The latest discovery of a fossil skull in Kenya, more than three million years old, once again demonstrates the complex evolution of humankind. The following article examines the evidence and sees how it fits into the ideas of human origin formulated by Frederick Engels more than 100 years ago.
"There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." (Charles Darwin, The Origin of the Species, pp. 459-60, Penguin 1985.)
The latest discoveries in paleontology once again reveal the rich and complex evolution of the human species. In March, the magazine 'Nature' reported on a new fossil find in Kenya of a 3.5 million year-old skull. Originally, it was thought that the human linkage had been traced back to an ancestral genus called the Australopithecines (the "Southern Ape"), the most famous remains being 'Lucy', discovered by D.C. Johanson. These proto-humans roamed the savannahs and Rift Valley of Africa more than 3 million years ago, and are closer to modern humans than apes. However, new evidence suggests that the Australopithecus family was not the only hominid species to have existed at this time.
'Nature' describes a new species - Kenanthropus platyops - with a much flatter face than any Australopithecine. "Kenyanthropus shows persuasively that at least two lineages existed as far back as 3.5m years," said Meave Leakey of the Kenya national museum. It is clear that the evolutionary tree is far bushier that at first appeared. While the human lineage split from that of the African apes some 5-10 million years ago, this new evidence suggests possible new lines from which humans evolved. It shows a far greater diversification of human evolution prior to the emergence of the Homo genus.
The newly discovered skull has a small ear hole, like those of chimpanzees. However, it shares other features of early hominids, such as a small brain. But there are other striking differences, including tall cheekbones, small teeth and a flat plane beneath its nose bone, giving it a flat face appearance. The flatter face - a feature once thought distinctly human - arises primaril...
... middle of paper ...
...ical view of evolution, called punctuated equilibrium. Gould has recognized Engels' contribution, describing his essay on human origins as "a brilliant expose." However, notes Gould, it "had no visible impact on Western science." (Ever Since Darwin, p.210)
"All merit for the swift advance of civilization was ascribed to the mind, to the development and activity of the brain", wrote Engels. "Men became accustomed to explain their actions from their thoughts, instead of from their needs... And so there arose in the course of time that idealistic outlook on the world, has dominated men's minds. It still rules them to such a degree that even the most materialistic natural scientists of the Darwinian school are still unable to form any clear idea of the origin of man, because under that ideological influence they do not recognize the part that has been played therein by labour."
The latest discoveries in this field of human origins are a testimony to Engels thought and contribution, not least the discovery of Kenanthropus platyops. It is a confirmation of the method of dialectical materialism, the only consistent scientific outlook of the world.
Humanity became fascinated with the idea of evolution with the work of Charles Darwin and the Scientific Revolution. People began hunting for fossils that would prove that man had an ape derived ancestry (Weiner, 1955). After various years of searching, a piece of physical evidence was found in England that was said to confirm the theory of evolution (Weiner, 1955).This confirmation came from Charles Dawson’s discoveries from 1908, that were announced publicly in 1912 (Thackeray, 2011). Dawson was believed to have found the fossil remains of the “missing link” between ape and human evolution, the reconstructed skull of Piltdown man (Augustine, 2006). The material was found in stratigraphical evidence and animal remains that were, at the time, adequate enough to confirm the antiquity of the remains (Weiner, 1955). In 1915, another specimen, Piltdown man II, was found further proving this theory (Augustine, 2006). However, this was merely a hoax proven by fluorine relative dating in 1953; the artifacts and bone fragments discovered turned out to be altered to fit the proposed scenario (Augustine, 2006). The skull found was actually composed of a human braincase that was younger than the complimentary orangutan lower jaw (Falk, 2011). Both sections of the skull had been stained to appear to be from the same person of the same age (Falk, 2011).The perpetrator of this act was never caught and there are many theories proposed for the motive of this hoax (Augustine, 2006). Many people have been taken into consideration for this crime, such as Chardin, Woodward, Hinton, and Dawson (Augustine, 2006). Nevertheless, the evidence that proves that Dawson is guilty of this crime against anthropology is quite substantial compared to the evidence...
Over the last few hundred years, more and more has been added to the world’s fossil collection, fossils from all over the world. New theories have been created and old theories have almost been proven about the evolution of man. For example, we have proof that different species of man existed with certain types of DNA sequences and instincts, some we may not have anymore, or some that other species did not have back then. Even though it is subjected to much debate, one of the most widely accepted theories however, is that Homo sapiens interbred with the slightly more primitive species of man, the Neanderthal.
A study performed by Martin Hausler and Peter Schmid of the University of Zurich, Switzerland, appeared in the October 1995 issue of Journal of Human Evolution, igniting controversy over the 1974 Australopithecus discoveries in Hadar, Ethiopia. The most famous of the Hadar specimens is the 3-million-year-old skeleton, “Lucy,” who was recovered by paleoanthropologist, Donald Johanson. In his article, Shreeve presents the methods and findings of Hausler and Schmid’s study as well as some counter arguments from other scientists in the field.
There was a chief new discovery of fossil bones and teeth belonging to the earliest human ancestors ever discovered. The fossil bones predate the oldest formerly discovered human ancestor by more than a million years. The discovery was of fossil remains of a hominid that lived in present day Ethiopia between 5.2 and 9.8 million years ago. (Hominids include all species following the split as of the chimpanzees on the “human” side of the evolutionary tree.)
In July of 2001, a group of archeologists discovered the skull and jaw bone of the oldest member of the human family. The skull is a new discovery and was found in the Djurab Desert of Northern Chad by a group of archeologists lead by Michel Brunet, and is thought to be six to seven million years old (Walton). The age of the skull and jaw bone were approximated through the association of the fauna that were found with the fossils (Brunet). The skull is a major find for archeologists because they now have a new piece of the puzzle that shows the evolution of humans from apes and it provides information to a period that scientists had very little knowledge about because of the lack of evidence (Whitfield).
Australopithecus afarensis who existed 3.5 million years ago and a 4.4 million year old skeleton of an Ardipithecus ramidus are the closest science has come to discovering the human lineage. Shattered Ancestry an article written by Katherine Harmon discusses the remains of two hominids found within Ethiopia. These skeletal remains have created a huge controversy within the topic of evolution questioning many assumptions that have been made referencing the human lineage. The skeleton of the Australopithecus afarensis was named Lucy and was discovered in 1974. The evidence of her walking upright on her two feet essentially guaranteed her a spot in the human lineage line. Lucy was a chimplike ape that was said to walk upright making scientists believe the human ancestry was simple. The complete skeleton found in Ethiopia of an Ardipithecus ramidus named Ardi completely changed all assumptions made from scientists about the complexity of the human lineage. These remains have encouraged researches that the human line is not the only lineage to have evolved but the chimpanzee line has undergone drastic changes as well. There are many traits that researchers have always directly linked to the human lineage however since these discoveries occurred researchers are reconsidering. The recent discoveries that have shattered what has always suggested what linked a species to the human lineage have changed the certainty of whether it is possible to confidently identify the human’s last common ancestor. Majority of scientist had forgotten that there would have been many hominid species living together at one time. New theories have been suggested since scientists revealed that the foot of a hominid found called the Burtele site was found ju...
The first morphological features that later would become typical of Neanderthals, the projecting middle part of the face and a depression at the back of the skull, have been observed in fossils found in Europe as old as 400,000 years (Stringer & Hublin, 1999). These fossils belonged to Homo heidelbergensis, which in one of the various evolutionary scenarios that ties Neanderthals and modern humans is considered the ancestor of both Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens (Hubmlin, 2009).
One of the most revered and utterly enigmatic topics present within humanity is the evolution of humankind itself. Collectively contrasting both the origins of man physically and the very beginning of complex thought processes has been an incredible task, which is currently undetermined. The exact methods of the mind and of human character are both delicate and completely beyond true understanding. The only ways
Australopithecus afarensis existed between 3.9 and 3.0 million years ago. The distinctive characteristics of A. afarensis were: a low forehead, a bony ridge over the eyes, a flat nose, no chin, more humanlike teeth, pelvis and leg bones resembled those of modern man. Females were smaller than males. Their sexual dimorphism was males:females; 1.5. A. afarensis was not as sexually dimorphic as gorillas, but more sexually dimorphic than humans or chimpanzees. A lot of scientists think that Australopithecus afarensis was partially adapted to climbing the trees, because the fingers and toe bones of the species were curved and longer than the ones of the modern human.
Humans know or understand the theory of evolution and how they evolved from apes, but there is always talk of a missing link between apes and modern humans. Apes did not just suddenly evolve into modern day humans. Apes evolved into another species that fall into the relation of modern humans. This is what the missing link is referring to; we call the species hominins. Hominins comprised of many species actually, including but not limited to, Australopithecus afarensis and Homo erectus. Homo erectus may have been a direct descendant of modern Homo sapiens. These species hold strong evidence that they are the missing link between apes and modern humans. There are many pieces of evidence that lay the path of evolution from these species to modern humans, “…these include anatomy, living primate behavior, and genetic relationships” (Stanford, 237). Australopithecus afarensis comes first, existing about 3.9 to 2.9 million years ago, with intermediate anatomical traits between living apes and modern humans; their fossils were found in Africa (Yukimoto). About a million to two million years later, the species Homo erectus came into existence and lots of evidence has been found about this particular species, in fact, it was probable that it was the first species to leave Africa (Yukimoto). These species are significant in the evolution of modern humans. We do not have a clear path or even understand why these species emerged when they did or how they, in theory, eventually evolved into modern humans. We can only assume these things, by using various evolutionary processes such as natural selection, genetic bottleneck, and many more.
The evolution of man is constantly in question. While we are reasonably sure that modern humans and primates are both related to the same common ancestor, there is constant debate over what initially caused the two species to split into early hominids and apes. According to some, our longest and most popular theory on the division of man and ape is profoundly wrong. However, those same individuals usually offer an equally controversial theory as a substitute, one that is almost impossible to scientifically test or prove. Both the Savanna Theory and the Aquatic Ape Theory offer solutions to how and why humans evolved into bipedal toolmakers. But with enough questioning, each loses its accountability to rhetorical science.
...d was made of thick bones and had a low cranial vault. Their face also consist of a big arching browridges just above their eyes (Stanford 302).
Throughout history, humans have asked many questions in regards to our own beginnings. Religion and science have examined what makes us who we are, and have tried to answer the enduring question of our own modern origins. Scientifically, theories are still debated as to when, where, and how modern Homo sapiens came to be what they are today. There are two major theories that now dominate the discussions of experts in the field of biological anthropology: the “Out-of-Africa” model and the “Multiregional” model of evolution. Stringer and Andrews argue that genetic and paleontological evidence supports a more recent Out-of-Africa model as opposed to a more drawn out Multiregional method that also incorporates gene flow (1263). In contrast, Wolpoff, Hawks, and Caspari claim that the Multiregional model is misunderstood, and clearing up discrepancies could bolster support for this theory instead (129). Pearson notes that while people like Wolpoff et al defend the Multiregional model, archaeological evidence seems to show that likely no intermixture between modern Homo sapiens and other archaic hominins happened during the spread of early Homo sapiens out of Africa (145). It is easy to see that the debate lingers onwards with an end not clearly in sight. This paper will further examine the arguments asserted by these authors and identify their core arguments, the data they use to support their arguments and determine which paper is the most convincing of the three.
The following essay examines the evolutionary approaches of anthropologists and neo-evolutionists Leslie White and Julian Steward. Although, Leslie White and Julian Steward debated against each other over their respected evolutionary approaches, both approaches do share several similarities amongst each other, even though both anthropologists disregarded any relationship between the two.
On Darwin’s trip around the world he found something very interesting on the Galapagos Islands. On the isolated islands he found fourteen species of finches with very similar characteristics but they had some differences in their beaks, diet, body size and habitat. Darwin thought the birds had a common ancestor. He thought that some time back some finches arrived on the islands and the finches with the beaks that suited the islands conditions survived this happened on all the islands. When they had offspring the next generation would inherit the same beak. This is a great example of natural selection which was a contributor to how humans evolved. From this Darwin established his theory of natural selection and how slowly over time creatures...