Posted on 08/12/2010 4:58:56 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
The "African Eve" theory of human evolution was given much play in the media a few years back. According to the "African" view, modern humans arose exclusively in Africa and, about 100,000 years ago, expanded rapidly from there into Europe and Asia, displacing "lesser" hominids. Unfortunately, the DNA studies that stimulated this conjecture have been found to be flawed. And now new fossil testimony casts further doubt.
In 1989 and 1990, near the Han River, in China's Hube Province, anthropologists found hominid skulls with the characteristic flat faces of modern humans. These skulls seem to be about 350,000 years old. Although they apparently retain some primitive features, paleoanthropologist D. Erler, of the University of California, asserted, "This shows that modern features were emerging in different parts of the world." In other words, all of the evolutionary action was not confined to Africa. Proponents of the "African Eve" theory retort that the dating of the Chinese skulls is questionable and that flat faces alone are not enough to support the idea that modern humans arose separately in widely separated locales?
(Gibbons, Ann; "An About-Face for Modern Human Origins," Science, 256: 1521, 1992. Also: Bower, Bruce; "Erectus Unhinged," Science News, 141:408, 1992.)
Comment. Could the African and Asian fossils imply that so-called "parallel" or "convergent" evolution has occurred in the human lineage, too, just as it has in so many other forms of life?
(Excerpt) Read more at science-frontiers.com ...
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Discover · Bronze Age Forum · Science Daily · Science News · Eurekalert · PhysOrg · · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · · History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword · · Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · · |
|||
It seems like the more they learn the less they know!
To some people.
Tell me about their eyes
BTW, flipped back to one of your older references and there was an element of criticism of the "Clovis Only" thesis.
Since that time, and the discovery of Sa'ami marker DNA in North American Indians, the thesis has been ADJUSTED quite a bit. Now you find it common for analysts to suggest Europeans (that is, Sa'ami) made it to North America even 25,000 years ago, or possibly even earlier.
We note, though, that the time-line for supposed earlier East Asian penetration is focused on a single copralite found in a cave!
One more East Asian group has been added to the Sa'ami/Berber/Indian group ~ the Yakuts are now identified as having an ancient lineage from Europe.
These folks are, of course, ancestral to the Sakha, and to the Eskimo, and very closely related to the primary East Asian group that makes up the greater part of the American Indian background (for both North and South America).
An African tribe has also been added to the group with the clear implication that the Sa'ami marker genes were delivered TO Africans, not the other way around.
Catching up on the Sakha, they are mentioned in the Indian Epic "Mahabarat" among the "nations" fighting in the war between "truth and untruth". They were later expelled about 200 AD.
I love Darwinists. They’re just so CUTE with their lil theories! :-)
The politically correct, multi-culti sorts will fiercely resist any evidence that the races evolved in any substantially different ways. They just love the "everything thing originated in Africa" version of the story.
Betty Davis.
Likelihood is that the major races each started in their own native location on the globe, and the palaeontologists have not got the complete picture yet.
We note, though, that the time-line for supposed earlier East Asian penetration is focused on a single copralite found in a cave!>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No $hit? Did it have a pair of chop sticks beside it or something?
It was the DNA ~
Appropo to nothing at all, the drinking yogurt my wife buys is made by a Japanese company named Yakult.
These mysterious connections just seem to leap right out at one.
Over the last 2.5 million years there are 21 times that could have happened (at a minimum), and maybe as many as 100 times all things considered.
Most of the record of human development to handle colder and higher latitudes would have been destroyed in this process, or in the comings and goings of the Sahara desert.
It's noteworthy that sometimes the Middle Eastern arid zone is FAR LARGER and constitutes as big a desert as the Sahara ~ it has not always been the case that people could travel South from Central Asia back to Africa or to Sundaland.
The other day in reading about how fast the ability to confer lifelong lactase production can be passed into a population (they have a living example of a Sa'ami group that picked it up in about 5 generations), I realized that all but about 25% of Subsaharan Africans have that ability ~ which is traceable TO Northern and Western Europeans.
Those genes flowed South to Africa, not North to Europe. All the other genes could have done so as well.
There's little reason to imagine that "modern" development even occurred in Africa.
A Yak is an important animal in Northeast Asia. it is among those herded by the Yakuts ~ who also herd horses, reindeer, goats, sheep and COWS ~ being the only Turkic speaking group in East Asia to herd cows at all. It is believed they picked up that custom during a sojourn in India.
Turks invented yoghurt of course.
If you want to know more about the Yakuts or Sakha, there are several entertaining videos. One I like is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy8bJW9zGTA Pay close attention to the blond haired Japanese looking lady who is speaking Russian (dubbed in English). Watch her walk out into -50 F weather in light clothes and a fur muff ~ she’s got Sa’ami in her background too.
Thats a really interesting fact to know, I woder how the theorists who promote “Out of Africa” handle that argument. Its sounds pretty solid to me.
So much of science today is driven by political correctness.
The climate boondoggle being the greatest modern example, and the Omana Junta ready to milk it for personal millions in Cap N Trade.
The Chinese are on to their approach because they too genuinely believe that China is the cradle of ALL civilization. I am glad they are giving the Africa origin
school a run for their money.
The indiginous Europeans must have found a way to live in the glacial periods, one wonders where they went.It will be found one day, likely under the Mediterranean Ocean.
There were OTHER groups, though, and during interglacials they also moved across Eur-Asia.
It is difficult to imagine that they couldn't move to Africa, and back into Eur-Asia.
The groups in Africa may well be "ancestral" at some level, but at the same time they've been on the receiving end of a lot of East-West and North-South gene flow ~ just like happens today.
They've developed their own optimal types for living in the Tropics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.