English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-06-17 11:31:06 · 8 answers · asked by anonymous 2 in Arts & Humanities History

8 answers

Yes, all of the various genus and species designations of hominids that were ancestors of modern homo sapiens are based on the discovery and careful analysis of physical remains of those ancient hominids and their geological context.

A prime example is the aforementioned "Lucy" an australopithecus afarensis skeleton found in Ethiopia.

Scientists don't simply make up binomial genus/species designations without evidence.

Homo sapiens (humans) emerged roughly 200,000 years ago.

Some anthropologists have posited a shift to more "modern" humans 50,000 years ago when we begin to see more evidence of the complex of traits we typically associate with being human, including tool use, burial of dead, production of clothing, cave art, and more "novelty" or variety in production of tools. However, most of these "innovations" are attested at far earlier periods even before the emergence of homo sapiens - rather it is the complex or group of all of these traits together and their increasing frequency that suggests a "shift" to some people. It's worth noting though that the chronological resolution possible when studying artifacts originating that far in the past is not particularly fine. What seems like a "sudden" shift probably was not all that sudden, but we cannot date items with sufficient accuracy to be positive. Vagaries of preservation must also be taken into account.

2006-06-17 13:33:28 · answer #1 · answered by F 5 · 1 0

Nothing has been proven. It was soo long ago that any evidence would have been destroyed by now. Just looking at modern "scientist" that reserch the history of the earth makes me laugh. The creationist belive that God created everything, The evolutionist belive that gods cannot exist. So they argue, and since neather of them have any evidence, nobody gets anywere. Even the "missing links" have been disproven, by evolutionist, but they keep them in the textbooks because they have nothing to replace them with, and all the creationist have is old books. There is no proof, and there probobly never will be.

2006-06-17 11:45:07 · answer #2 · answered by name 2 · 0 0

You are a descendant of the first humans. The fact that you exist now is irrefutable proof that the first humans existed.

2006-06-17 12:01:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, there are or is no physical proof of the first existing humans.

2006-06-17 11:40:10 · answer #4 · answered by odsirighamusamicah26734 1 · 0 0

I believe that Scientist have found "Lucy" the "Eve" of modern humans in Africa.

You may want to check out this website: http://users.hol.gr/~dilos/prehis/prerm3.htm There are several other websites with simular information. The National Geographics has a wonderful article on it.

2006-06-17 11:35:13 · answer #5 · answered by abstractrose2 2 · 0 0

bassmeister is right. all of us are proof. your question is very vague-
-regardless of when the first humans arrived and regardless of how- we are proof that they were here

2006-06-17 13:53:46 · answer #6 · answered by lyleaux 2 · 0 0

The Leaky's (archeologists) have studied in Africa for years. Man originally comes from Africa.

2006-06-17 13:09:44 · answer #7 · answered by kriend 7 · 0 0

it's hard to say. there have been some fairly recent finds of ancient humanoids but with the various mutations it's hard to say for sure....

2006-06-17 11:35:04 · answer #8 · answered by rooster2381 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers