Computer model answers questions surrounding Neanderthal extinction

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

For a long time, archaeologists have suggested that modern humans wiped out Neanderthals because we had greater technological and cultural development, which allowed us to find and exploit resources more readily than Neanderthals did. It’s a plausible explanation, but it leaves us with pressing questions about the details of how this might have happened.

For a start, we know that Neanderthals had some culture, so exactly how much more would modern humans have needed to have in order to be more competitive? And modern humans entered Neanderthal territory in smaller numbers than the established Neanderthal population—could technology make up for what they lacked in numbers?

These questions highlight a major challenge with this model: there are other plausible explanations for the disappearance of Neanderthals. For example, they could have been wiped out by climate change or an epidemic.

Competition between species is “ultimately a matter of numbers,” the authors write. Where one species thrives, the other is reduced to zero. Modelling this interaction is a matter of boiling it all down to numbers: creating two mock “populations” in a computer model, giving them certain characteristics, and seeing what circumstances lead to one population wiping the other out.

Read full, original post: Computer simulation fills in the blanks of Neanderthal extinction

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Crumbling MAHA Stage Portrait
Cataloging the RFK Jr.-MAHA crushing midterm collapse
Microscopic IVF Egg Injection
With technical barriers to human embryo editing falling, ethical concerns escalate
Blue Checklist in Centered Hand
Viewpoint: From Medicaid cuts to MAHA-backed anti-vaccine and chemical hysteria, voters reject Republicans’ science-skeptical agenda
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Hipster eugenics: better babies for billionaires
Viewpoint: “Positive eugenics”: Reviving a movement reviled and condemned for a century
Picture1
Viewpoint: How badly is the U.S. food-safety net fraying? FDA’s bungled handling of the tainted lettuce crisis deepens concerns over cuts to disease tracking and response
Reaching Through the Woven Sky
Challenging genetic modification rejectionists: Our evolving food system has relied on science for thousands of years
Screenshot 2026-11-04 at 12.02
Ever wonder why AI can so easily be duped into manufacturing health misinformation?    
Smiling-Woman-Over-Teal-Abstract-Shapes
Viewpoint: RFK Jr.’s latest foray into junk science: Even Kennedy’s hand-picked NIH director balks at appointment of crackpot mental health director
Bayer Crop Circle in Golden Wheat
Making fertilizer from thin air: Bayer’s gene-editing innovation could dramatically cut chemical fertilizer use in growing food
Screenshot-2026-10-29-at-11.18.34-AM
Viewpoint: ‘Just the flu’: Skipping your child’s flu shot could be a fatal mistake
Screenshot-2026-11-02-at-11.34.28-AM
Farmers are collateral damage in the PFAS “forever chemicals” crossfire. Here’s what they need to know.
Neon Genome_ Fetal Dreamscape
The race to genetically engineer babies
Screenshot-2026-10-28-at-3.00.44-PM
Viewpoint: Activist attacks on corporations increasingly depend on "attribution" science to target oil companies for global climate change
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.