Jump to content

Homo Erectus is 200k older….


norseman

Recommended Posts

Admin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Fascinating as always, Norseman! I think the main thing this article shows, without saying it outright, is just how little is really there in the fossil record, and how incomplete it really is. Chances are there were these three species and probably at least a couple more we 'be found no evidence of, coexisting. The arrival of hominids as a new form spreading out through a variety of habitats and ecosystems, just begs for early stage speciation, effectively trying out different models of the basic format as guided by the selective factors of a given region. Youd think  at least a couple might have retained a more arboreal way of life until outcompeted them finished off by the eagles and pythons, ok, and leopards. But any niche that could be newly filled or replaced by a smart primate moving up in the world would probably involve some degree of specialization, and given any genetic isolation it doesn't take too long to come up with something a little different. Evolution is not always a slow long drawn out process, bottlenecks and catastrophes are just as effective selectors as are reaching fruit or developing immunities to local venoms .

But when maybe 5-7% of creatures are represented by the fossil record, it's pretty absurd to think we have anything close to a clear or complete picture of our origins! Like somehow all the hominids had someone fossilized, and by some divine provenance we've unearthed at least one of each! The odds of such are incalculable. What's easier to figure out is that we monkeys are pretty self-impressed with our conjectured models of how things went despite the missing 95% of the story! 

This article also shows we sexed our competition in to extinction!

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...