Human much older than we think

Ive read an article about humans being older than we think, i would love to have an expert ( know there is a few ) who could share their light on this matter at hand? Thank in advance

That would mean that the ancestors of humans were already wandering down a solitary path apart from the other kinds of archaic humans on the planet 100,000 to 400,000 years earlier than expected. “It resolves one controversy—that they’re in the Neandertal clade,” says paleoanthropologist Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London. “But it’s not all good news: From my point of view, it pushes back the origin of H. sapiens from the Neandertals and Denisovans.” The possibility that humans were a distinct group so early shakes up the human family tree, promising to lead to new debate about when and where the branches belong.

Are human older

a reply to: Hyperia

What if humanity have a technologically advanced civilization but overtime got devolved into several human species after a Cataclysm bombed them back to stone age?

a reply to: starwarsisreal

I have another hypothesy, but seems i piss off people so im not saying anything, since they think im a schizo....

a reply to: Hyperia

Does it really matter we go back so far?

And before that we something else...but we were still us looking different?

Fashion has changed due to need forever, because functional works.

Lol


Cheers

a reply to: Treespeaker

It actually does make a difference, most likely cause of historical facts, about co exisiting, fire, wheel, domestication, historical artifacts, weapons, craft, astronomy, religion, the list is massive. the list goes on and on and on.

a reply to: Hyperia

I always enjoy seeing more information come to light on our ancestry and our cousins. I have to chuckle a little when people claim that there's too little fossil evidence or too many gaps or that there's no missing link. If anything, we have an almost embarrassing overabundance of information about hominid ancestry.

Just speculation & opinion on my part but, I think as we gather more and more data on H. neandertalensis and H. denisova, we'll come to understand that they weren't really different species, as their taxonomic names imply. We'll ultimately end up renaming them H. sapiens neanderthalensis and H. sapiens denisova, and we'll be H. sapiens sapiens.

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
What if humanity have a technologically advanced civilization but overtime got devolved into several human species after a Cataclysm bombed them back to stone age?

There would still be evidence of it. What did it do? Vanish into thin air? If we're able to find fossils millions of years old, we can certainly find somebody's broken iPad.

a reply to: Hyperia

I find history very fascinating.

But here and now is the matter at hand if you will....

Every thing living is of course the product of millions of years of life, and at that less than 10% of what was and is now arguably.

Ones focus is key.

a reply to: Blue Shift

thats the problem you wont!

worked stone endures but man-made products not so much metals, fabrics, even plastics all break down
within decades to a few hundred years if our population vanished today in a thousand years even our
most advanced city's would look like Roman or Greek ruins at best.

it is perfectly possible that humans were around our current level 14,000 years ago and were subjected
to a global disaster say a comet impact followed by nuclear winter deep enough to trigger an ice age.
there would be virtually nothing left to find by now except for sites like Göbekli Tepe at around 12,000 years old
and the few survivors scattered around the globe would have REdeveloped into us bringing with them
the legends of the time before such as the Sumerian stories pre bible or the Indian tails like the Mahabharata
or even the root off the Atlantis tail the ancient tails all talk of "gods" with fantastic powers and monstrous
disasters fire floods etc i am fairly convinced we are the second generation of humans to dominate earth
but for all we know we may be the third or more as the records have not survived.

a reply to: Hyperia

Hello I am going to assume English is not your first language? So I'm going to try and avoid using jargon

By Human I am assuming you are thinking Homo sapiens? Because some scientists refer to humans as any member of the genus Homo. We breed with the Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalus) and Denisovians. The fossil record is always patchy (bones do not survive or fossilize easily) and tools are a poor way to discover WHO made them, with out remains. Its why modern human anthropology is easier than paleontology, you find a burial with grave goods, and can be confident that it belongs with something. But primitive tools by themselves? Its more guess work

Genetics give us the best tool but it also often challenges what we have previously thought happened. It is a new tool, and we have very few examples of Neanderthals to get DNA samples from (forget Denisovians, we have barely any samples).

So when you have just a few samples you can only draw a few conclusions.

Remeber (I hope) they told you at school you need at least three points to draw a line? Well this is like that, we have a thousand or so (I think) Human genomes sequenced, not bad, it is expensive but getting cheaper all the time. We've got only a few different Neanderthals tested, and one or two Denisovians at most.

So yeah this is interesting WHEN we have more information to look at I will be convinced one way or another. Especially when the DNA might conflict with the fossil evidence at times.

a reply to: Noinden

So it's a click and bait?

a reply to: Hyperia

Hmmm my post (first reply to this) went awol? Oh well.

Yes and No.

This is real science, the interpretation? I'm not convinced and I am a scientist

Would Neandertals count as 'archaic' humans? I'd agree we go at least 500k back as far as cavemen!

I forget how long ago did the last large dinosaurs live around?

a reply to: Noinden

I think you hit the nail on the head here. It's a very interesting study with potential for long reaching implications but based on the sample size alone, it MUST be taken with as grain of salt without more corroborating data. 2 exemplars from 1 site doesn't make for facts... yet. It's definitely a very interesting thing if it turns out to be realized and turning the clock back on when HN became a distinct species from Heidelbergensis and became the first truly European hominid... that's some epic S#. It doesn't have any actual implications on Homo Sapiens Sapiens though so the headline could be construed as a little misleading but every little find and every new DNA study done that can be added to the database does nothing but expand our knowledge of a little understood period of pre-history so it's all pretty cool as far as I'm concerned!


Here are some other sources with good information on this site from last season and a post on John Hawkes blog from a couple years back as well.

www.sci-news.com...

johnhawks.net...

a reply to: Milah

any member of the genus Homo that existed prior to 195KA +/- That is, before "We" became Homo Sapiens Sapiens, they would all be considered "archaic human beings" from the perspective of an Anthropologist or Paleoanthropologist. So yes, Neanderthal, Denisovan, Heidelbergensis, Erectus, Habilis, Antecessor and on and on... would all be considered "archaic humans".

a reply to: Hyperia

Very interesting. Thanks for posting the article.

Until recently, we relied primarily on spectroscopic methods to determine age. I'm a little confused about the statement in the first paragraph about the "oldest mitochondrial DNA". That suggests they have something to compare it to. Not my field, but I didn't know they had that. Further down the article they talk about other samples of Neanderthal and Sima fossils. Not sure how that all works because you still need some type of metric to measure it against. I have to read the research papers and find out what that's about. The Denisovans are still a mystery. Interesting stuff though.

a reply to: peter vlar

I was looking for you! Is this bull s*** and if why, in a Hume speaking kinda way.

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: Hyperia

What if humanity have a technologically advanced civilization but overtime got devolved into several human species after a Cataclysm bombed them back to stone age?

What if my granny had wheels?

originally posted by: Hyperia
a reply to: starwarsisreal

I have another hypothesy, but seems i piss off people so im not saying anything, since they think im a schizo....

Who gives a damn what thwy think?

I wanna hear your theory. Even if its wrong who cares? Its just a theory right? As humans we all reserve the right to be wrong.

a reply to: 3n19m470

I think, homo sapiens are hmm. A result of breeding made by a smarter species. Who also lives on earth, and are primates.
The same primates who domesticated wolves, which i dont think were homo sapiens.

just a theory though, a farfetched