General The Science Thread

[RBNO]

In short, while there have been many other "humanoid ape like things" in relatively recent history, no, we didn't kill (most) of those evolutionary branches off. They would have gone extinct due to changes in their ecosystems and environment, and Homo sapiens had not spread out in such numbers so early in history to have directly been involved in the majority of those lineages' extinction.



It's not that we evolved from apes. We are apes. We, chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas, and bonobos are the existent "great apes" that evolved from a lineage of simians about 25 million years ago. We continue to evolve, and so do they.*

Our split from that branch supposedly dates back to between 4.3 and 3.8 million years ago with Australopithecus Anamensis, which is believed to be the first hominid genus. There are different hominoid species that have descended from this genus and gone extinct, while others have evolved further, as we did into the Homo Sapiens we are today.

There are no other species of the hominid lineage still in existence, but, until relatively recently, we had multiple others living alongside us. An example is Neanderthals. We did not evolve from them; we both evolved from Homo Erectus. We were alive simultaneously for a considerable period of time (about 20,000 years).Their lineage went extinct about 40,000 years ago (though researchers say that approximately 2% of us have traces of Neanderthal DNA as a result of inter-species breeding).

The same goes for Homo Floresiensis, a group of pygmy (3ft tall) hominids found in the Indonesian island of Flores. Research suggests they went extinct approximately 50,000 years ago when homo sapiens arrived on the island, and, as you say, we "did what we do best" in this particular case.

Now let's all laugh at Homo Erectus.



*We have found extinct species of the other great ape lineages, such as Gigantopithecus, a species from the same lineage as orangutans, that went extinct approx. 200,000 years ago. Orangutans did not evolve from them, nor vice versa, they were just an offshoot of the same lineage as eachother; the Ponginae.

oh i see so the common ancestor.....so through some genetic quirk we evolved? i hope they find the missing link....if it exists....try looking in the high streets of some major towns on a friday night lol.....but i still want to know where all the bits and bobs came from in the first place lol

 

[holdsteady]

oh i see so the common ancestor.....so through some genetic quirk we evolved? i hope they find the missing link....if it exists....try looking in the high streets of some major towns on a friday night lol.....but i still want to know where all the bits and bobs came from in the first place lol

Every creature alive has evolved into what it is now hasn’t it? We are not unique in that. Evolution is just the name for the process of changes that took us from various different creatures to what we are now, and what we may become (if we don’t die out first).

 

[Emilio]

so who is Lucy ?

Australopithecus Afarensis, believed to be a further evolution of the aforementioned Australopithecus Anamensis.

 

[Emilio]

oh i see so the common ancestor.....so through some genetic quirk we evolved? i hope they find the missing link....if it exists....try looking in the high streets of some major towns on a friday night lol.....but i still want to know where all the bits and bobs came from in the first place lol

Not really some genetic quirk, just the passing down of physical traits from generation to generation.

@chuckbert 's suggestion of looking at it as grandparents and cousins is a good one

You and I are (presumably) not so directly related, and we have some different genetic traits (height, facial structure, skin tone, hair colour, etc).

Let's say my descendants only reproduced with others who had a similar combination of those features, and that yours did the same with others whose features more resembled your own.

Give it 10,000 years and those different features will be so reinforced that my descendants at that point would look significantly different to yours - so much so that they may even have become so genetically different from one another to be classified as separate species.

 

[Paul Cannell]

...and at the same time, nowhere. Because nowhere existed.

Nowhere doesn't exist. It's a description of the absence of something e.g. existence (apparently).

 

[m]

Nowhere doesn't exist. It's a description of the absence of something e.g. existence (apparently).

Blimey.

"Nowhere existed"

I've realised that two-word sentence can have two distinct meanings.

The grammar may be more complex than the subject matter.

 

[SteMerritt]

Not really some genetic quirk, just the passing down of physical traits from generation to generation.

@chuckbert 's suggestion of looking at it as grandparents and cousins is a good one

You and I are (presumably) not so directly related, and we have some different genetic traits (height, facial structure, skin tone, hair colour, etc).

Let's say my descendants only reproduced with others who had a similar combination of those features, and that yours did the same with others whose features more resembled your own.

Give it 10,000 years and those different features will be so reinforced that my descendants at that point would look significantly different to yours - so much so that they may even have become so genetically different from one another to be classified as separate species.

You are pretty much describing eugenics there aren't you? Wasn't that theory discredited?

 

[Emilio]

You are pretty much describing eugenics there aren't you? Wasn't that theory discredited?

Good point. Let's try a different approach.

A good way to view evolution is from the perspective of a football fan.

Dad supported OUFC. He passed that on to me. When we lived in Oxford, we regularly attended matches.

I have now moved to Sweden. When I have kids, I will want to raise them as OUFC fans, but taking them to games will be increasingly impractical. I will inevitably start taking them to watch one of the local teams here (let's say ÖIS), and gradually they and their children will become fans of that side.

Gradually the habit of supporting and attending OUFC matches will (despite my hard work) die out in my lineage, and it will have changed from a lineage of OUFC fans to a lineage of ÖIS fans.

Does that mean that OUFC will cease to have fans? No, because you reprobates are still about. OUFC and ÖIS fans both exist simultaneously. However, at some point either OUFC or ÖIS will cease to exist. If OUFC dies first, then my lineages' adaptation to support ÖIS has been a successful evolution.

If the opposite were to happen (ÖIS go bust before OUFC) far in the future, by that point what connected my family to OUFC will be such a small footnote in the family history that they will not just revert to supporting OUFC. For the "trait" of supporting a football team and attending matches is to carry on in my lineage, they will have to adapt (evolve) to supporting yet another team else that trait will die out. Let's say my great great great great grandchild forms a new local club called XYZ here to replace the now defunct ÖIS.

Now, in England, OUFC go bust, and a United Football Club of Oxford (UFCO) phoenix club is formed.

Here you have an evolution from OUFC fans to both XYZ and UFCO fans due to having to adapt to various instances of environmental and circumstantial changes.


XYZ fans are to UFCO fans what humans are to orangutans.

 

[m]

Good point. Let's try a different approach.

A good way to view evolution is from the perspective of a football fan.

Dad supported OUFC. He passed that on to me. When we lived in Oxford, we regularly attended matches.

I have now moved to Sweden. When I have kids, I will want to raise them as OUFC fans, but taking them to games will be increasingly impractical. I will inevitably start taking them to watch one of the local teams here (let's say ÖIS), and gradually they and their children will become fans of that side.

Gradually the habit of supporting and attending OUFC matches will (despite my hard work) die out in my lineage, and it will have evolved from a lineage of OUFC fans to a lineage of ÖIS fans.

Does that mean that OUFC will cease to have fans. No, because you reprobates are still about. OUFC and ÖIS fans both exist simultaneously. However, at some point either OUFC or ÖIS will cease to exist. If OUFC dies first, then my lineages' adaptation to support ÖIS has been a successful evolution.

If the opposite were to happen (ÖIS go bust before OUFC) far in the future, by that point what connected my family to OUFC will be such a small footnote in the family history that they will not just revert to supporting OUFC. For the "trait" of supporting a football team and attending matches is to carry on in my lineage, they will have to adapt (evolve) to supporting yet another team else that trait will die out. Let's say my great great great great grandchild forms a new local club called XYZ here to replace the now defunct ÖIS.

Now, in England, OUFC go bust, and a United Football Club of Oxford (UFCO) phoenix club is formed.

Here you have an evolution from OUFC fans to both XYZ and UFCO fans due to having to adapt to various instances of environmental and circumstantial changes.


XYZ fans are to UFCO fans what humans are to orangutans.

Did you have cannabis for breakfast?

I'm not judging you btw.

 

[Emilio]

Did you have cannabis for breakfast?

I'm not judging you btw.

My wife has baked cookies, though I don't think there's anything mischievous in them.

 

[chuckbert]

The best examples are described in Richard Dawkins books, which an Oxford fan should consider essential reading.
Take chimps and bonobos. They are very closely related. However their ancestral species got split by the Congo river. The river was so big and strong that they couldn’t meet each other any more, and gradually evolved into separate species that couldn’t interbreed.

Evolution is just the result of natural selection acting as a filter. Everything alive today is a result of having survived that filter. It’s not an optimisation and the fact that we’re smart doesn’t mean we’re winning at evolution any more than bacteria that are still going strong. In fact if we f**k up the planet such that it can’t suppport us any more, the natural selection filter will just take us out.

 

[Emilio]

The best examples are described in Richard Dawkins books, which an Oxford fan should consider essential reading.
Take chimps and bonobos. They are very closely related. However their ancestral species got split by the Congo river. The river was so big and strong that they couldn’t meet each other any more, and gradually evolved into separate species that couldn’t interbreed.

Evolution is just the result of natural selection acting as a filter. Everything alive today is a result of having survived that filter. It’s not an optimisation and the fact that we’re smart doesn’t mean we’re winning at evolution any more than bacteria that are still going strong. In fact if we f**k up the planet such that it can’t suppport us any more, the natural selection filter will just take us out.

Dawkins' Congo River, my North Sea.

Potayto, potaato.

 

[RBNO]

You are pretty much describing eugenics there aren't you? Wasn't that theory discredited?

farmers and animal breeders carry out "eugenics" in one form or another....breeding out undesirable traits etc and breeding in desirable traits.....the upper echelons are kind of doing it...marriage within own social standings etc...then we have arranged marriages in some cultures......i agree the Nazis took it a bit far ....but forms of eugenics if i read it correctly happen everyday?

Haldane wrote in 1940 that "the motor bus, by breaking up inbred village communities, was a powerful eugenic agent."

 

[Stranger]

farmers and animal breeders carry out "eugenics" in one form or another....breeding out undesirable traits etc and breeding in desirable traits.....the upper echelons are kind of doing it...marriage within own social standings etc...then we have arranged marriages in some cultures......i agree the Nazis took it a bit far ....but forms of eugenics if i read it correctly happen everyday?

Haldane wrote in 1940 that "the motor bus, by breaking up inbred village communities, was a powerful eugenic agent."

Bet he never thought he'd be turning out for the Mighty Yellows in a pre-season friendly at Brackley some 70 years later

 

[Stranger]

farmers and animal breeders carry out "eugenics" in one form or another....breeding out undesirable traits etc and breeding in desirable traits.....the upper echelons are kind of doing it...marriage within own social standings etc...then we have arranged marriages in some cultures......i agree the Nazis took it a bit far ....but forms of eugenics if i read it correctly happen everyday?

Haldane wrote in 1940 that "the motor bus, by breaking up inbred village communities, was a powerful eugenic agent."

And also, wtf? That's like saying the Nazis took genocide against the Jews 'a bit far'

 

[Emilio]

Bet he never thought he'd be turning out for the Mighty Yellows in a pre-season friendly at Brackley some 70 years later

I wonder whether his bright orange skin was a product of eugenics

 

[Marked Ox]

I wonder whether his bright orange skin was a product of eugenics

Is he on the same twig of the tree as Trump?

 

[Malc]

i would just like to know where it all came from...all the bits and bobs that were there to create a big bang or anything else for that matter?

May I suggest Tesco's?

Just joking of course.
Loving this thread, keep it coming.

Gosh we've got a lot of brainy people on this forum.
Did you notice Ian?

 

[Emilio]

Is he on the same twig of the tree as Trump?

Quite possibly. He didn't come across as the smartest cookie.

 

[RBNO]

And also, wtf? That's like saying the Nazis took genocide against the Jews 'a bit far'

eugenics mate....not genocide.....and lets keep to science.....dont get me started on genocide and the modern world

 

[Stranger]

eugenics mate....not genocide.....and lets keep to science.....dont get me started on genocide and the modern world

Are you not aware how the Nazis practised eugenics? It was all part of their genocidal strategy

 

[holdsteady]

Eugenics was a bit of a craze far earlier than the Nazis, I remember reading how someone famous basically disowned a daughter of theirs because they married someone who wore glasses, this was in England in the 20s.

But to turn this thread away from becoming another political battlefield, aliens, yay or nay?

 

[SteMerritt]

aliens, yay or nay?

Depends on what you are expecting from alien life. Statistically, it would be staggering if Earth was the only planet anywhere with life.

The first confirmation of extra-terrestrial life could be from probes going to some of the moons of our gas giants.

 

[RBNO]

if there are more planets we have seen than grains of sands on all the beaches on earth the odds say there must be alien life somewhere? but i think we look at alien life and compare it to ours it could be completely different....not needing oxygen and water but some other cocktail of elements to survive....maybe we are the most advanced lifeforms? maybe we are billions of years behind? its a bit like ghosts until i meet one ill keep my mind open

 

[holdsteady]

Depends on what you are expecting from alien life. Statistically, it would be staggering if Earth was the only planet anywhere with life.

The first confirmation of extra-terrestrial life could be from probes going to some of the moons of our gas giants.

Any and all really, from the most basic to something similar to humans? You are right, with all the planets etc it would be strange if nothing had ever come about elsewhere, I suppose the big question is to what level.

Also given the sheer size of the universe and the age of it we could quite easily never come across any other more complex civilisations during the times humanity exists.

 

[RBNO]

i suppose the one thing that wrangles in my mind is IF there are more advanced aliens out there capable of crossing vast distances of space and time ...would they crash land in Roswell? also where did all the bits n bobs come from? lol

 

[holdsteady]

i suppose the one thing that wrangles in my mind is IF there are more advanced aliens out there capable of crossing vast distances of space and time ...would they crash land in Roswell? also where did all the bits n bobs come from? lol

If any species is capable of travelling the sort of distances in space ships then they could conquer us easily.

 

[RBNO]

but are we a mere experiment for far advanced lifeforms?

 

[Emilio]

eugenics mate....not genocide.....and lets keep to science.....dont get me started on genocide and the modern world

Agreed, that's for another thread.


Back to science:

As you'll probably know, our own solar system is part of the Milky Way galaxy. You may not know that our largest neighbouring galaxy is the Andromeda Galaxy, which is about 2.54 million light-years away from Earth.

If you were to travel from Earth to the Andromeda Galaxy and back at just under the speed of light, it would take you just over 5 years.

However, due to the theory of relativity and time dilation, while it would only feel like 5 years to you, 5 MILLION years will have passed on planet Earth.

 

[stokeu]

However, due to the theory of relativity and time dilation, while it would only feel like 5 years to you, 5 MILLION years will have passed on planet EaEarth.

And we still wouldn't have been awarded a penalty.....