Essay on Herto Homo Sapiens and the Origin of Man

A. C. H., was discovered in the loft space above the office of the Keeper of Zoology—the office Hinton had occupied from 1936 to 1945. This was the first concrete evidence implicating Hinton in the Piltdown hoax (Gardiner, 2003). Contained in the trunk were x teeth similarly stained to the materials discovered at Piltdown I, while several other materials, such as elephant and hippopotami teeth and bone fragments, had been whitened similar in fashion to the ‘cricket bat’ found at the Piltdown II site; the cricket bat having been made form an elephant femur. Hinton had experimented with bone and tooth staining (De Groote et al., 2016) predominantly staining them with iron to match the gravels of a Pleistocene era (Gardiner, 2003)… Also among Hinton’s effects, were eight human teeth that had been stained with iron, chromium, and manganese (Gardiner & Currant, 1996), similar to those of the Piltdown site. When the fluorine dating method was implemented this further incriminated Hinton as the findings from the Piltdown I site evidenced “a recent ape jaw and canine had been artificially modified, stained and planted at Piltdown I, along with parts of a similarly stained recent human skull” (De Groote, 2016, p. 4). The method Hinton practiced (evidenced by the findings in his trunk) was unique to him—a signature—therefore, implicating him as the Piltdown

Homo erectus was first found in Africa and the fossilized remains dated 1.8 and 1.0 million years old. The Homo erectus traits are very similar toward the modern human traits. Homo erectus brain size was smaller than the Homo sapiens. Homo erectus had a brain size of approximately 650 cc and Homo sapiens had a brain size of approximately 1251

We share almost 99 percent of our genetic material with chimpanzees. Yet we have several traits that are very different. Two legged walking, or bipedalism seems to be one of the earliest of the major hominine characteristics to have evolved. To

1.1) The MRC theory says after the first migration from Africa 1.8 million years ago, the different groups of humans in different part of the world slowly evolved in parallel with each other. The emergence of modern humans didn’t occur in a single area, but on different continents. In contrast, the OOA theory says humans evolved first in African and then migrated to different continents. The Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens evolved into different species and interbreeding would be rare which is why there are different races. The only similarity between the two theories is that humans started in Africa. Until about 14 years ago, Genetic DNA showed that the MRC theory was correct. But 13 years ago more evidence shows the OOA theory is more realistic. Anatomical evidence shows different physical characteristic between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens. Archeological

Dating of the collection was’nt avalible for the lack of stratagraphy but bone from one the the skulls was date. It returned a date of 1000 BP, the date was retreived using the uranium thorium method. These skulls have been shown to show links to those from Kow Swamp.

In the Article “Redrawing Humanity’s Family Tree” by John Noble Wilford, describes how two different skulls challenge the theories of human origins and migrations. The Central African skull, that dates back to nearly 7 million years ago, was assigned to a whole new genus and species because of its apelike and evolved hominid species. The 1.75-million-year-old Georgian skull shows evidence that the first hominids may have been intercontinental travelers who set motion the migrations that occupied the whole planet. Finally a third skull was found that is the same age and shares a resemblance but, the size of the skull suggests that the brain was smaller than expected for H. erectus.

The importance of the research being done based on this find is explained within this same article in a quote from Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum, London saying, “A find like this does make us question the trees people have built up of human evolution”(Noble, 2002). Not only is finding this skull phenomenal, but the implications it holds are tremendous. The idea that one fossil such as this can change the way we have thought about human evolution is a huge deal that deserves much research and even much speculation and dispute.

The fossils which passed the amino acid tests were called “transitional” elements between the two species.  They represented a part of Europe where the Neanderthals and early humans would have more than likely encountered each other.  The same DNA sequence was found in Neanderthals and early humans, but also in ancient cave bears from Croatia and Austria.  This made the researchers skeptical of their findings and decided to test for mtDNA stands.  When the fossils were further analyzed, the researchers found that the mtDNA embedded in the Neanderthal fossils was of a different strain than that in the early humans, which was of course, different from that of the ancient cave bears.

Skulls dating back to the 1000s CE were found with man-made holes in them, being the first pieces of evidence of brain surgery. Most of the skulls from this time showed no signs of bone repair, meaning that surgery must have been fatal at one point. (National Geographic 2008) The development of brain surgery took place over the next 400 years, showing an immense amount of improvement in the procedure. The most recent skulls found by archeologists demonstrated many signs of bone repair, and researchers even discovered that bone surgery went from being fatal to have a 90% success rate in the 1400s (National Geographic 2008).

During the early 19th century, scientists, archeologist and other scholars, speculated, studied and disagreed about the development of humans and our origins. Some experts theorized that humans are monogenism and developed into various varieties of species. Others argue that we

The first Neanderthal fossils found in Europe, a fragmented child’s cranium in Belgium in 1830, and an adult cranium in Gibraltar, were not immediately recognized as a divergent kind of human. Only in 1856 after a partial skeleton was found in a cave in the Neander Valley in Germany it became clear that these fossils belonged to an extinct human and our closest evolutionary relative (Hublin and Pääbo, 2006). Since then, questions about their relationship with modern humans have been fiercely debated between anthropologists. But what attracts most interest from scientists and popular media is the possibility of hybridization between Neanderthals and modern humans if, in other words, they were a genetically different specie or a

The next species to appear were the Homo erectus which might have descended from Homo habilis. They were the first human whose fossils were found outside of Africa. They also had larger brain than the species before them. Homo sapiens sapiens came after the Homo Neanderthalensis; they are the only human species around. This could have been due to the result of increase brain sizes that allows more cognitive abilities that help them adapt to different environment changes and hence survive. Global evidence have been found of art, music, and culture and advanced tool making. In Mithen’s 3 phase of mind proposes that the shape of the Neanderthals’ frontal lobe was similar to the one of the modern Homo sapiens and this indicated that they were able to cope with complex cognitive functioning. Evidence for this could be explained using the phonological approach by Frank Gall (1758-1828).

Human evolution is the gradual process in which people, or Homo sapiens, originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence, particularly in the form of fossils and secondary remains, show that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people evolved over a period of approximately six million years. Humans are primates. Both genetic and physical similarities show that humans and the great apes (large apes) of Africa, chimpanzees (including bonobos, or so-called “pygmy chimpanzees”) and gorillas share a common ancestor that lived between 8 and 6 million years ago. The volume of fossils found in Africa suggests that most evolution occurred there and is likely the place of origin for early humans. This brings to fruition the “out of Africa” theory, also called the “single-origin hypothesis.”

There has been a great deal of heated debate for the last few decades about where modern Homo sapiens originated. From the battle grounds, two main theories emerged. One theory, labeled “Out-of-Africa” or “population replacement” explains that all modern Homo sapiens evolved from a common Homo erectus ancestor in Africa 100,000 years ago. The species began to spread and replace all other archaic human-like populations around 35,000 to 89,000 years ago. The rivaling opinion, entitled the “regional continuity” theory or “multiregional evolution” model refutes this theory and states modern humans evolved from various species of Homo erectus who interbred with others that lived in

Human evolution according to research started over 6 million years ago. The outcome of the evolution process is the current human beings. Scientific studies have revealed over the years a remarkable affinity between the chimpanzees/Apes and human beings. Even though this reality is not a definitive prove that human beings evolved from apes, it does show that the human beings are in one way or another related to other primates. Scientists suppose that the humans and the primates shared a common ancestor. The subject of what makes humans what they are and their origin has been the exclusive purpose leading to many scientific studies globally (Coolidge & Wynn, 2011). Studies believe that Africa was the origin of evolution millions of years ago. Fossil remains have been discovered in different parts of Africa as well as other regions of the world. Different hominins have been discovered around the world in the last 1 million years. Thus, the different discoveries have led to comparisons between the various species of hominins to clarify on their similarities as well as differences. This essay seeks to explain whether they were distinctively different species or regional versions of the same species.