Homo naledi update.

CEngelbrecht said:
I answered your question. Now you answer mine. How many fossil specimens are currently labeled chimp and gorilla ancestry versus how many labeled human? It's a simple numerical listing for taxonomic equivalance.
Click to expand...

They would not be labelled "chimp" would would they? Pan troglodytes is a modern extant animal as are humans. Here are the species found and named. (most are NOT Homo)

Some are classed as ape, some Homo and some in between because that is how Evolution works, it is a bush not a line

akalipithecus

Samburupithecus

Ouranopithecus

(Ou. turkae)

(Ou. macedoniensis)

Chororapithecus

Oreopithecus

Sivapithecus

Sahelanthropus

Graecopithecus

Orrorin

(O. praegens)

(O. tugenensis)

Ardipithecus

(Ar. kadabba)

(Ar. ramidus)

Australopithecus

(Au. africanus)

(Au. afarensis)

(Au. anamensis)

H. habilis

(H. rudolfensis)

(Au. garhi)

H. erectus

(H. antecessor)

(H. ergaster)
 
Plato_Simile_of_the_Cave.jpg
 
Pinball1970 said:
They would not be labelled "chimp" would would they? Pan troglodytes is a modern extant animal as are humans. Here are the species found and named. (most are NOT Homo)

Some are classed as ape, some Homo and some in between because that is how Evolution works, it is a bush not a line

akalipithecus

Samburupithecus

Ouranopithecus

(Ou. turkae)

(Ou. macedoniensis)

Chororapithecus

Oreopithecus

Sivapithecus

Sahelanthropus

Graecopithecus

Orrorin

(O. praegens)

(O. tugenensis)

Ardipithecus

(Ar. kadabba)

(Ar. ramidus)

Australopithecus

(Au. africanus)

(Au. afarensis)

(Au. anamensis)

H. habilis

(H. rudolfensis)

(Au. garhi)

H. erectus

(H. antecessor)

(H. ergaster)
Click to expand...

And where are the chimp and gorilla branches of that bush? Surely they would be expected to have fossilized just as often as our branch living concurrently on the same continent for the same few million years?
 
Pinball1970 said:
Totally free to do that but if you are going to come on a hard science thread regarding current main stream research, bring something better than piltdown man or you will get push back.
Click to expand...

Tell me how that foot cannot possibly be the foot of a bonobo of very recent date. Turning the three big toe fragments 90 degrees.

Such a shame that the medial cuneiform just happens to be missing. While the teeth on the cranium look strangely filed down. You know, like on the Piltdown Man.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
And where are the chimp and gorilla branches of that bush? Surely they would be expected to have fossilized just as often as our branch living concurrently on the same continent for the same few million years?
Click to expand...
Not everything that ever lived fossilized and there are reasons why some species fossilize and some are less likely to do so. The same reasons why the majority of fossils are marine.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Not everything that ever lived fossilized and there are reasons why some species fossilize and some are less likely to do so. The same reasons why the majority of fossils are marine.
Click to expand...

But somehow, there are 1,000 specimens labeled hominin in the current fossil archive, and less than 10 for panin and gorillinin, combined. That's the answer.

Can you explain to me why human ancestors would fossilize so much more often than those of chimps and gorillas? Were they perhaps more marine than their cousins? Did the heretic Elaine Morgan have a point? Or are the bone hunters, perish the thought, never even considering the mere possibility that an African ape fossil could be one of the other two pointless genera? If you'd consider such an inconvenient thought, would any already renowned finds perhaps apply as not human at all? Would we suddenly drown in chimp and gorilla ancestors that would be perceived worthless by our arrogant ape asses?

Some_image.width-800.441600b.jpg

image_1680e-Paranthropus-boisei.jpg

-
somso-skull-of-gorilla-female-zos51-628986_grande.jpg

female-gorilla-caring-for-young.jpg
 
Pinball1970 said:
Yeah, they got the fossils, the largest single collection ever from Africa and decided to start filing some of the parts down. Makes sense.
Click to expand...

That has happened before. Man knew immediately what he actually found after all that spelunking and all those wasted funds. Eager to parade himself on CNN with the great new hominin find. No, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Thats not an answer that is a number. Over 40 million fossils have been found and categorized and some are less like to become fossilize than others, either timing, habitat or behaviours.
Click to expand...

You're skirting it. Why that massive over-representation compared to our cousins? If they're not mislabeled out of wishful peer pressure? Why were they preserved so much more often? Why don't the bone hunters find any chimps and gorillas, but so many "people"?
 
CEngelbrecht said:
You're skirting it. Why that massive over-representation compared to our cousins? If they're not mislabeled out of wishful peer pressure? Why were they preserved so much more often? Why don't the bone hunters find any chimps and gorillas, but so many "people"?
Click to expand...
So why so many Australopithecus? Why pick on Homo? You don't get it. The rising star finds are the single largest haul of Homo fossils. They are calling them Homo because they have many Homo traits. They of course have also more primitive traits because this is what happens when you go back in time, these fossils are a snapshot in time.
If they would have been classed as Australopithecus, they STILL would be just as precious due to the number of individuals and number of individual fossils for each individual.

Now I request again that you refrain from trying to derail the thread. The issue with the find is the fact that the researchers are claiming these individuals were buried deliberately.
Please read the papers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top