this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
1069 points (97.9% liked)

Comic Strips

19593 readers
909 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 6 days ago (2 children)

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

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 103 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Neanderthals are representing anti-science right wing government here

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 116 points 6 days ago (5 children)

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

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 23 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (3 children)

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

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days 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 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days 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 1 points 6 days 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?

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days 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.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Not a feature but a bug. 🤪

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 9 points 6 days 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 6 days 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 6 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] ronl2k@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days 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 4 days 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 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days 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 4 days 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 4 days 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 4 days ago

No doubt about that.

[–] Muaddib@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 days ago

You mean equating

[–] bulwark@lemmy.world 30 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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 6 days 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 26 points 6 days 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 5 points 6 days 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 16 points 6 days 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 6 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] egrets@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days 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 6 days ago

Babies are actually pretty good communicators 🤓

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

[–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days 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 6 days 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 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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 6 days 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 6 days 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 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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)

[–] Email@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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.