homo sapiens at this young developmental age." As they
> note, this is a "brave and imaginative interpretation of which it is
> unlikely that a majority of paleoanthropologists will consider
> proven."
This is really not my field, but I have *heard* that there were
Neanderthal-like features on some humanoid remains in Australia. I
think this was strongly challenged and that the Neandertal appear to
have only occupied western Europe and some parts of Asia, but anyway,
I throw it out there for little it's worth mainly because how (or if)
that has been completely sorted out. Also, I recall Glenn Morton
posted a reference from the Journal of Human Evolution on "Mungo Man"
(Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net) Sat, 22 May 1999 11:57:16 -
0500). I have not had a chance to check the original reference, so I
only cite the source at this point.
> Sample sizes of one can tell us very little, particularly if the
> authors want to extrapolate the results to indicate that
> hybridization had been ongoing for serveral millennia (which they
> are forced to do, as they were not able to argue that the specimen
> was a 50:50 [F1] hybrid). Until further putative hybrids are found,
> it is best not to beleive that hybridization is proven in any way.
By the same token, the mtDNA measurements (in "Neanderthal DNA
Sequences and the Origin of Modern Humans", Cell 90:19-30 (1997)) only
involve one sample, and as the authors themselves point out,
(paraphrasing) "it would be nice to know the genome diversity". The
article is a very careful study, and, as far as I can tell, they made
every effort to examine the data from every angle. Nevertheless we
really need more data. In addition, as Glenn Morton posted earlier
(see post: Mitochondrial Eve Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Thu, 13 May 1999 08:29:57 -0500), the issue of mtDNA needs to be
considered with *some* caution.
The weakness in the hybrid evidence appear to be in finding some
irrefutably distinctive features that could only be attributed to
H. neanderthalensis within the H.s.s population.
On the other hand, short of invoking some sort of "divine
intervention" such as a pathogenic disease, it defies human nature to
assume that the Neandethal simply disappeared without a fight. Yes,
technology and all the rest of the evolution reasons, but when that
comes down to response, we would probably do well to consider how the
American Indians responded to the white man's technology. I am
skeptical that they (the H. neanderthalensis) just "went away". There
is no evidence of mass genocide, so the question remains "what
happened?".
I would still wager that Samual heard more than "bleating sheep" when
he challenged Saul about his role as king of Isreal.
Wayne