Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mlc9852
When exactly were there "no tools"?

Paranthrapoids had tools as far back as 2.4mya, but as this article shows, there's no evidence H. erectus/ergaster used tools until 1.5mya.

36 posted on 04/21/2006 12:07:26 PM PDT by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: Alter Kaker

There was some earlier debate in the paleoanthropological community as to the number of early human species in southern Africa between 3 and 1 million years ago. Conventional wisdom had it that two species existed, Australopithecus africanus and Paranthropus robustus. In contradiction to this view, Milford Wolpoff, of the University of Michigan, advocated the"single species hypothesis". It claimed that the differences between the southern forms were caused by age differences and sexual dimorphism of the specimens. Many researchers had problems with this hypothesis. For example, why in southern Africa were the supposed males dying at a different place than the supposed females? And why were they dated to almost a half a million years later? It was clear that a larger fossil record would be needed to prove or disprove this hypothesis.

Interestingly, the answer to the question of the southern African early humans would come from hundreds of kilometers away in East Africa. The discovery of two fossils, KNM ER 406 and KNM ER 732, at Koobi Fora in eastern Africa would provide the necessary expansion of the record needed to disprove the "single species hypothesis". Upon discovery its in 1969, ER 406 showed enough similar morphology to be assigned to the same species as OH 5; with the addition of ER 732, comparisons could be drawn between the two that could shed light on the nature of dimorphism in early humans. As these two specimens were examined, researchers found that the early humans of this period followed what is called the great ape model of sexual dimorphism. Male crania were larger than females, and more heavily constructed. While differences existed between the two skulls, these differences were exactly what would be expected between the sexes in other great apes.

The two southern African forms, however, did not fit this model of the distinction between the sexes. The differences were too great to be the result of sexual dimorphism. This observation favored the idea of two distinct species in southern Africa.

The final blow to the "single species hypothesis" was the 1975 discovery of the cranium KNM ER 3733, assigned now to Homo ergaster, in the same layer as ER 406, the "robust" form Paranthropus boisei. Scientists finally knew for sure that more than one species of early human coexisted in the same geographical area. The old single line of progressive evolution was, once and for all, split into branches. And the human family tree has never looked the same since.

The "Peninj mandible" is a nearly complete mandible of Paranthropus boisei. It provided researchers with their first understanding of the complete adult dentition and the structure of the lower jaw of this species.

http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/bos.html

I find it difficult to believe a separate species can be assigned because of a different structure of a jaw. I think humans are/were humans.


43 posted on 04/21/2006 12:19:43 PM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson