Did man evolve in Africa alone or did it happen in South America, Australia and Southern india? Any evidence other wise ? Are we all africans, man and monkey, the desendents of Sir Propliopithecus, or is there a chance that we are south americans, australians or south indians also ? Any new evidence otherwise ?.
Hi Padmanabhan! Did you mean to ask if humans originated in more than one place? Probably women would not appreciate your outdated use of the generic "man" to mean humans. Also, it is well known that human evolution took place on multiple continents over 100,000 of years, so I think you must be asking about the origin. There is no simple answer for this question. It is an entire field of study with constantly shifting views according to the reinterpretations of old evidence and the discoveries of new evidence.
It was eve who bit the apple and poor adam came tumbling after. Please spare us if we are old fashioned! Coming to the point, yes ! I was referring to the origin through homo habilis, erectus and the rest. Let me know if you come across anything interesting and out of the box.
Dental formula on new world monkeys v. Old world monkeys & great apes. That's a start - as far as I know humans only reached full braincase size in between mid-north Africa & southern - Middle East.
It is said that the aborigines in Australia only made one massive tribal migration when sea levels were low around the last ice age - this also enabled northern Asians to migrate across a land bridge or glacier into north America & spread south. We all come from a single cradle.
Hi all,
A couple of interesting news stories on this topic:
Lucy had neighbors: A review of African fossils:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160606154911.htm
Research proves Aboriginal Australians were first inhabitants:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160606154905.htm
Cheers, Fred.
Finds in Meadowcroft, PA, and at Cinmar on the Chesapeake bay dispute the "Clovis First" theory of the peopling of the Americas, however, evolution and migration are two separate processes. In the Americas, DNA from diverse areas has been found, including Siberia and Sub-Saharan Africa. While Monte Verde in South America is thought to be an early entry point, my GUESS is that anomalies are cropping up everywhere. If Solutrean (France, 22,000 B.C.E appears to be in the middle of this era) tools are believed to have been found at Cinmar, we can't even rule out European descent -- so it is a deep riddle.
I think if you were to study descending lines of austrolepithicus you may find your answer. Although not appropriate for scholarly work, Wiki seems to do a good job of explaining this theory.
" A. africanus was once considered to be ancestral to the genus Homo (in particular Homo erectus). However, fossils assigned to the genus Homo have been found that are older than A. africanus[citation needed]. Thus, the genus Homo either split off from the genus Australopithecus at an earlier date (the latest common ancestor being either A. afarensis or an even earlier form, possibly Kenyanthropus), or both developed from a yet possibly unknown common ancestor independently (Wiki)."
This information meshes with anthropological thought. Fascinating subject -- good luck!
I felt like I may be a little behind, and looked up some research on the genome project and Aboriginal peoples. It said the initial colonization of Australia is thought to be 59,000 to 60,000 BCE. Haven't had time to look through the whole thing, but colonization, would in my mind, point again to migration. There appears to be a lot of limitations and conjecture regarding possible DNA mutations. Interesting though!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Physiology
- Biosignals
- Biomedical Signal Processing
- Statistical Analysis