Last life period of the common ancestor for apes

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by timojin, Nov 15, 2015.

Page 1 of 6
  1. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    Since man is the last one of the apes , then the common ancestor should be alive or vanished after the birth of man
     
    timojin, Nov 15, 2015
    #1

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    What makes you think "man is the last one of the apes"?
    Why do you think the common ancestor "should be alive or vanished after the birth of man"?
     
    origin, Nov 15, 2015
    #2

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sculptor

    sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,476
    The curious thing is that we seem to be the only living representative of the genus homo.
    It seems that we last shared a common ancestor with the apes 13 million years ago, but for much of our existence as homo, we shared the planet with other's of the genus. During the holsteinian interglacial, Europe was shared by 3 of our genus, Heidelbergensis, neanderthalensis, and denisovans.
    Are we really alone?
     
    sculptor, Nov 15, 2015
    #3

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Ardipithecus is the earliest species that can be identified as a branching-off of the human genetic line from the chimpanzee line. She (the best-preserved specimen is female) is dated to about 7MYA, not 13MYA.

    And by the way, we are apes, specifically a species of great ape. This taxonomic family includes humans, the two species of chimpanzee, the two species of gorilla and the two species of orangutan.

    The several species of gibbons comprise the family of lesser apes, and the two families together comprise the superfamily Hominoidea, to which all ape species belong.
    And there were a few other species of genus Homo on other continents, such as Homo Floresiensis.
    We out-competed the Neanderthals in Europe as the climate warmed. Their anatomy made it difficult to hunt the smaller, faster prey animals that migrated into Europe with our species--but they interbred with sapiens. Europeans descended from the first wave of sapiens into the continent, the Cro Magnon, have small but easily identified bits of Neanderthal DNA.

    Presumably the same thing would have happened on the other continents that were home to species of genus Homo. Our ancestors were simply better adapted to the warming climate.

    If you're wondering whether somewhere there are tiny populations of Homo ergaster or habilis or another recent ancestor, it's hard to imagine how and where they managed to conceal themselves from us for so long. The polar regions are about the only place that we visit so infrequently that a viable community could hide, and the reason we don't go there very often is precisely because the weather is terrible and there's very little food. This would be just as big a problem for the other species as it is for us.

    We keep discovering new species of other clades of animals, but they're almost always rather small (all the better to hide from us) and herbivorous or insectivorous (so they can find enough food). If there are hominids hiding in the rain forests, they're gonna be some pretty tiny folks.
     
    Fraggle Rocker, Nov 15, 2015
    #4
  8. spidergoat

    spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    T
    The common ancestor of existing apes and man would likely be extinct by now, that was a long time ago. But species don't always disappear when a new one branches off.
     
    spidergoat, Nov 15, 2015
    #5
  9. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    You answer. Is man the latest branch of the common ancestor ? Is there a stem left of the ancestor tree ?
     
    timojin, Nov 16, 2015
    #6
  10. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    If man evolved after the apes then man is the ancestor, because other apes branched off and man is still the trunk of the branch
     
    timojin, Nov 16, 2015
    #7
  11. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Actually, the two species of chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, the larger and more warlike chimpanzee, and Pan paniscus, the smaller and more peaceful chimpanzee, only split apart from the "trunk" about one million years ago.

    So to use your terminology, the chimpanzees are the trunk of the branch, since we split off much further back.
     
    Fraggle Rocker, Nov 16, 2015
    #8
  12. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    No.
    Huh? listen, about 7 million years ago there was a common ancestor of pans and humans so they both are the latest if I understand what you are trying to say.
     
    origin, Nov 16, 2015
    #9
  13. sculptor

    sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,476
    The ancestors of humans and chimpanzees may have begun genetically diverging from one another 13 million years ago, more than twice as long ago as had been widely thought, shedding new light on the process of human evolution, researchers say.
    ...
    Now a new study of chimp mutation rates appears to confirm that the most recent common ancestor of humans and chimps lived about 13 million years ago.
    "Our results add substance to the idea that the human-chimpanzee split was considerably older than has been recently thought," said study co-author Gil McVean, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics in Oxford, England.
    from:
    http://www.livescience.com/46300-chimpanzee-evolution-dna-mutations.html
     
    sculptor, Nov 16, 2015
    #10
  14. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
     
    timojin, Nov 16, 2015
    #11
  15. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    To make a parallel to your description of the two branches of chimp. I would say man evolved into Caucasian Negroid and Chines , Japanese . ( we all are Human ) They are chimps in your case .
     
    timojin, Nov 16, 2015
    #12
  16. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    Not correct. Humans are all one species. The bonobo and chimpazee
    are different species.
     
    origin, Nov 16, 2015
    #13
  17. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    Pardon me, you are incorrect in telling me been incorrect .( note I have not mentioned in my posts bonobo )
    My point was in reply to Fraggle Rocker "chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, the larger and more warlike chimpanzee, and Pan paniscus, the smaller and more peaceful chimpanzee, "
    But you are Ok
     
    timojin, Nov 16, 2015
    #14
  18. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    No you are incorrect comparining different races of man to different species of apes. Pan troglodytes (common chimpanzee) and Pan paniscus (bonobo)
     
    origin, Nov 16, 2015
    #15
  19. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Uh, no. All modern humans are members of the same species: Homo sapiens. The difference between the DNA of a European, a Chinese, an African, a Native American and a Native Australian are no greater than the difference between two people in the same country with no common ancestors going back at least four generations.

    Even the faint but identifiable traces of Neanderthal DNA in the European descendants of the Cro-Magnon (the first wave of sapiens migration from Asia into Europe, roughly 40KYA) are not a sufficient (much less consistent!) difference from any other group of humans, and in fact no more different than you might be from your next-door neighbor if your grandparents came to America from two different countries.

    On the contrary, the Bonobo chimpanzee and the "true" chimpanzee have consistently different DNA that can clearly identify a chimp's species. (The species were cross-bred in captivity out of ignorance, before the technology of DNA analysis was available, but they rarely interbreed in the wild, if only because the larger troglodytes are very aggressive and often kill chimps from other tribes, while the smaller paniscus are the hippies of the jungle and spend half their time in sex orgies that involve the entire tribe--and run for the hills if they see the trogs coming.)

    The issue has been explained this way: the DNA of a cocker spaniel and an Afghan hound, whose common ancestors lived only a couple of thousand years ago, are MORE DIFFERENT from each other than the DNA of a Norwegian and a Native American, whose common ancestors lived more than ten thousand years ago.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2015
    Fraggle Rocker, Nov 16, 2015
    #16
  20. spidergoat

    spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    No.
     
    spidergoat, Nov 16, 2015
    #17
  21. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    It is very interesting when there is a one set mind . between me and spidergoat , Origin, and Fraggil. , You guys read and don't digest , then replay what is set in your mind.
    Thank you anyhow
     
    timojin, Nov 16, 2015
    #18
  22. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    You are the one who is not digesting what you read. You have a set idea in your mind and that is that man is above the animals or that man is the pinnacle of creation. This clouds your ability to see reality.

    Quite simply, after the common ancestor of man and chimpanzees, both the lines of man and the lines of chimpanzee continued to evolve. You seem to think man evolved and the chimps did not, which is false.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2015
    origin, Nov 16, 2015
    #19
  23. timojin

    timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    I was going to stop my part of the post , but , Again this is not what I am driving (You seem to think man evolved and the chimps did not, )
    Think : There is a tree, the have 4 branches, each branch higher then then the other , the distance between the branches is measured in time . Branch 1 is the lowest , branch 4 is the highest , branch 4 is the youngest.. The branches are attached to the same trunk which goes to the rut.
    Now I look at the 4 branches # 4 human , # 3 chimp # 2 Gorilla # 1 Orangutan ...... I call the trunk biological appe .
    So here we are different , we come out at different time , from the trunk
    So where is the trunk ( common ancestor ) ?
    Is the common ancestor alive ?
    I hope you will understand me .
     
    timojin, Nov 17, 2015
    #20
Page 1 of 6

Share This Page