0
Evolution
The scientific theory according to which populations change gradually through a process of natural selection.
5,264 Questions
Why was the first Australopithecus afarensis found called Lucy?
The first Australopithecus afarensis fossil was named "Lucy" after the song "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" by The Beatles– which was playing at the expedition camp when the fossil was discovered in Ethiopia in 1974.
How did the first human evolve?
SPECIES
TIME PERIOD
Ardipithecus ramidus 5 to 4 million years ago Australopithecus anamensis 4.2 to 3.9 million years ago Australopithecus afarensis 4 to 2.7 million years ago Australopithecus africanus 3 to 2 million years ago Australopithecus robustus 2.2 to 1.6 million years ago Homo habilis 2.2 to 1.6 million years ago Homo erectus 2.0 to 0.4 million years ago Homo sapiens archaic 400 to 200 thousand years ago Homo sapiens neandertalensis 200 to 30 thousand years ago Homo sapiens sapiens 200 thousand years ago to present
What a question, a large question! There is no, good, short answer. But one would presume that as humans moved north over thousands of years dialects would evolve and change. This can be seen in the similarities between Latin based languages for example. However, not all languages really evolved from the one source, so obviously not all languages have such striking similarities. But if you come to the realisation that all languages are merely 'signs' pointing 'things' then they are all the same, but that is the realm of semiotics. If your interested in modern language's inaccuracies look into Korzybski's E-Prime.
Second answer
I'm going to assume that the asker wants to know about the biological evolution of language. There are two main schools: vocal and gestural. The vocal school posits that human language evolved from the grunts and hoots of our early ape-like ancestors. For instance, the evolutionary psychologist Robin Dunbar theorizes that as their numbers dramatically increased, our animal ancestors had to find new ways of cementing community bounds over long distances. Therefore, Dubar thinks speaking evolved to replace grooming--the glue of ape society (see Evolutionary Psychology: Beginner's Guide, 2005). The problem with this school is that it cannot account for syntax, or proper grammar like, say, the SVO (subject-verb-object) order of English.
The gestural school posits that human language evolved from the hand gestures of our early ancestors. This is because Chimps, our closest genetic cousins, mostly communicate through visual and tactile cues like facial expressions, hand and body gestures, and bodily contact. Chimps who have been taught American Sign Language progress at the same rate as human children learning sign language or spoken language. Most importantly, they do not make grammatical mistakes. This is because syntax is built into such gestural movements. In his book Next of Kin (1997), Roger Fouts writes:
"But experts in sign language, who assume a gestural origin for language, can explain the emergence of syntax in a much simpler, more commonsense way. You can test it yourself right now by following this suggestion of David Armstrong, William Stokoe, and Sherman Wilcox from their book, Gesture and the Nature of Language:
'If you will, swing your right hand across in front of your body and catch the upraised forefinger of your left hand.'
By enacting this gesture, say the authors, you have just illustrated the most primitive form of syntax. 'The dominant hand is the agent (it acts), its swinging grasp is the action (verb), and the stationary finger is the patient or object. The grammarians' symbolic notion for this is familiar: SVO [subject-verb-object].'
It is easy to imagine our earliest ancestors using this gesture to communicate [using the hand signs], HAWK CAUGHT GOPHER. And they might have modified this sentence with adjectives (two fingers for two gophers) and adverbs (raised eyebrows for expressing disbelief: HAWK SOMEHOW CAUGHT GOPHER). These variations on a relationship are the beginnings of language as we know it" (p. 194).
But how can hand movements lead to oral speaking? Well, the area of the brain that controls detailed movements of the hands also controls the detailed movements of the tongue. Fouts, who is a Prof. of Psychology, taught American Sign Language to a pair of autistic boys who could not speak or even interact in normal social situations with members of their families. The amazing thing is that these boys gained the ability to speak within a few weeks of learning to sign. Nicholas Wade mentions in his book Before the Dawn (2006) that people with a mutated version of FOXP2, the brain gene associated with speech, have great trouble in talking because they do not have proper control of their mouth and tongue muscles. FOXP2 is located close to the gene responsible for autism; therefore, learning to control their hands through sign language helped the autistic boys gain control over their tongues, allowing them to speak.
Researchers have suggested that the FOXP2 gene evolved around 50,000 years ago because human cultural exploded after this point, probably due to language. Vocal language is far more effective in transmitting ideas than hand gestures. This suggests that humans used gestural communication for thousands of years before the gene switched on. It is important to note that a 2012 paper entitled "Monkey lipsmacking develops like the human speech rhythm" points out that the coordination of the jaw, tongue, and hyoid used in primate lip-smacking is comparable to that used for human speech. No sound is produced during lip-smacking because their vocal cords are in the wrong position. Human vocal cords are lower in our throats. Our vocal cord and tongue anatomy had to change before we could produce the sounds that we do today. In conclusion, the road to human speech involved hand gestures, lip-smacking, the dropping of the vocal cords, and the evolution of a brain gene to better control the tongue and mouth muscles.
The human race is believed to have evolved from earlier hominids over millions of years through a process known as human evolution. This evolution occurred through natural selection and genetic mutations, leading to the development of modern humans. The earliest known species in the Homo genus is Homo habilis, which appeared around 2.8 million years ago.
What are the 7 scientific names of a human?
There is some dispute about the "seven" names. However, we do have "homo sapiens", "homo neandertalensis", "homo heidlebergensis","archaic homo sapiens", "homo ergaster","homo erectus", and "homo habilis".
How are humans and apes alike?
They are not alike. The most-oft used argument - that humans and apes share 99% similar genomes, has been proven wrong. The only comparisons done so far pertain ONLY to the 1% of the genome which codes for proteins. No comparison has been done between the ENTIRE human genome and ENTIRE chimp genome. Such a huge and costly study would undoubtedly yield a very low similarity. When comparing ONLY the 1% of the genome which codes for proteins, the similarity is between 70% and 96%, depending on the study.
One reason why very few studies have been done on the NON-protein coding portion of the genome is because, for decades, many scientists assumed it was junk DNA - now we know this was completely wrong. So much for assuming. We now realize the NON-protein coding portion is responsible for many important functions such as preserving the genome itself! Also, a recent report unexpectedly found specific sequence patterns in "junk" DNA called "pyknons" which are responsible for determining when and where proteins are made. Furthermore, within this "junk DNA", the areas of greatest difference appear to involve regions which are structurally different (commonly called "rearrangements") and areas of heterochromatin (tightly packed DNA).
The protein coding portion of the human genome has approximately 50% similarity with bananas. There are several reasons why this is so: 1) All life on Earth is based on the same carbon/water system. 2) In order to eat and digest bananas, we must share genomic similarities, otherwise we wouldn't be able to eat bananas in the first place. Genomic similarity among us is required for all of us to live on earth. 3) If we ever found another organism which we DIDN'T share any genomic similarities, that organism would be from a completely different planet with a different life-sustaining system altogether.
Hominid evolution refers to the evolutionary process of primates that eventually gave rise to modern humans. It includes the development and diversification of various hominid species over millions of years, leading to the emergence of anatomically modern humans. This process involved changes in physical characteristics, behavior, and cognitive abilities.
What two kinds of human forms do physical anthropologists study?
Physical anthropologists, also known as biological anthropologists, study early hominids as well as modern humans. Early hominids are the ancestors of humans, many physical anthropologists specialize in this field. Other physical anthropologists will specialize in modern humans and focus on studying grave sites discovered during excavations.
What did the neanderthal wear?
Neanderthals are believed to have worn clothing made from animal skins and furs for warmth and protection. They likely made use of natural materials, like plant fibers and leather, to create garments suited for their environment and lifestyle. Archaeological evidence, such as bone needles and tools for leatherworking, supports the idea that Neanderthals had the ability to create and tailor their own clothing.
If Darwin believed we came from apes then where did apes originate from?
Charles Darwin believed that apes evolved from earlier, more primitive species, which in turn evolved from even earlier species. Ultimately, all mammals, including the apes and humans, evolved from the first mammal species, which in turn evolved from earlier species, and so on back to the beginning of life on Earth.
Where did Herbert Spencer use the term survival of the fittest?
Herbert Spencer did not actually use the term "survival of the fittest"; that phrase was coined by Herbert Spencer's contemporary, Charles Darwin. Spencer, however, adopted Darwin's ideas of natural selection and social evolution in his own works.
How long have humans been evolving?
Homo sapiens, as a species, have existed for about 300,000 years.
Hominids as a whole have existed for about 14,000,000 years.
Who were the first two people in the world?
The book of Genisis in the Christian Scriptures tell us that God made Adam, the first man. When He realized that Adam may be lonely in the Garden of Eden, he waited till Adam was sleeping and took from him a rib bone and from this He created Eve, the first woman, to be Adam's companion. I cannot speak for any other for other religious belief systems.
What are the other theories to arrival of the first American?
Other theories for the arrival of the first Americans include the coastal migration theory, which suggests humans migrated along the Pacific coastline using boats or land bridges. The Solutrean hypothesis posits that Europeans arrived by crossing the North Atlantic from Western Europe. The Beringia Land Bridge Theory is the most widely accepted, suggesting that humans crossed a land bridge from Siberia to Alaska during the last Ice Age.
When did humans first appear on earth?
According to some geneologists (working from the Bible and using estimates of lifespan) around 6000 years ago.
According to some other groups, somewhat before that, usually agreeing with the third group;
According to current paleological work, modern humans appeared around 200 thousand years ago.
When did human evolution begin?
Humans first arrival into history was 5,000,000 years ago when Australipithicus Affarensis first appeared on earth modern man (homo sapien) has been here for 50,000 years
Rebutting the second answer, if you believe that the Bible is true, human history began when Adam was created on the 6th day of the universe's existence.
History means recorded events, prehistoric means before writing or drawings were invented. Early cave drawings have dated as far back as 7500-7250 b.c..
How long have people been alive?
A long time that's for sure.
Answer:
If you only include members of genus homo going back through the archaic types (Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis, Homo neanderthalensis ) then you are looking at a period beginning 500,000 years into the past. Including hominid ancestors would put the earliest types back to 4 million yeas before the present. Only including "anatomically modern" humans limits you to about 200,000 years ago. Further limiting yourself to socially and culturally modern humans decreases the history to 50,000 years before the present.
While humans can communicate with animals through body language, vocal cues, and training, animals do not have the ability to understand human language in the same way that humans do. However, there are some ways to establish a basic form of communication and understanding between humans and certain animals through training and bonding.
Scientific evidence says that the first modern humans, Homo sapiens, appeared more than 200,000 years ago. Some fossils from the middle Pleistocene period (about 400,000 years ago), referred to as Homo sapiens rhodesiensis, may be archaic Homo sapiens - a transitional species. The earliest known fossil of a human ancestor, a female Ardipithecus ramidusspecimen nicknamed "Ardi," is 3.2 million years old.
What theory did Charles Darwin help to explain?
Charles Darwin helped to explain the theory of evolution through natural selection. This theory proposes that species with characteristics better suited to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce, leading to changes in the characteristics of populations over time.
Is everyone related to each other?
Biblically Speaking
Yes. According to the bible, God created a man named Adam and a woman named Eve and told them to populate the earth. Therefore, from a biblical perspective, our ancestors came from Adam and Eve, so we are all related.
Non-Creationist View
Yes. Studies of mitochindrial DNA indicate that all current humans had a single "mother", or common ancestor, whose DNA pattern has been replicated in all Homo sapiens on Earth.
In fact according to evolution, not only are all humans related to each other through a single common ancestor (that lived ca. 2.5 million years age, with modern humans having a common ancestor only a couple 100,000 years ago if not sooner), but every living thing is related to every living thing through a single common ancestor (that lived ca. 3.4 billion years ago).
The evolution of Homo sapiens as a distinct species from earlier ape ancestors is one of the central topics within evolutionary biology. The study of human evolution uses many scientific disciplines, including physical anthropology, primatology, archaeology, and genetics.
The exact lineage that traces humans back to their ancestors is still unclear, and the classification of humans and their relatives has changed considerably through time. Genetic evidence suggests that the human lineage split from the lineage that would lead to chimpanzees around 8 million years ago. The genus Australopithecus, which first appeared around 4 million years ago, is now thought to be the ancestor of the genus Homo, to which we belong. Australopithecus was an evolutionary milestone for humans, because they are the earliest known apes to begin walking upright. Walking upright lead to many advantages, including the further development of the brain. Australopithecus gave rise to the Homogenus.
Homo habilis lived about 2 million years ago and is called the "handy man" because he is currently the earliest known hominid to manufacture primitive stone tools. There is still some debate on whether habilis should be considered a separate species. He may have instead been a late Australopithecine or an early erectus. Homo erectus evolved an even more complex brain that was similar to humans, so complex that it is believed he developed speech. He also made weapons, discovered fire and used it to cook his food. Homo heidelbergensis may or may not be the direct common ancestor of both Homo sapiensand Homo neanderthalensis. Anatomically and behaviorally modern humans are believed to have first appeared between 50,000-100,000 years ago.
The mental and social capacities of humans have evolved too. From the beginning, the ancestors of humans were social animals. An individual ape was never strong enough nor fast enough to fend for itself or be safe from predators, so they had to rely on living in cooperative groups to protect from the dangers of a hostile world. Many of the social characteristics of humans, including compassion, cooperation, curiosity, inventiveness and competitiveness existed well before Homo sapiens emerged and some ape species of today also have them. As we became smarter, we came up with social structures that were more organized and more complex, assigning leaders to groups and establishing primitive government systems to ensure the well-being of all members. Early Homo sapienswere nomadic hunter-gatherers who lived in small social groups. The invention of agriculture gave rise to modern, structured communities.
Human evolution is not one continuous series, as illustrations you may have seen would have you believe. Rather, human evolution is more like a branching tree containing many different ape species that have appeared and long since died out. We are still trying to figure out exactly how humans are related to these species.
Evidence for human evolution is found not only from the transitional fossils we uncover but our genetic and anatomical similarities with our ape relatives. We share between 95-99% of our genome with chimpanzees, our closest living relatives. Fossils of several different hominid species have been found, and upon being closely examined and dated, show relatedness to humans at varying degrees. Paleontologists have always been hard at work piecing together the puzzle and connecting the dots fossil by fossil, in order to reconstruct the evolutionary history of humans as accurately as possible. There have been great strides in the study of human evolution, and while many questions remain, they continue to be answered as more research is done.
There are some questions regarding humans that the theory of evolution itself may not be able to answer, especially moral and existential questions. The role of science is to explain how we came to be, not why we exist or what our purpose is. The answers to these questions lie in philosophy and religion, not science. Nevertheless, there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that humans are descended from earlier prehistoric apes, and that we are closely related to other apes of today, and the gaps in the human lineage continue to be filled as more research is done and more fossils are uncovered.
In the beginning humans were apes and kept on evolving because the environment was forcing them to change.They kept evolving until the way they look today, so if they keep on evolving(today they stand upright)and maybe a thousand years from now we will be looking straight up.
Human evolution is one of the central topics within evolutionary biology. It attempts to explain the origin and evolution of Homo sapiens as a distinct species from other hominids, great apes and mammals. The study of human evolution uses many scientific disciplines, including physical anthropology, primatology, archaeology, linguistics and genetics.
While we have made great strides in the study of human evolution, there remains many unanswered questions. Just because these questions remain unanswered for now does not mean we will not find the answers in the future with more hard work and research.
One thing is for sure, humans evolved from earlier primate ancestors. The exact lineage that traces humans back to their ancestors is still unclear, and the classification of humans and their relatives has changed considerably through time. The genus Australopithecus is now thought to be the ancestor of the genus Homo, to which we belong. Australopithecus was an evolutionary milestone for humans, because they are the earliest apes to begin walking upright, and walking upright lead to many advantages, including the ability to develop more intelligence. Australopithecus gave rise to Homo species such as Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, and ultimately Homo sapiens.
Human evolution is not one continuous series, as illustrations you may have seen would have you believe. Rather, human evolution is more like a branching tree containing many different primate species that have appeared and long since died out. We are still trying to figure out how exactly humans are related to these species.
It is believed that the mental and social capacities of humans evolved too, as the ancestors of humans developed larger, more complex brains, and social structures also became more complex. Humans rely on living in groups to survive which is why it was essential for us to develop beneficial and cooperative social behaviors and structures that ensured the success of our species.
There are some questions the theory of evolution itself may not be able to answer, especially moral and existential questions. The answers to these questions lie in philosophy and religion, not science. Nevertheless, there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that humans are descended from earlier prehistoric apes, and that we are closely related to other apes of today, and the gaps in the human lineage continue to be filled as more research is done and more fossils are uncovered.
Why is Charles Darwin's theory disputed?
Opinion
Darwinism is "disputed" for religious reasons. Most religious people think that because it contradicts the story of creation in the bible then natural selection and the evolution of species is unacceptable. Elaborate pseudo-scientific disputations have been developed simply because it contradicts the bible.
The Theory of Evolution by means of Natural Selection, first suggested by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace is not disputed among scientists, who have masses of evidence and expertise. It is disputed among laypeople who do not know enough to really have a standpoint. It is disputed by religious people (maybe fundamentalist) who are unable to reconcile the discoveries of biology and genetics and palaeontology with literal readings of religious texts and such text's creation stories.
The religious, whether creationist or Intelligent Design proponent or straightforward religious have tried to give a picture of controversy between creationism and evolution. This may be due to 'moral outrage' as Richard Dawkins puts it, rather than real factual objection. If religious bible-living people think their bible is the work of all morality, then the apparently godless world of evolution and abiogenesis may become (by spoken word among fellows) drummed up as 'heretical'. In such a case, moral objection would occur. Or if there is a desperate desire or belief that a god did indeed create everything, the idea of 'self-producing' life may seem difficult to swallow. Religious/Creationist or moral objection may be the ancient reason for the attacks on today's science of evolution.
But today, with the Internet and such hypercommunication as that, there is much confusion, whether stemming from religious objection or the addition of 'Creation Science' and 'Intelligent Design theory' 'science' into the public's eyes. Laymen are too ready to jump on this bandwagon of pseudoscience, giving the idea of controversy between creation and evolution. Creationism is an ancient story, now classified a creation myth. Intelligent Design and Creation Science are political nonsense. All this generates confusion and from that stems dispute and debate. Some of the confusion is right here on this very page. By this I mean the tired recitals of objectors to evolution. (The big bang may have to do with the 'evolution'/development of the Universe but has nothing to do with the Evolution of life. Yes, there are negative mutations. There are also neutral mutations and positive mutations. There is no objection to Evolution among scientists. There are most definitely transitional fossils. Evolution most certainly does not violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics.)
What can be done to remove all this confusion and and thus confused dispute? The answer is that everyone should learn about Earth and its multitudinous and extraordinary life. 'Look at the evidence'. 'Just go and look' are Richard Dawkins' insistings. 'Isn't this lovely?' says David Attenborough, regarding the beauty and complexity of life. Well, if it is lovely, let us learn about it and learning will vanquish all this confusion.
Anyone interested and willing to gain a better understanding of this opinion should take the time to read Kitzmiller V. Dover at the related link.
