Posted on 03/06/2002 7:38:41 PM PST by ValerieUSA
A new piece of evidence—one sure to prove controversial—has been flung into the human origins debate.
A study published March 7 in Nature presents genetic evidence that humans left Africa in at least three waves of migration. It suggests that modern humans (Homo sapiens) interbred with archaic humans (Homo erectus and Neandertals) who had migrated earlier from Africa, rather than displacing them.
Ancient Origins
In the human origins debate, which has been highly charged for at least 15 years, there is a consensus among scientists that Homo erectus, the precursor to modern humans, originated in Africa and expanded to Eurasia beginning around 1.7 million years ago.
Beyond that, opinions diverge.
There are two main points in contention. The first is whether modern humans evolved solely in Africa and then spread outward, or evolved concurrently in several places around the world.
The second area of controversy is whether modern humans completely replaced archaic forms of humans, or whether the process was one of assimilation, with interbreeding between the two groups.
"There are regions of the world, like the Middle East and Portugal, where some fossils look as if they could have been some kind of mix between archaic and modern people," said Rebecca Cann, a geneticist at the University of Hawaii.
"The question is," she said, "if there was mixing, did some archaic genetic lineages enter the modern human gene pool? If there was mixing and yet we have no evidence of those genes—as is indicated from the mitochondrial DNA and y chromosome data—why not?"
Alan Templeton, a geneticist at Washington University in St. Louis who headed the study reported in Nature, has concluded that yes, there was interbreeding between the different groups. "We are all genetically intertwined into a single long-term evolutionary lineage," he said.
To reach his conclusion, Templeton performed a statistical analysis of 11 different haplotype trees. A haplotype is a block of DNA containing gene variations that researchers believe are passed as a unit to successive generations. By comparing genetic differences in haplotypes of populations, researchers hope to track human evolution.
Templeton also concluded that modern humans left Africa in several waves—the first about 1.7 million years ago, another between 800,000 and 400,000 years ago, and a third between 150,000 and 80,000 years ago.
Alison S. Brooks, a paleoanthropologist at George Washington University, is more cautious about Templeton's conclusions. "Archaeological evidence supports multiple dispersals out of Africa," she said. "The question has always been whether these waves are dead ends. Did all of these people die? Templeton says not really, that every wave bred at least a little bit with those in Eurasia.
"This has not been the majority viewpoint of geneticists up to this point," said Brooks.
Dueling Theories
The fossil record shows that about 100,000 years ago, several species of hominids populated Earth.
Homo sapiens could be found in Africa and the Middle East; Homo erectus, as typified by Java Man and Peking Man, occupied Southeast Asia and China; and Neandertals roamed across Europe.
By about 25,000 years ago, the only hominid species that remained was Homo sapiens. Scientists have conducted a considerable amount of both genetic and archaeological research in an effort to understand how this outcome occurred.
....More at link......
I doubt this is the case. Not to say that a certain level of perversion didn't exist then as it does today. Nature seems to put up some strong walls to gene exchanges between species. Look at the Feline family. They are all cats but there are no known crosses between leopards and lions or tigers.
In my opinion the human race staved out and killed all other competing hominoids for the simple reason of survival and that we were better.
Ok who's been fooling around with Janet Reno?
With this, I agree 100%!
But could infertile offspring leave behind fossils just to confuse us???
You asking about the world in general or just in West Virginia?
Yep. Mules are an example. Horses and donkeys are close enough genetically to mate and produce offspring. However, the resulting offspring (mules) are infertile. Horses and donkeys are therefore classified as different species.
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.