28 JANUARY 2011 VOL 331 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org 39.docxtamicawaysmith
28 JANUARY 2011 VOL 331 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org 392
NEWSFOCUS
New genomic data are settling an old
argument about how our species evolved
C
R
E
D
IT
S
:
M
A
X
P
L
A
N
C
K
I
N
S
T
IT
U
T
E
F
O
R
E
V
O
L
U
T
IO
N
A
R
Y
A
N
T
H
R
O
P
O
L
O
G
Y
FOR 27 YEARS, CHRIS STRINGER AND
Milford Wolpoff have been at odds about
where and how our species was born.
Stringer, a paleoanthropologist at the Nat-
ural History Museum in London, held that
modern humans came out of Africa, spread
around the world, and replaced, rather than
mated with, the archaic humans they met.
But Wolpoff, of the University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, argued that a single, worldwide
species of human, including archaic forms
outside of Africa, met, mingled and had
offspring, and so produced Homo sapiens.
The battle has been long and
bitter: When reviewing a man-
uscript in the 1980s, Wolpoff
scribbled “Stringer’s desper-
ate argument” under a chart;
in a 1996 book, Stringer wrote
that “attention to inconvenient
details has never been part of
the Wolpoff style.” At one tense
meeting, the pair presented
opposing views in rival sessions
on the same day—and Wolpoff
didn’t invite Stringer to the
meeting’s press conference. “It
was diff icult for a long time,”
recalls Stringer.
Then, in the past year, geneticists an-
nounced the nearly complete nuclear
genomes of two different archaic humans:
Neandertals, and their enigmatic eastern
cousins from southern Siberia. These data
provide a much higher resolution view of
our past, much as a new telescope allows
astronomers to see farther back in time
in the universe. When compared with the
genomes of living people, the ancient
genomes allow anthropologists to thor-
oughly test the competing models of human
origins for the fi rst time.
The DNA data suggest not one but
at least two instances of interbreeding
between archaic and modern humans, rais-
ing the question of whether H. sapiens at that
point was a distinct species (see sidebar,
p. 394). And so they appear to refute the com-
plete replacement aspect of the Out of Africa
model. “[Modern humans] are certainly com-
ing out of Africa, but we’re fi nding evidence
of low levels of admixture wherever you
look,” says evolutionary geneticist Michael
Hammer of the University of Arizona in Tuc-
son. Stringer admits: “The story has undoubt-
edly got a whole lot more complicated.”
But the genomic data don’t prove the
classic multiregionalism model correct
either. They suggest only a small amount
of interbreeding, presumably at the margins
where invading moderns met archaic groups
that were the worldwide descendants of
H. erectus, the human ancestor that left
Africa 1.8 million years ago. “I have lately
taken to talking about the best model as
replacement with hybridization, … [or]
‘leaky replacement,’ ” says paleogeneticist
Svante Pääbo of ...
Home Read Sign inEXPLORATIONSCONTENTS Search in boSusanaFurman449
Home Read Sign in
EXPLORATIONS
CONTENTS
Search in book …
Private: Main Body
9. Early Hominins
Kerryn Warren, Ph.D., University of Cape Town
Lindsay Hunter, Ph.D., University of Witwatersrand
Navashni Naidoo, M.Sc., University of Cape Town
Silindokuhle Mavuso, M.Sc., University of Witwatersrand
Kimberleigh Tommy, M.Sc., University of Witwatersrand
Rosa Moll, M.Sc., University of Witwatersrand
Nomawethu Hlazo, M.Sc., University of Cape Town
Learning Objectives
De�ne what is meant by “hominin”.
Understand what is meant by “derived” and “primitive” traits and why this is relevant for understanding early
hominin evolution.
Understand changing paleoclimates and paleoenvironments during early human evolution, and contextualize
them as potential factors in�uencing adaptations during this time.
Describe the anatomical changes associated with bipedalism in early hominins and the implications for
changes in locomotion.
Describe the anatomical changes associated with dentition in early hominins and their implication for diet in
the Plio-Pleistocene.
Describe early hominin genera and species, including their currently understood dates and geographic ex-
panses and what we know about them. Previous: Primate Evolution
Next: Early Members of the Genus Homo
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/front-matter/__unknown__/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/wp-login.php?redirect_to=https%3A%2F%2Fpressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu%2Fexplorationsbioanth%2Fchapter%2Fchapter-9-early-hominins-2%2F
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/chapter/__unknown__-10/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/chapter/__unknown__-15/
Describe the earliest stone tool techno-complex and what it implies about the transition from early ho-
minins to our genus.
DEFINING HOMININS
It is through our study of our hominin ancestors and relatives that we are exposed to a world of “might have beens”: of
other paths not taken by our species, other ways of being human. But in order to better understand these different evolu-
tionary trajectories, we must �rst de�ne the terms we are using. If an imaginary line were drawn between ourselves and
our closest relatives, the great apes, bipedalism (or habitually walking upright on two feet) is where that line would be.
Hominin, then, means everyone on “our” side of the line: humans and all of our extinct bipedal ancestors and relatives
since our divergence from the last common ancestor (LCA) with chimpanzees.
Historic interpretations of our evolution, prior to our �nding of early hominin fossils, varied. Debates in the mid-1800s re-
garding hominin origins focused on two key issues:
���Where did we evolve?
���Which traits evolved �rst?
Charles Darwin hypothesized that we evolved ...
28 JANUARY 2011 VOL 331 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org 39.docxtamicawaysmith
28 JANUARY 2011 VOL 331 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org 392
NEWSFOCUS
New genomic data are settling an old
argument about how our species evolved
C
R
E
D
IT
S
:
M
A
X
P
L
A
N
C
K
I
N
S
T
IT
U
T
E
F
O
R
E
V
O
L
U
T
IO
N
A
R
Y
A
N
T
H
R
O
P
O
L
O
G
Y
FOR 27 YEARS, CHRIS STRINGER AND
Milford Wolpoff have been at odds about
where and how our species was born.
Stringer, a paleoanthropologist at the Nat-
ural History Museum in London, held that
modern humans came out of Africa, spread
around the world, and replaced, rather than
mated with, the archaic humans they met.
But Wolpoff, of the University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, argued that a single, worldwide
species of human, including archaic forms
outside of Africa, met, mingled and had
offspring, and so produced Homo sapiens.
The battle has been long and
bitter: When reviewing a man-
uscript in the 1980s, Wolpoff
scribbled “Stringer’s desper-
ate argument” under a chart;
in a 1996 book, Stringer wrote
that “attention to inconvenient
details has never been part of
the Wolpoff style.” At one tense
meeting, the pair presented
opposing views in rival sessions
on the same day—and Wolpoff
didn’t invite Stringer to the
meeting’s press conference. “It
was diff icult for a long time,”
recalls Stringer.
Then, in the past year, geneticists an-
nounced the nearly complete nuclear
genomes of two different archaic humans:
Neandertals, and their enigmatic eastern
cousins from southern Siberia. These data
provide a much higher resolution view of
our past, much as a new telescope allows
astronomers to see farther back in time
in the universe. When compared with the
genomes of living people, the ancient
genomes allow anthropologists to thor-
oughly test the competing models of human
origins for the fi rst time.
The DNA data suggest not one but
at least two instances of interbreeding
between archaic and modern humans, rais-
ing the question of whether H. sapiens at that
point was a distinct species (see sidebar,
p. 394). And so they appear to refute the com-
plete replacement aspect of the Out of Africa
model. “[Modern humans] are certainly com-
ing out of Africa, but we’re fi nding evidence
of low levels of admixture wherever you
look,” says evolutionary geneticist Michael
Hammer of the University of Arizona in Tuc-
son. Stringer admits: “The story has undoubt-
edly got a whole lot more complicated.”
But the genomic data don’t prove the
classic multiregionalism model correct
either. They suggest only a small amount
of interbreeding, presumably at the margins
where invading moderns met archaic groups
that were the worldwide descendants of
H. erectus, the human ancestor that left
Africa 1.8 million years ago. “I have lately
taken to talking about the best model as
replacement with hybridization, … [or]
‘leaky replacement,’ ” says paleogeneticist
Svante Pääbo of ...
Home Read Sign inEXPLORATIONSCONTENTS Search in boSusanaFurman449
Home Read Sign in
EXPLORATIONS
CONTENTS
Search in book …
Private: Main Body
9. Early Hominins
Kerryn Warren, Ph.D., University of Cape Town
Lindsay Hunter, Ph.D., University of Witwatersrand
Navashni Naidoo, M.Sc., University of Cape Town
Silindokuhle Mavuso, M.Sc., University of Witwatersrand
Kimberleigh Tommy, M.Sc., University of Witwatersrand
Rosa Moll, M.Sc., University of Witwatersrand
Nomawethu Hlazo, M.Sc., University of Cape Town
Learning Objectives
De�ne what is meant by “hominin”.
Understand what is meant by “derived” and “primitive” traits and why this is relevant for understanding early
hominin evolution.
Understand changing paleoclimates and paleoenvironments during early human evolution, and contextualize
them as potential factors in�uencing adaptations during this time.
Describe the anatomical changes associated with bipedalism in early hominins and the implications for
changes in locomotion.
Describe the anatomical changes associated with dentition in early hominins and their implication for diet in
the Plio-Pleistocene.
Describe early hominin genera and species, including their currently understood dates and geographic ex-
panses and what we know about them. Previous: Primate Evolution
Next: Early Members of the Genus Homo
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/front-matter/__unknown__/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/wp-login.php?redirect_to=https%3A%2F%2Fpressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu%2Fexplorationsbioanth%2Fchapter%2Fchapter-9-early-hominins-2%2F
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/chapter/__unknown__-10/
https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/explorationsbioanth/chapter/__unknown__-15/
Describe the earliest stone tool techno-complex and what it implies about the transition from early ho-
minins to our genus.
DEFINING HOMININS
It is through our study of our hominin ancestors and relatives that we are exposed to a world of “might have beens”: of
other paths not taken by our species, other ways of being human. But in order to better understand these different evolu-
tionary trajectories, we must �rst de�ne the terms we are using. If an imaginary line were drawn between ourselves and
our closest relatives, the great apes, bipedalism (or habitually walking upright on two feet) is where that line would be.
Hominin, then, means everyone on “our” side of the line: humans and all of our extinct bipedal ancestors and relatives
since our divergence from the last common ancestor (LCA) with chimpanzees.
Historic interpretations of our evolution, prior to our �nding of early hominin fossils, varied. Debates in the mid-1800s re-
garding hominin origins focused on two key issues:
���Where did we evolve?
���Which traits evolved �rst?
Charles Darwin hypothesized that we evolved ...
Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years.
Human evolution is the evolutionary process leading up to the appearance of modern humans. It is the process by which human beings developed on Earth from now-extinct primates. It involves the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. The study of human evolution involves many scientific disciplines, including physical anthropology, primatology, archaeology, ethology, evolutionary psychology, embryology and genetics. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioural traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years.
TABLE OF CONTENT
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Evolutionary Theory
3.0 Process of Evolution
4.0 History of Human Evolution
5.0 Paleoanthropology
6.0 Evidence of Evolution
6.1 Evidence from comparative physiology
6.2 Evidence from comparative anatomy
6.3 Evidence from comparative embryology
6.4 Evidence from comparative morphology
6.5 Evidence from vestigial organs
6.6 Genetics
6.7 Evidence from Molecular Biology
6.8 Evidence from the Fossil Record
7.0 Divergence of the Human Clade from other Great Apes
8.0 Anatomical changes
8.1 Anatomy of bipedalism
8.2 Encephalization
8.3 Sexual dimorphism
8.4 Other changes
9.0 Genus Homo
10.0 Homo Sapiens Taxonomy
MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY PUBLICATION FOR EDUCATORSV.docxroushhsiu
MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY PUBLICATION FOR EDUCATORS
VOLUME 31 NO. 1 SPRING 2010
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN?
A BEHAVIORAL PERSPECTIVE
by Alison S. Brooks
˜ ˜ ˜
“…it would be impossible to fix on any point when the term “man”
ought to be used……” (Darwin 1871: 230)
A
new permanent exhibit at the Smithsonian’s Na
tional Museum of Natural History asks the ques
tion “What does it mean to be human?” Before
there were any fossils to inform us about the roads taken
and not taken on our evolutionary journey, 18th and 19th
century scholars wrestled with the anatomical similarities
between humans and apes, especially, as Darwin noted,
the African apes. Many of the human distinctions these
early scholars cited were behavioral, including language,
tool-making and technology-dependence, culture, use of
fire, a sense of shame, burial of the dead, and a sense of
the sacred. Even today, our anatomy alone may not suf-
fice to define our genus Homo. Indeed in 1964 one of the
oldest members of our genus, Homo habilis, was defined
as Homo to a large extent on the basis of the tools found
in association with its bones; the evolutionary or generic
status of the bones themselves remains controversial. As
in the museum’s new exhibit, new approaches to under-
standing our past and defining our species emphasize the
role of changing human behavior and its relationship to
and possible role in changing our anatomy.
This paper offers a brief summary of key discover-
ies in the fossil record followed by a discussion of be-
havioral characteristics defining modern humans and their
emergence through time. This is followed by a descrip-
tion of the evidence documenting the development of
archaic, Neanderthal, and modern humans, tracing the
evolution of key behaviors from 600 kya to 40 kya (thou-
sands of years ago). Finally, the evidence for the role of
Africa in the gradual evolution of distinctly modern hu-
man behaviors is argued as the paper concludes.
The Fossil Record of Human Evolution
Charles Darwin in his 1871 book, The Descent of Man,
located the likely origination of humans in Africa due to
the geographic distribution and comparable anatomy of
the chimpanzee and gorilla. Other early scholars, how-
ever, thought that our two most distinctive anatomical
features, our large brains and our two-legged gait, had
evolved together and that these changes had happened in
Europe. In Darwin’s time, only a few fossils of Nean-
SPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINS
What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?
ANTHRONOTES®
Page 2
AnthroNotes Volume 31 No.1 Spring 2010
derthals, our closest extinct relatives, had been recovered
from European sites. The 1891 finding in Java of Pithecan-
thropus erectus (now Homo erectus), an ...
William Golding imagined a prehistoric encounter between Neanderthals and our ancestors, Homo sapiens. In 1955, when he wrote the novel describing a preliterate society gradually exterminated by a more modern civilization, our understanding of this Stone Age encounter was sketchy. Scientists could not even say whether Homo sapiens sapiens had lived at the same time as Neanderthals, or instead were descended from them. But in the last 10 years, a much more complete picture has emerged of what happened--40,000 years ago--when the last two branches of the human family tree met, and one prevailed.
Neanderthals were not as primitive as they are often portrayed in popular culture. They were humans like us, and their brains were at least as big as ours. They were larger and stronger, and were successful hunters of big and small game. They probably even had language, which is generally thought to have arisen between 300,000 and 400,000 years ago. They were, in any case, anatomically capable of speech. Their stocky bodies are thought to have made them well adapted to the northern latitudes and glacial climates of Europe, where they lived for at least 300,000 years--far longer than we have.
Essay on The History of Human Evolution
Human Evolution Essay
Human Evolution And The Human Race Essay
Human Evolution Essay
Evolution Of Human Evolution
Human Evolution
Essay on human evolution
The Evolution of Humans Essay
Human Evolution Essay
Homo Sapien Human Evolution
The Importance Of Human Evolution
The Future Of Human Evolution Essay
Persuasive Essay On Human Evolution
Essay about Human Evolution and Adaptation
Did Human Evolution: How Did Humans Come To Be?
Evolution Of Human Evolution
Essay on The Importance of Human Evolution
Evolution And Its Impact On Human Evolution
Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years.
Human evolution is the evolutionary process leading up to the appearance of modern humans. It is the process by which human beings developed on Earth from now-extinct primates. It involves the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. The study of human evolution involves many scientific disciplines, including physical anthropology, primatology, archaeology, ethology, evolutionary psychology, embryology and genetics. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioural traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years.
TABLE OF CONTENT
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Evolutionary Theory
3.0 Process of Evolution
4.0 History of Human Evolution
5.0 Paleoanthropology
6.0 Evidence of Evolution
6.1 Evidence from comparative physiology
6.2 Evidence from comparative anatomy
6.3 Evidence from comparative embryology
6.4 Evidence from comparative morphology
6.5 Evidence from vestigial organs
6.6 Genetics
6.7 Evidence from Molecular Biology
6.8 Evidence from the Fossil Record
7.0 Divergence of the Human Clade from other Great Apes
8.0 Anatomical changes
8.1 Anatomy of bipedalism
8.2 Encephalization
8.3 Sexual dimorphism
8.4 Other changes
9.0 Genus Homo
10.0 Homo Sapiens Taxonomy
MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY PUBLICATION FOR EDUCATORSV.docxroushhsiu
MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY PUBLICATION FOR EDUCATORS
VOLUME 31 NO. 1 SPRING 2010
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN?
A BEHAVIORAL PERSPECTIVE
by Alison S. Brooks
˜ ˜ ˜
“…it would be impossible to fix on any point when the term “man”
ought to be used……” (Darwin 1871: 230)
A
new permanent exhibit at the Smithsonian’s Na
tional Museum of Natural History asks the ques
tion “What does it mean to be human?” Before
there were any fossils to inform us about the roads taken
and not taken on our evolutionary journey, 18th and 19th
century scholars wrestled with the anatomical similarities
between humans and apes, especially, as Darwin noted,
the African apes. Many of the human distinctions these
early scholars cited were behavioral, including language,
tool-making and technology-dependence, culture, use of
fire, a sense of shame, burial of the dead, and a sense of
the sacred. Even today, our anatomy alone may not suf-
fice to define our genus Homo. Indeed in 1964 one of the
oldest members of our genus, Homo habilis, was defined
as Homo to a large extent on the basis of the tools found
in association with its bones; the evolutionary or generic
status of the bones themselves remains controversial. As
in the museum’s new exhibit, new approaches to under-
standing our past and defining our species emphasize the
role of changing human behavior and its relationship to
and possible role in changing our anatomy.
This paper offers a brief summary of key discover-
ies in the fossil record followed by a discussion of be-
havioral characteristics defining modern humans and their
emergence through time. This is followed by a descrip-
tion of the evidence documenting the development of
archaic, Neanderthal, and modern humans, tracing the
evolution of key behaviors from 600 kya to 40 kya (thou-
sands of years ago). Finally, the evidence for the role of
Africa in the gradual evolution of distinctly modern hu-
man behaviors is argued as the paper concludes.
The Fossil Record of Human Evolution
Charles Darwin in his 1871 book, The Descent of Man,
located the likely origination of humans in Africa due to
the geographic distribution and comparable anatomy of
the chimpanzee and gorilla. Other early scholars, how-
ever, thought that our two most distinctive anatomical
features, our large brains and our two-legged gait, had
evolved together and that these changes had happened in
Europe. In Darwin’s time, only a few fossils of Nean-
SPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINSSPECIAL ISSUE ON HUMAN ORIGINS
What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?What Does it Mean to be Human?
ANTHRONOTES®
Page 2
AnthroNotes Volume 31 No.1 Spring 2010
derthals, our closest extinct relatives, had been recovered
from European sites. The 1891 finding in Java of Pithecan-
thropus erectus (now Homo erectus), an ...
William Golding imagined a prehistoric encounter between Neanderthals and our ancestors, Homo sapiens. In 1955, when he wrote the novel describing a preliterate society gradually exterminated by a more modern civilization, our understanding of this Stone Age encounter was sketchy. Scientists could not even say whether Homo sapiens sapiens had lived at the same time as Neanderthals, or instead were descended from them. But in the last 10 years, a much more complete picture has emerged of what happened--40,000 years ago--when the last two branches of the human family tree met, and one prevailed.
Neanderthals were not as primitive as they are often portrayed in popular culture. They were humans like us, and their brains were at least as big as ours. They were larger and stronger, and were successful hunters of big and small game. They probably even had language, which is generally thought to have arisen between 300,000 and 400,000 years ago. They were, in any case, anatomically capable of speech. Their stocky bodies are thought to have made them well adapted to the northern latitudes and glacial climates of Europe, where they lived for at least 300,000 years--far longer than we have.
Essay on The History of Human Evolution
Human Evolution Essay
Human Evolution And The Human Race Essay
Human Evolution Essay
Evolution Of Human Evolution
Human Evolution
Essay on human evolution
The Evolution of Humans Essay
Human Evolution Essay
Homo Sapien Human Evolution
The Importance Of Human Evolution
The Future Of Human Evolution Essay
Persuasive Essay On Human Evolution
Essay about Human Evolution and Adaptation
Did Human Evolution: How Did Humans Come To Be?
Evolution Of Human Evolution
Essay on The Importance of Human Evolution
Evolution And Its Impact On Human Evolution
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxEduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher presents at the OECD webinar ‘Digital devices in schools: detrimental distraction or secret to success?’ on 27 May 2024. The presentation was based on findings from PISA 2022 results and the webinar helped launch the PISA in Focus ‘Managing screen time: How to protect and equip students against distraction’ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/managing-screen-time_7c225af4-en and the OECD Education Policy Perspective ‘Students, digital devices and success’ can be found here - https://oe.cd/il/5yV
The Indian economy is classified into different sectors to simplify the analysis and understanding of economic activities. For Class 10, it's essential to grasp the sectors of the Indian economy, understand their characteristics, and recognize their importance. This guide will provide detailed notes on the Sectors of the Indian Economy Class 10, using specific long-tail keywords to enhance comprehension.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
How to Create Map Views in the Odoo 17 ERPCeline George
The map views are useful for providing a geographical representation of data. They allow users to visualize and analyze the data in a more intuitive manner.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
We all have good and bad thoughts from time to time and situation to situation. We are bombarded daily with spiraling thoughts(both negative and positive) creating all-consuming feel , making us difficult to manage with associated suffering. Good thoughts are like our Mob Signal (Positive thought) amidst noise(negative thought) in the atmosphere. Negative thoughts like noise outweigh positive thoughts. These thoughts often create unwanted confusion, trouble, stress and frustration in our mind as well as chaos in our physical world. Negative thoughts are also known as “distorted thinking”.
The Art Pastor's Guide to Sabbath | Steve ThomasonSteve Thomason
What is the purpose of the Sabbath Law in the Torah. It is interesting to compare how the context of the law shifts from Exodus to Deuteronomy. Who gets to rest, and why?
CLASS 11 CBSE B.St Project AIDS TO TRADE - INSURANCE
Out of Africa_ _ American Scientist.pdf
1. To the Editors:
"We Are All Africans" by Pat Shipman (Marginalia, November–December) is
very interesting and thought-provoking. Its support for the African Eve
theory gives a partial picture of the origin of modern man.
The African Eve theory is based on the hypothesis that Homo sapiens
sapiens appeared in Africa more than 100,000 years ago and migrated out of
Africa into Europe and Asia sometime afterward. The key problem with the
African Eve theory is the replacement of the indigenous population in the
other parts of the world by Homo sapiens sapiens recently migrated out of
Africa. Replacement of the Neandertals in Eurasia is not difficult to accept,
though some may still have reservations. Replacement of the descendants
from Homo erectus in Asia, especially East Asia, is questionable. This part of
Asia was not totally covered by glaciers as in Europe during the Pleistocene.
In view of the large landmass, abundant food supply and tool technology,
including the use of bamboo, the population in East Asia must have far
exceeded Neandertals. Their replacement by a small group of hominids from
American Scientist
Out of Africa?
ANTHROPOLOGY EVOLUTION GENEAOLOGY
2. Africa is very difficult to envision. Furthermore, no evidence shows that the
stone-tool culture in East Asia was altered as a result of the recently arrived
Homo sapiens sapiens from Africa.
The Multiregional theory is based on the migrations of Homo erectus from
Africa over a million years ago. They settled in different parts of Europe and
Asia, with periodic gene exchanges between the groups. Through time, they
evolved into the modern population. Neandertals, as discussed in the article,
form only one branch of the multiregional population. Also, the early man
described in the African Eve theory is really a part of the multiregional
population unless "replacement" can be proved.
Dating of the genetic events, such as the time hominids migrated out of
Africa, is very uncertain. Mutation is not a constant event, and assuming a
constant rate for mutation to be used in this calculation of dating genetic
events could lead to serious errors. Since both the African Eve and
Multiregional theories are based on African origin, any genetic data without
proper dating would support either theory.
A serious effect of ignoring hominid evolutionary processes beyond 100,000
years ago is the loss of input data to research. For example, the effect of
bipedalism would not be included in the study of evolutionary psychology
and other evolution-related science, since bipedal development is believed
to have occurred much earlier than 100,000 years ago.
Adam Chou
Flemington, New Jersey
3. Dr. Shipman replies:
Dr. Chou raises some important questions that have puzzled several
readers.
He asks first about evidence for the replacement of archaic humans around
the world by modern humans who arose in Africa, a key tenet of the Out of
Africa theory. He finds the replacement of the Asian population of Homo
erectus by "a small group of hominids from Africa . . . difficult to envision."
Although we humans often judge ideas on their plausibility, plausibility is not
a rigorous test of the validity of scientific ideas.
Whether we can envision it readily or not, the replacement of one species by
another invasive species has happened repeatedly on large landmasses with
abundant food supplies. For example, a few pairs of English starlings were
released in Central Park in New York City in the 1890s; starlings are now a
widespread and extremely numerous species across the United States,
which is contributing to the decline of native species of swallow, bluebird
and woodpecker. These indigenous species nest, as do starlings, in tree
cavities, but apparently the invading species is better at monopolizing an
essential and limited resource. Replacement often occurs by indirect
competition.
What evidence might we find of such a replacement? Three possibilities
come to mind.
4. First, as Dr. Chou suggests, the style of tools in a geographic area might
change if tool-making invaders arrived. Frustratingly, it is very difficult to
know who made any particular stone tool or type of tool. Hominids are very
good imitators, and the knowledge of how to make a particular type of tool is
not biologically encoded, so far as we know. The archaeological record does
not give us clear evidence either of replacement or of its lack.
Second, a change in anatomy or morphology of the fossils should reveal
whether an indigenous species has evolved or whether another species has
moved in from elsewhere. Unfortunately, Out of Africanists and
Multiregionalists cannot agree on whether there is good evidence of
morphological continuity in the fossil record of the genus Homo within any
single geographic region.
Third, we can turn to genetics. Evolution in situ will leave evidence of genetic
continuity; replacement by another lineage will not show such continuity.
This is where the comparison of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) extracted from
various hominids has provided strong evidence of replacement. As I
discussed in my article, the only test yet completed compared mtDNA from
three European hominids: archaic Neandertals; anatomically modern but
ancient Cro-Magnons; and living, modern Europeans. If Multiregionalists are
correct, these three populations ought to be more similar to each other in
mtDNA than they are to hominids from other geographic regions—but that
is emphatically not the case. For confirmation, similar studies should be
conducted on Asian and African fossil and modern humans. Since extracting
mtDNA from fossils is technically difficult, time-consuming and expensive, we
shall have to wait for those further tests.
5. Dr. Chou is right when he observes that dates based on molecular clocks are
uncertain. Fortunately, dates based on fossils are very accurate, when the
specimens have been buried in sediments with the appropriate geochemical
attributes. The occurrence of fossils with modern anatomy thus provides a
good check on the molecular dates. This is why the most compelling answers
come from the consilience of genetic and fossil evidence.
Dr. Chou fears that evolutionary developments in our lineage that are older
than the origin of modern humans will be ignored, to our peril. I agree
wholeheartedly. The human species as a biological entity is deeply rooted in
primate, mammalian and vertebrate evolution. Anyone wanting to develop a
sense of who we are must take that ancient ancestry into full account.
