It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Byrd Not all primates are in the human lineage. There are many which aren't. The New World Teilhardina are more closely related to marmosets: en.wikipedia.org...
Byrd: Ah... wait. Are you suggesting that hominids evolved in the Americas separately from the ones that evolved in Africa?
Not all primates are in the human lineage.
it is safer to cower in the trenches of stagnant orthodoxy...battle across the minefields...one's own truth...I do not do so in search of medals, or honours or money or baubels -only in the hope that I will find a better truth of our history and origins at the end of my journey than the one that spouts forth from the fetid mound of perceived wisdom that you so readily accept as gospel
250,000 year old artefacts found in Mexico. FACT. (Yes, the date is disputed but VSM stands by her original dates).
Parallel Evolution within phylo is FACT ergo there is every reason to suppose that such parallel evolution could have occurred at a much earlier stage (i.e. Precambrian). This then opens the door to possible independent evolution of hominid species which may then explain the "anomalous artefacts" in the Americas.
SC: 250,000 year old artefacts found in Mexico. FACT. (Yes, the date is disputed but VSM stands by her original dates).
Kandinsky: As repeatedly pointed out, the 'site' has been dated. A recent paper by Sam VanLandingham continues to support a date of between 80ka and 25 000ka.
VanLandingham, S.L., 2009, Use of diatom biostratigraphy in determining a minimum (Sangamonian = 80,000--ca.220,000 yr. BP) and a maximum (Illinoian = 220,000--430,00 yr. BP) age for the Hueyatlaco artifacts, Puebla, Mexico. Nova Hedwigia (February, 2009), Beiheft 135, p. 15-36.
Kandnisky: These are professional anthropologists and archaeologists more than happy to accept the 250000ka date. They would just like the 'possibility' to be validated by further study. Given the right data a lot of guys are happy to extend the human presence in the Americas. I'm happy too and I've been clear about that before hence my offering you the link more than once.
DNA and fossil evidence indicates that modern humans [Homo Sapiens Sapiens] originated in east Africa about 200,000 years ago.
SC: Parallel Evolution within phylo is FACT ergo there is every reason to suppose that such parallel evolution could have occurred at a much earlier stage (i.e. Precambrian). This then opens the door to possible independent evolution of hominid species which may then explain the "anomalous artefacts" in the Americas.
Kandinsky: Yes. It is a fact.
Kandinsky: However you are extending the concept to allow for the separate evolution of a bipedal hominid in the Americas.
Kandinsky: That parallel evolution 'could have' occurred is still unsupported by fossil record or other evidence.
Kandinsky: This is why I'm so keen to know your overarching concept of our past...The repeated question as to what exactly do you believe was asked in the vain hope of cutting to the chase.
The 'Out-of-Africa' theory proposes that 1.4 million years ago Homo erectus left Africa and spread throughout Europe and Asia. In Europe, Homo erectus evolved into the Neanderthals. In Asia, most Homo erectus stopped evolving - with the exception of a small group in the Indonesian archipelago that branched off to become Homo floresiensis (aka the Hobbit). Unlike most of the Homo erectus in Asia, which stagnated, the Homo erectus that stayed in Africa continued to evolve and eventually became Homo sapiens.
About 200,000 years ago, Homo sapiens left Africa. They spread throughout the globe and conquered or out-competed Neanderthals and Homo erectus. The last Neanderthal died out around 30,000 years ago. The last Homo erectus died out somewhere between 200,000 and 30,000 years ago. The last Hobbit is believed to have died out in a volcanic eruption around 10,000 years ago. After conquering Homo erectus in Indonesia, Homo sapiens moved to Australia. If Homo erectus had made it to Australia first, then they too would have been conquered.
In a nutshell, 200,000 years ago an African tribe, either through superior food gathering ability or open war, started the extinction of all hominid species living throughout Eurasia.
Supporting the Out-of-Africa theory is work by Allan Wilson who provided evidence in 1987 that all modern humans share a single female ancestor who lived in Africa approximately 200,000 years ago
Mungo Man is a huge spanner in the works for the Out-of-Africa theory because it can't explain how Mungo Man looked liked modern humans, yet was not related to any human that had left Africa in the last 200,000 years. A 'Multiple-Regions' theory is held up as the answer. If Out-of-Africa is a theory of war, then Multiple Regions is a theory of sex. The theory proposes that Homo erectus was not conquered. Rather, once Homo erectus left Africa 1.4 million years ago, it kept evolving on migration lines between Asia and Africa (and possibly Australia). Interbreeding among nomadic tribes kept most of the different groups on a relatively constant evolutionary track and ensured they remained the same species.
Most proponents of the Multiple-Regions theory argue that the Neanderthals in Eurasia and the Hobbit in Indonesia were not unique species of hominid and therefore must have contributed DNA to modern Homo sapiens. However, testing of modern Europeans has found no evidence of Neandathal DNA. Hobbit DNA is yet to be tested. Although Homo sapiens and Neanderthals could have had sex, they might not have been able to produce offspring or their offspring may have been sterile.
Even if Neanderthals and the Hobbit were unique species, that does not mean that Multi-Regions theory is disproved. Perhaps the two species evolved independently because they were not on the Homo erectus migration routes. The Neanderthals evolved independently because they were an ice age people living in caves. Ice age Eurasia was just too inhospitable for nomadic Homo erectus. Likewise, in the Indonesian archipelago, the ancestor of the Hobbit may have been cut off from migration routes due to changes in sea levels or volcanic activity. Consequently, they also become a unique species of hominid.
Aside from the Neanderthals and the Hobbits, all other Homo erectus keep migrating, keep breeding and kept evolving on a constant track. Eventually they evolved into Homo sapiens.
At some stage in the last 850,000 years (or longer), either Homo erectus or Homo sapiens made the crossing from Java to Australia. These hominids were the ancestors of Mungo Man. It would not have been a difficult crossing to make. Rats are believed to have made the crossing 2 million years ago.
200,000 years ago, females from an African tribe started spreading their genes through the entire arc between Australia and Africa. This spreading of female genes could have occurred as a result of a nomadic African tribe emerging from Africa and breeding throughout Asia. It could also have occurred as a result of an Asian tribe going to Africa, and forcibly taking women back to Asia. (*Although evidence indicates that all humans might have had a female African ancestor 200,000 years ago, there is no evidence to show a male ancestor.)
Originally posted by punkinworks09
(*Although evidence indicates that all humans might have had a female African ancestor 200,000 years ago, there is no evidence to show a male ancestor.)
Huh, we have no common male ancestor, interesting.
In 1974, the discovery of Mungo Man turned the conventional theory of human evolution upside-down. Mungo Man was a human-like primate who is estimated to have died 62,000 years ago, and was ritually buried with his hands covering his penis. Anatomically, Mungo Man's bones were distinct from other human skeletons being unearthed in Australia. Unlike the younger skeletons that had big-brows and thick-skulls, Mungo Man's skeleton was finer, and more like modern humans.
In a study conducted by Australian National University graduate student Greg Adcock and others in 1995[1], mitochondrial DNA was collected from bone fragments from Mungo Man's skeleton and analysed. The mtDNA was compared with samples taken from several other ancient Australian human skeletons, a Neanderthal mtDNA sequence, modern day living Australian Aborigines, and other living humans. The results showed that despite being anatomically within the range of fully-modern humans, Mungo Man was descended from a different direct maternal ancestor than the most recent common ancestor in the female line of all living humans, the so-called "Mitochondrial Eve". His mtDNA is not entirely extinct, however, as a segment of it is found inserted in nuclear chromosome 11 of many people today.
The results can be reconciled with the Out of Africa model, however, if the Mitochondrial Eve mtDNA type, and the Mungo Man mtDNA type were both spread from Africa, with one maternal line going extinct and one surviving to today. The time of the split between Mitochondrial Eve and Mungo Man's maternal ancestor must have been earlier than the date when the main wave of fully modern humans left Africa, about 50,000 - 60,000 years ago.
Since remains of a robust form of modern humans have been found in Ethiopia dating to about 160 ka, and similar remains have been dated at Jebel Qafzeh in Israel at about 100 ka, it is conceivable that Mungo Man's maternal ancestor left Africa in an early wave. Indeed, Schillaci has recently found morphological similarities among the crania of early humans of the Levant and those of Australasia [1].
The study by Adcock has been criticized by a study conducted by Chris Stringer. Adcock claimed to have found an exceptionally large amount of ancient DNA from the Mungo remains. This finding is inconsistent with other researchers who were searching for Neanderthal DNA. The study indicates that Ancient DNA is most likely preserved in cold environments such as those found in Europe. But even in the case of Neanderthal remains, the probability of extracting DNA is still low. The study further indicates that the likelihood of any DNA being preserved over the 40,000 - 60,000 years since the Mungo burial is very low. [2]
"The Kow Swamp people have thick brow ridges, very large faces and the biggest teeth that have ever existed in modern humans. And that creates a problem. They look ancient but at 10,000 years of age they’re much younger than the lightly built Mungo people."
This is real science, the source.
Kow Swamp is the site of the largest known single population of late Pleistocene humans in the world (Flood, 1999). The site is a palaeolake on
the margin of the floodplain of the Murray River in northern Victoria (Fig. 1). In 1925, a human cranium was unearthed from levee deposits close
to the northwestern shore of the palaeolake
(Macintosh, 1953; Macumber & Thorne, 1975).
It displayed robust physical characteristics that at first suggested links to early hominid finds in Java (Macintosh, 1952).
This discovery was followed by the 1968–1972 excavation of some forty individuals on the eastern shore of Kow Swamp with similar ‘archaic’ traits (Thorne & Macumber,1972).
14C dating of bone apatite, shell and charcoal fragments suggested that the Kow Swamp people lived 15–9 ka ago.
(Thorne & Macumber,1972; Thorne, 1975; Wright, 1975; Macumber, 1977)
Various theories have been promoted to explain the robusticity of the Kow Swamp people and in particular their relationship to the more gracile, yet older, late Pleistocene people recorded at Lake Mungo. (Bowler et al., 1972; Bowler & Thorne, 1976)
One is that robust forms were descended from earlier Indonesian forms and interbred with the gracile type to produce modern Aboriginal
people (Thorne, 1971).
Others include sexual dimorphism (Pardoe, 1991), environmental stress
(Wright, 1976) and cranial deformation (Brown, 1981; Anto´n & Weinstein, 1999).
Mitochondrial DNA sequences now show that most robust and gracile individuals are within a clade that includes living Aborigines (Adcock et al., 2001; cf. Cooper et al., 2001).
The mtDNA of the Kow Swamp people is conserved in modern lineages but their distinct robust morphology is not.
Originally posted by DaddyBare
just to catch you up the argument is about a polyphylogenetic evolution model... basically did we have co evolution occurring in both old and new worlds at the same time??? in truth we don't know... thanks to a very incomplete fossil record... but that's nature for ya....
Originally posted by punkinworks09
Ok,
im going to throw a wrench in the works,
I found a fascinating discussion on "the out of africa" theory vs. a multi regional hypothosis of modern human development as it pertains to the population of australia.
Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Originally posted by Byrd Not all primates are in the human lineage. There are many which aren't. The New World Teilhardina are more closely related to marmosets: en.wikipedia.org...
Hence my remark..."Ain't science fun" Thank you once again, Byrd, for applying cutting edge Anthro to a subject so filled with vagaries and idle conjecture.
65K? Once the 12.5k floodgates opened, so much became possible! If only you were a pro on Lake Ontario Iroquois as well...sigh.
"The Bradshaw Paintings are incredibly sophisticated, yet they are not recent creations but originate from an unknown past period which some suggest could have been 50,000 years ago." Peter Robinson, Project Controller of the Bradshaw Foundation.
In northern Australia, a mysterious form of rock art could legitimately be referred to as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. Known as the Bradshaws, the art is dispersed in around 100 000 sites spread over 50 000 sq. km of nothern Australia. Although the art's pigment can't be dated, a fossilised wasp nest covering one of the paintings has been dated at 17,000 + years old. This makes the art at least four times older than the pyramids of Egypt. It also makes the art a comparable age to the Grotte Chauvet paintings in France, which have been dated at 30,000-years-old. Although radio carbon dating was used to date the Grotte Chauvet pigments, the Bradshaw art can't be dated in the same way. Because the are so old, they have become part of the rock itself.
Aside from being extremely old, the Bradshaws are very significant to world history because instead of depicting animals, they depict highly decorated humans and relatively advanced technology. They show people with tassels, hair adornments, and possibly clothing. Such body adornments are usually only found in agricultural societies that have developed hierarchical systems of status. Another painting depicts a boat with 29 people on board. Another depicts a boat with four people on board, and a rudder.
The art is very different from that created by the hunter gatherers living in the area at the time of European colonisation. The hunter gatherer paintings are known as Wandjinas. Although the Wandjinas are like the Bradshaws in that they depict the human form, they are very different as the Wandijina's forms are simply replicated over and over, they lack fine detail in line construction, and they lack the use of hieroglyphic-style symbols.
Peter Brown (1999) evaluates three sites with early East Asian modern human skeletal remains (Liujiang, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China; Zhoukoudian's Upper Cave; and Minatogawa in Okinawa) dated to between 10,175 to 33,200 years ago, and finds lack of support for the conventional designation of skeletons from this period as "Proto-Mongoloid"; this would make Neolithic sites 5500 to 7000 years ago (e.g. Banpo) the oldest known Mongoloid remains in East Asia, younger than some in the Americas. He concludes that the origin of the Mongoloid phenotype remains unknown, and could even lie in the New World.[20]
and
Dr. T. Tirado claims that "many experts" consider American Indians and East Asians to be descended from a "Proto-Mongoloid" population which existed as late as 12,000 years ago.
The physical features of the "Proto-Mongoloid" were characterized as, "a straight-haired type, medium in complexion, jaw protrusion, nose-breadth, and inclining probably to round-headedness".[34] Kanzō Umehara considers the Ainu and Ryukyuans to have "preserved their proto-Mongoloid traits".
Actually, "out of Africa" occurs with homo erectus and gives rise to homo habilis, homo neanderthalis, homo heidelbergensis and several other cousins of homo sapiens as well as the hobbit. Australians belong to the homo sapiens species.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Byrd
Hello Byrd,
Not all primates are in the human lineage.
SC: But the question does not actually relate to human lineage but to some other intelligent hominid species that evolved independently and which, subsequently, became extinct along with all other hominid species.
Regards,
Scott Creighton
A primate of the family Hominidae, of which Homo sapiens is the only extant species.
Originally posted by punkinworks09
The Out of Africa theory im talkin about states that all modern humans can trace their ancestry to an african female around 200k years ago. Which genetic studies bare out.
When you get the time read the really good paper on
Kow swamp and its people, and how they are very different from the earlier mungo man and the latter early australasians.
These same australasian whom might have given rise to the peoples of the americas and asia.
Byrd: So no. If it's a hominid, then it came from a lineage that is 7 million years old.