Sites Elsewhere

Hominid Evolution : New Fossils and Our Understanding of Human Evolution, New Hominid Fossils Reported

Permian Extinction : The Day the Seas Died: What Can the Greatest of All Extinction Events Teach Us About Climate Change?

Living Alongside Ancestors?

Out of Africa and University College London comes National Geographic fieldwork describe in a NYT article (BBC).

"Scientists who dated and analyzed the specimens — a 1.44 million-year-old Homo habilis and a 1.55 million-year-old Homo erectus — said their findings challenged the conventional view that these species evolved one after the other. Instead, they apparently lived side by side in eastern Africa for almost half a million years."

The NYT article quotes Dr. Leakey as saying that the "co-existence makes it unlikely that Homo erectus (1.55 Mya) evolved from Homo habilis (1.44 Mya)." Certainly, an earlier erectus specimen could not have evolved from a later habilis specimen, but I am not convinced that a species could not co-exist with an ancestral species.

The article states that, "It means that both habilis and erectus must have originated from a common ancestor between two million and three million years ago, a time when fossil hunters had drawn a virtual blank."

This seems eminently possible, though difficult or impossible to demonstrate. The conclusion of divergence from a common ancestor seems excessive when based on only two specimens.

What's wrong with the exclusory picture? Based on DNA evidence, Homo sapiens (us) and chimpanzees, who still live contemporaneously, arose from a common ancestor somewhere around 7 to 5 million years ago. There is simply no way to know how long individuals of the divergent lineage might have lived alongside the ancestral lineage, nor of how different the lineages might have appeared half a million years after diverging genetically.

The ancestors of chimpanzees and bonobos are estimated to have split again between 0.89 and 0.86 million years ago, and the two common chimpanzee subspecies are estimated to have diverged about 0.46 million years ago. The two common chimpanzee subspecies are quite similar morphologically after only half a million years.

The modern definition of a species is that sexual intercourse between different species does not produce fertile offspring. Clearly, Wilt Chamberlain and jockey Willie Shoemaker could not have mated (for other reasons than species difference), but would a paleontologist place them in different species on the basis of skeletal fragments some 1.5 million years hence? Although the image of two males of very different height is striking, Wilt Chamberlain would tower over women and Mike Tyson is bulkier than women. Paleontologists refer to this size difference as sexual dimorphism and skulls of different sizes can be expected in males and females of the same species.

The DNA data suggests that an evolutionary split does not necessarily immediately eradicate the pre-split ancestral line. However, the greater reproductive success of humans does indicate that one divergent species may be much better adapted to survival and that passage of sufficient time will probably eliminate (replace) the common ancestor.

Several challenges face paleontologists studying hominids. The number of specimens is small and their preservation is typically incomplete (imagine trying to reconstruct a person from only a tooth or the top of their skull). Most of the species or apparent species studied are extinct, so we have no DNA evidence to indicate their evolutionary relationships. Further, it is more interesting for the paleontologist (and the media) when the latest discovery appears to diverge from previous analyses.

Certainly, the notion that hominid ancestry resembled a bush rather than a direct linear descent is nothing new.

Other blogs: New Fossils and Our Understanding of Human Evolution, New Hominid Fossils Reported

Darwinism

Charles Darwin accurately predicted that his theories would evoke skepticism from scientists and ridicule from the religious. Happily, scientists came to accept his ideas, and his breakthrough insights have proved highly influential. Unhappily, those biblical literalists who insist that "Genesis" is an accurate description of life's origins, continue to unjustly vilify Darwin's theories.

Summary of Darwin's observations and his Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection:
1. Most animals have such high fertility rates that their population size would increase exponentially if all individuals were to reproduce.
2. Yet, except for seasonal fluctuations, populations remain relatively stable in size.
3. Because environmental resources are limited, individuals compete for resources, limiting survival and reproduction.
4. Individual characteristics vary within populations and those members of a population that are better adapted for survival in the face of competition are more likely to pass their characteristics on to the next generation.

5. Thus, species gradually accumulate inherited adaptations that best suit them for their environment, passing these on to progeny. Speciation involves gradually accumulated differentiation of characteristics.

Darwin was not aware of the existence of DNA, nor of the mechanisms that alter genotype. Darwin focussed on the inheritance of adaptive individual characteristics that had ensured reproductive success, and the resultant slow accumulation of adaptive phenotypic change. Darwin did not say that all species are gradually evolving (cf. quote.)

Subsequent evolutionary theorists first disputed Darwin's concept of gradual evolution. Gould and Eldredge introduced the concept "phyletic gradualism " which they discredited through the concept of punctuated equilibria. The Theory of Punctuated Equilibria was proposed in order to explain patchiness in the fossil record and the the localized adaptive radiation of species observed following extinction events. This stage of thinking about evolutionary mechanisms has been termed "Neo Darwinism".

Modern advances in molecular genetics, coupled with studies of population genetics have led to the "Modern Synthesis" of understanding concerning mechanisms of evolution. Current understanding incorporates knowledge of genetic drift, gene flow, mutation, recombination, and natural selection mechanisms.

Creationists and defenders of "intelligent design" theory commonly attack a "strawman" depiction of Darwinism or Neo-Darwinism as representing current thinking in their attempt to discredit evolutionary science. It is important for any person wishing to defend evolution-as-fact and modern evolutionary theories to attain a thorough understanding of modern evolutionary theory as well as fallacious creationist arguments.

?► Site Map ◄?

connected

Affiliated science sites • Abiogenesis and Evolution • Algorithms of Evolution • Archea Eubacteria • Cancer • Cell Biology • Complex Systems • Cyanobacteria • Diagrams Tables • Endosymbiosis • Enzymes • Evo Devo • Evolution in Action • Fat • Geology • Glossary • Immunology • Life Chemistry • Medical Science • Mechanisms of Evolution • Molecule • Molecular Biology • Molecular Paths • Neurosciences • Organics • Origin of Life • Paleogeology • Pathways • Photosynthesis • Protein • Receptor • Rocks & Minerals • Science of Evolution • SET • Signaling • Sleep • Stem & Progenitor Cells • Stromatolites • Taxonomy Phylogeny • Tissue • Virus •

Also some philosophy/general interest sites: Avidity : Eine Kleine Nattermusing : eMusings : Galaria : Godspell Follies : Harper's Folly : Mimble Wimble : Sintheist : Tabula Flexuosa :

Evolving Atheist Blogroll

If you are interested in joining Mojoey's huge atheist blogroll, click on the image below and send him an email. His website Deep Thoughts (I wonder if that's a pun) is also worth a look-see.



Gray Matters
Adeistic
Avidity
Eine Kleine Nattermusing
eMusings
eVolition
Galaria
Godspell Follies
MetaThoughts
Mimble Wimble
Naturalism
Neologisms
palimpsest
Sechuam
Sintheist
Tabula Flexuosa
Weltschauung