From Newsgroup: talk.origins

Here is a post by Julian on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
of a text by Mike Pitts.
--------------------------------------
A new report from the field of human origins had sub-editors reaching
for their hyperboles. A million-year-old skull, we have learnt, has
rewritten humanityrCOs story. The finality of this is misleading, but
there is nonetheless something going on here.

For decades, Chinese archaeologists have been investigating a site known
as Yunxian, beside a tributary of the Yangtze river. The researchers
have been rewarded with human fossils rCo to date, three skulls around a million years old. These bones have been preserved well but the skulls
have been crushed. As a result, comparing them with other fossils, and therefore finding exactly which species they might represent, has been a challenge.

The skulls are broken, but not distorted: most of the right bits are in
the right shape, just not in the right places. In a new study, published
in the journal Science, a dozen Chinese archaeologists and scientists
joined by Chris Stringer of LondonrCOs Natural History Museum, claim to
have overcome this difficulty using cutting edge digital imaging and
computer modelling to put them back together again. After doing so, they
have revealed that a nearly complete skull found in 1990 is something no
one had predicted: a creature that suggests our own family tree, made up
of Homo Sapiens, is twice as old as previously thought. WhatrCOs more,
this early ancestor of ours was walking around Asia, but apparently not
Africa. How did we get here? And what does it tell us about ourselves?

It has long been agreed that humanityrCOs deep origins lie in Africa. A
major genetic study released earlier this year found that humans and our chimpanzee ancestors separated from each other a little over five or six million years ago. What happened next on our side has become complex, if
not downright confusing. The number of apparent species, and which parts
of Africa, Europe or Asia they occupied and when, has come under
constant scrutiny.

The first close human lookalike appeared in Africa around two million
years ago in the form of Homo erectus. Humans soon spread into rCo or
appeared as related species in rCo parts of Europe and much of Asia.
Making sense of the rare and fragmentary fossil evidence has been helped
by genetic studies, which have confirmed the later and simultaneous
presence of three species across Eurasia by around half a million years
ago: Neanderthals rCo Homo neanderthalensis rCo in the west, Denisovans in
the east, and the more widespread Homo sapiens occasionally breeding
with the others. Ancient DNA and proteins recently identified a Chinese
skull known as Dragon man as the first known Denisovan face, and
Denisovans have been described, somewhat controversially, as a species
known as Homo longi.

The new study extends this picture with further complexities and a
longer history. The Yunxian skull, say the scientists, has a mix of
ancient and newly acquired features. Parts recall erectus fossils, while
its brain is larger, and the craniumrCOs face and lower back instead
compare favourably to Dragon man rCo or even, says Stringer, Homo sapiens.
The skullrCOs age, however, independently shown by geology and the
particular ecosystem of mammals in the siterCOs well-preserved remains, suggests it comes from the erectus era.

The team resolves these apparent contradictions by rethinking the
historic human landscape. In this new view, ancestral Neanderthals,
Denisovans and sapiens separated a little over a million years ago,
rather than around 500,000 years ago.The theory posits that
Neanderthals, Denisovans and sapiens were alive at the same time as Homo heidelbergensis (traditionally thought of as the common ancestor of Neanderthals and sapiens) and later Asian Homo erectus. In other words,
for hundreds of thousands of years our planet hosted five highly
intelligent, large-brained types of human. In the long run, only one
survived: us.

What does this mean for other human fossils we have found? Homo
antecessor, for example, a species identified from remains in a Spanish
cave at Atapuerca, has been proposed as an ancestor to heidelbergensis;
this would put it at the root of the group that includes us and
Neanderthals. That has always been controversial (itrCOs the excavatorsrCO idea), and in the new analysis, the antecessor species is said to belong
to the Denisovan group rCo and so, ultimately, doomed to extinction.
Genetic studies have suggested different relationships, separating
Dragon man from its African ancestors a relatively recent 700,000 years ago.

And then there are the fossils we donrCOt have. If Neanderthals,
Denisovans and sapiens evolved away from each other a million years ago,
there must have been earlier human forms not yet seen. The placing of
their common ancestor among the intertwined branches of early human
trees is unknown. It all opens up a quest for previously unsuspected
types of fossils.

ItrCOs the bigger picture here which is particularly exciting. Only
archaeology can help us understand the nature of all these creatures:
how they behaved and thought. Thirty years ago, archaeologists talked of
a revolution marked by the sudden appearance of sophisticated art in
Europe rCo indication, it was said, of the arrival of the modern human
mind a mere 30 or 40,000 years ago. Evidence from the ground has since
shown such developments also occurred far beyond Europe, and over a
longer time span.

If early Homo sapiens evolved a million years ago, as this study
suggets, when did individuals start to make art? At what point did they
become rCymodernrCO rCo and why? Could this have happened first in Asia,
rather than Europe or Africa, and again, if so, why? Sooner or later
werCOll get to answer such questions. Doing so will take us into a new,
deeper understanding of who we really are.

Mike Pitts
--
https://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page) rCLAnd now the angry morning/Gives the early signs of warning/You must
face alone the plans you make/Decisions they will try to break" (S.McL.)

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 9/29/2025 11:49 PM, David Dalton wrote:

Here is a post by Julian on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
of a text by Mike Pitts.
--------------------------------------
A new report from the field of human origins had sub-editors reaching
for their hyperboles. A million-year-old skull, we have learnt, has
rewritten humanityrCOs story. The finality of this is misleading, but
there is nonetheless something going on here.

For decades, Chinese archaeologists have been investigating a site known
as Yunxian, beside a tributary of the Yangtze river. The researchers
have been rewarded with human fossils rCo to date, three skulls around a million years old. These bones have been preserved well but the skulls
have been crushed. As a result, comparing them with other fossils, and therefore finding exactly which species they might represent, has been a challenge.

The skulls are broken, but not distorted: most of the right bits are in
the right shape, just not in the right places. In a new study, published
in the journal Science, a dozen Chinese archaeologists and scientists
joined by Chris Stringer of LondonrCOs Natural History Museum, claim to
have overcome this difficulty using cutting edge digital imaging and
computer modelling to put them back together again. After doing so, they
have revealed that a nearly complete skull found in 1990 is something no
one had predicted: a creature that suggests our own family tree, made up
of Homo Sapiens, is twice as old as previously thought. WhatrCOs more,
this early ancestor of ours was walking around Asia, but apparently not Africa. How did we get here? And what does it tell us about ourselves?

It has long been agreed that humanityrCOs deep origins lie in Africa. A
major genetic study released earlier this year found that humans and our chimpanzee ancestors separated from each other a little over five or six million years ago. What happened next on our side has become complex, if
not downright confusing. The number of apparent species, and which parts
of Africa, Europe or Asia they occupied and when, has come under
constant scrutiny.

The first close human lookalike appeared in Africa around two million
years ago in the form of Homo erectus. Humans soon spread into rCo or appeared as related species in rCo parts of Europe and much of Asia.
Making sense of the rare and fragmentary fossil evidence has been helped
by genetic studies, which have confirmed the later and simultaneous
presence of three species across Eurasia by around half a million years
ago: Neanderthals rCo Homo neanderthalensis rCo in the west, Denisovans in the east, and the more widespread Homo sapiens occasionally breeding
with the others. Ancient DNA and proteins recently identified a Chinese
skull known as Dragon man as the first known Denisovan face, and
Denisovans have been described, somewhat controversially, as a species
known as Homo longi.

The new study extends this picture with further complexities and a
longer history. The Yunxian skull, say the scientists, has a mix of
ancient and newly acquired features. Parts recall erectus fossils, while
its brain is larger, and the craniumrCOs face and lower back instead
compare favourably to Dragon man rCo or even, says Stringer, Homo sapiens. The skullrCOs age, however, independently shown by geology and the
particular ecosystem of mammals in the siterCOs well-preserved remains, suggests it comes from the erectus era.

The team resolves these apparent contradictions by rethinking the
historic human landscape. In this new view, ancestral Neanderthals, Denisovans and sapiens separated a little over a million years ago,
rather than around 500,000 years ago.The theory posits that
Neanderthals, Denisovans and sapiens were alive at the same time as Homo heidelbergensis (traditionally thought of as the common ancestor of Neanderthals and sapiens) and later Asian Homo erectus. In other words,
for hundreds of thousands of years our planet hosted five highly
intelligent, large-brained types of human. In the long run, only one survived: us.

What does this mean for other human fossils we have found? Homo
antecessor, for example, a species identified from remains in a Spanish
cave at Atapuerca, has been proposed as an ancestor to heidelbergensis;
this would put it at the root of the group that includes us and
Neanderthals. That has always been controversial (itrCOs the excavatorsrCO idea), and in the new analysis, the antecessor species is said to belong
to the Denisovan group rCo and so, ultimately, doomed to extinction.
Genetic studies have suggested different relationships, separating
Dragon man from its African ancestors a relatively recent 700,000 years ago.

And then there are the fossils we donrCOt have. If Neanderthals,
Denisovans and sapiens evolved away from each other a million years ago, there must have been earlier human forms not yet seen. The placing of
their common ancestor among the intertwined branches of early human
trees is unknown. It all opens up a quest for previously unsuspected
types of fossils.

ItrCOs the bigger picture here which is particularly exciting. Only archaeology can help us understand the nature of all these creatures:
how they behaved and thought. Thirty years ago, archaeologists talked of
a revolution marked by the sudden appearance of sophisticated art in
Europe rCo indication, it was said, of the arrival of the modern human
mind a mere 30 or 40,000 years ago. Evidence from the ground has since
shown such developments also occurred far beyond Europe, and over a
longer time span.

If early Homo sapiens evolved a million years ago, as this study
suggets, when did individuals start to make art? At what point did they become rCymodernrCO rCo and why? Could this have happened first in Asia, rather than Europe or Africa, and again, if so, why? Sooner or later
werCOll get to answer such questions. Doing so will take us into a new, deeper understanding of who we really are.

Mike Pitts

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ado9202

The Chinese believe that there was what they call Homo longi and they
claim Denisovans are derived from Homo longi. This would mean that Neanderthals were also derived from H. longi. The evidence that we have
so far is that sometime after the chromosome 2 fusion event the
population that became Neanderthals and Denisovans left Africa around
800,000 years ago and the population that became modern humans stayed in Africa. The chromosome fusion event may have occurred less than 1
million years ago, but more than 900,000 years ago. Neanderthals,
Deniovans and modern humans all share the chromosome 2 fusion.

The estimated age of this H. longi specimen is too old for it to belong
to the Denisovan lineage. It would have existed before the chromosome 2 fusion event. There has always been the possibility that H. erectus
that migrated out of Africa over a million years ago came back into
Africa at some time. There is also the possiblity that Denisovans
interbred with this Homo. The Denisovan genome has evidence of
interbreeding with a more ancient lineage of Homo somewhere in Asia.

The way that this crushed skull has been reconstructed makes it look
more modern than the H. erectus Peking man skulls that may have been
800,000 years old. The way that the skull has been reconstructed it
looks more like Neanderthal than Peking man. This may be a
reconstruction issue.

There may be time for H. longi to have migrated back into Africa. The population that came back may have even had the chromosome fusion or
been in the process of fixing the chromosome fusion during the migration.

The way that this skull has been reconstructed it looks like the initial development of the pentagonal skull shape that became characteristic of
modern humans as the skull became less elongated and rounded and
increased skull volume above the eyes in Modern humans (we have a
forehead while Neanderthal and H. erectus had skulls sloped backwards
above the eyes). Neanderthals kept the oblong skull with a more rounded
lower profile skull shape.

We likely need more Chinese and African fossils from between 900,000 and
1 million years ago to confirm the current skull reconstruction, and
what it might mean as to how related H. longi is to modern humans and Neanderthal-Denisovans evolution.

Ron Okimoto


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 30/09/2025 05:49, David Dalton wrote:

Here is a post by Julian on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
of a text by Mike Pitts.
--------------------------------------
A new report from the field of human origins had sub-editors reaching
for their hyperboles. A million-year-old skull, we have learnt, has
rewritten humanityrCOs story. The finality of this is misleading, but
there is nonetheless something going on here.

For decades, Chinese archaeologists have been investigating a site known
as Yunxian, beside a tributary of the Yangtze river. The researchers
have been rewarded with human fossils rCo to date, three skulls around a million years old. These bones have been preserved well but the skulls
have been crushed. As a result, comparing them with other fossils, and therefore finding exactly which species they might represent, has been a challenge.

The skulls are broken, but not distorted: most of the right bits are in
the right shape, just not in the right places. In a new study, published
in the journal Science, a dozen Chinese archaeologists and scientists
joined by Chris Stringer of LondonrCOs Natural History Museum, claim to
have overcome this difficulty using cutting edge digital imaging and
computer modelling to put them back together again. After doing so, they
have revealed that a nearly complete skull found in 1990 is something no
one had predicted: a creature that suggests our own family tree, made up
of Homo Sapiens, is twice as old as previously thought. WhatrCOs more,
this early ancestor of ours was walking around Asia, but apparently not Africa. How did we get here? And what does it tell us about ourselves?

It has long been agreed that humanityrCOs deep origins lie in Africa. A
major genetic study released earlier this year found that humans and our chimpanzee ancestors separated from each other a little over five or six million years ago. What happened next on our side has become complex, if
not downright confusing. The number of apparent species, and which parts
of Africa, Europe or Asia they occupied and when, has come under
constant scrutiny.

The first close human lookalike appeared in Africa around two million
years ago in the form of Homo erectus. Humans soon spread into rCo or appeared as related species in rCo parts of Europe and much of Asia.
Making sense of the rare and fragmentary fossil evidence has been helped
by genetic studies, which have confirmed the later and simultaneous
presence of three species across Eurasia by around half a million years
ago: Neanderthals rCo Homo neanderthalensis rCo in the west, Denisovans in the east, and the more widespread Homo sapiens occasionally breeding
with the others. Ancient DNA and proteins recently identified a Chinese
skull known as Dragon man as the first known Denisovan face, and
Denisovans have been described, somewhat controversially, as a species
known as Homo longi.

The new study extends this picture with further complexities and a
longer history. The Yunxian skull, say the scientists, has a mix of
ancient and newly acquired features. Parts recall erectus fossils, while
its brain is larger, and the craniumrCOs face and lower back instead
compare favourably to Dragon man rCo or even, says Stringer, Homo sapiens. The skullrCOs age, however, independently shown by geology and the
particular ecosystem of mammals in the siterCOs well-preserved remains, suggests it comes from the erectus era.

The team resolves these apparent contradictions by rethinking the
historic human landscape. In this new view, ancestral Neanderthals, Denisovans and sapiens separated a little over a million years ago,
rather than around 500,000 years ago.The theory posits that
Neanderthals, Denisovans and sapiens were alive at the same time as Homo heidelbergensis (traditionally thought of as the common ancestor of Neanderthals and sapiens) and later Asian Homo erectus. In other words,
for hundreds of thousands of years our planet hosted five highly
intelligent, large-brained types of human. In the long run, only one survived: us.

What does this mean for other human fossils we have found? Homo
antecessor, for example, a species identified from remains in a Spanish
cave at Atapuerca, has been proposed as an ancestor to heidelbergensis;
this would put it at the root of the group that includes us and
Neanderthals. That has always been controversial (itrCOs the excavatorsrCO idea), and in the new analysis, the antecessor species is said to belong
to the Denisovan group rCo and so, ultimately, doomed to extinction.
Genetic studies have suggested different relationships, separating
Dragon man from its African ancestors a relatively recent 700,000 years ago.

And then there are the fossils we donrCOt have. If Neanderthals,
Denisovans and sapiens evolved away from each other a million years ago, there must have been earlier human forms not yet seen. The placing of
their common ancestor among the intertwined branches of early human
trees is unknown. It all opens up a quest for previously unsuspected
types of fossils.

ItrCOs the bigger picture here which is particularly exciting. Only archaeology can help us understand the nature of all these creatures:
how they behaved and thought. Thirty years ago, archaeologists talked of
a revolution marked by the sudden appearance of sophisticated art in
Europe rCo indication, it was said, of the arrival of the modern human
mind a mere 30 or 40,000 years ago. Evidence from the ground has since
shown such developments also occurred far beyond Europe, and over a
longer time span.

If early Homo sapiens evolved a million years ago, as this study
suggets, when did individuals start to make art? At what point did they become rCymodernrCO rCo and why? Could this have happened first in Asia, rather than Europe or Africa, and again, if so, why? Sooner or later
werCOll get to answer such questions. Doing so will take us into a new, deeper understanding of who we really are.

Mike Pitts

Commentary from John Hawks

https://www.johnhawks.net/p/the-problem-skulls-from-yunxian
--
alias Ernest Major

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 9/30/2025 10:41 AM, Ernest Major wrote:

On 30/09/2025 05:49, David Dalton wrote:

Here is a post by Julian on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
of a text by Mike Pitts.
--------------------------------------
A new report from the field of human origins had sub-editors reaching
for their hyperboles. A million-year-old skull, we have learnt, has
rewritten humanityrCOs story. The finality of this is misleading, but
there is nonetheless something going on here.

For decades, Chinese archaeologists have been investigating a site known
as Yunxian, beside a tributary of the Yangtze river. The researchers
have been rewarded with human fossils rCo to date, three skulls around a
million years old. These bones have been preserved well but the skulls
have been crushed. As a result, comparing them with other fossils, and
therefore finding exactly which species they might represent, has been a
challenge.

The skulls are broken, but not distorted: most of the right bits are in
the right shape, just not in the right places. In a new study, published
in the journal Science, a dozen Chinese archaeologists and scientists
joined by Chris Stringer of LondonrCOs Natural History Museum, claim to
have overcome this difficulty using cutting edge digital imaging and
computer modelling to put them back together again. After doing so, they
have revealed that a nearly complete skull found in 1990 is something no
one had predicted: a creature that suggests our own family tree, made up
of Homo Sapiens, is twice as old as previously thought. WhatrCOs more,
this early ancestor of ours was walking around Asia, but apparently not
Africa. How did we get here? And what does it tell us about ourselves?

It has long been agreed that humanityrCOs deep origins lie in Africa. A
major genetic study released earlier this year found that humans and our
chimpanzee ancestors separated from each other a little over five or six
million years ago. What happened next on our side has become complex, if
not downright confusing. The number of apparent species, and which parts
of Africa, Europe or Asia they occupied and when, has come under
constant scrutiny.

The first close human lookalike appeared in Africa around two million
years ago in the form of Homo erectus. Humans soon spread into rCo or
appeared as related species in rCo parts of Europe and much of Asia.
Making sense of the rare and fragmentary fossil evidence has been helped
by genetic studies, which have confirmed the later and simultaneous
presence of three species across Eurasia by around half a million years
ago: Neanderthals rCo Homo neanderthalensis rCo in the west, Denisovans in >> the east, and the more widespread Homo sapiens occasionally breeding
with the others. Ancient DNA and proteins recently identified a Chinese
skull known as Dragon man as the first known Denisovan face, and
Denisovans have been described, somewhat controversially, as a species
known as Homo longi.

The new study extends this picture with further complexities and a
longer history. The Yunxian skull, say the scientists, has a mix of
ancient and newly acquired features. Parts recall erectus fossils, while
its brain is larger, and the craniumrCOs face and lower back instead
compare favourably to Dragon man rCo or even, says Stringer, Homo sapiens. >> The skullrCOs age, however, independently shown by geology and the
particular ecosystem of mammals in the siterCOs well-preserved remains,
suggests it comes from the erectus era.

The team resolves these apparent contradictions by rethinking the
historic human landscape. In this new view, ancestral Neanderthals,
Denisovans and sapiens separated a little over a million years ago,
rather than around 500,000 years ago.The theory posits that
Neanderthals, Denisovans and sapiens were alive at the same time as Homo
heidelbergensis (traditionally thought of as the common ancestor of
Neanderthals and sapiens) and later Asian Homo erectus. In other words,
for hundreds of thousands of years our planet hosted five highly
intelligent, large-brained types of human. In the long run, only one
survived: us.

What does this mean for other human fossils we have found? Homo
antecessor, for example, a species identified from remains in a Spanish
cave at Atapuerca, has been proposed as an ancestor to heidelbergensis;
this would put it at the root of the group that includes us and
Neanderthals. That has always been controversial (itrCOs the excavatorsrCO >> idea), and in the new analysis, the antecessor species is said to belong
to the Denisovan group rCo and so, ultimately, doomed to extinction.
Genetic studies have suggested different relationships, separating
Dragon man from its African ancestors a relatively recent 700,000
years ago.

And then there are the fossils we donrCOt have. If Neanderthals,
Denisovans and sapiens evolved away from each other a million years ago,
there must have been earlier human forms not yet seen. The placing of
their common ancestor among the intertwined branches of early human
trees is unknown. It all opens up a quest for previously unsuspected
types of fossils.

ItrCOs the bigger picture here which is particularly exciting. Only
archaeology can help us understand the nature of all these creatures:
how they behaved and thought. Thirty years ago, archaeologists talked of
a revolution marked by the sudden appearance of sophisticated art in
Europe rCo indication, it was said, of the arrival of the modern human
mind a mere 30 or 40,000 years ago. Evidence from the ground has since
shown such developments also occurred far beyond Europe, and over a
longer time span.

If early Homo sapiens evolved a million years ago, as this study
suggets, when did individuals start to make art? At what point did they
become rCymodernrCO rCo and why? Could this have happened first in Asia,
rather than Europe or Africa, and again, if so, why? Sooner or later
werCOll get to answer such questions. Doing so will take us into a new,
deeper understanding of who we really are.

Mike Pitts

Commentary from John Hawks

https://www.johnhawks.net/p/the-problem-skulls-from-yunxian

John Hawks phylogeny is a reason why these ice age fossils like the over 400,000 year old Sima de los Huesos (likely Neanderthal, but
characterized as Denisovan by Hawks) need to be kept in liquid nitrogen
or, at least, -70 C. We need to get more nuclear DNA out of these
fossils, and technology will likely improve in the future. The fossil
has Neanderthal like features, but they were able to get mitochondrial
DNA out of it and it is closer to Denisovan. What is now known is that Neanderthals and Denisovans left Africa as one population that shared
the same mix of mitochondrial lineages that would have separated from
modern humans mitochondrial lineage over 800,000 years ago (our
mitochondrial DNA coelesce to a single lineage less than 200,000 years
ago in Africa (mitochondrial Eve). This is after Neanderthals and
Denisovans left Africa and is after a second group of Africans left
Africa to interbreed with Neanderthals less than half a million years
ago. This migration took more ancient lineages of mitochondrial DNA
from Africa to Europe than now exist in Africa. This migration failed
to produce a new African population outside of Africa and just became
part of the Neanderthal population. What was significant is that the
newer African mitochondrial lineage took over the Neanderthal population
while the nuclear contribution of the African migrants remained minor.
It is why the Neanderthal nuclear genome and mitochondrial genomes are
more closely related to African modern humans than are the Denisovan
genomes. The Sima de los Huesos Neanderthal still has the original mitochondrial lineage that Neanderthals and Denisovans left Africa with.
Hawks is likely misclassifying them as Denisovans. This fossils
Neanderthal relatives may have acquired the newer Neanderthal
mitochondrial lineage a hundred thousand years after this individual
existed in Europe.

Hanks can't root his phylogeny with the taxa that he has on it.

He does put up the dating results indicating that the Chinese fossils
could be between 600,000 to 1.1 million years old. If it is closer to
600,000 years these could be involved in the Denisovan lineage. The
African derived population that became Denisovans may have been
occupying parts of Asia by 800,000 years ago. So these Chinese fossils
may be more closely related to Denisovans than they are to Peking man
and Java man Homo erectus.

Ron Okimoto

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

David Dalton wrote:


Next question...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2