Humans Did Not Speciate For Two Million Years

Posted on November 15, 2013 by Jeffrey Daniels

http://www.united-academics.org/magazine/earth-environment/anthropology-archaeology-skull-hominids/

[As I mentioned last time I am a longtime supporter of this theory-DD]

Humans Did Not Speciate For Two Million Years      

Newly found fossils suggest hominids are ‘breeds’ of the same species.

I remember hearing exactly this sort of thing in my anthropology/archaeology courses while I trudged through university attaining my first degree.  Maybe you’ve also taken similar courses in the past, and have heard the same kind of thing. Well, a recent discovery in Dmanisi serves to lend much credence to this theory after all.
The skull, named ‘Skull 5’, appears to have traits belonging to African hominids dating from at least two million years ago, and also traits belonging to Eurasian hominids dating to around 1.5 million years ago.  The skull was found in a pit with four other humanoid fossils, each of them slightly different from the others. And with several animals, all dating to around the same time.
The hybrid appearance of Skull 5 has made the researchers studying it begin to turn towards the theory of human evolution that basically says we’re all still Homo erecti – just different ‘breeds’, so-to-speak, of the original erectus line. In other words, our entire hominid line hasn’t speciated (formed new species) at all in over two million years.
For two million years our line has been diversifying, especially once we started migrating out of Africa. I imagine the main thing that would keep us from speciating during this time would be a healthy amount of interbreeding continuously occurring across vast expanses of our population.  Of course, this tradition continues, definitely moreso, to this day.
So, instead of wracking one’s head in futility trying to construct a ‘normal’ phylogeny for the hominid line, as is usually possible for most other animals, one should construct more of a bubble-shaped phylogenetic tree and simply label the various ‘buddings’ as different kinds of a one particular species of hominid – whatever one we wish to go with.
That means we must start to think like this


As opposed to this:

Reference:
Ann Gibbons (2013). Stunning Skull Gives a Fresh Portrait of Early Humans Science DOI: 10.1126/science.342.6156.297

Zana and the Old African Element

The complication with the Sykes finding that the DNA of Zana the Wild Woman contains DNA from a female line that stayed in Africa and did not mingle with the Out of Africa people is that the people that stayed in Africa did include a more archaic form that evidently interbred with the local equivalents of Neanderthals (The Kabwe type AKA "Rhodesian man")

 

 

In 2011, DNA tested from African hunter-gatherer groups (Biaka Pygmies, San, and Mandinka) concluded that part of the genetic material found in these modern African populations was inserted into the African genome approximately 35,000 years ago from a now-extinct species, not found in the DNA of non-Africans, that broke away from the modern human lineage around 700,000 years ago. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110905/full/news.2011.518.html
 In 2012 another study was done testing DNA from 3 sub-Saharan African populations (Pygmies, Hadza and Sandawe), indicating that the ancestors of the African populations bred with different archaic species of hominins, probably 40,000 years ago.[but possibly up to 10000 years ago]
 http://www.nature.com/news/hunter-gatherer-genomes-a-trove-of-genetic-diversity-1.11076

A report in New Scientist dated January 16, 1993, entitled "On the Origin of Races" stated, it was reported that evolutionary anthropologists are now proposing nothing less than the complete abolition of Homo erectus, on the grounds that the species is insufficiently distinct from Homo sapiens. The report proposed that all fossil remains of Homo erectus and Archaic Homo sapiens (including Neanderthals) should be reclassified into a single species, Homo sapiens which is to be subdivided only into various contemporaneous geographic races. The various assorted terms such as Homo erectus, Solo Man, Neanderthal Man, Rhodesian Man and so on simply mean the same as “Us.”

 

This statement is not universally accepted, however it is the one I follow myself.

Sykes on Almas Zana's DNA: Yes....and NO

The story of ‘Zana’ the Wild Woman, as Explained by DNA analysis

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/was-russian-bigfoot-actually-an-african-slave

 

The following news story is reproduced under the terms of the definition of Fair Use. Thank You.,

 

Was Russian ‘Bigfoot’ actually an African slave?.

 

Published: 01/11/2013

Bryan Sykes, Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Oxford, has carried out DNA tests on saliva samples taken from descendants of Zana – a so-called ‘wild woman’ captured in the late 19th century in southern Russia, who local people believe was an ‘Almasty’.
Professor Sykes’ research (part of a worldwide analysis of alleged Bigfoot samples), has yielded a remarkable result: that Zana’s ancestry was 100% Sub-Saharan African and that she was most probably a slave brought to the region by the ruling Ottomans.
To answer the riddle and establish what species she belonged to, Professor Sykes has tested samples from six of Zana’s living descendants. He has also recovered DNA from a tooth taken from the skull of one of her sons, Khwit. Such work is highly specialized and Sykes was the first geneticist ever to extract DNA from ancient bone.
But the big surprise in Sykes’ results was that Zana’s DNA is not Caucasian at all, but African. Khwit’s tooth sample confirms her maternal African ancestry and the saliva tests on the six living descendants show that they all contain African DNA in the right proportions for Zana to have been genetically 100% sub-Saharan African. 

“The most obvious solution that springs to mind is that Zana or her ancestors were brought from Africa to Abkhazia as slaves, when it was part of the slave trading Ottoman Empire, to work as servants or labourers,” says Professor Sykes. “While the Russians ended slavery when they took over the region in the late 1850s, some Africans remained behind. Was Zana one of them, who was living wild in the forest when she was captured?“
But that theory would not explain her extraordinary features, described by reliable eyewitnesses. There is an even more intriguing alternative theory. Having carefully studied the skull of Zana's son, Khwit, Professor Sykes believes there are some unusual morphological skull features – such as very wide eye sockets, an elevated brow ridge and what appears to be an additional bone at the back of the skull – that could suggest ancient, as opposed to modern, human origins.
And Sykes has raised the bold theoretical possibility that Zana could be a remnant of an earlier human migration out of Africa, perhaps tens of thousands, of years ago. If correct, Zana could be evidence of a hitherto unknown human 'tribe', dating from a distant time when the human species was still evolving and whose ancestors were forced into remote regions, like the Caucasus mountains, by later waves of modern humans coming out of Africa.
One of the Russian Almasty hunters, Dr Igor Burtsev, offers testimony in the Channel 4 documentary that may back this theory up. He unearthed Khwit's skull in 1971 and a few years later, showed it to a group of anthropologists in Moscow. They were, he says 'amazed', and identified a mix of 'primitive' and 'progressive' (modern) features in the skull. Lacking the scientific tools at Sykes' disposal, they could take it no further. Now Sykes is able to propose the theory with some confidence.
It is only a theory at this stage - and a bold and speculative one at that. But Professor Sykes intends to study it much further before reaching his final conclusions.
Zana’s story will feature in Bigfoot Files on Channel 4 on Sunday, November 3rd at 8.00pm. In the programme Mark Evans also meets former heavyweight boxing champion of the world, seven foot tall Nikolai Valuev, who admits to having a bit of a Neanderthal look himself. He is now Duma Deputy (the equivalent of an MP) for Kemerovo in Siberia and fascinated in Almasty. The programme also investigates some of the other claimed sightings of the creatures in Russia.
The series, made by Icon Films, examines the stories behind famous Bigfoot sightings and Mark Evans meets people who believe passionately that other species of hominid exist. A book by Professor Sykes about his research The Yeti Enigma: A DNA Detective Story will be published by Coronet in Spring 2014.
The programme is available to view and there are images available.

Read the story of Zana  here.

Tip: Matthew Robinson

Zana’s son Khwit

 

[CRITICISM: The definite statement that the DNA was Not Caucasian at all but was Sub-Saharan African carries a somewhat different interpretation than Sykes has stated. Recently there have been several news stories about the DNA series which is unique to Africans and NOT shared with the Out of Africa crowd (especially Cauasians) at all. Such stories have been reprinted at Frontiers of Anthropology recently.

The gist of the theory is that the Africans inside Africa were breeding with a local distinct (and now extinct) variety of humans unknown outside of Africa and the inference has been made that this was "Rhodesian Man" or the local variety of H. heidelbergensis /H. sapiens heidelbergensis instead of having anything to do with the Neanderthals or Denisovans.

Saying that Zana's DNA was of a special kind of DNA NOT found in Caucasians might well imply the exact oppositre of what he is claimimg: Zana could be a relic "Rhodesian man" and the structure of Khvit's head and face definitely has that appearance.-DD]

Bigfoot Chicks With African Archive Report

This old article from 1867 is an incredible account of a lion hunter's run in with a 7 foot tall African Wild Man. When the hunter discovers that someone was taking his catch, he sets out in pursuit of the culprit. What happens next is truly shocking. You will be sucked into this story and amazed at the drama that unfolds when one man loses his life and the lion hunter has a show down with an alleged Bigfoot.


See article below.



Frederick, Maryland, Saturday, July 30, 1892
Africa's Giant Wild Man
The Fierce Savage Who Was Slain By A Lion Hunter

Late in 1867 a fatal epidemic broke out among the captive lions in all parts of the world. It was very like the epizooty which struck the horses five years later, but nearly all the lions died, and so the price rose 200 or 300 percent. This excited great activity among the famous lion hunters of Quillimane, East Africa, who usually capture the animals by the covered pit method.

The agent of a great Hamburg animal house penetrated to the main lion range near Lake Nyassa, employed forty-two negroes and had captured one lion and a few inferior beasts when he discovered that some mysterious creature was interfering with his pits. One morning his men found a magnificent male lion dead in a pit. Apparently he had been killed by a sharp pointed stake, and there were huge tracks about, somewhat like those of a gorilla.

"I was satisfied," says the agent in his report,"that no one but a man could make use of such a pole. Indeed the fact of the pole's being hardened by fire was proof sufficient that a man was engaged in the work. He must be a native of course, and he must also be a wild man. After holding a council with three or four of my best men we started out in parties of ten to hunt down the wild man. Each of my men had a cheap English musket and knew how to use it , and the order was to fire at the man at sight. To brace up the courage of the natives I offered a reward of ten dollars to whoever should fire the lucky shot. The four parties took different directions. The one I headed went to the north, where there was a long stretch of almost impenetrable thicket, with various paths traversing it in different directions.

"We had turned back and the last man had just fallen in line when I heard a shot and a cry of alarm. The three natives next behind me dodged under my arm and made off down the path, while the others were so upset that it took me three or four minutes to ascertain what had happened. The wild man had been concealed behind a big tree near the path. He leaped out and struck the last man a blow with his club which killed him. The wild man bounded into the brush and disappeared but my men were panic stricken.

"When I announced my intention next morning to hunt him the whole gang of blacks broke into lamentations. One young man, however, said: "I see, master, that if we do not kill this thing he will kill all of our lions and many of us. If we move away he will probably follow. It is our business to kill him at once. I am only a young man, but I will go with you and do my best."

FACING THE WILD MAN

"We agreed that in case we met the wild man face to face he was to fire and then drop to the earth and give me a show. About three miles from camp, and as the path ascended a ridge, my companion halted, pointed at a broad tree on the left and whispered, "Master, do yo see that his house is there among the branches?"

"I could make out a platform of sticks and branches, and now I took the advance. My weapons were a rifle and a revolver. We crept cautiously forward until right under the platform, and after a few seconds both of us made out a black foot and leg hanging down between the poles. The wild man was at home, but the next thing was how to deal with him. I had more fear of his getting away than I had of his hurting us. I finally posted myself to the west, believing he would make for a thicket in that direction as soon as disturbed, and at a signal the young man fired at the nest. The report of his gun was followed by a most unearthly yell and it was yet ringing in my ears when I saw a dark object dropping off the platform to the earth. It was the wild man. The young man stood where he had fired, and before he could realize what was happening the monster was upon him. He was picked up and flung almost at my feet and as he landed he called to me: "I am not much hurt, master? Be sure that you kill him for he is a terribly strong fellow!"

"The man didn't seek safety in flight. On the contrary, he picked up a limb, broke off a part of it for a club and slowly advanced upon us, his eyes flashing, his teeth gritting and his face expressing fury. I had my rifle to my face and I let him come within ten feet before I fired. He was shot between the eyes and he fell back so dead that he never moved a finger. When we came to examine him we go frightened. His height was seven feet by the tape line, and he seemed to be all muscle.

"I haven't the least doubt that a slap from his big right hand would have killed any of us stone dead. He had tremendous shoulders, with muscles bunched up in a wonderful way, while his fingers were long and the nails on them almost like claws. Hundreds of natives came to look at the body, but none could remember of having seen the man before. Freed from his interference with our enterprise we had no more trouble, and during the next sixty days we caught and dispatched to the coast eleven handsome lions as ever. "

http://bigfootchicks.blogspot.com/2012/10/lion-hunter-has-showdown-with-african.html?spref=fb

Dale Drinnon I had heard something like this long ago, but not the same report: in the other report the Wild Man was throwing rocks. his would be the biggest form of "Mr X" and the only one that is really worthwhile: and it sounds like a survival of Rhodesian Man or Kabwe man, which could regularly be up to 6'6" tall and was a close relative of the Heidelberg man in Eurasia


Rhodesian Man, clip art