Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Tue Sep 17, 2019 6:21 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 5:22 pm +0000
Posts: 771
It seems to me, based on reading the Urantia Book, that the first humans originated in Southeast Asia, not Africa. At the same time, the Urantia Book says that there were other strains developing besides that which led to Andon and Fonta, so it's possible that while the first humans originated in Southeast Asia, they evolving in Africa as well.

When looking at all the fossil evidence and what the Urantia Book says, I think the multiregional hypothesis is the most compelling explanation for human origins. Out of Africa theory basically has to ignore the fossil finds of H. erectus in Asia that likely led to modern Asian people, and that most people who developed outside Africa have at least two percent Neanderthal DNA.

Quote:
Even the loss of Andon and Fonta before they had offspring, though delaying human evolution,would not have prevented it. Subsequent to the appearance of Andon and Fonta, and before the mutating potentials of animal life were exhausted, there evolved no less than seven thousand favorable strains which could have achieved some sort of human type of development. And many of these better stocks were subsequently assimilated by the various branches of the expanding human species.
Urantia Book, Paper 65: Section 3

_________________
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience. -
Teilhard de Chardin


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 940
There's a lot of good information and evidence presented on this topic at ubthenews.com...specifically the following article links:

Lemurs To Humans Report

A Urantia Book-based taxonomy of human beings:

Eugenics, Race, and The Urantia Book

Research on the Double Dual Origin of Modern Man and pre-Modern Man


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 5:22 pm +0000
Posts: 771
This article does a good job of discrediting Out of Africa thoery:

The Case Against Eve
Milford Wolpoff; Alan Thorne; Roger Lawn
New Scientist (1991)
http://www.virginia.edu/woodson/courses ... lpoff.html

Quote:
In conflict with the Eve theory, our measurements show that modern Chinese, Australasians and Europeans each resemble their local predecessors much more than they resemble archaic Africans. But that is not all. In each region of the world, we have uncovered links that tie living populations to their own local antecedents, whose remains are preserved in the fossil record for the area. The most convincing evidence comes from Asia.

For example, the fossils of Indonesia can be arranged in an anatomical sequence which shows no signs of interruption by African migrants at any time. The sequence starts around one million years ago, with the remains of Java Man--a representative of the hominid species Homo erectus discovered in 1891--and ends with the remains of Australians dated at around 10 000 years ago. Java Man bears certain distinguishing features, notably a robust cranium and a distinctively shaped face. Compared with Homo erectus from elsewhere, the Javan skulls have thick bone, pronounced ridges above the eyes and a well-developed shelf of bone at the back of the skull for anchoring the neck muscles.

These early Indonesians have large projecting faces, with massive rounded cheek bones and large teeth. The face bears a number of small but important features: a "rolled edge" on the lower margin of the eye socket, a distinctive ridge on the cheek bone and a nasal floor that "flows out" smoothly onto the face. These and other traits combine to create a special Indonesian variation on the Homo erectus theme.

The next set of fossils in the sequence come from Ngandong in Java and are dated at around 100 000 years ago. These skulls carry the same special combination of features, although they have bigger brains. Our research also shows that these hominids were not confined to Java, but probably migrated to Australia. For the earliest known Australian hominids, which are less than 50 000 years old, share the Javan features, along with even larger brains and other signs of modernisation.

Some anthropologists question the significance of the Indonesian sequence, saying it is based on too little fossil information to be reliable and that it is unclear whether the Australian fossils represent one or more populations. Yet no other ancient population has the special combination of features found in the Indonesians and Australians. And if Africans rather than Indonesians were the ancestors of Australian people, why do neither modern Australians nor their ancestors have African features? In reality, the traits distinguishing modern Australoids from other living human populations are precisely those that distinguish their regional predecessors from their own contemporaries in East Asia, Africa and Europe. Such continuity would be impossible if the modern populations were invaders descended from a species of Africans with another set of regional features.

The fossils of northern Asia tell a similar story, but with a different set of distinctive features. The very earliest Chinese fossils, which are at least 750 000 years old, differ from their Javan counterparts in ways that parallel the differences between northern and southern Asians today...
http://www.virginia.edu/woodson/courses ... lpoff.html

_________________
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience. -
Teilhard de Chardin


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 5:22 pm +0000
Posts: 771
Here is more evidence showing that modern Chinese people descended from H. erectus that already lived in China, rather than from anatomically modern humans who migrated to China from Africa:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb9WWXgoH7U

According to the multiregional hypothesis, H. erectus, Neanderthals, h. sapiens, etc. should not be considered distinct species, but instead are different variations of the same human family. Recent evidence has suggested this to be true:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBbyrI2UhOU

_________________
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience. -
Teilhard de Chardin


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 923
New findings in this field are coming fast and furious.

Fossil found by fisherman may reveal new type of ancient human
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/29/asia/ ... index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/0 ... storic.cnn

Which is a popular report of

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/15012 ... 37_F1.html

At least 20 different types of prehuman hominins have been discovered. It hasn't been demonstrated that *any* of them are directly in our ancestry.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141127 ... ur-origins


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 940
stumbled across this report from 1988 that points toward an asian origin:

Late Pliocene Artefacts from Northern Pakistan

Quote:
This find has several implications for our understanding of early human developments. The first is that it is considerably older than any well-provenanced find of either hominid fossils or artefacts in Eurasia. Secondly, the artefacts we have found in the Soan Valley are within the time range of the oldest generally accepted in-situ artefacts from East Africa...

On the basis or our results, therefore, we argue that current thinking on early man may need reappraisal; implications are that (a) Homo habilis was distributed as far east as Pakistan, (b) Homo erectus is an Asian lineage at least as old as H. habilis, or (c) another, as yet unidentified tool maker was responsible.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 940
it's nothing to do with human origins but this find pushing the origin of agriculture back to 23kya from the current ~12kya theory is interesting and a pretty big deal:

Stunning: Humans began farming as early as 23,000 years ago


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: fanofVan, Google Feedfetcher


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group