Why don’t you get to think and make a suggestion creating another UA-cam Videos Shows that’s all about the Extinct Prehistoric Amphicyons (Bear Dogs) on the next Extinct Zoo coming up next?!⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️👍👍👍👍👍
Why don’t you think of a suggestion making a UA-cam Videos all about Dakosaurus, the “Biter Lizard”, an Extinct Prehistoric Metriorhynchid (the Marine Crocodile) the “Godzilla” of the Jurassic and the Cretaceous Seas on the next Extinct Zoo coming up next?!👍👍👍👍👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Why don’t you think of a suggestion making a UA-cam Videos all about Dakosaurus, the “Biter Lizard”, an Extinct Prehistoric Metriorhynchid (the Marine Crocodile) of the Jurassic and the Cretaceous Seas on the next Extinct Zoo coming up next?!👍👍👍👍👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Literally every claim you make here is soundly disproven by genetic studies. That and archeological evidence. I’ve heard a thousand versions of this narrative by now. I’m leaving this here as a note. This is not science. Its ideology.
It's a bit mind-blowing to me that Homo Erectus was around with its home-building and tool-making technology for about 1.75 million years. All that history, and we'll never know anything more than a minuscule fraction of the broadest outlines.
Humans have been around far longer than 1.75 million years. everyone will know in the near future. They can't hide it much longer and many already are becoming aware. You'll be hearing it from their descendants.. not people on the surface of Terra.
And at some point in the future very much the same thing will probably be said about us. Little will be left of our technology in any evidence of how we lived, if those in the future looking back are so advanced in their technology, that what we could do impressed them but still classified us primitive.
Post singularity AI will be able to simulate what it was like for them with high fidelity. The question is will we live long enough to see that time? Also, assuming society doesn’t collapse before or because of it.
An interesting question along those lines is: did bands Homo Erectus engage in warfare with other bands of Homo erectus? Is there any evidence in skeletal remains of injuries that are the apparent result of attack by another human? Or, were the bands so spread out (that is, was the human population so small and sparse) that bands rarely, if ever, encountered one another?
One thing is clear: We don’t agree on how they actually looked. All jokes aside, thank you for an insightful documentary with great narration and great imagery
From looking at the many different skulls, it might be that ancient humans were more similar like dog breeds are today. All human, but slightly different, hopefully we’ll learn more.
Yea I think something like this would be more achievable then taking someone back in time. Like opening some kind of hole to se in space woth telescope idk
@@wingedhussar1453alright... Hear me out... What if we used complex AI that basically "does the math* on like, the whole planet... It would be a huge thing and maybe not even possible. But if it scanned an area it could determine how everything got there right? By like crunching the numbers? Like how certain geological formations occured or how certain things could or couldn't be possible? Idk I'm not a genius lol. I'm rather average just thought of it when I was a kid....
Knowing these lines of early humans lived so long and accomplished so much really boggles the mind. In a very real way, we stand on the shoulders of those who went before us, giving humanity an amazing legacy to live up to.
Absolutely most successful human species, not only by longevity, but by the advancements they made (sapiens excluded) Using and making fire, clothes, advanced weaponry and tools, caring for others for extended periods...remarkable people.
@@fredkelly6953Is that a mockery? They evolved and adapted to become us. They were here for 2 million years and we are here for only 300,000. With our current speed in tech advances, I believe our own specie will be gone in a shorter time. Our descendants will call us dead too.
The biggest problem I see with all these hypotheses is that whoever is coming up with them pretty obviously spends most of their time indoors. Like the idea that humans first captured naturally occurring fire rather than created it. Humans always gathered up dry grass for bedding. Apes do that. When humans started flaking stone tools is was inevitable that they would spark their dry grass bedding on fire. And this idea that physically modern vocal cords are required for speech. Apes talk to each other. My dogs talk to each other. I can tell by the way they bark what they're after. It's different for rat or snake or cat or possum. Solresol is a language with seven syllables. Southern Koisan uses five different clicks. It really doesn't require vocal cords to have a language.
Fire, for example: was probably discovered sporadically throughout different regions and time spans. Probably the same for other major discoveries as well.
I got the distinct impression that the video was referring to modern speech. Homo Erectus could communicate vocally, they just did not have the apparatus to make the sounds WE depend on for communication.
Shit, babies talk, if you count screaming and babbling. Most organisms have some means of communication, so something as sophisticated as these folks would definitely have some kind of language. Maybe not ancient Latin, but something, they must have had something.
Ive always felt theres a deep biological connection in our brains between how we portray the villians in slasher movies, And how it is we hunt. The similarity is eerie if you think about it. The killer never runs. hes a walking, steady pace, never tiring brute with a sharp implement. You run away from him, he only walks, so you MUST get away right? wrong. Just when you think you can relax, here he is again. you can never escape. ...... you can run a hundred times faster than him trying to save your life, But he still runs you down, and never even ran to begin with......................... The victims in slasher movies are the legit experiences of our prey.
I dont know how they did it, if me and a group of guys walked into the woods now with a spear each and saw a deer, it would bolt and there is no way we would be able to find it again yet alone stalk it and wear it down, amazing
@@killgazmotron Injuring the animal on initial contact seems necessary for the entire hunting success. Predatory is our inherent demeanor. Oh, how one longs for the Garden of Eden.
@TM-ch3hl persistence hunting works best in hot, open areas, as heat exhaustion is part of what wears the animals down. Humans are better at staying moving when hot than some other animals. In a colder, woodland habitat with a lot of brush to slow you down, I dont think that strategy would work very well, so being stealthy and taking game down quickly before it can get away would be better.
Nowadays people complain when they have to walk more than a block between escalators and elevators. Our ancestors were able to spread throughout the world, in between long dangerous swims or boat voyages, in every possible weather condition, entirely on foot! What heroes!
Not really a big deal. Most fit people today walk on average 5 miles. 5 miles x 365 days in a year is 1825 miles. In slightly more than a year you can easily walk across a continent. To me the hard part would be not having shoes so i suppose they must've made shoes - or had tougher feet
to be fair though, some of us have deformities that prevent us from stuff like endurance running (i have one leg longer than the other, i have asthma, super high arches on my feet, not much fat cushioning in my feet, etc.)
Smells like fraud or evolutionary misrepresentation doesn't it? .....considering that we are not homogeneous but several hybrids with other animals and rightfully deserve more distinctive categories.
Mankind during Paleolithic spent many a night in caves...our hormonal rhythms /endocrine system operate best under total darkness (with the illuminated dials and 'winky-blinky' lights bad for your normal body day/night endocrine balance)...therefore cave-sleeping allowed for our natural day-night cycle to develop.
I assume that Homo Erectus probably used logboats and rafts to paddle across open water, rather than anything as sophisticated as a sail? Either way, it was one hell of a feat.
I would argue that a charitable and fair explanation for the disappearance of *Homo erectus* is as a result of isolated populations diversifying into other forms of *Homo:* namely, *Heidelberginsist->Neanderthalensis, Denisovans, Sapiens, and likely Floresiensis as well as Ludonensis.* Sure, there were isolated populations of them that simply died out, but this is not representative of all of what seems to have been going on during the later parts of their presence in the ecosystem.
The upper crust non-hybridized rh negatives were the source of the male part of the homo erectus lineages today via an "animal Eve" from the homo erectus group and an offworld male. The families with no homo erectus in them are vastly different, posessing the mtDNA of "divine Eve" that is apparent;y necessary for the ascension practise.
Erectus aren't the direct ancestors of any of the species you mentioned except the latter two due to differences in shoulder, skull, & limb morphology as well as overlapping temporal ranges. We still don't know the crown ancestor of Homo sapiens s, assuming there even is a single one we could point to given how fluid the notion of "species" is amongst Hominins.
@@Aerxis The black headed people were often said to not be able to learn ascension because they had no soul. They were exempted from the ten commandments according to ancient accounts such as king Og and were farmed like goats in the region with the highest dolmen counts in the world. Some bred in, even though original human strain with the rh negative blood can't host rh positive pregnancies very well. The mtDNA of a human with divine female markers is not from homo erectus. There were several original unrelated species.
@@kekkic I found out there's no evolution but there is rampant hybridisation and crossbreeding with other life forms. It wasn't even "natural selection" but beastiality. Good thing there are still real humans left to sort it out.
I read a report from 1950 from mexico city that stated during the laying of a new water pipe thru the city that 4 ancient humans were laying next to a wolly mamoth.Spears and tools were laying around the site.Just one year later,close by the first find they found another wolly mamoth.
Perfect timing, I was looking for something exactly like this. Started with dinosaurs, then pterosaurs, now homo. Love the history of our distant, yet closest relatives. A video about the earliest homo sapiens would nice (and other groups too, like heidelbergensis, habilis, neanderthalensis etc.).
Wow, this was a fascinating video on Homo erectus, the longest-lived human species ever. I learned a lot from your summary and highlights of their achievements, such as hunting, fire, and seafaring. One thing that I think is also interesting is that Homo erectus may have been the first human to use symbols and art, as evidenced by the engraved shells found in Java that date back to 500,000 years ago [00:19:21]1. These shells are the oldest known examples of abstract patterns made by humans, and they suggest that Homo erectus had some form of symbolic communication and expression. I wonder what they were trying to convey with these engravings. Maybe they were the first artists of our kind. Thanks for the great video!
@7:45 It is amazing how successful groups of predators can be with cooperative hunting tactics. Able to bring down much larger, stronger, and hardier prey than any one individual predator. Humans being pack hunters, tool users, and tool makers, were advantaged by physiology that also allowed them to become superb pursuit hunters.
Things have changed. My mother was one of nine, but their neighbor had 15 kids in the 30s. And that was under modern civilization conditions. Homoerectus woman probably popped out one kid or even two every fertile year of her life.
Is it not a bit outdated to think that evolution was 'sudden'? The first human species to leave Africa have also been contributed to being Homo Habilis. Between Habilis and Erectus there is probably a lot of in-between variants.
There probably are a lot of in-between variants. It takes several several several generations to evolve. I didn't think they were saying this happened suddenly. But these are the fossils we found and classified as these several species. The in-between variants just haven't been found or have fallen under these other species. There are a lot of gaps, always will be gaps.
As some Africans can remind you, not every speech sound rely on the pneumatic system: imagine a hunting party that not only have to conserve breath, but also be quiet - so we have a lot of clicking and clacking sounds in some languages, thus it's not at all necessary to have those organs to develop and use speech :-P
The truth is so much more complex than old Anthropologists like to debate. These ancestors of ours roamed back and forth and all over the World as best they could. They stayed in places for long periods of time, they migrated frequently at the same time others stayed put. They simultaneously evolved independently and interbred. It is not one or the other.
I think you would have to define speech! Homo erectus spread widely over the habitable planet. They lived in a wide range of environments which meant over time they had to adapt their physiology to live in those environments - body covering, footwear, fire, plant and tree awareness, directional awareness, and advanced planning skills, etc. They made tools, most probably some form of weapons and I've read they used water to transport. It's ridiculous to think they didn't have some kind of verbal communication skills to live successfully in their environment. I think those skills were probably more than squeals and grunts but whatever they used helped them be successful. They lived a long time and were probably taken out by advanced weapons and far more intelligent Homo sapiens.
Think again. Erectus led to Heidelbergensus which led to the common ancestor of Neanderthals and us. We are several steps down the line, much too late to be responsible for their decline.
FUN FACT: 'Peking Man' was a great band in 1980's New Zealand. Their biggest hit was "Room that Echoes". The music video used what was, for the time, cutting edge computer graphics.
Life's short span i.e. higher death rate due to the conditions certainly were the factors, this incl. lots of infants or newborn lost etc., men died often during the hunt or wars, women naturally exceeded them in numbers, and were also tolerated or in demand of other packs around, as it produced men - fighters, hunters protectors, so my guess the birth rate was very healthy, but the odds were not quite "pro" life in general.
Humans can have kids anytime, other species normally can't. Higher replacement rate. Only limitation is carrying 1 child only when migrating. I expect predation also led to faster development. Get smart or die.
@@indyawichofficial1346 interestingly there's very little evidence of human on human conflict during the stone age. Around the bronze age (or was it copper age?) Was when we start seeing a lot of conflict.
Interesting that H. erectus "disappeared" during the previous glacial warm interval, a time between glaciations much like our own Holocene. They persisted as themselves apparently only in refugia, like Indonesian islands. Also interesting that the appearance of "modern humans" occurred at the time of an earlier warm interval. My guess is that during warm intervals there would be some forced and some opportunistic migrations, bringing different branches of humanity into contact with one another.
There's a positive correlation between warm temps and violent behaviors in modern civilization. Maybe there were interspecies wars during these periods.
@@FarmerDrew I'm not sure why they think this way, but scientists apparently think there may have been as few as 800 individuals at a time in all of Europe in the Aurignacian period (42,000 - 33,000). If this low count also applied in the Mousterian (160,000 - 40,000) which covered all of Europe and east to the Altai Mountains, it's hard to imagine any violent encounters of scale occurring during these early periods, warm or not. Hard to imagine any encounters at all, frankly.
@@FarmerDrew It's probably even more than you think, because they also say that in the past the density of animal populations was much higher than people tend to assume.
The graph @ 20:34 is a good summation of what we know thus far. Only, it lacks a KEY hominid, in that the Denisovan is not on it. This particular subspecies is primary in the genetic code of people of South Asia and Australia.
I don't think there's any argument, Homo Erectus, apart from sounding like a gay porn movie, has to be the most successful human species in history. We think we're clever, but to invent the use of fire, construction, advanced tools where there none before shows a level of ingenuity up there with luminaries such as Newton, Einstein, and Hawking, and we've barely been around a fraction of the time they were.
Yeah, and then they died out because on their island were growing more trees? Nah, man, that sounds so stupid. Evtl, some kind of virus or other things combined drove them to extinction, but a simple klimate change? when they had developed seafahring, fire, tools? Sorry but no.
And we haven't got any further than their use of fire - imagine it had never been harnessed. Where would we be? What wouldn't we have? Our entire existence is the result of the expert use of fire.
@beingsentient there is a fine line between arrogance and confidence. Confidence is a healthy belief in your abilities, while arrogance is an excessive one.
Arrogance most likely comes from the sheboons. Real rh negative non-hybrid Adamics have a hard time assimilating many of the emotives the hybrids profess.
@beingsentientThe basic motivation (of any species) is to transmit genes. Arrogance (and many other character elements ie compassion, ingenuity,...) are tools to improve the individual's chances of transmitting her/his genes. Belief became a property of the species when it was realized that larger groups offered better survival rates than smaller groups. To maintain coherence in a group, religion turned out to be a good tool (also of control). "Belief" probably only became relevant after Homo x managed to strike a match and started exchanging instinct for intelligence.
4:07 "Pecking man," lol! That was a needed giggle, although it didn't seem deliberate; thank you! Thanks also for the interesting presentation! It was especially interesting to see that chart, featuring the various species of Homo, and where their timelines overlapped.
You should do a video on the ancient human use of psychedelic mushrooms. It's a wacky theory for sure, but Terence and Dennis McKenna share the idea that there may have been a point in time when psychedelic mushrooms greatly impacted human society in ancient times. I won't get into their detailed ideas since that's a rabbit hole of its own, but if you are a reader or listener of their ideas, it's interesting to look into.
I would be very surprised if they *didn't* impact human society. I find it very unlikely that word of magic mushrooms or psychoactive plants wouldn't have traveled far and wide, and we have historical analogues for "medicine men" going back for hundreds and hundreds of years: apothecary gardens were preceded by shamanic practice that almost certainly circulated through the oral tradition. I think the only real question is, how far back did human ancestors collectively make a choice to make these plants a central part of their lives and/or culture? What I really find amusing to imagine is, what was the first moment a human ancestor *really* went on a trip profound enough to impact their perspective? Was it an accidental ingestion? Or like, were there hominids watching other animals accidentally trip who decided they wanted to get in on that? "Grok, dude, look! Look at that horse! Dude, that horse is spacin' out! What did he EAT? Lolol, he's on another continent! Oh, wait - hey, it's those mushrooms that are making him wild out! Wowwwww...yo. Hey, hey hey Grok, hey man, you wanna try some?"
Fire is also a weapon. IMHO Homo evolved, while Australopithecus and Paranthropus went extinct, because of the dialectics between lions, just arrived to Africa back then, and fire, just tamed in Africa around the same time. Previously we (australopithecines) survived big predators by climbing to trees, especially at night, as neither hyenas nor saber tooth cats could do that, but when lions (and their individualist cousins: the leopards) arrived from Asia, those who could not muster fire and some half decent weapons, were at great risk.
I became fascinated with Homo Erectus when I saw an Illustration of the earliest known human-made tools. I noticed that it was Homo Erectus who first created tools that were not only recognizable but almost pretty. When I read the book Java Man I learned of their nearly world-wide migration and their use of fire. Now they're my favorite early hominids.
It takes such a perfect set of conditions for fossils to form that just because they disappear from the fossil records that in no way means that they were not around. Archaeologists are the biggest class snobs in all of Academia. I hate how they are always displayed in just a hide thrown over them because there's also been sewing needles found at these sites. I wish they would they would just be honest for once, and say that we got not a fucking clue. For someone to be buried with grave goods in the first place, there has to be such an abundance that those items are not detrimentally useful to the survival of the tribe.
Maybe the engraving on ivory and shells were “maps” as Jean M. Auel portrays in The Mammoth Hunters. Highly recommend reading her series The Clan Of The Cave Bear. Simply marvelous storytelling!✌️
I highly disagree with treating them like they are entirely different species. These are also human beings but of races much more different than the differences of today. I don't believe these highly adaptive and intelligent people totally died out, but live on in modern people just as the Neanderthal people do. This treatment would be like finding the bones of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli and concluding that Aragorn and Legolas closely related races of the same species, but stumpy broad Gimli was a primitive sub-human and perhaps could only grunt and groan about superior elves. The world once had much more diverse races as populations were small and spread out, but as they grew they blended together as is no longer disputed regarding Neanderthal. They were weird looking and differently built as some people are today, but I consider them human until proven otherwise.
In a way you’re right, the distinction of separate “species”was created by us and race is a social construct that doesn’t correlate to actual modern human variation. However, the distinctions between us and other extinct human species can be extrapolated through genetics. All Homo sapiens sapiens are very closely related albeit with many groups having small genetic admixtures with extinct species. But again H. Erectus for example was probably something like nearly 2 million years removed from our modern lineage so the distinction of them as separate species is definitely a fair distinction and both useful and important for taxonomy and categorization for the purposes of researching and understanding biological anthropology. Edit/: Also all other species of humans did technically “die out” because they no longer exist as distinct lineages/populations. Gotta be careful with these types of assertions because these type conclusions are now being used to promote new types of dangerous pseudoscientific racism (I don’t believe this was your intention though). Finally, with all due respect, LOTR; which is a fantasy world is a terrible comparison. It is cool though, I also enjoy LOTR and other fantasy worlds. I think that a high fantasy that world that includes interaction with other human species and extinct fauna would be awesome! (I’m also literally working on this exact world building project, so I’m biased!)
Well said. I just made a similar comment. I think there's a political motive lurking in this "they weren't us" narrative. Soon "we" will be blamed for exterminating "them".
Also,these differences would have occurred slowly over many many generations. It's not like some homo erects parents looked at their kids and said, " these kids dont look like us, they must be homo sapiens"
At 11:39 you show an illustration depicting chimpanzee, homo erectus, and homo sapiens. I think it is mislabeled with the chimpanzee and homo erectus being switched. One for sure mistake is the misspelling of homo sapiens as homo sapien, without the s.
~ Surprizingly, HomoErectus has an authentic Asian ancestry, whereas they were the first to develop the ability to look over the tall grasslands in order to see predators approaching by watching the grass patterns made as the predators traveled across. If there were trees around & HomoErectus could see predators from afar, then they would give a warning signal, but if there were no trees around, then listening for predators traveling across the grasses & looking over by standing & watching for falling grass as the predators roamed, was the way to be aware of their presence approaching. ~ A great advantage for HomoErectus was bamboo, one of the first largest grasses, per as it first served as weapon then eventually used for refuge from predators because bamboo is very strong & sturdy. ~ DID YOU KNOW: Ancient humans eventually developed strong vocal cords to ward off predators when they were being attacked, by screaming at them in protest.
Wait one second, you're saying that primitive humans were able to scream and yell, just like most jungle monkeys do today? And for that matter, most other animal species too!...... Well that is amazing, isn't it! By the way, have you ever seen how a lion moves through very tall grass? Is like a freaking shark moving through the water!.... You sense it, but you really don't see it much..... It's freaking awesome!
Group hunting is probably the norm among most felines that predate on herds or large species. Although cats often specialise in solo ambush predation cheetahs are team predators, Lions still practice a small variation on the feline norm of females and young hunting in groups and the males being pretty parasitic on the rest of the group except when extra muscle is required.
@FarmerDrew once again thts only cats in Africa where humans migrated out of. Cats outside of Africa dint have groups .seems like lions evolved to b pact animals.suprised scientists didn't put those two facts together
I love that these distant ancestors of ours lived very hard lives and been through it all just so modern humans can call them fake and never existed thousands of years later, funny how history works
0:05 homo is Latin for “same” ,in the like of homonym. Homo became the term to classify human ancestors based on they were similar or “same” to us. I also paused 5 seconds in to this video to comment this.
I'm fascinated by the apparent fact that different species of early humans left Africa multiple times, and each new wave appears to have replaced or absorbed the previous in a pretty uniform way. Some populations of modern humans have varying percentages of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA, but it's always in the single digits. It's actually surprising that we DON'T see some isolated populations of Neanderthals or Denisovans somewhere on the planet.
@@jeremycoffen4619_"evidence of what"_ The highest level of technology achieved by the other human species. _"we haven’t gone anywhere yet"_ We've gone further than any other human species.
I’m a bit confused about the diagram at 18:47 and the clothes analysis. From my understanding of the current knowledge of homo Erectus there are no artifacts that indicate clothes were worn. In the timeline diagram at 18:47 the artifacts shown between 2 Mya and 3 Mya were dated to about 2000-5000 BC. I like the theory of clothing being created and worn my homo Erectus and I think it is plausible but currently there is no evidence to support the theory due to the deterioration of clothing materials. If im missing any new articles or artifact reports that provide evidence to support this theory could someone link them?
Agree. And no housing 1.75 million years ago, those are temporary shelters. Housing is a year round space that only began about 10,000 years ago when Sapiens needed a place to store grains year round.
This obsession with whether humans began in Asia or Africa is entirely political. In reality, these are one single connected land mass, and the climate zones cross these land masses fairly evenly, with modern and past animial species living on both sides of the imaginary line between the continents. Europe too is connected to these, and the only line between them is in our collective imaginations. The only importance of this so-called origin is purely cultural and political, and it is neither scientific nor in-line with the modern understanding of population genetics.
Haha! Somebody deleted their goofy response to me. I guess they realized that, yes, human fossils have also been found outside of Africa. So goofy these people.
i totally agree with your point but let’s pretend we did start in what nowadays we consider africa, wouldn’t it be useful to know where in the connected land mass we originated ? i’m not disagreeing or anything but it’s the best way to coordinate the possible beggining of us. i agree with the political part though and imaginary lines
@@shamulol with population genetics, you're not going to have a precise origin of a species in time or space, so it becomes more of a zone (in time and space). It can take several generations or many generations for a recognizably new species to appear. So, for example, animals that are suddenly isolated on an island may become quite unique over just a few generations, becoming a "new species". Or for example, a natural barrier like a lake could dry up, and two distinct populations could converge into one in just a couple generations. We can't forget that many species can still interbreed with each other, and classification is determined by factors other than capacity to interbreed. These types of isolation or convergence events certainly would be important to our understanding of emerging species. But such easily identified events and places are more the exception than the rule. Often times with species that have a large range, like humans, they form gradients of difference over time and space. We can see that in humans with our "racial" changes both across the continents and across time, as groups converge and diverge. These more broad convergences and divergences are also useful to our understanding, so where and when they happen over larger and less specific areas are keys to that understanding. For humans, our bipedalism makes us extremely energy efficient for long distance travel by land, and that combined with our early propensity to follow migratory animals gave many of our ancestors massive territorial ranges. On the flip side, our ability to consume a low variety omnivorous diet and adapt a local environment to our needs can lead to long term settlement and isolation, thus a very tiny range. These two traits have opposite effects on our changes as genetic populations. The migratory groups tend to intermix frequently and have wider zones of origination of specific trait changes/adaptations. But isolated groups can become highly differentiated and highly adapted to a very specific place and time. For these reasons, it's best to view humans in a multi-origin context. Africa itself is a huge place, but so is East Africa. Pointing to the entire continent and saying "there" is pretty useless, unless that continent is isolated like an island, like Australia, for example. Humans are so migratory, however, that even barriers that create strong isolation effects on other species, like islands, are relatively weak. If we look at gene populations, we see that only massive barriers like the Himalayas, the Pacific ocean, and the Sahara desert had any kind of strong isolating effect during our evolution. But those effects have decreased over time, as we've become better at overcoming those barriers. Our ability to build sea craft like rafts may even predate our species itself, with some speculating that Homo Erectus could build such craft. This is a game changer from an evolutionary standpoint, strongly affecting the concept of place origin. Anyone who's floated on the ocean knows that coastal currents can carry you tens or hundreds of miles effortlessly. While bipedalism is energy efficient, floating effortlessly is far more efficient. We have countless examples of other animals getting trapped on natural sea rafts that cross vast expanses of ocean, like from Africa to South America, thus changing their evolutionary path. So when we introduce intentionally created rafts, that makes such massive distances less meaningful to population isolation, both for humans and the plants and animals we may take with us. All of this migration makes pointing to a precise geographic origin for the entire species somewhat pointless. Rather, the origin of different specific traits caused by specific regional events is more useful. So, yes, we can point to a place and say "there" for certain trait emergences. My original point is also very important, though. When we point to "there" choosing arbitrary lines has no utility at all. If we point to East Africa, understanding that it also includes the southern Arabian peninsula and eastern coastal Mediterranean (including small parts of Asia and Europe) as part of it, then, yes, it has meaning. But if we cut things off in the middle of nowhere based on geographic convention, that is purely political. The parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe that are close to each other or touch are basically the same place. From a biology perspective they should have the same name, while more distant parts should be called something else. There's no biological reason why Greece and Sweden should both be called "Europe". They're not remotely similar to each other in terms of habitat. But coastal Greece, Israel, and the Nile delta are much more similar from a habitat perspective, despite being on three different continents. I know you may have wanted a simpler answer of yes or no, but population genetics is anything but simple. And the concept of geographic naming predisposes people to odd biases that require a more nuanced explanation.
It’s Africa, white person. Facts are facts. Sounds like the one who is “political” about it is you. Every scientist who is smarter than you and I would roll their eyes at you.
Thanks for the great video. I think you got the naming at the shoulder view diagram wrong, looks like the chimp is more modern looking than erectus @11:44
You must be young.... Not being detrimental towards you, it's just that it still amazes me how with each generation things need to be learned and taught again. Guess how long ago this information has been known?
Peculiarly pedantic point to pontificate, based as it is on a mispronounciation of the largely obsolete Wade-Giles transliteration for Beijing, but its "peeking" not "pecking".
I reckon the CG AI voice thingy has discovered, quite by chance, the Pecking man. A totally new subspecies of Homo Erectus. Shudder the thought. Wonder of its got a beak?
What does that mean? "A new species arrived on the scene". They didn't evolve in a vacume. What was that pivotable moment in time that distinguished them as something different than thousands of generations that came before? Was it just one indivdual that some how managed to pass on their DNA or several indiduals spread through out the population? What was it in their DNA that was different from their predecessors?
Fire is ubiquitous thus hominid groups must have discovered how to create it many times, perhaps in many cases through tool making because some types of rock give-off sparks when struck.
And yet we think it’s impossible for a species of upright bipedal hominid to exist independent of humanity despite the countless eyewitness accounts across vast gulfs of time and space that share similarities with one another.
17:17 so, if I want to see those houses mentioned in the title, I have to watch the 17 minutes of everything everybody should already know about our ancestors?! Is this a novel way to attract more viewers?! Or shall we call it something else?
Too many hads, the second had is unnecessary. There is a large school of thought that homo erectus is just homo sapian, so it is very possible that they had faith in a deity.
I'm guessing early humans are still here. It's called evolution, not climate change. This stuff makes me laugh. A little entertaining though. Funny how money and politics has too enter into everything.
Lots of humans species went extinct. And some dinosaur species haven't. In every mass extinction event (5 previous) 75% of species on earth or more went extinct. Plus there is always a background extinction rate normally
Housing began and spread with agriculture when our ancestors needed a place to store grains year round, about 10,000 years ago. Prior there were only temporary shelters. No houses 1.75 million years ago.
It seems anachronistically quite rad that early hominids had their own industrial periods, as well. To think of it in those terms lends a greater relatability to these guys and gals. The real question, however, is did Homo erectus also produce industrial music?
Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer! bit.ly/ExtinctZoo
Why don’t you get to think and make a suggestion creating another UA-cam Videos Shows that’s all about the Extinct Prehistoric Amphicyons (Bear Dogs) on the next Extinct Zoo coming up next?!⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️👍👍👍👍👍
Why don’t you think of a suggestion making a UA-cam Videos all about Dakosaurus, the “Biter Lizard”, an Extinct Prehistoric Metriorhynchid (the Marine Crocodile) the “Godzilla” of the Jurassic and the Cretaceous Seas on the next Extinct Zoo coming up next?!👍👍👍👍👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Why don’t you think of a suggestion making a UA-cam Videos all about Dakosaurus, the “Biter Lizard”, an Extinct Prehistoric Metriorhynchid (the Marine Crocodile) of the Jurassic and the Cretaceous Seas on the next Extinct Zoo coming up next?!👍👍👍👍👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Literally every claim you make here is soundly disproven by genetic studies. That and archeological evidence. I’ve heard a thousand versions of this narrative by now. I’m leaving this here as a note.
This is not science. Its ideology.
stick your heritage u know where....👎🤧
It's a bit mind-blowing to me that Homo Erectus was around with its home-building and tool-making technology for about 1.75 million years. All that history, and we'll never know anything more than a minuscule fraction of the broadest outlines.
Humans have been around far longer than 1.75 million years. everyone will know in the near future. They can't hide it much longer and many already are becoming aware. You'll be hearing it from their descendants.. not people on the surface of Terra.
And at some point in the future very much the same thing will probably be said about us. Little will be left of our technology in any evidence of how we lived, if those in the future looking back are so advanced in their technology, that what we could do impressed them but still classified us primitive.
Post singularity AI will be able to simulate what it was like for them with high fidelity. The question is will we live long enough to see that time? Also, assuming society doesn’t collapse before or because of it.
Caves sites show that Homo erectus only had use of the flip phone.
An interesting question along those lines is: did bands Homo Erectus engage in warfare with other bands of Homo erectus? Is there any evidence in skeletal remains of injuries that are the apparent result of attack by another human?
Or, were the bands so spread out (that is, was the human population so small and sparse) that bands rarely, if ever, encountered one another?
Immagine being there for the first boat ever to cast off... "GRUG! LOOK AT THIS, IT CAN FLOAT! HOP ON HOMIES WE GOIN SOMEWHERE"
"It's witchcraft don't trust it"
"What's witchcraft you're not imagining things again are you Gorsh?"
the first boat moment was also probably the first "hold my beer" moment 🤔🤣
I'm convinced that 90% of human* discoveries were just some homies f*ckin around and finding out
*human: as in the Homo gene
No respectfully.
The 2nd boat was made and they went
Racing.
And you have to name him Grog. Can't resist the temptation, can you? 😂😂
One thing is clear: We don’t agree on how they actually looked.
All jokes aside, thank you for an insightful documentary with great narration and great imagery
From looking at the many different skulls, it might be that ancient humans were more similar like dog breeds are today.
All human, but slightly different, hopefully we’ll learn more.
@CalisthenicsForTheBrain 🤣🤣🤣
If they came back to modern times, the first thing they'd do is sue for defamation based on all the crude depictions.
Me, pulling up in my sled pulled by dogs
"Get in losers, we're making cave art in Colombia"
👑 🏆
Awesome comment man!!
A time machine that would allow us to see into the past without affecting it would be useful.
Understatement of all time.
Yea I think something like this would be more achievable then taking someone back in time. Like opening some kind of hole to se in space woth telescope idk
Would be nice to see history without living in it 😂
We have one!! Paleontology 😀
@@wingedhussar1453alright... Hear me out... What if we used complex AI that basically "does the math* on like, the whole planet... It would be a huge thing and maybe not even possible. But if it scanned an area it could determine how everything got there right? By like crunching the numbers? Like how certain geological formations occured or how certain things could or couldn't be possible? Idk I'm not a genius lol. I'm rather average just thought of it when I was a kid....
Knowing these lines of early humans lived so long and accomplished so much really boggles the mind. In a very real way, we stand on the shoulders of those who went before us, giving humanity an amazing legacy to live up to.
Absolutely most successful human species, not only by longevity, but by the advancements they made (sapiens excluded) Using and making fire, clothes, advanced weaponry and tools, caring for others for extended periods...remarkable people.
Well they're remarkably dead now.
@fredkelly6953 they were around for longer than we've been here. Maybe in another 600 000 years homo sapiens will all be gone too
@@fredkelly6953 did they not assimilate with later species?...or evolve?
@@fredkelly6953Is that a mockery? They evolved and adapted to become us. They were here for 2 million years and we are here for only 300,000. With our current speed in tech advances, I believe our own specie will be gone in a shorter time. Our descendants will call us dead too.
@@xtinctube7283yeah, part of them evolved eventually into us.
The biggest problem I see with all these hypotheses is that whoever is coming up with them pretty obviously spends most of their time indoors. Like the idea that humans first captured naturally occurring fire rather than created it. Humans always gathered up dry grass for bedding. Apes do that. When humans started flaking stone tools is was inevitable that they would spark their dry grass bedding on fire. And this idea that physically modern vocal cords are required for speech. Apes talk to each other. My dogs talk to each other. I can tell by the way they bark what they're after. It's different for rat or snake or cat or possum. Solresol is a language with seven syllables. Southern Koisan uses five different clicks. It really doesn't require vocal cords to have a language.
Fire, for example: was probably discovered sporadically throughout different regions and time spans. Probably the same for other major discoveries as well.
I talk to my cat. And she talks back!
I got the distinct impression that the video was referring to modern speech. Homo Erectus could communicate vocally, they just did not have the apparatus to make the sounds WE depend on for communication.
Don’t forget whistle languages (which I find fascinating)
Shit, babies talk, if you count screaming and babbling. Most organisms have some means of communication, so something as sophisticated as these folks would definitely have some kind of language. Maybe not ancient Latin, but something, they must have had something.
Ive always felt theres a deep biological connection in our brains between how we portray the villians in slasher movies,
And how it is we hunt. The similarity is eerie if you think about it.
The killer never runs. hes a walking, steady pace, never tiring brute with a sharp implement. You run away from him, he only walks, so you MUST get away right?
wrong. Just when you think you can relax, here he is again. you can never escape. ...... you can run a hundred times faster than him trying to save your life, But he still runs you down, and never even ran to begin with.........................
The victims in slasher movies are the legit experiences of our prey.
I dont know how they did it, if me and a group of guys walked into the woods now with a spear each and saw a deer, it would bolt and there is no way we would be able to find it again yet alone stalk it and wear it down, amazing
@@TM-ch3hlthere was almost certainly stealth involved in the initial aproach too no doubt. which changes nothing, becuase that is also difficult lol.
@@killgazmotron Injuring the animal on initial contact seems necessary for the entire hunting success. Predatory is our inherent demeanor. Oh, how one longs for the Garden of Eden.
@@TM-ch3hl Trackers are amazing people. Hard thing to learn, I'm sure.
@TM-ch3hl persistence hunting works best in hot, open areas, as heat exhaustion is part of what wears the animals down. Humans are better at staying moving when hot than some other animals. In a colder, woodland habitat with a lot of brush to slow you down, I dont think that strategy would work very well, so being stealthy and taking game down quickly before it can get away would be better.
Nowadays people complain when they have to walk more than a block between escalators and elevators. Our ancestors were able to spread throughout the world, in between long dangerous swims or boat voyages, in every possible weather condition, entirely on foot! What heroes!
Not really a big deal. Most fit people today walk on average 5 miles. 5 miles x 365 days in a year is 1825 miles. In slightly more than a year you can easily walk across a continent. To me the hard part would be not having shoes so i suppose they must've made shoes - or had tougher feet
PS It would only take a few hours to walk those 5 miles leaving vast majority of day for other activities
Dogs pulled Beringians on sleds
to be fair though, some of us have deformities that prevent us from stuff like endurance running (i have one leg longer than the other, i have asthma, super high arches on my feet, not much fat cushioning in my feet, etc.)
Who are those people? Fat colleagues?🇺🇸
Homo Erectus is by far my favorite Homo name. This is purely a scientific opinion.
Man standing.
@@randallbesch2424 Man standing to attention? If you get my drift lol
@@randallbesch2424 Man standing erect.
@@andyf1235lol
@@randallbesch2424 As you say...
Hey man, I don't know if you'll see this or not but this is a really good video. I appreciate you and that you take the time to make videos like this.
Dang I wish humans still built houses
Boy do I have great news for you
underrated comment
never been to Indian huh
No! You only get brick prison..
0:01
"...the homogenous,"
I see what you did there.
Smells like fraud or evolutionary misrepresentation doesn't it? .....considering that we are not homogeneous but several hybrids with other animals and rightfully deserve more distinctive categories.
Homo genus
@@Aerxis homo genius
It would make sense we built homes before fire.. Seeing how most animals build nests.. The complexity, on the other hand.. Brains
Mankind during Paleolithic spent many a night in caves...our hormonal rhythms /endocrine system operate best under total darkness (with the illuminated dials and 'winky-blinky' lights bad for your normal body day/night endocrine balance)...therefore cave-sleeping allowed for our natural day-night cycle to develop.
@@johndesade126 this implies that all diurnal animals evolved that way because they inhabited caves. untrue
You had to have somewhere (and someone) to bring your catch home to. Nothing special about a species having a burrow, nest, etc..
I assume that Homo Erectus probably used logboats and rafts to paddle across open water, rather than anything as sophisticated as a sail? Either way, it was one hell of a feat.
Why couldn't they figure that out? Even the simple Portuguese Man O' War use their "fin" as a sail to go thousands of miles
They turned their jesus hack on walked across my dude
Our Australian Aboriginals were an undisturbed Civilization for 75,000 years, and never had sails on their canoes.
@@johntomasini3916Pacific islanders had pontoon style canoes they paddled everywhere. Sails leave you at the mercy of the winds and tides
I would argue that a charitable and fair explanation for the disappearance of *Homo erectus* is as a result of isolated populations diversifying into other forms of *Homo:* namely, *Heidelberginsist->Neanderthalensis, Denisovans, Sapiens, and likely Floresiensis as well as Ludonensis.*
Sure, there were isolated populations of them that simply died out, but this is not representative of all of what seems to have been going on during the later parts of their presence in the ecosystem.
The upper crust non-hybridized rh negatives were the source of the male part of the homo erectus lineages today via an "animal Eve" from the homo erectus group and an offworld male. The families with no homo erectus in them are vastly different, posessing the mtDNA of "divine Eve" that is apparent;y necessary for the ascension practise.
Erectus aren't the direct ancestors of any of the species you mentioned except the latter two due to differences in shoulder, skull, & limb morphology as well as overlapping temporal ranges. We still don't know the crown ancestor of Homo sapiens s, assuming there even is a single one we could point to given how fluid the notion of "species" is amongst Hominins.
@@DrCorvid what are you mumbling about?
@@Aerxis The black headed people were often said to not be able to learn ascension because they had no soul. They were exempted from the ten commandments according to ancient accounts such as king Og and were farmed like goats in the region with the highest dolmen counts in the world. Some bred in, even though original human strain with the rh negative blood can't host rh positive pregnancies very well. The mtDNA of a human with divine female markers is not from homo erectus. There were several original unrelated species.
Isn’t it though that at some point Homo Erectus lived alongside all those forms of Homo
excellent! just in time for my most recent hyperfixation: human evolution 😂
same i lowkey only found out about this channel because i was hyper fixated on dinosaurs
I’m hyper fixated on both
@@kekkic I found out there's no evolution but there is rampant hybridisation and crossbreeding with other life forms. It wasn't even "natural selection" but beastiality. Good thing there are still real humans left to sort it out.
oh I am not alone I see
oh, I see I am not alone in my obsession
I read a report from 1950 from mexico city that stated during the laying of a new water pipe thru the city that 4 ancient humans were laying next to a wolly mamoth.Spears and tools were laying around the site.Just one year later,close by the first find they found another wolly mamoth.
IN MEXICO!? W O A H!!!!
Perfect timing, I was looking for something exactly like this. Started with dinosaurs, then pterosaurs, now homo. Love the history of our distant, yet closest relatives. A video about the earliest homo sapiens would nice (and other groups too, like heidelbergensis, habilis, neanderthalensis etc.).
Wow, this was a fascinating video on Homo erectus, the longest-lived human species ever. I learned a lot from your summary and highlights of their achievements, such as hunting, fire, and seafaring. One thing that I think is also interesting is that Homo erectus may have been the first human to use symbols and art, as evidenced by the engraved shells found in Java that date back to 500,000 years ago [00:19:21]1.
These shells are the oldest known examples of abstract patterns made by humans, and they suggest that Homo erectus had some form of symbolic communication and expression. I wonder what they were trying to convey with these engravings. Maybe they were the first artists of our kind. Thanks for the great video!
Sea faring H RErectus may also be the mastodon butchers in California 130,000 years ago
Shoot, I rememeber back when teeth first appeared in the cambrian seas. Now that was a game changer.
"Okay, Helicocystis" 🙄
(Cambrian joke, had to, 😅)
You are of very great age.
@7:45 It is amazing how successful groups of predators can be with cooperative hunting tactics. Able to bring down much larger, stronger, and hardier prey than any one individual predator. Humans being pack hunters, tool users, and tool makers, were advantaged by physiology that also allowed them to become superb pursuit hunters.
Much like African wild dogs
Amusing. You go on to memtion these very points.
*mention
Things have changed. My mother was one of nine, but their neighbor had 15 kids in the 30s. And that was under modern civilization conditions. Homoerectus woman probably popped out one kid or even two every fertile year of her life.
@@SewingBoxDesigns Potentially, depending on resource availability.
extinctzoo is the best paleo channel
Is it not a bit outdated to think that evolution was 'sudden'? The first human species to leave Africa have also been contributed to being Homo Habilis. Between Habilis and Erectus there is probably a lot of in-between variants.
The record shows sudden changes so accept it.
@@noticing33 our understanding, evolves all the time with new findings.
There probably are a lot of in-between variants. It takes several several several generations to evolve. I didn't think they were saying this happened suddenly. But these are the fossils we found and classified as these several species. The in-between variants just haven't been found or have fallen under these other species. There are a lot of gaps, always will be gaps.
Thanks this was an excellent doco and kept me interested all the way through
I'm happy that this channel exists
As some Africans can remind you, not every speech sound rely on the pneumatic system: imagine a hunting party that not only have to conserve breath, but also be quiet - so we have a lot of clicking and clacking sounds in some languages, thus it's not at all necessary to have those organs to develop and use speech :-P
Exactly! There are so many ways ways to communicate besides speech.
Java Man at 5:43 took ages to decide which was the campest selfie to post for the Employee of the Month wall
Did they die out or did they evolve?
Or do you consider dying out and evolving to be the same thing?
The truth is so much more complex than old Anthropologists like to debate. These ancestors of ours roamed back and forth and all over the World as best they could. They stayed in places for long periods of time, they migrated frequently at the same time others stayed put. They simultaneously evolved independently and interbred. It is not one or the other.
Some of us don't have a genetic trace of that kind of archaic-sourced hybrid. Game on huh?
"pecking man"? A human-woodpecker hybrid?
Beijing is also spelled as Peking.
Although, when you think about it, are not all men pecking?
And the uncomfortable fact: "erect man", I mean... seriously!
@@LuisAldamiz"Homo" erectus no less!
"Like homo sapiens - us!"
"...Pecking Man."
Artificial intelligence not a member of homo sapiens.
Oh, come on. Modern humans first appeared on a park bench in New York City, and possibly delivered there by a flying saucer witnessed by Alice Cooper.
😂
Why not?
Brian of Nazareth was kidnapped by a flying saucer.
Admittedly they gave him back.
@@michaelreifenstein2114too plausible needs rewrite
Your confused, you mean aqualung
Yeah what are WE?
I think you would have to define speech! Homo erectus spread widely over the habitable planet. They lived in a wide range of environments which meant over time they had to adapt their physiology to live in those environments - body covering, footwear, fire, plant and tree awareness, directional awareness, and advanced planning skills, etc. They made tools, most probably some form of weapons and I've read they used water to transport. It's ridiculous to think they didn't have some kind of verbal communication skills to live successfully in their environment. I think those skills were probably more than squeals and grunts but whatever they used helped them be successful. They lived a long time and were probably taken out by advanced weapons and far more intelligent Homo sapiens.
Think again.
Erectus led to Heidelbergensus which led to the common ancestor of Neanderthals and us. We are several steps down the line, much too late to be responsible for their decline.
FUN FACT:
'Peking Man' was a great band in 1980's New Zealand. Their biggest hit was "Room that Echoes". The music video used what was, for the time, cutting edge computer graphics.
Always puzzled me as to how much early humans were predated on, given we/they reproduce relatively slowly.
A lot. Fair amount of fossil evidence. Murder of course has always been higher
Life's short span i.e. higher death rate due to the conditions certainly were the factors, this incl. lots of infants or newborn lost etc., men died often during the hunt or wars, women naturally exceeded them in numbers, and were also tolerated or in demand of other packs around, as it produced men - fighters, hunters protectors, so my guess the birth rate was very healthy, but the odds were not quite "pro" life in general.
Humans can have kids anytime, other species normally can't. Higher replacement rate. Only limitation is carrying 1 child only when migrating. I expect predation also led to faster development. Get smart or die.
Don't forget that until the last century child birth was the number one killer of women the world over!
@@indyawichofficial1346 interestingly there's very little evidence of human on human conflict during the stone age. Around the bronze age (or was it copper age?) Was when we start seeing a lot of conflict.
Interesting that H. erectus "disappeared" during the previous glacial warm interval, a time between glaciations much like our own Holocene. They persisted as themselves apparently only in refugia, like Indonesian islands. Also interesting that the appearance of "modern humans" occurred at the time of an earlier warm interval. My guess is that during warm intervals there would be some forced and some opportunistic migrations, bringing different branches of humanity into contact with one another.
There's a positive correlation between warm temps and violent behaviors in modern civilization. Maybe there were interspecies wars during these periods.
@@FarmerDrew I'm not sure why they think this way, but scientists apparently think there may have been as few as 800 individuals at a time in all of Europe in the Aurignacian period (42,000 - 33,000). If this low count also applied in the Mousterian (160,000 - 40,000) which covered all of Europe and east to the Altai Mountains, it's hard to imagine any violent encounters of scale occurring during these early periods, warm or not. Hard to imagine any encounters at all, frankly.
@@SG-js2qn my God that would be amazing hunting land, can you imagine the bounty of unperturbed fauna
@@FarmerDrew It's probably even more than you think, because they also say that in the past the density of animal populations was much higher than people tend to assume.
@@SG-js2qnThere are theories of some groups meeting and some individuals mixing which resulted in mixed babies.
The graph @ 20:34 is a good summation of what we know thus far. Only, it lacks a KEY hominid, in that the Denisovan is not on it. This particular subspecies is primary in the genetic code of people of South Asia and Australia.
The denisovans were under 5 1/2 feet tall on average, which makes them ineligible to be called what scientists refer to as "true humans."
@NoOne-zm4rb That may be one of the dumbest things I've ever read. You can't be serious.
Absolutely love this channel! I learned so much from here! 👍
I don't think there's any argument, Homo Erectus, apart from sounding like a gay porn movie, has to be the most successful human species in history. We think we're clever, but to invent the use of fire, construction, advanced tools where there none before shows a level of ingenuity up there with luminaries such as Newton, Einstein, and Hawking, and we've barely been around a fraction of the time they were.
Yeah, and then they died out because on their island were growing more trees? Nah, man, that sounds so stupid. Evtl, some kind of virus or other things combined drove them to extinction, but a simple klimate change? when they had developed seafahring, fire, tools? Sorry but no.
And we haven't got any further than their use of fire - imagine it had never been harnessed. Where would we be? What wouldn't we have? Our entire existence is the result of the expert use of fire.
Developed teamwork ❤ tysm for sharing with us ❤
What do you mean arrived on the scene? Did they float in on a scallop shell?
🤣🤣🤣
Scallop shells float?
In Greek mythology the do
Majic
Appearing in the fossil record.
15:59 bro was literally the meme of the girl taking a pic of a burning house 💀
The most persistent human trait is arrogence.
Because it can’t be spelling…
Arrogence
@beingsentient there is a fine line between arrogance and confidence. Confidence is a healthy belief in your abilities, while arrogance is an excessive one.
Arrogance most likely comes from the sheboons. Real rh negative non-hybrid Adamics have a hard time assimilating many of the emotives the hybrids profess.
@beingsentientThe basic motivation (of any species) is to transmit genes. Arrogance (and many other character elements ie compassion, ingenuity,...) are tools to improve the individual's chances of transmitting her/his genes. Belief became a property of the species when it was realized that larger groups offered better survival rates than smaller groups. To maintain coherence in a group, religion turned out to be a good tool (also of control). "Belief" probably only became relevant after Homo x managed to strike a match and started exchanging instinct for intelligence.
4:07 "Pecking man," lol! That was a needed giggle, although it didn't seem deliberate; thank you!
Thanks also for the interesting presentation! It was especially interesting to see that chart, featuring the various species of Homo, and where their timelines overlapped.
dam quest for fire vindicated lol.
That was a great movie when you think about it.
It's hard to imagine what earth will be like 500 years from now, but 1 million years from now? Wow
You should do a video on the ancient human use of psychedelic mushrooms. It's a wacky theory for sure, but Terence and Dennis McKenna share the idea that there may have been a point in time when psychedelic mushrooms greatly impacted human society in ancient times. I won't get into their detailed ideas since that's a rabbit hole of its own, but if you are a reader or listener of their ideas, it's interesting to look into.
That's very interesting. Very interesting
Theres a story about magic mushrooms tied to Santa Claus, I think. Heard about it on the Stuff You Should Know podcast like 4 yrs ago.
I would be very surprised if they *didn't* impact human society. I find it very unlikely that word of magic mushrooms or psychoactive plants wouldn't have traveled far and wide, and we have historical analogues for "medicine men" going back for hundreds and hundreds of years: apothecary gardens were preceded by shamanic practice that almost certainly circulated through the oral tradition. I think the only real question is, how far back did human ancestors collectively make a choice to make these plants a central part of their lives and/or culture?
What I really find amusing to imagine is, what was the first moment a human ancestor *really* went on a trip profound enough to impact their perspective? Was it an accidental ingestion? Or like, were there hominids watching other animals accidentally trip who decided they wanted to get in on that?
"Grok, dude, look! Look at that horse! Dude, that horse is spacin' out! What did he EAT? Lolol, he's on another continent! Oh, wait - hey, it's those mushrooms that are making him wild out! Wowwwww...yo. Hey, hey hey Grok, hey man, you wanna try some?"
good video! thank you for such a big work!
@16:00 Fire is also capable of generating light.
Good point
Fire is also a weapon. IMHO Homo evolved, while Australopithecus and Paranthropus went extinct, because of the dialectics between lions, just arrived to Africa back then, and fire, just tamed in Africa around the same time. Previously we (australopithecines) survived big predators by climbing to trees, especially at night, as neither hyenas nor saber tooth cats could do that, but when lions (and their individualist cousins: the leopards) arrived from Asia, those who could not muster fire and some half decent weapons, were at great risk.
well done!!
I became fascinated with Homo Erectus when I saw an Illustration of the earliest known human-made tools.
I noticed that it was Homo Erectus who first created tools that were not only recognizable but almost pretty.
When I read the book Java Man I learned of their nearly world-wide migration and their use of fire.
Now they're my favorite early hominids.
why be so shocked that H Erectus built shelters and huts? Our lcal Sasquatcyes do that sort of thing all the time
Really interesting thank you
Your video popped up in my suggestion box, and l already looove it. You got yourself a new subscriber 👏🙌♥️🙏✌️👽
Fire was their television.
It takes such a perfect set of conditions for fossils to form that just because they disappear from the fossil records that in no way means that they were not around. Archaeologists are the biggest class snobs in all of Academia. I hate how they are always displayed in just a hide thrown over them because there's also been sewing needles found at these sites. I wish they would they would just be honest for once, and say that we got not a fucking clue. For someone to be buried with grave goods in the first place, there has to be such an abundance that those items are not detrimentally useful to the survival of the tribe.
Maybe the engraving on ivory and shells were “maps” as Jean M. Auel portrays in The Mammoth Hunters. Highly recommend reading her series The Clan Of The Cave Bear. Simply marvelous storytelling!✌️
I don't mean to pick nits - but, isn't that probably an australopithecine or something that's mixed in at about 0:29?
Nit picker!
Excellent series. keep up the good work
I highly disagree with treating them like they are entirely different species. These are also human beings but of races much more different than the differences of today. I don't believe these highly adaptive and intelligent people totally died out, but live on in modern people just as the Neanderthal people do. This treatment would be like finding the bones of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli and concluding that Aragorn and Legolas closely related races of the same species, but stumpy broad Gimli was a primitive sub-human and perhaps could only grunt and groan about superior elves. The world once had much more diverse races as populations were small and spread out, but as they grew they blended together as is no longer disputed regarding Neanderthal. They were weird looking and differently built as some people are today, but I consider them human until proven otherwise.
In a way you’re right, the distinction of separate “species”was created by us and race is a social construct that doesn’t correlate to actual modern human variation. However, the distinctions between us and other extinct human species can be extrapolated through genetics. All Homo sapiens sapiens are very closely related albeit with many groups having small genetic admixtures with extinct species. But again H. Erectus for example was probably something like nearly 2 million years removed from our modern lineage so the distinction of them as separate species is definitely a fair distinction and both useful and important for taxonomy and categorization for the purposes of researching and understanding biological anthropology.
Edit/:
Also all other species of humans did technically “die out” because they no longer exist as distinct lineages/populations. Gotta be careful with these types of assertions because these type conclusions are now being used to promote new types of dangerous pseudoscientific racism (I don’t believe this was your intention though). Finally, with all due respect, LOTR; which is a fantasy world is a terrible comparison. It is cool though, I also enjoy LOTR and other fantasy worlds. I think that a high fantasy that world that includes interaction with other human species and extinct fauna would be awesome! (I’m also literally working on this exact world building project, so I’m biased!)
Well said. I just made a similar comment. I think there's a political motive lurking in this "they weren't us" narrative. Soon "we" will be blamed for exterminating "them".
Also,these differences would have occurred slowly over many many generations.
It's not like some homo erects parents looked at their kids and said, " these kids dont look like us, they must be homo sapiens"
Their physical characteristics and dna are far too divergent to be considered the same species. These are very different beings.
@@samgoodwin89 Nonsense Sam. They are anatomically and genetically the same as us with almost negligible difference.
Teamwork makes the dream work
At 11:39 you show an illustration depicting chimpanzee, homo erectus, and homo sapiens.
I think it is mislabeled with the chimpanzee and homo erectus being switched.
One for sure mistake is the misspelling of homo sapiens as homo sapien, without the s.
~ Surprizingly, HomoErectus has an authentic Asian ancestry, whereas they were the first to develop the ability to look over the tall grasslands in order to see predators approaching by watching the grass patterns made as the predators traveled across.
If there were trees around & HomoErectus could see predators from afar, then they would give a warning signal, but if there were no trees around, then listening for predators traveling across the grasses & looking over by standing & watching for falling grass as the predators roamed, was the way to be aware of their presence approaching.
~ A great advantage for HomoErectus was bamboo, one of the first largest grasses, per as it first served as weapon then eventually used for refuge from predators because bamboo is very strong & sturdy.
~ DID YOU KNOW: Ancient humans eventually developed strong vocal cords to ward off predators when they were being attacked, by screaming at them in protest.
Wait one second, you're saying that primitive humans were able to scream and yell, just like most jungle monkeys do today?
And for that matter, most other animal species too!......
Well that is amazing, isn't it!
By the way, have you ever seen how a lion moves through very tall grass? Is like a freaking shark moving through the water!.... You sense it, but you really don't see it much..... It's freaking awesome!
I wonder if lions turned into pact animals because of humans .most cats are not like this
Group hunting is probably the norm among most felines that predate on herds or large species. Although cats often specialise in solo ambush predation cheetahs are team predators, Lions still practice a small variation on the feline norm of females and young hunting in groups and the males being pretty parasitic on the rest of the group except when extra muscle is required.
yea but lions have their own pacts which isnt seen in other felines@@TheMudwatcher
@@wingedhussar1453 brother cheetahs stay together for years
@FarmerDrew once again thts only cats in Africa where humans migrated out of. Cats outside of Africa dint have groups .seems like lions evolved to b pact animals.suprised scientists didn't put those two facts together
ya that is interesting. perhaps a lot of animals in africa might bear defenses from homo cohabitations past
4:05 No, he is not _"now known as _*_pecking_*_ man."_
Is this channel voiced by an AI?
I love that these distant ancestors of ours lived very hard lives and been through it all just so modern humans can call them fake and never existed thousands of years later, funny how history works
0:05 homo is Latin for “same” ,in the like of homonym. Homo became the term to classify human ancestors based on they were similar or “same” to us.
I also paused 5 seconds in to this video to comment this.
You're confusing two different words from two different languages (Greek and Latin).
I'm fascinated by the apparent fact that different species of early humans left Africa multiple times, and each new wave appears to have replaced or absorbed the previous in a pretty uniform way.
Some populations of modern humans have varying percentages of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA, but it's always in the single digits.
It's actually surprising that we DON'T see some isolated populations of Neanderthals or Denisovans somewhere on the planet.
If we weren’t the first species of human to colonize the world, who’s to say we’ll be the first human species to colonize the stars 🤷🏻♂️
_"who’s to say we’ll be the first human species to colonize the stars"_
The evidence.
@@AlbertaGeek the evidence of what??💀💀 we haven’t gone anywhere yet
@@jeremycoffen4619_"evidence of what"_
The highest level of technology achieved by the other human species.
_"we haven’t gone anywhere yet"_
We've gone further than any other human species.
@@jeremycoffen4619 Modern humans have been around for at least 250,000 years.
@@AlbertaGeek that we are aware of.
Imagine the stories they could have told us. I grieve that we will never hear them.
I’m a bit confused about the diagram at 18:47 and the clothes analysis. From my understanding of the current knowledge of homo Erectus there are no artifacts that indicate clothes were worn. In the timeline diagram at 18:47 the artifacts shown between 2 Mya and 3 Mya were dated to about 2000-5000 BC. I like the theory of clothing being created and worn my homo Erectus and I think it is plausible but currently there is no evidence to support the theory due to the deterioration of clothing materials. If im missing any new articles or artifact reports that provide evidence to support this theory could someone link them?
Agree. And no housing 1.75 million years ago, those are temporary shelters. Housing is a year round space that only began about 10,000 years ago when Sapiens needed a place to store grains year round.
😂 thats an awesome beard on the guy around the 18:31 mark
20:26 probably more successful than us
Maybe because they weren't arguing, fighting or killing each other over religion and/or politics.
You should do a video on what happened to all the other human species
This obsession with whether humans began in Asia or Africa is entirely political. In reality, these are one single connected land mass, and the climate zones cross these land masses fairly evenly, with modern and past animial species living on both sides of the imaginary line between the continents. Europe too is connected to these, and the only line between them is in our collective imaginations. The only importance of this so-called origin is purely cultural and political, and it is neither scientific nor in-line with the modern understanding of population genetics.
Haha! Somebody deleted their goofy response to me. I guess they realized that, yes, human fossils have also been found outside of Africa. So goofy these people.
i totally agree with your point but let’s pretend we did start in what nowadays we consider africa, wouldn’t it be useful to know where in the connected land mass we originated ? i’m not disagreeing or anything but it’s the best way to coordinate the possible beggining of us. i agree with the political part though and imaginary lines
@@shamulol with population genetics, you're not going to have a precise origin of a species in time or space, so it becomes more of a zone (in time and space). It can take several generations or many generations for a recognizably new species to appear. So, for example, animals that are suddenly isolated on an island may become quite unique over just a few generations, becoming a "new species". Or for example, a natural barrier like a lake could dry up, and two distinct populations could converge into one in just a couple generations. We can't forget that many species can still interbreed with each other, and classification is determined by factors other than capacity to interbreed. These types of isolation or convergence events certainly would be important to our understanding of emerging species. But such easily identified events and places are more the exception than the rule.
Often times with species that have a large range, like humans, they form gradients of difference over time and space. We can see that in humans with our "racial" changes both across the continents and across time, as groups converge and diverge. These more broad convergences and divergences are also useful to our understanding, so where and when they happen over larger and less specific areas are keys to that understanding.
For humans, our bipedalism makes us extremely energy efficient for long distance travel by land, and that combined with our early propensity to follow migratory animals gave many of our ancestors massive territorial ranges. On the flip side, our ability to consume a low variety omnivorous diet and adapt a local environment to our needs can lead to long term settlement and isolation, thus a very tiny range. These two traits have opposite effects on our changes as genetic populations. The migratory groups tend to intermix frequently and have wider zones of origination of specific trait changes/adaptations. But isolated groups can become highly differentiated and highly adapted to a very specific place and time. For these reasons, it's best to view humans in a multi-origin context.
Africa itself is a huge place, but so is East Africa. Pointing to the entire continent and saying "there" is pretty useless, unless that continent is isolated like an island, like Australia, for example. Humans are so migratory, however, that even barriers that create strong isolation effects on other species, like islands, are relatively weak. If we look at gene populations, we see that only massive barriers like the Himalayas, the Pacific ocean, and the Sahara desert had any kind of strong isolating effect during our evolution. But those effects have decreased over time, as we've become better at overcoming those barriers.
Our ability to build sea craft like rafts may even predate our species itself, with some speculating that Homo Erectus could build such craft. This is a game changer from an evolutionary standpoint, strongly affecting the concept of place origin. Anyone who's floated on the ocean knows that coastal currents can carry you tens or hundreds of miles effortlessly. While bipedalism is energy efficient, floating effortlessly is far more efficient. We have countless examples of other animals getting trapped on natural sea rafts that cross vast expanses of ocean, like from Africa to South America, thus changing their evolutionary path. So when we introduce intentionally created rafts, that makes such massive distances less meaningful to population isolation, both for humans and the plants and animals we may take with us.
All of this migration makes pointing to a precise geographic origin for the entire species somewhat pointless. Rather, the origin of different specific traits caused by specific regional events is more useful. So, yes, we can point to a place and say "there" for certain trait emergences.
My original point is also very important, though. When we point to "there" choosing arbitrary lines has no utility at all. If we point to East Africa, understanding that it also includes the southern Arabian peninsula and eastern coastal Mediterranean (including small parts of Asia and Europe) as part of it, then, yes, it has meaning. But if we cut things off in the middle of nowhere based on geographic convention, that is purely political. The parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe that are close to each other or touch are basically the same place. From a biology perspective they should have the same name, while more distant parts should be called something else. There's no biological reason why Greece and Sweden should both be called "Europe". They're not remotely similar to each other in terms of habitat. But coastal Greece, Israel, and the Nile delta are much more similar from a habitat perspective, despite being on three different continents. I know you may have wanted a simpler answer of yes or no, but population genetics is anything but simple. And the concept of geographic naming predisposes people to odd biases that require a more nuanced explanation.
It’s Africa, white person. Facts are facts. Sounds like the one who is “political” about it is you. Every scientist who is smarter than you and I would roll their eyes at you.
@@timl9724 thanks for th thorough answer man learnt a lot
Thanks for the great video. I think you got the naming at the shoulder view diagram wrong, looks like the chimp is more modern looking than erectus @11:44
You can fix the reading of your computer animated voice with misspellings. It is (Pee-King-Man) not (Peeking Man). Really?
😅
Wow, I didn’t realize that we had found their tread in the mud, amazing.
You must be young.... Not being detrimental towards you, it's just that it still amazes me how with each generation things need to be learned and taught again.
Guess how long ago this information has been known?
Boy, these videos are just so funny and I can’t stop laughing.
Peculiarly pedantic point to pontificate, based as it is on a mispronounciation of the largely obsolete Wade-Giles transliteration for Beijing, but its "peeking" not "pecking".
I reckon the CG AI voice thingy has discovered, quite by chance, the Pecking man. A totally new subspecies of Homo Erectus. Shudder the thought. Wonder of its got a beak?
Great content. Stay on the front line of new discoveries!
What does that mean? "A new species arrived on the scene". They didn't evolve in a vacume. What was that pivotable moment in time that distinguished them as something different than thousands of generations that came before? Was it just one indivdual that some how managed to pass on their DNA or several indiduals spread through out the population? What was it in their DNA that was different from their predecessors?
4:08. So, we have a new fossil man called "Pecking Man"! Thank you, AI !
Fire is ubiquitous thus hominid groups must have discovered how to create it many times, perhaps in many cases through tool making because some types of rock give-off sparks when struck.
Outstanding Presentation!
What I'm hearing is that we have no idea where we came from and that we are still a long way off from figuring it out.
Great video!
And yet we think it’s impossible for a species of upright bipedal hominid to exist independent of humanity despite the countless eyewitness accounts across vast gulfs of time and space that share similarities with one another.
Did I hear him say - Pecking Man.?
Mister ExtinctZoo man is an AI.
17:17 so, if I want to see those houses mentioned in the title, I have to watch the 17 minutes of everything everybody should already know about our ancestors?! Is this a novel way to attract more viewers?! Or shall we call it something else?
Click the gear, fast forward. It really IS that easy.
Tap the screen, drag the red button while watching the thumbnail. Even easier.
@@hollyingraham3980 of course. But you need to know where to skip. I believe majority of people knew this as it is a know topic. So... useless.
Great channel.
Had these early humans had invented god yet?
😂 that's why we should Just focus on our heritage
Too many hads, the second had is unnecessary.
There is a large school of thought that homo erectus is just homo sapian, so it is very possible that they had faith in a deity.
That depends upon the level of sophication or language and the ability to make stuff up and lie about it.
@@luludhamma774 why do you think language was ever invented, so they could sit around the fire and lie to one another, just as we all do today.
"Yo grog! i hit these two rocks and it made the hot bright thing!"
I'm guessing early humans are still here. It's called evolution, not climate change. This stuff makes me laugh. A little entertaining though. Funny how money and politics has too enter into everything.
That's a Tortoise not a Turtle in the video. Different creatures.
Sometimes i think that the humans are the species that should be extinct, no the dinosaurs.
You are so gay
Dinosaurs were cool 🦕 🦖 🐲
Lots of humans species went extinct. And some dinosaur species haven't. In every mass extinction event (5 previous) 75% of species on earth or more went extinct. Plus there is always a background extinction rate normally
@@frakismaximus3052agreed!
Dinosaurs are not extinct. Birds are therapod dinosaurs.
Housing began and spread with agriculture when our ancestors needed a place to store grains year round, about 10,000 years ago. Prior there were only temporary shelters. No houses 1.75 million years ago.
It seems anachronistically quite rad that early hominids had their own industrial periods, as well. To think of it in those terms lends a greater relatability to these guys and gals.
The real question, however, is did Homo erectus also produce industrial music?