Human Evolution. “Neanderthals On Trial” Documentary Sample College Essay

Could Homo neanderthalensis have interbred with Homo sapiens?

Neanderthals could have interbred with Homo sapiens due to the DNA evidence, their inclination to producing paintings, tools, music and pieces of jewelry. As per DNA, the Neanderthal are 99, 7 percent same to human DNA, which is one percent more than in comparison with chimps (Jordan, 2013). They are different in body shape and size, brain capacity, skull shape, the tooth size, form of the jaw and other. Nonetheless, they had a complex culture and were capable of creating pieces of art.

Neandertals on Trial: How do preconceived notions affect the results of a study?

According to Trinkaus, the ancestors took care of those who suffered from serious injuries (such as the loss of an arm) so that the injured could continue to be functional members of the society, which proves them compassionate (Neanderthals on trial 2002; Robert & Lewin, 2013). In terms of tool technology, Dibble claims that it is difficult to estimate whether the tools were man-made as they could have been rocks that were naturally broken (Neanderthals on trial 2002).

Did Neanderthals have a language?

There is evidence that Neanderthals had a language because their minds were capable of handling the symbolic communication (Stanford et al., 2012). The archeological finding revealed that Neanderthals created and used symbols and ornaments that clearly indicated the behavioral contemporaneity. Moreover, they possessed the language-relevant genes characteristic of modern humans.

In what ways do some splitters anticipate racism?

It should be noted that the European anatomists divided people by racial groups. The Europeans were denoted as the noblest race, while the other races were held as inferior. Some scientists considered the skull sizes, eyebrows’ slopes, and other differentiators as the evidence of the gradation (Stanford et al., 2012).

Were Neanderthals able to plan ahead, have compassion for their fellows and a sense of the afterlife?

Neanderthals were able to plan ahead as evidenced by the fact that they shepherded animals to death by navigating them into a sinkhole. It reveals their ability to communicate as a group and capacity to take advantage of the location or situation (Robert & Lewin, 2013). Regarding the compassion, Neanderthals treated the diseased and tried to soothe others when one of them died (Robert & Lewin, 2013). Moreover, there is evidence of rituals that they held when burying individuals in the ground (for instance, folding the hands of the dead close to the head), which proves their beliefs in the afterlife.


Jordan, P. (2013). Neanderthal: Neanderthal man and the story of human origins. Stroud, UK: The History Press.

Mark Davis. (Director). (2002). Neanderthals on trial [Documentary]. United States: PBS.

Robert, A. F., & Lewin, R. (2013). Principles of human evolution. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Stanford, C., Allen, J. S., & Anton, S. C. (2012). Exploring biological anthropology. London, UK: Person.

Marketing Lessons From Malcolm Gladwell’s TED Talk

The most important message delivered by Malcolm Gladwell in his “Choice, happiness, and spaghetti sauce” speech that can be linked to marketing (and pricing policy in general) is the innovation that should be brought to the pricing strategy. This innovation regards examples in which companies revolutionize their pricing policies, strategies, or organization, or where companies use an understanding of customer psychology to change client perceptions of value and price (Hinterhuber & Liozu 2012). This means that somewhere deep inside the customers know what they want, but they would never tell.

In most cases, the customer would not tell the company what his or her preferences are just because the company does not ask the right question and the resonance, they get is confusing. It is important that even research-intensive, advanced companies should approve a variety of substitute pricing strategies across their merchandise and service portfolio. When approving the strategies, the businesses should remember that there is no perfect price for all the customers, but there is a perfect price for a distinct cluster of clients.

One of the best strategies that correlate with the customers’ needs is the value-based strategy. The customers’ value is well-defined as the customers’ alleged preference for and appraisal of those product characteristics and consequences that simplify (or complicate) reaching the customer’s goals and purposes in use conditions.

Price-adjustment strategies are often based on competitive conditions. Competitive pricing strategy is the most popular among other types of pricing strategies (Jensen 2013). Another key to understanding the customer needs is dynamic pricing. But the most important lesson that you learn is that sometimes the best position is simply the one that is open. This means that if you are planning to launch a new tomato sauce and the opponents are all priced about the same, that tells you the best niche for your new product might be top priced.

Additionally, when you launch, your unique selling proposition will be informal and persuasive, offering your customers to treat themselves to the best. Any pricing strategy, no matter how good it seems to be, should be first tested among the potential customers (Kotler et al. 2013). After you received the results, you would divide the clients into groups by a unique characteristic that would define each cluster.

Another great lesson that we learn is that sometimes we should forget everything we have known before and try to start over in order to come up with new ideas that would change the game. The main idea is also that we should not always follow the patterns, but create our own if we want to represent the dominance and originality in the business world. The pricing strategy might seem aggressive, but if it is one of a kind – it is destined to be successful. Creating a pricing strategy is like creating a spaghetti sauce – you will have to create 45 varieties of it before you make it in a proper way as there is no chance the same price, just as the same sauce, would be ideal for everyone.


Hinterhuber, A & Liozu, S 2012, Innovation in Pricing: Contemporary Theories and Best Practices, Routledge, London.

Jensen, M 2013, Setting Profitable Prices: A Step-by-Step Guide to Pricing Strategy -Without Hiring a Consultant, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.

Kotler, P, Armstrong, G, Trifts V & Cunningham P, 2013, Principles of Marketing, Ninth Canadian Edition, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River.

Australopithecines To Homo And “The Story Of Lucy”

According to “The Story of Lucy”, did our ancestors become bipedal first and get smart later?

The discovery of Lucy has revealed crucial facts proving that bipedalism came first. The remains of the skeleton presented specific anatomical features. It turned out that the upper part of Lucy’s body was apelike, while the lower part was humanlike (Neanderthals on trial 2002). As for her pelvis and knee joints, they were typical of bipedalism. The joints of her knees were locked straight, and the structure of her bones resembled the modern human form (Jordan, 2013).

Lucy had broad a pelvis and the rib cage in the shape of a funnel. In general, the hip, leg, and shinbone resembled human’s rather than chimp’s, and it distinguished Lucy from quadrupeds. The fossil presented that the hominid was capable of walking upright; however, there were no signs of intellectual development (no language, no tools).

Could A. afarensis have been able to make and use tools?

As per the findings in Ethiopia Afar Basin, the A. afarensis have used unaltered rocks to remove the flesh of cows, antelopes and other animals from the bones. The Australopithecus afarensis used the stones to cut or crush flesh and bones and, probably utilized them as hunting arsenal. Nevertheless, there is not enough evidence whether the apelike ancestors made any of those tools themselves (Neanderthals on trial 2002).

What arguments can be made for Kenyanthropus platyops being closer to the ancestral line of humans than Lucy and her kind?

It is difficult to say if the K. platyops is more closely related to modern humans that Lucy, while there are many missing pieces of the fossils that could potentially reveal the truth. However, K. platyops has less protruding jaw than Lucy and her kin does and platyops’ cheekbones are more pronounced (Jordan, 2013). These features compose a less apelike face than that of Lucy’s. Although platyops has smaller teeth, a different type of diet can explain this feature.

What are two interpretations from existing evidence dominate food getting among early hominids?

Hunting-gathering (foraging) and scavenging were the two main hypotheses of food getting among early hominids. In terms of foraging theory, the early hominids hunted or trapped animals or fished, as well as gathered fruits, vegetables, nuts, insects and so on. Their diet depended on the environment (Jordan, 2013). While according to the second theory, the ancestors were passive scavengers rather than hunters. However, many scientists claim that foraging provoked hominids to run after animals, which may have resulted in the evolution of some human characteristics and attributes.

What is the difference between the tool-making and other technologies of Homo habilis and that of Homo erectus?

Homo habilis used altered stone cobbles with the end of the stone knocked off by another stone. (Stanford, Allen, & Anton, 2012). As it was difficult for the H. habilis to cut through thick skin, they utilized cobbles to butcher and slice the animal meat. This kind of tool was not modified in the knife and remained a simple flake tool (Jordan, 2013). Whereas Homo erectus created more sophisticated tools out of stones, for instance, they were able to sharpen and straighten the tool’s edges. Moreover, they were capable of mastering implements out of wood, bark or grass. Further, Homo erectus were the first to try moving to accommodation in colder areas (Robert & Lewin, 2013). Erectus used fire for cooking or heating. Unfortunately, it is not known whether they were able to obtain fire at will.

How can the association of tool-making ability with cranial capacity and hand development be traced?

Homo heidelbergensis cranial volume was almost 90 percent of the cranial capacity of Homo sapiens (Robert & Lewin, 2013). Homo neanderthalensis maintained the main features of the predecessor, although they had a larger brain. They were able to show the tool-making abilities like heidelbergensis and used various sophisticated tools, obtained fire and possessed hunting skills, which evidences that their hand development was continuing.


Jordan, P. (2013). Neanderthal: Neanderthal man and the story of human origins. Stroud, UK: The History Press.

Robert, A. F., & Lewin, R. (2013). Principles of human evolution. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Stanford, C., Allen, J. S., & Anton, S. C. (2012). Exploring biological anthropology. London, UK: Person.

error: Content is protected !!