Another Ancestor of Man? New Lineage of Ancient Human

Seems like the tool dejour, is the DNA and it seems presumptions of the Evolutionary climb of Humanity out of the trees of Africa has been given yet further complications.

A NEW spieces of Early Man has been discovered in Siberia

Researchers Discover New Lineage of Ancient Human
by Michael Balter on March 24, 2010 2:28 PM

DNA from a 40,000-year-old human finger bone found in a Siberian cave points to a new lineage of ancient human, researchers report today. The find—the first made with genetic, not fossil evidence—suggests that Central Asia was occupied at that time not only by Neandertals and Homo sapiens but also by a third, previously unknown hominin lineage. "This is the most exciting discovery to come from the ancient DNA field so far," says Chris Tyler-Smith, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Hinxton, United Kingdom.

The work complicates the human story once again, much as the discovery of the controversial H. floresiensis—a.k.a. the hobbit—has upset earlier and simpler views of early human migrations around the globe. If four early humans including the hobbit were alive about 40,000 years ago, "the amount of [human] biodiversity ... was pretty remarkable," says geneticist Sarah Tishkoff of the University of Pennsylvania.

AND

They got a big surprise: Although Neandertals differ from modern humans at an average of 202 nucleotide positions in the mitochondrial genome, the Denisova hominin differed at an average of 385 positions from modern humans and 376 from Neandertals, the team reports online today in Nature. When mtDNA from chimpanzees and bonobos was added to the mix, the researchers were able to estimate that the new hominin had shared a common ancestor with Neandertals and modern humans about 1 million years ago.

Seems this may effect the Africa Centric Mindset much like the 'Hobbit' had done upon it's discovery.

Full Story

Ciao

Shane

Yeah I just read that on NewScientist.

Rather intriguing, no?

However I'm wondering - what caused the extinction of this different species of humans? And possibly does that mean this could occur again to us?

Or maybe we're getting significant data of how 'history repeats itself' - almost as this is an ongoing cycle.

reply to post by BlackPoison94


I think the common theory is that we happened to the other species. We have evidence that we fought with Neanderthals. This a clear demonstration of survival of the fittest. All of these species were competing for the same resources, and in the end we simply played the game better than the others, so with us taking the majority of the resources the other species simply didn't have enough to survive, so they slowly died off.

Seem I may have been Hasty, (to quote Treebeard), but they are not yet ready to verify this is a New Species. Some further examinations will occur prior to this being annouced.

N Y Times Report

Dr. Paabo, a pioneer in decoding ancient human DNA, said in a news conference that before asserting the Denisova child was a new species, he needed to rule out the possibility that it belonged to a population formed by interbreeding between the new lineage and a known species. He said he was analyzing the rest of the child’s DNA, from the main or nuclear genome, to test this possibility.

“Back at the time this lineage came out of Africa, it had to have been a distinct group, perhaps a distinct species,” he said. “But whether or not this individual was distinct species, we have to wait for the nuclear DNA.”

There is one Ugly Look at what the nearest "Realitive" may have looked liked, for an example of the newly discovered fellow in USA Today.

USA Today

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a1901e97835a.jpg[/atsimg]

Very interesting look to say the least. I expect he'll be in Russian Gieco Commercials in the coming weeks. Maybe his temperment will be better than the Caveman.

The Story seems to Echo the previous Articles in Details.

And here, I found a relatively related link which places ALL of our Ancestors together for display.

Our Ancestors Together

Some seem to be just Orangutans and similiar Great Apes, but maybe thats just me.

Enjoy

Ciao

Shane

P.S. I just noted this last example was also offered and is being discussed at another Thread in this Section. Commentary in respects to this article would maybe best be presented or offered within the Topic noted below

Exhibition of Skull/Facial Reconstruction of some of Man's Earliest Ancestors



[edit on 24-3-2010 by Shane]

reply to post by Shane

They got a big surprise: Although Neandertals differ from modern humans at an average of 202 nucleotide positions in the mitochondrial genome, the Denisova hominin differed at an average of 385 positions from modern humans and 376 from Neandertals, the team reports online today in Nature. When mtDNA from chimpanzees and bonobos was added to the mix, the researchers were able to estimate that the new hominin had shared a common ancestor with Neandertals and modern humans about 1 million years ago.

Its sorta looks like ancient alien genetic engineering. Most likely another product "manufactured" by the Anunnaki...

reply to post by ucalien


I'm not sure how you can argue that. To me it looks like a perfect example of evolution. There were a bunch of hominid species around at the same time, but they became obsolete when we came around and started using up all their resources, so they died out.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

To me it looks like a perfect example of evolution.

The "evolution" of the Earth humanoids weren't natural. There are many holes between the stages of the ancestors of the standard homo-sapiens. The "missing link" of Darwin, NEVER was actually found. You should google for Dr. Chang of the GENOME PROJECT and see what he says about alien genetic engineering in the human DNA.

That's very interesting. I try and imagine what it that would have been like with other lifeforms walking around that were quasi human, sort of looked human, and were related, but were not actually the same species. Weird.

Flag

reply to post by ucalien


At least 99% of all species that have ever existed have gone extinct. However, we have not found remains of many of these animals. Even with the species of hominids we know of, we only have one or two samples for many of them. However, one can't believe that only one or two individuals from this species ever existed. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. Seeing as how we are still discovering new species of hominids after all of these years, should clearly indicate how hard it is to find samples of these species.

Originally posted by dragonsmusic
That's very interesting. I try and imagine what it that would have been like with other lifeforms walking around that were quasi human, sort of looked human, and were related, but were not actually the same species. Weird.

Flag

Well, as one who believes in the Bible, and the outlay given within the Text of Genesis Chapter one, I find it fancinating that we are finding ever more evidence of Pre Human Life on this planet.

Now, I know to some, this may seem strange, but the Accounts recorded in Genesis Chapter 1 are truthfully a RECREATION, and it has been MY PERSONAL belief, the ever renouned verse, "Let us make man in Our Image" has more meaning than the Church ever wishes to acknowledge, let alone tell the Sheep.

I have had difficulties with the linguistics in this verse, due to the manner inwhich man is spoken in a casual or familiar way. You would believe if man was an unknown entity, the verse may reflect this as follows.

Let us make an upright being, and call it man, and create it, both male and female, and instruct it to have dominion over the, blah,, blah,,blah.

But no, It is expressed as if Man was previously known to both God and his Sons. And frankly, I am more than pleased they stepped in a made the improvements they did.

These Ancestors are frightening at the least, and it is quite easy to see why they became extinct. Who would Wish, or Want to Mate with someone looking like that. They didn't have Bags to place over heads in those days. They may have tried Ferns or Banana leaves, but didn't have enough Rope or "Tape" to keep these secured. Sorry, My Bad

But yes, I do find this facinating and inspiring that details such as these are begining to be presented that express the "Status Quo" maybe not according to Hoyle, so to speak.

Thanks for the reviews and contributions from all.

Ciao

Shane

I love the fact that it's a DNA story and not a Fossil. This way they'll be able to determine once and for all if it was distinct.


Another interesting to twist.

S & F

reply to post by dragonsmusic

I try and imagine what it that would have been like with other lifeforms walking around that were quasi human, sort of looked human, and were related, but were not actually the same species. Weird.

Yes, it is a little strange, but not really a whole lot stranger than it would have been for explorers in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, seeing Africans, Melanesians, Chinese and so on face to face. Confrontation with the Other is always disturbing when the Other resembles us in some ways, yet differs in others. Don't forget that as late as the last century, some anthropologists were still arguing that blacks were a different species, or subspecies, from whites. And of course Nazi types still believe it...

Do you think our legends of fairies, dwarves, pixies, leprechauns, trolls and boggarts hark back to a time when we shared the Earth with other human races?

Also, I wonder how long before someone pops up on ATS claiming to be the last surviving Neanderthal or whatever...

I did not note some this offered earlier in the previous Links/Stories. The BBC report had this included within their story.

DNA identifies new ancient human dubbed 'X-woman'

Dr Krause said the ground layer in which the Denisova hominin fragment was found contain tools which are similar to those made by modern humans in Europe.

Slice of time

"We have ornaments, there is a bracelet, so there are several elements in the layers that are usually associated with modern human archaeology," he told BBC News.

"That's quite interesting, but of course, it is hard to prove that the bone is strongly associated to this archaeology, because it is possible that bones could have moved within the site.

"We are also not sure how exactly the excavation was done. It could have come from a deeper layer, so that's hard to say."

So either they used and wore these tools and ordornments, or as noted, the excavation resulted in this presumption.

The balance of the report is easy to follow, and actually a nice read.

Ciao

Shane