http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2011/06/30/mabuse.man.stoned.to.death.cnn?hpt=hp_t2

http://www.cnn.com/video/...?hpt=hp_t2

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110606/full/news.2011.350.html2

Excavation cites reveal that Homo Erectus had camps and civilizations in the Eurasia region of the planet at least 1.85 million years ago.

The significance of this is summed up as such:

1. Homo Erectus, which lead to homo sapiens (believed) could have evolved seperately than homo ergaster (an African hominid). This would challenge the long standing notion that modern hominids evolved in the plains and grasslands of Africa.

2. Early hominids were much more mobile than previously thought. Though hunters and scavengers, they may have been extremely nomadic, settling in Eurasia much earlier than originally thought.

3. Early modern human evolution may have taken place in jungles and forests.

The reason I find this so fascinating is that I don't believe we're plains creatures. I think we evolved much like chimps and gorillas--under foliage and amongst trees. In the open plain, we would need a much better system of body temperature regulation---fur. We're for the most part, hairless. We also have much more bod fat than other mammals.

I'm not saying that we're aquatic in origin (there's a theory running around about the fact that we may have had an aquatic past which is why our body fat makeup is much much different from other primates and mammals). But, I am saying that I think evolved under the shelter of forrests and not in the open plains.

At any rate, 10 years from now something new will be discovered that may throw a wrench in everything, and this isn't an earth shattering change in the thinkings of the origins of man, but it does introduce a more complex view of the origins of modern man.

I'd love to hear the take on those 'aquatic' origin folks have on the sites in Georgia.

.

[Edited 7/1/11 4:35am]

They just can't make up their minds.

One minute it's that all life began in Africa, the next it's Eurasia.

They should just admit they don't fucking know.

armpit said:

They just can't make up their minds.

One minute it's that all life began in Africa, the next it's Eurasia.

They should just admit they don't fucking know.

If it happened in Africa, I'm still not convinced it was in the plains.

I just think it had to be in forests or jungles.

i think we'll se even more evidence of early humans when the polar ice caps recede the poles used to be tropical, and to me it makes sense that early humans lived where food was abundant

XxAxX said:

i think we'll se even more evidence of early humans when the polar ice caps recede the poles used to be tropical, and to me it makes sense that early humans lived where food was abundant

I just spent TOO much time reading up on the aquatic theory

I'm perplexed as to why we lost our body hair. It's the perfect temperature regulator in hot or cold climes. While we fat (which humans have a very high percentage of compared to other mammals on land), is a great insulator for animals that spend enormous or exclusive amounts of time in the water.

imago said:

XxAxX said:

i think we'll se even more evidence of early humans when the polar ice caps recede the poles used to be tropical, and to me it makes sense that early humans lived where food was abundant

I just spent TOO much time reading up on the aquatic theory

I'm perplexed as to why we lost our body hair. It's the perfect temperature regulator in hot or cold climes. While we fat (which humans have a very high percentage of compared to other mammals on land), is a great insulator for animals that spend enormous or exclusive amounts of time in the water.

[img:$uid]http://images.bizrate.com/resize?sq=500&uid=2239550328[/img:$uid]

imago said:

XxAxX said:

i think we'll se even more evidence of early humans when the polar ice caps recede the poles used to be tropical, and to me it makes sense that early humans lived where food was abundant

I just spent TOO much time reading up on the aquatic theory

I'm perplexed as to why we lost our body hair. It's the perfect temperature regulator in hot or cold climes. While we fat (which humans have a very high percentage of compared to other mammals on land), is a great insulator for animals that spend enormous or exclusive amounts of time in the water.

Because at some point we started to wear clothes, unlike other mammals.

"HOMO erectis"? Whats that like a bad joke on your part? Homo erectus stopped being a funny word after 10th grade science.

Also *cough* reptillians *cough*.

[Edited 7/1/11 4:28am]

Tremolina said:

imago said:

I just spent TOO much time reading up on the aquatic theory

I'm perplexed as to why we lost our body hair. It's the perfect temperature regulator in hot or cold climes. While we fat (which humans have a very high percentage of compared to other mammals on land), is a great insulator for animals that spend enormous or exclusive amounts of time in the water.

Because at some point we started to wear clothes, unlike other mammals.

which we would only have needed, to supplement our own fur if we started off in a warm place and migrated somewhere cooler

Tremolina said:

imago said:

I just spent TOO much time reading up on the aquatic theory

I'm perplexed as to why we lost our body hair. It's the perfect temperature regulator in hot or cold climes. While we fat (which humans have a very high percentage of compared to other mammals on land), is a great insulator for animals that spend enormous or exclusive amounts of time in the water.

Because at some point we started to wear clothes, unlike other mammals.

But, the body hair was lost previous to this, wasn't it?

And besides, almost all uncontacted tribes when naked, normally cover their genitals.

Yet, our genitals are grotesquely hairy in comparison to the rest of our bodies (except our heads).

Have you seen the old pictures of the Dirty Mind era Prince, for example? His pubic mound is enormous.

armpit said:

They just can't make up their minds.

One minute it's that all life began in Africa, the next it's Eurasia.

They should just admit they don't fucking know.

It's not that anyone can't make up their minds. It's that new evidence and information is found and we have to take that into account.

imago said:

Tremolina said:

Because at some point we started to wear clothes, unlike other mammals.

But, the body hair was lost previous to this, wasn't it?

And besides, almost all uncontacted tribes when naked, normally cover their genitals.

Yet, our genitals are grotesquely hairy in comparison to the rest of our bodies (except our heads).

Have you seen the old pictures of the Dirty Mind era Prince, for example? His pubic mound is enormous.

he has the classic osama bin laden pubes

From what I understand, there were three waves of humanoid migrations.

Homo Erectus allegedly left Africa first and settles mainly in Eurasia.

Homo Neanderthalis left second and settled in Europe.

Homo Sapien was the latecomer, and supposedly spread everywhere...mixing with the former 2 and making them "extinct".

I know it's more complex than that, but basically that's what I read.

It would stand to reason why then Asians (heavy Homo Erectus features), Europeans (heavy Neanderthalis features) and Africans (unadulterated Homo Sapien features) are so unique.

PurpleJedi said:

From what I understand, there were three waves of humanoid migrations.

Homo Erectus allegedly left Africa first and settles mainly in Eurasia.

Homo Neanderthalis left second and settled in Europe.

Homo Sapien was the latecomer, and supposedly spread everywhere...mixing with the former 2 and making them "extinct".

I know it's more complex than that, but basically that's what I read.

It would stand to reason why then Asians (heavy Homo Erectus features), Europeans (heavy Neanderthalis features) and Africans (unadulterated Homo Sapien features) are so unique.

with a name like that, I bet they settled in Germany!

imago said:

Tremolina said:

Because at some point we started to wear clothes, unlike other mammals.

But, the body hair was lost previous to this, wasn't it?

And besides, almost all uncontacted tribes when naked, normally cover their genitals.

Yet, our genitals are grotesquely hairy in comparison to the rest of our bodies (except our heads).

Have you seen the old pictures of the Dirty Mind era Prince, for example? His pubic mound is enormous.

Yeah but Prince is Wobbit Erectus.

Is this one where the guy found remains in Georgia, USA dating back over a million years? Which I think would upset a whole lot of thing.

imago said:

Tremolina said:

Because at some point we started to wear clothes, unlike other mammals.

But, the body hair was lost previous to this, wasn't it?

And besides, almost all uncontacted tribes when naked, normally cover their genitals.

Yet, our genitals are grotesquely hairy in comparison to the rest of our bodies (except our heads).

Have you seen the old pictures of the Dirty Mind era Prince, for example? His pubic mound is enormous.

hair grows where skin rubs on skin, also I think it is a protective thing.

I mean, what if we had no eyebrows? Our naked brows would be as vulnerable as newborns!

imago said:

The reason I find this so fascinating is that I don't believe we're plains creatures. I think we evolved much like chimps and gorillas--under foliage and amongst trees. In the open plain, we would need a much better system of body temperature regulation---fur. We're for the most part, hairless. We also have much more bod fat than other mammals.

but there are people who live in deserts and plains right now, like in Africa, and they are not very hairy people.

NDRU said:

imago said:

The reason I find this so fascinating is that I don't believe we're plains creatures. I think we evolved much like chimps and gorillas--under foliage and amongst trees. In the open plain, we would need a much better system of body temperature regulation---fur. We're for the most part, hairless. We also have much more bod fat than other mammals.

but there are people who live in deserts and plains right now, like in Africa, and they are not very hairy people.

My knowledge on the subject is really limited, but I've heard the theory, that walking upright and leaving the woods, it would make sense for the first ape men to survive better without the hair, as it out in the open plains it would be easier to cool under the sun (an ape that walks on all four gets a larger income of sun, than an upright man in mid-day).

But as I said, I don't know.

OF COURSE...no one is mentioning the OTHER theory...

...comcerning extraterrestrial experimention on the primitive primates on this planet that resulted in modern man.

Not saying that I believe it...but I'm not discounting the possibility that the Garden of Eden was really a secure facility and the subjects did something ("ate the fruit") that screwed up the tests...resulting in a frustrated departure by the spacefaring scientists and their experiments unleashed upon the earth to grave consequences. Kind'a like what we did with the killer bees in Brazil.

PurpleJedi said:

OF COURSE...no one is mentioning the OTHER theory...

...comcerning extraterrestrial experimention on the primitive primates on this planet that resulted in modern man.

Not saying that I believe it...but I'm not discounting the possibility that the Garden of Eden was really a secure facility and the subjects did something ("ate the fruit") that screwed up the tests...resulting in a frustrated departure by the spacefaring scientists and their experiments unleashed upon the earth to grave consequences. Kind'a like what we did with the killer bees in Brazil.

yes, it is certainly an interesting discussion. As much as we are still animals, clearly we are different than every other animal on the planet, and what the hell made us that way?

Of course, if you're (not you, specifically) going to suggest aliens, then why not just God, as had been originally proposed?

Cravens said:

NDRU said:

but there are people who live in deserts and plains right now, like in Africa, and they are not very hairy people.

My knowledge on the subject is really limited, but I've heard the theory, that walking upright and leaving the woods, it would make sense for the first ape men to survive better without the hair, as it out in the open plains it would be easier to cool under the sun (an ape that walks on all four gets a larger income of sun, than an upright man in mid-day).

But as I said, I don't know.

not to mention skin color which allows different people to maximize (or minimize) sun absorbtion depending on climate

NDRU said:

Cravens said:

My knowledge on the subject is really limited, but I've heard the theory, that walking upright and leaving the woods, it would make sense for the first ape men to survive better without the hair, as it out in the open plains it would be easier to cool under the sun (an ape that walks on all four gets a larger income of sun, than an upright man in mid-day).

But as I said, I don't know.

not to mention skin color which allows different people to maximize (or minimize) sun absorbtion depending on climate

Hair solves all of this.

It regulate temperature far better than bare skin on mammals as well as providing protection from the sun.

Melonin is great and all, but hair still wins.

Come to think of it, maybe that's why the head and genital area has hair--the help regulate our bits and pieces and our brains. This could be what explains Prince's huge public mound.

imago said:

NDRU said:

not to mention skin color which allows different people to maximize (or minimize) sun absorbtion depending on climate

Hair solves all of this.

It regulate temperature far better than bare skin on mammals as well as providing protection from the sun.

Melonin is great and all, but hair still wins.

Come to think of it, maybe that's why the head and genital area has hair--the help regulate our bits and pieces and our brains. This could be what explains Prince's huge public mound.

yes I totally agree. Hair also covers vital parts like arteries (like a man's beard)

Why did we lose our hair? It is a weird question, apparently we have the same number of hairs as chimpanzees, but they are much shorter. And to say clothing is what made us lose our hair makes no sense to me when in Africa where people wear less clothes, they are less hairy than in Europe where they wear more clothing.

But clothes aside, it does make sense that people in colder climates are more hairy than people in warmer climates. Vain Andy, are you reading this? Why the hell are you living in the south?!

NDRU said:

PurpleJedi said:

OF COURSE...no one is mentioning the OTHER theory...

...comcerning extraterrestrial experimention on the primitive primates on this planet that resulted in modern man.

Not saying that I believe it...but I'm not discounting the possibility that the Garden of Eden was really a secure facility and the subjects did something ("ate the fruit") that screwed up the tests...resulting in a frustrated departure by the spacefaring scientists and their experiments unleashed upon the earth to grave consequences. Kind'a like what we did with the killer bees in Brazil.

yes, it is certainly an interesting discussion. As much as we are still animals, clearly we are different than every other animal on the planet, and what the hell made us that way?

Of course, if you're (not you, specifically) going to suggest aliens, then why not just God, as had been originally proposed?

Because if you throw God into the equation, then never mind the great primate African dyspora...we're then discussing clay = man and man's rib = woman.

NDRU said:

imago said:

Hair solves all of this.

It regulate temperature far better than bare skin on mammals as well as providing protection from the sun.

Melonin is great and all, but hair still wins.

Come to think of it, maybe that's why the head and genital area has hair--the help regulate our bits and pieces and our brains. This could be what explains Prince's huge public mound.

yes I totally agree. Hair also covers vital parts like arteries (like a man's beard)

Why did we lose our hair? It is a weird question, apparently we have the same number of hairs as chimpanzees, but they are much shorter. And to say clothing is what made us lose our hair makes no sense to me when in Africa where people wear less clothes, they are less hairy than in Europe where they wear more clothing.

But clothes aside, it does make sense that people in colder climates are more hairy than people in warmer climates. Vain Andy, are you reading this? Why the hell are you living in the south?!

I think our losing our hair was not a gradual thing but happened pretty quickly--within tens of thousands of years or less.

The Aborigines of Australia have gone one step further in adaptation (Beyond skin pigmentation), and have the ability to withstand extreme heat and cold without the need for clothing though---this kind of puts a damper on the hair theory.

I once saw a documentary conducted where several Europeans had camped out in the Outback, and they were bundled up in jackets and sleeping bags freezing their tails off at night, while the Aboriginal guide was shirtless and didn't seem too bothered by the cold.

THis psychical adaptation couldn't have taken too long to evolve. My assumption is that if there's a need or advantage, it would happen really quickly in isolated places--and Australia was for ages, isolated. Even more isolated locales lead to dwarfism and "gigantism"--tribes exist in small islands and pockets in China where these changes took place (And, it had to have happened quickly).

But going from one race to another with changes in a few pyshical adaptations (eyes, skin color, body build, etc.) is relatively minor regardless of the adaptive advantages.

Loosing all of your fur and developing that 2% IQ leap from Chimp to hominid, at least to me, would have required some really special circumstances.

.

[Edited 7/1/11 12:56pm]

PurpleJedi said:

NDRU said:

yes, it is certainly an interesting discussion. As much as we are still animals, clearly we are different than every other animal on the planet, and what the hell made us that way?

Of course, if you're (not you, specifically) going to suggest aliens, then why not just God, as had been originally proposed?

Because if you throw God into the equation, then never mind the great primate African dyspora...we're then discussing clay = man and man's rib = woman.

Just playing devil's advocate to say why would it be one thing whose existence is unproven (aliens) and not another (God)?

Aliens are more likely to me though!

Article about Aboriginal body temperature regulation:

http://books.google.com/books?id=-K_SYHBo42MC&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=aborigines+not+cold+at+night&source=bl&ots=QTx7v2yrUR&sig=LOeUmHLjOik0Td_XFmVvF_GyKoA&hl=en&ei=giMOTvTvLYiyrAfXh-TWCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=aborigines%20not%20cold%20at%20night&f=false

http://books.google.com/b...mp;f=false

This is an interesting topic...but I AM sorry in advance but the term homo erectus has always cracked me the hell up...talk about classic sexual innuendoes! LMAO

imago said:

XxAxX said:

i think we'll se even more evidence of early humans when the polar ice caps recede the poles used to be tropical, and to me it makes sense that early humans lived where food was abundant

I just spent TOO much time reading up on the aquatic theory

I'm perplexed as to why we lost our body hair. It's the perfect temperature regulator in hot or cold climes. While we fat (which humans have a very high percentage of compared to other mammals on land), is a great insulator for animals that spend enormous or exclusive amounts of time in the water.

that's because our alien ancestors were entirely bald. when they combined their DNA with that of earth's apes to create homo sapiens, hair/fur only barely made the cut.