Comparing Homo Sapiens to Neanderthals is a bit like comparing apples with oranges. Anyone with any knowledge of our evolutionary history knows that Homo spaiens didn't evolve from Neanderthals; they co-existed and shared a common ancestor. Needless to say, there are 6,000,000,000 homo sapiens alive today and 0 neanderthals. You can draw the same comparrison between homo sapiens and a gorilla, or a chimpanzee; both of which we would be out-muscled by.

@ James #80

"However these plates do not move significantly sideways"

We had this argument in the 60's, until a New Zealand Geologist, Harold Wellman, showed that faults can definitely move side-ways.

Have you looked at a geological map of New Zealand recently? Possibly the world's best example of "side-ways" or horizontal movement on a fault lies right here in NZ! Rocks on the western side of the Alpine Fault near Nelson (e.g. the red rocks of Dun Mountain) are identical in every way to those on the eastern side of the Alpine fault in NW Otago (e.g. those in Cascade River). These rocks were once continuous and have since been separated "side-ways" from each other by "side-ways" movement on the Alpine fault.

Faults can also cause parts of the crust to move away from each other. The crust is stretching in some places, like East Africa, where it will eventually separate and form a new ocean. Don't take my word for it check out:

http://geology.com/articles/east-africa-rift.shtml

Or, am I being too complicated for a lesser-educated academic?

I'm not sure where you get your information from, Fraser, but here in Australia no-one minds referring to aboriginals as aboriginals, including themselves.

#70 JCofChch,

Your comment is reasonable,in a sporting context. However I was referring to a particular historical incident. Ancient rowers rowed for survival as they were the "engine" of Greek warships,that's definitely more incentive than a medal or two. The rowers were recruited from the poorer citizens(not slaves) of the city-state,I doubt if even historians know much about their training methods.

@ #29 Evolution is considered fact, the theory of evolution is how evolution works.

Call me a wimp... so what!

@ Tom 68

Thanks I was hoping someone would actually respond!

But its not the issue im targeting, your hypothesis claims that our large brains are an adaptation to survive declining physical abilities. But what would cause this decline? The prevailing hypothesis in this book and thread is that we dont need to be strong or fit anymore, and my earlier post argued that lack of pressure doesnt force a decline, it just fails to produce an improvement, "evolutionary stasis" as Dawkins calls it.

We still have incredible latent genetic potential for physical fitness. An adult can more than double their strength over a few years of strength training, people can train to run ultramarathons in thier senior years. We still have these genes, but we need to train to switch them on - they havent been devolved out. I would agree that if you took the average modern man and placed him in Ancient Rome he would be relatively weak, at least for a while. But if you took a child and did the same thing - I submit they would be just fine.

Re: #80 James

The tectonic plates are shifted horizontally by the convection of molten rock below the crusts mantle (not vertically due to upward forces from inside the earth). Mountain ranges are formed when the tectonic plates collide, i.e. the Himalayas. When the tectonic plates diverge you get mid-ocean ridges which is where the molten rock rises from below the crust and forms new plates as the molten rock cools as it comes into contact with seawater.

The plates do move significantly sideways in the way that some of us lesser educated academics think continents merge and drift!

@ James #80

... are you serious? There is no way vertical plate shift could create mountain ranges like the Himalayas without Volcanic activity. Are you trying to say the plates bend at the edges without fracturing and releasing magma?

We're talking about a timescale of over 200 million years, a few small centimetres a year will go a hell of a long way over that time. To come to such absurd conclusions you must be a creationist working on a timescale of a few thousand years?

The Expanding Earth theory has been disproved (the radius of the Earth has not changed measurably and it would've with the scale of upheaval in the many earthquakes and volcanic that happen each year). So where then does the released mass go? It's physically impossible for it do disappear...

Your academic field can't be Geology. Theology perhaps?

j #73 1:05pm

You are not arguing for survival of the fittest there, just who is the most attractive or sought after as a mate? How many children have Dan Carter and Richie McCaw got? vs how many children have that family in Auckland getting the $1000 plus a week of welfare, you know the one, the one with multiple physical and mental health issues. So where are the maximum genes going forward from?.

Those having the biggest fsamilies, adding most to the gene pool, are those we least need. High in illnesses, mental problems, obesity, diabetes, asthma, the list goes on. Survival of the unfittest.