Title: Message
Fair
enough. I regard the multiple-origins hypothesis as one of those ideas that can
be, and has been, used for racist purposes although the idea is not inherently
racist and people who hold it are not necessarily racist. I'm a bit out of my
depth here, but I first read about it in this widely read
book:
Coon,
Carleton S. (1962) . The Origins of Races. New York: Alfred
A. Knopf.
Coon's
work was engagingly written and not overtly racist, though he was accused
of racism, e.g., by anthropologist Ashley Montagu, and I do not know the truth
of that matter. Coon was certainly curious about how humans developed and
whether their physical differences represent climatic adaptations. The results,
although often interesting, were inconclusive and further research in this area
is evidently discouraged.
Setting all thoughts of racism aside, a scientific question can be framed
whether isolated populations of a species can all develop simultaneously into
another species -- perhaps under the influence of simultaneous climatic change.
To me, this hypothesis seems so complex as to make it extremely unlikely. How
many identical mutations would have to occur at once on different continents? Or
are we supposed to believe that a preexisting genetic switch was turned on, like
industrial melanism in several species of moths?
Warning flags are also raised by these considerations:
(1) I know of no
other species for which such a complex history has been proposed.
(2)
Coon based his hypothesis on a very small number of
specimens.
One can posit nearly
isolated populations receiving new genes from a common source as a far more
likely scenario, but this compromise is not what Carleton
Coon proposed. Coon thought that H.
erectus races in Europe, Asia, and Africa developed regionally and independently
into H. sapiens races in the same places. But so far, the molecular evidence, such as the
"mitochondrial Eve" tree, seems to indicate that this sort of "genetic
leavening" of various races of Homo erectus never happened. Instead, a great
wave of Homo sapiens erupted out of Africa and replaced the preexisting
populations.
I'm at the extreme edge of my knowledge on the topic, so that will be all
for me. But if anyone has heard of another totally interfertile species that is
supposed to have developed from multiple lines of ancestors, it would be apt to
hear about it now.
Your
cousin,
Andrew
K. Rindsberg
-----Original Message-----
From:
paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk [mailto:paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk] On Behalf Of
Bill Chaisson/Deirdre Cunningham
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 3:04
PM
To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
Subject: RE: paleonet ID in the
Classroom
I'm not convinced that it's racist, but I
still don't agree
with it. -And my grandfather was from Alabama, so
we could
be cousins! I'm just a few miles away from Dayton,
Tn,
home of the Scopes trial.
Isn't this issue something that can be settled with DNA evidence?
I also don't understand why it seems unlikely that a large highly mobile
and highly adaptable organism like Homo sapiens could not become
globally distributed after originating from a single population of H.
erectus.
Please provide a reference where the multi-origins evidence is
presented.
Thanks,
Bill
--
---------------------------------------------------
William P.
Chaisson
Adjunct Assistant Professor
Department of Earth and
Environmental Sciences
University of Rochester
Rochester, NY
14627
607-387-3892
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.2 - Release Date: 3/25/2005