+- WildFact (https://wildfact.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Information Section (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-information-section)
+--- Forum: Extinct Animals (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-extinct-animals)
+--- Thread: The Evolution of Man (/topic-the-evolution-of-man)
RE: The Evolution of Man - brotherbear - 11-10-2016
What are your thoughts on the 'Aquatic Ape Theory'? http://www.primitivism.com/aquatic-ape.htm
RE: The Evolution of Man - Vinay - 11-10-2016
(11-10-2016, 04:06 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Vinjay; I agree ( post #26 ). Neanderthals were most likely both fat and muscular ( adapted to the cold even better that Eskimos ) and very very hairy ( almost bear-like ). Probably with blond or red hair and blue eyes. The Cro-magnons might possibly, at this time, have retained their dark African skin color. -Just my humble opinion.
What are your thoughts on the 'Aquatic Ape Theory'? http://www.primitivism.com/aquatic-ape.htm
Neanderthals are muscular but not fat or hairy.Blue eyes is just one mutation (like white tiger) and may be their hair is red.
This is my theory,Indian subcontinent is the border b/w Neanderthal and homo erects or Whites == Neanderthals, they interbreed sapiens later
*This image is copyright of its original author
2.Yati/Mermaid/Aquatic ape are just CONSPIRACY theories.... don't waste time on it.
RE: The Evolution of Man - brotherbear - 11-10-2016
Neanderthals are muscular but not fat or hairy.Blue eyes is just one mutation (like white tiger) and may be their hair is red.
How would you explain that no bone sewing needles have ever been discovered among Neanderthal relics, but numerous among Cro-magnon? If not physically adapted to freezing temperatures, just how did the Neanderthal people survive?
RE: The Evolution of Man - Vinay - 11-10-2016
(11-10-2016, 06:38 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Neanderthals are muscular but not fat or hairy.Blue eyes is just one mutation (like white tiger) and may be their hair is red.
How would you explain that no bone sewing needles have ever been discovered among Neanderthal relics, but numerous among Cro-magnon? If not physically adapted to freezing temperatures, just how did the Neanderthal people survive?
Small correction .. U are correct, Neanderthals must be like Siberian Tigers 1 inch FAT or like Himalayan langurs- heavily body hair to survive in cold areas.
So, i vote 1-inch FAT for Neanderthals.
sewing needles/settlements is CIVILIZATION,that is entirely different topic.
RE: The Evolution of Man - Polar - 11-10-2016
(11-10-2016, 06:38 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Neanderthals are muscular but not fat or hairy.Blue eyes is just one mutation (like white tiger) and may be their hair is red.
How would you explain that no bone sewing needles have ever been discovered among Neanderthal relics, but numerous among Cro-magnon? If not physically adapted to freezing temperatures, just how did the Neanderthal people survive?
Although they weighed almost 200-pounds on average in Europe, and only 160-pounds in Iran/Caucasus, there are several weight gain-linked or inflammation-linked diseases in modern Europeans (and now others because of inter-mixing) that point back to the Neanderthal lineage such as Type II diabetes or Crohn's disease. They were extremely muscular (and not that fat, simply stocky), but they still had genomes for these types of diseases.
Some humans can live bare or with minimal clothing in Arctic temperatures, so it is no surprise that Neanderthals could as well. Like the Inuit, Neanderthals were stocky (short-limbed, long-torso), except that the Neanderthals had greater muscle mass which, in return, excreted great body heat when exercise was done. Thicker skin layers and a nice layer of thick body hair than modern humans as well.
RE: The Evolution of Man - Pckts - 11-10-2016
@Polar No person is living bare in arctic temperatures. Body temp will drop and hypothermia will set in.
RE: The Evolution of Man - brotherbear - 11-11-2016
An elephant would not last long on the Canadian tundra. Yet, somehow, some elephants survived to evolve into the woolly mammoth - similar to some grizzlies evolving into polar bears. It is my thoughts that the history of the Neanderthal is similar.
RE: The Evolution of Man - brotherbear - 11-11-2016
The eruption of super volcano Mt. Toba 70,000 years ago and our direct ancestors - http://www.livescience.com/29130-toba-supervolcano-effects.html
RE: The Evolution of Man - parvez - 11-14-2016
I have a question why did man evolve to be a two legged animal? Though it has some disadvantages like pumping blood to brain becomes difficult due to gravity and also his upper body does not get as much exercised as lower body due to less exercise or less movement of upper body due to walking on two legs. Despite this disadvantage how did he evolve intelligent than other animals?
Perhaps the answer may be to intimidate the predators that he is a bigger animal and hence escaping from it. But how did he evolve to be intelligent is a big question.
RE: The Evolution of Man - Spalea - 11-14-2016
@parvez:
About #37: Why did man evolve to be a two legged animal ? Because being from now a two legged animal, two legs, the two former front legs, are completely relieved of the locomotion modalities. The benefit is obvious. The front legs, becoming arms and hands, are used to bring, to write ( in order to acquire a writing memory), thus the fingers have a disproportionate importance, and so on... The front legs being completely relieved of the locomotion, the man can adopt a quite vertical posture. Very interesting for dominating the landscape when he was patroling...
And his brain started to develop.
RE: The Evolution of Man - GrizzlyClaws - 11-14-2016
The Skhul man from Israel that dated about 100 kya. It looks pretty Caucasoid to me.
The new theory suggests that the migration timeline of Homo sapiens could be pushed back as early as 130 kya.
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
RE: The Evolution of Man - parvez - 11-14-2016
Thanks for beautiful answer spalea. But technically thinking it becomes difficult for brain to get nourished with blood as heart has to pump vertically upwards. Blood has to flow against gravity. Even then man evolved intelligent. That is something like a great achievement IMO.
RE: The Evolution of Man - Spalea - 11-14-2016
(11-14-2016, 01:27 PM)parvez Wrote: Thanks for beautiful answer spalea. But technically thinking it becomes difficult for brain to get nourished with blood as heart has to pump vertically upwards. Blood has to flow against gravity. Even then man evolved intelligent. That is something like a great achievement IMO.
I think that you have not to think only in terms of anatomy, of anatomical process. Even if, after all, some bipedial animals such the ostrichs (and all the ratites) are very very efficient runners. But ok, what the man can lost at the level of strength, he gains in hability with his fingers in order to make tools for exemple, to inscribe the first signs (on the tree trunks) and so on. These first signs generating the first writing memory traces. And the beginning of a thought which can be passed from a generation to the following one. At this step he becomes an animal quite different.
RE: The Evolution of Man - parvez - 11-14-2016
(11-14-2016, 04:17 PM)Spalea Wrote:Yes they are efficient runners but in terms of intelligence and brain size they are very poor. Their brain size is particularly pathetic. Even if we consider the case of birds their forearms are modified into wings but that did not make them as intelligent though they can fly which rarely other animals can do. Evolution of man is truely mesmerizing topic. There is lot to study.(11-14-2016, 01:27 PM)parvez Wrote: Thanks for beautiful answer spalea. But technically thinking it becomes difficult for brain to get nourished with blood as heart has to pump vertically upwards. Blood has to flow against gravity. Even then man evolved intelligent. That is something like a great achievement IMO.
I think that you have not to think only in terms of anatomy, of anatomical process. Even if, after all, some bipedial animals such the ostrichs (and all the ratites) are very very efficient runners. But ok, what the man can lost at the level of strength, he gains in hability with his fingers in order to make tools for exemple, to inscribe the first signs (on the tree trunks) and so on. These first signs generating the first writing memory traces. And the beginning of a thought which can be passed from a generation to the following one. At this step he becomes an animal quite different.
RE: The Evolution of Man - Spalea - 11-14-2016
@parvez:
You quote: "Yes they are efficient runners but in terms of intelligence and brain size they are very poor. Their brain size is particularly pathetic. Even if we consider the case of birds their forearms are modified into wings but that did not make them as intelligent though they can fly which rarely other animals can do. Evolution of man is truely mesmerizing topic. There is lot to study.
The ostrichs only had an anatomical advantage, they stayed with their very pathetic brain size, I'm quite agree. As concerns the man the bipedial posture gain leaded them obviously into a quite different situation: the specificity of the mankind.