Early Humans: A Single Species?

[CMD]

Interesting if true. Not for what it says, which would represent a fundamental change in interpretation after all, but because it shows how easy it is to create a narrative of human evolution based on paucity of evidence, and just one more piece of evidence, in this case a single well preserved skull, can turn the narrative apple cart right over.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24564375

[Jeffery Howle]

We all have our own thoughts about how man started and how we came to be. This evidence is what is needed along with other things that have been found. Evidence such as written scrolls and anything else that was written by man is all in the interpretation of the person writing or drawing it. To me anything that was written is a story that the writer is telling and could be the truth or not. So to me there needs to be more evidence to back up MANS writings of what really happened in the past.
Hopefully I didn't offend anyone because this is just this mans beliefs and do not push mine on anyone.

[gregszybala]

Georgia? and 1.8 million years? Yep, that should stir up the science community. Let alone the consideration that there are not 3 different groups but one. Who knows when or if we ever truly figure out what we are and were we came from.

[Jeffery Howle]

gregszybala wrote:

Georgia? and 1.8 million years? Yep, that should stir up the science community. Let alone the consideration that there are not 3 different groups but one. Who knows when or if we ever truly figure out what we are and were we came from.

  Greg you do know its not Georgia in the US.?

[gregszybala]

Yes I do Jeff
But that Georgia is still a long way from Africa!

[Ftperry]

This story made the front cover of today's Wall Street Journal along with a photo of the fifth of the five skulls analized.

[TexasHarper]

Interesting!!!  I think that when the dust settles, Science will figure out that there are no clear black and white answers.  There was interbreeding of the species.  Humans were moving around, either out of necessity or plane old curiosity.  It's pure hubris to believe that early humans didn't relate to each other or their surroundings, like modern man.

[CMD]

I think if we had written records, we would know more about prehistory, which is, pre writing after all. We do have some records in the form of petroglyphs and pictographs. But who can be certain of interpretation? Writing would allow insight into the mind of prehistoric peoples. That's what history, writing, provides. Forensic evidence, is easy for recent times. More difficult the further back in time. And real scanty that far back. Without a written record, we lose thought, we lose communication. We have skeletal remains, tools, cave paintings, a few objects reflective of thought. If we had writing though, we would know far more. It would bring the Paleolithic to life for us. The ancient Egyptian Pharaohs may have spun some bs for us to ponder, but we know far more about them because they had writing then if all we knew were these big triangles on the Giza plateau  
What I found revealing is if we say the findings are true. It would mean a narrative existed of human species that never really existed. The apple cart. The model. Then along comes one more better preserved skull, and, woops, over goes the apple cart. It just reminds me of what I already know. Don't take models too seriously. Everyone took Clovis First seriously for a couple generations and we could have been looking more closely for pre-Clovis all along. The apple cart refused to budge. Anyway, thanks for all the thoughts. We are Homo sapiens :rolf:

[Ron Kelley]

Thanks Ray, That was a very interesting article.
Glad to see the new category: This should be fun.

[painshill]

Some more about interbreeding of hominin/hominid groups and the DNA from the Denisovan hominin:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...creatures.html
You have to forgive the sensationalist way in which the newspaper reports it, but the facts are essentially correct.  :laugh:

[G10+]

I was thinking God had a role in how why came to be .....

[TexasHarper]

While I'm quite certain, no one want to argue that point, I do find it very interested when looking at the origins of man in the Bible, there seems to be clear evidence that there were other's inhabiting the world around Eden.  Where did the offspring of Adam and Eve get their wives??  I also always found it exciting that the Bible confirms the existence of gods other than the one of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 
I believe that even with a strict interpretation, the Bible leaves plenty of room for humans before Adam and Eve.