Fossils in Greece Suggest Human Ancestors Evolved in Europe, Not Africa

greekreporter.com...

A recent analysis of fossils recovered in the 1990s in the village of Nikiti in northern Greece supports the controversial idea that apes, the ancestors of humans, evolved in Southeastern Europe instead of Africa.

The 8 or 9-million-year-old fossils had first been linked to the extinct ape called Ouranopithecus.

However, a team led by David Begun from the University of Toronto’s Department of Anthropology has recently analyzed the remains and determined that they likely belonged to a male animal from a potentially new species.

A very interesting hypothesis but not new as far as I know, with a number of scientists who find this scenario highly plausible and believe human ancestors first evolved in Europe and then migrated to Africa.

The problem is where do you draw the line on what a hominin is. The research team is not sure whether this is a hominin or another species. Back in 2017 (see article) Dr Begun and his research team determined that a 7.2-million-year-old ape called Graecopithecus, which also lived in what is now Greece, could be a hominin.

The most widely accepted hypothesis is that hominis originated in Africa around 7 million years ago but the above scenario is highly plausible in my view. This publication by Dr Begun et al

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

argues hominins first evolved between 7 and 9 million years ago in both Europe and Anatolia (modern-day Turkey). Fossils of potential hominins have also been found in Turkey and that's equally important in determining the origin of hominins. In this case I think the authors refer to the common ancestor of hominins and not to the human lineage.

a reply to: Consvoli

idea that apes, the ancestors of humans, evolved in Southeastern Europe instead of Africa

Not sure how to take an article seriously when it says something like this.

Well, it all goes back to whether you think life on this planet started with a lightning strike in a puddle of goo or an icky meteor landing in some goo. Now locating that goo on a modern globe is problematic as the land is moving around by continental drift, vulcanisum, and pole shifts, weathering, etc...

Funny how modern man made up all the names of places then apply the names back to when the naming of things had not been invented yet.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

and what single cells decided other single cells were gonna be a@@holes. come on man what self respecting single cell is gonna want to be a a@@hole.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Consvoli

idea that apes, the ancestors of humans, evolved in Southeastern Europe instead of Africa

Not sure how to take an article seriously when it says something like this.

Is based on research and findings published back in 2012

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

together with further research and findings since then.

You can have your opinion.

originally posted by: BeyondKnowledge3
Well, it all goes back to whether you think life on this planet started with a lightning strike in a puddle of goo or an icky meteor landing in some goo. Now locating that goo on a modern globe is problematic as the land is moving around by continental drift, vulcanisum, and pole shifts, weathering, etc...

Funny how modern man made up all the names of places then apply the names back to when the naming of things had not been invented yet.

The article and the paper I ve linked don't deal with the origins of life but with the evolution of hominins.

a reply to: Consvoli

We have apes living among us right now.

Humans, taxonomically are apes. Hominini, homo, sapien.

a reply to: Consvoli

It's total racist bollox to suggest anything that runs counter to the widely accepted view that human's evolved in Africa! Follow the science!

originally posted by: Cvastar
a reply to: Consvoli

It's total racist bollox to suggest anything that runs counter to the widely accepted view that human's evolved in Africa! Follow the science!

a reply to: Consvoli

Ok, but I thought you were discussing origins of humans. I might have gone back a little too far.

a reply to: Cvastar

Follow the science? Science said cigarettes are good. Science said rocks don't fall from the sky. Science said COVID was from nature.

Science is often mistaken when new information is found.

a reply to: Cvastar

Science does say humans evolved in africa... this one isolated piece of highly disputed evidence agaisnt the mountains of evidence that has come out of Africa shows that humans evolved in africa.

There's a ton of if's here and assumptions. It sounds like they are not even sure what they have found.

Not all anthropologists agree with Begun and his team’s conclusions. As noted by New Scientist, the Nikiti ape may be completely unrelated to hominins. It may have evolved similar features independently, developing teeth to eat similar foods or chew similarly to early hominins.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Cvastar

Science does say humans evolved in africa... this one isolated piece of highly disputed evidence agaisnt the mountains of evidence that has come out of Africa shows that humans evolved in africa.

It's the most accepted hypothesis but it remains a hypothesis.

New evidence comes along the way and we construct a new hypothesis or let's say there are two competing hypotheses.

The author does admit it's controversial for the scientists who have accepted the most prevailing hypothesis.

You missed the part where fossils of potential hominins found in Turkey (Anatolia) and date back to 7.2 million years. That's 200 thousand years before the first hominins evolved in Africa according to the prevailing hypothesis.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

Funny how modern man made up all the names of places then apply the names back to when the naming of things had not been invented yet.

That's called language and it helps us all to understand what we are refering too and understand what it we're all yakking about......

a reply to: Consvoli

They found a potential fossil of a close cousin to hominines... not hominin.

And yes, it is a hypothesis, but the scientific evidence, facts, leads to an African origin. The fossil found in Greece can't even be accepted upon which species it might even be.

a reply to: Consvoli

I thinks the article writers need to plot the position of these places on maps of the continents in the positions they were in at the time with the recognised continent positions in a shadow so we can maybe see the relationships easier. I mean when they name the places people are automatically assuming the routes they must have taken follow the current positions.

Unless of course, the continents haven't drifted that much since the 'homins' have arrived.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Consvoli

They found a potential fossil of a close cousin to hominines... not hominin.

And yes, it is a hypothesis, but the scientific evidence, facts, leads to an African origin. The fossil found in Greece can't even be accepted upon which species it might even be.

The evidence we have so far leads to this but it's not conclusive yet. The fossils found in Turkey could belong to a hominin and fossils found in Greece in the ancestor of hominins.

The origin of hominins is not a settled science and there could be more evidence on the way.

a reply to: Consvoli

It pretty much is conclusive. Since we have ancient hominine, hominid and hominin ancestors only found in Africa, talking tens of millions of years old. That would suggest a constant lineage of going out, and back into Africa, was a common thing over the years.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Consvoli

It pretty much is conclusive. Since we have ancient hominine, hominid and hominin ancestors only found in Africa, talking tens of millions of years old. That would suggest a constant lineage of going out, and back into Africa, was a common thing over the years.

I don't agree with you on this.
There is nothing conclusive yet and that's why it has remained a hypothesis. There is strong evidence but that's far from a conclusion and premature confusions are not good.

Unless it's politically incorrect to say what the author said...