SackScratch Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted November 5, 2019 Admin Author Share Posted November 5, 2019 14 hours ago, Huntster said: They walked, just like all the other critters, including homo sapiens.......unless you subscribe to the theory that homo sapiens got here by boat from Siberia, which I believe is very possible. No matter if they walked or rafted along the shoreline? The bigger question is, did humans start in Africa? Or did many continents give rise to similar species? I think science has settled this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted November 5, 2019 Moderator Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, norseman said: I think science has settled this. No, science is still fighting over it. One side of the argument considers it settled, but not the other. The evidence against the currently prevailing paradigm is growing. I recommend reading "The Forgotten Exodus: the Into Africa Theory of Human Evolution" by Bruce Fenton and "Lone Survivors: How We Came to be the Only Humans on Earth" by Chris Stringer. IMHO they present each side of the discussion very very well. MIB 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, norseman said: .........The bigger question is, did humans start in Africa? Or did many continents give rise to similar species? I think science has settled this. Seems to me that science rarely settles anything. If anything, it raises different questions. The supposed ages of fossils appears to answer that question, but it may be more of a situation of certain parts of Africa simply being much more conducive in preserving fossils than the rest of the world. At any rate, trying to go back several million years is for others to play around with. I'm much more interested in the past 100,000 years, and even more interested in the past 30,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted November 5, 2019 Admin Author Share Posted November 5, 2019 I think the science was settled through DNA not fossils. Albeit yes the oldest and most diverse hominid fossils do come from Africa. But Modern European and Asian populations are hybrids. Modern Africans are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 What seems to be shunted to the side with all of the proposed ancestral candidates is the nose morphology. All are depicted with flat, pongid noses. Am I right that there are are very few (any?) photos or witness accounts that describe that kind of nose? Patty certainly didn’t have one. I don’t know what adaptive pressures there would be to change nose shape that dramatically in a species...maybe colder weather ?...but I don’t think it is a trivial point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted November 6, 2019 Admin Author Share Posted November 6, 2019 10 minutes ago, WSA said: What seems to be shunted to the side with all of the proposed ancestral candidates is the nose morphology. All are depicted with flat, pongid noses. Am I right that there are are very few (any?) photos or witness accounts that describe that kind of nose? Patty certainly didn’t have one. I don’t know what adaptive pressures there would be to change nose shape that dramatically in a species...maybe colder weather ?...but I don’t think it is a trivial point. True. But they are reconstructing tissue on best guesses, as none of that was preserved. Did Paranthropus have a flat nose or a human like nose? It could go either way I suppose. As we do not have its genome. The clincher is the mandible and teeth size and sloped head for chewing that seem to be the main considerations for Meldrum in his comparison. Im torn myself. If we are simply dealing with a bipedal Gorilla? We should be viewing them in a zoo by now. But Patty looks far from human to me as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 Are we not reconstructing the paranthropus skull to the pixelated Patty face? How accurate are any of our reconstructions? Look at variations in human skulls compared to human faces. Its all guesses on top of guesses. Educated or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 2 hours ago, norseman said: True. But they are reconstructing tissue on best guesses, as none of that was preserved. Did Paranthropus have a flat nose or a human like nose? It could go either way I suppose. As we do not have its genome. The clincher is the mandible and teeth size and sloped head for chewing that seem to be the main considerations for Meldrum in his comparison. Im torn myself. If we are simply dealing with a bipedal Gorilla? We should be viewing them in a zoo by now. But Patty looks far from human to me as well. I got to do some research on this. I got to believe there are bony characteristics of the septum that might indicate fleshy/cartilaginous morphology, maybe? Interesting question, and I just don’t know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 If you want to examine diverse skull features of contemporary humans, check the Philippines. North to south, east to west. I forget how many dialects they have. I think it is around forty. 7,000 islands makes the area very diverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 Tell me about it! My ex is Filipino and just going to a party with them you’ll have different dialects and they’ll have slight issues understanding each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 7 hours ago, Twist said: Tell me about it! My ex is Filipino and just going to a party with them you’ll have different dialects and they’ll have slight issues understanding each other. You intentionally did not mention the 'karaoke factor' and the versions of "Feelings" that punished your ear drums. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franco Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 Interesting.... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7656993/12-million-year-old-ape-fossil-straight-legs-missing-link-primates-humans.html On 10/12/2019 at 12:29 PM, georgerm said: It sounds like a man or bigfoot. It was described as being tall and covered with two inch long black fir that made me to think bigfoot. The human part was a long beard, and hand stiched rabbit furs. I've never heard of Sassy having a cloak made of furs. Has anyone? Below is a log structure that I found 4 miles south of Reedsport, Oregon. My friend Red is pictured here. Was it man made of a bigfoot nest? I'll go back and look for hairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Catmandoo said: You intentionally did not mention the 'karaoke factor' and the versions of "Feelings" that punished your ear drums. karaoke is a staple at all parties, or gathering of 2 or more Filipina’s! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted November 7, 2019 Share Posted November 7, 2019 The news coverage of the article published in Nature about the 12 million year old fossils of apes who had the ability to be bipedal is getting a lot of play. The current find is of apes that were about 3.5 feet tall and 70 lbs. They are different than the Gibbons. Gibbons are 'lesser apes'. Gibbons can swing through the trees at over 30mph. Makes Tarzan look like slug bait. They walk on the ground too. Check out their tracks if you have time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts