Where did the first human come from?

>9 posters
>7 replies
>"hurr durr same fagging"

Any bitch can hit F11 in a chrome window and edit text.

OK, you know what, you guys are totally 100% right

evolution dont exist
world flat
science dumb
no humans in africa
we wuz never hominids
peace out

>using Chrome

I'm not a retard like you.

There is no such thing as a "first human". That's not how evolution works. It's not as though a human popped out of an ancient hominid and was its own species. There is no clear line between when one species ends and another begins when looking at a sequence of ancestors.

How would you define the first human?

definitely not a communist

They probably were. Early tribes would likely have shared resources as a group. There certainly was no legal system necessary for a system of personal property.

How can you be certain there was no legal system? There's no reason why they couldn't have an informal law, or set of traditions. It's language which makes such things possible, and a human must have language

>Early tribes would likely have shared resources as a group.
>likely

that's called sharing, not forced communes

The out of Africa theory has been brought into question with the recent discovery that Caucasoids have a significant amount of Neanderthal DNA, Asians also have a small amount. That would explain why northern hemisphere people can into civilization while southern hemisphere people can't get past stone age tribalism.

You only want to share with people when you have a sense of kinship with them. That's why socialism only works in homogenous societies.

>implying the other cavemen didnt beat you up if you were a dick about it

cow lick salt

Except it wasn't a chimp it was a caveman nigger, and it wasn't an alien it was a Neanderthal. Read about the myths of Thule.

I did nae make the picture senpai

I'm not saying that early tribes were Communist, but they do certainly fit in with the Marxist idea of social evolution.

Right throught the Neolithic almost all burials in Europe and the Near East (I'm not sure about the rest of the world because that's not my area of study) were collective, usually with cheap and few gravegoods, which can suggest that these communities were classless. The Early Bronze Age (Chalcolithic/Copper Age) is when we first start to see the emergence of dedicated, singular burials, for example at Varna (pic) where many individual graves and cenotaphs were found, with a select few being ornately decoarted with very expensive items for the time, such as copper axe heads, and multiple thousands of copper beads (which suggests jewelry - a status symbol). From this Archaeological evidence it is pretty conclusive that the copperworking society of Varna had a structured class society with a select ruling elite, which is something not seen in previous sites across Europe and the Near East in the Neolithic or Mesolithic.

Neanderthals developed in and inhabited the Near East until 30000bp, and every group of modern humans have a small amount of Neanderthal DNA, even Papuans, except Africans, which is pretty conclusive evidence supporting Out of Africa.

ayy

>throught the Neolithic
Not true, at least for the territory of modern day Bulgaria. In fact we less than 300 burials for the whole Neolithic, mainly of females and infants, and all of them, apart from the ones at the Durankulak necropolis, are intramural. We have not excavated an extramural (save for Duranlukak) Neolithic necropolis and we can't say for sure what the traditional burial rite was, because we don't have enough data.

About the Varna necropolis. Most of today's Bulgarian archaeologists do not accept the cenotaph interpretation of the excavator, Ivan Ivanov. Moreover, most of the gold in the Late Eneolithic necropolis at Varna was found in these so called "cenotaphs", and not in actual burials. Burial #41, the one you shared, is an exception, and it is quite the exception. By the way, pic related is the only photo of the burial shot during the excavations. The reconstruction in your pic was made for the exposition in Japan, if I'm not mistaken.
Most of the researches tend to agree that the "rich" burials meant stratified society. I personally disagree, at least with the way the data is interpreted. Apart from Durankulak - The Island, we have 0 excavated settlements of the so-called culture Varna. Most of the arguments for the stratified society comes from the analysis of the myriad necropoleis we have from this and the other large late eneolithic culture - the Gumelnita - Kodzhadermen - Karanovo VI.

I will continue in the next post.

Ucko in his "Ethnography and Archaeological Interpretation of Funerary Remains", 1966, proved how deceptive interpreting the material remains of a burial can be, when you have no ethnographical data. In my opinion we should focus on the data we have in the settlements, where the religious factors probably have played a lesser role, must have played a lesser role. I wrote a "paper" on the birth of metallurgy and I wrote about the society as well. Were they complex? No doubts. Was there an elite? I think it's too early to say. In 0" Introduction: The Beginnings of Metallurgy in Global Perspective", Thornton et al. 2009, most researchers point out that there appears to be a delay in the emergence of an elite after the discovery of metallurgy.

By the way, the 5th millennium is the Copper age, and the Early Bronze Age is the 3500-2000 period.

We don't know, we just found the oldest ever skeleton of what could be "human" in Africa.

No. Every race archetype come from different place and species. Negroid from Africa, Caucasoid from around Middle East. Mongoloid from somewhere around China or Siberia. Austronesian from Australia.

This is prehistoric.

(Or better yet, just go back to )

Except first civilizations appeared in mesopotamia and India, followed by the high performing chinese civilization.

Europe was trash until recently except for greeks and romans, and even them were mediterranean.

t. European with neanderthal genes

The reason we believe proto humans wandered out of Africa is for this reason: We find the oldest remains of proto-humans in Africa. Over time, in various "waves", proto-human and human remains are found in other parts of Europe and Asia. When/ if we find proto-human remains older than ones in Africa outside of Africa, we can discuss whether or not "humans came from Africa".

If you ( against experts ) want to identify "humans" as something other than proto-humans, i.e. specifically homo sapien, the first examples of these in the fossil record "happen" in the region of modern southern russia or northern Iran. Truth be told, there have been remains of beings found all over the earth to whom none of "today's" humans are related because they lived in isolated communities which got cut off, caught up in glacial periods and died out. They didn't just spontaneously appear there from cats or lizards, though, they descended from earlier waves from Africa.

So someone spends years studying archeology to give us a lecture about evolution... what a meme.

I personally believe we should dam up the Straight of Hormuz and drain the entire Persian Gulf, turning that into one huge archaeological dig. I believe we will find more evidence there, not only of links specifically to identified varieties of proto-human breeds and modern humans, but also earlier evidence of society.

On a side note, I also believe we would find there the "truth" behind the oral tradition of the garden of Eden.

What the fuck is an evolutionist?

>responding to obvious baiter.

Comrade Yui fights for the prolitarietat.

Comissar give us word that you make misuse of k-on content. Is it true, comrade?