Many traditional PAs still assume that australopiths ("bipedal") are closer relatives of us ("hominins")
than of Pan or Gorilla, but this is wrong, of course: miraculously there would be 100s of
Plio-Pleistocene fossil human ancestors in Africa, but (almost) 0 fossil chimp, bonobo or gorilla
ancestors (obviously an anthropocentric prejudice).
Many traditional PAs still assume that australopiths ("bipedal") are closer relatives of us ("hominins")
than of Pan or Gorilla, but this is wrong, of course: miraculously there would be 100s of
Plio-Pleistocene fossil human ancestors in Africa, but (almost) 0 fossil chimp, bonobo or gorilla
ancestors (obviously an anthropocentric prejudice).
The evidence we find is consistent with Aquatic Ape, and so isn't the evidence
that we don't find!
People get it drilled into their heads that "Absence of evidence is not evidence
of absence," but it is. It may not be "Proof" but it's certainly evidence!
One of the problems is that most PA textbooks still reason:
- forest primates incl.apes = quadrupedal,
- outside forest = plain (savanna in Africa) = bipedal,
- australopiths = BP, hence they're human, not ape ancestors.
One of the problems is that most PA textbooks still reason:
- forest primates incl.apes = quadrupedal,
- outside forest = plain (savanna in Africa) = bipedal,
- australopiths = BP, hence they're human, not ape ancestors.
There just plain isn't enough genetic "Distance" between Homo and Pan
to not have Chimps evolving from a bipedal ancestor.
For the longest time the LCA was placed at 6 million years before present, all based on modern mtDNA and stupid assumptions: The imaginary
"Molecular Clock." This greatly exaggerated the age of the LCA.
Even so, the 6 million year figure places the split well after the emergence of bipedalism!
So if we look at the exaggerated age, Chimps evolved from a bipedal
ancestor. And, if we look at a more recent, more realistic age, Chimps evolved from a bipedal ancestor!
Personally? Going out on the limb here, I'm going to place it around 3.7 million years ago and quite possibly as recently as 2.8 million! Either way we are well within the range of Australopithecus afarensis.
NOTE: What actually constitutes a "Split" may be less objective and more subjective than any of us would like.
The lines between closely related "Species" are blurry enough, start
throwing in concepts such as "Sub Species" and we just sparked a bar
room brawl...
Two populations can become discernible, genetically, without them
becoming separate species, and quite frankly there is no "Test" for determining when speciation has occurred, and the single BEST test of
all, interbreeding, can't be raised without dispute. So a handful of reasonable people could (and in fact do) reasonably conclude different
points of speciation.
IMO the traditional splitting dates (e.g. H/P 4-7 Ma) fit remarkably well.
In fact, 5.4 Ma (when the red Sea opened into the Gulf) is perfect:
H followed the N-Ind.Ocean shores, P followed the W-Ind.Ocean initially.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbressan/2018/04/03/the-discovery-of-the-great-rift-valley-where-africa-is-splitting-in-two/
-- Praeanthropus-Gorilla followed the E.Afr.Rift->lake Turkana etc.?
-- Australopithecus-Pan 2 or 3 My later followed the S.Afr.Rift->lake Malawi etc.??
This could explain their parallel evolutions? Praeanthr.afarensis->boisei->gorillas // Australop.africanus->robustus->bonobo-chimp??
Meanwhile, Homo followed the S-Asian coasts, of course.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 04:25:48 |
| Calls: | 12,099 |
| Calls today: | 7 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,517,894 |