The discussion revolves around new findings related to the timeline of Homo sapiens, specifically suggesting that the emergence of the species may date back 300,000 years instead of the previously thought 200,000 years. Participants explore implications of this timeline shift, the evolving understanding of human history, and the methodologies used in research.
Participants generally share a sense of intrigue about the new findings and the evolving nature of human history, but there is no consensus on the implications of the timeline change or the interpretations of migration patterns.
Some claims about the timeline and migration patterns depend on ongoing research and may not be fully established. The discussion reflects a range of uncertainties and assumptions about human evolutionary history.
Yes, these are bad news. 300,000 years instead of 200,000. This means we had even an entire half more time to not improve on our wild evolutionary habits.1oldman2 said:
Agreed, I always thought as an analogy, "If genetics were a deck of cards there would be a lot of extra jokers in the deck"fresh_42 said:
I'm particularly pleased with the new technologies being developed in these fields, at this rate it really is a never ending story.Evo said:Amazing how we keep finding out more and more about our history, it's like the never ending story.
I find especially interesting the investigations of mitochondrial DNA to reconstruct our migrations. Let alone these are far from being known. IIRC even the settlement of the Americas isn't finally known. Somehow funny that we know more about how we managed to reach Polynesia, which by the way is an enormous achievement, than we actually know how many migrations waves and whether along both coasts or only along the pacific coast took place to reach Fireland.1oldman2 said:I'm particularly pleased with the new technologies being developed in these fields, at this rate it really is a never ending story.
Although this one has been a little controversial, it still boggles my imagination. A major rewrite if its proven correct.fresh_42 said: