Human Evolution

Human evolution is an incredibly important subject to be studying, as it helps modern humans understand why their body is shaped in the way that it is and what purpose the many morphological changes serve. The study can also help to humble modern humans and help them remember their place in the world. Although humans dominate and shape the world currently, it has not always been that way and we are lucky to have evolved in the ways that we have. Not only will the knowledge of human evolution educate us about the reasons why our bodies work the way they do, but it will also satisfy the curiosity that people inherently have. People wonder where they come from and how they have gotten to where we are in societal and biological spheres today.  Although there has been lots of research done on the concept of human evolution and this research has produced fascinating results, there is still much work left to be done in the field. For example, there have been so many finds in Africa, but centr

For those who are aware that human evolution is not a linear process, but a tree with many different branches and families, it has always been hard to believe that no interactions occurred between two different species of hominin. Currently, there is so much data being released by researchers that prove that there were instances in which two or more hominin species existed in the same place at the same time and they would have interacted. For example, we know that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals have to have interacted and even interbred. We also know, thanks to Herries et al., that Australopithecus, Paranthropus, and Homo erectus all existed together in Drimolen, South Africa between 2.04 and 1.95 million years ago.  Although we know that they did exist in the same time period, we do not know how their interactions would have gone. I, like many others, believe that they would have been friendly in general, as they had to share the land. With these friendly interactions, it can also be a

The analysis of Ardipithecus ramidus has produced a plethora of new information about the lifestyle of early hominids. For example, scientists have noticed that the anatomy of Ardipithecus ramidus  suggests that the last common ancestors of humans and African apes were not as similar to chimpanzees as most people have previously thought. In the paper, Ardipithecus ramidus and the Paleobiology of Early Hominids, White et al. state that "most aspects of the craniofacial structure of Sahelanthropus/Ardipithecus are probably close to the African ape and hominid ancestral state." We also know that Ardipithecus was most likely an omnivore. The dentition shows no strong signs of "ripe-fruit frugivory, folivory-herbivory, or feeding on hard objects...wear patterns suggest that its diet was not particularly abrasive but may have included some hard foods." This nutritional pattern can also indicate what type of locomotion was most commonly used, as some foods are more commonl

There are several indicators of bipedality in modern humans and their ancestors, some of which are not easily noticed or known by those who are not experts in the field.  The obturator externus groove is one of these features. This groove is located on the back of the femoral neck and serves as an attachment area for the obturator externus tendon, which runs from the back of the thigh to the front of the pelvis. The o bturator externus serves as a flexor and external rotator of the thigh, shortening the distance between the pelvis and the femur, which helps to steady the hip joint.  In bipeds, this tendon creates a groove by applying pressure to the back of the femoral neck as a result of frequent full extension of the femur. As pressure is placed onto the neck of the femur, the bone remodels itself to accommodate the tendon.  Apes are naturally knucklewalkers but sometimes use bipedal locomotion. Even so, there is little to no pressure produced on the femur from this tendon, and no

If humans evolved from chimps, then why are there still chimps? Many people think that this is a dumb question, but it is not, it is actually very valid. This is a question that science has not yet come up with a concrete answer for.  The first thing we must address is the fact that we did not actually evolve from chimpanzees. Humans and chimpanzees both evolved from a common ancestor, so instead of chimps being the "mothers" of humankind so to speak, they are more like cousins to humans. We are closely related, yes, but we have actually been on separate evolutionary paths for around six million years, give or take. Unfortunately, we do not have much information at all on our common ancestor, as fossils have yet to be found. Hopefully, this will change and we will be able to put a face to our ancestor, but for now, we must work with the fossils of early hominids as well as chimpanzee and human DNA.  Although we did not evolve from chimps, the question still remains: why did w

Dunsworth, Sterling, and Athreya and Ackermann have done great work at bringing to light the issue of colonial mindsets in modern anthropological research in their respective fields and articles. Athreya and Ackermann specifically mention the concept of "otherization," or the process of marginalizing and devaluing concepts having to due with minority populations. This is a word I had never heard about until their article, Colonialism and Narratives of Human Origins in Asia and Africa, and a word that I think is very helpful in explaining the way that minority, or non-white, populations are treated and more specifically the way that their narratives and experiences are put on the back burner to be ignored and forgotten about.  I also believe that it is incredibly unfortunate that many people in science have retained the colonialist mindset without even knowing it. It is something that can be drilled into people, starting when they are kids and continuing throughout their entir

Hi! I'm Delaney Edwards and I am very excited about what this class has in store!