My cousin the Neanderthal

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by timojin, Oct 6, 2017.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,192
    What?

    Can you please show where I was suggesting they were marrying, of all things? Because I have not proposed anything about the pairings themselves or how they occurred. You are the only one who has done that. I'd suggest you stop assigning things to people when it was never said to begin with.

    I simply pointed out that your scenario is not supported by the DNA since there is no known evidence Neanderthal mtDNA in humans alive today. Do you understand what that means in accordance to your scenario?

    Secondly, you are applying this with a modern viewpoint. By which I mean that you do not know what was acceptable to "sapiens men" back then or what happened. You have this whole ridiculous 'mah womin' thing going on..

    The only thing we have are bones, archaeological sites and DNA which do not support your scenario.

    Nor do you know who was the dominant species or otherwise. To the one, the breeding events occurred much earlier than thought, which means that the H. sapiens would not have been the dominant species in the region at that time. To the other, there is still that little point that there is no evidence of H. neanderthal mtDNA in humans today.

    Which indicates that the pairings that produced viable and fertile offspring were H. neanderthal male and H. sapiens female, with female offspring, due to the lack of Y chromosome. It could mean that those with H. neanderthal mothers and H. sapiens fathers were either not fertile, were not compatible and did not produce viable offspring, or their line simply died at some point.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,540
    They were dominant overall. They survived with 96-98% of their gene poll passing to the present., neanderthal only 'survive' as 3-4%. Likewise, all evidence shows dominant weaponry, including throwing of spears. Many have theorized that neanderthal only had stabbing spears, not throwing spears. That indicates dominant overall.

    Europeans did not 'invent' race. Modern 'races' (actually, slight concentrations of some geneticall inheritable traits, but not enough to make a distinct 'race' along the lines of 'sapien' vs. 'neanderthal' vs. 'denisovan') existed long before Europeans gave them names. Look at Egyptian murals from 3-5 KYA and you'll see various 'races' based on color. Likewise, the same in meso-america murals from circa 2-3 KYA.

    But yes, tribes, 'races', and races would freely interbreed, creating constant 'experimentation', eventually leading to H. sapiens which then continue to divide into races (neanderthal, denisovan, sapien, etc.).

    Likewise they appear to be highly fertile combinations, with some 2-4% of extant euroasian sapiens carrying neandertyhal DNA. Apparently, the region was swamped with sapiens (huge invasions) but the neanderthals managed to inject their DNA in large amounts into the invading hordes. The claim that only "some combinations" resulted in offspring is unsupported by the evidence.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,540
    When I use the word 'marry', that is equivalent to 'mate'. but we can presume they had some long-term relationship as well, along the lines of modern marriage.

    As i have repeatedly indicated I am well aware that the mtDNA from the neanderthal lineage is not showing in extant humans. This does NOT mean that only male neanderthal mated with female sapien, with no sapien male with neanderthal female. But that is what you keep insisting has to be the case, without even examining the alternative.

    The alternative, that also explains the absence of neanderthal Y chromosome in modern sapiens, is that the sapien male mated with the neanderthal female, and then the female babies were killed (precluding the passage of the mtDNA). This would also explain the absence of the neanderthal Y chromosome in extant sapiens, in that the neanderthal males did not mate with sapien females.

    This is far more plausible than your scenario wherein only the neanderthal males mated with sapien females (and the sapien males had no sex with neanderthal females), and then the male babies aborted in-utero due to some alleged incompatibility due to the neanderthal Y chromosome in the developing fetus causing spontaneous abortions if in sapien mothers, but not in neanderthal mothers.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
    sculptor likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,433
    That doesn't mean sapiens were dominant during the time of crossbreeding.

    The larger, fiercer, dominant predator in most ecosystems is more likely to go extinct than the lesser, dominated ones, in general.
    Yes, they did. Every single human race currently extant was invented by Western culture - Europe and European colonizers - during the colonial era.
    They did not. No such genetic clusters existed, any more than they exist now. The names were not given to genetic clusters, but to differentiated features of appearance with highly variable and multiply differentiated and largely overlapping genetic bases.
    The genetic evidence says Neandertals were dominant, if either were. Speculations regarding the role of weaponry take a back seat to physical evidence.
    (The Roman Legions used stabbing spears to defeat throwing spears, btw. One problem with throwing spears, for example, is that you are giving them to the enemy).
    That most likely doesn't mark fertility, but rather dominance of a subgroup - probably Neandertal males and their children. The narrow range of viable combinations indicates low and fragile fertility.
     
  8. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    I will wait a few years more for more finding , There is an interesting finding in Siberia where young boys
    were found preserved for 34000 years.
     
  9. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,192
    Why would you presume that?

    You keep applying modern standards of behaviour to early H. sapiens. Do you have any evidence of long term relationships?

    All we know is that some interbreeding occurred. You have taken that and run with it, at times, even in direct contradiction to what the DNA has shown.

    No one has said that H. sapiens male and H. neanderthal female pairings did not occur. What the DNA shows is that either any offspring from those breeding incidents did not carry to term or any offspring from those sexual interludes were either infertile or that line died off.

    You do understand this, yes?

    The genes shows that there was a high probability of incompatibility with male offspring being carried by H. sapiens if the father was H. neanderthal.

    That is all it shows. But what the genes do show is that the DNA Europeans and Asians carry from H. neanderthals were from a H. sapiens female and H. neanderthal male pairing, but only if a female offspring was the result. It does not show H. neanderthal mtDNA, which indicates that either there was incompatibility or the offspring from those pairings either did not survive to procreate or its familial line died off, leaving no residual DNA in modern H. sapiens.

    That is literally what the DNA is telling us and all we can go on until we find new evidence to suggest differently.

    You have taken that and come up with a scenario that involves raiding H. neanderthal tribes, stealing females and killing off the males, to keep the females for sex and/or procreation.

    There is no evidence of that.

    We have absolutely no idea of the circumstances surrounding how the two interbred or interacted. We should certainly not be dreaming up scenarios without any scientific support or worse, DNA evidence, because it fits our world view of how human males would behave.

    There is evidence to suggest that H. neanderthal males did mate with human females and that the viable female offspring that went on to have offspring, the lines of which survived to the extent that it is showing up in modern human DNA, occurred. That is what the genes are telling us. And here you are saying there is no way that could have happened because 'man would not allow anything to touch his woman'.. Which is absurd.

    The genes show that there were issues with compatibility with male offspring from male Neanderthals, and the genes humans carry today also tell us that the offspring from the interbreeding events would have come from male Neanderthals and human females. There is no evidence of female Neanderthal mtDNA in our genes today, which indicates that either there were compatibility issues, meaning any offspring from female Neanderthal and human males did not come to fruition or were not fertile, or that line died out and is not represented in the Neanderthal DNA people still carry today.

    That is all we know and that comes directly from the DNA and genes we carry.

    If you have evidence that states otherwise, then please cite it.

    Your scenarios mean absolutely diddly squat. Because there is no genetic evidence of what you are dreaming up. Could it have happened? Sure. But there is no evidence to suggest that it did, and there is certainly no evidence to suggest that human males prevented any pairings between human females and male Neanderthals.. On the contrary, there is absolute genetic evidence in people today, that human females and male Neanderthals did mate at some point and did produce some viable and fertile offspring. Unless you can provide evidence that supports your scenario, I would suggest you stop demanding we take it seriously. This is a science forum. Either back up your claims or stop making them and stop denying the scientific evidence that does exist because it does not fit into your view of how human males behaved when they first migrated out of Africa.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  10. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,540
    You do understand that you keep repeating your misunderstanding, don't you?? I'm getting very bored/tired of having to repeatedly correct your misunderstanding.

    Nothing I have stated as a possibility contradicts the DNA evidence.

    Your conclusion, that you keep repeating as established by the DNA, is that "(w)hat the DNA shows is that either any offspring from those breeding incidents did [sapien male with neanderthal female] not carry to term or any offspring from those sexual interludes were either infertile or that line died off."

    The DNA evidence most decidedly does not show that.

    The absence of mtDNA in modern sapiens shows that any pairings of sapien males with neanderthal females did not result in hybrid females surviving to adulthood (and passing the neanderthal mtDNA to future generations, i.e extant sapiens (us). That's all it shows.

    My conclusion is that indicates those pairings resulted in the death of the female baby, with the male babies surviving. I've also concluded that there were few, if any, neanderthal males mating with sapien females, as the neanderthal Y chromosome is not present (or at least not found as of yet) in modern sapiens.

    Your conclusion, based on that DNA evidence is that there were no matings of sapien males with neanderthal females leading to viable offspring. You also conclude that any ndeanderthal male matings with sapien females resulted in the death of the male baby (either prenatal as you suggest, or post natal) as a basis to explain absence of neanderthal Y chromosome in extant sapiens). You base your conclusion in an assumption of incompatibility of the neanderthal Y-chromosome as the growing hybrid fetus producing some form of aborticent because of the neanderthal Y-chromosome it possesses. There is little evidence of this, other than a mere suggestion of incompatability.

    Both scenarios require the loss/death of one of the genders in their infancy/neonatal state (loss of male baby in your scenario, though not required to be in utero as you suggest; loss of female baby in mine).

    Of those two possibilities, I suggest my suggestion is far more likely/probable, as it is in keeping with known sapien behavior.

    I seriously doubt that any sapien female known to be cuckolding her sapien mate by a neanderthal mating would have had any offspring allowed to be raised to maturity in the sapien tribe, as you suggest. Or, are you suggesting that female sapiens joined the neanderthal tribes without the sapien males trying to bring them back to their tribe, and were thereafter raised/lived in a neanderthal tribe?

    Your scenario greatly conflicts with established modern, and historical, sapien behavior.

    As to Iceaura's suggestion the stabbing spears are just as efficient as throwing spears, the extensive paleontological evidence is to the contrary.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  11. Gawdzilla Sama Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    650
    Compare ranges for stabbing and throwing spears. Atlatal for bonus points.
     
    Walter L. Wagner likes this.
  12. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    Walter L. Wagner likes this.
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,192
    I had mentioned before that there is also a lack of the Y chromosome from male H. neanderthal, which also means that there were either issues of incompatibility, the offspring died before it could pass on its genes, etc..

    I had assumed that was obvious from earlier arguments. I guess I was wrong.

    And once more..

    Because mtDNA is passed down exclusively from mother to offspring, if Neanderthal males were the only ones contributing to the human genome, their contributions would not be present in the mtDNA line. It is also possible that while interbreeding between Neanderthal males and human females could have produced fertile offspring, interbreeding between Neanderthal females and modern human males might not have produced fertile offspring, which would mean that the Neanderthal mtDNA could not be passed down. Finally, it is possible that modern humans do carry at least one mtDNA lineage that Neanderthals contributed to our genome, but that we have not yet sequenced that lineage in either modern humans or in Neanderthals. Any of these explanations could underlie the lack of Neanderthal mtDNA in modern human populations.

    So when you come out with stuff like this:

    You ignore the fact that "mtDNA is passed down exclusively from mother to offspring", while the Y is pass down exclusively from father to male offspring.

    Perhaps you did not know or understand that mtDNA is passed from the mother to both son and daughter.....

    So I guess that little kink in your scenario is not so little anymore, eh Walter?

    Okay.. A quick lesson for you..

    mtDNA is passed on from the mother to her offspring, be they male or female.

    The Y chromosome is passed on by the father to his male offspring only.

    Scientists have also found genes from male neanderthals that could trigger an immune response in human females if pregnant with males.

    Now, what we know from people today and their DNA, there is a complete lack of H. neanderthal mtDNA (remember, this is passed on to both male and female offspring) in humans today. Now, this could be because of a variety of reasons. We also know that male Neanderthals may have had compatibility issues with females, particularly with male offspring. Could this mean that all the female offspring were killed or not carried to term? Unlikely, and I address the killing part further down in this pst..

    We also have found no trace of the Y chromosome from H. neanderthals, which can only be passed down from father to son.

    Combined together, what does it tell you?

    That isn't my conclusion Walter. I am merely restating what the DNA has shown.

    You keep attributing this to me that I have not said. I have explained the possibilities, quoted and linked from studies, as to how it is possible for the mtDNA and the Y chromosome in males could be lacking from Neanderthals. Because of your scenario, you seem hell bent on ignoring everything that has been said and posted if it does not fit into the little box you have tried to cram human history into. And I mean that literally.

    I provide you with countless of links which show the genes that are known to cause an immune response in human females and those links explained how male Neanderthals carried those genes and how and where, and they also explained how it could lead to issues of incompatibility, and you claim there is no evidence of this?

    Just as your frankly absurd scenario of human males raiding tribes of Neanderthals, killing the males, mating with the females, killing off the female babies because 'gosh, those women are going to get jealous of any girl babies' and somehow or other keeping the male offspring (because hey, those males want more competition for the females in their tribes, which is why they raided other tribes and killed off all of those Neanderthal males....)..

    You have failed to support any of your arguments with any evidence, instead, we are going solely on conjecture, most of which actually goes against what the DNA has shown directly.

    Yes, because they are going to raid Neanderthals, who are stronger than they are physically, to steal their females and kill off all the males, then take back their spoils of war, have sex with them, kill off all the female off spring because the other girls in the tribe would just get jealous, while keeping all the male offspring alive in a highly competitive environment, where there probably would be competition with other males...

    Ya, that totally makes sense......

    Why in the hell are you applying your modern standard for female behaviour to ancient tribes of humans who had just evolved and migrated out of Africa?

    I mean, cuckolding? What the hell?

    Humans and Neanderthals had sex. That means both sexes. Perhaps stop foisting your own social mores onto ancient tribes and basically dropping a giant turd on our history because of your own prejudices.

    What? That females had sex?

    That they probably had sex with male Neanderthals? And?
     
  14. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,540
    I keep repeating myself and you keep not understanding.

    When the sapien male has sex with the neanderthal female, the male offspring has neanderthal mtDNA in his genes (passed from mother to son). But when he grows up, then has sex thereafter (with sapien female, passing along his neanderthal genes to the sapien gene pool), he does NOT pass on his maternal mtDNA he inherited from his neanderthal mother. Thus that neanderthal mtDNA is lost in his descendants.

    That's how it works, Bells.

    Males do not pass along the mtDNA to their offspring (generally speaking). The sperm do not possess mitochondria. That's why we have mitochondrial eve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

    So, if the sapien male has sex with a neanderthal female, the mtDNA is passed to both male and female babies. If the female babies survived, we'd have neanderthal mtDNA in the extant sapient gene pool. Since we do not, then the females of such unions did not survive to adulthood.

    The term 'cuckold' is also a common biological term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckold
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  15. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,993
    So over thousands of years of interaction all of the female offspring died and the males lived. That is kind of an unlikely scenario.
     
  16. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,540
    less unlikely than the other scenario; that all of the male babies died in utero if a neanderthal male impregnated a sapien female.

    looking at those two potential scenarios, i believe it is more likely that the sapien males were more numerous, outnumbered the neanderthal tribes, had more advanced weaponry, and the sapien males were pretty exclusively having sex with neanderthal females; not the other way around as suggested by bells.
     
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,433
    I made no such suggestion.
    There is no such research.
    I said this:
    Of course the supposition that Neandertal males were dominant - although supported by physical evidence from brain size and musculature to genetic endowment of current humans - is mere speculation, not serious.
    It requires that a specific and fairly complicated set of "behaviors", documented among only some sapiens at some times, and never completely effective even among them (there are no know sources of tribal crossbreeding in which both the male and female lineage of one tribe vanished),

    be not only universal but also completely effective throughout the entire large (continental) range of hominid interaction in all the hundreds of different tribes and circumstances over thousands of years, starting from every single initial encounter worldwide and continuing until Neandertal extinction worldwide.

    Meanwhile, the data also show what one would expect from an ordinary, common, well documented pattern of hybrid infertility.

    Occam's Razor, remember?
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  18. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,433
    There are no Africans with white skin mentioned in that article. Every single African mentioned in that article would be a "black" person if living in the US.

    Give up. There is no scientific basis for your racial fantasies, and there never will be - they don't make any sense. The racial distinctions you are trying to explain do not exist in the first place.
     
  19. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,540
    You said: "there are no know[n] sources of tribal crossbreeding in which both the male and female lineage of one tribe vanished". Tribal crossbreeding is what takes place if they are very similar (same race, different tribe), and not very separate races (H.s. sapien and H.s. denisovan, for example), as modernly takes place all over the globe. Back then, it would have been racial inter-breeding, with very different races, creating hybrids. The only 'experiment' in the hominin lineage that we have in that regard, that we are presently aware of, is that of sapien/neanderthal hybrid.

    The dominance of the sapien over neanderthal is not evident to you? They swamped the gene pool. They had better weapons. While neanderthal had larger cranial capacity, that is not evidence of dominance in most anthropologists's understandings. They might have been 'brawnier', but apparently sapiens could throw spears better, with suggestions that neanderthals had a difficult time with spear throwing. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread421006/pg1 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/28663444/...thals-lacked-projectile-weapons/#.WeEm2IQrK00
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/dec/05/neanderthals-genome-anthropology

    The fact of the matter is that pure-neanderthal tribes died out, and the sapien tribes (with an admixture of neanderthal DNA) persisted throughout Eurasia. Hence it is generally referred to as the 'extinction' of the neanderthals, even though modern humans can trace our ancestry to them, in part. I call this being H.s. sapiens as the dominant race.
     
  20. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,192
    And that could very well have happened. Just as Neanderthal males could have had sex and fertile children with human females.

    However, that does not mean that human males were keeping Neanderthal females captive and killing off female babies because as you professed earlier, the other women in the tribe would be jealous and just keeping the males alive... Now you change it to the females just didn't survive.

    Because that is essentially what you have proposed in this thread, with absolutely no evidence to support it.

    I provide you with studies that have looked at the DNA of male Neanderthals and they found that there was a chance of incompatibility for male offspring when mixed with human DNA. And you make out as though this is false. This is literally what scientists are saying, that male Neanderthals could have had problems making male babies with human females.

    The Neanderthal Y chromosome genes could have simply drifted out of the human gene pool by chance over the millennia. Another possibility, said Mendez, is that Neanderthal Y chromosomes include genes that are incompatible with other human genes, and he and his colleagues have found evidence supporting this idea. Indeed, one of the Y chromosome genes that differ in Neanderthals has previously been implicated in transplant rejection when males donate organs to women.

    “The functional nature of the mutations we found,” said Bustamante, “suggests to us that Neanderthal Y chromosome sequences may have played a role in barriers to gene flow, but we need to do experiments to demonstrate this and are working to plan these now.”

    Several Neanderthal Y chromosome genes that differ from those in humans function as part of the immune system. Three are "minor histocompatibility antigens," or H-Y genes, which resemble the HLA antigens that transplant surgeons check to make sure that organ donors and organ recipients have similar immune profiles. Because these Neanderthal antigen genes are on the Y chromosome, they are specific to males.

    Theoretically, said Mendez, a woman’s immune system might attack a male fetus carrying Neanderthal H-Y genes. If women consistently miscarried male babies carrying Neanderthal Y chromosomes, that would explain its absence in modern humans. So far this is just a hypothesis, but the immune systems of modern women are known to sometimes react to male offspring when there’s genetic incompatibility.

    Do you have any scientific evidence to counter what these scientists have found? Yes or no?

    Which is exactly what I have said repeatedly, that either the female infants died at some point, either during pregnancy or before producing offspring, or there were issues of infertility, or the line from that female infant died and thus, is not present in the current human population or, the offspring may have been raised by the Neanderthal female in her tribe, which became extinct when Neanderthals became extinct. I have said this repeatedly to explain why Neanderthal mt DNA is not present and you came out with the scenario that the human males raided the Neanderthal tribes, stole the females, killed off the female offspring because the other women in the tribe would be jealous and somehow or other only kept the male offspring....

    You ignored all other possibilities and went with your scenario of what amounted to Neanderthal sex slaves. Just as you poo pooed the very thought that male Neanderthals would have mated with human females because human men would not have allowed it.

    Which brings me to whole cuckold issue..

    Do you have scientific proof to suggest that this was the only way a human female would have mated with a Neanderthal male?

    We have absolutely no idea how these interbreeding events occurred, whether they were consensual or not. Whether humans and Neanderthals were at war or whether some lived peacefully and cohabited. Anything is possible. We simply do not know. What I have repeatedly asked you to not do is dream up scenarios and refuse to accept what we know thus far scientifically, because it does not fit into your scenario.

    But one thing we do know is that human females did mate with male Neanderthals.. Ready for it? Over 220,000 years ago. And how do we know this? Because her mtDNA is present in later Neanderthals.

    Researchers sequenced ancient DNA from the mitochondria—tiny energy factories inside cells—from a Neandertal who lived about 100,000 years ago in southwest Germany. They found that this DNA, which is inherited only from the mother, resembled that of early modern humans.

    After comparing the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) with that of other archaic and modern humans, the researchers reached a startling conclusion: A female member of the lineage that gave rise to Homo sapiens in Africa mated with a Neandertal male more than 220,000 years ago—much earlier than other known encounters between the two groups. Her children spread her genetic legacy through the Neandertal lineage, and in time her African mtDNA completely replaced the ancestral Neandertal mtDNA.

    Other researchers are enthusiastic about the hypothesis, described in Nature Communications this week, but caution that it will take more than one genome to prove. “It’s a nice story that solves a cool mystery—how did Neandertals end up with mtDNA more like that of modern humans,” says population geneticist Ilan Gronau of the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya in Israel. But “they have not nailed it yet.”

    [...]

    But some experts say DNA from other Neandertals is needed to prove that their mtDNA was inherited entirely from an early H. sapiens rather than from an ancient ancestor the two groups shared. “Is there other evidence of another [early] mtDNA introgression event?” asks Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London.

    Not yet, Posth says. Pääbo is seeking evidence of early gene swapping by trying to get nuclear DNA from the HST Neandertal and others. “We will learn a lot about the population history of Neandertals over the next few years,” he says.

    Fascinating article and study.
     
  21. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,433
    And you agree, apparently - at least, you don't know of any.
    But males having preferential sex with their choice of females is. And that's one obvious, simple, interpretation of the genetic evidence.
    Of course there are others - hybrid infertility, say - almost as simple and indicated.
    The genetic evidence says the opposite. It's not a sure thing, but it's the major item of evidence we have.
    They didn't go extinct, and lots more migrated in after the Neandertals went extinct. So of course tens of thousands of years later they managed to swamp the gene pool - the only way to avoid that would have been going extinct themselves.
    They needed them, to make up for their apparent physical and intellectual inferiority.
    And by good fortune or insight, these turned out to be well suited to the hunting and gathering milieu of the new climate and ecosystems in the northern latitudes. So here we are.
     
  22. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,524
    atlatl----250 yards plus-------and then the genius of the detachable foreshaft.
    Once embedded in flesh, a clovis point will continue to cut and do more damage as the prey animal moves. Meanwhile, the dart can be recovered and fitted with a new foreshaft with point attached.

    Were the clovis points too big to work well attached to an arrow sent by a bow?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,433
    A bit more advanced than what's known from Neandertal times.
     

Share This Page