Hamas murdered 200 Israeli citizens in their homes. Over a thousand people wounded as a result of Hamas' attack

Apparently... Hamas never studied history. It's not nice to piss off Israel (7-day War, Yom Kippur, etc). 🤷🏼

Never studied history . . . and so HAMAS and our leftists definitely do share a trait in common.

All I know is to look at the Bethlehem section when Israel is in control. . .and when Palestine is in control.

Control of what? Even Christian Palestinians in East Jerusalem will tell you of lights out at night and water cutoffs as well as constant harrassment by the police asking for ID and whatnot for no reason. It's basically an open air prison but with nicer architecture.

Well, they can dump Ukraine now and send all our money to Israel.

Biden gets too much money funneled into his bank account from sending money to Ukraine.

The Cloward-Piven strategy never went away. He'll just spend us into oblivion. That is why he was installed as president.

The libs who support Biden in a nutshell:

https://youtu.be/m6zX7iQnuys?si=KZp-n-Xv_gUGTfZO

But it's OK for the Israelis to do the same to the Palestinians

I do not get this fantasy world that the left lives in. I really don't. Could you point me to a news story showing how Israel has been bombing and killing hundreds in Palestinian areas in Israel??? No? Then stop making stuff up.

This are the same people who claim to "support science" yet they believe that men can breastfeed. What did you expected???

When did they attack and murder and wound thousands of civilians in their homes?

Idk, for decades?

After all the bullshit we've seen leftists spread over the years, you're now going to try the same? Lol

Supporting people who specifically target women and children is simply wrong. There is no justification you can make for it. Only scumbags support that.

I don't know like all the time take it from a man whose father grew up in Palestine from 1972 to 1981

Good generality. Maybe if you didn’t use women and children as a shield collateral damage wouldn’t happen. Palestinians have proven they are not seeking peace. If that was so Gaza would have produced schools and roads instead of rockets and terrorists.

Netanyahu is responsible for this mess Israel is in right now. All because he wanted to avoid jailtime.
81vz3d.jpg (click to show)

When 9/11 happened in the US, where you one of the people who said that the US deserved this attack?

Jangler. Unless you also are GoldenSaurus, then pay attention to the conversation.

Sorry, I was linear at the moment...

No worries. It happens to me all of the time.

Hamas and Iran are responsible. Deliberate Murderers of innocents and they deserve to have justice served upon them.

Because the last several times we "made the rest of the Muslim world shake in their boots" didn't stop Islamic fundamentalism, but this time it surely will.

Here's a crazy idea, what if Israel let the Palestinians have their land back.

I know I've given you some deserved shit, but it seems you want to undermine every country. LMAO at least you're consistent! Props to you, honestly. I wish you'd just buy some land and set them up. Then I'd tell the Palestinians to deal with it and stop bitching. Bust open that moldy wallet.

Respect where it's deserved.

Hamas are not Palestinians. The land belongs to the Jews. It never belonged to the Palestinians. Egypt controlled the land before 1947 and Egypt didn't really care about the area.

You know who else doesn't want the Palestinians? Every other Middle least arm nation. They are a people without a home and Israel has bent over backwards to accommodate them.

Seeing how you named yourself after Dennis Prager then maybe you heard him say, if Israel laid down there arms, they would cease to exist. If the Palestinians laid down their arms there would be peace.

I suppose you want all of the Jews exterminated also.

Search "History of Palestine" and read up; you might be surprised.

I have.

I did, however, make one mistake. Hamas is a terrorist organization that is made up of mostly Palestinians. This doesn't mean all Palestinians are terrorists. I'm sure a large percentage fully supports Hamas. Maybe even some of the ones that Hamas used/is using as human shields.

Just like all the terrorist groups all over the world (change the name, the name stays the same), people are joining to kill. They don't care about the why, they don't care about the who. As long as they get paid, and as long as the Biden/Obama is paying.........

Two mistakes: the second one being that the land never truly belonged to Israel; it was originally stolen via force of arms when the Israelite subculture moved into the allegedly "promised land" (history being written by the victors) of Palestine from Egypt and wrested it from the Canaanites. Of course, there were quite a few changing of hands afterward until, post-WWII, it was objectively stolen once again by the Allied Powers and divided between Palestinian land holders and the newly minted nation of Israel. Which, as per the above map, clearly wasn't sufficient for Israeli leadership's liking and was essentially demonstrated by the 6-day War's seizure of the Golan Heights. Since that time, Israel has been steadily stealing more and more land via a mix of annexation coupled with forcible eviction by bulldozer and generally turning a blind eye to, denial of extrajudicial killings of Palestinians by the IDF, Israeli police, murders committed by Israelis, stonewalling efforts by outsider investigators.

So when Moses lead Israel out of Egypt were they just wandering around until the found a place they liked OR where they going back to their homeland where they came from? And when they got there the Canaanites had moved into the land.

Today's Palestinians are NOT Canaanites. The Canaanite people don't exist any more. They were a people who fell apart and assimilated into other cultures long before Mohammad was born and long before the Palestinians moved into Israel.

The same is true of the Philistines. The Philistines are not Palestinians.

The land was not stolen by the Allied Powers. Israel had always maintained a presence in the land. The Allied Powers just told the Palestinians to move over because the Jews were coming home. Palestinians were only in Israel because Jordan didn't want them, nor did anyone else in the Middle-East.

The above map was created by a pro-Muslim, pro-Nazi group.

If you had a group of people living in your land who believe that their god commanded them to kill you would you want them in your country?

After all of the talking and posturing and all of the other crap going on what this all hinges on is Muslims are commanded by Allah to exterminate every Jew on the planet. That is at the base of everything that is happening. It doesn't matter if it is Sunni or Shia Muslim they all are commanded to exterminate Jews.

The fact that the Jews, knowing this, haven't just slaughtered every Palestinian long ago shows that Israel wants peace. They want to get along with everyone.

There's a lot to discuss in that comment which, for the purpose of address, will require breaking it up into individual chunks.

For now, lets start with the map issue: first, check out the original post-WWII map of land division between Palestine and Isreal then go to wikipedia's entry on the Palestinian National Authority, scroll down to see the CIA's 2008 map of the West Bank detailing Isreali encroachment -or- there's wiki's specific entry on the West Bank and its accompanying "West Bank Access Restrictions June 2020" .pdf map (a bit less busy, easier to read).

No. Let's start at the beginning. Mohammed was told by Allah to eradicate all Jews.

Ever since then Muslims have posed a serious threat to the Jewish people. That is the foundation upon which everything that has happened in Israel since long before the UN settlement of the Jews in their homeland.

This has been going on since the foundation of Islam. End of story.

I don't care about the maps. If I was in charge of Israel there would be no Palestinians in Israel. I would have deported every last one of them to some other Muslim country where they live happy and continue under Sharia law. I would care that no other Muslim nation wanted them. They would cease being a problem in Israel.

Why the Jews kept them around is a mystery. As long as Palestinians live in Israel there will be violence. In Islam it is not a sin to murder, rape, torture or steal from unbelievers. That type of ideology in a religious form is every bit as evil as the religion of Marxism. Mankind would be sooooo much better off without both Islam and Marxism.

Thats the thing with libs. Even if you present them evidence that supports your claim they will deny it and ask for more because they know they cannot provide any themselves. As observed here.

"I don't care about the maps."

I see... so it matters when the maps are allegedly the work of "a pro-Muslim, pro-Nazi group" and you don't care about the maps when they're the product of a government which stands with Israel -maps which stand as supporting evidence for the point against which you're arguing. Or in other words, the upshot of your comment, having been presented with fact-checkable evidence supporting the point against which you're arguing, is "I refuse to look at the evidence; the situation is what I say it is. QED."

Very well, I'll play the game by your rules: in which verse of the Quran is Muhammud commanded to eradicate all Jews?

Let's start at the beginning. Mohammed was told by Allah to eradicate all Jews.

You're still not showing your proof that Muhammud was commanded to eradicate all Jews. As that is the foundation, the beginning of your entire argument, until you do so, there's nothing more to discuss. Prove it.

First you deny my evidence and now you deny his. Libs sure love to accuse their opponents of having no evidence but they cant provide any themselves.

I didn't deny your evidence, I challenged you to prove your claim. And now that you've displayed a failure to comprehend the the obvious differentiation 'twixt the two, I'm questioning the value of continuing this exchange as you're evidently not intellectually qualified to partake in this debate.

"So when Moses lead Israel out of Egypt were they just wandering around until the found a place they liked OR where they going back to their homeland where they came from? And when they got there the Canaanites had moved into the land."

Anecdotally (per the Bible) yes, the Israelites allegedly spent several years wandering around before finally arriving at the "Promised Land" and had to wait another 40 years for their old heads to die off. Did they arrive to find Canaanites had squatted on their on their land in the interim? Per archaeological indicators, no. It's generally understood that the Israelites were a subcultural offshoot of the Canaanite group -i.e. the Canaanites possession, occupation of the area known as Palestine predated the Israelites, making the Israelites usurpers who murdered their own relatives to take control of the land.

Okay I did say "wondering" but that is not what I meant. They were not wondering around looking for a home.

Every culture on the planet are and were usurpers of land. It is just the story of mankind. The Jews claim to Palestine comes from God. The Bible predicted that the Jews would return to Israel and they did.

Except that you've already stated the Jews never really left the Levant....

Not since Moses brought them back to their homeland. There were 12 tribes of Israel, 10 of them are gone but 2 of them have had a presence in Israel ever since then. It started when Jacob whose name was changed to Israel, took his family to Egypt. They stayed in Egypt and their family and their descendants became slaves. Moses freed them and returned them to their original homeland.

Then the Muslims come along in about 300 AD and decide that where ever they rest their heads belongs to them. Their ultimate goal is to claim the world for Allah. It is called a caliphate and they have been trying to establish that off and on ever since the beginning of the religion.

But for whatever reason the left calls the Jews the occupiers of the land as if it belongs to the Muslims. I'll never understand why the left sides with those whose goal is global domination. You would think that the left (who also have the goal of global domination) would be in competition with them but instead they stand with Islam.

"After all of the talking and posturing and all of the other crap going on what this all hinges on is Muslims are commanded by Allah to exterminate every Jew on the planet. That is at the base of everything that is happening. It doesn't matter if it is Sunni or Shia Muslim they all are commanded to exterminate Jews."

Nope; that's a common misconception encouraged, depended on by people with a political agenda of fear-induction; Quran, Surah 9:5 "And when the forbidden months have passed, kill the idolaters [note: "idolators" is also sometimes translated as "polytheists" -given the period during which the Quran was written, it is reasonable to assume its intended subjects are the Catholic Church, Roman, Egyptian, Levant area polytheists although Hindus can't be ruled out considering the Spice Road was open and active] wherever you find them and take them prisoners, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent and observe Prayer and pay the Zakah, then leave their way free. Surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful."

The fundamental difference between Islam and Judaism is about the same as the difference between Judaism and Christianity -i.e. minor; they're both monotheistic, aligned with the god of Abraham (YAllahweh so to speak), share Abrahamic tradition minus the circumcision, share most of the 10 Commandments, etc.

Now, if we're talking about fatwahs which have been issued over the last 70 years decreeing war on Israel specifically, Jews generally, that's a different story and yes, of course, that's a thing. But that steers back to impact on Palestinians of the Israeli government's expansionism and the turning of a blind eye, active facilitation, aid in covering up when its own commit extrajudicial killings. Add to that Israel's rumored nuclear capability, it's demonstrated willingness to take land from other nations by force (Golan Heights taken from Syria) and the distinction between who's wearing the white/black hats starts to get hazy.

Dont even listen to Xiao. Xiao worships Neanderthals and denies that they where enemies with humans and that neanderthals coerced female humans. He also has no respect for his own species but worships Neanderthals as gods. Yet tries to act smart.

Yeah, I'm not buying this whole neanderthal stuff. There is only one race, human. There are no hybrids.

Xiao also disables the commentd on the memes she posts on the politics stream. Showing that xiao cannot take criticism.

And yet, here I am, taking... well, what you're doing isn't reasonably classifiable as criticism -it's more along the lines of gobshite shitposting... but let's say "criticizing is what you think you're doing" and work from there; here I am, taking your "criticism" in clear invalidation of your asserted inability on my part. Now what?

Am not the one who said "Not fair, Neanderthaks where wicked smart!!"

"Am not the one who said 'Not fair, Neanderthaks where wicked smart!!'"

And that's relevant to your assertion that I can't take criticism -an assertion destroyed by the very exchange in which we're engaged- how, exactly? Or, to phrase things in a manner which is more on par with your displayed capacity for debate: so what?

Baaically you where showing "empathy" to a group of hominins who would never care about you (specially considering their anti social and xenophobic nature) and are all extinct.

"Baaically you where showing "empathy" to a group of hominins who would never care about you (specially considering their anti social and xenophobic nature) and are all extinct."

And there you go making pronouncements about things you can't possibly know again.

I showed you studies, which you deny and falsely accuse of speculation when they have showed direct proof. I also connected the dots for you.

True. However Neanderthals where a violent species of hominins that battled the ancestors of Europeans and coerced some of their females (which in many cases resulted in the hybrid hominin births). Yet the liberals worship them as gods while calling their own species "monsters". So we can clearly see that the libs are traitors to the human race.

"Comparing the anatomy of the bon structure of the hands of Neanderthals with those of other primates has helped researchers in finding out that they where likeley promiscous rather than monogamous."

Okay, now that you've asserted one may determine who is and who isn't promiscuous by the appearance of their hands, cite your source. I've searched rather thoroughly and as yet have found no scientific papers to back your claim. Prove it.

The study never said you can discover who is monogamous/promiscous by looking at their hands. They said they determine that by comparing the anatomy of monogamous and promiscous primate species and observe which traits are common in promiscous/monogamous species. And there is more evidence to support them bring promiscous:
-This study found out that the neanderthal genome causes aggresion, depression and PROMISCUITY in humans: https://www.newsweek.com/neanderthal-dna-makes-people-more-aggressive-677733#:~:text=Neanderthal%20Genes%20in%20Your%20DNA%20Could%20Be%20Making%20You%20Unhappy%20and%20Aggressive,-Oct%2004%2C%202017&text=We%20like%20to%20joke%20about,make%20some%20modern%20humans%20insufferable.
Hybrid animals develop behaviours of both parents, suggesting that Neanderthals where promiscous and their DNA causes humans to have similar behaviours.
-Neanderthals are suggested to keave the group during their adolescence to find mates from other clans to avoid inbreeding. Meaning neanderthal children could not mate with clan members of their own age because they where either siblings, half siblings or cousins. And that could only be the result of the parents promiscuity. This is also backed up by the fact that their groups where family-based.
-Neanderthals had low population numbers and sometimes genetic diversity became scarce. Monogamous species reproduce slower than those who are promiscous, so monogamy wouldnt benefit them given their low populations. Promiscuity however can easily help them repopulate when genetic diversity is scarce.

And your proof of coercion is what, exactly? Keeping in mind that your imagination isn't proof, detail for everyone how you know females of either hominid subgroup were coerced into cross-species mating.

This is nothing something you need evidence of, its basic common sense. Rape happens in the animal kingdom. Chimps and humans are related to Neanderthals and both have been observed practising r#pe, so Neamderthals likely did it to sometimes, both to their femakes and female humans. Alao ironic how you talk about imagination yet people on your side believe that children can be trans.

By your own logic the claim that Neanderthals use fire is false because you never saw neanderthals using fire.

"Xiao its basic common sense that many primate species, including hominids, practise r#pe. And comparing me with those people is a bad argument as your trying to equate me to those people whenw here not alike at all.

And no ivr not confessed anything. Your just taking my claims out of context to make me look bad."

I'm not trying to equate you with anyone; you've done that all on your own by claiming, continuing to claim "it's just basic common sense" while also continuing to furnish non-evidence to back your claims.

Also, there's no need to de/re-contextualize your claims; as they've been made in the absence of, apparent inability/refusal to provide supporting documentation, they're meaningless. Only you can make you look bad; my duty is merely to point out why you're wrong so other people won't make the same mistakes you have --whatever happens after that the result of your own actions.

Dude its literally common sense. And I showed you evidence. And ironically there is no documentation of neanderthals using fire yet you openly aite the use of their remains to proof they did. Same applies to their behaviour. Thats how paleontology works. Thats how scientists discovered that Tyrannosaurus rex was a smart as a chimp, by studying the brain structure. You just dont want to accept the studies or at least take in consideration their points.

"This is nothing something you need evidence of, its basic common sense. Rape happens in the animal kingdom. Chimps and humans are related to Neanderthals and both have been observed practising r#pe, so Neamderthals likely did it to sometimes, both to their femakes and female humans. Alao ironic how you talk about imagination yet people on your side believe that children can be trans."

Ah yes... the old "It's basic common sense" argument -the argument used by flat earthers, election deniers, creationists, young earthers, grifters, people with no evidence, etc. to support whatever nonsense they're on about.

"People on my side"? Should I deduce from that piece of data that this is actually a politics-based butthurts things for you, that the argument over unproveable, presumed behavioral traits of a long-dead hominid is just a conveneient vehicle to swing things around until the subject has shifted to what you really want to cry about?

Soooo... now that you've confessed, confirmed you're working purely on the machinations of your imagination, there really isn't any need for me to continue interacting with you... but I'm going to anyway as I feel a certain obligation exploit opportunties to showcase individuals who display strong tendencies toward irrational, suppositional declarations as though they're facts.

Xiao its basic common sense that many primate species, including hominids, practise r#pe. And comparing me with those people is a bad argument as your trying to equate me to those people whenw here not alike at all.

And no ivr not confessed anything. Your just taking my claims out of context to make me look bad.

"By your own logic the claim that Neanderthals use fire is false because you never saw neanderthals using fire."

Wow... you got really, really close to actually making an accurate statement that time. Good work -but not good enough, I'm afraid. Where your reasoning failed is the assumption of proximal physical evidence not being an indicator of physical conditions.

While it's true that the presence of neanderthalensis' tools, jewelery, fragments of prey animals' bones, coprolytes in close proximity to a firepit doesn't prove controlled use of fire among neanderthals, multiple layers of such, built up over carbon-datable hundreds or thousands of years serves as a stong indicator of persistent neanderthal habitation, use of fire.

Comparing the anatomy of the bon structure of the hands of Neanderthals with those of other primates has helped researchers in finding out that they where likeley promiscous rather than monogamous. And if anything they wouldprofit better from promiscuity giving their low population numbers, repopulating fast would not be possible of they where monogamous. Not to mention that the adolescents need to find mates from other clans, suggesting that all children within a clan are related by blood, as a result of the parents promiscuity. Confirmed by the fact that they lived in family based groups.

"The land was not stolen by the Allied Powers. Israel had always maintained a presence in the land. The Allied Powers just told the Palestinians to move over because the Jews were coming home. Palestinians were only in Israel because Jordan didn't want them, nor did anyone else in the Middle-East."

Interesting proposition... so what you're saying is that if a cultural group is largely absent from their ancestral land, that the parcel in question being that group's ancestral holding stands as adequate justification for an over-arching authority to order the current occupant(s) move aside that said absent cultural group may repossess the parcel for the purposes of re-inhabitation.

What happened to the Native Americans was atrocious. However, Native Americans never claim to "own" the land. There were many, many, many different tribes in this country. Many of them were at constant war for hunting grounds.

When the Europeans came here many Native Americans were very much willing to share the land, some weren't. Some were willing at first but we screwed them over and then they fought us.

If there was one tribe who had claimed the entire area, from sea to sea, then we might have a similar comparison but there wasn't.

Not to mention Native Americans do not have a commandment from their deity to kill all of the unbelievers. Not a single tribe has that commandment. Some tribes were more bloodthirsty than others but they weren't commanded to murder innocent people, like Islam. The Aztecs used to play a game using the heads of their enemies as a ball. Two of the three tribes that Columbus first encountered were cannibals. Columbus established good relations with the tribe that was not cannibalistic and helped them to get back many of their people who had been kidnapped by the cannibals for livestock.

So the question for Israel is why on earth would you allow people in your country who wanted all of you dead?

"What happened to the Native Americans was atrocious. However, Native Americans never claim to "own" the land. There were many, many, many different tribes in this country. Many of them were at constant war for hunting grounds.

When the Europeans came here many Native Americans were very much willing to share the land, some weren't. Some were willing at first but we screwed them over and then they fought us.

If there was one tribe who had claimed the entire area, from sea to sea, then we might have a similar comparison but there wasn't."

So you concede that individual tribes claimed land (that's a throwaway, we know for a fact that individual Amerind tribes owned, defended and traded land).

You do understand what you just described are the exact same socio-political conditions that have been present in the Levant for literal, documented millenia, correct?

Nope. That was a quotation of AdamSmithsInvisibleHand's post, not a claim made by me. If you actually paid attention to, comprehended what you read, you wouldn't have made that mistake.

Show me evidence of Neandies being "wicked smart" then. Also have you ever seen a Neanderthal in its habitat being smart?? Sounds crazy when I do it, right?? Thats because its crazy when YOU do it.

That's fair, I should have said "wicked smart for the time". Oh, I never said I'd observed neanderthalensis in the wild; again, we're back to you imagining things that didn't happen.

Now, let's discuss your double standard: you pointed to wikipedia's entry on Neanderthal behavior, wherein was dicussed the quality of their tools serving as an indicator of intellectual capacity... so the wikipedia entry is valid when you think it supports your claim (it doesn't and make clear it doesn't) and irrelevant when you think it's contraindicative?

"If you have to connect the dots, if you have to create a narrative story about the artifacts, it's not proof."
Thats literally how science works.

It literally supports my claim buddy. Thats how evidence works. If you dont think its vakid then try to disprove it with your own evidence.

So copy and paste a part, any part which proves I don't know what I'm talking about. Prove it.

Just read the articles and anaylise the info and also connect the dots. Then make a conclusion based on what you learned and tell me what you thought.

If you have to connect the dots, if you have to create a narrative story about the artifacts, it's not proof.

Bruh you worship Neanderthals and deny them being violent towards humans. You also care more about them than your own kind. Dont act like a humanitarian when you have little to no respect for the human race while openly praising extinct xenos.

Wrong meme, bruh. Also, I never said they weren't/couldn't be violent toward humans; that's your imagination telling you things that didn't happen.

Ohh so accepting that humans and Neanderthals where violent to one another is "imagination" huh??? Also yes it did happen as neanderthals where foudn to be anti social and territorial. And competitiin with resources and territory with humans would also cause aggresion.

Okay, now that you've claimed you have evidence showing behavioral traits which cannot be gleaned from bones, show it. Let everyone see you're not just talking out of your ass.

And your proof of those claims is what, exactly?

Many animals are known to practice rape, primates included like chimpanzees and humans. And neanderthals where also found to be promiscous and competitive for mates, species with those traits have high chances to rape. Neanderthals where also physically stronger than humans, meaning they could easily capture human females to coerce them. Just look up wikipedia "Neanderthal behaviour"

Yes, many animals have been *observed* to engage in rape, primates included --but not all animals. Do you understand how you shot yourself in the foot by operating on blanket assumptions? Additionally, Wikipedia's entry on neanderthal behavior does not prove your assertions of exhibited social behaviors among Neanderthalensis. That said, I welcome and encourage you to copy and paste the parts of it you believe support your claims. And I'll be happy to point out for you why they don't. So where's your proof?

But manu have. Also you forget that Humans and Neanderthals ARE primates. And as you know many primates, including humans and chimps, who are related to neanderthals, have been observed commiting r#pe. So that means that Neanderthals did it too, both with their own kind and with females of other hominid species. Wikipedias entrance DOES prove my point ajd it lists the SOURCES. Perhaps you should look at then and read them while also connecting the dots.

Ironic how you tell peopoe to search for histiry yet have have zero knwoledge on the history of the Human vs Neanderthal wars and you dare to defend the Neanderthsls despite them battling and r#ping your ancestors...

You're doing a lot of talking but not showing your proof of socialogical behaviors in neanderthals which cannot be gleaned from bones. Show your proof. You do have proof, right?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/brain-comparison-suggests-neanderthals-lacked-social-skills-flna1c8834846

No kidding, the sheer size of it does too.

Neanderthals and even Cro Magnons (and earlier Sapiens) had bigger brains than modern humans, whose skulls have been shrinking since the advent of agriculture and (I have to look further into this), even as far back as 30 or even 60,000 yrs. I heard it postulated that the domestication of the dog might have been a factor (some say it was dogs that in effect actually domesticated people!).

See, by parceling tasks out to various individuals in the group, being a self contained unit is no longer that necessary. If Urhg can carve better than Og, but Og can sew better, they can trade goods and thus compensate for their personal limitations.

When you live in a harsher colder ecologic zone, there will be less of you and in smaller groups. In more hospitable warmer climes, larger populations survive and more extensive societies can develop. This is why no civilizations ever sprung in northern latitudes yet the people who live in them tend to average higher IQs.

You literally are comparing apples with oranges. 1)They are not the same species. They have different behaviours. 2)Neamderthals where anti social (according to brain anaylsis), rarely left home and lived in tiny xenophobic groups while humans are more social, travel for miles, can greet outsiders and live in larger groups (no matter the climate, we exceeded neanders in all of this.) 3.Cro magnons likely got those trains by crossbreeding with neanderthas or other hominids. 4.Not all of Europe was like that yet all neanders where anti social and xenophobes that live in tiny clans. And for the record, Chimps and Bonobos live in larger groups than Neanderthals.

1) Hence the 2 different names?

Everything else you said is conjecture which is based more on sheer nonsense than anything remotely related to evidence.

All of what you said i based on speculation. What i said is based on evidence and connecting the dots. Leftoid "scientists" or leftoid "science" fans rarely connect the dots nowdays.

If their not the same species then why do you assume they will have the same behaviours when they clearly did not??

Crows have an even greater eye:brain size ratio than either H. neanderthalensis or H. sapiens but are very social animals. Had you been paying attention to the content of the article, you'd have recognized its speculative nature, the flaw in its use as a supporting evidentiary document.

The study focuses on the brain structure, not the brain size. Brain size does not dictate behaviours, brain structures do. Neanderthal brain structures focused too much on vision rather than socializing. Combine that with their groups being smaller than those of chimps, bonobos or even crows. Its not speculation but facts.