BU Dialogues in Biological Anthropology: The Mysterious Origins of the Genus Homo-Part 1
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 чер 2024
- New fossils have sparked new, revolutionary ideas about the origins of the genus Homo. Did the first truly human primates evolve in East Africa, as the textbooks would have it? Or was the human homeland in Asia or South Africa? On April 7th, 2011, the third BU Dialogues in Biological Anthropology confronted these questions, along with the long-simmering debate over who owns the fossils and who gets to see them.
In this webcast, Dr. Lee R. Berger (Reader in Human Evolution and the Public Understanding of Science, Institute for Human Evolution, School of GeoSciences, University of the Witwatersrand) and Dr. Adam van Arsdale (Department of Anthropology, Wellesley College) present, discuss, and debate contrasting ideas about new fossil discoveries and the evolutionary origins of the human genus.
Excellent info and content. Thank you for sharing.
Nice. Very nice. Really fascinating. Always enjoy these discussions.
Thanks. Excellent info...love the dialogue.
Pretty cool hearing Lee say that there's more out there before he finds Rising Star😎
Outstanding, highly professional presentation. This is a prime example of taken your research & science communication serious...
Thanks to anybody involved
Super interesting. Thank you for sharing.
Although I am confused now:
>Austrolopitecus is NOT our ancestor, right?
>Our first ancestor emerged in East Africa, although he came, most probably... from Asia?!
I think most people in the field would say that we evolved from Australopithecins, the question is from which one? Have we found this species yet? And of course we know today that there has been a lot of hybridization in the genus homo, so why not between Australopithecins? But these Austrolopithecins we evolved from then of course have to be earlier than Homo fossil finds. Au. afarensis is up to 3,8 million years old and Au. amanenis is up to 4 million years old.
The talk is from 2011. Today the Dmanisi fossils are seen as Homo erectus and that species is 2 million years old, as well as Australopithecus sediba. So erectus didn't evolve from sediba but shares a common ancestor with sediba back in time. Homo erectus is also the first homo species to leave Africa and live in Europe and Asia, where they evolved into the Neanderthals and Denisovans respectively. Homo erectus evolved in Africa around before 300 k years into Homo sapiens which then also spread to Asia and Europe, replacing the Neanderthals and Denisovans while hybridizing with them. So Homo sapiens is still entirely out of Africa. I hope that helps to clear up some confusion.
It is sort of our ancestor because Homo Erectus emerged from Australopithecus between 2-3 million years ago and both were alive at the same time. It was basically a more human like bipedal ape and an offshoot of it became Homo.
I think oldest Homo sapien and Erectus have both been in Africa but there’s the Dmanisi site which is pretty old so it’s close or confusing without more info. But I think scientists still think they left Africa to get to Dmanisi.
Basically everyone outside of Africa has Neanderthal dna and most Asians also have 5% Denisovan. So some modern humans have at least 7.5% ancient dna from those absorbed/extinct populations and that’s just the ones we know about.
I bet we’re a mix of several more extinct hominid subspecies that we don’t know about yet, they maybe had a few genes worth keeping but the subspecies itself didn’t last long, which I guess is just natural selection.
Australopithecus IS our ancestor, I think there is almost universal agreement on that.
I think it is assumed Homo Erectus evolved in East Africa.
@@vinm300 Is Erghaster the same thing as Erectus?
Fossil Africa is high and dry whereas if humans evolved in a wet climate it’s unlikely to produce fossils especially if, like in Scotland, the soil is acidic.
The fossils these guys are digging up came from originally wet areas though that’s how fossils get formed. The soft parts decompose leaving the skeleton, then it gets covered by sediment and the minerals in sediment replace the bone. That’s why they have so much trouble finding soft body fossils from early earth history. There’s probably fossils in Scotland if you find the right layers I think I remember hearing of dinosaur fossil from there.
So, homo may have evolved in Scotland, but the fossil record has been destroyed? I'd like to think that could eventually be proven, and it would amuse me to see the English have to deal with that.
Aha! So Homo originated in Scotland, as shown by the absence of evidence. Hoot man!
If I remember correctly, this last ice age started about 26 million years ago. When do they think Scotland stopped being mostly buried under an ice sheet? I don’t know how thick that one was, but the ones in North America were up to 2 miles thick less than 40,000 years ago. A mile is about 5,280 feet. I don’t know what that is in kilometers or meters. Things have changed drastically everywhere. There was at least one huge lake where the Sahara is before the drastic event that killed almost all the large animals and raised the sea levels by at least 200 feet. Ice sheets started melting fast. Undoubtedly the source of all the flood stories.
Excellent!
I wonder, has anthropology taken the great ice age floods into account? It seems to me it could explain a "deposit" in east Africa being that it sure looks like a tremendous amount of water came rushing down off the end of the Himalayas, washed over northern Africa and appeared to have stopped around the same place they have found all the hominid fossils. I don't know.
Those miners forgot where the hole was....?
My mother in law didn't evolve she looks like Lucy just taller
😂
I only date Neanderthal’s, I an spot em miles away or should I say my Hormones can smell them around the corner 😂 😅😊
Great presentation. Bit not convinced that either fossil location holds early homo.
Need to subtitles
Do other species of homo not have the same variation of homo sapiens?
Subtitles also do good things politically for good reasons.
2011? Can someone say if this is substantially out of date or not?
Yep, I can confirm that. The same video I am watching today says it's from Nov. 23rd, 2020. I would expect more from the Boston University.
Just because L3 divergents exists in only certain populations of Africa in no way confirms that ALL humanity has it's origins in Africa. L3 is massively found in Eurasia. In the remote past, there WAS no country called Africa or any other named land. It was just free movement of primates and other animals. There were no borders. L3 woman could have come from anywhere; from Eurasia, Asia and surrounding lands to what we now call East Africa. To base one's entire anthropological world view on one L3 dna is very ignorant.
So where's Adam?
Chimpanzees have technology, Australopithecus could have had it too, made of perishable materials and unmodified stone tools, similar to the ones used by chimps.
Hello Maty,
Hello Matt,, what are you calling a mandolin? They all seem to have smiles on their skulls, could it be foul.play? There was a skull museum in Pilsen Chicago with the same cocept.
I would be most interested in the status of biological anthropology in relation to ethnography, these days. In the wakes of the critique of the old pseudoscience of race and the rise of demographic research using genetics, what remains (if anything) of biological angles on defining, distinguishing or categorizing ethnic groups?
The continued use of biological anthropological techniques for refining our understanding of the early ancestors of our own species (and those adjacent to us) strikes me as fascinating - but also uncontroversial.
Naledi bred with a modern human coming in from Europe.
Presupposed conjecture...
Just find.it.weird new species have been made.we.can point .to
If all this talk and presentation of erudiction makes you happy and helps you pay your food and fend off desease, then Banzai!!! to Anthropology.
You are not suppose to wear silver.
Here's a theory. Maybe this creature was nocturnal and spent the daytime hours hiding in the cave. With its ability for climbing, coupled with an ability to navigate in low light environments it was able to explore and navigate the depths of the cave.
In summary, a creature spending a great deal of time in the cave, add to that climbing ability and being comfortable in dark environments due to their nocturnal nature. Suddenly finding individuals down there doesn't seem so unlikely.
Add to this predentary pressure from cats or other humanoids that can pursue Naledi into the cave system. Then the remote depths of the cave become a natural refuge where predators couldn't or wouldn't follow.
I'm not saying I believe this, but if outside-the-box thinking is invited, then give this some consideration?
ALL YOU ARE GOING TO FINED ARE MONEY BONES.
Hahahahahahahahaaaa classic lol
Where are the People of Color in Anthropology? Why are there NO Black or Asian people on this panel?
All anthropologists are secretly members of the klan. Or alternatively, maybe there are not many Blacks and Asians who major in that field which there is little or no market demand for unless you can land a job as a professional academic.
Where are the people from non English speaking countries in anthropology? Why are only English native speakers on the panel, where are the Germans and the Georgians from the Dmanisi dig? Where are the women? The person who discovered and identified the first Dmanisi mandible shown in this video was a German woman called Antje Justus (and the male English speaking anthropology world ridiculed her for saying this was probably Homo erectus). I think what we see here is mainly the dominance of males in the the field (who exude authority by their sheer maleness and who can delegate the family work to women) and of English speakers who also control the "international" journals. Also, anthropology is a field that does not teach a profession of any use outside of university. There are very, very few jobs to be had, and minority ethnics within the Anglosphere tend to make more pragmatic choices what to study, like law or medicine.
What's that backfeed arrow from mesopotamia? Is that a white supremacist attempt to deny homo sapiens sapiens development in Africa? Otherwise I've not heard of any such contemporary development.
It is widely and probably universally accepted that there were back migrations from Asia to Africa, not just one way movement of populations.
What about the findings in Greece! Burgaria!!! We did NOT come from Africa
Proves nothing.
what findings?
Please expand on the findings to which you are referring.
The word, "mysterious" is an unfortunate choice to put in the title of this video. It conjures up "ancient aliens" and all sorts of nonsense. Just saying.
Poor host to talented presenters.
Nothing mysterious it's called evolution 😀
Nothing mysterious. This is a beautiful video, but unfortunately it's unscientific biologically: Mio-Pliocene hominoids (apes, incl. australopiths) were already upright,
but not for running: they typically waded bipedally & climbed arms overhead in swamp forests (like bonobos & lowland gorillas still do sometimes in forest swamps in search of waterlilies or sedges), google e.g. "aquarboreal ancestors". For the evolution of the genus Homo during the Ice Ages, google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo PPT".
All these bones buried in the earth 🌎 in sedimentary layers would be a perfect fit to the words spoken by God himself when he concluded he had no choice but to destroy ALL FLESH just as he told us.
Bible. Genesis 6:7-8,11-14,17-19,21-22
[7]And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
[8]But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
[11]The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
[12]And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
("As it was in the days of Noah so shall it be at the coming of the son of man." JESUS.
[13]And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
[14]Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.
[17]And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
[18]But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.
[19]And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
[21]And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.
[22]Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.
I dare anyone to watch this series and after watching be in agreement with the explanation given in this STORY.
Genesis conflict series.
ua-cam.com/play/PL13eE2x3qhPktufTQOHw0wsMOPdxFky-P.html