Comments on: Small Girls with Sharp Rocks http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/06/09/small-girls-with-sharp-rocks/ A blog about life, past and future. Written by DISCOVER contributing editor and columnist Carl Zimmer. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:52:02 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Peter Nielsen http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/06/09/small-girls-with-sharp-rocks/comment-page-1/#comment-3076 Peter Nielsen Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:50:39 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/06/09/small-girls-with-sharp-rocks/#comment-3076 New to paleo-archaeological debates, I see how the field is unnecessarily diminished by the historical division between "out of Africa" and "regionalist" camps, in the Homo floresiensis discussion for example. Human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)/Y-chromosome phylogeography shows very strongly that homo sapiens came "out of Africa". But such explanation is generally too totalistic. Both sides tend to illogically totalise, fail to mention or see that, while homo sapiens and the hominid genus almost certainly came "out of Africa", Homo Erectus probably came out of Asia (Kohn 2006). Some homo erectus ancestors and other hominids may also have come "out of Asia". This difference between homo erectus, homo sapiens centres of endemism is very telling, has implications. As I explain in (paper 5 page 6 of) my ebook at www.nodrift.com/vol_5/5.1.pdf : "SEXUAL SELECTION THUS MOST IMPORTANT FOR HOMO SAPIENS . . . evolutionary considerations AND homo sapiens evolving in AA Africa, coming "Out of [AA] Africa", not "Out of [IR] Asia", page 5, imply a corollary: Conventions are very much a product of sexual selection. Sexual selection has thus evidently been more important than natural selection in evolution of homo sapiens, in contrast to evolution of homo erectus, where natural selection may have been more important than sexual selection." New to paleo-archaeological debates, I see how the field is unnecessarily diminished by the historical division between “out of Africa” and “regionalist” camps, in the Homo floresiensis discussion for example. Human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)/Y-chromosome phylogeography shows very strongly that homo sapiens came “out of Africa”.

But such explanation is generally too totalistic. Both sides tend to illogically totalise, fail to mention or see that, while homo sapiens and the hominid genus almost certainly came “out of Africa”, Homo Erectus probably came out of Asia (Kohn 2006). Some homo erectus ancestors and other hominids may also have come “out of Asia”.

This difference between homo erectus, homo sapiens centres of endemism is very telling, has implications. As I explain in (paper 5 page 6 of) my ebook at http://www.nodrift.com/vol_5/5.1.pdf :

“SEXUAL SELECTION THUS MOST IMPORTANT FOR HOMO SAPIENS
. . . evolutionary considerations AND homo sapiens evolving in AA Africa, coming “Out of [AA] Africa”, not “Out of [IR] Asia”, page 5, imply a corollary:

Conventions are very much a product of sexual selection. Sexual selection has thus evidently been more important than natural selection in evolution of homo sapiens, in contrast to evolution of homo erectus, where natural selection may have been more important than sexual selection.”

]]> By: Charles http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/06/09/small-girls-with-sharp-rocks/comment-page-1/#comment-3075 Charles Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:52:28 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/06/09/small-girls-with-sharp-rocks/#comment-3075 It strikes me that the arguments that isolate the Flores homenims as deformed are based upon the idea that H.Sap is unique. It is similar to the assumptions that kept behaviorists from looking at tool use in "sub-human" species from chimps to birds. The view seems to be that humans are "special" It strikes me that the arguments that isolate the Flores homenims as deformed are based upon the idea that H.Sap is unique. It is similar to the assumptions that kept behaviorists from looking at tool use in “sub-human” species from chimps to birds. The view seems to be that humans are “special”

]]>