1

ANTH-1020-001
Matilde Olvera
Research paper
Modern Humans
Science has been working in order to find answers; such as what is the origin of
modern humans? There are two stories of evolution that explain that. They are Regional
Continuity and Replacement. Evolution explains how hominids are bipedal and have
larger brains compared to other species. Modern humans are everywhere and through
evolution they have acquired a race.
The two strongest theories seem incompatible, yet each continues to return
evidence backing their own theory.
The Regional Continuity theory sees modern uses the most recent discoveries.
The two studies, published separately by Australian and Us scientists, examine two
types of evidence: DNA and anatomical. Both studies, say show that modern humans
could not have evolved from a single African source. Multiregionalists, see human
modern men arising from a process of change with a species said one of the
theorists architects, Milford Wolpoff. Multiregionalits see modern human arising from
these changes in Africa, Eurasia, and Australia. The species that evolved, they say,
gain traits held by all modern humans but remain racially diverse because of
2

geographical adaptations and the distances between populations. The modern traits
were shared species- wide through interbreeding.
On the other hand, the theory of replacement, which claims, that modern human
arose from a single cradle of civilization in Africa. One circle of scientists maintains
that human precursors remaining in Africa evolved into a second out of Africa group
of physically and intellectually modern humans Homo sapiens who recolonized Eurasia,
replacing so called archaic humans. The theory maintains that Neandertals and other
geographically distinct hominids descendants of the first African Exodus became extinct
with Ideas on human origins evolve at anthropology gathering.(the arrivals of modern humans
100,000 years ago)
Another question in evolution is Bipedalism. How did it arise? Biologists and
anthropologists have wrestled with for centuries and have postulated a diverse series of
explanations for why we became bipedal. Nearly all of the speculation has fallen far
short, however, of a coherent, powerful understanding, with little explanatory or
evolutionary relevance, of this unique adaptation.
Most explanations target a single cause such as standing up to look over tall
grass on the savannah of Africa. This is, in fact, logically one of the least rewarding of
all explanations. Our earliest bipedal ancestors were small in stature. For example, Lucy
was only three-and-a-half feet tall as an adult and weighed roughly 60 pounds. Imagine
this puny little hominid venturing out of the forest, where she and her ancestors had
lived for millions of years, onto the new, challenging, and highly dangerous world of the
3

grasslands. A major shift in habitat is not a good time to experiment with a totally new
mode of locomotion; leaving the speed and agility of quadrupedalism behind for upright
walking would have been a terrible choice.
Standing up in the grasslands to get an enhanced view would have immediately
announced to carnivores galore that a new entre had appeared on the menu! Hyenas,
saber-toothed cats, lions, large, wild dogs, and other fierce creatures populated the
savannah. Each specialized carnivore would have been capable of devouring a tiny,
bipedal hominid. Being slow, clumsy runners, the early hominids would have quickly
fallen prey. Likewise, lacking the ability to fall back onto all fours and outrun the
carnivores would have signaled the end of human evolution.
Standing up to reach fruit in low-hanging branches is also a lame explanation.
Quadrupeds like chimpanzees can stand up on two legs and then fall to all fours to
escape danger with great speed. Why become bipedal if it is possible to stand and
retain the benefits of quadrupedalism?
Upright posture assisted our ancestors in keeping their bodies cool, and some
have offered this as an explanation for bipedalism. Sure, it's hot under the African sun,
but why not simply rest in the shade of a nice acacia tree during the hottest part of the
day like baboons do, restricting foraging to the cooler times in the morning and
afternoon?
Next, the aquatic "theory" is perhaps one of the all-time worst explanations. No
primates collect food in the water, while most avoid being in water at all costs. If this
4

were a good explanation, then we should have lost our limbs like the whales, which
evolved from quadrupeds. Furthermore, African lakes and rivers are dangerous places
occupied by hippopotami, which kill more humans each year in Africa than any other
animal, as well as snakes, crocodiles, giant otters, and other dangerous creatures.
If we stood up to make tools, then why is there a disconnect between the earliest
evidence for bipedalism and the first stone tools? Evidence for bipedalism extends as
far back as 4.2 million years ago, perhaps even six million years ago, but stone tools do
not appear in the archeological record until 2.6 million years ago so we can rule out tool-
making as an explanation.
The simple reason that these explanations fail is that most scholars have asked
the wrong question: Why did our ancestors become upright? The correct question is:
What were the advantages for early hominids that resulted in such a behavioral change
from quadrupedalism to bipedalism?
All contemporary humans are members of the same polytypic species , homo
sapiens. Nevertheless, in discussion of human variation, most people have traditionally
combined various characteristics, such as skin color, face shape, nose shape, hair
color, hair form, and eye color. People who have particular combinations of these other
traits have been place together in categories associated with specific geographical
localities. These categories are called race. Race had various meanings since, but now
days is used for a classification. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/origins-
bipedalism.html)
5

In the Biological way Race has been used synonymously with species as in the
human race. Since the 1600s race also has referred to various culturally defined
groups , and this meaning still common. For example you will hear people say the
English race or Japanese race , among others. So even though when race is usually
a term with biological connotations, it also has enormous social significance. There is
also still widespread perception that certain physical traits are associated with
intelligence and numerous cultural attributes. As a result in many cultural contexts a
persons social identity is strongly influenced by the way he or she expresses those
physical traits traditional used to define racial groups. (Jurmain, Kilgore, Trevathan,
2013)
In conclusion we can say that evolution according to the theories of science such
as the origin of humans, how they became bipedal and lastly a race. In other words
evolution has brought physical and social changes to species known today as race.







6

Citation
Gibbons, Ann. "Ideas on human origins evolve at anthropology gathering.(Meeting Briefs;
American Association of Physical Anthropologists)." Science 25 Apr. 1997: n. pag. Print.

Chaddha, Rima. "Origins of Bipedalism." PBS. PBS, 1 Oct. 2006. Web. 4 Aug. 2014.
<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/origins-bipedalism.html>.

Jurmain, Robert, Lynn Kilgore, and Wenda Trevathan. "Human Variation and Adaptation."Human
Origins Evolution and Diversity. Manson, Ohio: Cengage Learning, 2013. . Print.