I saw this article and thought it might be of interest to some people here.  I’m not sure there’s much tp debate about this article unless you want to try and convince someone that this is part of a divine plan to mask the true age of the Earth in order to test one’s faith. 

Using genetic variation is an innovative way to infer a timeline.  I know it’s been done to set a date for the domestication of dogs.  It’s also been used to learn more about Neanderthals.  It is interesting that humans were living in small groups in Africa much like neanderthals in Europe.  One of the theories for the extinction of neanderthals is that they couldn’t compete with the more advanced culture, technology, and greater numbers of homo sapiens. 

I wonder if the homo sapien culture was the result of a genetic development or an adaption made due to growing numbers.  For example, I think there is a gene that scientists suspect made it possible for humans to communicate verbally.  Obviously we primates have a communal gene and the neanderthals’ small groups are consistent with other mammalian and primate social structures.  I wonder if there was further mutation of the communal gene and how significant that was to the rise of homo sapien or if a sharp population rise resulted in the development of large communities.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080425101050.cni2ks3u&show_article=1

JRM5001 - 25 April 2008 10:40 AM

For example, I think there is a gene that scientists suspect made it possible for humans to communicate verbally.

There must had been something that gave us the advantage to compete against the Neanderthals, but I don’t think it was our ability to communicate verbally. See the following:

The idea that Neanderthals lacked complex language was widespread,[citation needed] despite concerns about the accuracy of reconstructions of the Neanderthal vocal tract, until 1983, when a Neanderthal hyoid bone was found at the Kebara Cave in Israel. The hyoid is a small bone which connects the musculature of the tongue and the larynx, and by bracing these structures against each other, allows a wider range of tongue and laryngeal movements than would otherwise be possible. The presence of this bone implies that speech was anatomically possible. The bone which was found is virtually identical to that of modern humans.

Neurological evidence for potential speech in neanderthalensis exists in the form of the hypoglossal canal. The canal of neanderthalensis is the same size or larger than in modern humans, which are significantly larger than the canal of australopithecines and modern chimpanzees. The canal carries the hypoglossal nerve, which controls the muscles of the tongue. This indicates that neanderthalensis had vocal capabilities similar to modern humans.

Both quotes are from Wikipedia.

Hmm, I should have read the whole thing. This is what it says at the end:

Steven Mithen (2006) proposes that the Neanderthals had an elaborate proto-linguistic system of communication which was more musical than modern human language, and which predated the separation of language and music into two separate modes of cognition.

Sorry.

FYI there’s been some interesting but quite speculative work on how neandertals might have sounded. To hear one proposed neandertal vocalization, see the article and links HERE.

Fascinating.  Neanderthals sound like they’ve been sucking on helium… “Alvin, Simon… Theodore.”

Cool! How do you find this stuff, Doug?

George - 25 April 2008 03:45 PM

Cool! How do you find this stuff, Doug?

Oddly, I can’t remember. I’m sure it was through some science site or podcast or something.

That is very interesting.  It seems like they would have formed some sort of communication with each other. I don’t see why they couldn’t have. Even animals have means of communicating.

Neanderthal studies is a constantly changing field with new information coming out all the time.  In five years, someone will find a new fossil and they will be saying neanderthals spoke in a deep baritone. 

Neanderthals’ biggest problem was probably the influx of a new, more advanced hunter who outnumbered them and killed them off to eliminate competition. 
The biggest source of conflict in human history, that starts wars large and small, is migration--usually a search for limited resurces. 

Of course, a change in climate could have wiped out neanderthals as well.  At one time, anthropologists theorized that woolly mammoths were driven to extinction by over-hunting, but now believe the thawing of the last ice age was the real culprit.  maybe neanderthals, specially modified for cold weather, suffered a similar fate.

I don’t think verbal communication could be isolated to a single gene. You might be able to rank one as most important, but I think it would be outweighed in importance by the collective weight of other contributive genes. I think it is a gradual buildup of responses to sounds, and conscious manipulations of these sounds, and this may actually be meme-based and a response to symbols like sign language.

I spoke inaccurately for the sake of brevity, I’m not a geneticist but my understanding is that very few traits can be ascribed to a single gene, most traits arise from some sort of combination. 

Neanderthals and humans did share a gene associated with language not present in lower primates called FOXP2.  However the scientists who found the DNA stated that there were other as yet undiscovered genes that also play a role in lingual communication:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=cave-speak-did-neandertal

The recent reconstruction of the neanderthal voice box was apparently based on computer generated estimates of skull and neck anatomy.  There was some question about the accuracy of the reconstruction given some anatomical issues:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_page_id=1965&in_article_id=560130

This article is a bit dated but it demonstrates some of the difficulties in determining whether neanderthals had the ability to speak.  Based on the article we may not be able to tell from the fossil record because for example it is unlikely that the hyoid bone will ever be discovered in its anatomically correct position:

http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/1995/6/firstwords.cfm

JRM5001 - 25 April 2008 10:40 AM

I wonder if the homo sapien culture was the result of a genetic development or an adaption made due to growing numbers. 

These references to a 2006 Proceedings of a National Academy of Science article discuss a gene favoring larger brain size seems to have appeared ‘spontaneously’ and it is suggested that it came from Neandethals..

erasmusinfinity says this link doesn’t work for him
[ Are our brains a gift of the Neanderthals?]

[Neanderthals in our Midst]

here is another intro :  Googling ...  neanderthal genome brain haplogroup
[ John Hawks Weblog: Introgression and microcephalin FAQ]

Jackson,

The first link didn’t work for me.  It downloaded some sort of file that wouldn’t work on my system.

The second article is quite interesting.  It does not seem an unreasonable consideration to me.

The link worked for me Jackson.  Thanks for posting those articles, they were informative. 

I would be curious to know the number of neanderthal genetic samples that are the basis for these conclusions.  I also wonder about the timing.  one would expect a 400,000 year old sample to be different from one only 50,000 years ago.  It’s amazing they can find any.  I saw this article a few years ago and it’s a pretty good overview.  of course it came out before the articles you mentioned.  However, if it is correct that the neanderthals died out before homo sapiens arrived, I guess it was the aliens who inserted the gene, maybe a tall, shiny black rectangle.  Hello Dave. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/science/15nean.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

This field is fast moving and difficult to keep up with for a layperson like me.  I am cautious about putting anything up for fear it has become obsolete.  However in the interest of better understanding for all, I offer this article which seems to argue against homo sapien/neanderthal interbreeding.  In partial answer to the question I raised above, it appears there are very few samples.  The article references some issues raised before herein:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.07/caveman.html

This is unrelated to neanderthals but it relates to brains.  The human brain generates a lot of heat and one of the advantages of walking upright is that the posture assists in the draining of blood, necessary to keep the brain fom overheating.  There is a debate though about whether man started walking upright before his brain increased or whether the brain grew first and then man began walking upright.  I would think it was the former, but if the experts can’t agree . . .

JRM5001 - 09 May 2008 12:49 PM

The link worked for me Jackson.  Thanks for posting those articles, they were informative. 
This is unrelated to neanderthals but it relates to brains.  The human brain generates a lot of heat and one of the advantages of walking upright is that the posture assists in the draining of blood, necessary to keep the brain fom overheating.  There is a debate though about whether man started walking upright before his brain increased or whether the brain grew first and then man began walking upright.  I would think it was the former, but if the experts can’t agree . . .

I guess the changes could also happen in parallel.

It is easy to imagine back then those with growing brains who were developing the ability to walk upright across savannas dying of heat stroke less frequently. Always fun to speculate!