HumanKind

Discussion in 'Science' started by Moi621, Jan 28, 2014.

  1. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    2,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Human Kind not a Homo sapien.
    Another example of the flawed system of classifying ancient PeopleKind

    http://news.yahoo.com/300-000-old-caveman-39-campfire-39-found-152628371.html
    "A newly discovered hearth full of ash and charred bone in a cave in modern-day Israel hints that early humans sat around fires as early as 300,000 years ago — before Homo sapiens arose in Africa. . . "

    From H. habilus on they were H. sapien via continuity through continuous hybridization.
    Could a person today produce an off spring by H. habilus that would be fertile ? If yes, then of the same species.


    Moi :oldman:







    No Canada-1.jpg
    Quel primitif
     
  2. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are not ready to tell scientists they dont know how to do their work.


    It is Homo sapiens, not "sapien" and "habilis" not "habilus"

    A cow and an american bison can produce a fertile offspring,
    so your idea about species could use a little brushing up, dont you think so?
     
  3. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,909
    Likes Received:
    691
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Fire may have been used by erectus as long as 1.5 million years ago...

    With out dna there is no way to determine what you propose...but I would say habilis and sapiens is out of the question...
     
  4. bobov

    bobov New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I long ago stopped paying attention to these stories because, interesting as they may be, they're inevitably contradicted or complicated by data from the next discovery. Our knowledge is too scant to make more than plausible conjectures about the remote past. Go to the archives of the NY Times to find several decades of stories about discoveries compelling revision of theories about our origins. They all seem persuasive ... until new data demolishes them.
     
  5. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    2,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Remember those skulls of several ancient HumanKinds found in a cave in the Caucasus ? Armenia maybe.
    Within the last year or two.
    I believe their brain case was no bigger than H. habilus although they have not been so identified.
    They no doubt had to have some smarts, culture, planning, to have lived there in their time.
    Probably even curing hides and sewing to create garments.
    And they must have had some fire even if they could only maintain it and not create it.
    ref. Quest for Fire
    Wyly :ignore: What were they in your book? Check with your daughter too. :blowkiss:
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/july-dec13/ancestry2_10-18.html
    Those folks. What were they?




    taikoo - YES ! And in my lifetime I have witnessed my positions winning as the scientist were disproven.
    PM me if you would like some of my list. Neanderthal genes in most of "us" is my recent big win over decades of arguing with an "anthropologist" woo woo


    Moi :oldman:
    Think it through. Think FREE





    Quel Primitif
     
  6. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The thing with this discovery, it is not so much the fire pits themselves, but what else we find that might change things. Most evidence points to humans developing culture around 100,000 years ago. If the right artifacts are discovered around the area of the pits, it may lead to a bit of a rethink about current theories
     
  7. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why? Seems reasonable to me.
     
  8. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    22,850
    Likes Received:
    5,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Cross breeding between Erectus and Sapiens might be a slim possibility, as they likely overlap in existence....Habilis however predates both by millions of years. Neanderthal is pretty much a given, as Sapien existed at the same time in many of the same locations...and genetics have shown we have a bit of them in us.
     
  9. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,909
    Likes Received:
    691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Iike tecoyah I think to much time would've passed and the likelyhood of a fertile hybrid would be small...the genetic evidence for a link to neanderthal is very small even though we apparently occupied the same regions for some 70k years...so it would appear very little genetic exchange occured...if we were closely related I would've expected neanderthal to have been completely assimulated by the more numerous sapiens, but that never happened...and as I understand the dna evidence that the genetic mix occurred very early on near the the time of initial contact...

    Donkeys and horses have hybrid offspring, the males are always sterile but occasionally the females are fertile....maybe that was the case with neanderthals...maybe there was only a single viable offspring in 70k of contact that supplied the dna contribution to our modern populations...if that is case we are not all that close genetically and habilis even further removed genetically...
     
  10. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How long ago do you suppose that the auroch and the american bison shared a common ancestor?
     
  11. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,909
    Likes Received:
    691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i have no idea...i read the other day that cows and bison can interbreed, I don't know if that's true though...
     
  12. bobov

    bobov New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're quite right, and it's interesting. But a year from now we may read of a new discovery from 500,000 years ago, forcing yet another revision. We just don't have complete data, so we make shaky inferences.
     
  13. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    22,850
    Likes Received:
    5,122
    Trophy Points:
    113

    "The American bison and European bison(wisent) have been hybridized with Domestic Cattle. With wisent, this was originally done in an attempt to reinvigorate the declining wisent population. First generation hybrid males are sterile, but females may be crossed back to either a wisent or domestic bull to produce fertile males. Modern wisent herds keep hybrids well isolated from pure wisent. However, since the modern purebred wisent are descended from less than 2 dozen individuals, this has resulted in a significant genetic bottleneck for the purebred wisent.

    European bison (Wisent) have also been crossed with domestic cattle to produce the zubron. These were first bred in Poland in 1847 as hardy, disease resistant alternatives to domestic cattle. Breeding was discontinued in the 1980s. The few remaining zubron can be found at Bialowieski National Park.

    American bison bulls (American "buffalo") have been crossed with domestic cattle to produce beefalo and cattalo. These are variable in type and colour, depending on the breed of cattle used e.g. Herefords and Charolais (beef cattle), Holsteins (dairy) or Brahman (humped cattle). Generally, they are horned with heavy set forequarters, sloping backs and lighter hindquarters. Beefalo have been back-crossed to bison and to domestic cattle; some of these resemble pied bison with smooth coats and a maned hump. The aim is to produce high protein, low fat and low cholesterol beef on animals which have "less hump and more rump". Although bison bull/domestic cow crossings are more usual, domestic bull/bison cow crossings have a lower infant mortality rate (cow immune systems can reject hybrid calves). Modern beefalo include fertile bulls, making the beefalo a variety of "improved cattle" with a dash of bison. There were suggestions of crossing the beefalo to Cape buffalo, although this idea essentially ended when the Cape buffalo was found to have 52 chromosomes (instead of 60 as in cattle and bison), meaning that the hybrid's success would be unlikely. Bull and cow cattalos are reported in Wonders of Animal Life edited by J A Hammerton (1930)."
     
  14. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    it is true, and they can produce viable offspring.

    They dont look much alike.

    Gotta find a paleontologist to ask, i bet they have diverged at least as long ago as H. sapiens and H. habilis.

    The auroch and bison are not even considered to be the same genus.

    i kind of think that any two of the same genus should be able to interbreed.
     
  15. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OT but there is the most incredible youtube of a guy in S Africa who found a way to make friends with wild cape buffalo. its really something to watch.
     
  16. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That is why it is such an exciting field - Just when we think we have those ancients worked out - Bang they jump up and bight us again
     
  17. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The original objection to bothering with the latest discovery is akin to saying he dont read nothing 'bout the civil war, coz they keep larnin' new stuff that invalidates them old ideas.

    Data does not change. The oldest know this or that is still at the same level and date, when something older is found. The civil wat still happened when they say it did. The fire pit was there with people using it, when they say it was.

    The oldest known was originally presented as "oldest known" the biggest as the biggest known, and so on. Science is always like that. No conclusions, just more data.

    if that is boring, then it is. Life is boring, so jump off a bridge.
     
  18. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,909
    Likes Received:
    691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I saw that too on a documentary, dispels myths of their ferocious temperament..

    they do kill people but that's understandable when they've been shot, animals tend to get angry when that happens...
     
  19. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,909
    Likes Received:
    691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    horses and zebras are but still have sterile young...so there doesn't appear to be a simple straight line that can be drawn to differentiate species and viability...but based on how little neanderthal and sapiens intermingled and habilis was much much further back in time it seems unlikely to me...without dna I can't see it ever being verified...
     
  20. taikoo

    taikoo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i think in a way, the garden of eden story is true, we could freely mingle with most animals, no problem, if we'd quit teaching them that we are bad news.

    lions, i dont know about trusting them if they get hungry.
     

Share This Page