Human Evolution: Origins?

[karhu]

Hello

I have always been wondering about human evolution and where it started. I want to know what kind of opinions people have about it. Is it so that human primates evolved only in Africa or could it be possible that they evolved elsewhere?

Some background facts -- as probably everyone knows;
African apes evolved from asian orang-utans 15 million years ago and apes and human primates diverged some 4-6 million years ago. The really interesting thing is the evolution of the modern human being. There is the "out of Africa theory" and the "multi evolution theory" stating that the modern human being might have evolved in Asia as well as in Africa. There is of course the genetic theory/ evidence about the African Eve. So what did really happen? Any toughts?

[PatrickHenry]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (karhu,)
Hello
Some background facts -- as probably everyone knows;
African apes evolved from asian orang-utans 15 million years ago and apes and human primates diverged some 4-6 million years ago. The really interesting thing is the evolution of the modern human being. There is the "out of Africa theory" and the "multi evolution theory" stating that the modern human being might have evolved in Asia as well as in Africa. There is of course the genetic theory/ evidence about the African Eve. So what did really happen? Any toughts?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
This is a debate site. Please post sources for your statements or label them clearly as opinions...

[shunyadragon]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (karhu,)
Hello

I have always been wondering about human evolution and where it started. I want to know what kind of opinions people have about it. Is it so that human primates evolved only in Africa or could it be possible that they evolved elsewhere?

Some background facts --  as probably everyone knows;
African apes evolved from asian orang-utans 15 million years ago and apes and human primates diverged some 4-6 million years ago. The really interesting thing is the evolution of the modern human being. There is the "out of Africa theory" and the "multi evolution  theory" stating that the modern human being might have evolved in Asia as well as in Africa. There is of course the genetic theory/ evidence about the African Eve. So what did really happen? Any toughts?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Very recent discoveries in Africa of the oldest cultural artifacts known, possibly dating from more than 75,000 years ago support the out of Africa view.

Beads made from sea shells and Ostrich egg shell have been found in two locations in Africa.

There are several other opposing views to the out of Africa theory. Some of the origins thories are subject to regional, ethnic pride and religious bias.

(1) Asia and Australiasia origins. Chinese academia and some other scientists support this view.

(2) Eurasian origins. This view is an older theory popular because of the large number of early sites discovered in Europe, but no longer recieves wide spread support, because most European scientist now support the out of Africa theory.

(3) Multiple origins theories. These theories come and go based on the evidence found and regional and ethnic bias. It is not generally popular with most scientists because of the complexity and difficulty of cutting and pasting all the evidence to fit this model.

(4) Out of Arfica or whereever according to the fundimentalist Christians and the 'Creation Science' advocates. This belief is based on the literal interpretation of the Bible and the origins of humans and everything else is by an act of God less than 10,000 years ago. The Garden of Eden is the place of origin of humans. Many believe the Garden was in Africa.

[karhu]

I´m sorry I´m new at this forum: here are some sources to check up:

Ian Shaw: a dictionary of archaeology: Blackwell publishing 2002
Colin Renfrew& Paul Bahn: archaeology; theory metohds and paractice. Thames& Hudson 2001; 3rd edition
Göran Burenhult: the illustrated history of humankind; part 1-2. Weldon Owen Pty Limited 1994.

Here are some of the books I used. I should probably get some facts from the internet, I´ll try and find some and I´ll post them as soon as possible!

[ruiner]

there's always the "from outer space" theory

[dalin]

In support of 'Out-of-Africa' theory:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1323485.stm
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20020225/eve.html (this one addresses the mitochondrial DNA link alluded to in the previous one)

This paper considers the two (single-origin vs. multiregionalism) citing the points and shortcomings of both:
http://www.micro.utexas.edu/courses/mcmurr...llysherard.html

I haven't done much reading on the subject, but I'll come back to this one.

[karhu]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Very recent discoveries in Africa of the oldest cultural artifacts known, possibly dating from more than 75,000 years ago support the out of Africa view.
Beads made from sea shells and Ostrich egg shell have been found in two locations in Africa.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Yes you are right. But these discoveries do still not prove the "out of Africa theory". There might still be earlier finds in Asia that no one has discovered yet. These discoveries in Africa do support the "out of Africa theory" for now, but more finds are yet to be discovered. Only a partial area of Asia has been archaeologically surveyed so there is still more to find.

Beads made from sea shells is not a unique product of early human beings. Artifacts like these are to be found from all over the world from archaic times until modern times. They are not a proof for the "africa theory" either. In my humble opinion there is still much more research to do. Survey should be conducted in the areas not surveyed yet, and more emphasis on modern technology (such as DNA) should be in use.

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by

Some of the origins theories are subject to regional, ethnic pride and religious bias.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

I totally agree with you, this is an ethnic pride/ religious race and many scholars refuse to see the evidence as it is.

But you have very good points :)
Some scholars should check your post out :)

[Ralph38449]

I mean no offense by stating this yet people used to believe it. People used to believe that Africa was a savage and primative area that contained the ealiest man and that more complex man moved on from the area. It is just a fight over race to say that some one was their first.
Africa is big and to say that man came from a place that big is very vage.
Also we can't even found out what happend to Roanoke (spelling???) so how can we find where man came from without noing where he is going and where he went.
The fact is we will never know and that people will never agree.
Again you all do have some good points.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by ruiner, there's always the "from outer space" theory

I have never considered the 'from outer space' theory seriously.

I have heard three theories related to this idea. The first is plausible that the source of some of the proteins may have been extraterrestial, but still from materials from within the solar system. The second is that the first primative organisms are from outer space beyond our solar system. This teory is very weak, because from all known evidence we have about cosmology indicates that our solar system is a closed system from about the time of formation. The third is the least likely. It believes that human origins are extraterrestrial. The first problem with this one is that our genetic origins are so intimately related to life on earth it would be hard to seperate our origins from life on earth. The second problem is that, like the second choice, there is not one shred of evidence for this.

[Impenitent]

that's because the aliens covered their tracks...

except for the pyramids anyway...

besides, who do you think ate the dinosaurs?

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Impenitent, that's because the aliens covered their tracks... except for the pyramids anyway... besides, who do you think ate the dinosaurs?

If they ate the dinosaurs, what do you think they would do to 6.4 billion plus helpless humans. It would be one hell of a barbeque.

[Impenitent]

they went to the next solar system to eat more dinosaurs...

humans get stuck between their teeth... (why do you think they haven't been back in so long?)

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Ralph38449, I mean no offense by stating this yet people used to believe it. People used to believe that Africa was a savage and primative area that contained the ealiest man and that more complex man moved on from the area. It is just a fight over race to say that some one was their first. Africa is big and to say that man came from a place that big is very vage. Also we can't even found out what happend to Roanoke (spelling???) so how can we find where man came from without noing where he is going and where he went. The fact is we will never know and that people will never agree. Again you all do have some good points.

Of course people never realize that Africa had advanced civilizations that traded with China, but the primitive or advanced nature of civilizations should not be an issue. The modern civiliiztions we are talking about are only thousands of years old. The human history and journey accross the globe is 200,000 years or mor older than that regardless of where they came from.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Impenitent, they went to the next solar system to eat more dinosaurs... humans get stuck between their teeth... (why do you think they haven't been back in so long?)

I guess you have not read the alien conspiracy reports. Aliens brought the first humans here as farm to raise food for their future space ventures. With 6.4 billion + they shoud be back any day for harvest time. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[dalin]

Originally posted by karhu, Yes you are right. But these discoveries do still not prove the "out of Africa theory". There might still be earlier finds in Asia that no one has discovered yet. These discoveries in Africa do support the "out of Africa theory" for now, but more finds are yet to be discovered. Only a partial area of Asia has been archaeologically surveyed so there is still more to find. Beads made from sea shells is not a unique product of early human beings. Artifacts like these are to be found from all over the world from archaic times until modern times. They are not a proof for the "africa theory" either. In my humble opinion there is still much more research to do. Survey should be conducted in the areas not surveyed yet, and more emphasis on modern technology (such as DNA) should be in use.

Did you guys endeavor into any of those links I posted? DNA studies have been conducted (I believe even in Asia) that link various peoples to an African ancestry:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1323485.stm
Especially the section titled "Genetic Markers"

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20020225/eve.html


However, the Out-of-Africa theory itself is changing. Before, the belief was that an enlargement in the brain inspired the exodus, but primitive hominid fossils and artifacts have been found in the Republic of Georgia, Israel, and other regions, suggesting that the exodus was inspired by some other reason.

Here are some links on the matter:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/...00512083134.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/...11107072856.htm

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by dalin, Did you guys endeavor into any of those links I posted?  DNA studies have been conducted (I believe even in Asia) that link various peoples to an African ancestry: However, the Out-of-Africa theory itself is changing.  Before, the belief was that an enlargement in the brain inspired the exodus, but primitive hominid fossils and artifacts have been found in the Republic of Georgia, Israel, and other regions, suggesting that the exodus was inspired by some other reason.

Yes, I read over the links you posted and I believe in the 'Out of Africa' theory.

I believe the exodus does not have anything to do with enlarged brain. Other far more less intelligent animals spread and migrate for the more logical and obvious reasons that our human ancestors also likely spread out from Africa. This exodus happened more than once when older ancestors of humans also spread out from Africa.

The most likely reason is the obvious one. The spread and migration occured during a very ideal time went the climate and other conditions caused a large growth in the population of human ancestors in Africa. In the past North Africa was at times a very productive grasslands inhabited by abundant animals. During these times the favorable conditions with abundant resources across Africa, Asia and Europe humans as well as other animals spread and populations increased.

[ruiner]

I wonder how early homnids behaved towards apes

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by ruiner, I wonder how early homnids behaved towards apes

bestiality?

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by ruiner, I wonder how early homnids behaved towards apes

They were different species. They would likely be adapted to different habitats and possibly not interact much at all. As early humaniods became hunters it is possible some of the other primates became the hunted.

Personally I see no problem with either the "out of Africa theory" and the "multi evolution theory." It stands to reason that hominids could have evolved sepreately in multiple parts of the world. The fact that all current humans have a genetic link back to an Eve does not dispute the multi evolution theory.
What could have happend, IMO, is that there was interbreeding between the different sub-species of hominids, and extinction of the non-homosapien varieties. I believe the differences in body types could be evidence of this interbreeding. Some Europeans could be ancestors of homosapiens and cromagnons. Asians could have remnants of a hominid species indiginous to parts of Asia, etc. It does seem clear that African hominids did migrate to all points of the compass and eventually became the dominant, and only, species to remain til today.