Anthropogeny is the original study of human origins
Anthropogeny is the original study of human origins.
During the time of Darwin, anthropogeny was the study of human origins. Then it was taken over by its sub-discipline paleoanthropology, with focus on fossils found in dry parts of Africa.
This is the aquatic ape hypothesis, made to fit with all fossil finds, and the DNA and anatomy of humans and chimps.
|
|
Chimpanzees and gorillas evolved in central and western Africa with no fossils being formed. What about humans?
DNA evidence shows us that the last common ancestor of gorillas and chimpanzees lived about 10 Ma ago. The two branches that diverged − gorillas (Gorilla) and chimpanzees (Pan) − look rather similar today (ape-like) because the habitats they evolved in were about the same. They did not change much from their common ancestor. |
|
Did student Tom Gray plant the Lucy fossils, and then trick professor Donald Johanson into discovering them?
It has been said that those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. The history of Piltdown Man was not well known in 1974 when the fossils of Lucy were discovered. Piltdown Man was a hoax; A knowledgeable trickster planted some bone fragments, and then took eager experts to the place where they could personally help discover them. The hoax was left unexposed for about 40 years, from 1912 to 1953, because no impartial scientists were allowed to test the bones. The Piltdown Man was a mix of bones from a human and an orangutan. When they were finally tested for fluorine absorption, the minimal amounts of fluorine that they contained showed that they did not belong to the same individual, and they were not really fossils at all. by Donald C. Johanson and Kate Wong |
|
Bodies that were not made for a hot, dry East African climate
Minibuses with no air conditioning and with an extra heater were probably made for a cold climate, not a hot one. Using similar logic, human bodies, with no fur for sun protection, and with a sweat-cooling system that uses up to a liter of salty fluid per hour, were probably not made for the hot, dry East African climate. I think the human body evolved on rainy Bioko island, off the coast of western Africa.
Icy Norwegian roads are salted in the winter, and cars here get rusty. I have a 30-year old Mercedes minibus that I use for hauling rocks and students on geological field trips. It is the fourth old minibus that I have had. When these minibuses are too rusty to last much longer, they are sent to Africa, where the rusting will cease, and they can be used for many more years as share-taxis.
It you looked objectively at one of these rusty minibuses in Africa, you would understand that it was not in its original habitat. It might still have snow tires with the metal studs removed. You might notice its built-in heater under the back seats. It has an electric engine-warmer, so that it can be pre-warmed to start on cold winter mornings. It has insulated passenger windows, that cannot be opened on hot days. And it has no air conditioner at all.
You don't see such old minibuses here in Norway, but you might fine a few in East Africa. This is similar to gorillas and chimpanzees. You won't find fossils of them in their original habitats of central and western Africa. That is because bones decay in those habitats, and don't survive as fossils. But three chimpanzee teeth have been found in East Africa. No other fossils are known of chimpanzees or gorillas.
Human features suggest to me that human bodies were built for a place like Bioko island. It is one of the ten rainiest places on Earth, so there is plenty of fresh water and salt. The temperatures in the air and the ocean are comfortable all year round. Fur would not be needed there, because the nights are never cold, and there is no blazing sun that would burn the skin during the day. |
|
Speculating about fossils is fun, but does not explain human traits or human origins
A dream of every paleoanthropologist is to find a fossil that "can rewrite early human evolution." A lesser goal is to find a fossil that allows a paleoanthropologist to claim a new hominin species. A still lesser goal, but also rarely achieved, is to find a fossil fragment that can be related with any confidence to a hominin species that has already been proposed.
|
|
Johanson's 1981 version of the 1974 Lucy fossil discovery
When Gray told the others about the discovery, he said "We've got it. We've got The Whole Thing." It sounds like the others knew what "Whole Thing" he was talking about.
Donald C. Johanson & Maitland A. Edey Simon & Schuster Paperbacks 1981
Prologue
As a paleoanthropologist−one who studies the fossils of human ancestors−I am superstitious. Many of us are, because the work we do depends a great deal on luck. The fossils we study are extremely rare, and quite a few distinguished paleoanthropologists have gone a lifetime without finding a single one. I am one of the more fortunate. This was only my third year in the field at Hadar, and I had already found several. I know I am lucky, and I don't try to hide it. That is why I wrote "feel good" in my diary. When I got up that morning I felt it was one of those days when you should press your luck. One of those days when something terrific might happen.
Throughout most of that morning, nothing did. Gray and I got into one of the expedition's four Land-Rovers and slowly jounced our way to Locality 162. This was one of several hundred sites that were in the process of being plotted on a master map of the Hadar area, with detailed information about geology and fossils being entered on it as fast as it was obtained. Although the spot we were headed for was only about four miles from camp, it took us half an hour to get there because of the rough terrain. When we arrived it was already beginning to get hot.
At Hadar, which is a wasteland of bare rock, gravel and sand, the fossils that one finds are almost all exposed on the surface of the ground. Hadar is in the center of the Afar desert, an ancient lake bed now dry and filled with sediments that record the history of past geological events. You can trace volcanic-ash fall there, deposits of mud and silt washed down from distant mountains, episodes of volcanic dust, more mud, and so on. Those events reveal themselves like layers in a slice of cake in the gullies of new young rivers that recently have cut through the lake bed here and there. It seldom rains at Hadar, but when it does it comes in an overpowering gush−six months' worth overnight. The soil, which is bare of vegetation, cannot hold all that water. It roars down the gullies, cutting back their sides and bringing more fossils into view.
Gray and I parked the Land-Rover on the slope of one of those gullies. We were careful to face it in such a way that the canvas water bag that was hanging from the side mirror was in the shade. Gray plotted the locality on the map. Then we got out and began doing what most members of the expedition spent a great deal of their time doing: we began surveying, walking slowly about, looking for exposed fossils.
Some people are good at finding fossils. Others are hopelessly bad at it. It's a matter of practice, of training your eye to see what you need to see. I will never be as good as some of the Afar people. They spend all their time wandering around in the rocks and sand. They have to be sharp-eyed; their lives depend on it. Anything the least bit unusual they notice. One quick educated look at all those stones and pebbles, and they'll spot a couple of things a person not acquainted with the desert would miss.
Tom and I surveyed for a couple of hours. It was now close to noon and the temperature was approaching 110. We hadn't found much: a few teeth of the small extinct horse Hipparion; part of the skull of an extinct pig; some antelope molars; a bit of a monkey jaw. We had large collections of all these things already, but Tom insisted on taking these also as added pieces in the overall jigsaw puzzle of what went where.
"I've had it," said Tom. "When do we head back to camp?"
"Right now. But let's go bak this way and survey the bottom of that little gully over there."
The gully in question was just over the crest of the rise where we had been working all morning. It had been thoroughly checked out at least twice before by other workers, who had found nothing interesting. Nevertheless, conscious of the "lucky" feeling that had been with me since I woke, I decided to make that small final detour. There was virtually no bone in the gully. But as we turned to leave, I noticed something lying on the ground partway up the slope.
"That's a bit of a hominid arm," I said.
"Can't be. It's too small. Has to be a monkey of some kind."
We knelt to examine it.
"Much too small," said Gray again.
I shook my head. "Hominid."
"What makes you so sure?" he said.
"That piece right next to your hand. That's hominid too."
"Jesus Christ," said Gray. He picked it up. It was the back of a small skull. A few feet away was part of a femur: a thighbone. "Jesus Christ," he said again. We stood up, and began to see other bits of bone on the slope: a couple of vertebrae, part of a pelvis−all of them hominid. An unbelievable, impermissible thought flickered through my mind. Suppose all these fitted together? Could they be parts of a single, extremely primitive skeleton? No such skeleton had ever been found−anywhere.
"Look at that," said Gray. "Ribs."
A single individual?
"I can't believe it," I said. "I just can't believe it."
"By God, you'd better believe it!" shouted Gray. "Here it is. Right here!" His voice went up into a howl. I joined him. In that 110 degree heat we were jumping up and down. With nobody to share our feelings, we hugged each other, sweaty and smelly, howling and hugging in the heat-shimmering gravel, the small brown remains of what now seemed almost certain to be parts of a single hominid skeleton lying all around us.
"We've got to stop jumping around," I finally said. "We may step on something. Also, we've got to make sure."
"Aren't you sure, for Christ's sake?"
"I mean, suppose we find two left legs. There may be several individuals here, all mixed up. Let's play it cool until we can come back and make absolutely sure that it all fits together."
We collected a couple pieces of jaw, marked the spot exactly and got into the blistering Land-Rover for the run back to camp. On the way we picked up two expedition geologists who were loaded down with rock samples they had been gathering.
"Something big," Gray kept saying to them. "Something big. Something big."
"Cool it," I said.
But about a quarter of a mile from camp, Gray could not cool it. He pressed his thumb on the Land-Rover's horn, and the long blast brought a scurry of scientists who had been bathing in the river. "We've got it," he yelled. "Oh, Jesus, we've got it. We've got The Whole Thing!"
That afternoon everyone in camp was at the gully, sectioning off the site and preparing for a massive collecting job that ultimately took three weeks. When it was done, we had recovered several hundred pieces of bone (many of them fragments) representing about forty percent of the skeleton of a single individual. Tom's and my original hunch had been right. There was no bone duplication.
But a single individual of what? On preliminary examination it was very hard to say, for nothing quite like it had ever been discovered. The camp was rocking with excitement. That first night we never went to bed at all. We talked and talked. We drank beer after beer. There was a tape recorder in the camp, and a tape of the Beatles song "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" went belting out into the night sky, and was played at full volume over and over again out of sheer exuberance. At some point during that unforgettable evening−I no longer remember exactly when−the new fossil picked up the name of Lucy, and has been so known ever since, although its proper name−its acquisition number in the Hadar collection−is AL 288-1
|
|
The discovery of the Lucy bones as a "surface find" is geologically impossible
Bones from a single animal lie buried within a single horizontal layer of sediment. A few million years later, erosion starts to expose the layer. Gullies are carved into the soft sediment, and part of the layer is exposed in the slope of the hill. Each time there is a hard rain, a centimeter or more of sediment can be loosened from the edge of the slope, and washed downhill. This rain can free a fragment of one of the bones, which also moves down the hill, and can be found loose on the ground. |
|
Paleoanthropology promotes untestable evidence and unfounded beliefs
Manuscript in preparation, May 2020.
(This is an early version of the manuscript published in August 2020 in Researchgate.) |
|
The story of human evolution is based on fictional fossil evidence
Manuscript in preparation, with hyperlinks to cited references.
August 16, 2020. |
|
Mammal fossils in Africa, map
The 6-volume work (3760 pages) Mammals of Africa, by Jonathan Kingdon and others https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/mammals-of-africa-9781408122570/
shows a map of all the known mammalian fossil sites (Volume 1, page 41). Here we see Hadar (8), Turkana (14), Olduvai (24), Laetoli (25), Taung (33), Sterkfontein (32), all famous for hominin fossils. Mammalian fossils are only found in savanna areas and other relatively dry parts of Africa. That does not mean that there were no mammals living and evolving in wet parts of Africa. It simply shows where fossils can be preserved and found. |
|
The earliest human footprints (Laetoli) occur in lake sediments that have been misinterpreted as datable volcanic ash
The earliest human footprints (Laetoli) occur in lake sediments that have been misinterpreted as datable volcanic ash
Allan Krill, Department of Geoscience, NTNU, Trondheim, krill@... An alternative paradigm of human evolution is the “aquatic-ape hypothesis,” in which our ancestors evolved naked skin, long head-hair, large brain, bipedal gait, subcutaneous fat (blubber), descended larynx, hooded nose, and all other human features, during a period of semiaquatic habitat. This unorthodox theory has been ridiculed in paleoanthropology for 60 years, just as the “continental-drift hypothesis” was ridiculed in geology in its time. The current paradigm is that human ancestors evolved on the eastern African savanna and were bipedal as early as 3.5 Ma ago. I contend that this history is based on errors — falsifications like Piltdown Man (e.g. Lucy, Turkana Boy, Little-Foot) — and geological misinterpretations (e.g. Laetoli). Humans may instead have evolved from chimpanzees that became isolated on Galapagos-like volcanic islands: proto-Bioko in western Africa, where fossils could not be preserved. No mammal fossils are known in any of the areas where chimpanzees speciated. The human footprint track at Laetoli is said to be 3.5 Ma old. That age is probably wishful thinking, and the layer less than 200 000 years old. Calcareous sediments have been interpreted to be volcanic ash, in which K-feldspar and biotite dates give meaningful ages. 18 thin calcareous layers with mud cracks, raindrop marks, and footprint trails from hundreds of savanna animals (and even an insect), are interpreted to be fresh ashfall from 18 volcanic eruptions. The geology professor behind this interpretation thought that enough rain fell after each ashfall to dampen the ash so that it could preserve prints. There was not enough rain to wash the ash away from the flat, horizontal and grassless surface where the animals walked. I claim that this is an unreasonable geological interpretation. The layers are calcaerous, so it was thought that the ash was carbonatite from the Sadiman volcano. But ash of carbonatite is unknown in geology, and no carbonatite is found at Sadiman, or on the Laetoli-Serengeti Plain. Thin-section photos and chemical analyses of these so-called ash layers have never been published. Mineral grains giving K-Ar dates of 3.5 Ma have been claimed to be the age of the layers and the footprints. Grains giving inappropriate dates were discarded. To protect the footprints from vandalism, the layer was covered over by soil and blocks of rock, before the exciting results were published. This cover-up kept visiting geologists from suggesting that these were lake sediments that cannot be dated using detrital minerals. A lake-sediment hypothesis has never been mentioned. I am hoping to publish a paper exposing these errors. You can read the manuscript, with pdf references, here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344220554_The_story_of_human_evolution_is_based_on_fictional_fossil_evidence See also http://AquaticApe.net |
|
Bioko is in the center of the fossil-free chimpanzee range
Bioko is in the center of the chimpanzee range, where no mammal fossils have ever been reported. It is outside the reach of mainland African viruses, such as CERV1 (PtERV1). It is always warm on Bioko, both in the water and on the land, and it is nearly always cloudy, so body fur and top-head hair (think of male pattern baldness) is not needed for sun protection. There are no large predators on Bioko, even today, so apes could learn bipedal running without danger. It is a huge island, where humans could evolve with gene flow and without mixing with other apes for a few million years. Take an aerial tour around cloudy Bioko here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wCf3rOIk14I
We don't know what Proto-Bioko was like when chimpanzees may have stranded there a few million years ago. It may have been like Bioko today, or it may have been a tiny barren volcanic island with no trees and almost no animals (like Galapagos was when a few animals arrived there by rafting.) But even if it was exactly like Bioko today, and the chimps stranded on a small rocky islet like this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-0wtDWx6mPQ, they could not swim to the main island, and would find no food on their little islet except marine food. Their descendants would eventually learn to swim, and when they swam over to the main island, they would maintain their attitude that the only real food is marine food. That is similar to paleoanthropologists who maintain their attitude that the only real evidence is fossil evidence. That is how chimps and people are. |
|
Geologists didn’t want to talk about continental-drift theory
Geologists didn’t want to talk about continental-drift theory, from 1912 to 1962. They said it was speculation, and not worth discussing. (See krilldrift.com)
Anthropologists haven’t wanted to talk about aquatic-ape theory since 1960. They say that it is only speculation, there is no evidence for it, and it is not worth discussing. The real problem with aquatic-ape theory is, that if it is right, it means that everything that they have been saying since Dubois and his Homo erectus (a supposedly fossil tooth, skullcap and femur) is wrong. Waterside-apers don’t want to talk about Bioko. The say that it is only speculation, there is no evidence for it, and it is not worth discussing. The problem is, that it was discovered by an outsider (Not-Invented-Here Bias). And, if it is right, it means that everything that they have been saying since Elaine Morgan’s last book is wrong. Waterside-apers praise Elaine Morgan for her idea, while they take her published evidence and make it their own. Elaine Morgan had more than an idea — she did the research and wrote the evidence for others to use. She got almost everything right. Read her work here. Morgan’s mistake was accepting the fossil evidence and related geologic evidence, which are no more correct than Piltdown Man. She was looking at dry East Africa and the Danakil Alps, instead of the rainy fossil-free areas where chimpanzees, gorillas, and humans most likely evolved. AquaticApe.net Anthropogeny.net |
|
From genetics, I think the LCA was a chimpanzee that became isolated in an aquatic habitat
Excerpt from the intro chapter to the book Chimpanzees and Human Evolution, by Muller et al. 2017. (My bold-italics for the last 3 sentences.)
The idea that modern chimpanzees might be similar to the LCA is frequently dismissed out of hand, because of the long time span involved. In a typical comment, Henry Gee insisted that we should not cast chimpanzees in the “role of Our Ancestors,” because they “have been evolving away from our common ancestor for precisely as long as we have” (2013: 714). This sentiment, with its underlying assumption that millions of years of evolution must have altered the chimpanzee lineage as much as they have the human one, is now widely shared.2 Robert Sussman wrote that “chimpanzees have been evolving for as long as humans and gorillas, and there is no reason to believe that ancestral chimps were highly similar to present-day chimps” (2013: 103). Meredith Small’s variant (1993: 128) was more measured: “Although we’d like to use chimps as models for our distant forebears, we often forget that they evolved down their own path, shaped physically and behaviorally by pressures slightly different from those our ancient ancestors experienced” (for more or less identical statements, see Ehrlich 2000: 166; Zuk 2013: 41). The problem with these arguments is that molecular evolution is not the same as phenotypic change. And even in closely related species, rates of morphological or behavioral change can differ substantially over time. Darwin was aware of this latter point, as illustrated by the quotation that opens this chapter. Pilbeam and Lieberman (this volume) observe that multiple primate lineages are morphologically conservative over extended periods of evolutionary time. The gibbon (Hylobatidae) radiation, for example, has been dated to around 7 Ma, putting it close in time to the Pan / Homo divergence (Israfil et al. 2011). Few would contend, however, that the common ancestor of the fourteen-plus gibbon species alive today looked very different from a modern gibbon, on the basis that gibbons have been “evolving for as long as humans and gorillas.”3 The inference that chimpanzees are also a conservative species, little changed since their split from the hominin line, is based on careful analysis and straightforward logic (Pilbeam 1996; Wrangham and Pilbeam 2001; Pilbeam and Young 2004). Chimpanzees and gorillas are extremely similar morphologically, to such an extent that for decades they were considered to be monophyletic, fundamentally size variants of the same animal. Genetic data, however, are unambiguous in showing that chimpanzees and humans are more closely related to each other than either is to the gorilla. This points to one of two conclusions: the extensive similarities between chimpanzees and gorillas represent evolutionary convergence, or the last common ancestor of chimpanzees, gorillas, and humans was very much like a chimpanzee or a gorilla. Because such extensive convergence is unlikely, and because the earliest hominins are all chimpanzee-sized, the LCA is inferred to be chimpanzee-like. |
|
Born to believe and to continue believing
The world has many competing religions that involve various miracles that specialists believe in. But they don't think that the miracles of any competing religion are actually valid. Those miracles are considered false.
Paleoanthropologists have fossil finds of many creatures that they call hominins or possible human ancestors. They realize that only one or two of them could actually be human ancestors, and that all the others must be dead-ends, having become extinct without leaving any descendants that are alive today. Paleoanthropologists admit that their creatures may all be dead-ends, and that fossils of actual human ancestors may not yet have been found. Religious-miracle specialists have their own beliefs, and prehuman-fossil specialists have their own beliefs. These specialists want followers who also believe in their version of things. That is how the specialists get funding and status. And there are plenty of people willing to follow them. Even if proven wrong, the specialists want to continue believing that they are right. That is what they do. There may be no miracles that are valid, and there may be no prehuman fossils that are human ancestors. It may be that the direct ancestor of Homo sapiens is Pan troglodytes, the chimpanzee. A group of chimpanzees may have speciated to humans in a single freak aquatic event. But that hypothesis spoils everyone's fun and would reduce everyone's funding and status. So let's talk about something else. |
|
Elaine Morgan's Publications
Elaine Morgan's Publications
Elaine Morgan 1972 The Descent of Woman Elaine Morgan 1982 The Aquatic Ape: A Theory of Human Evolution Elaine Morgan 1990 The Scars of Evolution: What Our Bodies Tell Us About Human Evolution 1991 The Aquatic Ape: Fact or Fiction? The First Scientific Evaluation of a Controversial Theory of Human Evolution Chapter 1 by Elaine Morgan: The Origins of a Theory Chapter 2 by Elaine Morgan: Why a New Theory is Needed Elaine Morgan 1994 The Descent of the Child: Human Evolution From a New Perspective Elaine Morgan 1997 The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis Elaine Morgan 1999 Human Evolution: The Water Theory Elaine Morgan 2005 Pinker's List Elaine Morgan 2008 The Naked Darwinist: Questions About Human Evolution Elaine Morgan 2008 Elaine Morgan on Aquatic Ape Theory at UCL Elaine Morgan 2009 I Believe We Evolved From Aquatic Apes TED talk 2011 Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? 50 Years After Alister Hardy - Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution Forward by Elaine Morgan Elaine Morgan 2012 Knock 'Em Cold, Kid (autobiography) |
|
The story of human evolution is based on fictional fossil evidence
Manuscript in preparation.
Dec. 8, 2020 This is the same manuscript as August 2020 in Researchgate, but this version includes more details about Java Man and Peking Man, as follows: Java Man |
|
Great apes with small brains were not very mobile
Including the human, there are now 13 living taxa of great apes. Except for the human, the great apes are not very mobile. We can be certain that each taxon now lives in the isolated area where it evolved. There were once many other taxa of great ape between Indonesia and Central Africa, but they are now extinct.
Human (last common ancestor about 6 Ma?) Western Chimp Nigeria-Cameroon Chimp Central Chimp Bonobo (Pigmy Chimp) Eastern Chimp (last common ancestor about 10 Ma?) Cross River Gorilla Western Lowland Gorilla Eastern Lowland Gorilla Mountain Gorilla (last common ancestor about 15 Ma?) Borneo Orangutan Sumatra Orangutan Tapanuli Orangutan Genetic studies show that the human is closely related to the chimp, next closely to the gorilla, and next to the orangutan. The human, after its evolution, had a remarkably large brain. With that brain, it was able to invent shoes and clothing, and tools for defending itself and carrying water and food. Those inventions enabled it to spread out and populate the entire globe. Because of its current spread, we do not know the area where the human evolved its large brain. Since it was small-brained and not yet mobile, the place was presumably near one of the chimp places. Fossils show that early humans (Homo erectus, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Homo sapiens) migrated great distances from where they evolved. Genetic studies of living humans show that the area of their origin was somewhere in Africa. |
|
Advertising poster for Bioko
Hey Chimps! Sail on over to Bioko! You won't be able to leave, and your descendants won't want to leave. Relax with plenty of nutritious marine food — great for brain growth. No need to look for food in the forest. (In fact, there is no forest.) You won't need big jaws. The shellfish and marine greens are chewy.
|
|
Sail Away (Bioko theme song)
Sail Away, by Randy Newman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCRGrnhdNQE (Now sing it with new lyrics for Bioko.) In the water you'll get food to eat. |
|