Chapter 6. Sapiens, but not our relative This lemur really gave the impression of a small man with a dog's head. B. Euvelmans Sapiens, but not homo? It is believed that there were no human ancestors in America. There were no apes there. Ancestors of a special group

Homo sapiens ( Homo sapiens) - a species of the genus People (Homo), family of hominids, order of primates. It is considered the dominant animal species on the planet and the highest level of development.

Currently, Homo sapiens is the only representative of the genus Homo. Several tens of thousands of years ago, the genus was represented by several species at once - Neanderthals, Cro-Magnons and others. It has been established for certain that the direct ancestor of Homo sapiens is (Homo erectus, 1.8 million years ago - 24 thousand years ago). For a long time it was believed that the closest ancestor of humans is, but in the course of research it became clear that Neanderthal is a subspecies, a parallel, lateral or sister line of human evolution and does not belong to the ancestors of modern humans. Most scientists are inclined to believe that the direct ancestor of man was the one who existed 40-10 thousand years ago. The term “Cro-Magnon” defines Homo sapiens, who lived up to 10 thousand years ago. The closest relatives of Homo sapiens among the primates existing today are the Common chimpanzee and the Pygmy chimpanzee (Bonobo).

The formation of Homo sapiens is divided into several stages: 1. Primitive community (from 2.5-2.4 million years ago, Old Stone Age, Paleolithic); 2. The ancient world (in most cases determined by the major events of ancient Greece and Rome (First Olympiad, foundation of Rome), from 776-753 BC); 3. Middle Ages or Middle Ages (V-XVI centuries); 4. Modern times (XVII-1918); Modern times (1918 - present day).

Today Homo sapiens has populated the entire Earth. At last count, the world population is 7.5 billion people.

Video: The Origins of Humanity. Homo Sapiens

Do you like to spend your time exciting and educational? In this case, you should definitely find out about museums in St. Petersburg. You can learn about the best museums, galleries and attractions of St. Petersburg by reading Viktor Korovin’s blog “Samivkrym”.

Progress in medicine, biotechnology, and pharmaceuticals is usually expected from success in the development of genetics. But in recent years, genetics has been actively manifesting itself in anthropology, a seemingly distant field, helping to shed light on human origins.

This is what Australopithecus, one of the possible ancestors of humans, who lived about three million years ago, could have looked like. Drawing by Z. Burian.

According to the displacement model, all modern people - Europeans, Asians, Americans - are descendants of a relatively small group that emerged from Africa approximately 100 thousand years ago and displaced representatives of all previous waves of settlement.

The sequence of nucleotides in DNA can be determined using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which allows the hereditary material to be copied and multiplied many times over.

Neanderthals inhabited Europe and Western Asia from 300 thousand to 28 thousand years ago.

Comparison of Neanderthal and modern human skeletons.

Neanderthals were well adapted to survive in the harsh climate of Europe during the Ice Age. Drawing by Z. Burian.

As genetic studies show, the settlement of anatomically modern humans began from Africa approximately 100 thousand years ago. The map shows the main migration routes.

An ancient painter finishes painting on the walls of the Lascaux cave (France). Artist Z. Burian.

Various members of the hominid family (probable ancestors and close relatives of modern humans). Most of the connections between the branches of the evolutionary tree are still in question.

Australopithecus afarensis (southern Afar monkey).

Kenyanthrope pay.

Australopithecus africanus (southern African monkey).

Paranthropus robustus (South African form of massive hominid).

Homo habilis (handy man).

Homo ergaster.

Homo erectus (homo erectus).

Upright walking - PROS AND CONS

I remember my surprise when, on the pages of my favorite magazine, in an article by B. Mednikov, I first encountered a downright “heretical” thought not about the advantages, but about the disadvantages of upright walking for the entire biology and physiology of modern man (“Science and Life” No. 11, 1974). Such an opinion was unusual and contradicted all the “paradigms” learned at school and university, but it sounded extremely convincing.

Upright walking is usually considered a sign of anthropogenesis, but birds were the first to stand on their hind limbs (among modern ones - penguins). It is known that Plato called man “two-legged without feathers.” Aristotle, refuting this statement, demonstrated a plucked rooster. Nature “tried” to raise its other creations on their hind legs, an example of this is the upright kangaroo.

In humans, upright walking caused a narrowing of the pelvis, otherwise lever loads would lead to a fracture of the femoral neck. And as a result, it turned out that a woman’s pelvic circumference is on average 14-17 percent smaller than the head circumference of the fetus growing in her womb. The solution to the problem was half-hearted and to the detriment of both sides. A child is born with an unformed skull - everyone knows about two fontanels in babies - and also prematurely, after which he cannot stand on his feet for a whole year. During pregnancy, the expectant mother turns off the expression of the gene for the female sex hormone estrogen. It should be remembered that one of the main functions of sex hormones is to strengthen bones. Turning off estrogen synthesis leads to osteoporosis (decreased bone density) in pregnant women, which can cause a hip fracture in old age. Premature birth is forced to prolong the period of breastfeeding. This requires large mammary glands, which often results in the development of cancer.

Let us note in parentheses that just as “favorable” a sign as upright walking is loss of hair. Our skin becomes bare as a result of the appearance of a special gene that suppresses the development of hair follicles. But bare skin is more susceptible to cancer, which is also aggravated by a decrease in the synthesis of the black pigment melanin when migrating north to Europe.

And there are many such examples from human biology. Take heart diseases, for example: isn’t their occurrence due to the fact that the heart has to pump almost half of the blood volume vertically upward?

True, all these evolutionary “advantages” with a “minus” sign are justified by the release of the upper limbs, which begin to lose mass; at the same time, the fingers acquire the ability to make smaller and more subtle movements, which affects the development of the motor areas of the cerebral cortex. And yet we must admit that upright walking was a necessary, but not decisive stage in the development of modern man.

Thus began a letter from the then unknown F. Crick and J. Watson to the editor of the journal Nature, published in April 1953. We were talking about the double-stranded structure of DNA. Everyone knows about it now, but at that time there would have hardly been a dozen people in the world who were seriously working on this biopolymer. However, few people remember that Watson and Crick opposed the authority of Nobel laureate L. Pauling, who had recently published an article on triple-stranded DNA.

Now we know that Pauling simply had a contaminated DNA sample, but that’s not the point. For Pauling, DNA was simply a “scaffold” to which protein genes were attached. Watson and Crick believed that double-strandedness could also explain the genetic properties of DNA. Few people immediately believed them; it was not for nothing that they were given the Nobel Prize only after they awarded the biochemists who isolated the enzyme for DNA synthesis and were able to establish this same synthesis in a test tube.

And now, almost half a century later, in February 2001, a decoding of the human genome was published in the journals Nature and Science. It is unlikely that the “patriarchs” of genetics could hope to live to see their universal triumph!

This is the situation that arises with a quick glance at the genome. The high degree of “homogeneity” of our genes is noteworthy when compared with the genes of chimpanzees. Although genome sequencers say that “we are all a little African,” referring to the African roots of our genome, the genetic variability of chimpanzees is four times higher: 0.1 percent on average in humans and 0.4 percent in apes.

At the same time, the greatest difference in genetic pools is observed among Africans. Representatives of all other races and peoples have much lower genome variability than on the Dark Continent. We can also say that the African genome is the most ancient. It is not for nothing that molecular biologists have been saying for fifteen years that Adam and Eve once lived in Africa.

For many reasons, anthropology does not often please us with epoch-making finds in the savannah scorched by the merciless African sun. American researcher Don Johanson became famous in 1974 for the discovery of the famous Lucy in Ethiopia. The age of Lucy, named after the heroine of one of the Beatles' songs, is determined to be 3.5 million years. It was an australopithecus (Australopithecus afarensis). For a quarter of a century, Johanson assured everyone that it was from Lucy that the human race originated.

However, not everyone agreed with this. In March 2001, a press conference was held in Washington, at which an anthropologist from Kenya, Meave Leakey, spoke, by the way, a representative of a whole family of famous anthropologists. This event was timed to coincide with the publication of the journal Nature with an article by Leakey and her colleagues about the discovery of Kenyanthropus platyops, or Kenyan flat-faced man, approximately the same age as Lucy. The Kenyan find was so different from others that researchers awarded it the rank of a new human species.

Kenyanthropus has a flatter face than Lucy and, most importantly, smaller teeth. This suggests that, unlike Lucy, who ate grass, rhizomes and even branches, Platyops ate softer fruits and berries, as well as insects.

The discovery of Kenyanthropus is consistent with the findings of French and Kenyan scientists, which they reported in early December 2000. A left femur and a massive right shoulder were found in the Tugen Hills of Kenya, about 250 km northeast of Nairobi. The structure of the bones shows that the creature both walked on the ground and climbed trees. But the most important thing is a fragment of the jaw and preserved teeth: small canines and molars, which indicates a rather “gentle” diet of fruits and soft vegetables. The age of this ancient man, who was called "orrorin", is estimated at 6 million years.

Meav Leakey, speaking at a press conference, said that now instead of one candidate for future people, namely Lucy, scientists have at least two. Johanson also agreed that there were more than one African species from which humans could have descended.

However, among anthropologists, in addition to supporters of the emergence of man in Africa, there are also multiregionalists, or polycentrists, who believe that the second center of the origin and evolution of man and his ancestors was Asia. As evidence of their correctness, they cite the remains of Peking and Javanese man, with which, in general, scientific anthropology started at the beginning of the last century. True, the dating of those remains is very blurry (the skull of a Javanese girl is estimated at 300-800 thousand years old), and besides, all Asian representatives of the human race belong to an earlier stage of development than Homo sapiens, called Homo erectus (upright man) . In Europe, the representative of Erectus was Neanderthal.

But anthropology in the age of the genome does not live only on bones and skulls, and molecular biology was destined to resolve the disputes.

The molecular approach was first discussed in the middle of the last century. It was then that scientists drew attention to the uneven distribution of carriers of different blood groups. It has been suggested that blood type B, especially common in Asia, protects its carriers from such terrible diseases as plague and cholera.

In the 1960s, an attempt was made to estimate the age of humans as a species using serum proteins (albumin), comparing them with those of chimpanzees. No one knew the evolutionary age of the chimpanzee branch, the rate of molecular changes at the level of amino acid sequences of proteins, and much more. Nevertheless, the purely phenotypic result amazed the minds of that time: humans have been evolving as a species for at least 5 million years! At least it was then that the branches of ape ancestors and ape-like ancestors of humans split.

Scientists did not believe such estimates, although they already had skulls two million years old. The protein data were dismissed as a curious “artifact.”

And yet, molecular biology had the final say. First, the age of Eve, who lived in Africa 160-200 thousand years ago, was determined using mitochondrial DNA, then the same framework was obtained for Adam using the male sex chromosome Y. Adam’s age was, however, somewhat less, but still in the range of 100 thousand years.

Explaining modern methods of accessing evolutionary DNA files requires a separate article, so let the reader take the author's word for it. We can only explain that the DNA of mitochondria (the organelles in which the main energy “currency” of the cell, ATP, is produced) is transmitted only through the maternal line, and the Y chromosome, naturally, through the paternal line.

Over the decade and a half that ended the twentieth century, the sophistication and resolution of molecular analysis increased immeasurably. And new data obtained by scientists allow us to talk in detail about the last steps of anthropogenesis. In December 2000, an article was published in Nature that compared the complete mitochondrial DNA (16.5 thousand letters of the gene code) of 53 volunteers from 14 major language groups of the world. Analysis of DNA protocols made it possible to identify four main branches of the settlement of our ancestors. Moreover, three of them - the “oldest” - are rooted in Africa, and the last one includes both Africans and “displaced people” from the Dark Continent. The authors of the article dated the “exodus” from Africa to only 52 thousand years (plus or minus 28 thousand). The very emergence of modern man dates back 130 thousand years, which approximately coincides with the originally determined age of molecular Eve.

Almost the same results were obtained when comparing DNA sequences from the Y chromosome, published in Nature Genetics in 2001. At the same time, 167 special markers were identified that correspond to the geography of residence of 1062 people and reflect waves of migration around the world. In particular, the Japanese, due to geographic and historical isolation, are characterized by a special group of markers that no one else has.

The analysis showed that the most ancient branch of the family tree is the Ethiopian one, where Lucy was found. The authors date the exodus from Africa to 35-89 thousand years. After the inhabitants of Ethiopia, the most ancient are the inhabitants of Sardinia and Europe with its Basques. By the way, as another work shows, it was the Basques who settled southwestern Ireland - the frequency of a particular DNA “signature” reaches 98 and 89 percent, respectively, on the west coast of Ireland and in the Basque Country!

Then there was settlement along the Asian coast of the Indian and Pacific oceans. At the same time, American Indians turned out to be “older” than Indians, and the youngest were South Africans and residents of Japan and Taiwan.

Another message came at the end of April 2001 from Harvard (USA), where the Whitehead Institute, which, by the way, conducts the main work on the Y chromosome (it was there that the male gene SRY - “sex region Y” was discovered) , compared 300 chromosomes from Swedes, Central Europeans and Nigeria. The results are very clear: modern Europeans descended about 25 thousand years ago from a small group of only a few hundred people who came out of Africa.

By the way, the Chinese also turned out to come from the Dark Continent. The journal Science in May 2001 published data from a study by Chinese scientist Li Ying, a professor of population genetics at Shanghai University. Blood samples for the study of male sex Y chromosome markers were collected from 12,127 men from 163 populations in East Asia: Iran, China, New Guinea and Siberia. Analysis of samples, which Li Yin conducted together with Peter Underhill from Stanford University (USA), showed that the ancestors of modern East Asians lived about 100 thousand years ago in Africa.

Alan Templeton from Washington University in St. Louis (USA) compared the DNA of people from ten genetic regions of the world, and he used for analysis not only mitochondria and Y chromosomes, but also X chromosomes and six other chromosomes. Based on these data, in his article in the journal Nature in March 2002, he concludes that there have been at least three waves of migration from Africa in human history. The emergence of Homo erectus 1.7 million years ago was followed by another wave, 400-800 thousand years ago. And only then, about 100 thousand years ago, did the exodus of anatomically modern humans from Africa occur. There was also a relatively recent (several tens of thousands of years ago) return movement from Asia to Africa, as well as genetic interpenetration of different groups.

New methods for studying DNA evolution are still young and quite expensive: reading one letter of the gene code costs almost a dollar. That is why the genome of several tens or hundreds of people is analyzed, and not several millions, which would be highly desirable from a statistical point of view.

But nevertheless, everything is gradually falling into place. Genetics does not support supporters of multiregional human origins. Apparently, our species originated recently, and those remains that were found in Asia are just traces of previous waves of settlement from Africa.

Eric Lander, director of the Whitehead Institute, said on this occasion, speaking in Edinburgh (UK) at the HUGO (Human Genome Organization) conference: “The Earth's population is now 6 billion people, but gene variability shows that they all came from several tens of thousands, and very closely related ones. Man was a small species that became numerous literally in the blink of an historical eye."

Speaking about the results of reading the human genome and a preliminary comparison of the genomes of representatives of different nations, the researchers stated as an indisputable fact that “we all come from Africa.” They were also struck by the “emptiness” of the genome, 95 percent of which does not contain “useful” information about the structure of proteins. Throw away some percentage of regulatory sequences, and 90 percent will still remain “meaningless.” Why do you need a telephone book with a volume of 1000 pages, 900 of which are filled with meaningless combinations of letters, all sorts of “aaaaaaaa” and “bbbbbw”?

A separate article can be written about the structure of the human genome, but now we are interested in one very important fact related to retroviruses. Our genome contains many fragments of the genomes of once formidable retroviruses that have been “pacified.” Let us recall that retroviruses - these include, for example, the immunodeficiency virus - carry RNA instead of DNA. They make a DNA copy on the RNA template, which is then integrated into the genome of our cells.

One might think that viruses of this kind are very necessary for us as mammals, since they allow us to suppress the reaction of rejection of the fetus, which is genetically half foreign material (half of the genes in the fetus are paternal). Experimental blocking of one of the retroviruses living in the cells of the placenta, which is formed from fetal cells, leads to the death of developing mice as a result of the fact that maternal immune T-lymphocytes are not “deactivated”. Our genome even contains special sequences of 14 letters of the gene code necessary for integrating the retroviral genome.

But, judging by our genome and its size, it takes a lot of (evolutionary) time to pacify retroviruses. That is why ancient man fled from Africa, fleeing these very retroviruses - HIV, cancer, as well as such as the Ebola virus, smallpox, etc. Add here polio, which also affects chimpanzees, malaria, which affects the brain, sleeping sickness, worms and much more that tropical countries are famous for.

So, some 100 thousand years ago, a group of very intelligent and aggressive human individuals escaped from Africa and began their triumphal march around the world. How did interaction occur with representatives of previous waves of settlement, for example with Neanderthals in Europe? The same DNA proves that genetic interbreeding most likely did not take place.

The March 2000 issue of Nature published an article by Igor Ovchinnikov, Vitaly Kharitonov and Galina Romanova, who, together with their English colleagues, analyzed mitochondrial DNA isolated from the bones of a two-year-old Neanderthal child found in the Mezmaiskaya cave in the Kuban by an expedition of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Radiocarbon dating gave 29 thousand years - it seems that this was one of the last Neanders. DNA analysis showed that it is 3.48 percent different from the DNA of the Neanderthal from Feldhofer Cave (Germany). However, both DNAs form a single branch that is markedly different from the DNA of modern humans. Thus, Neanderthal DNA did not contribute to our mitochondrial DNA.

One hundred and fifty years ago, when science first turned from myths about the creation of man to anatomical evidence, it had nothing at its disposal except guesswork and conjecture. For a hundred years, anthropology was forced to base its conclusions on rare fragmentary finds, which, even if they convinced anyone of something, still had to involve a share of faith in the future discovery of some kind of “connecting link.”

In the light of modern genetic discoveries, anthropological findings indicate many things: upright walking is not associated with the development of the brain, and the manufacture of tools is not associated with it; Moreover, genetic changes “overtake” changes in the structure of skulls.

The Italian scientist Guido Barbugiani, who, with the permission of the Pope, conducted a study of the relics of the Evangelist Luke, was unable to establish the nationality of Christ’s companion. The DNA of the relics is definitely not Greek, but some markers are similar to sequences found in modern inhabitants of Turkish Anatolia, and some to Syrian ones. Again, in such a short period of historical time, the populations of Anatolia and Syria did not diverge genetically far enough from each other to be significantly different. On the other hand, over the past two thousand years, so many waves of conquest and great migrations of peoples have passed through this border region of the Middle East that it has turned, as Barbujani says, into a zone of numerous gene contacts.

The scientist goes even further, declaring that “the concept of genetically distinctly different races of man is completely incorrect.” If, he says, the genetic differences between a Scandinavian and an inhabitant of Tierra del Fuego are taken as 100 percent, then the differences between you and any other member of the community close to you will average 85 percent! Back in 1997, Barbujani analyzed 109 DNA markers in 16 populations taken from around the world, including the pygmies of Zaire. The analysis showed very high intragroup differences at the genetic level. What can I say: transplantologists know very well that organ and tissue transplants are often impossible, even from parents to children.

However, transplantologists were also faced with the fact that white kidneys were not suitable for transplantation to black Americans. It got to the point that a new heart remedy, BiDil, specially designed for use by African Americans, recently appeared in the United States.

But the racial approach to pharmacology does not justify itself, as evidenced by more detailed studies of the effectiveness of drugs conducted already in the post-genomic era. David Goldstein of University College London analyzed the DNA of 354 people from eight different populations around the world, resulting in four groups (an analysis was also carried out on six enzymes that process these same drugs in human liver cells).

The four identified groups characterize people's response to drugs much more accurately than races. An article published in the November 2001 issue of Nature Genetics provides a striking example. When analyzing the DNA of Ethiopians, 62 percent of them were in the same group as Ashkenazi Jews, Armenians and... Norwegians! Therefore, the unification of Ethiopians, whose Greek name translates as “dark-faced,” with African Americans of the same Caribbean is not at all justified. "Racial markers do not always correlate with people's genetic relatedness," Goldstein notes. And he adds: "Similarity in genetic sequences provides much more useful information when conducting pharmacological tests. And race simply 'masks' differences in people's responses to a particular drug."

It is already an established fact that the chromosomal sites responsible for our genetic origin fall into four groups. But previously they simply shrugged it off. Now pharmaceutical companies will get down to business and quickly expose all racists...

In connection with the deciphering of the genome, there was no shortage of predictions for the future. Here are some of them. Within 10 years, it is planned to release dozens of gene tests for various diseases onto the market (just as you can now buy antibody pregnancy tests in pharmacies). And 5 years after this, gene screening will begin before in vitro fertilization, which will be followed by gene “amplification” of future children (for money, of course).

By 2020, cancer treatment will be established after gene typing of tumor cells. Medicines will begin to take into account the genetic constitution of patients. Safe therapies using cloned stem cells will become available. By 2030, “genetic healthcare” will be created, which will increase active life expectancy to 90 years. Heated debates are coming about the further evolution of man as a species. The birth of the profession of “designer” of future children will not blow us away either...

Will it be the apocalypse of our days in the style of F. Coppola or the deliverance of humanity from God's curse for original sin? Candidate of Biological Sciences I. LALAYANTS.

Literature

Lalayants I. Sixth day of creation. - M.: Politizdat, 1985.

Mednikov B. Human Origins. - "Science and Life" No. 11, 1974.

Mednikov B. Axioms of biology. - “Science and Life” No. 2-7, 10, 1980.

Yankovsky N., Borinskaya S. Our history written in genes. - "Nature" No. 6, 2001.

BRANCHING TREE OF OUR ANCESTORS

Back in the 18th century, Carl Linnaeus developed a classification of plants and animals living on our planet. According to this classification, modern man belongs to the species Homo sapiens sapiens(homo sapiens sapiens), and he is the only representative of the genus to survive evolution Homo. This genus, believed to have appeared 1.6-1.8 million years ago, together with the earlier genus Australopithecines, which lived between 5 and 1.6 million years ago, form the family of hominids. Humans are united with apes by the superfamily hominoids, and with the rest of the apes by the order of primates.

It is believed that hominids separated from hominoids about 6 million years ago - this is the figure given by geneticists who calculated the moment of genetic divergence between humans and apes based on the rate of DNA mutations. French paleoanthropologists Martin Picfort and Brigitte Senu, who recently discovered fragments of a skeleton called Orrorin tugenensis (after the location near Lake Tugen in Kenya), claim that it is approximately 6 million years old. Before this, the oldest hominid was Ardipithecus. The discoverers of Orrorin consider it to be the direct ancestor of humans, and all other branches are collateral.

Ardipithecus. In 1994, in the Afar region of Ethiopia, American anthropologist Tim White discovered teeth, skull fragments and limb bones that date back to 4.5-4.3 million years old. There are indications that Ardipithecus walked on two legs, but it is believed that it lived in trees.

Australopithecines (southern apes) lived in Africa from the late Miocene (approximately 5.3 million years ago) to the early Pleistocene (approximately 1.6 million years ago). Most paleoanthropologists consider them to be the ancestors of modern humans, but there is disagreement over whether the different forms of australopithecines represent a single lineage or a series of parallel species. Australopithecus walked on two legs.

Australopithecus anamensis (southern lake monkey) discovered in 1994 by the famous anthropologist Meave Leakey in the town of Kanapoi on the shores of Lake Turkana (northern Kenya). Australopithecus anamensis lived between 4.2 and 3.9 million years ago in coastal forests. The structure of the tibia allows us to conclude that he used two legs to walk.

Australopithecus afarensis (southern Afar monkey) - the famous Lucy, found in 1974 in Hadar (Ethiopia) by Don Johanson. In 1978, footprints attributed to Afarensis were discovered in Laetoli (Tanzania). Australopithecus afarensis lived between 3.8 and 2.8 million years ago and led a mixed arboreal and terrestrial lifestyle. The structure of the bones indicates that he was upright and could run.

Kenyanthropus platiops (flat-faced Kenyan). The discovery of Kenyanthropus was announced by Meave Leakey in March 2001. His skull, found on the western shore of Lake Turkana (Kenya), dates back to 3.5-3.2 million years. Leakey argues that this is a new branch in the hominid family.

Australopithecus barelgasali. In 1995, French paleontologist Michel Brunet discovered part of the jaw in the town of Koro Toro (Chad). This species, dating back to 3.3-3 million years ago, is closely related to Afarensis.

Australopithecus garhi discovered by Tim White in 1997 in the Bowri Valley, Afar region (Ethiopia). Garhi means "surprise" in the local dialect. This species, which lived approximately 2.5-2.3 million years ago, already knew how to use stone tools.

Australopithecus africanus(African southern monkey) described by Raymond Dart in 1925. This species has a more developed skull than Afarensis, but a more primitive skeleton. He probably lived 3-2.3 million years ago. The light structure of the bones indicates that it lives primarily in trees.

Paranthropus ethiopicus. Paranthropus is close to Australopithecus, but has more massive jaws and teeth. The earliest massive hominid, Aethiopicus, was found near Lake Turkana (Kenya) and in Ethiopia. The most famous example is the "black skull". Paranthropus ethiopicus dates back to 2.5-2.3 million years ago. It had massive jaws and teeth suitable for chewing the rough plant food of the African savannas.

Paranthropus boisei discovered by Louis Leakey in 1959 near Lake Turkana (Kenya) and in the Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania). Boisei (dated 2-1.2 million years ago) probably descended from Aethiopicus. Because of its massive jaws and teeth, it is called the “nutcracker.”

Paranthropus robustus- a South African form of a massive hominid, found in 1940 by Robert Broome in the town of Kromdray (South Africa). Robustus is a contemporary of Boisea. Many paleoanthropologists believe that it evolved from Africanus rather than from Aethiopicus. In this case, it should be classified not as a paranthropus, but as a different genus.

Homo rudolphensis discovered by Richard Leakey in 1972 in Kobi Fora near Lake Turkana (Kenya), which at that time bore the colonial name - Lake Rudolf. This species, which lived approximately 2.4-1.9 million years ago, was first classified as a species of Homo habilis, then separated into a separate species. After the discovery of the flat-faced Kenyan, Miv Leakey proposed that Rudolphensis be included in the new genus Kenyanthropus.

Homo habilis(handy man) was first discovered by Louis Leakey in Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania) in 1961. Then his remains were found in Ethiopia and South Africa. Homo habilis lived approximately 2.3-1.6 million years ago. Many scientists now believe that it belongs to the late Australopithecus rather than to the genus Homo.

Homo ergaster. The best example of Ergaster is the so-called "Turkana Youth", whose skeleton was discovered by Richard Leakey and Alan Walker in the town of Narikotome on the shores of Lake Turkana (Kenya) in 1984. Homo ergaster is dated to be 1.75-1.4 million years old. A skull with a similar structure was found in 1991 in Georgia.

Homo erectus(Homo erectus), whose remains were first discovered in Morocco in 1933 and then in Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania) in 1960, lived between 1.6 and 0.3 million years ago. It is believed to have originated from either Homo habilis or Homo ergaster. In South Africa, numerous sites have been found for Erectus, which learned to make fire approximately 1.1 million years ago. Homo erectus was the first hominid to migrate out of Africa, approximately 1.6 million years ago. His remains were found on the island of Java and in China. Erectus, who migrated to Europe, became the ancestor of Neanderthals.

The question of how old the human race is: seven thousand, two hundred thousand, two million or a billion is still open. There are several versions. Let's look at the main ones.

Young “homo sapiens” (200-340 thousand years)

If we talk about the species homo sapiens, that is, “reasonable man,” he is relatively young. Official science gives it about 200 thousand years. This conclusion was made based on a study of mitochondrial DNA and famous skulls from Ethiopia. The latter were found in 1997 during excavations near the Ethiopian village of Herto. These were the remains of a man and a child, whose age was at least 160 thousand years. Today, these are the most ancient representatives of Homo sapiens known to us. Scientists have dubbed them homo sapiens idaltu, or "oldest intelligent man."

Around the same time, maybe a little earlier (200 thousand years ago), the ancestor of all modern people, “mitrogondrial Eve,” lived in the same place in Africa. Every living person has its mitochondria (a set of genes transmitted only through the female line). However, this does not mean that she was the first woman on earth. It’s just that in the course of evolution, it was her descendants who were most fortunate. By the way, “Adam,” whose Y chromosome is present in every man today, is comparatively younger than “Eve.” It is believed that he lived about 140 thousand years ago.

However, all this data is inaccurate and inconclusive. Science is based only on what it has, and more ancient representatives of homo sapiens have not yet been found. But Adam's age has recently been revised, which could add another 140 thousand years to the age of humanity. A recent study of the genes of one African-American man, Albert Perry, and 11 other villagers in Cameroon showed that they had a more “ancient” Y chromosome, which was once passed on to his descendants by a man who lived approximately 340 thousand years ago.

"Homo" – 2.5 million years

“Homo sapiens” is a young species, but the genus “Homo” itself, from which it comes, is much older. Not to mention their predecessors - Australopithecus, who were the first to stand on both legs and begin to use fire. But if the latter still had too many common features with monkeys, then the most ancient representatives of the genus “Homo” - homo habilis (handy man) were already similar to people.

Its representative, or rather its skull, was found in 1960 in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania along with the bones of a saber-toothed tiger. Perhaps he fell victim to a predator. It was later established that the remains belonged to a teenager who lived about 2.5 million years ago. Its brain was more massive than that of typical australopithecines, its pelvis allowed it to move calmly on two legs, and its legs themselves were only suitable for walking upright.

Subsequently, the sensational discovery was complemented by an equally sensational discovery - homo habilis himself made tools for labor and hunting, carefully selecting materials for them, going to great distances from sites for them. This was found out due to the fact that all his weapons were made of quartz, which was not found near the places of residence of the first person. It was homo habilis who created the first - Olduvai archaeological culture, with which the Paleolithic or Stone Age began.

Scientific creationism (from 7500 years ago)

As you know, the theory of evolution is not considered fully proven. Its main competitor was and remains creationism, according to which both all life on Earth and the world as a whole were created by a Supreme Intelligence, the Creator or God. There is also scientific creationism, whose followers point to scientific confirmation of what is said in the Book of Genesis. They reject the long chain of evolution, arguing that there were no transitional links, all living forms on earth were created complete. And they lived together for a long time: people, dinosaurs, mammals. Until the flood, traces of which, according to them, we still find today - this is the great canyon in America, dinosaur bones and other fossils.

Creationists do not have a consensus on the age of humanity and the world, although they all rely on the first three chapters of the first Book of Genesis on this issue. So-called “young earth creationism” takes them literally, insisting that the entire world was created by God in 6 days, about 7,500 years ago. Followers of “Old Earth Creationism” believe that God’s activity cannot be measured by human standards. One “day” of creation can mean not just a day, but millions and even billions of years. Thus, it is almost impossible to determine the real age of the earth and humanity in particular. Relatively speaking, this is the period from 4.6 billion years (when, according to the scientific version, planet earth was born) to 7500 years ago.