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

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

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

Screenshot 2025-08-25 203032
Mazzenga’s 20-year old muscles: How a still-going-strong 92-year old sprinter wins every race she enters
Screenshot-2026-06-05-at-1.44.09-PM
Viewpoint: Scientists have scrapped the worst-case climate scenario. Is that proof that climate change is a hoax, as Trump claims?
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
Screenshot 2026-05-26 at 10.15
Viewpoint: Double standard—Why does the wellness industry get a free pass while Big Healthcare is treated as morally suspect?
Screenshot-2026-06-08-at-10.19.30-AM
‘Natural’ wellness supplements linked to liver injury
Screenshot-2026-06-03-at-3.33.44-PM
Viewpoint: Vaccine deniers are attacking a life-saving Vitamin K shot for newborns that isn’t even a vaccine
Screen Shot at AM
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Right-wing politics bad for your health? Separating speculation from science
Screenshot-2026-06-05-at-2.12.30-PM
Some plants can poison you. So how did humans figure out what is safe to eat?
px extra strength tylenol and tylenol pm
Why ‘null-findings’ on Tylenol’s safety for pregnant women barely move the needle on countering misinformation
Screenshot-2026-06-08-at-1.35.30-PM
Viewpoint: Social media and fake natural health propaganda fuel surge in use of mostly useless supplements
ChatGPT-Image-May-28-2026-12_56_54-PM
Viewpoint: Vaccines' non-specific effects? The ‘shoddy’ Danish couple whose 'research’ inspires RFK, Jr.’s health delusion
Credit: ACSH
Viewpoint: Who and what’s to blame for the surge in vaccine-preventable diseases?
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-10-2026-12_57_24-PM
Viewpoint: Why gene-editing babies is moral and certain to happen
glp menu logo outlined

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