Thread: Did chimp and human ancestors interbreed?

"SKOL" wrote:

Funny how scientists can't seem to learn from nature. When something gets too far out of line it can no longer breed. Cross a horse and a donkey and you CAN make an a-s-s..., but the a-s-s is infertile. Also maybe there's a reason why the fossil records do not support evolution (ie. man appears suddenly, not gradually). If they were to dig up an ancestor of "the elephant man", that maybe lived 4,000 years ago, they'd probably call it a missing link. But why isn't there more than one?

Just a few facts that shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out. JMO

Animals can be infertile when they interbreed between species, but you have to remember humans are not caused by some bizarre interspecies abomination like a jackalope and a penguin or a gorilla and a monkey. They are caused by two apes mating and having an offspring that is slightly different from themselves. If this new child's genetics allow him/her to reproduce and maintain the survival of his/her offspring, then you will see that change in genotype prosper. Many generations down the line and many minute changes later, you will see a large amount of variance from the original animal to the new one. A good friend of mine attends a university in Philadelphia and studies archaeology. She is making her thesis paper on what dictates whether or not two animals can mate. Is it the amount of DNA similarity, are there certain chromosomes in animals that either cause the body to advance and begin pregnancy or reject the outside species genetics, or another factor?

Also, there are many, many, many fossils of ape-humans. There is a vast collection of them which have been used to study when, how, and what changes occured in our human lineage. Such as, when humans began becoming more bi-pedal (just means 'walks upright') the foramen magnum (anthropologists like to use complex terms for simple concepts - probably to make themselves sound cooler around the ladies even though I'm sure it doesn't work - anyway the foramen magnum is just a word for the hole in the bottom of our skull where our spinal column connects) began moving more and more downward until it is where it is now - at the bottom of the skull. This is discovered by studying the old fossils of ape-humans from which we descended. Also, sexual dimorphism (another complex term for no reason - it just means the amount of difference in body size between males and females in a species) has drastically decreased in the past 3 million years of our human history. We know this, once again, by studying fossil records - and facts like this open up an enormous amount of knowledge about how our past relatives lived and why and how we changed. For instance, high sexual dimorphism in a species usually suggests there is a lot of male/male competetion, a low amount of monogamy (one man for one woman) and a high amount of polygamy (one man for many females). Since our dimorphism decreased it could be assumed that humans now have higher amounts of monogamy (which is true) and lower amounts of male/male fights to the death (well, they still happen, but MUCH less likely than before or in traditional hunter/gatherer societies).
For one of my classes we had to spend an entire week just observing and taking notes looking at 12 different replica ape-human fossils of skulls, midsections, etc. Yeah, you guessed it, it was almost as boring as it sounds. True, I love the topic, but I'm not into the whole 'staring at something for six hours until something makes sense to me'. I'd rather have someone who enjoys that figure it out and explain it to me, and luckily enough, I get that. I love anthopological theory, just making quick assumptions, allowing those to form into legitimate hypothesis, then trying to create a realistic test for them.
If anyone has any questions about anthropology, I would love to answer them - I honestly love the topic and think many people can benefit from understanding why humans work in the ways they do.

"enlvikeman" wrote:

Bible anyone?

:lol:

"SKOL" wrote:

Funny how scientists can't seem to learn from nature. When something gets too far out of line it can no longer breed. Cross a horse and a donkey and you CAN make an a-s-s..., but the a-s-s is infertile. Also maybe there's a reason why the fossil records do not support evolution (ie. man appears suddenly, not gradually). If they were to dig up an ancestor of "the elephant man", that maybe lived 4,000 years ago, they'd probably call it a missing link. But why isn't there more than one?

Just a few facts that shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out. JMO

To bad that's not true with Packer fans & sheep. :razz:

"singersp" wrote:

"SKOL" wrote:

Funny how scientists can't seem to learn from nature. When something gets too far out of line it can no longer breed. Cross a horse and a donkey and you CAN make an a-s-s..., but the a-s-s is infertile. Also maybe there's a reason why the fossil records do not support evolution (ie. man appears suddenly, not gradually). If they were to dig up an ancestor of "the elephant man", that maybe lived 4,000 years ago, they'd probably call it a missing link. But why isn't there more than one?

Just a few facts that shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out. JMO

To bad that's not true with Packer fans & sheep. :razz:

If the theory is true we will soon see sheep-men in the pastures of Wisconsin.