Open access article in JHE:

Evolution of Homo in the Middle and Late Pleistocene.

Abstract

The Middle and Late Pleistocene is arguably the most interesting
period in human evolution. This broad period witnessed the evolution
of our own lineage, as well as that of our sister taxon, the
Neanderthals, and related Denisovans. It is exceptionally rich in both
fossil and archaeological remains, and uniquely benefits from insights
gained through molecular approaches, such as paleogenetics and
paleoproteomics, that are currently not widely applicable in earlier
contexts. This wealth of information paints a highly complex picture,
often described as 'the Muddle in the Middle,' defying the common
adage that ‘more evidence is needed’ to resolve it. Here we review
competing phylogenetic scenarios and the historical and theoretical developments that shaped our approaches to the fossil record, as well
as some of the many remaining open questions associated with this
period. We propose that advancing our understanding of this critical
time requires more than the addition of data and will necessitate a
major shift in our conceptual and theoretical framework. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248422001397

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Pandora wrote:

: This is the period when the ancestral lineage of living humans developed,
: thought to have first emerged as early as ca. 300 ka in Africa

This is just stupid.

There was NOTHING that could be mistaken for "Modern Man" back 300k
years ago. If you want to talk genetics, maybe, then it's probably a lot more accurate to go with the Good Doctor, Dr. Verhaegen, and say it all began
with erectus.

Modern man, that is.

There is a very compelling argument to be made for it.

I mean, how close are we, genetically, to Chimps? Certainly close enough for some to argue that Pan should be abolished & Chimps folded into Homo. Not
the same species as we are but Homo none the less...

"They looked different!"

Well your mother was right, you are wrong; "It's what is on the inside that counts!"

European skulls changed significantly over the last 600 years or so! Are you going to argue "Different Species" there?

Diet and lifestyle alone are enough to result in significant changes to anatomy.

And, yes, there is genetics...

Anyway, if you're going to push back "Modern" humans then why stop at 300k years ago? What are we pretending is significant here?

The Middle and Late Pleistocene is arguably the most interesting
period in human evolution.

Well. *Anything* can be argued, which makes *Everything* the "Arguably" most significant period of human evolution.

Why smear all that lipstick on a pig, unless you're trying to hide the fact that it's
a pig?

This broad period witnessed the evolution of our own lineage

Self refuting.

They pretend we began some 300k years ago which is well beyond the halfway
mark of the Pleistocene.

And "The Pleistocene" is just made-up anyway. It's the Quaternary Period with
a Holocene inexplicably erased. That's all. There's no reason for separating out
the Holocene. None. The only /Apparent/ reason is that whoever made it all
up in the first place assumed the Quaternary Period ended... that the glacial/interglacial cycle is over.

Why?

as well as that of our sister taxon, the Neanderthals, and related Denisovans.

So our "Sisters" are our parents?!?!?!?

This person is truly warped.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Pandora wrote:

Open access article in JHE:

Evolution of Homo in the Middle and Late Pleistocene.

Abstract

The Middle and Late Pleistocene is arguably the most interesting
period in human evolution. This broad period witnessed the evolution
of our own lineage, as well as that of our sister taxon, the
Neanderthals, and related Denisovans. It is exceptionally rich in both fossil and archaeological remains, and uniquely benefits from insights gained through molecular approaches, such as paleogenetics and paleoproteomics, that are currently not widely applicable in earlier contexts. This wealth of information paints a highly complex picture,
often described as 'the Muddle in the Middle,' defying the common
adage that ‘more evidence is needed’ to resolve it. Here we review competing phylogenetic scenarios and the historical and theoretical developments that shaped our approaches to the fossil record, as well
as some of the many remaining open questions associated with this
period. We propose that advancing our understanding of this critical
time requires more than the addition of data and will necessitate a
major shift in our conceptual and theoretical framework. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248422001397

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)