Remnants of new human like species discovered

Originally posted by Stoic
A-A- Ancient aliens?

It's from a show with theories about aliens in the distant past being involved with the evolution of mankind and how a lot of mythology is just a misunderstanding of technology and aliens.

For example the bible when an angel is described as a big wheel of fire with a bunch of eyes on it..they think that was how those people interpreted a UFO. Just like the light Moses followed in the desert. Or hell even the ark of the covenant and the stories of people being harmed by it had to do with it being an alien power source with deadly radiation.

Why couldn't we have killed off many of the animals in the ocean?
Aren't we doing that right now? Could algae blooms have killed off
many aquatic species in the past, like they are today? Have you seen
ponds filled with this stuff, and what it does to the fish alone?

Because back then there weren't as many people on the planet and we also didn't have anywhere near the level of technology we have now. Our ability to do harm to the environment was limited.

As for the meteor; This is something that could have wiped out many
of the dinosaurs, which may have caused a domino effect in terms of
creating an inhospitable environment for animals that would have
needed a stable ecology to sustain creatures of their enormous sizes.
I still can't get past the idea that Alligator's and several other creatures
have not changed in millions of years. @Rob, our DNA is more similar
to trees, than they are to Gorillas, and even Chimps. Weird shit huh?

Well the problem with the meteor is some species from that same time period survived into today. Certain species of frog and insects.

But the meteor would of blocked out the sun for a long time..meaning no plant life would be able to continue. If there is no plant life what were the insects and frogs eating to stay alive?

I watched a documentary about what would of happened to the planet if such a meteor hit. You'd have the sun blotted out for at least a decade and acid rain lasting for many years. With huge firestorms across the planet and a shower of thousands of tiny meteors.

Shows like that are great but are just taking WAGs.
I 've seen the same subject spun in a positive light, showing the myriad ways different species would survive.
Both trains of thought make for interesting viewing.

Best if viewed when drunk.

Evolution isn't real, so it doesn't matter.

Good boy...have a nana.

💃

If we come from a strain of.monkeys that evolved over time its only.natural that other monkeys will evolve over time. Maybe they're just waiting to attack...

Originally posted by Stoic
The theory of evolution has too many holes in it to rely on it 100% IMO.

There's a few things to note.

There's evolution, which 100% happens, it's both in the records and actually been observed in laboratory conditions.

Heck, did you know there's a species of mosquito adapted to the London Underground? Able to live in the warmer subway tunnels during the winter, it became isolated from the wider population, ditched seasonal breeding like it's non-subway dwelling cousins, and now cannot breed with other mosquitos. Unsurprisingly, it's evolved only very recently. Read about it, it's completely real

So, evolution definitely happens.

Then there's specific models of evolution, which may not be 100%, but are good enough that we can go, "Hmmm.... there should be a species of this kind here at this time," dig in that spot, and find fossils of the previously unseen type we were expected to find them. It's good enough to have solid predictive power (as compared to non-evolution models which have yet to demonstrate any predictive ability), but there's a lot of details we don't know, and things go get revised fairly often as we learn more about DNA, the fossil record, and so on.

It's not all that long ago that, say, we discovered that there was evidence of interbreeding with not just neanderthals but another homo genus member, denisovans, as well.

Originally posted by Surtur

Well the problem with the meteor is some species from that same time period survived into today. Certain species of frog and insects.

But the meteor would of blocked out the sun for a long time..meaning no plant life would be able to continue. If there is no plant life what were the insects and frogs eating to stay alive?

I watched a documentary about what would of happened to the planet if such a meteor hit. You'd have the sun blotted out for at least a decade and acid rain lasting for many years. With huge firestorms across the planet and a shower of thousands of tiny meteors.

The sun was blotted out, but not totally, not everywhere, and there are living things that don't rely on the sun like fungus and/or can go into dormancy for sustained periods. Plant life had a major extinction around that time itself, but certainly not total. Smaller life forms require a lot less food, so smaller populations of them could survive off of relatively small amounts of food.

The meteor completely wiped out life in the area it hit, but merely made it murky and harder to live in others. The firestorms were a pretty brief event and were a relatively small part of the problem.

Only about 75% of species were wiped out- bad, but there's been worse- the Permian hit 90-96% being a more sustained disaster.

^^^like i said, the situation can and has been spun in different ways.

Originally posted by riv6672
^^^like i said, the situation can and has been spun in different ways.

It's too bad there's no way to stick an observation setup back then and watch. It's not like we can replicate a mass extinction's effects on an extinct ecosystem in a lab, so we gotta make a lot of approximate guesses- We know is stuff got nasty, and some of the reason why and such, but to actually watch it would be something else.

Originally posted by Q99
It's too bad there's no way to stick an observation setup back then and watch. It's not like we can replicate a mass extinction's effects on an extinct ecosystem in a lab, so we gotta make a lot of approximate guesses- We know is stuff got nasty, and some of the reason why and such, but to actually watch it would be something else.

^^^Hell yeah, that would be pretty damn epic!

Also, if i'd been in charge, this discovery'd never have been made.
Look at the artist's rendition below.
No WAY i'd have gone into that...!

A chronology of human evolution

Ardipithecus ramidus (4.4 million years ago) : Fossils were discovered in Ethiopia in the 1990s. Pelvis shows adaptations to both tree climbing and upright walking.

Australopithecus afarensis (3.9 - 2.9 million years ago) : The famous "Lucy" skeleton belongs to this species of human relative. So far, fossils of this species have only been found in East Africa. Several traits in the skeleton suggest afarensis walked upright, but they may have spent some time in the trees.

Homo habilis (2.8 - 1.5 million years ago) : This human relative had a slightly larger braincase and smaller teeth than the australopithecines or older species, but retains many more primitive features such as long arms.

Homo naledi (Of unknown age, but researchers say it could be as old as three million years) : The new discovery has small, modern-looking teeth, human-like feet but more primitive fingers and a small braincase.

Homo erectus (1.9 million years - unknown) : Homo erectus had a modern body plan that was almost indistinguishable from ours. But it had a smaller brain than a modern person's combined with a more primitive face.

Homo neanderthalensis (200,000 years - 40,000 years) The Neanderthals were a side-group to modern humans, inhabiting western Eurasia before our species left Africa. They were shorter and more muscular than modern people but had slightly larger brains.

Homo sapiens (200,000 years - present) Modern humans evolved in Africa from a predecessor species known as Homo heidelbergensis. A small group of Homo sapiens left Africa 60,000 years ago and settled the rest of the world, replacing the other human species they encountered (with a small amount of interbreeding).

The bones were found in a chamber named Dinaledi (chamber of stars), accessible only through a narrow chute, almost a hundred yards from the cave entrance. How they got there is a mystery. The most plausible answer so far: Bodies were dropped in from above. Hundreds of fossils have been recovered, most excavated from a pit a mere yard square. More fossils surely await.
Cross section of cave today

Thus showing evolutionary evidence that our ancient predecessors put up with way more BS crawling than we do. Evidence of interbreeding with such homo offshoots manifests in some members of modern homo sapiens, such as archeologists.

Originally posted by Q99
It's too bad there's no way to stick an observation setup back then and watch. It's not like we can replicate a mass extinction's effects on an extinct ecosystem in a lab, so we gotta make a lot of approximate guesses- We know is stuff got nasty, and some of the reason why and such, but to actually watch it would be something else.

Well the documentary I mentioned supposedly used computers to determine what the impact would of been like. It was on the history channel a few weeks ago though I forget the specific name.

The are extinct because they were all homos.

I sense someone who watched Friends.

Originally posted by Surtur
Well the documentary I mentioned supposedly used computers to determine what the impact would of been like. It was on the history channel a few weeks ago though I forget the specific name.

Sure, we can re-create the impact and such, that's not hard at all, but how life responds to the aftermath in the following months, years, and decades is the interesting part.

Like, one thing you don't think about is sure, stuff dies in the immediate disaster, but then that takes out some of the population controls, so some stuff then expands it's population too much and takes out it's own food supply, or expands and takes out several other critters only to be met with another rapidly expanding species who's similarly lost it's limiters. A whole lot of who survives is luck- During the Triassic, Crurotarsans (crocodile-relatives) were twice as diverse in body type as Dinosaurs (some were small and catlike, some were fully aquatic swimmers, some were large mobile animals, etc.. Notably, modern crocodilians have more heart chambers than they need for their lifestyle, an artifact of their more active ancestors), but luck favored the Dinosaurs and crurotarsans got pushed back into shoreline-ambush-predator niches.

After the Permian extinction, there was a type of herbivore the that resembled a small pig. Lystrosaurus. It looked like this:
Had a few species before the extinction, but only one or two made it.

Evidence suggests it was a burrower, which may have been how it survived- it could dig and avoid a lot of danger. It also had a wide range, suggesting simply walking away from danger may have been key to it's survival. Aside from that, it's just a small herbivorous mammal, and hardly the only thing that burrowed or ranged.

Whatever the case, it was so successful with everything else dead that it makes up 95% of land-animal fossils from the post-extinction time period, and it had only two surviving possible predators (one of which a crurotarsan, which'd grow into the diverse batch I mentioned three paragraphs ago) . It was everywhere, no species has ever matched it's success in that respect.

It'd be fascinating if we could somehow learn how it was that successful. Or how the Crurotarsans went from kicking dinosaur tail to second place.

Of course ancient aliens tells us the dinosaurs were specifically targeted for destruction so humanity could rise and evolve.

Lystrosaurus. So CUTE! ✅

C'mon man it's an F'ing dinosaur..it doesn't want to be called "cute".

Could be worse.

Okay all of what Q99 said is really interesting, but is there any proof that modern human's will continue to evolve over time (if we truly ever have in the first place)? Has there been any change in modern man in the past 4000 years? I for one saw pictures of a lot of extinct animals, but what about the animals that have continued to exist all the way up to present day with no visible differences to set them apart from their ancient ancestors?

There are ancient aquatic creatures that have not changed one bit, and are still swimming around in the deepest parts of the ocean. What happened with those mosquitoes could be as easily called adaptation instead of evolution. Right? I was under the impression that evolution was a process that took centuries or longer to happen? How long has these man made subways existed? I recall moving to Montreal as a child, and having a very difficult time with the cold weather in the winters, but after 3 years I adapted to the winters to the point that I was able to walk around for prolonged periods of time without a winter hat.

Should I consider that instance me adapting to the climate, or did I evolve? Oh and I have another question; Can we be certain that the fossils that were exhumed from that supposed ancient cavern wasn't a hoax?

Without my visiting the site personally, i'm going to take it on faith and assume no hoax.
This is an internet message board however, so...