this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
1128 points (98.1% liked)

Comic Strips

19676 readers
820 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 97 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I...I can't tell if this is commentary about now or not. Is that bad?

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 107 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Neanderthals are representing anti-science right wing government here

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 117 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Comparing the US Nazis to Neanderthals is an insult to Neanderthals.

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Making fun of people's features is not really going to get us anywhere.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Disagree. With Trump, for example, it's one of the proven ways to get under his skin. It's useful to know how to goad people who otherwise have no capacity for empathy, regret, etc..., in my opinion.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Don't shit where you eat. Trump is not reading this post, not even MAGA people.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I'm not. I'm eating where I shit, which is still acceptable under the rules and, as a friendly aside, wildly efficient.

[–] SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Trust me, I love the idea of getting under Trump/MAGA's skin. But if we have to become the shitpeople to beat the shitpeople, do we really win?

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Not a feature but a bug. 🤪

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

It undercuts their dignity. If people think you're a joke, they don't do what you say when you say to do something awful.
We're dealing with fascists. They're a violent, angry pack of buffoons. We shouldn't cater to their feelings.

For reference, see the works Chaplin, and Moe, Larry and Curly.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

especially considering neanderthals were made extinct largely because of things like violence with homo sapiens, disease introduced by homo sapiens, the relationship (or lack thereof) with dogs, and climate change whilst the competitive advantages around social and cognitive development are relatively slight

[–] ronl2k@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Neanderthals went extinct because they couldn't survive the ice age of 40,000 years ago. Unlike homo-sapiens, they never learned to sew, so they couldn't make tighter-fitting fur clothing to keep warm. They mostly wore loose-fitting animal hides.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ice wasn't everywhere. The sewing can't be the only reason but interesting nevertheless.

[–] ronl2k@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ice wasn’t everywhere.

The last ice age of 40,000 years ago covered everywhere Neanderthals lived, and no Neanderthals survived it. The last Neanderthals went extinct from exposure in a cave in Spain, which was affected by the last ice age.

No sewing equipment has ever been found with Neanderthals. They died of exposure in spite of being more cold-hardy than homo-sapiens, who by the last ice age had mastered sewing tighter-fitting clothing with leather and fur. That's why we survived the last ice age, and the Neanderthals did not.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There are sites outside of Europe which means that it was not only sewing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal Demographics

[–] ronl2k@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

From your article:

Pre- and early Neanderthals seem to have continuously occupied only France, Spain, and Italy, although some appear to have moved out of this "core-area" to form temporary settlements eastward (without leaving Europe). Nonetheless, southwestern France has the highest density of sites for pre- and classic Neanderthals.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

continuously

They were expelled elsewhere. If they were not they would have survived.

It is also possible that they didn't need sewing but are extinct because sewing allowed us to finally also settle Europe.

[–] ronl2k@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The archaeological consensus remains that Neanderthals went extinct because they could not survive the last ice age.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

No doubt about that.

[–] Muaddib@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

You mean equating

[–] bulwark@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

I first read it as neanderthals are less aggressive so they must focus now on weapons. I'm pretty sure the intention is that the guys working on the wheel have to stop because the current leadership are neanderthals.

I think neanderthals were less war-like than humans because humans eradicated all of them, but I'm probably reading too much into it.

[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 34 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I think neanderthals were less war-like than humans because humans eradicated all

Akchually, Neanderthals were humans and we don't know why they disappeared. The idea that homo sapiens eradicated them all is probably a wrong one; their decline begun before the arriving of homo sapiens.

[–] purplemonkeymad@programming.dev 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The most recent suggestion I saw is that there were just more sapiens when they started interacting. Interbreeding must have happened, but with new groups of sapiens continuously arriving from the middle east, the neanderthal DNA just got more and more dilute. Eventually "pure" neanderthals no longer existed.

[–] GreenMartian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

with new groups of sapiens continuously arriving from the middle east, the neanderthal DNA just got more and more dilute

I can't tell if you're being serious, or making fun of the great replacement ~~theory~~ conspiracy...

[–] Mirror Giraffe@piefed.social 17 points 1 week ago

It is considered true but the"replacement" took place over thousands of years and the neanderthal population was very small in comparison to the ones they were bedding.

[–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Akchsually if you look at the genetic markers in modern populations its pretty clear what happened. 🍆💦 👶

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They ate egg plant, at which point there were heavy rains which did them in?

[–] egrets@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The combination of eggplant and deluge turned them all into babies. Unable to hunt or communicate, they were wiped out.

[–] lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Babies are actually pretty good communicators 🤓

[–] 13igTyme@piefed.social 1 points 5 days ago

Look who's talking was a great documentary on this very subject.

As I recall one theory is that Neanderthals was absorbed into homo sapiens.

[–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Europeans and Asians also have roughly 2% Neanderthal DNA on average, so it's likely we absorbed a significant chunk of their population into our own.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Pretty sure those 2% refer to the subsection of the genome that is unique to homo sapiens. We have >98% shared DNA among all great apes (including humans)

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

We also might simply have outbred them. Remember that modern humans have what appears to be detectable Neanderthal DNA so interbreeding has apparently occurred; we might simply have diluted them into perceived extinction. Besides, there doesn't seem evidence for large-scale war.

Of course that's all speculation.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

Neanderthals were also comparatively expensive, which is great when food is plentiful, but gave us the edge when food was scarce

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Huh I never thought about Neanderthals that way, but it makes sense. Crazy that now we refer to them as "less civilized" or more "savage", considering what war is.

[–] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

To add to that, evidence suggests that, not only were their brains larger than ours, but they likely had a higher capacity to learn than we do. Not to mention them being bigger and stronger than us too. We most certainly were the savages. It seems some things never change.

https://www.fortinberrymurray.com/todays-research/were-the-neanderthals-smarter-than-we-are

[–] Email@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's also known, from an invasive frog (cane toad) in Australia, that adaptation can occur due to rate of travel. I'm not sure that's relevant here, it's just another example of how we've found quirks of evolution.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

actually it’s a bit the opposite: neanderthals were slightly less cognitively developed, likely in tool use, creativity, and also social structures

(Species specific disadvantages on the wikipedia page)