What an incredible discussion. While the entire Q&A is informative, I particularly like that portion beginning at 38:15 , visually comparing bipedality between humans and chimps. Then there is the following discussion of the importance of the Achilles tendon and the consequent structure of the bone. And after this is the bipedality differences between the chimps and macaques. Which in turn is followed by the "fiber-type distribution" of the muscular-energy locomotive differences between fast-twitch and slow-twitch fibers. This is great stuff. Keep it coming... please.
Great discussion. Very interesting. Is there a reason we have such fewer chimpanzee fossils compared to hominoids? EDIT: Yep, just googled the question myself... It is thought the wet hot jungle conditions chimpanzees live in are not favorable for preserving fossils.
Our waist has taken the place of the hips for that rotation, in order that we can perform an over arm throw and put the power of our legs and buttocks into the projectile. Our upper torso anatomy is quite unique in hominins in that over arm throw. The arm is lifted and the hand positioned behind our head holding a spear at eye level, our wrist, elbow, shoulder, and waist rotated, either running or standing. The spear is pushed forward using the power stored in those rotated joints, added to by thighs and buttocks, then released transferring that energy into the projectile. Our shorter collar bone, the longer forearms for leverage, the range of motion in our limb joints, and our gracile form all allow this. The bipedalism in us provides an exceptionally stable platform for this action, unique to homo sapiens. We're the only creature ever known to kill at distance, and that over arm throw is what led to that solely sapiens behavior.
Hence no chimpanzees pitching in the majors. Throwing 90 plus mph strikes is very hard. I suppose hitting the ball is even harder though. But yes this is an incredible adaptation to humans.
Except thats just false.... they used to believe that... but not any more...now its understood that Neanderthal had the same throwing abilities that we do and also threw spears during hunts.
@@SeanMahoneyfitnessandart I couldn't care any less what "they" believed or didn't. Nor what you "believe". I look at anatomy. Neanderthal was built for vertical stability and power. We're not.
A lot of creatures kill at a distance, archer's fish, mantis shrimp, bombadeer's beetles, eagles (kinda, they'll drop stones on turtles to break their shells or just pick up and drop the turtle) And before you say none of them kill instantly, neither do humans, the closest we get now is just blowing something up but a stonetip will badly bleed an animal until they get finished off or bleed out
@@thychozwart2451 Archer fish knock prey into the water so they can grab it, they don't kill at distance. Bombadier's beetles spray a defense, it's not an aimed kill shot. Eagles kinda dropping prey isn't killing at distance. Humans do kill instantly at distance. A great deal of our technology is geared towards killing at distance. We're the only creatures that kill at distance, everything else kills within reach or grasp.
Excellent discussion, thanks. Initially, I was skeptical of independent convergent evolution of knuckle walking in chimps and gorillas. I’m now more comfortable with the idea, but it does leave open the question of why the last common ancestor of all three of our groups left the trees in the first place. I have heard the conjecture that this was because our ancestors were simply out competed in the trees. Even today, humans, the least arboreal of the groups, have a shorter attention span than chimpanzees, the most arboreal. When we hear “chimp size” most people don’t realize that an adult male chimpanzee can weigh around 73 kg or 160 pounds and is capable of killing an adult leopard. And is nothing at all like the cute young female chimps usually shown in jungle movies. When separating the lineages, a confounding factor would be that some individuals on either side could have traits more common to the other. This happens when trying to separate human races. At one time, individuals of hominin lineage and individuals of chimpanzee lineage were simply separate interbreeding races.
🤺☦️🇷🇺No monkeys, there were 3 identical Y-MRCAs, not just one and they were no apemen lol, so better try your luck next when you think you found a way to disprove God and the table of nations in Genesis🤣👉🗿🦍
In addition to bipedalism, humans are unique in their ability to throw. These are inextricably linked because the arms must be freed and the shoulder changed. I believe that a band of quadrupeds who learned to throw stones to drive scavengers off a carcass could start a feedback loop that would lead to more accurate throwing and a better platform for the act.
@@mjade1673 Of course, and they also throw objects in the wild. If you are pointing out that they are not nearly as good at it as we are, I agree. Chimps do not throw as hard or as accurately as humans do. The reasons why chimps can't throw like we do are that their shoulder joints don't rotate like ours do, they don't have the solid human bipedal platform, and they have not evolved the brain power to make ballistic calculations that would enable them to throw a rock accurately enough to kill anything. We seem to be in agreement that throwing is one of the earliest forms of divergence from chimpanzees that led to hominids, because they are still pretty bad at it while humans have mastered the art. Throwing leads to bigger brains and obligatory bipedal walking, which are two important features that separate us from chimpanzees.
@@charleskelly1887 some groups of chimpanzees are not only quite warlike, though (even a recently reported attack on a gorilla population nearby), they are getting much better and more accurate at throwing rocks and sticks.
@@MaryAnnNytowl Chimps are iimited in throwing by their physiology and morphology. If accurate throwing confers an advantage in survival, chimps will then evolve a shoulder less adapted to climbing and more adapted to rotation, their legs will get longer and their brains will develop the ability to make lightning ballistic calculations. I suspect this will take them a few million years.
To use a parallel in nature for two unrelated animals, walking apes and sabre tooth cats, it seems that nature has chosen repeatedly throughout history to resurect these adaptions in different places and in different times and we cannot explain why nor will we ever know why.
Do you think more slow twitch muscle than in other terrestrial mammals in humans means we are meant to be constantly on the move as apposed to other ànimals? Most animals seem to spend most of their time resting, if humans do that we invariably become unfit. Very interesting discussion, thank you
Late reply, but persistence hunting, as a primary strategy, is actually a pretty niche thing, reserved to basically only khoisan and related groups as well as the hadza (which if memory serves, have a RELATIVELY recent split time with khoisan related groups). Most remaining hunter gatherer groups in the world do not practice persistence hunting, and anyways, the sample size is biased, because (by necessity) the last remaining hunter gatherers live in suboptimal habitats, otherwise they would have already been encroached upon. The persistence hunting belief comes from the erroneous myth that humans evolved EXCLUSIVELY in a very small region of Africa (vs a constant ebb and flow of various groups in africa coming together intermixing periodically), that happens to coincide with the region where those HG groups I mentioned live. So people have, rather naively, assumed there is cultural and biological continuity with the first humans. Persistence hunting isn't even terribly viable in many environments on earth.
Without even watching the video, a I will predict a conscious effort to ignore the 23-24 split. To me, anything beyond discussing this subject, which is highly taboo in academia, is a distraction. Bipedalism is not important - another distraction. Approximately 1.3 million years ago, a creature designated Erectus developed from an earlier, more arboreal primate. Erectus had a man's body with a slightly bigger brain. This creature, which was indigenous to the planet had 24 chromosomes. It developed naturally and slowly due to climate change. By 300K years ago, Erectus was the apex predator of the planet. It had mastered fire and had populated the entire planet. Then something happened and a whole bunch of creatures with 23 chromosomes appeared, sapiens being just one.
I just recently found your channel and as a lay person with a long-time interest in the evolution of humans this video hits the mark in both subject matter and in how technical it gets. And presentation! I could listen to it while doing the dishes and take in what was being said without it slowing down the house work too much ;)
I feel like the Patterson Gimlin film might help answer some of these questions, MK Davis has done some great work regarding the locomotion of the creature
I read that chimpanzees' ancestors had hands more like humans, but they returned to tree life and hands evolved to suit. Bipedalism makes sense for semi aquatic life.
I believe that bipedalism developed as an advantage that allowed a weak and slow ape to compete for carcasses by carrying sticks and swinging them in a threatening manner at a kill site.
It’s a given that chimps are several times stronger than humans. I would bet the first of our ancestors retained much of that strength. When they started walking upright, they would certainly have needed that strength to compete with other wildlife for food and security, especially seeing as they still had a relatively small brain.
I love your videos and it is extremely lucky for me to come across the channel. I have been researching in reconstructing the Pan and Homo LCA so very convenient. Can you however add chapters to your videos so it easy to access the information displayed within your videos?
So, chimpanzees and humans have a true bipedal common ancestor, and proto-chimpanzees evolved into knuckle walking arboreal apes and humans didn't. Chimps and other knuckle walkers each have an exclusive interim species between themselves and their common bipedal ancestor.
It's no more than a layman's hunch (not worth a lot, I own), but something tells me that the LCA tended to walk upright on top of branches while holding on to higher branches. Some went more arboreal, “inventing” knuckle walking to protect their fingers, some went less arboreal and adapted their on-branch posture to an on-ground one. Gibbons and orangutans often behave that way, and quite a few really oldfossil apes seem to be adapted to that way of life. And both bipedalism and knuclewalking have a decidedly 'derived' flavour about them. As I said, a hunch. But somehow...
Yes, the upright movement in the trees with the feet grasping the branches underfoot - with an opposable toe - while holding onto the limbs and branches above with the upper limbs (and curved phalanges of the hand bones), is a topic of current discussion.
@Mad Lynx That's been thoroughly debunked for decades, even if it *has* led to folks spending more attention to period river and lake estuaries. It doesn't explain either hair loss or upright posture as well as originally thought, and breath control appears to be rather a consequence of increased vocal behaviour than a prerequisite. As for the essential fatty acids line, grubs, certain tubers, and increased meat consumption in a savannah context work just as well.
@Mad Lynx Fastest option; please check the sources. I fear I don't remember the names of the paleoanthropologists I asked about the hypothesis some 10 years ago when they were staying at my parents' hostel for a dig in Hagen, Germany, and you might well react the same way if I pointed you to some videos here on TH-cam by folks such as Gutsick Gibbon. As I'm on the phone, I can't give you the link right now -single-tab apps sometimes suck.
Matthew, I don't think you answered the question, "What changed our ancestor's bodies" for us to be able to walk upright? Where did the information come from to change the pelvis? Environmental changes can't force information into your genome, running from a tiger can't force information into your genome. Envrionments can trigger adaptations in animals, like finch beaks, but the finch still stays a finch. The adaptation uses the information already in the DNA to affect the adaptation. But you need massive amounts of information to be able to change an organism into a different organism. Similarity does not prove common descent.
It is random mutations which eventually produce the traits. 99% of mutations are deleterious, but every once in a while it is a great adaptation. That is how it changes.
"Environmental changes can't force information into your genome" - but genetic variations pre-exist, and favourable mutations (most are neutral, some are unfavourable) can add more, and environmental pressures can then favour some of these variations over others. For example, some in a population will be able to run better than others (because of inherited anatomical variations): if running then becomes more important (say, because the environment is slowly drying and trees are becoming further apart) the better runners will survive more often to pass on their inherited running abilities while the poorer runners don't as often. In time, the population is all descended from the better runners: this is "natural selection". It has been demonstrated that much less than a 1% advantageous variant allele can spread through a population very quickly. Now add further mutations (or already present but rare variations) and repeat, over and over again. Millions of years provide _enormous_ scope for selection to change a population's gene pool, ultimately becoming a different 'organism'. We're not _that_ genetically different from chimpanzees; some mutations can make surprisingly large differences.
@@terryhunt2659 Don't think so. There are genetic variations built into the genome which allows variation to suit the environment, but there is no know process that adds information into the genome. None, zilch, nada. Mutations REMOVE information from the genome, even beneficial mutations remove information. Nothing adds information to a genome, scientists have been trying that for years and years and they just can't do it. Variations come from the 'already loaded' DNA of a species. I heard Tyson speaking about our DNA once and he stated that with all the humans that have been born in the past and are living today, that we have not seen the end of the variations we can have for the human genome and won't for a very long time. So there is countless variations built into us. Talk to a dog or horse breeder they will tell you that you cannot add variation, you have to work with what you got. And to change one animal into another one, you need NEW information, and lots of it.
34:25 Oliver? Was Oliver then a throwback to a time when the ancestors of Chimps and humans were semi to obligate bipeds?? I think of gibbons running from tree to tree on two legs.
Oliver was simply choosing to exercise the abilities that all chimpanzees have, but usually do not have a reason to use more than about 10% of the time. Why? Because he'd been trained and encouraged to, and likely also because he wanted to 'fit in' with the other primates around him, who were humans rather than chimps. Of course, the more he did it the easier it became for him, just as some 'primates' through practice can easily sit in the 'lotus' pose while others like me cannot, at all.
I'd read, seen discussed, that there is enough difference in the knuckle-walking anatomy between chimps and gorillas such that a separate (post-LCA) derivation is likely. i.e. the common ancestor was not, likely, a knuckle-walker. What seemed, prior to later fossil discovers, so obvious has now been largely discounted. Which, as a bonus, avoids the need for some elaborate explanation as to the means by which knuckle-walking transitioned into bipedality. Gibbons & Orangs aren't knuckle-walkers, so there's a big clue right there.
Another possible ecological situation would be scavenging the seashore. The Wading Ape. Upright stance. Loss of body fur. Hair on the head. Babies that swim, holding their breath.
Walk upright, carry a big stick, throw rocks.. that would be a good way for a hominid to succed in the savanna.. Extinction events can also be seen as adaptation events.. Environment changes... out competed in whats left of your native environment? Already adapting so it just made sense? 🤔 Here we are!! 😁 Be Well!! 😃
I heard this commom ancestor looked not far from current chimpanzes since the conservative environment tend to keep the morpholy pretty stable... contrary to the ancestor who had hard time living in the open savanah facing big changes of weather and risks.
First..trees were going away..grass was tall..ur faster on two feet than knuckle walking..u can carry baby..carry food..carry a weapon..our lineage figured that out.
As a person who has studied anthropology passionately and the bible just as passionately and gaining a perspective on both, i believe that we cannot connect a common ancestor between chimps and living humans because there is none. The living human lineage only go's back 200,000 years to the mitocondrial adam and eve who according to science, appeared out of no where and not to the now extinct archaic humans, neanderthals and denesovans that homo sapiens sapiens overlapped with. Living humans were made from the earth in the image of god. We have a higher conscience, a hardwired desire to worship a diety greater then ourselves, art, music, looking billions of years ahead and billions of years in the past. We are stewards of this world and care for the animals and environment in it. What power behind evolution is responsible for this? It did not just happen by chance. If so then what chance in a quintillion could that happen on its own? No, we are not ancestral to chimp like ancestors. Maybe the extinct, archaic, humans were but not our adamic lineage. Do you really think australopithecines believed in an afterlife? Maybe some of them even witnessed to chimpanzees about jesus or another god? 😄
That _is_ how knowledge is built, though. Speculation leads to study, which leads to knowledge. That's just how it works. The discussion here is about the leading edge of study right now in the field, so, yeah, following the formula, it will include speculation. Why that is a problem to you, I cannot fathom.
Our bipedalism is closely tied to our 2.6M years of obligate carnivory. We must hunt or die out. This has disastrous health and population consequences when we as a species try to break away from that adapted paradigm. Miki Ben-Dor has some great work in this area.
@@chickenfist1554 there is documented written proof. All the evolutionist have is Darwins "THEORY "! Exactly as ots named a THEORY trying to argue against actual documented proof. It is I that has the laugh at idiots that believe a THEORY that's being proven wrong everyday 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@eternalflameofchristminist2430 _" there is documented written proof."_ Of what? Adam and Eve? Hahahahah. The only place that bs is written about is in the bible, and you can't use the bible to prove something in the bible. _"All the evolutionist have is Darwins "THEORY "!"_ The scientific theory of evolution has more evidence than any other area of study within science. It's called proof. _"Exactly as ots named a THEORY"_ Sounds like you're another uneducated religitard who doesn't know what 'theory' means, or how it is relevant to evolution. No surprises there 😂 Let me clear it up for you. The definition of the term 'Theory' is: a statement of an opinion or an explanation of an idea that is believed to be true, but might be wrong Cambridge Dictionary In other words, how the term is used in everyday conversation and what *YOU* assert evolution is. _"In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence"_ American Museum of Natural History But that's not evolution. Evolution is a *SCIENTIFIC THEORY* which is totally different and defined as: _"A Scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts"_ American Museum of Natural History _"The meaning of the term scientific theory as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory. In everyday speech, theory can imply an explanation that represents an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, whereas in science it describes an explanation that has been tested and is widely accepted as valid"_ National Academy of Sciences _"However, there are two senses of theory which are sometimes troublesome. These are the senses which are defined as 'a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena' (such as evolution) and 'an unproven assumption; conjecture.' The second of these is occasionally misapplied in cases where the former is meant, as when a particular scientific theory is derided as 'just a theory,' implying that it is no more than speculation or conjecture. One may certainly disagree with scientists regarding their theories, but it is an inaccurate interpretation of language to regard their use of the word as implying a tentative hypothesis; the scientific use of theory is quite different than the speculative use of the word"_ Merriam Webster
Correct, there are quite a few animals that locomote, or locomoted, bipedally, including many dinosaurs, birds, and other primates. However, humans evolved into obligate upright bipeds. In addition, our fore paws - our hands - subsequently developed into hands with opposable thumbs. Together, upright bipedalism with freed hands having opposable thumbs is, to my knowledge, unique in the animal kingdom, along with a subsequently expanded brain size.
Thank you for your help, Captain Obvious. We knew about dinosaurs, including birds, already. This has nothing to do with them, however. Please try to keep up.
The term “Last Common Ancestor” is meaningless unless you identify the species or groups you are discussing. For example, in my family, my last common ancestors are my parents. If you are looking at life in general, the last common ancestor is some single cell organism. Therefore the title of the video is essentially meaningless if it doesn’t highlight the groups that are being analyzed. For those who would want to misrepresent what I am saying, my point is not about the content, but about the title.
I can see your point! There was probably a lot of variation among them. And who knows how long it took for the split to finish and how much hybridization was involved. Likely, there are species from that time we don't even know about.
Same shit, different archeologist. You should interview a geneticist. What if archeology has been looking at fossil evidence upside down all along? Here's a new idea AGAIN. The earliest hominids (say 4, 5, maybe 10 million years ago) were all bipedal all along from Day 1. But we were so violent and deadly due to our bipedalness allowing for handheld weapons (the closest rock or club) to be swung with greater lethal force killing off all less violent homo lineages and other hominid species. Our lineage of hominae slaughtered all our other human competitors and drove the other primate groups of great apes' ancestry up into the trees for protection where they developed hands and feet for climbing and knuckle walking, later not earlier. It's difficult to climb a tree and carry a rock at the same time and as the deadliest primate on the planet, we are still working on improving the solutions to that problem to this day. Hominins didnt come down from the trees, we drove the hominids up into the trees.
First of all: he's not an archaeologist -- that's a schoolboy error. He's a paleoanthropologist. Second of all: coming up with an idea that sounds good in your head does not mean squat if you don't have the evidence to back it up. That's how science works.
What an incredible discussion. While the entire Q&A is informative, I particularly like that portion beginning at 38:15 , visually comparing bipedality between humans and chimps. Then there is the following discussion of the importance of the Achilles tendon and the consequent structure of the bone. And after this is the bipedality differences between the chimps and macaques. Which in turn is followed by the "fiber-type distribution" of the muscular-energy locomotive differences between fast-twitch and slow-twitch fibers. This is great stuff. Keep it coming... please.
HOW DID LIFE START ON A BARREN PLANET,WHERE DID THE CHEMICALS COME FROM FOR LIFE, HOW DID THEY KNOW HOW TO COMBINE.
Great discussion. Very interesting. Is there a reason we have such fewer chimpanzee fossils compared to hominoids?
EDIT: Yep, just googled the question myself... It is thought the wet hot jungle conditions chimpanzees live in are not favorable for preserving fossils.
Our waist has taken the place of the hips for that rotation, in order that we can perform an over arm throw and put the power of our legs and buttocks into the projectile. Our upper torso anatomy is quite unique in hominins in that over arm throw. The arm is lifted and the hand positioned behind our head holding a spear at eye level, our wrist, elbow, shoulder, and waist rotated, either running or standing. The spear is pushed forward using the power stored in those rotated joints, added to by thighs and buttocks, then released transferring that energy into the projectile. Our shorter collar bone, the longer forearms for leverage, the range of motion in our limb joints, and our gracile form all allow this. The bipedalism in us provides an exceptionally stable platform for this action, unique to homo sapiens. We're the only creature ever known to kill at distance, and that over arm throw is what led to that solely sapiens behavior.
Hence no chimpanzees pitching in the majors. Throwing 90 plus mph strikes is very hard. I suppose hitting the ball is even harder though. But yes this is an incredible adaptation to humans.
Except thats just false.... they used to believe that... but not any more...now its understood that Neanderthal had the same throwing abilities that we do and also threw spears during hunts.
@@SeanMahoneyfitnessandart I couldn't care any less what "they" believed or didn't. Nor what you "believe". I look at anatomy. Neanderthal was built for vertical stability and power. We're not.
A lot of creatures kill at a distance, archer's fish, mantis shrimp, bombadeer's beetles, eagles (kinda, they'll drop stones on turtles to break their shells or just pick up and drop the turtle)
And before you say none of them kill instantly, neither do humans, the closest we get now is just blowing something up but a stonetip will badly bleed an animal until they get finished off or bleed out
@@thychozwart2451 Archer fish knock prey into the water so they can grab it, they don't kill at distance. Bombadier's beetles spray a defense, it's not an aimed kill shot. Eagles kinda dropping prey isn't killing at distance. Humans do kill instantly at distance. A great deal of our technology is geared towards killing at distance. We're the only creatures that kill at distance, everything else kills within reach or grasp.
My sister-in-law in genius at assembling puzzles, should've worked for the Leakeys.
Excellent discussion, thanks.
Initially, I was skeptical of independent convergent evolution of knuckle walking in chimps and gorillas. I’m now more comfortable with the idea, but it does leave open the question of why the last common ancestor of all three of our groups left the trees in the first place. I have heard the conjecture that this was because our ancestors were simply out competed in the trees. Even today, humans, the least arboreal of the groups, have a shorter attention span than chimpanzees, the most arboreal.
When we hear “chimp size” most people don’t realize that an adult male chimpanzee can weigh around 73 kg or 160 pounds and is capable of killing an adult leopard. And is nothing at all like the cute young female chimps usually shown in jungle movies.
When separating the lineages, a confounding factor would be that some individuals on either side could have traits more common to the other. This happens when trying to separate human races. At one time, individuals of hominin lineage and individuals of chimpanzee lineage were simply separate interbreeding races.
🤺☦️🇷🇺No monkeys, there were 3 identical Y-MRCAs, not just one and they were no apemen lol, so better try your luck next when you think you found a way to disprove God and the table of nations in Genesis🤣👉🗿🦍
Don't you know? Aiens did it. ;)
Great discussion. Thank you both.
In addition to bipedalism, humans are unique in their ability to throw. These are inextricably linked because the arms must be freed and the shoulder changed. I believe that a band of quadrupeds who learned to throw stones to drive scavengers off a carcass could start a feedback loop that would lead to more accurate throwing and a better platform for the act.
Youve never seen various monkeys throwing poop in the zoo?
@@mjade1673 Of course, and they also throw objects in the wild. If you are pointing out that they are not nearly as good at it as we are, I agree. Chimps do not throw as hard or as accurately as humans do. The reasons why chimps can't throw like we do are that their shoulder joints don't rotate like ours do, they don't have the solid human bipedal platform, and they have not evolved the brain power to make ballistic calculations that would enable them to throw a rock accurately enough to kill anything.
We seem to be in agreement that throwing is one of the earliest forms of divergence from chimpanzees that led to hominids, because they are still pretty bad at it while humans have mastered the art. Throwing leads to bigger brains and obligatory bipedal walking, which are two important features that separate us from chimpanzees.
@@charleskelly1887 some groups of chimpanzees are not only quite warlike, though (even a recently reported attack on a gorilla population nearby), they are getting much better and more accurate at throwing rocks and sticks.
@@MaryAnnNytowl Chimps are iimited in throwing by their physiology and morphology. If accurate throwing confers an advantage in survival, chimps will then evolve a shoulder less adapted to climbing and more adapted to rotation, their legs will get longer and their brains will develop the ability to make lightning ballistic calculations.
I suspect this will take them a few million years.
To use a parallel in nature for two unrelated animals, walking apes and sabre tooth cats, it seems that nature has chosen repeatedly throughout history to resurect these adaptions in different places and in different times and we cannot explain why nor will we ever know why.
Do you think more slow twitch muscle than in other terrestrial mammals in humans means we are meant to be constantly on the move as apposed to other ànimals? Most animals seem to spend most of their time resting, if humans do that we invariably become unfit. Very interesting discussion, thank you
Two words to explain the behavior leading to dominance of slow twitch muscle fiber in humans: persistence hunting.
Late reply, but persistence hunting, as a primary strategy, is actually a pretty niche thing, reserved to basically only khoisan and related groups as well as the hadza (which if memory serves, have a RELATIVELY recent split time with khoisan related groups). Most remaining hunter gatherer groups in the world do not practice persistence hunting, and anyways, the sample size is biased, because (by necessity) the last remaining hunter gatherers live in suboptimal habitats, otherwise they would have already been encroached upon. The persistence hunting belief comes from the erroneous myth that humans evolved EXCLUSIVELY in a very small region of Africa (vs a constant ebb and flow of various groups in africa coming together intermixing periodically), that happens to coincide with the region where those HG groups I mentioned live. So people have, rather naively, assumed there is cultural and biological continuity with the first humans.
Persistence hunting isn't even terribly viable in many environments on earth.
Without even watching the video, a I will predict a conscious effort to ignore the 23-24 split. To me, anything beyond discussing this subject, which is highly taboo in academia, is a distraction. Bipedalism is not important - another distraction. Approximately 1.3 million years ago, a creature designated Erectus developed from an earlier, more arboreal primate. Erectus had a man's body with a slightly bigger brain. This creature, which was indigenous to the planet had 24 chromosomes. It developed naturally and slowly due to climate change. By 300K years ago, Erectus was the apex predator of the planet. It had mastered fire and had populated the entire planet. Then something happened and a whole bunch of creatures with 23 chromosomes appeared, sapiens being just one.
I just recently found your channel and as a lay person with a long-time interest in the evolution of humans this video hits the mark in both subject matter and in how technical it gets. And presentation! I could listen to it while doing the dishes and take in what was being said without it slowing down the house work too much ;)
Very glad to have you on board!
I feel like the Patterson Gimlin film might help answer some of these questions, MK Davis has done some great work regarding the locomotion of the creature
I read that chimpanzees' ancestors had hands more like humans, but they returned to tree life and hands evolved to suit. Bipedalism makes sense for semi aquatic life.
It’s the branch walking that matters?When have balanced yourself on branch from tree to tree that where walking evolved.
I suspect that there was more than one LCA, probably a group with quite a bit of variation and hybridization.
I believe that bipedalism developed as an advantage that allowed a weak and slow ape to compete for carcasses by carrying sticks and swinging them in a threatening manner at a kill site.
Great channel !
It’s a given that chimps are several times stronger than humans. I would bet the first of our ancestors retained much of that strength. When they started walking upright, they would certainly have needed that strength to compete with other wildlife for food and security, especially seeing as they still had a relatively small brain.
I love your videos and it is extremely lucky for me to come across the channel. I have been researching in reconstructing the Pan and Homo LCA so very convenient.
Can you however add chapters to your videos so it easy to access the information displayed within your videos?
Thanks so much and will look into adding chapters!
(The audio versions have chapters but I'm behind in uploading current eps)
Apes & gorillas are bad quadrapod-type walkers compared to tigers, elephants etc. what was their origin? HMMMMMMM!
Good point
WHERE did life come from on a barren planet?????????????????????? where did the water come from???
Different video
Knuckle walking evolved at least three times independently. In Gorillas, Chimps and Trumpanzees.
I stand in opposition but that's pretty funny.
Here it is in 2024 we got a monkey in the White House
Thats your common ancestors, not mine 😂👉
So, chimpanzees and humans have a true bipedal common ancestor, and proto-chimpanzees evolved into knuckle walking arboreal apes and humans didn't. Chimps and other knuckle walkers each have an exclusive interim species between themselves and their common bipedal ancestor.
Presumably.
Or else we were GMO'd by aliens....
😏
It's no more than a layman's hunch (not worth a lot, I own), but something tells me that the LCA tended to walk upright on top of branches while holding on to higher branches. Some went more arboreal, “inventing” knuckle walking to protect their fingers, some went less arboreal and adapted their on-branch posture to an on-ground one.
Gibbons and orangutans often behave that way, and quite a few really oldfossil apes seem to be adapted to that way of life. And both bipedalism and knuclewalking have a decidedly 'derived' flavour about them.
As I said, a hunch. But somehow...
Yes, the upright movement in the trees with the feet grasping the branches underfoot - with an opposable toe - while holding onto the limbs and branches above with the upper limbs (and curved phalanges of the hand bones), is a topic of current discussion.
You are describingDavinius Guggenmosi, a small ape from 11 Mya found in Germany.
@Mad Lynx That's been thoroughly debunked for decades, even if it *has* led to folks spending more attention to period river and lake estuaries.
It doesn't explain either hair loss or upright posture as well as originally thought, and breath control appears to be rather a consequence of increased vocal behaviour than a prerequisite. As for the essential fatty acids line, grubs, certain tubers, and increased meat consumption in a savannah context work just as well.
@@madlynx1818 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_ape_hypothesis
@Mad Lynx Fastest option; please check the sources. I fear I don't remember the names of the paleoanthropologists I asked about the hypothesis some 10 years ago when they were staying at my parents' hostel for a dig in Hagen, Germany, and you might well react the same way if I pointed you to some videos here on TH-cam by folks such as Gutsick Gibbon. As I'm on the phone, I can't give you the link right now -single-tab apps sometimes suck.
Fibre type difference could be down to a trade off between brute strength and fine motor control
Matthew, I don't think you answered the question, "What changed our ancestor's bodies" for us to be able to walk upright? Where did the information come from to change the pelvis? Environmental changes can't force information into your genome, running from a tiger can't force information into your genome. Envrionments can trigger adaptations in animals, like finch beaks, but the finch still stays a finch. The adaptation uses the information already in the DNA to affect the adaptation. But you need massive amounts of information to be able to change an organism into a different organism. Similarity does not prove common descent.
It is random mutations which eventually produce the traits. 99% of mutations are deleterious, but every once in a while it is a great adaptation. That is how it changes.
"Environmental changes can't force information into your genome" - but genetic variations pre-exist, and favourable mutations (most are neutral, some are unfavourable) can add more, and environmental pressures can then favour some of these variations over others.
For example, some in a population will be able to run better than others (because of inherited anatomical variations): if running then becomes more important (say, because the environment is slowly drying and trees are becoming further apart) the better runners will survive more often to pass on their inherited running abilities while the poorer runners don't as often. In time, the population is all descended from the better runners: this is "natural selection". It has been demonstrated that much less than a 1% advantageous variant allele can spread through a population very quickly.
Now add further mutations (or already present but rare variations) and repeat, over and over again. Millions of years provide _enormous_ scope for selection to change a population's gene pool, ultimately becoming a different 'organism'. We're not _that_ genetically different from chimpanzees; some mutations can make surprisingly large differences.
@@terryhunt2659 Don't think so. There are genetic variations built into the genome which allows variation to suit the environment, but there is no know process that adds information into the genome. None, zilch, nada. Mutations REMOVE information from the genome, even beneficial mutations remove information. Nothing adds information to a genome, scientists have been trying that for years and years and they just can't do it. Variations come from the 'already loaded' DNA of a species. I heard Tyson speaking about our DNA once and he stated that with all the humans that have been born in the past and are living today, that we have not seen the end of the variations we can have for the human genome and won't for a very long time. So there is countless variations built into us. Talk to a dog or horse breeder they will tell you that you cannot add variation, you have to work with what you got. And to change one animal into another one, you need NEW information, and lots of it.
34:25
Oliver?
Was Oliver then a throwback to a time when the ancestors of Chimps and humans were semi to obligate bipeds??
I think of gibbons running from tree to tree on two legs.
Oliver was simply choosing to exercise the abilities that all chimpanzees have, but usually do not have a reason to use more than about 10% of the time. Why? Because he'd been trained and encouraged to, and likely also because he wanted to 'fit in' with the other primates around him, who were humans rather than chimps. Of course, the more he did it the easier it became for him, just as some 'primates' through practice can easily sit in the 'lotus' pose while others like me cannot, at all.
I'd read, seen discussed, that there is enough difference in the knuckle-walking anatomy between chimps and gorillas such that a separate (post-LCA) derivation is likely. i.e. the common ancestor was not, likely, a knuckle-walker. What seemed, prior to later fossil discovers, so obvious has now been largely discounted. Which, as a bonus, avoids the need for some elaborate explanation as to the means by which knuckle-walking transitioned into bipedality. Gibbons & Orangs aren't knuckle-walkers, so there's a big clue right there.
I would love to learn more about the Gorilla/Hominid Last Common Ancestor
Another possible ecological situation would be scavenging the seashore. The Wading Ape. Upright stance. Loss of body fur. Hair on the head. Babies that swim, holding their breath.
Walk upright, carry a big stick, throw rocks.. that would be a good way for a hominid to succed in the savanna..
Extinction events can also be seen as adaptation events..
Environment changes... out competed in whats left of your native environment? Already adapting so it just made sense? 🤔
Here we are!! 😁
Be Well!! 😃
I heard this commom ancestor looked not far from current chimpanzes since the conservative environment tend to keep the morpholy pretty stable... contrary to the ancestor who had hard time living in the open savanah facing big changes of weather and risks.
At around 4:35 there is a nice hominid fossil timeline...does anyone know where i can download this particular graph?
Was going to major in Anthropology in college, changed course but I still love this stuff.
First..trees were going away..grass was tall..ur faster on two feet than knuckle walking..u can carry baby..carry food..carry a weapon..our lineage figured that out.
What if the split started way earlier than assumed, say 12 Mya and took maybe 5 or 7 Mya?
The part with Alex Bezzerides was very interesting but the very end of it was so stupid there was no place for comments.
Fascinating.
endurance over time rather than vertical swinging in trees at max force body weight in gravity climbing
🤡🤡🤡🤣😂😅
This is such a great deep dive into these anthropological subjects! It's fascinating, and I will definitely save this!
The sound special effects are distracting and annoying.
This is drole. He seems unable at saying anything new.
As a person who has studied anthropology passionately and the bible just as passionately and gaining a perspective on both, i believe that we cannot connect a common ancestor between chimps and living humans because there is none. The living human lineage only go's back 200,000 years to the mitocondrial adam and eve who according to science, appeared out of no where and not to the now extinct archaic humans, neanderthals and denesovans that homo sapiens sapiens overlapped with. Living humans were made from the earth in the image of god. We have a higher conscience, a hardwired desire to worship a diety greater then ourselves, art, music, looking billions of years ahead and billions of years in the past. We are stewards of this world and care for the animals and environment in it. What power behind evolution is responsible for this? It did not just happen by chance. If so then what chance in a quintillion could that happen on its own? No, we are not ancestral to chimp like ancestors. Maybe the extinct, archaic, humans were but not our adamic lineage. Do you really think australopithecines believed in an afterlife? Maybe some of them even witnessed to chimpanzees about jesus or another god? 😄
No, we were not made in the image of your phony god. You have NOT studied anthropology if you think this for one second.
Mythology is psychology, not science.
What kind of ape is it that appears at 44:54???
It is a chimpanzee - an albino hairless one. :-)
@@EvolutionSoup Thanks - it also looked twice as big as the others but that may be a visual trick though.
@@michaelwestenholz4458 I think just seeing the exposed musculature makes it look bigger than normal.
An ape is an ape. That's the way God made it.
An ape is an ape. That's the way God made it.
I find much of this to be highly speculative.
That _is_ how knowledge is built, though. Speculation leads to study, which leads to knowledge. That's just how it works. The discussion here is about the leading edge of study right now in the field, so, yeah, following the formula, it will include speculation. Why that is a problem to you, I cannot fathom.
Because it is it's science falsely so called, as long as Satan can keep people distracted and guessing then he has there eyes blinded.
Because it is it's science falsely so called, as long as Satan can keep people distracted and guessing then he has there eyes blinded.
Because your a foll and Satan has blinded you, you can't see the evidence of God in front of your eyes, even if it hit you in the face.
Because your a foll and Satan has blinded you, you can't see the evidence of God in front of your eyes, even if it hit you in the face.
Make our LUCA sexy again!
We hav been shitting on the chimp for years! Always wanting to know more about our " exit" from them.
Thank you for posting. Very interesting.
Our bipedalism is closely tied to our 2.6M years of obligate carnivory. We must hunt or die out. This has disastrous health and population consequences when we as a species try to break away from that adapted paradigm. Miki Ben-Dor has some great work in this area.
Actually we are Omnivores. Teeth for anything, stomach for meat, gut for veggies.
The gospel of salvation is in,
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV
Romans 10:9-13 KJV
Romans 3 KJV
George Lucas' imagination is much more interesting.
I do not need to be saved from or by your phony god.
…why on earth do u waste yr time watching watching? obviously way over yr head
@@ohyeayea6692 Apostle Paul said to beware of these snakes
Lucky bugger went to collage! We should study his anatomy.
That looks about right
YTs ANCESTORY...ABSOLUTELY👍🏿💯💯💯
We definitely are not a design of a delusion god but surely a evolution of nature
That's what Satan wants you to believe. Jesus Christ died for your sins so you could be reconciled back to your Creator.
That's what Satan wants you to believe. Jesus Christ died for your sins so you could be reconciled back to your Creator.
Maybe you cane from a monkey. I came from Adam and Eve
😂😂😂😂
@@chickenfist1554 there is documented written proof. All the evolutionist have is Darwins "THEORY "! Exactly as ots named a THEORY trying to argue against actual documented proof. It is I that has the laugh at idiots that believe a THEORY that's being proven wrong everyday 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@eternalflameofchristminist2430 _" there is documented written proof."_
Of what? Adam and Eve? Hahahahah. The only place that bs is written about is in the bible, and you can't use the bible to prove something in the bible.
_"All the evolutionist have is Darwins "THEORY "!"_
The scientific theory of evolution has more evidence than any other area of study within science. It's called proof.
_"Exactly as ots named a THEORY"_
Sounds like you're another uneducated religitard who doesn't know what 'theory' means, or how it is relevant to evolution. No surprises there 😂
Let me clear it up for you.
The definition of the term 'Theory' is:
a statement of an opinion or an explanation of an idea that is believed to be true, but might be wrong
Cambridge Dictionary
In other words, how the term is used in everyday conversation and what *YOU* assert evolution is.
_"In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence"_
American Museum of Natural History
But that's not evolution. Evolution is a *SCIENTIFIC THEORY* which is totally different and defined as:
_"A Scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts"_
American Museum of Natural History
_"The meaning of the term scientific theory as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory. In everyday speech, theory can imply an explanation that represents an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, whereas in science it describes an explanation that has been tested and is widely accepted as valid"_
National Academy of Sciences
_"However, there are two senses of theory which are sometimes troublesome. These are the senses which are defined as 'a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena' (such as evolution) and 'an unproven assumption; conjecture.' The second of these is occasionally misapplied in cases where the former is meant, as when a particular scientific theory is derided as 'just a theory,' implying that it is no more than speculation or conjecture. One may certainly disagree with scientists regarding their theories, but it is an inaccurate interpretation of language to regard their use of the word as implying a tentative hypothesis; the scientific use of theory is quite different than the speculative use of the word"_
Merriam Webster
Amen to that, these fools just hate God and they will be punished for it. Satan has them blinded so that they can't tell their eyes from the ears.
Amen to that, these fools just hate God and they will be punished for it. Satan has them blinded so that they can't tell their eyes from the ears.
You know aw🤔
Last Common Ancestor to all four great apes was the Ero-Ape rough;y 15.4 Mya. This includes hominin.
Ero ape 😂
@@Joe-li2nk 😂
DID YOU KNOW that humans are actually "devolving" now at least in a physical nature due to industrialization and now high technology.
Evolving simply means changing. There is no devolving. Humans are not the crowning achievement of some implied evolutionary hierarchy.
No the bible says all this would happen and it is so how's that for real evidence.
No the bible says all this would happen and it is so how's that for real evidence.
Matthew O'Neill is our last common ancestor?! 😳
But, seriously, is this hominids vs apes rather than Hss vs other hominids/hominins? Ie, not "what makes humans humans, and when did it happen?"
17:10
Fusion of Chromosome 2?
Hominids are not the first animal to be bipedal
Correct, there are quite a few animals that locomote, or locomoted, bipedally, including many dinosaurs, birds, and other primates. However, humans evolved into obligate upright bipeds. In addition, our fore paws - our hands - subsequently developed into hands with opposable thumbs. Together, upright bipedalism with freed hands having opposable thumbs is, to my knowledge, unique in the animal kingdom, along with a subsequently expanded brain size.
Thank you for your help, Captain Obvious. We knew about dinosaurs, including birds, already. This has nothing to do with them, however. Please try to keep up.
@@MaryAnnNytowl I appreciate you're humor and the fact that you felt the need to be an ass. Hope you feel better. You obviously didn't watch the doc
The term “Last Common Ancestor” is meaningless unless you identify the species or groups you are discussing. For example, in my family, my last common ancestors are my parents. If you are looking at life in general, the last common ancestor is some single cell organism. Therefore the title of the video is essentially meaningless if it doesn’t highlight the groups that are being analyzed.
For those who would want to misrepresent what I am saying, my point is not about the content, but about the title.
Your pedantic comment isn't even accurate, much less helpful in any meaningful way.
@@MaryAnnNytowl Poor you!
I can see your point! There was probably a lot of variation among them. And who knows how long it took for the split to finish and how much hybridization was involved. Likely, there are species from that time we don't even know about.
@@davidbrathwaite5779- Homo sapiens and chimps.
Whhhaaaaat, people still believe in evolution? Hate to brake it to you but we were created by the annunaki to mine gold.
Lol enjoying your humour 🤣
We're doing a damned poor job of it, then. And the annuki or whatever are doing an even worse job of supervision, too.
Jesus Christ died for your sins.
Jesus Christ died for your sins.
Does “extraneous issues” mean like homeschooling the kids? 😜
as for the pressure, it makes sense to think of using tools more and more keeps the hands busy , carrying things
and get it back "home"
Most likely our common ancestor with Chimps was a biped while on the ground and a brachiator in the trees, much like gibbons today.
Humans and chimpanzees were separately created from each other. The last common ancestor never existed.
Lol enjoying your humour mate 🤣🤣
Young Earth Creationists: The other flat earthers.
It's not humour. I am sorry that you are unable to figure out that humans and chimpanzees were separately created.
@@vesuvandoppelganger created by...?
That's a mystery isn't it?
Same shit, different archeologist. You should interview a geneticist. What if archeology has been looking at fossil evidence upside down all along? Here's a new idea AGAIN. The earliest hominids (say 4, 5, maybe 10 million years ago) were all bipedal all along from Day 1. But we were so violent and deadly due to our bipedalness allowing for handheld weapons (the closest rock or club) to be swung with greater lethal force killing off all less violent homo lineages and other hominid species. Our lineage of hominae slaughtered all our other human competitors and drove the other primate groups of great apes' ancestry up into the trees for protection where they developed hands and feet for climbing and knuckle walking, later not earlier. It's difficult to climb a tree and carry a rock at the same time and as the deadliest primate on the planet, we are still working on improving the solutions to that problem to this day. Hominins didnt come down from the trees, we drove the hominids up into the trees.
First of all: he's not an archaeologist -- that's a schoolboy error. He's a paleoanthropologist.
Second of all: coming up with an idea that sounds good in your head does not mean squat if you don't have the evidence to back it up. That's how science works.
Dumb
Correct