[Taxacom] confused origins

[John Grehan]

Here is an example of what happens to historical reconstructions when
systematic thinking is confused or sloppy, as it is in the case of human
origins. If one takes a look at the recent book "The last human" by
Sawyer and Deak 2007, Yale University Press the hominid illustrations
are most informative (about confusion I mean) as follows:

 

Sahelanthropus - this is made to look like an African ape, which is
possible and certainly indicated by the chimpanzee/gorilla-like ear.

 

Orrorin - this is made to look like an African ape even though the skull
shape is unknown.

 

Australopithecus anamensis - this is given a gorilla ear.

 

Australopithecus garhi - chimpanzee ear

Australopithecus afarensis - chimpanzee ear

 

Paranthropus robustus - gorilla ear

 

Homo habilis - now decided that a beard and mustache appears, and
somewhat long hair, and an orangutan-like ear.

 

Homo ergaster, H. erectus, 'Homo' floresiensis' - somewhat long hair,
but cut shorter than in humans, and always neatly combed back (like to
meet their barber). No eyebrows in floresciensis, but present in others.

 

Homo antecessor - after hinting at a slightly receded hairline for other
hominids, now the hairline is back to the eyebrows (like African apes).
Eyebrows have now evolved.

 

Homo rhodesiensis - now definitely a barber is the oldest profession? A
bare hit of eyebrows. Orangutan ear.

 

Homo heidelbergensis - hair down to the shoulders, but swept back from
the barely visible forehead. Must have a new hairstyle as the barber is
keeping the beard short and evidently the mustache does not meet over
the mouth. Really big eyebrows. 

 

Neanderthal - straggly beard, still short and hair combed back. But some
evidently shave better than others.

 

Homos sapiens - good haircut and nicely trimmed beard and mustache.
Orangutan ear.

 

Maybe artistic reconstructions should not be taken seriously, but they
are metaphors for our beliefs, and if our beliefs are confused, perhaps
it is not surprising that the metaphor is as well. And here the
confusion I refer to is the belief that humans evolved from a common
ancestor with the chimp despite the virtual absence of any biological
(anatomical, physiological, behavioral) evidence to support it.

 

John Grehan

 

 

Dr. John R. Grehan

Director of Science and Collections

Buffalo Museum of Science1020 Humboldt Parkway

Buffalo, NY 14211-1193

email: jgrehan at sciencebuff.org

Phone: (716) 896-5200 ext 372

 

Panbiogeography

http://www.sciencebuff.org/biogeography_and_evolutionary_biology.php

Ghost moth research

http://www.sciencebuff.org/systematics_and_evolution_of_hepialdiae.php

Human evolution and the great apes

http://www.sciencebuff.org/human_origin_and_the_great_apes.php