• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A New Addition to the Human Family Tree

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The human family tree just got more complicated. This is another exciting discovery from southern Africa. From an amateur's perspective it looks like several different varieties of hominid were present simultaneously in our prehistory.


Humanity’s strange new cousin is shockingly young — and shaking up our family tree
Homo naledi lived as recently as 236,000 years ago and could have crossed paths with the direct ancestors of modern humans, scientists say.


Homo naledi, a strange new species of human cousin found in South Africa two years ago, was unlike anything scientists had ever seen. Discovered deep in the heart of a treacherous cave system — as if they'd been placed there deliberately — were 15 ancient skeletons that showed a confusing patchwork of features. Some aspects seemed modern, almost human. But their brains were as small as a gorilla's, suggesting Homo naledi was incredibly primitive. The species was an enigma.
Now, the scientists who uncovered Homo naledi have announced two new findings: They have determined a shockingly young age for the original remains, and they found a second cavern full of skeletons. The bones are as recent as 236,000 years, meaning Homo naledi roamed Africa at about the time our own species was evolving. And the discovery of a second cave adds to the evidence that primitive Naledi may have performed a surprisingly modern behavior: burying the dead.
“This is a humbling discovery for science,” said Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. “It's reminding us that the fossil record can hide things … we can never assume that what we have tells the whole story.”. . . .
 
That was not evidence of macro-evolution begins in 3, 2, 1... ;)
 
The human family tree just got more complicated. This is another exciting discovery from southern Africa. From an amateur's perspective it looks like several different varieties of hominid were present simultaneously in our prehistory.


Humanity’s strange new cousin is shockingly young — and shaking up our family tree
Homo naledi lived as recently as 236,000 years ago and could have crossed paths with the direct ancestors of modern humans, scientists say.


Homo naledi, a strange new species of human cousin found in South Africa two years ago, was unlike anything scientists had ever seen. Discovered deep in the heart of a treacherous cave system — as if they'd been placed there deliberately — were 15 ancient skeletons that showed a confusing patchwork of features. Some aspects seemed modern, almost human. But their brains were as small as a gorilla's, suggesting Homo naledi was incredibly primitive. The species was an enigma.
Now, the scientists who uncovered Homo naledi have announced two new findings: They have determined a shockingly young age for the original remains, and they found a second cavern full of skeletons. The bones are as recent as 236,000 years, meaning Homo naledi roamed Africa at about the time our own species was evolving. And the discovery of a second cave adds to the evidence that primitive Naledi may have performed a surprisingly modern behavior: burying the dead.
“This is a humbling discovery for science,” said Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. “It's reminding us that the fossil record can hide things … we can never assume that what we have tells the whole story.”. . . .

Well, whomever they once were, they lost the evolutionary arms race it seems.
 
Well, whomever they once were, they lost the evolutionary arms race it seems.

From an evolutionary standpoint, that would be the case with 99.99% of the species that have existed. I'd also suggest that the mere sign of some form of societal development isn't a sign of humanity.

People need to keep in mind that it's the Homo genus where we find humans and that the Hominidae species covers a lot more territory. While it's kind of fun to look at some form of societal structure and think "Human!!" that isn't even close to the case. Most animal species exhibit some form of societal behavior (think "flock" or "herd" or "pack") but what sets humans apart is the use of tools and high level modifications to their environment.
 
Well, whomever they once were, they lost the evolutionary arms race it seems.

Yet even the losers likely contributed to that arms race - once you are the undisputed top dog then evolution is likely slowed. Once you possess the power to make even the weakest of your species survive to breed and compete for resources then that may not be such a good thing for the evolutionary process.
 
Yet even the losers likely contributed to that arms race - once you are the undisputed top dog then evolution is likely slowed. Once you possess the power to make even the weakest of your species survive to breed and compete for resources then that may not be such a good thing for the evolutionary process.

Not only that, you get to police the whole process.

For instance, there are monkeys that can use tools, apes that use weapons, some that can recognize themselves and show various forms of emotional attachment and even empathy. We should kill them all. Kill them all now before they become a threat later on. God damned banana munchers.

lol
 
what sets humans apart is the use of tools and high level modifications to their environment.

Exactly. I'm still holding out hope that Beavers are declared human.
 
Very cool.

I sometimes wonder what our civilization would be like if some of the other human species had survived. How would we treat them? Would we treat them like people or apes?
 
Exactly. I'm still holding out hope that Beavers are declared human.

When I see a beaver using a Husqvarna I'll write the petition myself!:lol:
 
Not only that, you get to police the whole process.

For instance, there are monkeys that can use tools, apes that use weapons, some that can recognize themselves and show various forms of emotional attachment and even empathy. We should kill them all. Kill them all now before they become a threat later on. God damned banana munchers.

lol

Better to capture them and place them in escape proof enclosures, charge admission to watch them up close and destroy their natural habitat so that you can claim to be protecting their species from extinction by charging folks to see them. ;)
 
Better to capture them and place them in escape proof enclosures, charge admission to watch them up close and destroy their natural habitat so that you can claim to be protecting their species from extinction by charging folks to see them. ;)

Only if they have enough intelligence to understand what we are doing, but then that's too much intelligence and brings them closer to a threat.

We can just destroy them all and replace them with robots, easily controlled robots.
 
Very cool.

I sometimes wonder what our civilization would be like if some of the other human species had survived. How would we treat them? Would we treat them like people or apes?

We probably would just stab them all with pointy things like we did 50,000 years ago.
 
The human family tree just got more complicated. This is another exciting discovery from southern Africa. From an amateur's perspective it looks like several different varieties of hominid were present simultaneously in our prehistory.


Humanity’s strange new cousin is shockingly young — and shaking up our family tree
Homo naledi lived as recently as 236,000 years ago and could have crossed paths with the direct ancestors of modern humans, scientists say.


Homo naledi, a strange new species of human cousin found in South Africa two years ago, was unlike anything scientists had ever seen. Discovered deep in the heart of a treacherous cave system — as if they'd been placed there deliberately — were 15 ancient skeletons that showed a confusing patchwork of features. Some aspects seemed modern, almost human. But their brains were as small as a gorilla's, suggesting Homo naledi was incredibly primitive. The species was an enigma.
Now, the scientists who uncovered Homo naledi have announced two new findings: They have determined a shockingly young age for the original remains, and they found a second cavern full of skeletons. The bones are as recent as 236,000 years, meaning Homo naledi roamed Africa at about the time our own species was evolving. And the discovery of a second cave adds to the evidence that primitive Naledi may have performed a surprisingly modern behavior: burying the dead.
“This is a humbling discovery for science,” said Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. “It's reminding us that the fossil record can hide things … we can never assume that what we have tells the whole story.”. . . .

And the modern human genome contains evidence of interbreeding among subspecies. These various distinct variants did not necessarily go extinct, but rather live on as assimilated or incorporated within our DNA.
 
Last edited:
An interesting development in the evolution of humans.
 
And the modern human genome contains evidence of interbreeding among subspecies. These various distinct variants did not necessarily go extinct, but rather live on as assimilated or incorporated within our DNA.

Agreed.
 
From an evolutionary standpoint, that would be the case with 99.99% of the species that have existed. I'd also suggest that the mere sign of some form of societal development isn't a sign of humanity.

People need to keep in mind that it's the Homo genus where we find humans and that the Hominidae species covers a lot more territory. While it's kind of fun to look at some form of societal structure and think "Human!!" that isn't even close to the case. Most animal species exhibit some form of societal behavior (think "flock" or "herd" or "pack") but what sets humans apart is the use of tools and high level modifications to their environment.

That's been re-thought. L.S.B. Leakey, on reviewing Jane Goodall's reports, said "We have to either redefine 'tool' or accept chimpanzees as human."
And I suspect our ancestors were humans before they modified their environment. Unless building a shelter is 'modification'.
I don't know that a behaviour can be what defines a human. It's just a matter of genetics, I think. For example, I've read that everyone born outside of Africa has Neanderthal dna in their genetic make-up.
 
That's been re-thought. L.S.B. Leakey, on reviewing Jane Goodall's reports, said "We have to either redefine 'tool' or accept chimpanzees as human."
And I suspect our ancestors were humans before they modified their environment. Unless building a shelter is 'modification'.
I don't know that a behaviour can be what defines a human. It's just a matter of genetics, I think. For example, I've read that everyone born outside of Africa has Neanderthal dna in their genetic make-up.

I think that is true for Asia/Europe, not Australia.
 
I think that is true for Asia/Europe, not Australia.

You could be right, it's kind of a vague memory.
Come to think of it, that's my life story.
 
Back
Top Bottom