A New Twist In The Evolution Of Man
Written by Major Tom
Filed under: Science & Technology, News & Info
August 9, 2007
Scientists are often too smart that some of them have invented and built the smart Tomahawk missile, so smart that it can hit a target many miles away with a margin-of-error merely in meters. I once had joked before that Tomahawk missile were so smart that if one of them would decide to enter Harvard University, it would surely end up with a masteral degree of some sort.
But a recent fossil discovery in Kenya had once again divulged the weakness of established scientific theories on human evolution and scientists have found themselves scratching their heads, realizing that they are back to square one. It was previously well-accepted in the scientific community that humans (homo sapiens) have evolved gradually from apes towards hominids (or human-like apes), into human-like species generally known as Homo Erectus and then towards the present form of humans as Homo Sapiens (see this Wikipedia article on human evolution).
And then this discovery of a skull remains of a Homo Erectus in Kenya, one that was carbon-dated to have lived side by side Homo Habilis and therefore effectively set aside and destroyed the previously accepted table of evolution that had showed how Homo Habilis—-termed as “The Handy Man” for having made and used stone tools—have gradually transformed intoe Homo Erectus, the specie heavily believed to be the direct descendants of humans, except for the “missing link” specie that should connect them.
Now, scientists are not merely puzzled about this missing link between Homo Erectus and humans, but have now to contend to the question of how and where did Homo Erectus have evolved from, when it is now found out that they could not have evolved from Homo Habilis.
This new findings in fact reinforces another contending theory on human evolution, one that hypothesizes the sudden onset of the human specie, proposing that humans have not really gradually evolved from apes and hominids but have appeared into the scene in a sudden spurt of generation, revoking thereon the natural selection theory of Charles Darwin, as inculcated in his seminal notes “The Origin of Species”.
How human beings have suddenly appeared on Earth is now a scientific mystery that must be worth inquiring and scientists today might find it more worthwhile to investigate this angle than be stuck with the seemingly never-ending search for “the missing link”, which over the years had became like the quest for the Holy Grail, always searching but no finding. Unless if we believe Steven Speilberg and Mr. Indiana Jones.
Maybe scientists could better enlist some Tomahawk missiles in their quest for the “missing link” for they could prove to be smarter than any scientists living today. Just a suggestion, mind you.
In February 2007, A University of Pittsburgh professor named Dr. Jeffrey H. Schwartz have subscribed to this theory of sudden onset of human beings through a study he made using the “Molecular Assumption” principle where it becomes scientifically accepted as form of empirical result-gathering the use of blood serums in order to established the relativity of different species. It is quite a tricky form of experimentation vis-à-vis the theory of evolution since it did established that man and apes have similar strong molecular reaction in their blood serum and so therefore it is established that they are closely related groupings of mammals.
Now, this would seem to establish more the theory that man could have really come from apes. Not so, said Dr. Schwartz since the strongly similar serum reaction of man and ape’s establishes the assumption that they could not in fact have evolved from each other, either from ape to man or man to ape, since they won’t easily “divulge” from each other, or in plain text, they can’t spread out from each other since in the first place, they have similar structure in molecular terms, closely knitted that they can spread out from one to another, but existing side by side most probably. It’s really a tricky scientific assumption, not easily understood.
But as I understand it, this Molecular Assumption theory can be exemplified by the circumstance of two plastic balls, one was small and simple (apes) and one was huge and quaint-looking (humans). They have been placed side by side in one particular place, there even from the beginning of time, and have not evolved from each other, one did not came from the other, but had always been there and placed there together—not one after the other.
Of course, this new theory on human evolution is very new that at this point it would be hard-pressed to easily overcome the well-established and accepted natural selection and gradual evolution theory that had been there for one and half century now, since the time Charles Darwin had launched “the voyage of the beagle”.
So did man gradually evolved from apes? If so, could we see a good evidence of gradual and slow transformation when the “missing link” species remains a mystery till this day and in fact been widened by this new fossil discovery in Kenya?
Or did human beings did came so suddenly as a specie?
Perhaps, it now becomes a question if in fact Adam and Eve were suddenly thrown out from Eden and found themselves suddenly on Earth full of hominids or Homo Erectus.
What do you think?
Know what I think? The Catholic church and other religious leaders will be ecstatic at this discovery because it proves that they were right the first time. That humans were created in the image of God and not as a result of evolution.
At the same time, this will also give credence to those UFO fanatics who believe that the human species that we know of today are a result of experimentations by extraterrestrial beings…
Take your pick…
Comment by snglguy — August 9, 2007 @ 11:04 am
To sngl: That was I was thinking and I should have mentioned this on this post; glad that you brought it up. Vatican would be smirking right now, now that a contending theory, a more modern one so it seems, seem to support their claim.
About the UFO’s,—I say that won’t be such a far-off possibility, is it?
Comment by Major Tom — August 9, 2007 @ 11:12 am
Since I find the idea of talking snakes too fantastic to be believable perhaps, UFO delivery?
Comment by eric — August 9, 2007 @ 12:03 pm
To eric: Ha..ha..Strange things do happen in this strange, strange world.
Comment by Major Tom — August 9, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
This new finding does not reinforce the Church’s creationism theory. It merely weakens Darwin’s theory of evolution. I think we would still find more proof on the origin of our species in the future. I am reluctant to wholly accept existing theories at the moment precisely because of the dearth of evidence available. But once we get to the bottom of this “mystery,” we would probably stop speculating and concocting myths regarding our origin.
Comment by slim whale — August 9, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
Interesting theory as I always believed in Darwin’s theory, now I’m none the wiser…
Comment by pining — August 10, 2007 @ 1:08 am
that’s a billion dollar question that scientist and researchers keep on amending their own findings on our origin.
to suddenly spurt out of nowhere is kind of questionable. there must be some basis on that theory.
funny, but it looks like it’s all hunches as to our beginnings.
well, as one of my friends mentioned…the truth is out there.
Comment by ipanema — August 10, 2007 @ 4:55 am
To slimwhale: It would still be far from reinforcing the Church’s position but to be sure, it had opened more questions on Darwinism and to this day, the “missing link” specie is yet to be found, for the difference in Homo Habilis (the known most latest of the erectus) and Homo sapien is still so wide in terms of body structure and brain size that if one puts it side by side, as if Homo Sapiens just appeared so suddenly, merely about 70,000 years in gap—that’s too short for evolution. Now, we can’t find any other homo specie in that 70,000 period that divides the habilis and the sapiens.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 8:51 am
To pining: I had always thought that the Darwinian theory of natural selection is so veritable for indeed, if one merely has average intelligence, you could clearly see that in the animal kingdom, the stronger specie survives and the weaker one desist, and you could see adaptation everywhere, where like the giraffe, perhaps it won’t be so unthinkable that they have grown so very long necks because over the ages, they kept on reaching out for higher trees in order to eat and survive. But that’s adaptation. Evolution is a very different matter. In the anciebnt years, some snakes have small two feet in order to travel, but now any snake had no such thing, but adaptation of the specie have made them so nimble and swift that they won’t need no feet no more.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 8:56 am
To ipanema: No not exactly “a sudden spurt of specie” for that’s merely a euphimistic term I’ve used to differentiate from the Darwinian principle of very slow and gradual evolution.
What the the new theory proposes that despite that there would be a base generation for humans to finally come, it didn’t come as a form of adaptation (see my comment on pining) but more of a specific activity of generation, like a sudden introduction of genome had occured and homo sapiens became an entirely new breed—as opposed to the very long process of adaptation and evolution.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 9:00 am
Call me simplistic, but I would rather believe that we were created in the image and likeness of God rather than having monkeys as ancestors…but I guess this is hard for some of us to believe, especially when we sometimes act more like monkeys rather than someone created in the image of God…sigh!
Comment by Gypsy — August 10, 2007 @ 10:46 am
To Gypsy: Well said Gypsy and I could subscribe to that seriously.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
To Gypsy: Well said Gypsy and I could subscribe to that seriously.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
i have been reading this news and the ensuing debates at a supposedly rizal-centric forum lately. evolutionists debates not aware of the rule to be on-topic…
talks aout homo erectus and homo sapiens co-inhabiting the same space but not necessarily interacting
Comment by tutubi — August 10, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
To tutubi: This circumstance—erectus and sapiens existing collaterally—is one possibility that might just weaken the evolution theory however, there had been no such fossil discovery that would give credence to this postulate. But if one day there’d be fossil evidence, it might strenghten the “sudden outspurt” theory although this won’t erase altogether that evolution could still have happened. I have a feeling that since what we are investigating had happened million of years ago, it would be nearly impossible to really know the truth no matter what. We could only guess by what we have in hand and nothing more.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
Hehehe. They never give up, do they? Before, it was just the missing link, ngayon naman, they are back to square one!
Comment by rhodora — August 10, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
To rhodora: I bet they would keep getting at it. I don’t really have a problem with this because every discovery and search for truth and uncovering of mystery are very good undertaking. I just felt that it would be so difficult really to find out about a circumstance that had happened eons ago.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
In strictly scientific term consistent with the big bang theory, life was formed by the combination and permutation of the chemical elements - oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, etc.. The theory of evolution appeals to those that subscribe to the big bang theory in with the assumption that the earth was barren in this origin and all forms of life evolved thereafter. If we think that man’s recorded history started some 5,000 years ago and the earth has been around say for the sake of argument 5 billion years or even more, man’s experience to investigate its origins is extremely limited.
Comment by bw — August 10, 2007 @ 7:13 pm
To BW: So true and probably the truth about human evolution would remain a mystery forever. Everything becomes merely estimation and calculation. If time travel becomes one day a reality, then that might just be the answer.
Comment by Major Tom — August 10, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
i an never a believer of darwin. although i do applaud him for such quest in finding how we’ve come to become the “humans” that we are.
i still am a believer of Genesis. I could not argue more with their theories because the way they have put on all their reasons, it is indeed probable.
i guess, i could only say that their geniuses all came from God’s divine intervention.
(naging masyado na ba akong Catholic, bro?)
Comment by intsik — August 11, 2007 @ 6:24 am
To Intsik: Hindi naman masyado p’re, you stand strong in what you believe in and that’s good. There are many out there who ain’t that strong.
In my case, I believe so much in Divine Intervention, despite that I am not Catholic in faith, and I believe that this might have happened in every creation we see, including human evolution.
Comment by Major Tom — August 11, 2007 @ 7:37 am
natawa talaga ako sa image ng pinakita mo, haha. parang gusto ko tumayo sa upuan ko ngayon, hehehe.
napanood mo na ba yung movie na “man to man”? nag download lang ako, maganda.
Comment by iskoo — August 11, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
i believe we may never really know where we came from. but i do believe that it’s better to focus on where we are heading.
Comment by pepe — August 11, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
Religion teacher: we are made from the image and likeness of God
Jose: Ma’am hindi po! galing po tayo sa mga unggoy!
Religion Teacher: Jose hindi natin pinag-uusapan ang lahi mo dito…
hrhrhrhr just want to share this joke
Seriously I don’t know what I believe. I mean yeah “we’re made from the image and likeness of God” but nobody really knows what GOd looked like beside that should not be taken literally right?
if there are proofs that we came from monkeys then so be it…maybe Adam and Eve looked like apes too or maybe Adam and Eve did not really exist. For me the important thing is the present (because we don’t look like monkeys anymore) and the future (because I doubt we will look like monkeys) hehehe
Comment by verns — August 11, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
You know what my anthropology-degree-less theory is? hehehe…. I think the Homo Erectus they found in Kenya was a prodigy on the evolution cycle. He/she must’ve evolved faster than others! LOL… I know it sounds stupid cause evolution is a slow process than spans eons… But then again… If we did evolve from apes and some “remain” apes… then it’s highly probable that as some Homo Habilis evolved into creatures that stand erect… Some “chose” to remain slouched and work with makeshift axes and what nots…
My epiphany also tells me that some war between Erectus and Habilis happened… Seeing that creatures that stand erect have some advantages (wider angle of vision, extra agility, etc.) One race won out. Now the reason for the war is sketchy from my epiphany… I am guessing it has something to do with copyrights of the wheel or the discovery of fire or something.
Darwin must be rolling in his grave with every word I typed in this comment.
Comment by Alternati — August 11, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
To iskoo: It is so funny thet i couldn’t resist using it–despite that my topic now is so serious.
Comment by Major Tom — August 11, 2007 @ 7:43 pm
To pepe: very good point pepe, why didn’t I thought about that. Surely it’s more worthwhile to estimate where we’re going instead of what we have been from…ape or not ape.
Comment by Major Tom — August 11, 2007 @ 7:45 pm
To pepe: very good point pepe, why didn’t I thought about that. Surely it’s more worthwhile to estimate where we’re going instead of what we have been from…ape or not ape.
Comment by Major Tom — August 11, 2007 @ 7:46 pm
To verns: Well said sis, the “now” is the time we live in, it is surely more important than the question betwen ape and man…
Comment by Major Tom — August 11, 2007 @ 7:48 pm
To alternati: Ha..ha…very funny but sounds so logical. As a hyphothesis, your perception about the Habilis and Erectus existing side by side but at the same time have generated from one another is indeed sounds probable and credible at that. Scientists should look into this angle…If we could only make suggestions, then this would be one hyphothesis worth proposing.
Comment by Major Tom — August 11, 2007 @ 7:51 pm
Very very interesting. lately, it seems that a lot of new discoveries (Scientific and religious) have been throwing our orthodox knowledge and belief out of balance. Making us think more and even doubt the authority of our old knowledge.
I guess science have to redefine their research methods now somehow and get out of the box they are in.
Comment by Ferdz — August 12, 2007 @ 10:13 pm
To Ferdz: A friend once told me so long ago that scientists have estimated that the amount of knowledge that man knows is but 5% of what there is to know in the world. This might sound so superflous considering the great technological advances that we have achieved so far. yet, I felt that there is still a lot that is out there and unknown, waiting for us to be discovered that in every moment, we keep on discovering new things—new facts, new proofs, new species, new technologies.
Comment by Major Tom — August 13, 2007 @ 7:19 pm
Very thought-provoking post Major Tom. But gee, I don’t even know where my parents came from… much less if I’m homoidonotknow… hehehe!
Or maybe also, the homo habilis found beside the homo erectus was a late bloomer?
Comment by Toe — August 14, 2007 @ 11:54 pm
on reading all of ur comments i pose a question…
if we are descended from apes, then why are there stil apes alive today? would all of the apes not evolved into humans, due to the fact we have such a great existence? surely our environment today is better suited for the survival of humans than it is apes?
i have totally baffled myself with this question.
i am still unsure as to what i believe with regard to the formation of life, but i like to think it is somewhere in between divine intervention and a chimp
Comment by pineapplepaw — January 8, 2008 @ 7:34 pm