Fossils of possible new human species found in China

[Capvin]

I, for one, really do not know, but I do think that with each new discovery the definition changes a bit.

 

[AquaEyes]

I think the only mammals that can be classified as human are Homo Sapiens.

In anthropology, the dividing line is whether or not the species is assigned to the genus Homo. Species assigned to the genera Australopithecus, Paranthropus, or others are considered "pre-human" or "proto-human."

But while that implies that there's a neat little dividing line, in terms of how populations change over time, there really isn't a line -- more of a gray zone. It's like trying to define the first dog from a wolf -- we know a transition occurred because of selective breeding, and that we are able to distinguish a wolf from a dog now, but it didn't happen that what we'd call a wolf suddenly gave birth to what we'd call a dog. There was a transitional period when the individual animals were somewhere in-between. But we like to compartmentalize things into mental categories because it makes things easier for us to understand.

 

[chickened]

You may find this interesting.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennewick_Man

 

[AquaEyes]

Yep, I remember that one. Who is entitled to the remains is still a contentious issue. Human populations have been moving around the globe for a very long time, and it's rather common to find that the population currently living in a specific area does not descend from the first population that ever lived there. Native Americans point to European colonization of this continent as the dividing line between "us" and "them", but scientists try to argue that evidence suggests multiple colonizations before the Europeans arrived in the 16th Century, and that not all archaeological finds are necessarily "of the same people" as the Native Americans today.

On the one hand, it's a shame to stifle further study of remains of people from so long ago (when there's no one alive who knew the individual before death, I feel like it's fair game, but that's just me), but on the other hand, Native Americans have already had so much of themselves stripped away that we must be sensitive to how strongly they hold onto the bits and pieces left, even if the remains are not of their ancestors. It's more about holding sacred the "time before the white man came" and now, "the white man" is trying to take that, too. There's also the element of not wanting to put their cultural stories and religions to the test of scientific inquiry -- sometimes, people would rather continue to believe what's been passed down in their culture than know for sure.

Touchy, touchy subject -- but fascinating nonetheless.

 

[GardenerGal]

Good find, AquaEyes. It's amazing that there are so many things as yet undiscovered, even on our tiny planet. It would not be in the least surprising to learn that the legends and myths that have been passed down through the generations in many cultures, had their roots in a kernal of truth.

On the other hand, it also would not be surprising to find out that the yeti and Sasquatch might just be a very large guy named Stan who likes to put on a gorilla suit and go out in the snow to make tracks, to scare the local Cub Scouts.

 

[AquaEyes]

On the other hand, it also would not be surprising to find out that the yeti and Sasquatch might just be a very large guy named Stan who likes to put on a gorilla suit and go out in the snow to make tracks, to scare the local Cub Scouts.

I always preferred the way the "Abominable Snowman" was depicted in the Pixar movie Monsters, Inc.

"Snowcone? You want a snowcone?"

 

[orientphoenix]

you know that the Laotian striped rabbit was also discovered too it was believed to be extinct . that country is explored less than many other countries. if more people spend time searching interesting will pop out

 

[GardenerGal]

Maybe the wild should be left untouched and unexplored. Whenever the hand of modern humanity touches the wild, the wild is despoiled.

you know that the Laotian striped rabbit was also discovered too it was believed to be extinct . that country is explored less than many other countries. if more people spend time searching interesting will pop out

 

[AquaEyes]

Maybe the wild should be left untouched and unexplored. Whenever the hand of modern humanity touches the wild, the wild is despoiled.

That would work, if the only "touching" involved "exploring." Unfortunately, a lot of the "touching" would also include people doing harm without even knowing what was there. So at least when we "explore" we can find out if there's something unique, and decide about preserving it.

 

[GardenerGal]

One problem with that, as I see it, is that while the initial explorers may be well-intentioned, their inroads into unspoiled areas creates an entry for greedy, self-interested people who will exploit and ravage the environment and its denizens for their own gain. The Amazon rainforest and many other such regions are currently being openly stripped of their resources by poachers and rogue "entrepreneurs" bent on extracting what they can, with no regard for what they are destroying.

That would work, if the only "touching" involved "exploring." Unfortunately, a lot of the "touching" would also include people doing harm without even knowing what was there. So at least when we "explore" we can find out if there's something unique, and decide about preserving it.