Analysis of ancient DNA from 7,000-year-old skeletons discovered in the once-lush Green Sahara reveals a previously unknown human lineage. These individuals, found at the Gobero archaeological site in Niger, possessed distinct genetic ancestry unlike any present-day African populations or other ancient groups analyzed so far. This suggests a complex and diverse human history in the region during the Holocene's wetter period, with this unique lineage thriving before the Sahara became a desert. The research highlights a "missing piece" in our understanding of African population history and prehistoric migrations.
Analysis of ancient human remains from the once-lush Sahara Desert reveals a genetically distinct group of people who thrived there during the African Humid Period. These "Green Sahara" inhabitants, dating back 5,000 to 10,000 years ago, possessed unique genetic markers unlike any present-day populations in North or Sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting a long period of isolation and independent evolution within this region before its desertification. This discovery challenges existing narratives of early human migration and settlement across Africa, highlighting a previously unknown branch of human ancestry that emerged and disappeared with the changing Saharan climate.
Hacker News users discussed the implications of the article's findings, expressing skepticism about the claim of a "unique" human group. Some commenters highlighted the fluidity of human movement and intermingling, especially in pre-historic times, making definitive claims of uniqueness difficult. Others pointed out the challenges in drawing conclusions based on limited skeletal remains and the potential for misinterpretations. The discussion also touched on the Sahara's history of cyclical climate changes and the impact on human populations, with some emphasizing that the region has seen numerous migrations and cultural exchanges over millennia. A few commenters criticized Science Alert's sensationalized reporting style. Overall, the consensus seemed to be that while the findings are interesting, the framing of a "unique" group is potentially misleading and warrants further investigation.
Researchers in Spain have unearthed a fragmented hominin face, believed to be over 1.4 million years old, at the Sima del Elefante cave site in Atapuerca. This fossil, consisting of a maxilla (upper jawbone) and cheekbone, represents the oldest known hominin fossil found in Europe and potentially pushes back the earliest evidence of human ancestors on the continent by 200,000 years. The discovery provides crucial insight into the early evolution of the human face and the dispersal of hominins across Eurasia, although its specific lineage remains to be determined through further study. The researchers suggest this finding might be related to a hominin jawbone found at the same site in 2007 and dated to 1.2 million years ago, potentially representing a single evolutionary lineage.
Hacker News users discuss the discovery of a million-year-old human facial fragment, expressing excitement about the implications for understanding human evolution. Some question the certainty with which the researchers assign the fossil to Homo erectus, highlighting the fragmented nature of the find and suggesting alternative hominin species as possibilities. Several commenters also discuss the significance of Dmanisi, Georgia, as a key location for paleoanthropological discoveries, and the potential for future finds in the region. Others focus on the methodology, including the use of 3D reconstruction, and the challenges of accurately dating such ancient specimens. A few highlight the persistent difficulty of defining "species" in the context of evolving lineages, and the limitations of relying on morphology alone for classification.
The article "The Prehistoric Psychopath" explores the evolutionary puzzle of psychopathy, questioning whether it's a purely maladaptive trait or if it could have offered some advantages in our ancestral past. It proposes that psychopathic traits, such as lack of empathy, manipulativeness, and risk-taking, might have been beneficial in specific prehistoric contexts like intergroup conflict or resource acquisition, allowing individuals to exploit others or seize opportunities without moral constraints. The article emphasizes the complex interplay between genes and environment, suggesting that psychopathy likely arises from a combination of genetic predispositions and environmental triggers, and that its expression and success might have varied across different social structures and ecological niches in prehistory. Ultimately, the article highlights the difficulty in definitively determining the evolutionary origins and historical prevalence of psychopathy, given the limitations of archaeological and anthropological evidence.
HN commenters largely discussed the methodology and conclusions of the linked article. Several questioned the reliability of extrapolating psychopathic traits based on sparse archaeological evidence, arguing that alternative explanations for prehistoric violence exist and that applying modern psychological diagnoses to ancient humans is problematic. Some debated the definition and evolutionary role of psychopathy, with some suggesting it may be a social construct rather than a distinct disorder. Others pointed out that while some individuals might exhibit psychopathic traits, classifying an entire group as psychopathic is misleading. The difficulty in distinguishing between instrumental and reactive violence in archaeological records was also a recurring theme, highlighting the limitations of inferring motivations from prehistoric remains. A few commenters focused on the article's presentation, criticizing its length and suggesting ways to improve readability.
A new genomic study suggests that the human capacity for language originated much earlier than previously thought, at least 135,000 years ago. By analyzing genomic data from diverse human populations, researchers identified specific gene variations linked to language abilities that are shared across these groups. This shared genetic foundation indicates a common ancestor who possessed these language-related genes, pushing back the estimated timeline for language emergence significantly. The study challenges existing theories and offers a deeper understanding of the evolutionary history of human communication.
Hacker News users discussed the study linking genomic changes to language development 135,000 years ago with some skepticism. Several commenters questioned the methodology and conclusions, pointing out the difficulty in definitively connecting genetics to complex behaviors like language. The reliance on correlating genomic changes in modern humans with archaic human genomes was seen as a potential weakness. Some users highlighted the lack of fossil evidence directly supporting language use at that time. Others debated alternative theories of language evolution, including the potential role of FOXP2 variants beyond those mentioned in the study. The overall sentiment was one of cautious interest, with many acknowledging the limitations of current research while appreciating the attempt to explore the origins of language. A few also expressed concern about the potential for misinterpreting or overhyping such preliminary findings.
Scientists have successfully extracted ancient human DNA from a deer tooth pendant found in Denisova Cave, Siberia, dating back to the Upper Palaeolithic period (19,000-25,000 years ago). By using a novel method that extracts DNA from the artifact's pores without damaging it, they recovered DNA from a woman genetically related to ancient North Eurasians. This breakthrough demonstrates the potential of porous materials like bone and teeth artifacts to preserve DNA and opens up new avenues for studying ancient human populations and their interactions with cultural objects. It suggests that handling such artifacts leaves detectable DNA and may help shed light on their creation, use, and ownership within past societies.
Hacker News users discussed the implications of recovering ancient human DNA from a 25,000-year-old pendant, focusing on the potential of this method for future discoveries. Some expressed skepticism about contamination, questioning how the DNA survived so long in a porous material. Others highlighted the significance of retrieving DNA from handled objects, opening possibilities for understanding social structures and individual interactions with artifacts. The innovative technique used to extract the DNA without destroying the pendant was also praised, and several users speculated about the stories this discovery could tell about the pendant's owner and their life. The ethical implications of handling such artifacts were briefly touched upon. Several commenters also compared the methodology and findings to similar research involving ancient chewing gum.
"Out of Africa", published in Nature, celebrates a century of research since Raymond Dart's Taung Child discovery, marking a pivotal moment in understanding human origins. The article highlights the ongoing advancements in paleoanthropology, genomics, and related fields, which have solidified the "Out of Africa" theory—that Homo sapiens originated in Africa and subsequently dispersed globally. While Dart's initial claims were met with resistance, subsequent fossil discoveries and genetic analyses have strongly supported his theory and significantly refined our understanding of human evolution, migration patterns, and the complex interplay of biological and cultural factors shaping our species. The article emphasizes the continued importance of African fossil sites and collaborative research in furthering our knowledge of human ancestry.
Hacker News users discuss the complexities of "Out of Africa" theories, pointing out that the model isn't as simple as often presented. Some highlight evidence of earlier hominin migrations and interbreeding with other hominins, suggesting a more nuanced "Out of Africa, and back again" narrative. Others discuss the political baggage associated with human origin studies, noting how easily such research can be misused to justify racist ideologies. Several commenters express excitement about advancements in ancient DNA analysis and its potential to further refine our understanding of human migration and evolution. The oversimplification of the "Out of Africa" theory for public consumption is a recurring theme, with commenters lamenting the loss of nuance and the resulting misunderstandings. Some also point out the importance of distinguishing between anatomically modern humans and other hominins when discussing migrations.
Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43663713
Hacker News users discussed the implications of the discovered lineage and the methodology used in the study. Some debated the meaning of "distinct lineage," questioning if the findings represent a truly separate group or simply variation within a known population. Several commenters highlighted the fascinating history of the Green Sahara period and its impact on human migration and development. Others expressed interest in the DNA analysis techniques, including the challenges of working with ancient DNA and the potential for future research to further illuminate this population's history. A few also touched upon the ethical considerations of studying ancient remains.
The Hacker News post titled "7k-Year-Old Skeletons from the Green Sahara Reveal a Mysterious Human Lineage" has generated several comments discussing the findings and their implications.
Several commenters focused on the surprising genetic diversity revealed by the study. One commenter pointed out the unexpected discovery of a distinct human lineage in the Green Sahara, highlighting the complex history of human migration and evolution in Africa. This commenter also expressed excitement about the potential for future research to further illuminate this lineage and its relationship to other ancient populations. Another emphasized how little we truly understand about early human populations and migrations, particularly within Africa. They saw this discovery as a significant piece of the puzzle, demonstrating that there were likely many more distinct groups than previously recognized.
Another thread of discussion centered around the concept of the "Green Sahara" itself. Some commenters shared additional information about this period, describing the Sahara as a lush and vibrant ecosystem teeming with life, a stark contrast to the arid desert we know today. They highlighted the dramatic climate shifts that have shaped the region and the impact these shifts have had on human populations. This led to a related discussion about the implications of climate change for modern societies, with some commenters drawing parallels between the past transformations of the Sahara and the potential future impacts of global warming.
A few commenters also questioned the use of the word "mysterious" in the title, arguing that while the findings are certainly significant, they don't necessarily point to anything inherently mysterious. They suggested that "previously unknown" or "distinct" would be more accurate descriptors. This spurred a brief discussion about the language used in science journalism and the potential for sensationalizing scientific discoveries.
Finally, several commenters expressed general enthusiasm for the research and appreciation for the opportunity to learn about ancient history and human origins. They praised the researchers for their work and expressed hope for further discoveries in the future. Some also shared links to related resources, allowing readers to delve deeper into the topic.