Science Chats Forum

I was just reading a post on climate change on another forum on this site. It was stated humans are the smartest species this planet has produced. I am not so sure.

There are anomalies in archaeological finds, some of which of questionable authenticity, that make me wonder at least if maybe Neanderthal and Cromagnon (sp) were not the only high intelligent, land-based cultures to live at the same time.

There was a map, which, if authentic, detailed the coast of Antarctica beneath the ice. It was supposedly made/or used in the 1500s. It was the nineteen sixties before this species managed to map Antarctica under the ice using satellites.

There is a Peruvian temple that's construction, if accurate to astronomy at creation, violates mainstream views on when Humans were in Peru.

And last, I will mention the Egyptians. What if the Sphinx has water damage? It would predate the Egyptians. Then there is the little issue of the Egyptians creating structures with ancient technology that cannot be replicated today.

If nothing else, it makes me wonder.

Interesting. I think if there were more intelligent specie than homosapiens, Neanderthal and Cromagnon, that there would certainly be much more archeological evidence to support it than certain archeological sites being older than previously thought.

There is a decent amount of knowledge of the Neanderthal and Cromagnon man it would seem unreliable to assume another type of hominidae could exist without leaving traces to be discovered. If not a hominid, what type of highly intelligent species could exist? It certainly leads to the realm of extra terreristrial.

I am not convinced by would be worth studying what other historical anomomolies exist that currently don't fit our contemporary world view.

__________________
PUA

There are some possibility about this potential other sentient life form. One, if the culture cremated its dead, it is unlikely we would find anthropological evidence of them. Depending on how long ago they exist, if at all, and what building materials they used, its a little stretch that we would not have found evidence of them. I have a lot of potential ideas, but I am not sure how to word them. I'm wary after being insulted on other forums for my opinions.

yeah i hear you. But how far reaching would this culture be? Maybe in North America before the asiatic peoples crossed over? I think it would have to be geo-centric and evolved separately from other hominids for it to reach advancement and wipe out without a trace.

__________________
PUA

If this race existed, and that's a big if, it would have been advanced enough to interact with a lot of early cultures. A lot of things could account for an advance culture leaving no trace. Though there are pieces here and there that could account for them. I wonder if a valid reason for the tribe in Africa knowing so much about the dog star has every been thought up?

If this advanced culture used biodegradable building supplies, and for everything else, and if they cremated their dead, or if they buried their dead in soil and their bones disintegrated quicker.

Without evidence, we will never know for sure.

I believe this advanced species could also be us. I think at one time we did have advanced knowledge and something cataclysmic may have wiped it out and we had to start anew.

There is that. With the destruction of the Library of Alexandria, there is evidence that a cataclysmic event could have set the human race back. The mysterious map builders could have simply been a lost group. The Egyptians could have been seafarers, as well. I have seen controversial claims that evidence has been found, and has disappeared, to support a far-reaching Egypt. I just wish there was some way to address the issue of contradictory science. I can't be the only one who sees holes, but they aren't addressed.

"Without a trace" is the problem here.

In 10,000 years will there be any recognizable trace of modern civilization? The Roman roads will still be there, however.

As for the other approach, there are three possible reasons that the mitochondrial method of checking for traces of other humans might not work, specifically the Neanderthal.

Given the predilection of many for blue-eyed blondes, they should predominate; but both are recessive genes. Could Neanderthal genes that were different have been recessive?

Could climate change have worked towards changing the genes, even in those who did not mix?

Could Neanderthal women have been considered less attractive even to Neanderthal men? The dominant males in the group get their pick; and they not only out-reproduce the others, but their children have a better chance of survival (access to group resources). Ending the Neanderthal women eliminates the Neanderthal mitochondrial trace. Note: Most Europeans have an indent in the chin bone that is present in Neanderthal skeletons.

Maybe there are traces and we haven't realized what we found. A fish, believed to have been extinct for 65 millions years, I believe, was used to date archaeology sites. Its been determined the fish was not extinct. Maybe that's not the only dating error for sites out there. Maybe we have found them and don't realize it.