Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
The Discovery and Initial Interpretation of ‘Lucy’ in Paleoanthropology with Ian Tattersall
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 сер 2024
- The discovery of Lucy, a fossil from the 1970s, changed paleoanthropology. Before Lucy, scientists saw human ancestors as rough guides, not distinct species. This mindset dominated the interpretation of fossils. Lucy's discovery, representing a new species called Australopithecus afarensis, showed the need to define species clearly. The clash of old and new views was seen in a 1981 debate between Richard Leakey and Donald Johanson. Leakey's refusal to offer an alternative emphasized flaws in traditional practices. This marked a shift towards a better understanding of human origins and diversity, despite some scientists holding onto old ways. Recorded on 04/06/2024. [7/2024] [Show ID: 39816]
Donate to UCTV to support informative & inspiring programming:
www.uctv.tv/do...
Learn more about anthropogeny on CARTA's website:
carta.anthropo...
More videos from: CARTA: Lucy 50th Anniversary Symposium: The Impact of "Lucy" on Human Origins Science
(www.uctv.tv/ca...)
Explore More Humanities on UCTV
(www.uctv.tv/hu...)
The humanities encourage us to think creatively and explore questions about our world. UCTV explores human culture through literature, history, ethics, philosophy, cinema and religion so we can better understand the human experience.
Explore More Science & Technology on UCTV
(www.uctv.tv/sc...)
Science and technology continue to change our lives. University of California scientists are tackling the important questions like climate change, evolution, oceanography, neuroscience and the potential of stem cells.
UCTV is the broadcast and online media platform of the University of California, featuring programming from its ten campuses, three national labs and affiliated research institutions. UCTV explores a broad spectrum of subjects for a general audience, including science, health and medicine, public affairs, humanities, arts and music, business, education, and agriculture. Launched in January 2000, UCTV embraces the core missions of the University of California -- teaching, research, and public service - by providing quality, in-depth television far beyond the campus borders to inquisitive viewers around the world.
(www.uctv.tv)
What an informative presentation! The difference between a linearly-progressive view of evolution of hominin phylogeny and a trial-and-error multi-branching account of hominin evolution. This harkens back to the days in paleoanthropology of lumpers vs splitters. Many thanks for sharing this.
When Dr. Johanson was in Berkeley we were in the same building and he took us on a tour. Showing us the cast of Lucy etc. Also fascinating was the painting of Lucy in her enviornment.
*Join the Enlightenment, support Secular Humanism.*
thanks
What a likable man, up beat and educational. Thank you.
Brilliant talk!!!
Yes indeed, the bushy nature of Hominin evolution fits the picture so much more clearly than does the linear model. Perhaps the same can be said of pre-hominins in the Miocene as singling out a single link from quadrupedal apes may be just as fraught as was the case in the Hominins of the Pliocene and the Pleistocene?
Excellent article 👏 👍
Glad you enjoyed it
We learned about Lucy in grade school, but I never knew about this debate between old and new scientists. It makes sense. Old ideas can be hard to let go of. Even once scientific ones. Fresh perspectives tend to get around this. Fun. Thanks. 😊
Happily along came Ascent of Man with Jacob Brunowski. Of course that was in the 60s with the advent of color tv under the direction of David Attenborough, two science communication giants.
I prefer the term population rather than species or even subspecies.
I knew there was a falling out between Johansson and the Leakeys and never understood why now it makes sense to me
There may be other fossil evidence that has not been discovered yet. Worse, other hominids may have left no fossil records at all or lived in places where they will never be found. The one thing we can say for certain is. . . 'every' time a new fossil is found or DNA evidence then the human story has to be rewritten yet again and If you base your conclusions solely on the information you have to hand then it's a theory. Maybe we will never know the complete story.
That would be as good a guess as the one they came up with!!!
I Love Lucy.
Perhaps the evidence is still scanty enough to this day that skepticism of the hair ball diagram of human evolution is still appropriate even now to many observers.
What spieces was she?
Were there trees or shrubs found?
Nigel Kerner in his book "Song of the Greys" (1997) makes a compelling case for a kind of reverse evolution. He contends that early hominids like australopithecus and others DID evolve...but into what are now the great apes; gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees, and lesser evolved, gibbons. This explains the rarity of early ape fossils. Sounds odd and upsets paleontological orthodoxy, but Kerner makes his point via the scientific method albeit using less traveled side roads.
hhmm, that's interesting. i've never heard this hypothesis before. thanks
Dear, sweet GrandMama Lucy! How I wish I had inherited those _fabulous_ cheekbones.
Do you have DNA sequence to make such bold claims?
Clumpers and dividers
Have. they carbon dated them?
Carbon dating isn't accurate with samples that old. There are however, multiple other methods that are. One involves dating rock and sediment layers above and below the fossil to place constraints on the possible age.
Well then what accounts for the evolution of Trump and the MAGA Republicans???
I'm not an ape. I'm a human being created in the image of God and descended from Adam and Eve, the first man and woman who God created, and I do not have a common ancestor with apes.
I think your ancestor is a "Know Nothing" supporter from the 1850's.
@@anthonyehrenzweig7697 I am afraid the same thing may be said about you kind Sir. Lucy isn’t a complete skeleton. It is a collection of bones found in an area encompassing c. 250 square meters (200 sq. yards). The whole area was sifted by machine and the bones collected and arranged in the form of a skeleton. It’s not known if it is a single animal or a composite of a few. It is basically a fraud designed to promote evolutionary biology.
Listen to what he said about how scientists capitulated against their own beliefs…Just like climate science. Speak out against the zeitgeist and you’re finished …
What controversy is there in climate science? Its basically data gathering and modelling. No real room for differing interpretations and no history to cling onto.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd Almost 100 percent of climate scientists agree, of those who do not the majority are funded by fossil fuel interests!
Climate change denialism is an exercise in foolishness.
Lucy has no hands or feet, but pictures of her show human feet and hands, how do they know what she looked like!!!
Due to her knees, hip and head. They all Spoke a clear language toward bipedal.
In fact we now know that the knuckle walking apes all wall on their knuckles in different was, so there are doubts if the Common ancestor of humans and Chips is a knuckle walker.
There is also the fact that Lucy was not the only fossil of her species found. There are a number of different individuals of Lucy's species that fill in the holes presented with Lucy's skeleton.
They've found 100's of others from Lucy's species.
@@ksbrst2010 The current theory is that the common ancestor was bipedal in the trees & on the ground but not in the same way as humans are bipedal. For example gibbons are bipedal on the ground using their long arms for balance but they split from the common ancestor 15/18 million years ago. There were different forms of bipedalism - different gaits - some walking on the outside of the foot & some on the inside. Knuckle walking is a new development for chimps, gorillas & bonobos & as you say these apes walk slightly differently & this form of walking may have developed independently.
@@anthonyehrenzweig7697 This is the question. We can only speculate about this common ancestor. We know that the Australopiticean were obviously walking quite good and the fundamental difference between Australopeticis and Homo is rather small
This isn’t science.
and i suppose you think your bible is? 😂😂😂
Sorry, but it is. Get over it.
It is science; the hypotheses are falsifiable. Your inability to do so is not a fault of the science.
The evolution of hominids into modern apes and humans is clear in the fossil record. It may conflict with your beliefs, but that is a concern for you personally, not the physical record.
@@mattzobian Evolution conflicts with science. You can’t get information that’s not there by making mistakes to the information that is there.
@@cliftongaither6642 I know that programming can’t reprogram itself.