Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 42

Thread: New findings on human evolution

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default New findings on human evolution

    https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-...347(18)30117-4

    The view that Homo sapiens evolved from a single region/population within Africa has been given primacy in studies of human evolution.
    However, developments across multiple fields show that relevant data are no longer consistent with this view.
    We argue instead that Homo sapiens evolved within a set of interlinked groups living across Africa, whose connectivity changed through time.
    Genetic models therefore need to incorporate a more complex view of ancient migration and divergence in Africa.
    Put into layman's language by the Graunid
    The telltale characteristics of a modern human – globular brain case, a chin, a more delicate brow and a small face – seem to first appear in different places at different times. Previously, this has either been explained as evidence of a single, large population trekking around the continent en masse or by dismissing certain fossils as side-branches of the modern human lineage that just happened to have developed certain anatomical similarities.
    The latest analysis suggests that this patchwork emergence of human traits can be explained by the existence of multiple populations that were periodically separated for millennia by rivers, deserts, forests and mountains before coming into contact again due to shifts in the climate. “These barriers created migration and contact opportunities for groups that may previously have been separated, and later fluctuation might have meant populations that mixed for a short while became isolated again,” said Scerri.
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...30482605444471
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,742

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    I can see a thriving network of connected, 'short' (two, three hundred mile) routes between earlier hunter gatherers that would facilitate this. Flip, you could walk from Kenya to Vladivostok in an easy couple of years, if you knew where to go. That sort of timescale and networking would be utterly lost in the fossil record, where physical evidence of human remains are often separated by hundreds and thousands of years.

    Andy
    "We were schooner-rigged and rakish, with a long and lissome hull ..."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    I thought that too Purri. As far as Aus is concerned the sea levels, climate, vegetation etc were so different 60,000 years ago that our 'generations' cannot easily conceive what it was like to walk from the Coburg Peninsula to Tasmania.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    The dates are a moveable feast it seems as the science progresses. Applies to all sub-species of Homo Erectus as new discoveries are made.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by purri View Post
    From OZ. So whats new?
    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    I thought that too Purri. As far as Aus is concerned the sea levels, climate, vegetation etc were so different 60,000 years ago that our 'generations' cannot easily conceive what it was like to walk from the Coburg Peninsula to Tasmania.
    Quote Originally Posted by purri View Post
    There is some evidence of seed deposits and carbon aggregations from sundry events about 130K BCE that are contested. Just waiting for the usual with the usual...
    Thread drift.
    The paper discusses what happened before Homo Sapiens left Africa.

    It is supported methinks by the knowledge that when they turned west they interbred with Neanderthals and on turning east they mixed with Denisovans. Old habits died hard.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Agreed PM. Drift.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    2,338

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    to assume we all came from the same people is arrogant at best. It does fit into the "adam and eve" storyline though
    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Art Haberland View Post
    to assume we all came from the same people is arrogant at best. It does fit into the "adam and eve" storyline though
    Genetics indicates a "pinch point" where we descended from a small population, so that we are all descended from one woman, her peers blood lines did not survive. I think that this new proposal is for the time before the population reduced to cause that pinch point.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Toronto Canada
    Posts
    1,449

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Does Frank know about this?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,692

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    A lot of what has been accepted human history will eventually turn out to be wrong. There is plenty left to be determined with a high degree of accuracy and possibly never with absolute certainty. That humankind migrated out of Africa only 70,000 years ago has long been unbelievable to me. Much too short a period to have resulted in the diverse groupings that are now known to have existed over the Eurasian continent and beyond.
    Tom L

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New Zealand's Far North
    Posts
    8,052

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    “These barriers created migration and contact opportunities for groups that may previously have been separated, and later fluctuation might have meant populations that mixed for a short while became isolated again,” said Scerri.

    If that is true, they were no longer the same populations.
    There is nothing quite as permanent as a good temporary repair.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Lathrop View Post
    That humankind migrated out of Africa only 70,000 years ago has long been unbelievable to me. Much too short a period to have resulted in the diverse groupings that are now known to have existed over the Eurasian continent and beyond.
    According to Google maps

    Now the anthropologists reckon people may have moved 25 miles to new territory every generation, say 30 years.
    So in 70,000 they can easily have moved 58,000 miles.

    Eminently do able.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by purri View Post
    ^Oh dear
    What, darling?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,692

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    According to Google maps

    Now the anthropologists reckon people may have moved 25 miles to new territory every generation, say 30 years.
    So in 70,000 they can easily have moved 58,000 miles.

    Eminently do able.
    Bad analogy Nick. Didn't say it wasn't doable, just that I don't believe that it was done that fast. More discoveries will eventually settle the question. Neither of us know the answer but I will stick to my thought until proven wrong. I anticipate discovery of evidence of human populations well outside Africa way earlier than 70K years. But maybe not. Time will tell.

    Populations can move fast but its usually hte result of some pressure like weather, food source or war.
    Tom L

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Lathrop View Post
    Bad analogy Nick. Didn't say it wasn't doable, just that I don't believe that it was done that fast. More discoveries will eventually settle the question. Neither of us know the answer but I will stick to my thought until proven wrong. I anticipate discovery of evidence of human populations well outside Africa way earlier than 70K years. But maybe not. Time will tell.

    Populations can move fast but its usually hte result of some pressure like weather, food source or war.
    A lot of experts in the field are happy with that timescale. There is a lot of evidence from different fields of study that says we are all out of Africa. What have you got to say it was not so?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    A lot of experts in the field are happy with that timescale. There is a lot of evidence from different fields of study that says we are all out of Africa. What have you got to say it was not so?
    I don't think that the Africa theory is wrong at this stage. More a matter of when, and 70,000 seems far too short a time.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,692

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Did someone say that Africa was not the source of homo sapiens? Certainly wasn't me. I only question the time scale as does skuthorp.
    Tom L

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    I don't think that the Africa theory is wrong at this stage. More a matter of when, and 70,000 seems far too short a time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Lathrop View Post
    Did someone say that Africa was not the source of homo sapiens? Certainly wasn't me. I only question the time scale as does skuthorp.
    Nothing is simple in archaeology
    Last year, researchers published evidence from German Neanderthal remains of mixing that occurred between 219,000 and 460,000 years ago. And in 2016, a team found signs that pioneer groups from Africa interbred with Neanderthals in the Altai region of Siberia about 100,000 years ago.
    "We had so many new pieces of evidence and we didn't know where they fitted," said Prof Hershkovitz.
    "Now with the new discovery, all the pieces fall into place - an exodus possibly as early as 250,000 years ago, which is the date of the tools found in the Misliya Cave."
    However, the early excursions into Eurasia by African Homo sapiens represented at Misliya are generally thought to have ended in extinction. Findings from genetics and archaeology suggest that present-day people living outside Africa trace their ancestry to an exodus just 60,000 years ago. Most DNA studies have failed to find evidence of these older migrations in our genes.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-42817323
    So it seems that the only surviving descendants of emigrations from Africa are from the exodus of approx 70,000 years ago.

    This has a lot of info: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...gration-13561/
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,261

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Lathrop View Post
    A lot of what has been accepted human history will eventually turn out to be wrong. There is plenty left to be determined with a high degree of accuracy and possibly never with absolute certainty. That humankind migrated out of Africa only 70,000 years ago has long been unbelievable to me. Much too short a period to have resulted in the diverse groupings that are now known to have existed over the Eurasian continent and beyond.
    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    . . .the anthropologists reckon people may have moved 25 miles to new territory every generation, say 30 years.
    So in 70,000 they can easily have moved 58,000 miles.

    Eminently do able.
    I'm thinking 30 years is too long for a 'generation' considering that, for most of our history, 30 would have been advanced middle age.

    IIRC, genealogists figure 20 years/generation.

    Taking that figure, there would have been ~3,500 generations in the past 70K years.

    That's not a whole lot of iterations in the genetic scheme of things, from what I understand.

    Also, there is simply now way that populations moved at any sort of regular 'rate'. 25 miles/Generation simply would not happen.


    Staying on the same range for 30-40 generations, then moving a few hundred miles in the space of one generation makes a LOT more sense.


    Furthermore, It is my understanding that there are about 12 basic 'x' chromosomes, yet only one 'y', which means that this is a more accurate phrase than the one originally posted by Peerie Maa:
    Genetics indicates a "pinch point" where we descended from a small population, so that we are all descended from one man, his peers' blood lines did not survive. . .
    This would make a WHOLE lot more sense, considering that one woman would have had to birth a LOT of babies to carry several 'y's forward.

    I think this has a parallel with Ghenghis Khan, who did everything in his power to ensure that only his genes endured.

    I think this may go a long way toward explaining the warlike, violent nature of humans.

    It could be that the only surviving people are descended from a man who was willing to kill all other 'y's, and inseminate all 'x's

    This is VERY interesting stuff, Nick, and thanks for posting it up.
    Rattling the teacups.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    ^ You have become confused between mitochondrial eve, from a lot further back in time and the population pinch point frm whom the out of Africa peoples descended. It was a population, albeit a small one, with all of the (limited) genetic diversity that implies.
    This discusses how and how fast the migration took place.
    http://www.pnas.org/content/109/44/17758
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,934

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Genetics indicates a "pinch point" where we descended from a small population, so that we are all descended from one man, his peers' blood lines did not survive. . .
    That's a little misleading. Every genome, male or female, is a patchwork of genetic material derived from both paternal and maternal ancestors. While Y-chromosomal Adam contributed that allosome, that does not mean that his buddy Oog's genes are excluded from the gene pool. Remember, there are 45 other chromosomes in play, and the genetic cards are reshuffled every time a sperm meets an egg. Suppose old Oog mates with a comely female hominin named Ook, contributing 23 chromosomes to the resulting daughter (who get his x instead of his y, of course). Oog and Ook's daughter then hooks up with Adam's son, a young fellow we might call Y-chromosomal Abel, and the resultant child is as statistically likely to share genetic material with Oog as with Adam. If this child is Oog's only living descendent, then Oog's Y chromosome will be lost to posterity, but the rest of his genetic material may still be in play. Indeed, we may have more Oog in us than Adam.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,261

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Taylor View Post
    That's a little misleading. Every genome, male or female, is a patchwork of genetic material derived from both paternal and maternal ancestors. While Y-chromosomal Adam contributed that allosome, that does not mean that his buddy Oog's genes are excluded from the gene pool. Remember, there are 45 other chromosomes in play, and the genetic cards are reshuffled every time a sperm meets an egg. Suppose old Oog mates with a comely female hominin named Ook, contributing 23 chromosomes to the resulting daughter (who get his x instead of his y, of course). Oog and Ook's daughter then hooks up with Adam's son, a young fellow we might call Y-chromosomal Abel, and the resultant child is as statistically likely to share genetic material with Oog as with Adam. If this child is Oog's only living descendent, then Oog's Y chromosome will be lost to posterity, but the rest of his genetic material may still be in play. Indeed, we may have more Oog in us than Adam.
    Oh, my.

    I think Nick addressed (most of) this by pointing out my confusion between mitochondrial DNA and X chromosomes.

    Please accept my confession of nearly total ignorance of the subject.

    And, by the way, Ook! Ook!

    Rattling the teacups.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,934

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    I think a lot of confusion arises from the overuse of terms like "mitochondrial Eve" and "Y chromosomal Adam," which can be misunderstood to mean that we received our entire genomic inheritance from those two individuals. In truth, our genomic inheritance comes not from any individual, but from much larger breeding populations (including, for some of us, Denisovan and Neanderthal populations which branched out long before those putative chromosomal ancestors were born!).

    The genome is a big, messy thing and can be sliced in a lot of different ways. Somewhere in our past, a human ancestor possessed a certain gene on chromosome 22 called C22orf45. Alas, we don't know whether that individual was male or female so we don't know whether to call that person C22orf45 Adam or C22orf45 Eve.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Taylor View Post
    I think a lot of confusion arises from the overuse of terms like "mitochondrial Eve" and "Y chromosomal Adam," which can be misunderstood to mean that we received our entire genomic inheritance from those two individuals. In truth, our genomic inheritance comes not from any individual, but from much larger breeding populations (including, for some of us, Denisovan and Neanderthal populations which branched out long before those putative chromosomal ancestors were born!).

    The genome is a big, messy thing and can be sliced in a lot of different ways. Somewhere in our past, a human ancestor possessed a certain gene on chromosome 22 called C22orf45. Alas, we don't know whether that individual was male or female so we don't know whether to call that person C22orf45 Adam or C22orf45 Eve.
    Thinking about it, does putting a date to Mitochondrial Eve actually add much value in the Big Scheme of Things?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    BC Coast
    Posts
    3,795

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    I can't find the information now, but I read not too long ago there was probably a migration(s) of HSS out of Africa prior to 100,000 years ago. It is thought IIRC this group eventually died out but presumable left genetic evidence with occasional dalliances' with HSN. There may have been a number of similar migrations, but as far as I can see Scientists are still holding to the theory the main migration that we are descended from was between 60K and 80K.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by gilberj View Post
    I can't find the information now, but I read not too long ago there was probably a migration(s) of HSS out of Africa prior to 100,000 years ago. It is thought IIRC this group eventually died out but presumable left genetic evidence with occasional dalliances' with HSN. There may have been a number of similar migrations, but as far as I can see Scientists are still holding to the theory the main migration that we are descended from was between 60K and 80K.
    Click the links in post #22.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Aboriginal populations in Aus would, in that case, likely be from a much earlier ex Africa movement.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    Aboriginal populations in Aus would, in that case, likely be from a much earlier ex Africa movement.
    Why?
    Remote cave reveals earliest Australians lived around 50,000 years ago
    https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/2...0000-years-ago
    That is still 20,000 years worth of walking.
    Whilst this
    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...an-exit-africa
    Tells a more complicated picture
    The authors also suggest the new date of 65,000 years for the peopling of Australia pushes back the time when modern humans coming out of Africa mated with archaic species in Asia, such as Neandertals and Denisovans. Living Aborigines carry traces of those two species' DNA, which their ancestors must have acquired by mixing somewhere in Asia before they reached Australia.
    But such early mixing with Denisovans and Neandertals is at odds with genetic evidence from living Aborigines and nearby Melanesians, says population geneticist David Reich of Harvard University. Analyses of these people's DNA "confidently" suggests that the interbreeding happened only 45,000 to 53,000 years ago, Reich says. "If these [new] dates are correct, they must be from a human population that was largely replaced by the people who are the primary ancestors of today's Australians and New Guineans," he says. If so, today's Mirarr descend from a later migration.
    That makes sense to archaeologist Jim O'Connell of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, who has favored the later chronology. This is "the only reliable [early] date," he says. "I'd make the argument that the ancestor of [living] Australian Aboriginals and New Guineans got there later."
    However, paleoanthropologist Michael Westaway of Griffith University in Brisbane still thinks there was only a single migration. He notes that genomic samples to date don't include Aborigines in northern Australia such as Nango and her family. Their DNA—or that of their ancestors—might help resolve the issue.
    It is postulated that there was more than one migration, but the earlier transients died out or were replaced, which agrees with the DNA evidence. Again see the link in post 22.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,692

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Most likely statement that is completely accurate. "Nothing is simple in archaeology" I reserve judgement. Since new facts are being discovered about what, when and where, and the future of mankind does not rest on the answer, there is no downside to waiting as human history becomes more defined.
    Tom L

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nowra NSW. A little piece of paradise
    Posts
    1,527

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    You all do realise these are theories, no more, no less.

    No body in 2018 has definitive proof of what happened back at the dawn of time.

    There should a caveat on all papers " In actual fact, all ideas expressed in this paper are just that, Ideas. No one really knows."

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    The genetics are no longer theories Barney, but we have a way to go. Some things will never be known because of time and decay. But from surviving evidence such as tooth wear and bone analysis, and art and ritual evidence some inferences can be drawn.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nowra NSW. A little piece of paradise
    Posts
    1,527

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    There are too many "What If's"

    The academics are talking the language of "Settled Science" and it is not.

    The migratory routes are a guess, educated? Yes, but still a guess.

    "What If" there was a land bridge across the Indian ocean at the latitude of Capricorn and the ancestors of the Aboriginal peoples crossed and then the bridge disappeared. How are we too know?

    I have heard of whole theories being based on the discovery of half a jaw bone with two teeth.

    And.... After 100,000 years I would not trust DNA. It is, after all organic. not crystaline

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    50,997

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    "The academics are talking the language of "Settled Science" and it is not."

    Scientists never talk of 'settled science'. it's a work in progress as are we.

    But Journalists love to insrt that inference, it makes for better, and occasionally more sensational headlines. Of course if you do read beyond the first para, and most don't, you often find the actual science in the article.If challenged the journo often says either "the editor did it", or "it makes a better headline". And there are empires in science fixed ideas that are defended though disproved. I instance tobacco, asbestos, and piltdown man.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    41,005

    Default Re: New findings on human evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by AussieBarney View Post
    I have heard of whole theories being based on the discovery of half a jaw bone with two teeth.

    And.... After 100,000 years I would not trust DNA. It is, after all organic. not crystaline
    Do you really think that the people doing the DNA analysis are incompetent?
    They do know how to get accurate results, and if the material cannot yield accurate results for one of many reasons they say so and do not issue any result.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •