How Similar Are We To The Extinct Human Species? | With Professor Chris Stringer
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 มิ.ย. 2022
- 'The Origins Of Homo Sapiens With Professor Chris Stringer'
From where did humans originate? What did the earliest humans look like? Why did homo sapiens survive while other hominin species went extinct?
In this filmed episode of The Ancients podcast, we're on location at the Natural History Museum in London as Tristan Hughes delves into a huge topic; the origins of modern humans!
Our guest, Professor Chris Stringer, is a leading expert in human evolution. Chris takes us through his research on the origins of our species, from Neanderthals and the strange hobbit-like hominin that lived in Indonesia, fossil evidence from across the planet, and how the 'Out of Africa' theory of early human dispersal has become more complicated in the light of new research.
Listen to the full version of the podcast here: shows.acast.com/the-ancients/...
Sign up to History Hit TV now and get 7 days free: access.historyhit.com/checkout
For more history content, subscribe to our History Hit newsletters: www.historyhit.com/sign-up-to...
#homosapiens #humanevolution #historyhit
If you could use a time capsule to travel back to a point in our evolution story, where (and when) would you go? 🤔
I want to watch the Lascaux Caves being painted.
I'D go back to when Hugh Heavner (Playboy) was opening up all those clubs around the country and be a billionaire playboy. Or any other very sexually hedonistic time in our history.
As an English teacher I've often used this question to elicit conversation. Personally speaking I have some pet-places and times I'd visit. For example I'd go and visit Sigmund Freud every year on his birthday, and dressed as his mother I'd custard-pie him. You can imagine how that would have influenced him. I'm an amateur photographer so I'd quite like to photograph famous people in history. Can you imagine dating Marilyn Monroe, or standing on the Grassy Knoll in 1963. A time-machine combined with a teletransport machine, and the list of "ways I'd prank history" becomes endless.
@@richardspencer7122 Custard-pieing Freud dressed as his mum!! Imaginative and entertaining idea. 😄👍
Between Gobekli Tepe and ancient Summeria there is a huge gap in our knowledge of early settlements. Were they flooded by a black sea deluge? It is possible they were more advanced than we realize. Sea levels being 100m lower could have eventually covered up much of the evidence. That's what I want to see
Never understood the mindset that these early people were dumb. By arrogant modern standards maybe, but they were intelligent enough to to survive for hundreds of thousands of years in terrain and a world much more harsh than the one we know. In learning about all of these species, and human genetics my mind set has completely shifted. I have so much respect for these early species. They quite literally walked so we could run.
And they surely memorized a ton of stories and songs to make sense of the world and themselves.
Yep, people assume things, but there's no reason to believe the first homo sapiens were any less intelligent than us. They are the same exact species, and same size brain cavity. The only thing they lacked were the years of history to build the technology we use today. They used the same brain power we use today, to start from scratch and build our society piece by piece. They deserve all the respect and reverence in the world.
Bill Maher said we can't judge people in the past with the morals, etc of this present time. We live in the moment we are in. That's also about all I agree with Bill Maher on.
Early Homo sapiens were just as intelligent but, just less educated. And, we can thank our ancestors for most we know now.
Stupid likely didn’t survive and reproduce. Today, well maybe not so much.
I studied Paleo-anthropology in the mid 1990s. What amazes me is how much the field has evolved in the past 25 plus years. What I learned about the relationships between the various species hominoids and hominids is mostly obsolete. So many new finds, and the whole family tree has been reworked. Although, most is contested. What a fascinating field. I wish I’d made this my career. What a time the last 25 years have been in the field.
Me too. I'm glad that they're sharing it on TH-cam videos so we can continue to learn new information and follow the developing interpretations.
Uuuuu
@@Brendawallingbear huu
Uu
@@Brendawallingbear i
Chris Stringer really is such a concise teacher, clearly explaining the key milestones, the distinctive details of human variations and clarifying very well the usually murky migrations, especially the "important" 60k y.a. dispersal. He's also professional enough to note the progression of the field's prevailing thoughts and not have an "ax to grind". Sometimes too many contentious "talking heads" result in a "many scientists think..." soup that's tasty but not filling or satisfying. The interviewer was skilled at maximizing Stringer's knowledgeable presentation.
I was lucky enough to catch a series of Chris Stringer's lectures whilst on a cruise along the Amazon in 2017. Some of the things he talks about here were just emerging from research programmes back then. It's great to hear how much progress has been made in the last five years.
What an excellent interview. Prof. Stringer is always clear and informative. And give credit to the interviewer - he did his preparation and had a great set of questions.
@gilda bra Uh, if I understand you correctly, you've got problems. Serious problems.
Did you guys notice the interviewer doesn't know the difference between a hominid and homonym?
There isn’t anything good about it unless you like only including some fossil remains to the record.
@@3Kiwiana On the contrary, it was a highly informative, well-organized presentation.
Crap presentation with only partial facts
I was taught as a child 50 years ago that what makes us humans different is the ability to make tools. This has been completely overturned since then. Even corvids (crows and similar species) are capable of making three or four part tools, problem solving and planning. What a great video, thanks to both!
I think its language, that sets us apart from other humanoids
@@robbleeker4777 some argue that some animals like various birds & cetaceans have languages
@@wisemonkey9858 I've heard a very compelling argument that cooking was the key factor. Wrangham was the guys name I think. He lays out a good case
I don't think we are set apart from animals at all. It's all too easy to forget that we are animals and not superior at all.
@@sharonhobbs4144 Hahah, so true. Just a week ago I discovered this great lost novel written by an elephant but it was never published. And dogs could easily be trained as bio technicians but they just haven't been given the opportunity *sigh* Why are we humans so intent on doing all this stuff ourselves when we are no different from the rest of the animal kingdom, come on, that's pure prejudice and bigotry...
I’d really love a longer deep dive on this topic. So so interesting.
Try Stefan Milo
Great channel
@@TheMongolianMage yes! He came up in my recommendations yesterday and I have already subbed hehe thank you
You have to!
An outstanding interviewer. He asked really good questions.
Mostly obvious stuff. Stopped Chris from going deeper.
@@douglaskingsman2565 Maybe to experts it was obvious. But I don't think that was the thrust of the interview.
@@scottythetrex5197 I agree. To the laymen, this was an intriguing and engaging interview. Douglas is a pretentious scholar :)
Agreed! We are in a time of Questions!!
Yes, a very uncommon skill on ordinary TV these days, where most programmes on scientific subjects are very rushed and superficial and are hosted by "journalists" who typically know very little about the topic and / or have very little real interest in it 🙄
I never miss a chance to listen to an interview with Chris Stringer. Always learn something more. Thank you for this.
He's the archdeacon of the field, isn't he?
If you ever get the chance, would you ask the Professor; what is the scientific proof that Darwinian evolution is a scientific fact? I have asked many people that question over the years and I have not received an answer yet.
Why’s that Randy? Does this interfere with your religious beliefs??
@@joedavidson6556 That nonsense makes normal religious people wince. Anyone with half a brain and a decent education can work out that the earth is far far older than 6000 years old.
Also this was a podcast a month ago. Excellent. But seeing the reconstructions is quite helpful so I’m glad history hit went through the effort to shoot all that stuff too.
It’s so mind blowing this whole idea of multiple different humanoids species all living together in earth. If I had a time machine it would be one of the first things I’d go back and see!
You'd be disappointed.
@@weseehowcommiegoogleis3770 like you’ve been there? Gtfo hahhahaha
Probably destroyed themselves in racist wars.
@@colincampbell4261 when you say it like that it shows that you’re some butthurt woke mob member. Maybe you should put it in more academic terms instead of letting your feelings dictate it
You don't need a time machine--just take a trip to Nubian Square in Roxbury, MA. You will see some very peculiar creatures. I don't know if any of them have been carbon-dated, but they certainly don't resemble modern humans.
I wish they would also mention that about 50% of the unique genetic variations found in the Neanderthals, are found in living humans. It is just that no more than under a bit 3% has been found in any one living human. Gives a more clear picture of the significance of the admixture.
he did at .11 & 15.05.
Yeap. And a small Denisovan admixture in the far East and southern Eurasia on top of the Neanderthal if I recall correctly.
If that Neanderthal dna is present in humans, how do we know it is unique to Neanderthal? Is it because each human has a different bit of that Neanderthal dna? And otherwise all humans would have it?
@@drzaius844 The Neanderthal genome has been sequenced from multiple sources, so we have it in completion and can use it as a baseline for comparison with modern human genomes. Most populations in Africa have 0% Neanderthal DNA, but almost all populations that left Africa have somewhere between 1.5-2.5% of Neanderthal DNA in their genome. However, different populations of humans have different parts of the Neanderthal genome, so comparing which parts of the Neanderthal genome that, say, Chinese populations have vs which parts Western European populations have vs which parts Indian populations have, for example, shows us that around 20% of the complete Neanderthal genome is still with us to this day.
@@caseytwill I find it strange that anthropologists won't acknowledge the obvious: Animals that can interbreed and have fertile offspring are part of the same species. Cro Magnons were much more numerous, and the Neanderthals just blended back in with their fellow humans.
This was fascinating! Thank you so much for such an interesting video talking to a Professor who has an obvious passion for his field.
Fascinating discussion. I read Dr. Stringer's book years ago and really enjoyed it. I hope we can look forward to more Paleo-anthropology content on this channel!
I enjoy the dirt around me...one time i propagated a tomato plant..i hope i can look forward to daylight.
@@AnotherOak Is that a corny joke?
@@rogerstone3068 Roger that..10- 4 rubber- duckie.
This is what I like! Discussing fascinating stuff in a library. Love it.
This is brilliant! Thank you HH team for bringing this to us!
Fascinating. Chris Stringer should've had much more recognition by now - maybe if the bbc had latched on to him more as a go-to expert and even presenter he'd have got it.
Then again, that might've diverted him from his great skill at collecting the information and making sense of it to the rest of us.
He's made many media appearances over the years. I think it's more to do with a general lack of 'content' on the subject.
I enjoyed listening to Chris, too. However, the subject today is neither new nor comprehensive. A reasonable introduction to current and decades old research.
Oh brother. You are worried about how famous Stringer is? That is his problem and who cares?
We are here to learn the story of our origins not make a household out of a scientists. Household names are for athletes and politicians and tv and film stars. Stringer is rather none of those. His work has been backed up by DNA studies. That is what matters not how popular his full ne is!
I agree with you, but if you continue to go back in time through our evolution, then at some point our intelligence would have had to be much less. I guess that initially they assumed that the time period of the Neanderthal and other mentioned hominids had less time (than us) to evolve their brains. Assuming that we have become smarter with time, which we should have.
@@bharris0128 Well, we still hunt in packs, and pay homage to the man with the healing stones, so maybe they aren't so different as we would like to think...
Besides, "We are Them"
Our knowledge is greater but it is not to say that we are more or less "intelligent" than they were.
Their goal, to fit in, was likely even more important, living in a more dangerous world.
They adapted, or we would not be here
Only time will tell if we are as intelligent as they were!
Fascinating stuff. Brilliantly put together.
Chris Stringer is AWESOME! Such a great communicator! Thanks for another fascinating episode!
always great to hear Chris stringe speak. when i was in university, i was lucky enough to have him as a guest lecturer on several occasions on account of him been mates with Proff john Gowlett
This is what makes TH-cam great. What a great interview!
Fascinating subject. Always leaves you wanting more information.
More info, indeed, like a proper explanation of female chimp to female human genitalia. Pelvis... or bust?🙄🙄🕊🕊
Fascinating! Please, more on this subject.
Great conversation, thank you both.
Absolutely fascinating. Very well presented. Chanced upon on a Friday night trawl of youtube. Thank you you for sharing. It is so sad that, what has taken millennia to evolve has turned into what it is today. All of the knowledge and wherewithal to live successfully and peacefully together anywhere in the world, but with no appetite to do so by too many of us.
That was an excellent discussion.
Very interesting info...
I recently visited the Stillbay museum where rock art dating back 140 thousand years is currently on display. Stillbay is a small, rural town on the south coast of South Africa. It was so exhilirating to learn about the ancestry of Homo sapiens in southern Africa! Our history is a spectacular one indeed!
Check out what Edgar Cayce said about how mankind came to be on earth. I think you will find it fascinating!
One thing I have learnt, from over 66 years on the planet, is that current knowledge is contingent to a huge degree. Contingent on our Human capability to visualize and enact new ways of satisfying our inherent Human curiosity. We need to hold all factual knowledge AND wisdom lightly in the palm of our hand. As a young adult, I held the view that we (homo sapiens) were all "out of Africa". This coloured my political discussions for decades. Not so fast. I watched Paleo-anthropology deepen and develop both theoretically AND in the field. I have marveled at what Genomic and Proteomic Science - to name just two - are bringing to our world, and who knows what our scientific future repertoire will bring. As a Human, I am just so excited at what I learn EVERY DAY!
And now today I'm just another racist ignoramus.
Excellent video, great discussions. It's both interesting and (maybe) frustrating that the human origins story keeps getting more complicated with each new discovery. Subbed! 👍
Once you tell one lie, you have to keep telling them. White people are ancient clones. Believe it, Or Not..
A complex topic so well explained.
I literally could’ve sat there and listen to these two guys for hours and hours. It was so interesting! Thanks for this, I had so many questions. Some were answered; however, some of the answers given only raised more questions! It’s all so interesting! I’m a Christian so I believe I know where we came from, but to one day have the proof would just be ground shattering. Thanks, guys, it was a very nice video. 👍
I wanted more. So, so interesting. I was enthralled by this discussion of early human species. I love that the story is getting more complex. Would love to know the latest theories regarding the extinction of the other human species.
Like you, Susanna, I was/am absolutely enthralled. This was the best treatment on the origin of human sapiens I've ever seen or heard. I'm starving for more.
If you want more information please do try a book, The World Before Us by Tom Higham.
Hes been involved with dating many of the species discussed in this video. The book is informative and easy to read and has given me an understanding I didn't have before. Highly recommend. Enjoy.
@@sarahcarter798 Thank you for the recommendation. I will definitely look into this book.
Most certainly similar species would have been seen as competition for resources and also a threat , yes interbreeding also would have taken place . But history has shown that humans would have exterminated similar species
@@TheRst2001 Yes, I have to agree. Meeting the hobbit or 3 or 4 feet tall humans would have been interesting though. Less related to us and less competition than Neanderthals though.
Homo heidelbergensis too YOUNG to be an ancestor: FASCINATING. Thank you for this wonderful refresher and re-visit of the known or posited facts.
They say that as they are tied to the OOA theory, like believing that the sun orbits the Earth. They move the goalposts when faced with DNA evidence which conflicts with the original OOA theory, which has since been stretched a bit too much
@@celtspeaksgoth7251 I am pretty sure the OOA theory still stands so far. For the modern humans that is. There were former out of africa waves of homo erectus and maybe even others when i look at homo floresiensis. That the modern humans mixed with the already present distant cousins on their way is just an add but no contradiction to the theory. The one who invented the modern DNA analysis of ancient skeletons, Svante Pääbo, had the opinion that there was no mixing since the mitochondrial DNA showed no continuity of neanderthals in modern humans but he falsified his own opinion with his own studies... Today there is even the possibility to identify major mixing times between cousins. Modern humans into neanderthals app 120000 years ago. Neanderthals into modern humans mostly app 60000 years ago, before they split up to settle in asia, australia, europe and america. some between Neanderthals and Denisovans (even a 50%-50% hybrid was found), some mixing into Denisovans from probably homo erectus tribes. Even in africa some mixing with distant cousins was identified but there is not a big database about africa - yet. Even though the diversity of the DNA in Africa is about a magnitude bigger than between all people outside of africa (before modern times and travelling). Something you can expect, when only people from a small part of the whole population left africa and populated the rest of the world. DNA studies show that europeans are separated from asians and ethiopians by app 60000 years but from KhoiSan in south Africa or people in West Africa by 100000 to 120000 years. All that makes it really difficult to ignore the OOA theory.
Chris Stringer's book, "Lone Survivors", is a great read.... he's just as lucid, articulate and interesting as he is in interviews.
Really interesting talk,yes still much to discover✌️
Homo floresinesis were small due to island dwarfism, it happens when a species doesn't have enough food on a isolated island and evolves to consume less food, thus making them smaller.
I find it very interesting that Indonesians have folklore of little people, they call them the Mante tribe.
Humans could have had interactions with homo floresinesis when humans arrived in the area.
Humans could have caused their extinct, just like prehistoric Australians contributed in the extinction of Dromornis stirtoni, a giant bird that also has folklore about it.
I have no degrees, I just love researching on my off time, I always have questions that need answers.
Many of the existing inhabitants of Flores are extremely short (there was even a suggestion when Homo floresiensis was found was that it was a small modern human, and not a separate species). So I guess there are two possibilites.......either they interbred with Homo Floresiensis, or the same island-dwarfism forces have got to work on modern humans.
The possibility might exist, but stories of little people are all over the place: dwarves and gnomes aren't an invention of modern fantasy literature but deeply rooted in European folklore (Scandinavian pagan dwarves weren't necessarily small, though).
But, yeah, it's an interesting idea.
Human adaptation into dwarfism could have happened in multiple isolated locations with similar pressures. Considering how many cousins we are finding, we have to remember there very well may be many species that we will never have direct evidence of.
@@joschafinger126 yes, but those stories are generally speaking newer than the ones mentioned above regarding the island peoples. They also come into being in a place that doesn’t have historic evidence of a timeline that allows for both modern and non-modern smaller peoples to have coexisted at one point. The existence of similar stories does not invalidate the idea that this particular strain of stories were brought about by the potential meeting of two species of human.
Most major cultural traditions has mythology involving dwarves and giants. Dragons and witches too.
They challenge our idea of what is normal so that as individuals and as groups we can establish what our agreed norms and preferences are. This helps with social cohesion, comprehension and communication.
A child has to learn the difference between a donkey and a horse and only then can it see the mule.
This is excellent, a nice visual representation along with an objective and accurate explanation of where we are in tracking down our ancestors. Sharing this to my fb so others can discover along with us
Much appreciated!
So interesting; thanks for sharing!
Overall nicely done. Thank you.
I am reading Kindred Neanderthal by Rebecca Wragg Sykes and even though the chapters on stone tool techniques are abit of a chore it's great.It was published in 2021
Wonderful and informative interview. Thank you!
Can you name one scientific fact he proved during his discussion?
And to think that our methods of study concerning our fit and origins is just getting started. We were amazing right from our start.
Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.
This was a great video to get a brief overview of the current ideas around human evolution. I could watch a 30 minute video on any of the topics he outlined today!
Evolution is science fiction. GOD created Adam and Eve on a single day - the sixth day of Creation - and they were perfect, highly intelligent, beautiful, and lived long healthy lives. Atheists hate the Bible story of Creation though it is true.
I just love this information!! thank you!!
Fascinating - thanks!!
Absolutely awesome, indeed!
Absolutely terrific interview. Thanks to both.
Brilliant information
Before I pass from this world to learn the Great Mystery... I shall again smile, laugh and enjoy the sweet taste of vindication as the big brains continue to find new evidence about human origins and realize why we are what we are and the way we are.
Ah... vindication. So sweet.
The heavy brow and the sloping skull case were evolutionary features that helped the owner to survive. Protected the brain. As we needed these things less , we started to lose those features. A case to argue against the theory that only the strong survive. In us , intelligence was our strength. But as we continue on our journey the intelligence is slowly being removed . Our thinking process cannot replicate our advancements . At least most of us. Maybe a few can .
If physical strength was more important than intelligence, humans would be at the bottom of the pecking order. So many animals are bigger and stronger than us from cattle and horses to tigers.
Has 'only the strong survive' ever been a real evolutionary theory? My understanding is that the species that is best adapted, or can best adapt, to its surroundings is the survivor. That rarely hinges on brute strength.
Recently I came across the theory that great apes (and homo species are all great apes) may have pushed too far along the r-K reproduction strategy. r is lots of cheap offspring in the hopes some survive, K is fewer offspring with more parental investment (time and energy), in the hopes that they survive (at least long enough to breed).
Homo Sapiens was able to overlap offspring better that other apes, i.e. bring up more than one at once, partly because we were a more social species, so we mostly avoided the too few children pitfall.
Only the strong survive is a wrong citation. The man said: "the ones that fit best into their surrounding environment has the best chance to create more offspring". The fittest survive is a dangerous reduction that might lead to wrong conclusions.
Can you given any scientific proof to back up what you just said in your comment?
It’s amazing the lack of denisovan fossils there are considering the high levels of dna found in the earliest seafaring populations and populations that lived at high altitude. My theory (based on interest in the topic with no knowledge of anthropology), is that coastal erosion and rising sea levels, could well have washed away complete fossils. I’m fascinated by people like Stringer, Paabo and Hawks, and look forward to more exciting discoveries in the future!!
Coastal erosion is a factor for the lack of fossils but not everywhere of course. Imagine how much evidence was simply destroyed over time. For example the earth from inside caves was excavated on industrial scale as a source of phospate around the time of WW1. They were going for caves with cave bear remains apparently but who knows what else they destroyed. Possibly entirely undiscovered human ancestors we will never know about. And there is hundreds of thousands of years of further activity messing up evidence....it's a miracle we found anything at all i would say.
No doubt living near Coast and living near River dektas River estuaries , low level marshes was an area full of resources , food and materials . So yes lots of early evidence has been lost . Im sure technology will find some amazing discoveries on next few years
There definitely topographies that better promote the preservation of fossils than others. Not going to find many fossils in wet moist climates as even bones get consumed before fossilization.
Thank You for Sharing 🙏
It never ceases to amaze me how much hominids evolved physicality in such a relatively short period of time. Leads one to wonder what Homo Sapiens will look like in the next 100,000 years.
It's amazing how DNA technology has allowed science to develop a deeper understand of many things, human, animal, reptile, insect, and plants. What was once settled science is now up in the air for further research. Pretty cool!
Ya man, that micro world is the business to be in, for future genius to indulge. It probably pays pretty good too.
These are exciting times - to be young! (and smart)
Chris Stringer is just so informed and generous with his knowledge 👏
Very beautiful ring, thank you
Thank you
Hell yes, I’ve read stringer’s book, so great
he is a world leader in specie-ism -- fighting for the equality for all life; ants and tape worms - dont matter what, is equal to de human; and what of the poison fungi - he must go one step further
- votes for all
thank you very much
Very important information here tank you
I wish they would put the date the interview was recorded in the description
I was just looking over an article from the Royal Society, published 2-NOV-22. Geneticists have found Denisovan, Neaderthal, and even strong Australasian markers in South America (Amazon) and Panama.
Wow. If you keep having this type of content I’m in.
Excellent, really enjoyed it and subscribed
Love you Chris sir good job keep going on
I think, in order to trace the beginning of Homosapiens, you should first look at the evolutional history of Storks. After all, Storks do the delivery work.
that supposed to be humour right🤥
LOL,that "theory" is on a par w/ all of this evolutionary science fiction that correlate some old ape fossils as our "ancestors". The dark side of this theory is that it promulgates the idea that some humans are "lower species"...,gave justification of the brutal colonization of Africans in the 19th century...,a fact that evolutionists want to sweep under the rug.
Jokes are good, Kevin.
Very interesting 🤔👌
Awesome video...I just subscribed!
Excellent
I need a video of what the world looked like 2million years ago to today, obviously the continents shifted etc, so I'd love to see how the layout of the land looked 2MYA to today...
The continents wouldn't have shifted much in 2 million years, the main differences in land masses would have been due to sea level variation.
Not much movement in land mass, but probably significant differences in what was grassland/desert/forest compared to today.
Keep researching!
Hominids have a different number of chromosomes to apes, & it likely happened in only 1 individual. The extra flexibility for gene movement in the fused chromosomes allowed rapid hominid development, including a raised palate & reduced jaw muscles. A pretty key moment!
If you think that's a pretty key moment, do an image search of female chimp genitalia🧐🧐😲😲 😂😂🕊🕊
Not really since as you mentioned 2 are fused in humans
YOU are mistaken, sir. '' and it likely happened ......'' ? YOU GOT PROOF ? N O ! then, just another human '' ass umption'' . charles darwin, is dead, SO are all his 'false' pagan 'ideas' of ' evolution' !! THE ONLY EVOLUTION GOING ON, IS THE PERVERSENESS/ VIOLENCE/ DESTRUCTION OF US HUMAN BEINGS !
ANY THING PHYSICAL, MADE BY HUMANS, COMES OUT OF '' THE GROUND''. IT BEGINS TO DECOMPOSE/ROT FROM THE FIRST MINUTE ITS' MADE. SO WE WERE ' MADE' FROM THE DUST OF THE GROUND, BY CREATOR GOD. ALL LIFE, IN ANY FORM, IS LIKE A WINDUP CLOCK, IT RUNS DOWN, AND THEN '' DIES ''. ANYTHING, THAT EXISTS, HAS A CREATOR, THIS COMPUTER, YOUR COMPUTER, YOUR BODY, MY BODY......EVERYBODYS' BODY..... EARTH, PLANETS, GRAVITY/MAGNETISM (which is a 'force' but only for certain metals= you scientists, don't even know what it is, or what causes it from a metal) AIR PRESSURE, ALL LIFE FORMS, EACH HAVING A UNIQUE DIET, LOCATION ON EARTH, AND CLIMATE. SOME, IN THE AIR, SOME ON/IN/UNDER THE GROUND, OTHERS, IN/ON AND UNDER THE SEAS/OCEANS, RIVERS/ AQUAFIERS. ALL MICROBES, OUR GUT BACTERIA WHICH GIVES US LIFE, FOOD WE ALL CONSUME, COMING ALL OUT OF THE GROUND. SOMEOME, SOMEWHERE DESIGNED ALL THIS, AND THIS HAS BEEN FUNCTIONING FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS......WE ' came ' ON THE EARTH, CREATED BY GOD, NEARLY ONLY 6,000 YEARS AGO. THERE IS NO HUMANS, NOW DEAD, OLDER THAN THIS. DARWIN IS STILL DEAD, AND SO ARE HIS PROPOGATED LIES. EVIDENCE, IS IN YOUR DAILY FOOD, AND WITH EACH BREATH YOU/WE ALL TAKE. READ HIS MANUAL FOR US, THAT BIBLE ! its all in there !
@@MrHominid2U wat?
@@petersack5074 You do that then, & live in a world built by the science of others, that is far beyond your capacity to grasp.
Thank you 😊
11:40 Back 2018 I was like joking when I said that with more evidence and fossil finding experts will one day say that homo sapiens is an amalgamation of several hominin species!
Now an expert saying it, it makes me feel warm around my heart.
Interesting video. In the early 80’s, I worked in a factory in Brisbane and a young man came to work there as a labourer. Seeing him proved to me that homo sapiens did indeed interbreed with Neanderthals, because he looked exactly like the scientific images of Neanderthals. Short, stocky, heavy brow ridges, stooped posture, longer than proportion arms. It was shockingly uncanny. 😳
Likewise I saw a guy in a pub in Bradford, England who was as you described. It was nearly 25 years ago and it still sticks in my mind.
That’s just Queenslanders. They are all throw-backs to something.
@@paulroberts3639 😂 Spoken like a true degenerate. 🤣👍
@@paulroberts3639 throwbacks...like boomerangs.
@@paulroberts3639no way....
Thanks for a straight forward and interesting interview with a knowledgeable expert 👏
Good liar
@@edwinamendelssohn5129 lol, good one 👍 🥱
Excellent video!
Thank you for the upload. My anthropology 101 just got a major update. 70,000 years was my baseline Africa crossing. Now it is later at 60,000 years.
Let me educate you. There is evidence of man in N. American over 140,000 years ago. There are hand axes going on the island of Crete 130,000 years old. ….due to low sea levels during an Ice age it would be easy to get to the island. Pay attention. If the “out of Africa” story is wrong then everything claimed cannot be trusted either. Not science. Ouch. Francis just got an education.
@@jimdandy9118 Thank you for the education Waste-of-time Jim. Education to me is not painful at all. Lmao. I enjoy learning. There was no single "out of Africa event". The video says DNA evidence points to an African origin of today's Homo Sapiens diverse populations. I am no DNA expert but I enjoy the DNA scientists when they tell me stories like that. 60,000 years ago, Homo Sapiens who managed to get out of Africa did not enter a world devoid of other creatures who were bipedal and used tools. Thank you for the homework, Jim. Appreciate it. Stone tools from 150,000 years ago. Chimps use tools to fish for termites. Hmmmm. How does that fit into your "proof" of stone tools disputing out of Africa hypothesis.
@@francissantos7448 A hand axe is not a tool made by monkeys. There is no multiple out of Africa claims that go back far enough to account for man in N America 140,000k years ago and complex tools in Crete. …..according to the bone stories it was somewhere between 40-80,000 years ago. They also claim man didn’t reach Europe until 40,000 years ago. What you call “learning” is just falling for made up stories …..you aren’t sophisticated enough to understand those who have careers in the field are the ones telling the stories so they must come up with something to justify their existence.
@@jimdandy9118 Hello Jim. I waste my time, I feel pain when I get an education and now I am not sophisticated enough so as to be "confused" about learning. Lmao. Sure Jim, I am not sophisticated enough as a story teller. That's why I buy books and go to the cinema. Lmao. See the logic waste of time Jim?
@@francissantos7448 I’m laughing at you now “I buy books and go to Cinema”…….should be “I read books and go to college”. Fail. You do need an education.
Hats off to Dr Stringer and all concerned for this. Lucidly explained, such that even an gr8 Fool such as I can understand the content! It is interesting that the "out of Africa" events of palaeontological history are mimicked in microcosm by events since the age of the Pharaohs, in cultural terms (more my field).. Clearly it is incumbent upon us all to look after the continent of Africa; certainly so for anyone interested in the culture of Western Europe being preserved. Much food for thought in this excellent discourse. Thanks for posting! Nice one. 👍
@Seán White "I pity the fool AND I pity the fool"? Perhaps you disagree with the position that paleo anthropological events are mirrored in microcosm by such cultural developments as the mixing of pigments for paint, or the development of the strings and guitars families of musical instruments (acknowledged respectively as migratory 'out of Africa' events destined respectively for Italy and Spain)? Or perhaps there's another reason for your cavil. Let's not have a plethora of fools, shall we? 😂👍
@Seán White Yes indeed. I reserve the right to claim, as I do, if, of course, Y'r Worship will permit (or not),
An Gr8 Fool.
PS;) No false humility HERE! 👍
You still believe in the out of Africa theory?
@@yingyang1008 Yup! And you?
@@yingyang1008 The genetics alone is overwhelming in favor of the Out of Africa Theory.
I'm curious as to whether we have enough information to distinguish between Neanderthals and Denisovans just based on morphology? Genetically, they're clearly distinct, but my understanding is that if we can't get DNA to test, we're really reduced to guessing based on the location of the find? Could some fossils thought to be Neanderthal actually be Denisovan?
This might be partly due to just not having enough Denisovan fossils to study, but it might also have implications for how we define species in the absence of DNA.
I'm thinking that the Dragon man skull might actually be a Denisovan.
We White Northern Europeans actually have Neanderthal DNA in us.
@@Woodman-Spare-that-tree Sure. So do Asians and basically everyone else outside of Africa. Even sub-Saharan Africans do to a much lower extent, do to back migration.
In the moment, DNA is nearly all we have. Morphologically there are differences but with small fossils it might just be an outlier of one population. so Denisovans are slightly less robust compared to neanderthals, the skull is wider, the molar teeth are bigger. But it might be an outlier as i said. Fortunately the denisovan DNA was in extremely good quality, so some morphologic features can be gained from it. So as hair and skin color and some other things. When you see a bone in a museum it is very hard to tell. There might be lots of denisovan bones in asian museums that are thought to be something different. same with europe.
Nicely Done!
I'm a retired sr. citizen (75yrs young) living in India. I read a lot about evolution of Human race. Most of the theories state that Africa is the area from where majority of human beings originated. Secondly, all spices remained to their original size and shape, only human being seem to have changed to this days appearance. How the human race spread across the world, and why there are discrepancies in that. While many spices have disappeared due to ice age phenomenon, volcanos, flood etc; how cum human race survived and continued to grow, change and sustain till date. There is NO mention about cultivation or shelter and the developments of various life supporting mechanisms. Development of voice from noise, reading, learning about evolution of language, writing and so on; Between all these developments, I think there are a whole volume of missing links, which as and when found, could evolve into a clear picture about our progress over millions of years.
I always wondered how the different body types (ectomorph mesomorph endomorph) came to be. Is it related to the mixing with different humans, like neanderthals or denisovans? Do other apes have similar types of metabolism?
Apes are way more genetically diverse than humans
sheldon's somatotypes isnt a real thing.
That's not a scientific conclusion on "body types". It is an invention of a particular time that benefits sellers of dietic, weight, workout, psychological and etc, etc, etc clap trap. Phrenology is a similiar thing.
Bodytypes are bunk. Some populations of humans seemingly do have larger average bone mass, but I'm not sure that it makes the somatype stuff relevant. Lots of variation within populations regardless. It's hard to draw a line between populations. Within there is a lot of variation in bone size.
Good theory, however some DNA evidence doesn't quite fit but it's great that discussion is happening. Dogma such as the "out of Africa" theory should not distract us from using the scientific method on all findings 👍
Like what? And the extent of diversity of hominin fossils before 2mya outside Africa is nothing compared to that inside. How can you overlook this?
@@DivyenduKashyap Exactly, the OOA theory means we have predominantly been looking in Africa. Now we know OOA is not correct to the extent we once thought, due to DNA evidence, we now have to make up "ghost" hominids to try and make the DNA evidence work. With this interview I feel alot better as experts in their field recognise that the foundation of OOA is not solid and everything is actually a working hypothesis in this field of study. 👍
@@hoodwinktheranger2967 That's incorrect, he even states at 12:25 that genetic scientists place the first modern humans leaving Out of Africa around 60,000 years to populate the rest of the world.
@@hoodwinktheranger2967 some DNA evidence doesn't quite fit? Like what exactly? You know more than our genetic scientists? No! You don't. A ghost population does not debunk out of Africa. Not one scientist have stated this ever. Try again but with facts this time.
@@ashelywilliams1718 listen to this guy again Ashley. I rate him 👍 he says the OOA has changed from 20 years ago.. and it has, significantly. Of course we can see their was a group 60000 years ago that left Africa, but our story before this has changed significantly in the last 20 years and the grand OOA theory is no more. I have read our genetic scientists papers and books, you should to. Its all very interesting and shows that what we thought to be correct 20 years ago isn't but also we should not make the same mistakes again jumping to conclusions like ghost hominids. Nice chatting with you Ashley 🙂
Thanks!
Thanks so much Peter!
Part of the problem with discussing human origins is defining exactly what we mean by "human." In classical paleo-anthropologoc terms, it means human in form - morphology. But the basic skeletal form of early hominids 5 million years ago is very similar to our own, and no one regards them as "human." The real difference between species is in the skull. Thus, the academic debate is whether Skull A or Skull B is more nearly like that of a modern human. Yet that begs the question of what is a "human." A very good case can be made that humanity should be defined in terms of behaviors; when did our predecessors first begin to act like us. And by that measure, the origins of homo sapiens are far more recent, no earlier than 300,000 years ago, and perhaps less than 70,000 years ago. Around 50,000 years ago, our predecessors in Europe began inventing new tools, building shelters, making fire, creating elaborate trading networks, drawing figures on cave walls, and demonstrating a capacity for higher abstract thought. Those behaviors were new. Moreover, they were decidedly "human," and reflect changes that occurred inside the skull -- the evolution of a large neo-cortex -- that made us truly human. We should look for the origins of homo sapiens inside the skull and in behaviors 70,000 years ago and more recently. Our many bipedal ancestors prior to that date were proto-humans, interesting and worth studing, but not yet truly human.
"Human" isn't a scientific term, so it doesn't really need precise definition in that way. It can be contextual.
It's generally used either for Homo sapiens or for the genus Homo, depending on the context.
Homo sapiens dates back to that roughly 300,000 years ago. It's awkward to suggest a new species based only on behavior - behavior changes with culture and technology even without any kind of speciation event. Was there a change in capability some 70K years ago or merely in behavior? If we're going to treat it as capability, it's worth considering that behavior then remained quite consistent with very slow changes until some 12,000 years ago with the beginning of large complex sites. Should that be considered a new species as well? The pace of change has increased again and again since then. It's obvious that technological and cultural changes today aren't tied to evolution of our brains, so why should we assume that past such changes were? Just because they were slower?
From braincases we've studied, I don't believe there are significant differences in organization between pre-70K H. sapiens and modern ones. There are certainly differences between us and Neanderthals, which could well relate to our later advances.
We are the freaks. Just look what we have done to our environment.
What I really appreciate is the examples of our ancient ancestors not being the cliché dark skinned hominids we're used to seeing, just because they originate in Africa.
The dark skin mutation, probably emerged after the common ancestor of Denisovans, Neanderthals and Sapiens split from the Basal West African Archaic Ancestor, who the Yoruba, Esan and Mende share 6-19% of their dna with.
Regardless of the location, equatorial or hot climates require dark skin to defend against skin cancer. Just look at the skin cancer rate among white and aboriginal Australians.
@@samreh6156 the ancestors of Archaic Hominids did not originate on the equator, they originated in the then tropics of East Africa.
The oldest extant lineage of modern anatomical humans the San, do not have dark skin, and when shaved our closest primate cousins tend to be light, with their dark coarse body hair, compensating for the lack of melanin.
@@MKRex a hot climates for sure, which required dark skin
@@samreh6156 tropics, are usually characterised by their rain and forest canopy, open savannah and desert terrain, might be what you're confusing tropical rainforest with. Particularly after a glacial maximum, ie ice age was just abating.
@@MKRex Whatever. I trust the science and trust what has been discovered concerning the skin color of early moderns out of Africa.
What is puzzling is that Professor Stringer says that when they compare skeletons of early humans, they are much more robust than that of modern humans. Why the 6 or 7 species of humans
disappeared will remain the number one question.
Maybe higher cognitive ability meant less reliance on brute force.
Cognition? As the only remaining "Homo" species, I'd hazard a guess.
@@elmowedgewood Early Homo sapiens had a larger brain size than modern humans.
@@kennethfisher7013 so did Neanderthals, but toolmaking evidence still points to a cognition and/or cultural advancement in later HS. Early h.sapiens did not appear to succeed when they first met Neanderthals in the Levant, but later migrations, probably with new tech and better social organisation swept all before them. Cranial capacity is an important indicator, but not the only pointer to cognitive ability. Neanderthals were incredible people though, but climate conditions, small, dispersed gene pools and bad timing were against them.
Given what we've seen lately why aren't we considering immune systems? If we had generally stronger ones coupled with faster reproduction that would explain a lot.
would be wonderful to take this discussion and relate it to the three main skull types... in existence today.
Amazing update on Origins of Homo Species......look forward to more discoveries. How far we have come in our understanding in the last two decades....
Love learning about our ancestors
I find these sorts of videos fascinating, one of the big questions that seems to be unresolved is why we eventually out competed the other Hominids. Gleaning information from other sources, it seems that modern humans where primarily pursuit hunters whilst others hominids were often ambush hunters who took on their prey face on. We as pursuit hunters had lost our body hair along with other adaptations that promoted stamina. Could the answer be something as simple as no body hair or not. I have no real evidence for this its just an idea that popped into my head. I wonder what some one with a more grounded knowledge would think of that idea.
Denk dat het zeker zo zou kunnen zijn. Menselijke jagers achtervolgde inderdaad hun prooi tot deze van vermoeidheid neerviel. Zelfs sommige stammen in Afrika jagen nog op deze manier.
I think language was the turning point, enabling huge brain growth and the exchange of information. Of course, I could be wrong!
@@TerriblePerfection actually I think you are right that language was a very big step forward for hominids, I just think it was later than the loss of bodily hair and improvements in hunting techniques. To reach the hunting cooperation level of wolves only needs rudimentary communication, which is very similar to the pursuit tactics hominids are believed o have used at that time. Also I think brain groth came first and language was a product of the enlarged brain capacity.
On major issue/problem is that - for essentially personal career reasons - the number of different Homo species identified on fossils seems to expand rapidly, whilst the inter-relationship between them isnt well understood at all. The question of whether Erectus fossils evolved over time and whether late forms are distinctly different (species wise) is an open question.
The Neanderthal/Denisovan/Missing Other DNA evidence of inter-breeding (both ways) with Sapiens really does suggest that there are physically similar looking groups with similar, but distinctive DNA that interacted reasonably frequently over time to create us.
Utterly fascinating. I’ve often wondered as a layman about black textured hair, when chimpanzees who have a common ancestor with homosapiens, have long stemmed luscious hair but still deal with the heat quite adequately; it then occurred to me that their common ancestor could have brought this amalgam of straight hair/curly hair gene with them out of Africa where it was the recessive gene, mixed with Neanderthals/other hominis absorbed their hair texture and it became the dominant hair texture of future hominins in Europe/Asia etc - just a theory but I would love Professor Stringer’s (or others) educated and profound comments on this - or this strictly paleobiology?
Apparently Homo flores... may still exist on the islands - according to local Homo sapiens
Great video, Dr Stringer is always passionate about this subject and the recent discoveries show that human ancestry is just like humans themselves, messy.
A question for Profesor Stringer if he ever runs across this: Would you say that the physical difference between these species, would be like the difference between lions and tigers? Wolves and coyotes? Grissleys and polar bears?
Thanks