Re: Neanderthal lineage

Glenn Morton (
Wed, 24 Dec 1997 06:08:20 -0600

At 01:17 AM 12/24/97 -0700, J. Arthur Alley wrote:
> I've not been following for a day or so, so if this was already discussed,
>me and ignore this.
> Have you read the article in this month's "Discover" magazine regarding
>the discoveries in Spain? They seem to have found an ancester to H. sapien
>that was resident in Europe some 800,000 years ago and more closely
resembles >H. sapien than does Neanderthal. They're calling this new
species "H. >antecessor," and the authors are proposing a new lineage to H.
sapien, by which >we are descended directly from antecessor, not from
Neanderthal, which the >author proposes was an unsuccessful offshoot, our
brothers, not our fathers.
> I thought of you, Glenn, immediately, as the discovery of a predecessor
>to humanity bordering the Med would impact your theory. If you haven't
read it >yet, it's well worth the read. If you have, what did you think?

This is from the Atapuercan site in Spain. I am unconvinced as yet that a
new species is required. The fossils do appear to be intermediate between
sapiens and Neanderthals and de Castro and Rosas are arguing that these
people are the common ancestor between sapiens and Neanderthal. In
principle I don't have a problem with accepting their view because I think
that all three were human in a spiritual sense.

As to their nearness to the Mediterranean, antecessor is far too late in
chronology to be the rag-tag surviors of the flood I proposed which was much
earlier in time. The current earliest member of our geneus Homo is around
2.33 MYR ago. I would ten to believe that a small population of Homo lived
long prior to that time and the population only grew big enough to have a
chance at fossilization by the 2.33 myr time. (see my web page or A^3 book
for more details.)


Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man


Foundation, Fall and Flood