Human Evolution

Jose · Post by **Jose** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:32 pm

jcrawford and I have been having some interesting discussions in other threads, which have led to the notion that we really need a thread on human evolution. So, here it is.

The Rules
We want to work from data. Data that is discussed must be accessible in the scientific literature. Personally, I would prefer the peer-reviewed literature, because, as those of us in science know all too well, the peer reviewers are usually one's competitors. Thus, they are typically extremely critical of what we write.

Any other information that is brought to bear must also be accessible to everyone. Where requested, direct quotes from the sources will be important.

The questions for discussion

1. What is the current best understanding of human origins?

2. What "confounds" are there in the interpretation of data?

3. Given that there is always genetic diversity within populations, how easily can we assign hominid fossils to different groups? Here, the term "form-species" is probably most useful, referring to similar fossils with similar forms, but in the absence of information on the capacity for interbreeding. In many cases, different form-species are different species (fossil trees vs fossil insects), but sometimes they are not (fossil leaves vs fossil roots of the same tree).

4. Does information based on fossil data mesh with information based on genetic data? The true history must be genetically feasible. The fossils must have been left by individuals who were produced by normal genetic methods. To be valid, any explanation of origins must incorporate both fossil and genetic data.

5. What are the parts of human history that are most at odds with (some) Christian views, and what suggestions can we offer for reaching a reconciliation?

I will begin by posting the following genetic data, which is pictorial representation of the differences and similarities in mitochondrial DNA sequence of a whole bunch of people. Relative difference/similarity is proportional to the lengths of the vertical lines. Horizontal lines merely separate the vertical lines so we can see them.

How do we interpret these data?

[If appropriate, I will edit this post to ensure that the OP of this thread lists the important questions.

jcrawford · Post by **jcrawford** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:55 pm

The Happy Humanist wrote:
jcrawford wrote:
The Happy Humanist wrote:
jcrawford wrote:Everyone already knows that some human beings have migrated from one continent to another and that kangaroos haven't,
They haven't? Then how did they get to Australia from Mt. Ararat?
Since Australia wasn't a continent separated by water from the land mass of Asia back then, they probably hopped.
Oh, THAT'S right. Of course. Silly me! The continent of Oceania has travelled 4000 miles in 6000 years. What was I thinking?

Well, how do think Kangaroos migrated to Australia? In canoes?

jcrawford · Post by **jcrawford** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:13 am

bernee51 wrote:
jcrawford wrote:
The Happy Humanist wrote:
jcrawford wrote:Everyone already knows that some human beings have migrated from one continent to another and that kangaroos haven't,
They haven't? Then how did they get to Australia from Mt. Ararat?
Since Australia wasn't a continent separated by water from the land mass of Asia back then, they probably hopped.
Back when exactly?

Shortly before your people did, assuming you're an Australian Aborigine.
With the onslaught of the Ice Age, a lot of folks headed south and some probably killed a kangaroo or two for meat and clothing on the way.

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 7:22 am

They could have sneaked on the ship like mice. I think they were big once and claws anf big teeth like grandma. They ended up smaller as food spply dwindled.

jcrawford · Post by **jcrawford** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 8:44 pm

Cathar1950 wrote:They could have sneaked on the ship like mice. I think they were big once and claws anf big teeth like grandma. They ended up smaller as food spply dwindled.

Are you sure that's part of neo-Darwinist theory about how kangaraoos migrated to Australia?

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 10:36 pm

I made up the part about mice.
But they were big and meat eaters so I think they would have taken over the boat. I am not even sure we we around then. I lost track of time when India crashed into China. Time are a changing.

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:28 pm

jcrawford wrote:
bernee51 wrote:
jcrawford wrote:
The Happy Humanist wrote:
jcrawford wrote:Everyone already knows that some human beings have migrated from one continent to another and that kangaroos haven't,
They haven't? Then how did they get to Australia from Mt. Ararat?
Since Australia wasn't a continent separated by water from the land mass of Asia back then, they probably hopped.
Back when exactly?
Shortly before your people did, assuming you're an Australian Aborigine.
With the onslaught of the Ice Age, a lot of folks headed south and some probably killed a kangaroo or two for meat and clothing on the way.

And which of the Ice Ages would that be.

As I understand it aboriginal people have been on this continent for 40,000+ years. Kangaroo fossils have been dated at 20 million. I guess in the context of a 15 billion year old universe 20 million years could be considered "shortly before".

BTW - heading south in the Southern Hemisphere during an Ice Age is taking you into the big chill not away from it.

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:42 pm

It does seem like 15 million years is a long time. Maybe the should have named us. I wonder what those kangeroos were doing running around all those years with out names?

jcrawford · Post by **jcrawford** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:31 pm

Cathar1950 wrote:I made up the part about mice.
But they were big and meat eaters so I think they would have taken over the boat. I am not even sure we we around then. I lost track of time when India crashed into China. Time are a changing.

What do kangaroos have to do with Australian Aborigines migrating from Africa though since there is no evidence of either travelling by boat or canoe from the Asian mainland once upon a time in neo-Darwinist mythologies about mice and men in India crashing into China?

jcrawford · Post by **jcrawford** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:52 pm

bernee51 wrote:
jcrawford wrote:Shortly before your people did, assuming you're an Australian Aborigine.
With the onslaught of the Ice Age, a lot of folks headed south and some probably killed a kangaroo or two for meat and clothing on the way.
And which of the Ice Ages would that be.

The last one, unless you believe in multiple worldwide deluges and floods which would be necessary to cause multiple Ice Ages.

As I understand it aboriginal people have been on this continent for 40,000+ years. Kangaroo fossils have been dated at 20 million. I guess in the context of a 15 billion year old universe 20 million years could be considered "shortly before".

Yes, in that evolutionist context, all Australians (aboriginal kangaroo, human or not) share common ancestors.

BTW - heading south in the Southern Hemisphere during an Ice Age is taking you into the big chill not away from it.

By the way you are dressed in your photo, I could believe it, if there were any glacial evidence of Australia being covered by great sheets of Ice ten tya.

jcrawford · Post by **jcrawford** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:09 pm

Cathar1950 wrote:It does seem like 15 million years is a long time. Maybe the should have named us. I wonder what those kangeroos were doing running around all those years with out names?

Kangaroos don't run, they hop.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/a ... aroos.html