Thanks for the link, I found it very informative, from a bias evolution perspective. But all the same, I learnt a bit. I learnt that science can never really be right, since it made a point at the start of saying how Boule was wrong and since scientific advances we've got a new perspective. How do you know this won't again be the case in 50 years? Anyway, I find it hard to believe they have artist conceptions of it with skin. How do they know, there looking at bones. So saying it is so similar to humans by adjusting the pictures to look like humans does little for know one. I wasn't trying to take you out of context, it's just I found it strange you actually suggested that as "gene flow" is fluff. mark24, why can you not look at the evidence as it really is, just because some Europeans have a heavier bone structure means they have a heavier bone structure. Simple. Why can you not look at the evidence for what it is. I find the creationist stand point for why there are so many races is very credible, logical and feasible. All races of humans are pretty much biologically the same. So, observing the evidence you can draw a conclusion evolution didn't work for the evolving of the humans. Why you ask? Well, lets take a look on all the different languages around, atleast 200, even more. Now, animals make there noises pretty much from instinct. However, humans are different, each grouping into there own languages, why is this so? Well, from an evolutionary perspective, every single group of languages would have had to evolved seperately. So, for them to be biologically the same is either, a chance coincedence since they would have had to evolve in all the different environments from around the world yet ended up pretty much the same. That is not possible. So, they all must of come from a homo sapien that had evolved to what we are today, then branched out from there. However, there is the language problem, it doesn't work. A language isn't something that you can just come up with, with no prior knowledge. Through history there are cases of children being locked away and never hearing any language. Even when they are adults they do not speak any real descriptive language. However, they have the brain capacity to do so. Now lets look at the creationist stand point. God made the two original human with one language. Through tests, we can see that close interbreding of such can quickly result into many different races, so that explains that. Now we have the languages, well it explains that to. Try knocking that argument. You can't, simply because that is how it probably happened. I never panick at anything any evolutionist have to say, if I did then I would have to re-think my faith. So don't come to such bias conclusions, perhaps you should use a bit of Jesus philosophy when making such rash judgement.
All I see of the Neanderthals is that they were very smart creatures. Without first hand seeing what the evidence points to, then I'll have to take there bias evolutionary views for stuff that is a lot of guess work when fitting it into what evolved into what. But all the same, I do not see how this disaproves creation, I'm sure there are 1000's of creatures that are no longer around, both smart and well, not so smart. God is an incredible designer and the Neanderthals are just more testimony to his incredible creations.
[This message has been edited by RetroCrono, 12-26-2001]