Humans evolved after a female chimpanzee mate

[sean6 50]

Humans evolved after a female chimpanzee mated with a pig': Extraordinary claim made by American geneticist

The human species began as the hybrid offspring of a male pig and a female chimpanzee, a leading geneticist has suggested.

The startling claim has been made by Eugene McCarthy, of the University of Georgia, who is also one of the worlds leading authorities on hybridisation in animals.

He points out that while humans have many features in common with chimps, we also have a large number of distinguishing characteristics not found in any other primates.

http://www.dailymail...geneticist.html

Edited December 1, 2013 by sean6

[Imaginarynumber1 22,794]

[Bendy Demon 5,162]

I read it and it was so moronic it made me wanna puke profusely.

[freetoroam 40,844]

What is scary is that this msn is a leading geneticist at a university

[President Wearer of Hats 34,829]

What is scary is that this msn is a leading geneticist at a university

You have to remember, it's an American University.

[Bendy Demon 5,162]

So, basically a dismally bored (or very confused) monkey shagged a pig one day and now we have humans!

Well, there you go. Evolution just got tossed out the window.

Lovely.

[Controller Junkie 37]

Grunt oink oink, oh i mean wow, this dude is crazy but also a much acredited scientist. Maybe too smart for his own good. I mean really did he even think about what he was imlpying... Well hopefully no one actually buys this nonsense , even with his credentials

[Imaginarynumber1 22,794]

You have to remember, it's an American University.

BURN!

[Skep B 4,405]

That pig must've had mad game.

[Lilly 34,336]

But...but...what about the bear? I mean, you need a bear to make a 'man/bear/pig', right? (makes about as much sense as this silly nonsense hypothesis)

[spacecowboy342 2,327]

But...but...what about the bear? I mean, you need a bear to make a 'man/bear/pig', right? (makes about as much sense as this silly nonsense hypothesis)

But man/bear/pig is real I tell you

[Hugh 887]

Initially the idea sounded extremely unlikely, but I went to the guy's site and started to read more.

http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html#.UprPnH-9KSM

There are many very interesting points he makes, and he develops his ideas in an easy to understand manner.

There are sidebars full of fascinating points, for example this one, which is:

______________________________

A list of traits distinguishing humans from other primates

DERMAL FEATURES

Naked skin (sparse pelage)

Panniculus adiposus (layer of subcutaneous fat)

Panniculus carnosus only in face and neck

In "hairy skin" region:

- Thick epidermis

- Crisscrossing congenital lines on epidermis

- Patterned epidermal-dermal junction

Large content of elastic fiber in skin

Thermoregulatory sweating

Richly vascularized dermis

Normal host for the human flea (Pulex irritans)

Dermal melanocytes absent

Melanocytes present in matrix of hair follicle

Epidermal lipids contain triglycerides and free fatty acids

FACIAL FEATURES

Lightly pigmented eyes common

Protruding, cartilaginous mucous nose

Narrow eye opening

Short, thick upper lip

Philtrum/cleft lip

Glabrous mucous membrane bordering lips

Eyebrows

Heavy eyelashes

Earlobes

FEATURES RELATING TO BIPEDALITY

Short, dorsal spines on first six cervical vertebrae

Seventh cervical vertebrae:

- long dorsal spine

- transverse foramens

Fewer floating and more non-floating ribs

More lumbar vertebrae

Fewer sacral vertebrae

More coccygeal vertebrae (long "tail bone")

Centralized spine

Short pelvis relative to body length

Sides of pelvis turn forward

Sharp lumbo-sacral promontory

Massive gluteal muscles

Curved sacrum with short dorsal spines

Hind limbs longer than forelimbs

Femur:

- Condyles equal in size

- Knock-kneed

- Elliptical condyles

- Deep intercondylar notch at lower end of femur

- Deep patellar groove with high lateral lip

- Crescent-shaped lateral meniscus with two tibial insertions

Short malleolus medialis

Talus suited strictly for extension and flexion of the foot

Long calcaneus relative to foot (metatarsal) length

Short digits (relative to chimpanzee)

Terminal phalanges blunt (ungual tuberosities)

Narrow pelvic outlet

ORGANS

Diverticulum at cardiac end of stomach

Valves of Kerkring present in small intestines

Mesenteric arterial arcades

Multipyramidal kidneys

Heart auricles level

Tricuspid valve of heart

Laryngeal sacs absent

Vocal ligaments

Prostate encircles urethra

Bulbo-urethral glands present

Os penis (baculum) absent.

Hymen

Absence of periodic sexual swellings in female

Ischial callosities absent

Nipples low on chest

Bicornuate uterus (occasionally present in humans)

Labia majora

CRANIAL FEATURES

Brain lobes: frontal and temporal prominent

Thermoregulatory venous plexuses

Well-developed system of emissary veins

Enlarged nasal bones

Divergent eyes (interior of orbit visible from side)

Styloid process

Large occipital condyles

Primitive premolar

Large, blunt-cusped (bunodont) molars

Thick tooth enamel

Helical chewing

BEHAVIORAL/PHYSIOLOGICAL

Nocturnal activity

Particular about place of defecation

Good swimmer, no fear of water

Extended male copulation time

Female orgasm

Short menstrual cycle

Snuggling

Tears

Alcoholism

Terrestrialism (Non-arboreal)

Able to exploit a wide range of environments and foods

RARE OR ABSENT IN NONHUMAN PRIMATES:

Heart attack

Atherosclerosis

Cancer (melanoma)

______________________________

Interesting that the Pig has all those traits, just like us.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Hugh

[aquatus1 7,093]

In all fairness...

Eugene McCarthy is advancing a theory of his own. He is promoting what he calls the Stabilization Theory. He posits (to my understanding) that evolutionary novelty occurs in a more or less spontaneous and stable form. Not in the nutty crocoduck creationist way, but rather at the genetic level, where phenotypes still have a bit of flexibility, but not so much as to evolve to an entirely new species. And he does make a genuine effort to explain data and phenomena, as opposed to just complaining about it or pretending it is wrong.

It's...science. Sure, it's unconventional, sure it may not be correct, but I am not geneticist or biologist, so I cannot say. I can say that I have looked at his website and primae facie, it doesn't spring the usual red flags I get when reading other "alternative" (read: creationist) theories. I did raise an eyebrow at his link to peer review, as the first piece posted is less a formal critique and more a positive op ed piece (scientific peer review doesn't involved praising the author for the excellent writing and riveting narrative). I haven't read his complete argument yet, and I am somewhat impatient to get to what seems to be his crucial point regarding certain axioms he claims have been passed down without proper skeptical inspection. That said, His writing has caught my interest enough to continue reading it. If he is a nutter, he is, at this point, to me, at least a fairly persuasive one. I will reserve judgement on his theory till I have finished reading it.

[Hugh 887]

Here's another article about it:

http://phys.org/news/2013-07-chimp-pig-hybrid-humans.html

[seaturtlehorsesnake 10,963]

well, if we're talking articles, there's this one, quoted in the daily mail article as well, i think:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/07/02/the-mfap-hypothesis-for-the-origins-of-homo-sapiens/

[Whisperer 322]

Perhaps he is trying to point out that 'some one or some thing' manipulated both gene sets to produce 'Man'...as such a thing cannot occure in nature i.e. infertility normally results from hybridization...

[Frank Merton 17,411]

Hybridization results in hybrid vigor, not infertility. If you have mules in mind that is breeding different species.

[Hugh 887]

I'd say the fact that we share many physical traits with pigs (as listed earlier), that are not found in other primates, suggests that there is a later genetic connection to them than is currently thought.

How this came about is open for debate, but I'd think in reality, the path of human evolution involved many different branches over millions of years interbreeding with each other.

The further back you go, the more the branches join together to be a common one.

If you go back far enough you find the common ancestor of the pig/chimp/human.

Move forward a few million years and you find a divergence, but still the possibility of interbreeding producing hybrids.

If we came from a line that involved an early primate breeding with an early pig tens of millions of years ago, that might explain why we have some of the physical features of each.

Scientists will eventually figure it all out.

[Frank Merton 17,411]

There is such a thing as convergent evolution, and humans and pigs are both omnivores.

[Leonardo 10,409]

There's nothing ground-breaking abut the theory Mr McCarthy proposes...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LzSX37C5J4

Mrs Garrison has already proposed the 'truth' about evolution.

(Sorry, I had to do it.)

[SameerPrehistorica 403]

What the......... hmm....Alright, Chimpanzee mated with a Dinosaur and Human beings evolved.

[spacecowboy342 2,327]

before I'm going to believe this someone is going to have to show me the offspring of a chimp and a pig

[Hugh 887]

before I'm going to believe this someone is going to have to show me the offspring of a chimp and a pig

I think people get caught up in the thinking of the current version of chimp and pig rather than the earlier versions that were in a closer evolutionary state.

[tyrant lizard 419]

If I'm related to a pig I want to be able to ejaculate for half an hour like a pig.

And find truffles

[spacecowboy342 2,327]

I think people get caught up in the thinking of the current version of chimp and pig rather than the earlier versions that were in a closer evolutionary state.

There are something like 80 million years since chimps and pigs shared a common ancestor. There are 5 - 7 million years since humans and chimps share an ancestor. Pigs have 38 chromosomes, chimps 48, and humans 46. Humans and chimps most likely are too separated to produce viable offspring though we are much more closely related than pig and chimps. Even than pigs and chimps would have been 10 mya. And you are going to suggest that they could produce viable offspring? I don't think so.