Origins of humans can be traced back to Europe, not Africa, study claims

[midian182]

Up until now, East Africa - long referred to as the cradle of humanity – was thought to have been the place where the last common ancestor of chimps and humans lived 7 million years ago. But the commonly held theory could have been out by 200,000 years, and the location may have been Europe, not Africa.

An international team of researchers at the University of Tubingen in Germany published two studios yesterday in the journal Plos One supporting the new theory. It’s based on fossils from Greece and Bulgaria of an ape-like creature, known as Graecopithecus freybergi, that lived 7.2 million years ago and may be the so-called missing link.

The creature’s lower jawbone, discovered in Athens in 1944, and its premolar tooth that was unearthed in Bulgaria in 2009 have been examined using new techniques such as CT scans. Their age was established by examining the sedimentary rock where they were found.

"While great apes typically have two or three separate and diverging roots, the roots of Graecopithecus converge and are partially fused - a feature that is characteristic of modern humans, early humans and several pre-humans," explained lead researcher Professor Madelaine Bohme.

One of the previous oldest pre-humans was Sahelanthropus, which lived 6-7 million years ago in Chad. The new findings now call into question the belief that hominins originated in Africa.

“Our species evolved in Africa. Our lineage may not have,” said Böhme, referring to the fact that Homos Sapiens' African origins 200,000 years ago wasn't being called into question.

The study claims the creatures would have evolved in the savanna landscape of Europe at the time, which was much more hospital to ape species than the emerging Sahara desert. "The incipient formation of a desert in North Africa more than 7 million years ago and the spread of savannahs in southern Europe may have played a central role in the splitting of the human and chimpanzee lineages," Böhme added.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/69426-origins-humans-may-traced-back-europe-not-africa.html

 

[davislane1]

What does this have to do with tech?

 

[amstech]

It's an interesting theory that's missing major amounts of data to prove anything one way or the other, but new information is always welcome. There are plenty of extinct species including many types of ancient ape, unfortunately no actual connection or middle ground yet, and were running out of bones to dig up.

 

[stewi0001]

What does this have to do with tech?

To make you feel high tech I guess lol

 

[TomSEA]

It's an interesting theory that's missing major amounts of data to prove anything one way or the other, but new information is always welcome. There are plenty of extinct species including many types of ancient ape, unfortunately no actual connection or middle ground yet, and were running out of bones to dig up.

The evolution of man/woman has been pretty much established with the latest DNA and carbon-dating research tools. Scientists were trying too hard to find a link between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens commonly referred to as "the missing link." Now it's accepted as scientific fact they were two different species altogether that had some similarities and eventually Homo Sapiens won out.

 

[amstech]

The evolution of man/woman has been pretty much established with the latest DNA and carbon-dating research tools..

It's a theory with a lot of data, but none of it consequential.
97% of our DNA is similar to a Chimpanzee, but were two different species with no connection. Being similar and being related are not the same. Were not related.

Scientists were trying too hard to find a link between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens commonly referred to as "the missing link." Now it's accepted as scientific fact they were two different species altogether that had some similarities and eventually Homo Sapiens won out.

It's an interesting theory.

 

[TomSEA]

The evolution of man/woman has been pretty much established with the latest DNA and carbon-dating research tools..

No its not.

Scientists were trying too hard to find a link between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens commonly referred to as "the missing link." Now it's accepted as scientific fact they were two different species altogether that had some similarities and eventually Homo Sapiens won out.

It's an interesting theory.

No theory to it - it's what happened. Do yourself the trouble of a little Google research, it's easily found and widely documented. Prior to DNA testing, archaeologists only had bone fragments to compare and they couldn't make the jump from Neanderthal to Homo Sapien hence the missing link issue. Once DNA testing came available, it was a "ureka!" moment for scientists, because it became evident they were looking at two different species. Having said that, they did inbreed to a small extent. Most modern humans have as much as 5% Neanderthal DNA in them.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

What does this have to do with tech?

Even 7 million years ago, life was far more complex and complicated than even the latest of today's tech.

 

[amstech]

No theory to it - it's what happened. Do yourself the trouble of a little Google research, it's easily found and widely documented. Prior to DNA testing, archaeologists only had bone fragments to compare and they couldn't make the jump from Neanderthal to Homo Sapien hence the missing link issue. .

That doesn't prove any relation, only a similarity.
If something like that ever got proven without a doubt, it would make international news.
It's a DNA similarity, nothing more.
Were not related.

(And before you post all this mumbo jumbo, links and whatever else, I've did extensive research on this, , the died hard evolutionists who take something like you posted and mark it as a holy grail of inarguable data, right down to the admissions of people and those who have passed away and came back only to experience nothing after death, from all walks of life. I am open minded! But nothing has been proven absolutely true in any manner, just similarities. I will not get into a debate on Techspot and open a can of worms, PM me if you want to discuss further if u want although I have no desire, whatever is posted I will not reply here.)

 

[TomSEA]

No theory to it - it's what happened. Do yourself the trouble of a little Google research, it's easily found and widely documented. Prior to DNA testing, archaeologists only had bone fragments to compare and they couldn't make the jump from Neanderthal to Homo Sapien hence the missing link issue. .

That doesn't prove any relation, only a similarity.
If something like that ever got proven without a doubt, it would make international news.
It's a DNA similarity, nothing more.
Were not related.

(And before you post all this mumbo jumbo, links and whatever else, I've did extensive research on this, , the died hard evolutionists who take something like you posted and mark it as a holy grail of inarguable data, right down to the admissions of people and those who have passed away and came back only to experience nothing after death, from all walks of life. I am open minded! But nothing has been proven absolutely true in any manner, just similarities. I will not get into a debate on Techspot and open a can of worms, PM me if you want to discuss further if u want although I have no desire, whatever is posted I will not reply here.)

LOL...the old "I can't prove you wrong so here's my last blast and I'm not coming back," post, eh? Very entertaining.

DNA is DNA. It's non-debatable. Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens were two different species as proved by their DNA numerous times. End of discussion, and why "the missing link" isn't brought up any more or even referred to in schools and evolution lectures/articles.

 

[centrino207]

The evolution of man/woman has been pretty much established with the latest DNA and carbon-dating research tools. Scientists were trying too hard to find a link between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens commonly referred to as "the missing link." Now it's accepted as scientific fact they were two different species altogether that had some similarities and eventually Homo Sapiens won out.

This news article may be other human like ape that is different than the Africa human like ape. So this article cannot prove there was no human like ape in Africa.

It well could prove people in Europe cannot be traced back to Africa. It would prove that apes and human like ape was common in Europe.

 

[centrino207]

LOL...the old "I can't prove you wrong so here's my last blast and I'm not coming back," post, eh? Very entertaining.

DNA is DNA. It's non-debatable. Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens were two different species as proved by their DNA numerous times. End of discussion, and why "the missing link" isn't brought up any more or even referred to in schools and evolution lectures/articles.

What this news article is saying is there is human like ape in Europe. If there still supporting evidence of human like ape in Africa all it would say is people in Europe cannot be traced back to Africa but apes in Europe!!

It would prove two other species.

 

[amstech]

LOL...the old "I can't prove you wrong so here's my last blast and I'm not coming back," post, eh? Very entertaining. .

Lol.
Who did that?
You haven't proved anything I just don't want to get into any debates over this anymore.

DNA is DNA. It's non-debatable.

This statement does nothing to support any claim.

Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens were two different species as proved by their DNA numerous times.

Who's arguing that?

End of discussion, and why "the missing link" isn't brought up any more or even referred to in schools and evolution lectures/articles.

Cause it was a ridiculous theory that had no backbone. I think were making different points.
My point is evolution is still nothing more then a theory when trying to explain human origins. But whatever is true, no theory or idea has been remotely proven yet.

 

[TomSEA]

"DNA is DNA. It's non-debatable.
This statement does nothing to support any claim."

I see. So you believe that DNA is voodoo magic then. For there rest of us, DNA is the final and conclusive proof of anything to do with biology and genetics. And for the last time, through DNA samples Neanderthals and have been PROVEN to be two different species. You can take that CLAIM to the bank.

 

[amstech]

I see. So you believe that DNA is voodoo magic then. For there rest of us, DNA is the final and conclusive proof of anything to do with biology and genetics. And for the last time, through DNA samples Neanderthals and have been PROVEN to be two different species. You can take that CLAIM to the bank.

Thats fine, I am just stating that nothing you have said does anything to counter what I have posted.
Moving along.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Come on people... it's been PROVEN beyond a shadow of a doubt that God created the world in 6 days... He created Man just under six thousand years ago.... I refer you to the bible as conclusive evidence!

Evolution... pah... that's a theory backed by hippies...

 

[CryofSilence]

I see. So you believe that DNA is voodoo magic then. For there rest of us, DNA is the final and conclusive proof of anything to do with biology and genetics. And for the last time, through DNA samples Neanderthals and have been PROVEN to be two different species. You can take that CLAIM to the bank.

Thats fine, I am just stating that nothing you have said does anything to counter what I have posted.
Moving along.

I'll just be over here in the corner, crying with my degree in biology and the mountains of data I had to read in order to get said degree. The arrogance of those who know nothing these days...

 

[ManuelV]

It had to be researchers from germany, now hitler will resurect as a zombie and kill us all.

 

[Raoul Duke]

There is a thing in the philosophy of science called "the problem of history' which briefly stated is that the problem with scientific theories (and what people think is 'proven') is that every theory we've had so far has been shown to be wrong by later theories. So, what does that imply for today's theories?
I leave it to you, humble reader

 

[Bubbajim]

There is a thing in the philosophy of science called "the problem of history' which briefly stated is that the problem with scientific theories (and what people think is 'proven') is that every theory we've had so far has been shown to be wrong by later theories. So, what does that imply for today's theories?
I leave it to you, humble reader

No, that's not the case at all. Many theories, particularly from the days before empirical testing was the norm, have been thrown out, like the four elements theory or phlogiston theory. But once we started testing things and looked for independently verified, repeatable testing as the basis for scientific knowledge, the majority of theories we've arrived at have only been updated and tweaked. Newton's calculations for the effects of gravity were magnificent and groundbreaking, and when Einstein came along and put forward his own model for gravity, all he did was improve upon Newton's work. The old theory wasn't "wrong", it was incomplete. Modern science is improving our understanding of nature by refining the theories that work, not replacing them outright.

Also, anyone who uses the argument that "evolution is only a theory" (the other guy above, not you Raoul), doesn't know what a theory is within science, and doesn't understand evolution by natural selection.

 

[Squid Surprise]

No, that's not the case at all. Many theories, particularly from the days before empirical testing was the norm, have been thrown out, like the four elements theory or phlogiston theory. But once we started testing things and looked for independently verified, repeatable testing as the basis for scientific knowledge, the majority of theories we've arrived at have only been updated and tweaked. Newton's calculations for the effects of gravity were magnificent and groundbreaking, and when Einstein came along and put forward his own model for gravity, all he did was improve upon Newton's work. The old theory wasn't "wrong", it was incomplete. Modern science is improving our understanding of nature by refining the theories that work, not replacing them outright.

Also, anyone who uses the argument that "evolution is only a theory" (the other guy above, not you Raoul), doesn't know what a theory is within science, and doesn't understand evolution by natural selection.

Clearly you have not heard of the restraining order handed down to Science and Religion... neither is allowed to be within 500 feet of each other at any time..."Science"... pah... it's all hokum and malarkey... next thing you'll be telling me is that modern medicine is more beneficial than good old voodoo!

 

[Bubbajim]

next thing you'll be telling me is that modern medicine is more beneficial than good old voodoo!

Pft! Modern medicine is obviously a conspiracy. Everyone knows the cure for cancer is slapping some mud on your buttcheeks and rubbing a small toad in your forehead. Duh.

 

[Scorpionking20]

LOL...the old "I can't prove you wrong so here's my last blast and I'm not coming back," post, eh? Very entertaining. .

Lol.
Who did that?
You haven't proved anything I just don't want to get into any debates over this anymore.

DNA is DNA. It's non-debatable.

This statement does nothing to support any claim.

Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens were two different species as proved by their DNA numerous times.

Who's arguing that?

End of discussion, and why "the missing link" isn't brought up any more or even referred to in schools and evolution lectures/articles.

Cause it was a ridiculous theory that had no backbone. I think were making different points.
My point is evolution is still nothing more then a theory when trying to explain human origins. But whatever is true, no theory or idea has been remotely proven yet.

I just have to jump in here...there's a difference between lexical and technical definitions. Here are some scientific theories: Gravity, Electricity, etc, etc. In science a "theory" is an explanation of all the components of fact and observation that describe events. In our everyday term, "theory" can often mean guess.

Sorry guy...your' an ape. And you are related to all apes. Most closely to Chimps. Evolution is a fact of life...weather or not you want to accept it doesn't matter. Your' an ape. Your' also related to fungus if you go back far enough. Our society has really taken a love of anti science and posts on websites like this where people make absurd claims, such as our species not being related to apes, should be made fun of.

Our universe doesn't need to make sense to you...but if you research, read, and remain thoughtful, there is a lot we can learn. Evolution describes the diversity of life...it's a fact. Proven tens of thousands of times through research.

 

[amstech]

Sorry guy...your' an ape. And you are related to all apes. Most closely to Chimps. Evolution is a fact of life...weather or not you want to accept it doesn't matter. Your' an ape..

I accept the fact no theory, including evolution, has been proven when it comes to explaining human origins.
We are related to many species, having similar DNA does not make us descendants, it makes us similar.
We are different species with no direct connection other then similarities.
Human skeletons found thousands of years ago are identical to ours today.
Sure we have found similar apes/species, both ancient and recent but no middle ground. Not even close.

Your' also related to fungus if you go back far enough.

Sure, were related with fish and birds.
Related. That's it.
Different species with no defying data to prove otherwise.

Evolution describes the diversity of life...it's a fact. Proven tens of thousands of times through research.

Yes its been proven in certain areas and species, but it does nothing to explain human origins yet and many more phenomena. The human eyeball almost squishes the theory by itself, as does our conscious. It's still at this point nothing more than an educated guess with massive holes in logic, data, correlation and defying information. Quality of data and quantity of data are different things. Evolution is a theory with large quantities of data, but not much quality when it comes to explaining human origins, and many other things. It's still nothing more then an unproven theory in that regard. And we've just about studied it all at this point.

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/44-reasons-why-evolution-is-just-a-fairy-tale-for-adults

There is more data supporting more of an engineering theory then evolution, this is also commonly known information. You can sit back in your chair and type 'your an ape' but 'your an ape' to believe something so distorted, so easily. It's a theory with some factual data, and a darn good one, but still a theory, a unproven guess, an unproven idea when it comes to explaining us, and many other things.

 

[Scorpionking20]

Sorry guy...your' an ape. And you are related to all apes. Most closely to Chimps. Evolution is a fact of life...weather or not you want to accept it doesn't matter. Your' an ape..

I accept the fact no theory, including evolution, has been proven when it comes to explaining human origins.
We are related to many species, having similar DNA does not make us descendants, it makes us similar.
We are different species with no direct connection other then similarities.
Human skeletons found thousands of years ago are identical to ours today.
Sure we have found similar apes/species, both ancient and recent but no middle ground. Not even close.

Your' also related to fungus if you go back far enough.

Sure, were related with fish and birds.
Related. That's it.
Different species with no defying data to prove otherwise.

Evolution describes the diversity of life...it's a fact. Proven tens of thousands of times through research.

Yes its been proven in certain areas and species, but it does nothing to explain human origins yet and many more phenomena. The human eyeball almost squishes the theory by itself, as does our conscious. It's still at this point nothing more than an educated guess with massive holes in logic, data, correlation and defying information. Quality of data and quantity of data are different things. Evolution is a theory with large quantities of data, but not much quality when it comes to explaining human origins, and many other things. It's still nothing more then an unproven theory in that regard. And we've just about studied it all at this point.

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/44-reasons-why-evolution-is-just-a-fairy-tale-for-adults

There is more data supporting more of an engineering theory then evolution, this is also commonly known information. You can sit back in your chair and type 'your an ape' but 'your an ape' to believe something so distorted, so easily. It's a theory with some factual data, and a darn good one, but still a theory, a unproven guess, an unproven idea when it comes to explaining us, and many other things.

I can't put out all the fires you want to set. I'd just like to admit that, yes, I also am an ape. And our closest living relative species would be Chimps. Evolution through the expression of survived genes is a science...I'm not sure what your' on about. You feel all other animals evolved, but humans didn't? Or is it your claim that we don't have the complete picture of the human line of evolution? I don't think anybody would say we have that, so I'm wondering where your issue is. Evolution has more evidence going for it than electromagnetism.