Slashdot Mirror
Humans First Arose in Asia?
IZ Reloaded writes "Two archaeologists are proposing the idea that early humans first arose in Asia instead of Africa as previously thought. These early humans then migrate out of Asia to parts of the world. From National Geographic: 'The unresolved status of the intriguing Flores finds attributed to H. floresiensis leaves open the possibility that this species is the end result and last survivor of an ancient migration of very primitive humans, or even prehumans, that formerly existed more widely across Asia ... '"
The earliest known pottery, some 20~30,000 years old, is found in Japan and China (every couple of years one side or the other finds an even older one). Pottery indicates civilization, simply because nomadic hunter gatherer type people don't have a lot of time to sit down, find suitable clay, mold it, and build a firing kiln, and pottery doesn't trvel particularly well to boot.
If the first civilization arrose in Asia, then it is not a completely abberational jump to say that humans started around there. Still would need a lot of investigation, of course.
What puzzles me is how remote volcanic islands became inhabited. Hawaii for example. Theres no way early man could have sailed there.
Why would you trust a testimonial when choosing hosting?
Everything has its time and place.
Religion had its time before science started to explain the natural world phenomena. In the beggining humans attributed the power of thunder, earth and fire to mighty gods, it is on our nature to attribute to an allmigthy deitity the things that we can not (yet) understand.
Science has progressed a lot since those times. Since the inquisition or the Roman or Greek (or Mayan, or any other kind of ) gods. There was a small development from politheist to monotheist religions. And the worshiped books are nothing more than laws used to rule over the people that did not believed (or did not have) an established society
It is because of this that Religion has had its time. Of course, our current society structure is not optimal, it is not the best but it is better. Science might also not explain all things we see in the universe but instead of going backwards and begin to attribute them again the this "deitity" humans should continue to develop knowledge.
I do not have a position as neutral as yours about Religion. For me, religion sucks, all kind of religion is stupid and do not have any fundaments or basis. Religion has been used only as means of control, this can be seen now on your current government (if you are from USA). Your president is seeding terror on you by means of religion. And this is because your politics and your society is deeply rooted on religious grounds.
Take a look at your dollar bills "In god we thrust", how can a country be cosmopolite if there is a predominant religion which I bet your constitution embraces.
I repeat, religion sucks, someone will surely tell me that religion does not sucks by itself but it is men that use it for their own convenience. But, the way I see it, that has been the role of religion since human created it. It is a tool (and very powerful) to control masses of people.
Religion should not be in churches or any other place, it should be erradicated, it should be labeled as a thing for non intelligent minds.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
so, the theory assumes that 200,000 years is not enough for such a migration?
And, of course, talk of 'migration' is nonsense. It would have been more like 'hey, it is getting a bit crowded here, let's find a cave or tree a bit further away'. A few thousand generations of this and a species can spread a long way!
It is believed that at one point the population of the human race was knocked down to a few thousand. This is backed up with genetic testing. Humans are extremely similar in terms of genetics. There is more difference between two random humans in the same race, then there is between two average humans of different races. In other words, if were to average all the genetics of each individual race, you would find that they are more similar to each other then difference you find between humans due to natural variation. It is pretty conclusive that humans all descend from the same few thousand people.
The "Eve" theory is evidenced by mitochondrial DNA.
We are all related to some nice lady from about 150,000 years ago. that's EVERYONE, mind you.
DNA doesn't lie. Modern homosapiens are all from the same place.
Imagine two civilizations. One is more or less cooperative, there is strife and people have to struggle to survive, but in general they have laws and don't attack each other without a very good reason. They live by the golden rule, even when it's not always in their own best interest.
The other civilization, on the other hand, is completely anarchistic; every person will kill their neighbor at the drop of a hat to take their food. The only penalty for doing so it that they may kill you first while you're sleeping and take your food.
Which civilization do you think will survive the longest?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Other lines of evidence involve archaeology and evolutionary psychology, and we find in Africa the earliest signs of decoration and art, key to the idea that Africa is where the earliest humans that behaved like us arose. These "psychological" traits spread from Africa much like modern genes, and demonstrate with a high degree of probability that Africa was the home of the first morphologically and behaviorally modern humans.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Kudos to the funny comeback however everything about the human body is needed in order for us to survive except for the appendix it seems. We couldn't have one thing develop without having something else as well, which goes against evolution which implies gradual changes. We need all of our organs and all the capabilities that our cells have to differentiate, multiply, copy dna, etc. is all needed at the same time so gradual changes would not suffice for us to exist based solely on evolution.
Come again? I don't know about everyone else but I've read this three times and can't identify either what point you are trying to make or the logic you are using to arrive at it. Please restate for the slower of us?
Take a look at your dollar bills "In god we thrust", how can a country be cosmopolite if there is a predominant religion which I bet your constitution embraces.
Yes, it also has an illuminati "all seeing eye" symbol called the Shining Delta with the words: "Novus Ordo Seclorum ( which can be translated to 'a new order of the ages')". The eye signifies the Illuminati's "all-seeing" infiltration of government and community. The triangle (or delta) around the eye is the mathematical symbol for change (the Illuminati's ultimate goal was to bring about massive change in the form of a secular New World Order.) And finally, the rays of light shining off the triangle signify enlightenment and illumination (i.e., intellectual freedom from the dangerous "myth" of religion.)
Just goes to show that the church wasn't the only influential group in America's founding fathers.
There's no place like ~/
Even though that's better than eternal suffering, it's still a pretty bad thing once you've found out that you could have had eternal life if you'd only believed.
Because of course God would be way too stupid to know that you were only a believer so that you could reap the rewards...
How about this twist: If you are a believer and you turn out to be wrong, you've wasted your whole life (the only one you had) believing in a fantasy and applying all the accompanying restrictions. Essentially, your whole life was based on a lie.
I live in the US, I can not see anything the government is doing to indicate it is using religeon to control people.
Then you should stop sticking your head inside your ass:
"I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen... I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it."
"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam [Hussein], which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."
We are no longer fighting a great enemy, we are asserting a great principle: that the talents and dreams of average people - their warm human hopes and loves - should be rewarded by freedom and protected by peace. We are defending the nobility of normal lives, lived in obedience to God and conscience, not to government.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
The two speak different languages, eat different foods, and have somewhat different cultures
It's even more complex than that. Many towns would speak mutually unintelligible dialects, even if they're only 15-20 miles away from each other. Did you know that there are several million natives in Guangdong province that does not speak a word of Cantonese?
What most Westerners think is the "Chinese" language and culture is actually that of the southern Chinese particularly from the Guangdong region of China. The Chinese written language is what unites all the people in China.
This is mostly due to the fact that almost all early migrants from China to the West were from southern Chinese provinces (Guangdong, Fujian, etc.) In most Chinatowns in the West, all of the older people will speak their native Southern (mostly Cantonese-derived) dialect. It has been this way for the last 150-200 years. Of course, this will change as more immigrants from mainland China and Taiwan migrate to the West.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
"Kudos to the funny comeback however everything about the human body is needed in order for us to survive except for the appendix it seems. We couldn't have one thing develop without having something else as well, which goes against evolution which implies gradual changes. We need all of our organs and all the capabilities that our cells have to differentiate, multiply, copy dna, etc. is all needed at the same time so gradual changes would not suffice for us to exist based solely on evolution."
Good point! After all, we can't survive without all of our limbs, eyes, lungs, kidneys, etc. Oh, wait, yes we can.
BTW - evolution isn't based on gradual changes. It's based on genetic mutations that can result in small or big changes. Those changes remain in the gene pool if they aid in the reproductive success of the species.
Also, I can't really understand you intelligent designers. You say life is too complex to have "just happened." Yet, you're happy to believe that your creator, with the power and complex knowledge necessary to create life, has always just existed...
Your mind looks a little cramped. Why don't you stretch it a little?
The problem has always been that there are two sorts of strong evidence: humans are almost all alike, and humans evolved in place. (E.g. early Australians were H. erectus; later they had mixed erectus and sap. characteristics; eventually the erectus features faded and vanished, leaving pure H. sap.) Naturally each had adherents who preferred to discount the others' evidence. The two have certainly seemed contradictory, up until now.
They were both right. What spread out of Africa was not actual populations of H. sap. etc., supplanting H. erectus populations that preceded them. Rather, successful gene complexes that define H. sap. spread out of Africa, upgrading local populations in-place. (Think of them as software patches.) Hardly anybody had to migrate any farther than the next village over. People married into neighboring villages, bringing their genetic advances with them, and the next generation brought them to the next village along. Of course successful genes could spread back to Africa, too, but Africa had the most variation, so produced more of the successful genes, and packaged them with more other, complementary genes.
Contrast this with the spread of agriculture into Europe, where there's evidence of farmers actually supplanting hunter/gatherers; and of course the historical record, with wholesale slaughters and genocides. (No doubt there was plenty of slaughtering earlier, but it takes technology, language, and civilized infantilization for genocides to be conducted efficiently.)
It doesn't seem like there are many other species in which this process would have worked. Bears, maybe.
The fact that institutions like the Roman Catholic Church waste resources on baubles does not devalue the Word. Citing fancy churches as evidence against God demonstrates your ignorance of the Bible and Christianity in general.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.