Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Homo sapien subspecies?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Homo sapien subspecies?

    Recent discoveries of human fossils dating in last 160,000 possibly older in Africa and Europe at least.

    Homo sapiens idaltu is one such subspecies from Africa.

    Originally posted by http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/herto.html

    Some new fossils from Herto in Ethiopia, are the oldest known modern human fossils, at 160,000 yrs. The discoverers have assigned them to a new subspecies, Homo sapiens idaltu, and say that they are anatomically and chronologically intermediate between older archaic humans and more recent fully modern humans. Their age and anatomy is cited as strong evidence for the emergence of modern humans from Africa, and against the multiregional theory which argues that modern humans evolved in many places around the world.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  • #2
    Why look at fossils to find homo sapiens subspecies when you can look around at the world and see the real thing?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
      Why look at fossils to find homo sapiens subspecies when you can look around at the world and see the real thing?
      This is not a joke thread.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #4
        I believe the discovery of fire hearth in Israel 300,000 years old is strong evidence of a subspecies of homo sapiens living at that time.

        Our ancestors lived and cooked in this cave in Israel 300,000 years ago. We at present do not have any fossil evidence as to which Hominin made this fire hearth, but the technology of the fire and the tool sign associated with this is definitely human.

        http://www.archaeology.org/news/1768...esem-fire-pit]


        300,000-Year-Old Hearth Uncovered in Israel

        REHOVOT, ISRAEL—A repeatedly-used hearth full of ash and charred bone has been uncovered in Israel’s Qesem Cave. The hearth measures more than six feet in diameter at its widest point, and was located so that many individuals could have used it. Bits of stone tools that may have been used for butchering animals were also found in and around the hearth. “[The finds] …tell us something about the impressive levels of social and cognitive development of humans living some 300,000 years ago,” said Ruth Shahack-Gross of the Weizmann Institute of Science. But it is not clear exactly which hominins lived in the cave and shared this large campfire.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #5
          For those who are interested the fact that there are subspecies huminins found of homo sapiens is an important part of demonstrating intermediates in the evolution of humans from early hominids. At present we have at least two Homo sapiens Neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens idaltu, and a possible third based on the 300,000 year old hearth fire in Israel.

          Closely related species that may be subspecies are Homo rhodesiensis and Homo heidelbergensis.
          Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-23-2014, 07:56 PM.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            This is not a joke thread.
            He isn't joking. And in an evolutionary worldview it is a perfect valid question. I would question his asking it in a Christian worldview.
            The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren View Post
              He isn't joking. And in an evolutionary worldview it is a perfect valid question. I would question his asking it in a Christian worldview.
              There are no subspecies alive today. The races of humans living today are not subspecies.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • #8
                I agree with you. But that is an assertion to be argued. Epo does not agree with you and if I were an evolutionist I might agree with him but I have an a priori assumption of the God breathed equality of all men.
                The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  I do not have much knowledge of (or any objections to) evolutionary theory so I have a question: I recall people talking about the 'missing link' in the fossil record of the evolution of humanity. It seems like there have been a lot of discoveries in the past decades. Have we found the proverbial 'missing link'? Is it still (was it ever?) a valid concept?
                  βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                  ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                  אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                    I do not have much knowledge of (or any objections to) evolutionary theory so I have a question: I recall people talking about the 'missing link' in the fossil record of the evolution of humanity. It seems like there have been a lot of discoveries in the past decades. Have we found the proverbial 'missing link'? Is it still (was it ever?) a valid concept?
                    At this rate, I think our knowledge of genetics has made a discovery of fossil evidence for 'missing links' (somewhat) irrelevant. The fossil evidence for our ancestral tree is quite a bit more fleshed out now, though. The concept may or may not be considered valid based what exactly you're looking for.
                    I'm not here anymore.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                      I do not have much knowledge of (or any objections to) evolutionary theory so I have a question: I recall people talking about the 'missing link' in the fossil record of the evolution of humanity. It seems like there have been a lot of discoveries in the past decades. Have we found the proverbial 'missing link'? Is it still (was it ever?) a valid concept?
                      The term "missing link" is an outdated expression first coined way back in 1851 by naturalist Charles Lyell . Lyell used it when describing abrupt changes in fossil types he discovered in adjacent layers of sediment. In the years immediately after Origin Of Species was published it was picked up by those critical of Darwinism to mean the undiscovered hypothetical species between humans and apes. The term hasn't appeared as a serious scientific description in over a hundred years. However to this day uneducated media people still love its sensationalism value. That's why we still get clueless news reporters gushing about the "missing link" to describe any sort of transitional fossil discovery.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks, Carikkure & HMS Beagle!
                        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren View Post
                          I agree with you. But that is an assertion to be argued. Epo does not agree with you and if I were an evolutionist I might agree with him but I have an a priori assumption of the God breathed equality of all men.
                          Genetic analysis has revealed that the concept of race is essentially an artificial construct demonstrating that we are definitely a single species just as evolutionary theory has said from the very start.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View Post
                            The term "missing link" is an outdated expression first coined way back in 1851 by naturalist Charles Lyell . Lyell used it when describing abrupt changes in fossil types he discovered in adjacent layers of sediment. In the years immediately after Origin Of Species was published it was picked up by those critical of Darwinism to mean the undiscovered hypothetical species between humans and apes. The term hasn't appeared as a serious scientific description in over a hundred years. However to this day uneducated media people still love its sensationalism value. That's why we still get clueless news reporters gushing about the "missing link" to describe any sort of transitional fossil discovery.
                            Occasionally you still get scientists themselves using this obsolete term, primarily when dealing with the public.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                              I do not have much knowledge of (or any objections to) evolutionary theory so I have a question: I recall people talking about the 'missing link' in the fossil record of the evolution of humanity. It seems like there have been a lot of discoveries in the past decades. Have we found the proverbial 'missing link'? Is it still (was it ever?) a valid concept?
                              If you'll permit an analogy, what's the missing link between a Ford model T and a Toyota Corolla?

                              As we understand the ToE now, the concept is really not even applicable. It is based on a poor understanding of the ToE that posits that older forms are "lower" than newer forms. You still find the term thrown around quite a bit among some evolution skeptics, and you still find some who ask "Have you found the missing link yet," but the question is a straw man.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Juvenal, 11-30-2020, 04:47 PM
                              3 responses
                              36 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Terraceth  
                              Started by rogue06, 11-28-2020, 12:54 PM
                              4 responses
                              37 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 11-26-2020, 09:46 PM
                              0 responses
                              12 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by lee_merrill, 11-23-2020, 10:25 PM
                              5 responses
                              51 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Seeker
                              by Seeker
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 11-22-2020, 08:25 AM
                              5 responses
                              74 views
                              3 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Working...
                              X