Comments, relating to the topic, are welcome, add a great deal to a blog, but must be in English, with no profanity, hate-filled insults, or links (unless pre-approved).




Sunday, December 12, 2010

The Third Chimpanzee


Evolution does not prove there is no god. It does not prove there is. I really consider it an explanation of a process by which there is no need for a creator who is constantly intervening and that's the upsetting part to some people. It leaves earth as part of a natural set of consequences where one thing leads to another which fits well with another of my core beliefs-- actions have consequences.

What are the evidences for evolution? Plenty but if you want a simple book that helps you get the basics in a way laymen can grasp, I suggest The Third Chimpanzee (that would be us) by Jared Diamond. It helps lay out the evidence today for how mankind may have come to be although there are plenty of unanswered questions along the way. There are long periods of not much change and then great leaps in development. There are debates over what has led to this or that aspect of mankind. It's really quite the story.

For the basics, here's the theory of evolution based on fossils, bones, DNA, and observation. For those who have studied this more extensively, it might seem too simplistic and I'd be fine with comments that add to it where I might have skimmed over something important.

The earth is basically 4.5 billion years old. Scientists have determined this as approximately when our Solar System came into being [Geologic Time: Age of Earth]. By radiometric dating of rocks, they have an approximation of the oldest earth rocks but that's less reliable than determining when this Solar System began. That doesn't mean living beings were on this earth as it was anything but habitable even by bacteria for a considerable span of time as it cooled. It was also bombarded constantly by space debris; so it was in transition a long while.

Skipping down earth's history to about 3.4 billion years ago, we come to when the first living organisms arose from inanimate matter: [Origin of Life on Earth]. Or another theory is the seeds of life arrived on space debris. One way or another this was more organisms than beings with personality.

The photo at the top is from the Yellowstone geyser basin where they have found living bacteria even within these boiling pools. These basins look much like the earth must have appeared for a long while, a burning sun in the sky and a very hot earth below. There is a quote from Jurassic Park that fits what happened next-- 'Life will find a way.'

Earth went through many stages of life, the age of the reptiles, age of the dinosaurs and finally 60 million years ago began the age of mammals which is where man will eventually enter the picture.

All mammals share a lot of DNA in common but for man there is none closer than the pygmy and common chimpanzees where we share all but 1.6% of the same DNA. Just think-- that tiny bit of DNA explains our human physical characteristics, the ones that identify us as a human and not an ape.

Chart scanned from page 35 The Third Chimpanzee

The interesting question is how and why did modern man emerge from this as a distinct species. For many many years life didn't change a lot. The tools these ancestors used to kill animals and satisfy their other needs for survival didn't change much from what the apes used. Our early ancestors didn't look at all like us. Six million years ago they stood up and from then on humans separated from chimpanzees physically-- even if our DNA can't be fooled.

How do we prove this happened? Human remains aren't very large and the likelihood of many bones surviving from 6 million years ago is slim. Not surprisingly the remnants are few and partial but there are some and anybody interested can research the available evidence. An interesting place to start would be Homo habilis.

Anthropologists find tools these 'protohuman's used back then but it took a long time before they would be considered firmly human. The more sophisticated tools start showing up 1.7 million years ago with Homo erectus, who had a larger brain. He could eat plants and animals, and by virtue of his tools, he was beginning to dominate the life around him to the point of extinction of the other competitors.

About a million years ago, Homo erectus, who was at that time the only protohuman on the African continent, began to expand his territory. That's when stone tools and bones showed up in the Middle East, Far East (Peking Man and Java man), and Europe.

Half a million years ago there were [Homo sapiens] who looked like men but with thicker skulls and brow ridges. The progress of man to dominate his world didn't happen instantly even from there. Man's ancestors did spread across the continents but it took time. He evidently either killed or forced Neanderthals to be unable to survive as this is when they disappear in most places where they had been. Homo sapiens produced art, sophisticated tools, and if you can call it progress were able to eliminate whole species of animals by their hunting techniques.

40,000 years ago is when Homo sapiens made what is called The Great Leap Forward as his technology began to improve. He could now kill mammoths and secure his food supply. These people, who looked much like modern man, have been named Cro-Magnons from the French site where their bones were first discovered. The tools found were ones enabling a kill from a distance, bone and antler tools, needles for making clothing, nets and rope. By this time artifacts found included not just those needed for survival, but ornaments, cave paintings, the Venus figurines of women which are probably religious in purpose, and even musical instruments. Life was changing fast.

Cro-magnon men were living longer and some of their skeletons indicated some lived into their 60s which was a big survival advantage over Neanderthals, who lived much shorter lives. It enabled them to have those in their community who remembered earlier events and could use that knowledge for current problems.

Although most recently there has been DNA evidence to indicate Neanderthals and Cro-Mangon man may have inter-mated, they were different in form and at the time of Cro-Magnon coming into their territory, there were Neanderthals and then none. This happened at different periods of time depending on the geographic area but always when the Cro-Mangons improved their technology-- especially where it came to killing.

So briefly, two million years ago there were several protohuman lineages in the world until something happened to leave only one standing. What enabled that one to conquer and basically either exterminate or out compete the rest?

The likely quality that enabled one group to excel over the others was language skills. It doesn't show up in DNA though. It's not in the bones, but what else could explain the ability to work together for higher purposes? Just making sounds doesn't do it. It takes being able to explain complex ideas and argue through superior paths to take.

Many other species of animals on earth today can communicate to a limited degree but none like man who has only increased this ability to transfer ideas from one person and group to another. It goes way beyond a few sounds to a language and with that language comes advancement sometimes at a startling rate.

At a certain point a group of those on the ancestral tree of man today were born with something in their DNA enabling them to use their tongues, larynx and the muscles required to speak words. When that happened, everything changed. Words and language freed Homo sapiens to develop in ways the other animals couldn't even imagine.

When we look at the reason it matters to study evolution, it's not all about history. It is also about lessons learned to get man to where he is today-- in a position to destroy all of life on earth through the very thing that got us where we are-- our technology. As there are lessons in the theory of creationism, there are lessons from evolution and those come next.

8 comments:

Ingineer66 said...

Interesting stuff. I enjoy studying about the evolution of species, I think it gives us knowledge that we can use in our future. I have heard that our DNA is closer to a chimps than a horse is to a zebra. Mot sure what that means exactly, but I find it interesting.

Your chart was difficult to read, but did it show the little hobbit people that they recently found evidence of in Sumatra? Supposedly they took a divergent evolutionary path.

Paul said...

I never did like chimps-I prefer gorillas! :-)

Dick said...

This series of yours is very interesting to read. I may look for that book you mention. I have never felt that evolution was wrong but I guess I also feel that it can go along with the idea that something greater than us guided evolution, at least at some critical points. But with all of the theories, I still wonder what was there before there was anything?

Kay Dennison said...

Fascinating!!! I'm going to get that book.

I've always felt that science and faith are reconcilable because the God I believe in moves in mysterious ways that we ordinary mortals don't understand.

Brian said...

Rain, I enjoyed this post. It doesn't bother me at all to know that we humans have evolved from other life forms. This shows how intimately connected we are with every living entity.

The universe is some 13.7 billion years old, so I think you mis-wrote when you implied that the age of the Earth (4.5 billion years) is about the same as the age of the universe.

The link you shared says that the age of the Earth is consistent with the much older birth of the Milky Way galaxy and universe as a whole, since obviously Earth couldn't have formed until long after the galaxy and universe of which it is a part did.

Rain Trueax said...

I should have said our solar system as a determinant for the earth's age as we were created when our sun and other planets in this solar system were. I am not sure how I got the word Universe in there. Thanks for the correction.

Rain Trueax said...

I think I got it corrected but if it's still not sounding right, let me know ;)

Robert the Skeptic said...

I had learned about biological evolution when I was a kid. Up to that point the phylogeny of living things was organized mainly on morphology; organisms having similar physical characteristics. I could see possibly back then where there might be room for opponents of biological evolution.

But once DNA was discovered and one could compare the similarities between organisms and actually trace the lineage, I thought the nail would be hammered into the coffin of creationists.

But no, they pervert the science and make it appear that god planned all this complexity out. As the Dover Pennsylvania trial showed, every day new information is added to the body of knowledge. Religion has nothing new and their feeble attempts continue to fall by the wayside.