Archive for the ‘human evolution’ Category

Neandertals probably favored feathers in ornamentation (well, maybe)

Wednesday, February 6th, 2013

This paper is interesting, but with those new dates pushing back the Iberian Neandertals, makes me hesitate now, as a lot of this paper addresses avian bones from a Gibraltar site after 50k. That date was picked because:

“The prevailing paradigm among Palaeolithic archaeologists today is still one which regards flying birds to have been difficult prey to capture and beyond the capabilities of all hominins prior to 50 kya and non-modern hominins (including the Neanderthals) even after the 50 kya threshold. The corollary, which has been applied to the Neanderthals for the period after 50 kya, is that they only targeted birds once easier prey (presumed to be energetically less costly to obtain than birds) were exhausted.”

If all of the Neandertals were already dead though..

I skimmed the paper, missing any mention of carbon dating of the avian bones. The bones were associated with Neandertal sites. Maybe the whole paradigm about flying birds being difficult prey prior to 50k years ago is wrong? Or are these sites really associated with Neandertals?

new dating of Iberian Neandertals

Tuesday, February 5th, 2013

Some articles reporting these new datings of Iberian Neandertals placing them 10,000 years earlier then they were previously are also insisting then there is no way modern humans interacted with Neandertals as modern humans were not in the same place at the same time. (That Nature article isn’t one of them, but this EurekAlert does.) That’s nice, but the genetics studies already show Neandertals and humans did interact, perhaps not in Iberia, but somewhere. I reckon that it’s just science journalists who haven’t accepted the genetics proofs are just ahead of the curve of the fossil evidence.

There’s another study arguing earlier dates for modern humans out of Africa than 60,000 years ago, in multiple dispersals.  (via Dienekes.) Even if Neandertals all went extinct earlier than thought, not just the ones in the Iberian peninsula, they still had the opportunity to interact with modern humans, as they were already in Europe.

archaic humans of Central Narmada?

Sunday, January 6th, 2013

I honestly don’t know what’s going on here. Two PDFs of research articles are floating about, but i’m too fuzzy-brained and undereducated to muddle through them.

The fossils date to the mid-Pleistocene to a river basin in northwestern India. They aren’t sure if they are modern humans or archaic hominids.  One researcher was insisting on their being ancestors to modern pygmies, which is weird and almost certainly wrong.

I’m leaning on the usual wild guess… another archaic human branch that wound up in modern human DNA through admixture, possibly only in South Asians or probably only Austronesians. They’ll be distinct from both Neandertals and Denisovans.

Update 0.1.29.13: As noted in comments, the article seems to read differently than it did originally. There is a noted correction at the suggestion of Dr. A. R. Sankhyan on January 21st. It’s likely changing the wording to mean more specifically pygmies of South Asia and the article now seems far, far more plausible. The reason why I get nervous about the possibility of anyone even hinting about westward migration that early, back into Africa, is because there is all kinds of dubious research that has bubled up through my years of combing through these news stories proposing human evolved in China that reeks of nationalism. Thankfully, with this correction, this research isn’t one of them.

Bow and arrow technology pushed back to 71,000 years ago

Saturday, November 17th, 2012

Once again, the find is out of South Africa. To quote the article, “But whether this flickering pattern in the archaeological record is real or merely an artifact of the small number of sites excavated has been unclear.” My vote is on the latter, based on just stubborn belief…. unscientific, yes, but it also doesn’t seem rational humans raced across the planet then refined these hunting technologies very quickly. They brought these more refined technologies with them, possibly why they spread so far and rapidly.

500,000 year old stone points in South Africa

Saturday, November 17th, 2012

Human ancestors were using stone points on spears 200,000 years prior to what was previously known.

Yep, yep, yep… sapient animals are great with tools. Hominids figured out that stone tips on wood shafts were more effective early on… yep.

So when did modern humans really become modern humans, eh?

An Australopithecine who ate bark

Friday, June 29th, 2012

Australopithecus sediba, a South African hominid identified in the past few years, ate bark and woody tissues. Its teeth were targeted by a laser to reveal certain carbons that would result only through that diet. Despite some of the articles that are popping up, it’s not yet known whether Australopithecus sediba would be a direct ancestor to modern man.

a genomewide map of Neandertal ancestry in modern humans

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

The blog Gene Expression points to an abstract of a paper for a genomewide map of Neandertal ancestry in modern humans.

discovery of remnants of fossil virus unique to Denisovans and Neandertals

Monday, June 25th, 2012

The original papers announcing Denisovans already stated their closer relation to Neandertals, but this virus that was unique to them is still interesting.

age of western branch of East African Rift Valley redated

Friday, March 30th, 2012

It’s now dated at the same age as the eastern branch, 25 to 30 million years ago.

Red Deer Cave people

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

Human Remains from the Pleistocene-Holocene Transition of Southwest China Suggest a Complex Evolutionary History for East Asians.

Mysterious Chinese Fossils May Be New Human Species.

‘Red Deer Cave people’ may be new species of human.

I’d seen mention of the Red Deer people for a few years now. After the Denisovans turned up, I failed to remember them, although I eagerly anticipated some interesting fossils that had already been discovered in China being re-examined in this new context. The new paper states that no genetic material has been recovered from these bones. All that is know so far is that these bones have archaic features that are unusual for that time and region. They might be Denisovans, have Denisovan admixture, or have a different lineage altogether.

The most remarkable part is that these bones are between 14,300 and 11,500 years old, which is really damned recent.