Page 1 of 1
Author Message

<  Non-Yao stuff  ~  An Asian Origin for Human Ancestors?

Malorkayel
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:24 am Reply with quote
Joined: 14 Nov 2003 Posts: 8886
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/06/an-asian-origin-for-human-ancest.html



Quote:
Researchers agree that our immediate ancestors, the upright walking apes, arose in Africa. But the discovery of a new primate that lived about 37 million years ago in the ancient swamplands of Myanmar bolsters the idea that the deep primate family tree that gave rise to humans is rooted in Asia. If true, the discovery suggests that the ancestors of all monkeys, apes, and humans—known as the anthropoids—arose in Asia and made the arduous journey to the island continent of Africa almost 40 million years ago.

Until 18 years ago, fossils of every suspected early anthropoid were found in Egypt and dated to about 30 million years ago. Then, starting in the 1990s, researchers began discovering the remains of petite primates that lived 37 million to 45 million years ago in China, Myanmar, and other Asian nations. This suggested that anthropoids may have actually arisen in Asia and then migrated to Africa a few million years later. But paleontologists have lacked the fossils to show when and how these anthropoids trekked from Asia to Africa, says paleontologist K. Christopher Beard of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

In 2005, Beard and an international team of researchers sifting fossils of early fish, turtle, and ancestral hippo teeth from fossil beds near the village of Nyaungpinle in Myanmar found a molar the size of a kernel of popcorn. The tooth, dated to about 38 million years ago, belonged to a new species of ancient primate, which would have been the size of a small chipmunk. After several more years of arduous fieldwork, the team has collected just four molars of this primitive anthropoid, which they named Afrasia djijidae. "It's a difficult place to work; it took us 6 years to find four teeth," says Beard.

The four molars were enough to show Beard and team leader Jean-Jacques Jaeger of the University of Poitiers in France that Afrasia was closely related to another primitive anthropoid that lived at about the same time, but in Africa—Afrotarsius libycus from Libya. When the researchers examined the teeth from the two primates under a microscope, they were so similar in size, shape, and age that they could have belonged to the same species of primate, says Beard. Such close resemblance between an Asian and African fossil anthropoid has "never been demonstrated previously," the authors write online today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

On closer examination, however, the team noticed that the new molars from the Asian Afrasia were more primitive than those of Afrotarsius from Libya, particularly in the larger size of a tiny bulge at the back of its last lower molar. These primitive traits, as well as the greater diversity and age of early, or "stem," anthropoids in Asia rather than Africa suggest that this group arose in Asia and migrated to Africa 37 million to 39 million years ago. "Anthropoids didn't arrive in Africa until right before we find their fossils in Libya," says Jaeger.

The Out-of-Asia scenario may have been complex. The team proposes that more than one species of anthropoid migrated from Asia to Africa at about this time, because there are at least two other types of early anthropoids alive at about the same time as Afrotarsius in Libya, yet they are not closely related to Afrotarsius or Afrasia. This may be because once they got to Africa, they found ideal lush conditions with few carnivores and underwent a "starburst of evolution," says Beard, rapidly giving rise to a number of new species.

Others agree that if both the new species of primates from Myanmar and Libya are indeed early anthropoids, they would greatly strengthen the case for the Asian origins of anthropoids. "If proven, the biogeographical significance of these results is profound," says paleontologist Richard Kay of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. It would show that there was a major migration of primates and probably other mammals between the two continents at a time when it was not easy to get across the ancient Tethys Sea that divided Africa from Asia. And for humans, it would suggest that our deepest primate roots were in Asia, not Africa.

Still, the similarity between the species rests on just four molars of Afrasia, Kay notes, although teeth are the most reliable way to measure relatedness. And some researchers have yet to be convinced that Afrotarsius in Libya is a stem anthropoid rather than an ancestor of tarsiers, primates that are not anthropoids and, thus, are more distant relatives. Kay, however, says the scales are tipping toward an Asian origin. "We've all heard about Out-of-Africa for human origins," adds Beard. "Now we think there was an Out-of-Asia migration into Africa first."
View user's profile Send private message
yaominginfohere
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:33 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 21 Jan 2004 Posts: 1942
We used to say we're all related to black people... but can we now say everyone is related to asians?
View user's profile Send private message
temuchin
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:03 am Reply with quote
Joined: 01 Apr 2004 Posts: 7902
even under Out of Africa it's not that we're descended from black people, it's that we have common ancestors

people get confused and think it means under that theory the original homo sapiens looked like Kanye West. they looked very different from both modern blacks and whites. both blacks and whites have drifted from the original population. most of the "black" features would have developed over time as did white and asian features.

those ancestors would have modern anatomical features but would look very different from any human we know today. like a totally different race.

the area that is supposedly the origin is East Africa, near the horn of africa which is actually right by arabian subcontinent. it's literally only a few miles by sea from africa to the middle east. in ancient times modern yemen and modern ethiopia were inhabited by the same people. for example even today it's debated whether Sheba of the Queen of Sheba myth in Hebrew legends was from Yemen (and thus middle eastern which is the view held by most jewish scholars) or Ethiopia (and thus African, which is what blacks insist). ancient myth places the Garden of Eden in the middle east. even under an Out of Africa scenario it's likely that humans did evolve near there. not say, in West Africa where most African Americans are from or from the Congo or South Africa which is what most Americans will think of when they think "out of africa"

keep in mind that the political thrust of Out of Africa is that humans share common descent. whether Out of Africa or Bottleneck theories, social scientists repeatedly emphasize that they believe that at most a few THOUSAND maybe even a few HUNDRED common ancestors led to all modern humans.

keep in mind that Out of Africa is an 80s theory. 100% of anthropology will be changed in the future. nothing they teach is 100% correct and very little of it will be what your great great grandchildren learn. the 21st century 2012 theory based on DNA evidence largely contradicts the main thrust of Out of Africa because it includes admixture of native populations to any common ancestors. all humans excluding blacks have neanderthal DNA and blacks have a different homo admixture. currently scientists estimate 2-5% but of course no one knows.

keep in mind also that there were previous migrations out of africa (and into africa as in malorkayel's article) and that other human species existed. Out of Africa is basically like taking a snapshot of the last 60,000 years of 1,000,000s of years of human evolution and emphasizing "this is who we are" based on this specific period along the evolutionary timeline.

I mean if you could go back further, you can reconcile neanderthals and homo sapiens with a common ancestor and say "this is what is important. neanderthals and homo sapiens are all one species." likewise someone could zoom ahead 20,000 years after Out of Africa to right before whites and asians split and say "asians and whites are one race" while simultaneously exclude blacks.

it's political more than anything. the out of africa theory has little application in medicine or anything else. doctors know there is any host of indications for disease, physical traits, body composition that differs by race. FFS East Asian and black populations even have different ear wax lolz. the primary impact of these evolutionary theories is influenced by social agenda and belief and is mainly political in nature
View user's profile Send private message

Display posts from previous:  

All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1
Post new topic

Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum