New evidence of Homo sapiens

Bells said:
A) The 300,000+ year old one that was published in Nature this month?

B)Looking at it, it does not seem that different to the Florisbad skull that was found in South African that was dated to around 200,000 years ago.
Click to expand...

A) yes
B) which, I believe was classified as heidelbergensis? (dated to 259,000 years old)?

....................................
Classification via morphology has always been a tricky beasty------(eye of the beholder and all that).

....................
It seems that most who publish on the subject believe that Heidelbergensis spawned both denisovans and neanderthals while continuing to exist and evolve as heidelbergensis
perhaps
aside from spawning neanderthals and denisovans,so to sapiens sapiens?
or are we the end product of heidelbergensis evolution?
 
Last edited:
sculptor said:
A) yes
B) which, I believe was classified as heidelbergensis? (dated to 259,000 years old)?
Click to expand...
Or H. helmei, wasn't it? An intermediary between H. heidelbergensis and H. sapiens.. That was the last mumble I had heard about it.

The brow looks similar to the Flobisbad Skull, as does the shape of the skull. The shape of the skull is also similar than that compared to H. sapiens.

Here is an image of the Morocco find next to the skull of a known H. sapiens:

1skulls_web.jpg


The side on view shows just how different the shape actually is. The face shows the extended brow. But the side view shows a more elongated skull from the Morocco find, compared to that of a H. sapiens. One study noted the similarities with other hominids, such as Neanderthals, but most importantly, looked in depth at the skull's profile and makes for a very interesting read. I linked the full text, but if it takes you to the abstract, there are options on that page to view the full text on PDF or HTML.
sculptor said:
Classification via morphology has always been a tricky beasty------(eye of the beholder and all that).
Click to expand...
I think just classifying it as H. sapiens, without any really definitive proof, just makes things trickier.

sculptor said:
It seems that most who publish on the subject believe that Heidelbergensis spawned both denisovans and neanderthals while continuing to exist and evolve as heidelbergensis
perhaps
aside from spawning neanderthals and denisovans,so to sapiens sapiens?
Click to expand...
I thought it was the running theme at present, that we evolved from H. heildelbergensis and that it also saw many other homo species evolve from it, but which failed to survive as a whole and that H. sapiens were the sole surviving hominids, with a bit of a mixture from interbreeding with various other hominids along the way..

Put simply, they haven't found another species that sets us apart or that shows differently at present..

sculptor said:
or are we the end product of heidelbergensis evolution?
Click to expand...
That depends, are we continuing to evolve? We won't know for sure for a while yet. I was reading somewhere, a while ago, that our development, our technological advancements, may have stunted our own evolution in that we may be the end product in a way.. I'll need to find it, was a while since I read it. But it was an interesting thought.


_____________________________________________

Studies cited:

Bruner, Emiliano, and Osbjorn Pearson. "Neurocranial Evolution in Modern Humans: The Case of Jebel Irhoud 1." Anthropological Science. The Anthropological Society of Nippon, 23 Apr. 2013. Web. 20 June 2017. <https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ase/121/1/121_120927/_html>.
 
Last edited:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-brontosaurus-is-back1/

The nearly 300-page study analyzed 477 different physical features of 81 sauropod specimens, involving five years of research and numerous visits to museum collections in Europe and the U.S. The initial goal of the research was to clarify the relationships among the species making up the family of sauropods known as the diplodocids, which includes Diplodocus,Apatosaurus and now Brontosaurus.

Seems the same sort of debate is going on with regards to Dinosaurs

:)
 
Bells said:
That depends, are we continuing to evolve? We won't know for sure for a while yet.
Click to expand...
Yes, in the sense that we are producing variation. Whenever selection acts, it will have plenty of material to act upon.

We haven't been subjected to a serious selection for a while now, as a species, nor have we generated an isolated breeding population. But we may - at which point, we will have evolved undeniably.
 
[QUOTE="iceaura,

We haven't been subjected to a serious selection for a while now, as a species, nor have we generated an isolated breeding population. But we may - at which point, we will have evolved undeniably.[/QUOTE]

Do we need more conditions than the former habitants ?
We have the polar condition the tropical condition in the jungle , the highlanders in Tibet, Bolivia
We have brought black white and asian races
There are some groups ( second generation ) growing six fingers on each hand.
What do we expect to grow tails again ?
At the present man is making and esigning its own environment
 
As far as I'm aware, there's very little reason to doubt the "out of Africa" hypothesis for the evolution of Homo sapiens. Genetic studies alone overwhelmingly support that hypothesis. Genetic diversity among people in Africa is far greater than anywhere else on the planet, indicating that the African people have existed for far longer than human beings anywhere else.
 
origin said:
Is there any of this or are you just making stuff up again.
Click to expand...
Amazingly enough, he has touched on something..

He is not exactly correct, but he is not that far off the mark either..

http://www.the-scientist.com/?artic...e/Could-the-Black-Death-protect-against-HIV-/

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/04/04/black-plagues-quirky-genetics-700-years-later/

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-03/uol-bdw031005.php

To sum it up, there is some evidence that suggests that a portion of Europeans have a higher chance of immunity to HIV. They carry a gene mutation that appears to be there because they are descendants of people who survived the Black Death or possibly even other plagues that struck Europe. But studies in Denmark found something else entirely.. In that the mutation most probably predated the Black Death, and may have been something that occurred much earlier in human history and it is that mutation that occurred from an earlier event, that may have allowed so many Europeans to survive the Black Death epidemic, and that same mutation now allows people to have an immunity to HIV today..

In 2000, another team of scientists, from Copenhagen's Hvidovre Hospital, investigated why many Europeans appeared to be resistant to HIV. Jesper Eugen-Olsen teamed up with archaeologist and carbon-dating specialist Kaare Lund Rasmussen from the Danish National Museum and analyzed genetic material from ancient bone tissue to try to solve the mystery.

"It always puzzled scientists in the field that the mutation never occurs in Asian or African populations, but only among European Caucasians," said Eugen-Olsen. It is much more prevalent in the North and tapers off towards the Mediterranean, meaning that only eight out of 100 Southern Italians carry the mutation, compared to one in four Danes.

The Danish group rejected the idea that the mutation became more prevalent as a result of the Black Death because the epidemic began in Sicily (in the South) and spread north to Scandinavia. This direction of travel would have predicted that the prevalence of the mutation would have become higher in the South than in the North, which is the reverse of what actually happened.

Assuming that the mutation arose in Scandinavia, Eugen-Olsen's team concentrated on determining the time of the major spread of the mutation by examining bones found in Denmark, dating from the last Ice Age, around 8000 BC to 1950 BC. In particular, they focused on the time between 1800 and 2600 BC, a Mesolithic period of massive change and migration.

Their findings suggested that the CCR-5-Δ32 mutation was already highly prevalent in Denmark before the Black Death. Rasmussen reported: "There is support in the fact that the distribution of the Single Grave Culture in Northern and Middle Europe matches that of the high prevalence of 32Δ." This meant that an epidemic decimating the Stone Age population could explain the archaeological observations as well as the distribution of the 32Δ mutation.

They proposed that people with the genetic mutation were then more likely to survive the Black Death, passing on the mutation to current generations and conferring resistance to HIV.

[Source]​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top