> Being perhaps a little smarter doesn't mean you win the evolutionary game. There are so many factors at play.

Considering most human groups have a % of Neanderthal DNA, they didn't exactly lose... Based on the % of Neanderthal vs. Sapien DNA, it seems Neanderthals were simply outnumbered.

▲

hrimfaxi 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What does it mean to lose evolutionarily if not be outnumbered?

▲

dismalaf 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Are numbers everything? Are sardines more evolved than whales?

Anyhow, the traditional view is that Neanderthals were brutes who were actually out-competed and killed off by Sapiens. The more realistic view considering the evidence is that Neanderthals were much closer to Sapiens, equally or even more sophisticated, but less numerous, and thus their contribution to our DNA is smaller than Sapiens.

But do keep in mind the Neanderthals live on because Europeans and Asians are all part Neanderthal.

▲

tsunamifury 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ants won over humans? Worms?

	▲	hrimfaxi 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		When you are in direct competition? I should have said outcompeted, which in this case I think outnumbered is a fair proxy.