CARTA: The Origin of Us - Fossils of Modern Humans Interbreeding within and outside of Africa
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- (Visit: www.uctv.tv/) One of the enduring questions of human origins is when, where and how we "Behaviorally Modern Humans" emerged and why and how we eventually replaced all the other human-like species. This series takes a fresh look at the situation today with a critical examination of the available evidence from multiple sources. Chris Stringer (Natural History Museum, London) leads off with a talk about the Fossil Record of Anatomically Modern Humans, followed by Michael Hammer (Univ of Arizona) on Interbreeding with Archaic Humans in Africa, and Richard "Ed" Green (UC Santa Cruz) on Interbreeding with Archaic Humans outside Africa. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [7/2013] [Science] [Show ID: 25388]
Wonderful presentation that was apparently posted back in 2013. There have been so many discoveries since then I would be interested to see how they impact this same subject today. I particularly enjoyed the presentation made by Ed Green. So if you are still looking in on this video Ed, thanks for your very effective presentation. I am a mostly retired senior with lots of time to spare so I spend that time going back over subjects I enjoy but was not able to adequately study back in college. This is a rewarding experience for me.
I could not have expressed my own thoughts better. I could listen to Mr. Green for several hours at the least! Haha
Youth is so wasted on the young.
So many exciting things to learn on this earth and so little time to learn it.
I am wondering how this new Jab they have introduced into our DNA will effect the evolutionary records of the future....
Long ago I went to prison ( driving whilst disqualified) Rest assured - all these hominid variations are alive and well.
Little bits of their genetic arrangement maybe in all of us. So in way they are. At least small portions of their genetic arrangement is still around in in us.
Lmao. Good one.
Sir...I have only one thing to say...(hopefully the result you hoped for when you commented) ...HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Agree...Please read my comments...Thank you
Lmao
The pattern that is emerging is very similar to that which we microbiologists have been comfortable with for decades. Bacteria cover a continuum of characteristics which reach across 'species boundaries'. We talk of this or that organism being, say, an E. coli, with say, 78% certainty but a, say, Klebsiella pneumoniae with 22% certainty, etc. This is because organisms evolve away from a common ancestor but then can swap genetic material between sometimes quite distinct populations. It would be unusual if the same thing has not happened with hominids. Perhaps the only thing that stops us doing the same for hominid fossils is the paucity of specimens and there still remains this discomfort that results from trying to fit specimens into particular species categories.
What the fuck did i just read
There is No Evidence of a transitional Species CHANGE.
No evidence of a Species Evolving into another Species.... None, if this is what you are trying to convey?
@@whoneverknow9588 I am a fundamentalist, evangelical, Pentecostal Christian, who happens to have realised that God invented evolution. As a microbiologist I am aware that upward evolution has been demonstrated with a clade of E. coli, which evolved the ability to aerobically ferment citrate. It happens! I have had to modify my understanding of the bible (God's true word) in the light of incontrovertible scientific evidence. It has led me to appreciate the creativity of our God even more than before and to appreciate the unfathomable depth of the Word of God. God demonstrated His ability to control situations that were seemingly under the control of some other power. Think of the crucifixion! The devil sought to defeat God's plan of salvation but he played into God's hands, not realising that God is in control, even of random events (like evolution).
@@johnellerman1
The only Evidence for Evolution is that which Darwin originally observed. A new Feature on the Same Creature. The Evolved Beaks on the Finches, that were different looking, but they were the Same Finch.
@@johnellerman1
As you are a microbiologist, what was the first Organism that suddenly appeared without any simple precursor 3.8 billion years ago on Earth?
*One of the most interesting symposiums videos I have ever watched.* I am from a different country so there is no way I could go there in person, but I'm glad I understand English this much so I could watch and listen without problem. *Thanks, thanks so much for uploading the video. There is nothing like this where I live.*
Where you from beautiful?
Lol! Selection pressure in action 😂
Do you live in Africa?
@@mikejohe1920 I'm a german descendant from Argentina, South America. Spanish is my native language.
@@EKrieger OK great I am for Trinidad and Tobago islands but i live in the USA now
What's funny is that the "new" way to virtuously refer to all humans now is to say "We all come from Africa," which isn't true in the way it's meant to be true. Looks like Wolpoff was more correct than anyone else.
It is all politics. Plus women love to believe the africa fable.
@@davidnoone3254 Speak for yourself.
@@davidnoone3254 Enough of your bias. Does a boogeyman african scare you if they're near your woman ? The same way an asian man feels when you hound after theres ?
I would be interested to know whether Dr Stringer and Dr Harvati have considered how the archaic skulls found in Australia fit with the Laetoli and ungaloba skulls of 160 ka and -13ka respectively.
Evolution is a lie...haha just kidding. Its is very refreshing to see lack of hateful comments from creationists on this video. I assume its either cause creationists are not interested in actually trying to learn about evolution or it is so compelling to them that they have nothing to say....its beautiful!
If we evolved from humanoids ignorant of science, why do we still have scientifically ignorant people today? >>evidence sufficient for Christians to believe their God is the one true creator God. LOL.
This so true, a creationist wouldn't bother to watch any more than two minutes of this that is the common trait of ignorance among people like creationists, just imagine if the only people who went onto the internet where people with an IQ above 100, what that mean more entertainment or less, that is a good question lol
Evolution is the meta narrative of our time and culture
Lorica Lass Nice use of blogs and UA-cam videos as citation, you realise not everything on the internet is correct?
RealCity X so mr. Real city x wants to believe in his 100% unsupported creator until the final 20-30% of evolution gets sorted out. Brilliant deduction on your part real city x
Fascinating topics & theories. Great presentation. Thank you.
I don't understand why people who don't believe in evolution watch so many videos about evolution. Unless they DON'T watch them, and just show up to make stupid comments. If they actually watched the videos, I think they would eventually begin to believe in it.
I don't believe I am the gullible one in this conversation.
@cobainzlady Yes, science is wonderful in only being concerned with the truth and not being afraid to change if better evidence is discovered. Unfortunately it's the gullible idiots who believe in pretend gods that won't change their views despite overwhelming evidence they are completely deluded...the truth just doesn't matter to them.
As in areas outside of Africa, H sapiens in Africa mixed with older types.
PacificCircle1 true
Those remaining in Africa mixed with Homo erectus
@@freestyle9368 You clearly didn't watch the video.
This was great! All the presenters really know their stuff. I wonder what we've learned in the 6 years?
You prat of course they do or they wouldnt be there. Moron
Really enjoyed that.
I love this kind of documentary.
emilyn12
It's so nice to see something that hasn't been dumbed-down and popularised (bowdlerised, often.) It's great to be forced to pay attention and find myself reaching for my notebook.
***** It is nice, isn't it? I think the "dumbing-down" trend regarding evolution, especially human evolution, is something of a reaction to the ID/Reality deniers. I wish it were not so.
Well then Rising Star Cave and Homo Sediba & Neleda will knock your socks off not to mention the Denisovans !
A lot of evidence concerning human history is quite probably lost in ocean sediments.
Let’s assume you still don’t know ...
Yup because the sea levels used to be lower.
Funny you should say that;
www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=stone+structures+under+the+sahara+desert
But HERE'S the Kicker.
ua-cam.com/video/oDoM4BmoDQM/v-deo.html
James T Cat Cato Quite interesting. All except the parts that mention “terrorist propaganda”. It just seems that censorship on the internet and fake science that keep the populous enslaved are here to stay, at least for now. It’s my opinion that the true origins of the human race are purposely being kept from us because I have yet to find anything that does not keep myself and many others running in circles. However, thank you for posting these links. I enjoyed them.
Or it could be that invaders of Africa has obtained artifacts and written books on this topic and either burned them or have them locked away in a museum basement.
The origin of mordern man is around the area between Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. Go and study the work of dr cheikh anta diop
That was interesting... Old now, given the advances in sequencing since the research was done 10 years ago...but interesting.
Right, so where's the CARTA talk from 2017 so I can scoot a little catching up together?
"different forms of one species"
Trying so hard to not say race.
Different species. There are finches more similar than us that we consider distinct. And as we accelerate with technology and others are going nowhere, they will continue to diverge. This seems to be the way of nature. At some point, we must isolate from them.
The must the one invidual thats the most neanderthal in the world and similary one sapiens most denisovan.
Been waiting for California to fall into the ocean 🌊 all my life, I'm disappointed 😔
The chart at 19:04 - humans cannot cross breed with any of the 3 Ape genuses nor any of the 3 Ape genuses with each other because the separation of all the 4 branches from each other has since exceeded 2 million years. It is in fact more than 5 million years in all instances. However, the subspecies of each of the 3 Ape genuses and the various subspecies of Homo Sapiens can interbreed amongst each other since those sub branches are separated from each other by less than 2 million years. So there you have it, folks.
Recessive genes...might even get something not "human".
@@johnrogan9420 Upon crossing the 2 million year lexicon of complete separation of given lineages and they can then no longer inter-breed.
All these people too scared to say race is a sub species. Look at skills of different races, they're all different. But people these days wanna say we're all the same
"Look at skills of different races, they're all different."..........ABSOLUTE NONSENSE!
"Races", as YOU seek to define them has ABSOLUTELY ZERO scientific validity, it is a simple-minded social convention.
RACE, is a SCIENTIFIC TERM, it has NOTHING in common with racist delusional degeneracy.
Our species, homo sapiens, has only one race, unlike other species that have several races within the species. There are different ethnicities within our species. However the genetic differences between people of different ethnicities is nil.
For example a Chinese man an African man and a European man have just as much difference is genetically as three different Chinese men, African men, or European men.
Compare them with a neanderthal, which is a different species, and there are significant genetic differences.
@DJ Ezasscul Homo Sapien Sapien, is a SINGLE "species", NO "speculation" there, "Darwin's Dupes" have a TON of NONSENSE to answer for!!!
species means the organism can interbreed lol
I'm not sure modern humans "replaced" all others as much as modern humans are the end result of millions of years of cross breeding and hybridization in conjunction with evolution. There is a little bit of a wide variety of species (many of which have yet to be identified) in all of us to lesser and greater extent. But this story also applies to all other primates as many species we have today would not have existed millions of years ago. Speciation is a dynamic process the concept of which is lost on ideologies that think the world is timeless and/or unchanging.
Anglus Different “races” are actually different species, but that wouldn’t be politically correct would it?
Let's melt Antarctica before jumping too conclusions!
There's people that live under the ice down there.
You mean returning to a more normal state of the planet? Oh noooo *clutches pearls*
Why does Stringer mention his PhD so often??
Human Origins: MUCH different and more complex than even Sci/Fi can show.
Dennis Dispenza
very true dennisovan
Dennis Dispenza the splitters are in control at the moment.
Dennis Dispenza I once heard someone say something like:
"Nature is stranger than we imagine. In fact, probably stranger than we CAN imagine."
why do we have 46 chromosomes and apes 48?
I have learned so much more on these talks then all my years of schooling. That includes university! This is the way of the future for learning....
And I hope that more and more is available for those of us with an interest but not in Academia.
@@DulceN An old saying you might appreciate that my dad started saying a lot after he mentored college engineering students for about three years. He was self-educated and the experience changed his views about Professors. “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach”. There are definitely good educators. But too many rarely step out of their insular world. They are mostly book learned and even those who apply things usually do it in a College or University setting. Not in the real world.
It is truly fascinating to think what may yet be recovered from Western Africa - unfortunately, at this time in history, disease and violent armed conflict and crime are rampant: a small army of body guards and medical staff would be needed for such a prospecting venture.
West Africa has their own historians already actively studying the areas...
👹😳
Good video. I have a question that keeps tugging at me though.... The migration patterns out of Africa don't coincide with the introduction and pockets of high Rh negative blood types very recently in our history. The coincidence of this "mutation" of our blood type (the only primate to have this "mutation" also is introduced into our species about the same time as blue and green eyes. I'm personnaly of the opinion, there was another species or a group of homo sapiens that developed independently outside of Africa and was introduced into the "traditional" homo sapiens/out of Africa. These populations were introduced at specific locations around the world which would explain the pockets of high Rh negative blood types and certain characteristics (red hair, blue/green eyes). The anamolies can't be explained by the accepted history unless there is some new population introduced somehow.... Glad you guys are continuing to push the boundaries!
It’s entirely possible.
Annoying music waiting for the start...
So AMD did not evolve in Africa, AMH interbred at 40-45kya with neanderthal and later at 35kya with another archaic human isolated since 700kya in central africa. This implicates a remigration to africa in later times. Correct? So AMH had to evolve in India to interbred with neanderthal an denisovans at first. This makes no sense.
We wuz Archaic human and shieet!
We wuz Archaic VIKANGZ and sheeeit.
Maybe no fossils in areas because they were unlivable, conditions for fossil not present or animals territories that no one would inhabit. lots of reasons. could exist.
Interesting. The Irish used to view inheritance of kingship being ideally from grandfather to grandson but out of necessity allowed father to son as well.
There's enough genetic variation among humans to constitute at least 3 different sub species if not as many as 8. We're just not allowed to talk about it because people are sensitive. The science community just goes along with it because it's hard to classify who is in what subspecies because of intermediary populations that are a mix between them. That's what they mean when they say there's no genetic basis for it, there's no clean cut groups unless you ignore the intermediary populations. The reason there aren't clean cut groups is because we aren't isolated like animal are, we move around.
Almost every population on earth is the direct result of 2 to 3 distinct populations mixing genetically, culturally and linguistically. And its just that, theres more intermediate populations than anything else , atleast in modern terms, but all of humanity is already a mix of various populations. In that case, theres hundreds of races. And not 3 sub groups. Perhaps that's just what you want to hear. Humanity is based on ancestries or populations, not seperate species.
@@SimpleMinded221 statistically and genetically you can accurately group all humans in 1 of four main groups: caucasoid, mongoloid, negroid, and australoid. Is there a massive number of ways people can be further broken down and grouped? Absolutely. That has no bearing on the reality that race exists though.
Also you're right all modern groups are the result of archaic or even more recent admixture between various groups. In fact the modern races we see today is a direct result of this process, it's called archaic admixture theory and you're already aware of it to a degree. Eurasians have a significant neanderthal ancestry, Europeans have significant cro magnon ancestry, asians(especially south asians) have denisovan ancestry, and sub-sahan africans have as much as 19% of their DNA from a ghost species with no discovered fossil remains. So in fact we're already an amalgamation of several different hominid species and depending on how you look at it that makes is different species.
Now if you go on to look at modern populations you'll find the amount of recent mixing also correlates to larger populations as well. For example in Europe almost every population is a mixture of three different genetic groups: native hunter gatherers, levantine farmers, and steppe herders. So the variation in the european groups doesn't have as much to do with their genetic mixing, as they all have the same, and has more to do with genetic isolation. Why are Germans different from the french, well because there was little intermarriage between the two populations for a few thousand years.
This idea expands easily and gives rise to how we ended up at our current genetic diversity considering more than one population bottleneck that resulted in homo sapiens population dropping under 10,000 people.
All humans share 98.9% identical dna. One race is all that exists.
@@williambrandondavis6897 I want you to Google how much identical DNA we share with chimpanzees. Then I want you to Google how much we share with cucumbers. Then I want you to come back here and tell me the same thing again.
Why was the comments for "Neanderthal Not So Different From Us"turned off?
The audio wasn't clear. I couldn't make it out if the speaker had a PhD.
I have my own theories from studies. Neanderthal are deuteronopians where what we now catagorize 'color blind' was normal. Cro Magnon is actually hidden sentences built into the names. These Cro are Chroma of Magog. These Chroma color vision developed a third cone behind the eye, which revealed invisible refracted light in the UV(Blue) spectrum. The Blue eye actually happened much more recent around 10k years, product of the newer OCA2 Albino genetic mutation. These later migration came out of the North African regions & Locations in the Hebrew bible. Neander were highly intelligent and had extended memory cranial mass at the rear of the skull. Chro took on frontal lobe cognitives allowing for more intuitive perceptions. Neander are actually taller(giants in those days.) Neander TALL.
Come on, your "Midrash" should have taught you that the plain text of the Bible is the "outer garment" of the teachings, therefore NOT to be taken literally,. to lift "ISIS VEIL", you have to obtain the KEY!!!
This existence isn't about gathering beliefs, but about exercising discernment. accept NO dogma and you are halfway there.
www.theosophical.org/files/resources/books/LostKeys/LostKey.pdf
Nice theories.
Yeah, but if the multiple development areas were considered within Africa, gee, how come you can't figure out it was going on all over the world. Stop thinking so small.
Any PROOF of your NONSENSE?
175-300k years? That's quite a vast "chasm" there.
God created man, this is all bullshit from the devil. Stop using your brain and take it on blind faith.
Ok I will, and you'll see, god will protect me.
+imperator parva I just ate a Chucky cheeseburger laced with cyanide. Guess what, I'm still here, but the cheeseburger is killing me. I threw up all over my bible. Chucky is now Upchuck. The cheeseburger saved my life, not god. Praise Chucky!
CHucky CHrist my lord and savior!
***** Too bad we can't do a scientific inquiry into the relationship between homo and jokes. I wonder what the first joke was?
Then they aren't christians, are they?
Then why are all of these crazy christians running around preaching hellfire and end of world vomit?
Is there a reason Yoruba seem to always be the West African reference population?
It's stupid to say human come from Africa because genetically human ansistry comes from sea water to defrunt continent land defrunt race
Not sure what you are talking about, all humans can trace their dna back to the continent of Africa.
Very interesting
26:00
Amazing, I love these updates
Liam Neeson?
Michael Hammer looks and sounds like Bob Odenkirk.
What are the geographic barriers in Africa that would have prevented gene flow among the different populations of the ancestors? rivers? deserts? mountains?
yes
at least 315,000ya humans in Morocco could look across the short straights to Spain and see other people that had lived there for over 100,000 years. Also, south of the Ural Mountains you can walk to Korea and back. Erectus made it from Russia to E. China and Indonesia well over 1.5Mya.
The second speaker has the part about Africa correct
I went to the County Fair and I think I have seen some "Neanderthal" and a few "Homo Erectus"
Fascinating!
just how many complete skeletons have been found, if i may ask
which skeletons?
we found around 6000 hominid individuals from that lived at different times
Eurasians evolving out of Neanderthals also explains your data but that is not entertained as not politically correct.
Eurasians did not evolve out of Neanderthals; that hypothesis was debunked a long time.
@@TheUltimateNatural debunked by who? Jewish science lol?
48:00 for my reference.
there are most problems about the origin of human beings . if we had come from monkeys , we should know where these monkeys had come from and so on . we cannot say that monkeys had come from trees , and fishs had come from seaweed . and what are the origins of trees or seaweed ?
Gilbert Nutier um
What are some good books on archaic humins and evolution?
Umm. Mein Kampf.
The transitional being has still not been found. It's creepy not to know where we came from.
Why?
Please convert in to hindi provided this matter because I am indian
That ? mark is Atlantis
N1a1a...Nenets of Siberia
Genetic analysis is not for the average human lol
Why do you say that?
So my great grandfather x 100 was... Broud.
A reader of Jean Auel :-)
Don't be a Durc .
65,000 year old ground edge stone axe in northern australia
Very interesting!
I know my divine origins. Its not my ancestor.
SATAN IS THE WORD! I know my ancenstors to squids
33 for my reference
18:50 right turn Clyde
Loring Brace. Read him.
how about to compere with geological movements.. combain all knowledge, professor
Combine....
46:00 hey, man, the air is free! That's why.
Eurocentric guy!!!
There are so many minor variations of skull and skeleton shapes and sizes within just one race today, that it seems quite silly to ascribe every variation in a fossil to a seperate prehistoric race, unless it seems like noticeable variations, for example eyebrow ridges or sagittal crest, teeth, placement of spinal opening at the base of the skull, etc.
It's also easy to show the general variations in the skulls and skeletons of races today, to the extent that of they had been fossil, the would certainly be classified as seperate species or subspecies, as they should be. That would clear up a lot of fog, and certainly point to the more plausible reality of multigenerational development that started closer to a few hundred thousand years ago around the second last interglacial warm period.
The suggestion that non-African populations (don't conflate Bantu and African as one and the same, that divergence must have happened much earlier) only diverged from those in Africa only 40-50k years ago seems a bit silly.
I was about to comment on the same subject. With all the variations modern humans have within the same ethnic groups, I wonder if these scientists ever wonder if two fossils found in similar circumstances and geographic area could belong to the same group instead of being part of different branches. I also wonder if any of the fossils belong to individuals born with deformities, as it happens nowadays, thus making them different from their closest relatives.
Reading these comments clearly indicate that you both seriously need to actually read a couple books on the subject instead of in typical dunning Kruger style claiming the work or hypotheses of thousands of actual experts with hundreds of different methods refined over years is "a bit silly".
Do you two actually or.... seriously believe individuals like Stringer don't count in the idea of "bone development anomalies"...🙄
On top of it, in today's time it isn't just fossil anatomy that counts...but molecular biology presents verification of all the other evidence collected.
In case you feel like getting your answers i highly suggest a visit to your local library.
"Origins Reconsidered" by Richard Leakey & Roger Lewin
"The Last Lost World" by Lydia Pyne & Stephen Pyne
"Who we are and how we got here" by David Reich
"Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind" by Donald Johanson & Maitland Edey
"Lone Survivors" by Chris Stringer
Concerning the "African Multiregionalism model" there are multiple research papers out there by Eleanor Scerri (example= "Did our species evolve in subdivided populations across Africa and why does it matter" Eleanor M. L. Scerri et al. in Trends in Ecology & Evolution published online July 11, 2018)
same story here; ralph
The model for interbreeding is flawed.
No explanation for why you state that?
Research the probable possibilities
Very relevant to hominids of the 1970s ganja culture, as it was preferred to be used in a Scoobi-Doo bong usually by 2 to 5 members of the same clan or cliché sitting in a circle while listening to Led-Zeppelin.
Members of the same cliché???? Did you use the wrong word perhaps?
So- where is the history of man from 200-300,000 years ago until 6,000 years ago?
Agriculture and "civilization" started earler, approx 12000 years ago. The movement of man and Neandertals are also roughly traced. For instance moderrn man reached Australia more than 40 000 years ago.
If you search you will have no problem to learn about this
jord9308 the last time humans came up I think they excavated most of the recent record, as we do today, before they collapsed. This would leave a void in the fossil record, as their museums and libraries would be lost.
@@paulingvar your telling me it took 300,000 years for humans to build a structure or civilization lol
@@curtiscoombs5193 Get real ! Our human ancestors were hunter-gatherers for most of the time ( till agriculture ). And our even earlier ancesters ( we don´t call them humans back then) even much earlier.
@@paulingvar yeah well i believe civilisation is possible older than 6 thousand years because of all the cataclysms that have happened over the hundreads of thousands of years. Your telling me not one structure or metal artifact was made over 300,00 years. I'm sceptical
B.S.
Why no fossil records in parts of Africa?
“I’ll grind your bones to make my bread.”
Hot climates cause organic remains to rapidly decay.
Lecture begins at 1:12
Dna. It’s in the blood
DNA is in every cell of every living organism.
amazing how the picture has changed since this was info presented
13:08
would be wonderful when we figure out Darwin and his theory has nothing to do with modern humans, the proof is everywhere, including in the Bible
cro magnon?
'atlantean', white, intelligent, artistic, spiritual, handsome, I haplogroup, proto european....extinct species?
Cro Magnon, the now called ‘early modern humans’ that coexisted with the Neanderthals for about 10,000 years.
@@tiami3886 Very similar interpretation to Atlantean Gardens, wouldn’t be surprised if you were him or you’ve watched him.
Haha, I was really confused by the first guy. He was saying a lot of stuff that I would consider wrong, and I was thinking, man this dude is talking about theories that were shown to be lack around 2015-2017, then I saw how old the video was.
Social processes must have been happening in the way that breeding across the different groups went. if any could be made with an educated guess, maybe one way went like this:
That youngster in the group is growing into the features of the neighboring people. Those neighbors from that way, that are so great, and even further away, that way, they say there's even greater people. Any way, that youngster is lucky because of his looks, he may be paired with a girl from the greater neighbors that way. Vice versa that process goes When there's people who's looks and persona grows a another way. They would be paired with a person of our lesser neighbors from the other way.
Those skulls all look the same.
I thought I saw this video many years ago. And I did. I remember Ed Green and his very distinguished look.
The second speaker is speaking non sense
just looking at his forehead you observe another's with a high straight forehead like mine...I have more frontal lobe, will he become extinct before my type ?
Perhaps creationism is not disputing because this evidence while valid is not relevant. Radiography depends upon the unwarranted assumption that radioactive decay is a constant; ice core data indicates that CO2 atmospheric content is a variable. All dating paradigms are artificial constructs.
Dating paradigms are not artificial constructs. They use different methods and all reach the same conclusion. The Earth is 4.5 billion years old, life is at least 3.5 billion years and humanoids lived here for at least 1 million years.
There is no reason to assume differently.
It's refreshing to hear someone pronounce the "th" in "Neanderthal" properly, if some regular person was narrating a documentary on this, they would likely say it wrong, not realizing the word comes from German.
I agree. Those kinds of people that are ignorant about word pronunciation always pee me off to no end. Most people, unfortunately, have no desire to look and sound correct. These are the cave people who accept things as they are and have no ambition to get out of the cave and buy a house .... I really think that human evolution was fueled by the desire to improve one's vocabulary and look decent......like wearing clothes instead of Tarzan shorts ....ha ha ha ....
Who cares how it's pronounced
Sorry to burst your formalist bubble, but the ORIGINAL wording was ironically (for you) NEANDER-TAL not Neander-thal, thal is actually an Anglicization. IF .....I actually CARED enough, I'd post the paleo-linguistics lecture for you.....but I DON'T
How d'ya like THEM apples?
LMAO!
@@americalost5100 People who aren't ignorant
@@jamestcatcato7132 Not correct. Tal/Thal both exist in German for "valley." "Thal" is archaic but well known to all speakers (common in place names and personal names). Pronounciation is the same.
The arogance in his statement is mind boggling, did he really say ut falls.out side modern human dna...
And their was me thinking we still have 80% of the congo unexplored, not to mention south America 🙄 ☠️
You must study dogs gens and skeletal shape to under stand dogs are dogs and human created as human if there changes in morphology except some people transform as a monky cause they denied to follow guide of only great god
You must study the English language to improve your written communication skills. Grammar is important.
GOD SAYS THERE'S NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN . IF UNCHRISTIAN SCIENTIST FIND A SCULL AND BUILD IT UP WITH CLAY ADDING ALSO WHAT THEY WANT ... IT LOOKS LIKE AN APE BECAUSE IT IS AN APE . THE BIBLE IS SCIENCE . THANK GOD FOR ALL THE CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST . GOD CREATED EVERYTHING AS HE WANTED IT .
and humans look like an ape becuase we are apes.
bible has nothing scientific in it.
bible science brought us the period in europe we call "dark ages"
@@spatrk6634 Your spiritually dead and blind . Wake up . Beg for some wisdom and knowledge from God .
@@williamwhite5407 what does that even mean.
begging my imaginary friend for knowledge wont get me nowhere
@@spatrk6634 Well some have the spirit of stupor from God to blind them from truth , because He knows they don't believe in Him so He gives them over to what they want to believe. Apparently He hasn't given up on you yet though or we wouldn't be in this conversation . He owns EVERY soul already. He just lets each of us choose what He will do with them.
@@williamwhite5407 i havent started this conversation because god has not given up on me.
i started this conversation to correct you that humans are apes.
but you dragged god into biology
Try history debunked on here , he knows his stuff
some people don't even know half the truth if you only knew you would go mad
+K. Coyi
Comparing Australian Aborigine DNA to Neanderthal
I did some reading on Aborigines in Wikipedia and they say they've
been genetically isolated for at least 50,000 years. To put that into
context, Cro-Magnon i.e. European man emerged ~35,000 years ago, and
Neanderthal was either driven out of Europe, driven to extinction, or
absorbed by Cro-Magnon. (Cro-Magnon by the way had a 4% larger brain
case than the average human today.)
On Wikipedia they say of Aborigines: "There is no clear or accepted
racial origin of the indigenous people of Australia. Although they
migrated to Australia through Southeast Asia they are not related to any
known Asian population. Nor are they related to the nearby peoples of
Melanesia or Polynesia." "In view of the very long time they have been in Australia, almost entirely isolated from other human populations, it
is unlikely that they will be found to be closely related to any
identifiable racial group."
The dominant features of Aborigines are:
- prominent brow ridge
- short bowed shoulder blades
- weak chin
- large nose
For obvious reasons, I compared them to Neanderthal:
- prominent brow ridge
- short bowed shoulder blades
- weak chin
- large nose.
There are differences too, such as Neanderthal had a 20% larger brain
case than modern humans, while the Aboriginal brain case is smaller than
the average human (even smaller than African blacks). Aborigines also
have the lowest IQ on the planet, which possibly indicates they belong
to a more distant racial group than other races.
So far this sort of evidence is circumstantial and easily denied, so I
started searching for DNA evidence and hit the jackpot. Apparently they
did a DNA analysis of a Neanderthal bone fragment in 1998 from a 30,000
year old specimen. To validate their results, in 2001 they did a second
bone fragment from a different site thousands of miles away, and the DNA
matched, meaning they truly did extract Neanderthal DNA. A bit more
background: apparently DNA can last about 100,000 years as it slowly
disintegrates, so there are gaps in the Neanderthal DNA sequence, but
much is intact.
I found a file on the web with mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) comparison
between Modern Humans, Modern Aborigines and Neanderthal. The Authors
omitted the "common" DNA that we share with other animals, trees, etc..
(we are like 98% similar in DNA to apes). The Neanderthal DNA is
fragmented as expected, but the available parts match the Australian DNA
much more closely than modern human DNA. I looked at only the markers
where there was an available marker for all three samples: 129, 189,
209, 223, 256, 258, 299 (possibly more after)
Modern Human: G, T, T, C, C, A, A
Modern Australian Aborigine: A, C, C, T, T, C, G
30,000 yr Neanderthal: A, C, C, T, A, G, G
In other words, in this sample Australian Aborigine DNA is a 0% match
with modern human DNA, but it is a 71% match with Neanderthal DNA. Only
256 and 258 were mismatches, and yet the Aborigine still did not match
the modern human DNA. If that isn't compelling evidence, I don't know
what is. Apparently the Aborigines had some limited mixing with
Polynesian people, so that could account for the differences (i.e. the
Aborigines are Neanderthal hybrids).
You can see the original DNA evidence for yourself here in PDF format:
www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/98/2/537.pdf
Or there is an easier chart of the same data here, including a
comparison to chimpanzee DNA (which is more similar to
Neanderthal/Aborigine):
www.godandscience.org/evoluti...iregional.html
I also found a few quotes from scientists who speculate on this: "The
original people of Australia, the Aborigines, have no known connection
to any other living race. Because of this, ethnologists usually classify
them as a separate race called Australoid. Some believe they may have
been migrants from the Asiatic mainland in pre-historic times. Others
identify the Australoids as a surviving remnant of the Neanderthal Man."
www.cdli.ca/CITE/auzzie.htm
"Some believe that Neanderthal was simply another race of humans, perhaps most similar to aborigines from Australia."
www.american.edu/ted/ice/neanderthal.htm
I did more research on interbreeding. When a species breaks off and can
no longer mate with the original species, it becomes its own species.
Apparently Canines can mate with other canines that branched off
1,000,000 years ago and Neanderthal only branched off about 500,000
years ago, so many scientists think they were genetically compatible
with modern humans. (Aborigines are compatible, for the record.)
+Myrddin Wyllt Denovisian are other hominids That have been studied genectically they are related to melanisan and australoids.
Myrddin Wyllt You copied this information verbatim from Stormfront. /forum/t285789
@@myrddinwyllt9375 Not only did you copy ALL that info from another site, you also took all the info as fact without doing ANY individual research LMAO. Answer so I can debunk EVERYSINGLE assumption you made aside from fact.
Sir. my PHD tell me u need Jesus