Associate Professor Stephen Wroe, a zoologist and paleontologist from the University of New England, and a team of international scientists worked together using 3D x-ray technology to provide evidence against the idea that early humans lacked the ability to speak. By analyzing the mechanics of a 60,000 year-old Neanderthal hyoid bone from Israel, Wroe and the other scientists built intricate computer models of the bone and compared the models to modern humans. Because the two were indistinguishable, they concluded that there is strong evidence to say that the vocal tracts were used the same way, rendering speech possible for Neanderthals.
link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140302185241.htm
NOS Themes:
Science is collaborative - Wroe worked with a team of scientists from around the world
Science is tentative - this new discovery challenged a widely accepted idea about speech.
Science is based on evidence - scientists made intricate models of the bone
This article was very intriguing. I would have originally thought Neanderthals were a very primitive being and that they could only perform basic human functions. It was very cool and creative to have compared the computer models of the hyoid bone to the current human bone and even more surprising to me that the two were indistinguishable. This leads me to wonder that because there is evidence that humans were evolved from Neanderthals, would this same method be helpful in finding links with other animals? Not saying that they could speak, but it would be cool if it could find evolutionary links between prehistoric beasts and current day animals.
ReplyDeleteA note on your comment, modern humans, Homo Sapiens, and the neanderthals, Homo Neanderthalensis, had once coexisted and interbred to the point where every human today has some form of neanderthal DNA, and some scientists are currently working on sequencing the neanderthal genome, and they obtain much of their data from human subjects.
DeleteNow, a question I have now is if there were to be an evolutionary divide in the human species, or neanderthals were to be introduced into society today, how might society function differently with two different sentient species? Would interbreeding between the two be acceptable, or frowned upon by the general populace? Would neanderthals possess the mental faculties to function in our increasingly knowledge and information based society? And lastly how would we need to redefine "basic human rights" to account for a nonhuman, yet still sentient species?
Sam to comment on your comment, I think there's a reason they died out and it would become evident even in modern society. They were likely less mentally developed then us and for that reason I would predict that they would be seen more as animal than human. It would not surprise me if we saw them as servants. So beneath us that they don't even deserve even rights. Now this being said the black community, and women, and many other minorities have over come the same segregation, so maybe the neanderthals would too. I would leave it at another question. Given that they died out once, would the neanderthals even be able to survive in our society? Would they simply go extinct again?
DeleteI hadn't considered that yet, Sam. I think that if they were introduced to modern society right now they would probably face severe discrimination simply because we wouldn't understand their mental capacity. However, if they had been present in society for longer I think we would have found ways to coexist and even work together. That being said, I could just be being an idealist. After all, we humans don't really have a history of getting along well with people who are different. I hate to say it, but there is a pretty good chance that we, the Homo Sapiens, would have enslaved them and treated them as an inferior race.
Delete