"Do Chinese Really Reject Homo Sapiens Ancestry???" Topic

This was absolutely new to me:

YouTube link

Is that controversial theory really officially taught and as generally accepted in that part of the world, as claimed in that show?

Does anyone know?

Thanks,

Dan

You could ask Mapleleaf he's working in China right now.

I really find it incredible that they should teach such a theory as official dogma, particularly when there's so much DNA evidence that points to a common sapiens heritage for all branches of mankind.

Dan

I don't know how major the issue is now, but they certainly did (it was one of the reasons why Peking Man was such a big deal to them.) The stance may have mellowed in recent years, but yes politics certainly over-rode science for quite a while, and still seems to at least influence it. Oddly the wikipedia page on Peking Man seems quite well-written as a start, but there's a book review here that may well be of interest:

PDF link

You have opened up a real question that needs books to explain not a few paragraphs.

First of all I am at a serious disadvantage I cannot see the U Tube program all U Tube is blocked in China and I cannot watch this show even when I use my normal proxies ( U Tube policy)

Second the teaching of where the Chinese people come from has absolutely nothing to do with the Communist Party it is Chinese tradition primarily Confucius and ancestor worship.

Dan you say that the policy is incredible but what is the difference between Chinese teaching and all the creationists and fundamentalists believing in the Bible as absolute truth . Creationism is not restricted to Christianity or Judaism.

Before going into a brief explanation I would also remind everyone that the current Homo Sapiens theory is based on current knowledge and there is no commonly accepted proof proof. DNA evidence has even been shown to be questionable at times. Archaeologists are continually making new discoveries and IRRC a new link in Africa has been found that is not Homo sapiens but is a possible link. Finally we do not even have conclusive evidence as to when the Neanderthals died out and what effect that had on DNA.

I am no expert on prehistory and due to the confusion here it is not an interest but I have gained a little insight into Chinese culture and thought.Note I do not necessarily agree with what I am writing but this as far as I can tell is what the Chinese believe.

The first concept to understand is that China is the home of the Chinese people who in their eyes have always ben here and have shared a common civilization for at least 5000 years. The vast majority (90%) of Chinese are Han who do share common DNA factors The others are minorities who came in from elsewhere. The Han believe they share a common ancestor ( like Adam and Eve or many North American Indian traditions). There is a 400,000 year gap between the famous Peking Man and the next set of fossils who lived 20000 years ago found in the same cave complex Peking Man has been lost since 1941 ( Sinanthropus pekinensis) and no DNA test is then possible.

In mythological Chinese History there was first an egg which hatched into a man called Pan Gu One half of the shell remained above him as the sky the other was below as the earth. Pan Gu grew very tall until both were separated Suddenly he collapsed and his fragmented body formed nature His limbs were the mountains his blood the rivers his breath the wind the voice thunder and his eyes became the sun and the moon- The parasites of his body became man.

This is in keeping with Chinese philosophy of ancestor worship man and nature are one as is heaven and earth. ( they never ask where did the egg come from?)

Ok so today man has spread allover the planet but to the Chinese they have gone nowhere they were always in China being Chinese. If others left and changed that is because they ( the other people) allowed it. Yes the rest of the world can share a DNA thread but we are not part of that thread.

Do not try to understand this through Western eyes or beliefs to Chinese this is the way it is. To them it is as central to their way of life as the Book of Genesis is to a Creationist. China is China the Central Kingdom between Heaven and Earth as was their ancestor Pan Gu. Changing this concept means unraveling 5000 years of acceptance

Again I do not agree with it but I see where the Chinese are coming from.

off topic but I love Alice Roberts. Smart and Sexy

Gunfreak, Oh yeah !!

The programe says that all the chinesse they tested for Dna all had markers that indicated african ancestory, from the same markers as every other non african racial group tested.

Phil

facts change faster than beliefs

Thanks Mapleleaf that was very informative.

I enjoyed that. If you watch to the end it seems that there are DNA markers that show the Chinese claims are actual false.

I guess the Chinese could claim all Africans show Chinese DNA markers.

I'll try watching all of it when I have time but while she may be sexy, she strikes as an intellectual giant of the Dan Snow mould.

I have been reading some stuff on the origin of language and the 'leading' theory(ies) seems so over influenced by those who where influenced by biblical stories it all seems a bit of a poor joke not science. Which rather reminds me of how the Chinese try and fit everything around China and why Americans/Europeans are always trying to find the answers from the bibical area and those areas close by.

Just because the Rift Valley gives us are best archaeological record for early hominids that does prove it was always the centre. I very much doubt their is any one centre after the inital spread of humanity.

Wow, so all 1.3 billion people in China belive the same thing?

I haven't really asked, but I doubt that most Chinese hold any belief that the Pangu myth was anything other than a myth, and I really doubt that most Chinese attach any sort of religious significance to it.

As for using genetics to back up politics, there are all sorts of nut-jobs promoting these kind of beliefs. Their "arguments" show a deep lack of knowledge about genetics, and are totally biased. I really wonder how many of the people they claim to represent actually subscribe to these beliefs?

Certainly not all 1.3 billion believe the same thing but the myth and the idea of the Central Kingdom are the focusses of both Confucianism and Taoism which play important roles in Chinee culture.

This would be similar to the Genesis story in the Western Judaeo Christian tradition .

One thing that you have to understand is the Central Kingdom idea that China, in Chinese eyes, was the centre of power in the world for a many years and is now returning to that position once again Pan gu is the start of that concept.

Hi

The central kingdom.

That simple for them.

As for the "bible as history types", who cares? That is a moral equivalency argument which qualifies as an excuse not a reason.

I don't know of "chinese DNA markers" this is another issue of "race" which isn't actually science.

What else?

In Star Trek the excuse given for all those species on various planets being human was direct genetic manipulation by some alien force not understood by the end of NG. Sadly, genetic drift mitigates against the theory of compatible species spontaneously in different areas. Thus, while "out of africa", specifically the Rift Valley might not be true, we just don't have any evidence for any place else! One issue is that the phenotypes we associate with race don't seem to show up until about 10k years ago anywhere. All known remains evince the "hot weather phenotype" we associate with sub saharan africa, not "mongol" cold weather adaptations.

Carry on.

Rocky

whoops on last sentence.

Just because the Rift Valley gives us the best archaeological record for early hominids that doesn't prove it was always the centre. I very much doubt their is any one centre after the initial spread of humanity.

pps-
I didn't think I was giving an 'moral equivalency argument', but maybe I was. I was also suggesting much of our 'science' ain't much better in that regard but we manage to spot the fault in others with far more ease- specially when it's upsetting an apple cart.

I'll try watching all of it when I have time but while she may be sexy, she strikes as an intellectual giant of the Dan Snow mould.

Actually she is a clever puppy:

link

And sexy with it!

Pete

Already read that and if she was telling me about something dug up at an Anglo Saxon Burial or some such thing- I'd be more than happy to take her word for it. But not on the subject here.

"she strikes as an intellectual giant of the Dan Snow mould".

Yep, sharp as button but visual enough for the job.

Well I don't see where it much matters.

If there are differences, there are also considerable similarities and AFAIK if you 'breed' (pardon the choice of words here) a Chinese person with a European or African you seem to get fertile offspring. Which means . . .

It's a fun thing to know but for me anyway, not terribly important.

Thanks for the insights Mapleleaf -- good stuff

mjc

Is or was there a major power anywhere who didn't think they are the centre of things or specially favoured by 'destiny', manifest or otherwise?

Chosen people? Fog over channel. Europe cut off? American Exceptionalism?

Well everyone knows Jesus was English…. <Ducks For Cover>

Hi

Most of the phenotypes we associate with geographical locations are recent as in since the last glaciation.

The "out of africa" isn't just the rift valley which is "cool" for various reasons. The issue is one of silence. Africa is where one finds remains going back millions of years, china is not. Pretty simple. If the source of the ape line that leads to Homo Sapiens were not in africa, SOMETHING would show up. I am not happy with "could have" when there is so much interlocking parallel lines of evidence leading back to africa ca 200,000 years ago.

It isn't as if people are not looking. The guy that finds Lamanites in america, or pre clovis in america, or 3million year old plausible australopithicines anywhere outside of africa would be instantly famous and flooded with grant money.

I think "Clovis" is a sort of point for me. Pre-Clovis what is around are suggestions of fire pits. Suddenly with clovis, the entire "new world" has not one site, but everything bones, tools, camp sites, kill remains. Hip deep in evidence.

Out of Africa is just so well covered and all the alternates are more "if hannibal had a piper cub" sorts of speculation but short on the bounty of evidence that is "out of africa".

Rocky

Thanks for that Rocky.
I can follow a line of argument for 200,000 time scale but wasn't 50,000 years years being pushed a while back. Or is that my imagination?

Wasn't there a rather a lot happening 10000 years ago with the end of the ice age and then farming- could that explain why it difficult to tell what is happening out side of Africa from the DNA and archaeologically(populations narrowing then widely expanding ). Africa I assume would have been far less affected by the ice age.

Hi

There is a human bottle neck observed when the sum total of our species was ca 2000 individuals. But that doesn't apply to any of the points we have here.

By 50,000 years ago, man has walked all over the planet and is a single world wide species, the first and unique in that regard. There are humans in Australia and in europe.

Meaning the story is already over about human origins. I am unaware of 50k being "pushed" by anyone. 50k is the observed date of the entry of humanity into australia, but is other wise I don't know of any other significance.

The issue we are talking about here is that mankind evinces what is called a "hot weather phenotype until 10,000 years ago. This is the basic reason why "kennewick" doesn't look "indian". All the cold weather phenotypes, such as "mongol" don't evince until after this date. I am not sure I have seen anyone suggest a reason for this change. The archeologist who was briefly able to inspect Kennewick ha suggested that it is the post glacial period with rising seas and such that produced the sort of isolation of population that lead to the modern "races". But so far, this is more speculation than settled.

Asians running north to south in china are more likely to exhibit cold weather characteristics the further north the population. The problem with the theory is that no one has suggested why the gracile hot weather southern chinese and "viet" were somehow isolated or the northern group was.

Rocky

From a Chinese Government website:

china.org.cn/e-gudai/1.htm

In 1998, a group under the guidance of Professor Qiang Biqin of the Basic Medicine Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Medical Science, and Professor Chen Zhu of the Shanghai Research Institute of Haematology of the Second Shanghai Medical University, together with Chu Jiayou, president of the Medicinal Biology Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Medical Science, who was the leader of a sub-group, published their thesis titled, "Genetic Relations Among Different Human Groups in China" in the journal of the US Academy of Medical Science. The group made analyses of generic samples of 28 major groups including the Ewenkis in Heilongjiang in the far north, the Uygurs in Xinjiang in the far west, several branches of the Gaoshan people in Taiwan in the east and people in Yunnan in the south. Their studies suggested that the 56 ethnic groups in China showed genetic differences among people in the north and south, with the Yangtze River as the dividing line. The genome tree conforms with the theory of a single African origin. To this day, no proof has been found to support the theory of an independent origin in Asia, which differs from what the fossils suggest.

As Rocky states, the age of the fossils become older away from Asia or Europe and target Africa as the source. Until the Chinese anthropologists can explain:

1) Why the fossil record of human remains become older when moving away from China.

2) The mechanism of how Homo Sapiens can develop in two separate places at the same time.

3) The mRna evidence.

then the "out of Africa" theory is still dominant and the rest is "nationalistic posturing".

Ralph

PS, on a different tack, Chinese Naval Historians were quick to attack the goofy ideas Of Gavin Menzies' 1421: The Year China Discovered America. They said the Treasure Fleets of Zheng He never got close to North America. They are in agreement with Western researchers in stating that Menzies "evidence" is bogus.

Interesting article about the battle between science and bogus science (that is, not science at all but pretending to be) in China here:

link

Hi

I remember a thread on 1421 a couple years ago where WE made the same observation.

But there are people who are "romantic" and "prove" the american south was wonderful and not invested in slavery, and UK or france is the pinnacle of civiliaztion, or Napoleon is the nee plus ultra of all command, or…well you get the idea.

Just as in another thread, some people are uncomfortable with the facts being what they are and must weave a "more amazing" story based on admiration.

Rocky

As for the "bible as history types", who cares?

Considering that a lot of history can indeed be dredged out of the Bible legitimately, quite a few people care.

The trouble comes from the ones who take word-for-word Truth from a book that has been *admittedly* altered by every group in a position to do so, including an unknown number before those words were even committed to writing.

Well look at it as good news, you have 1.3 billion Chinese that are taught about evolution, everythnig they get taught is correct exept the last 1.5 million years of a couple of species in the homo genius.

1.5 million years isn't that wrong in the grand sceam of 3.5 billion years of evolution, thats less then 00.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% wrong.

Thats still better then some school books in America with the Warring "evolution is just a theory" or the sevral 100 million muslims that proebly either get no evolutionary biology teachings at all, or if they do, it's very vague and ment to realy get them into creationism.

All (Muslim) biology is based on Water. So that vid said a couple of years back. That much I remember….

Hi

Gunfreak, and you know what is in american school books because of personally attending american schools, or as an atheist assuming your usual "stupid american" role?

Rocky

Gunfreak, and you know what is in american school books because of personally attending american schools,…..

Maybe he's thinking of, "Of Pandas and People".

link

link

This textbook is now world famous and it's very possible for informed foreigners to be aware of it. I think Gunfreaks comment is in line with Mr Bennetta (Fellow of the California Academy of Sciences) of the TTL.

link

Ralph

All (Muslim) biology is based on Water. So that vid said a couple of years back. That much I remember….

Sure why wouldn't it be to a bunch of illiterate, desert dwellers.

"
Hi

Gunfreak, and you know what is in american school books because of personally attending american schools, or as an atheist assuming your usual "stupid american" role?

Rocky
"

link

Or

link

I don't think you realise just how well informed western europa is about the american sociaty, rangeing from pop culture to how the goverment works.

In fairness Gunfreak, the stickers were removed, as were most of the board members responsible for putting them on. The former by a court of law and the latter by voters.

The bad news is that yes, there is a small but well organised group of religious fanatics actively trying to subvert the US Constitution. The good news is, they are dreaming. There are more than enough reasonable people in teh USA to defeat them, as they were here.

Here is a wonderful lecture btw by the author of the book which was so dangerous it needed a warning sticker. In it he completely demolishes ID, irreducible complexity, and Michael Behe, I mean completely. There is no wiggle room. Good speaker too.

The sticker story starts at about 15:00

YouTube link

Whatisitgood4atwork,

You quoted Youtube. If you check the Darwin Day link:

TMP link

You will find there is an on-going arguement between myself and an Creationist about Youtube.

I posted a similarly useful lecture that showed up the shallow superstition of Creationism by a professor of biology.

link

Now the Creationist dismissed the lecture on the grounds that anyone can post almost anything on Youtube. Now of course, it was because he did not want to listen to the evidence. Well, having looked at the evidence for evolution I, for one, want to stand with the scientists and will not drink the Kool-Aid.

The problem that biologists like Profs. Dawkins and PZ Myers is that they know their science and yet they come up against, time and time again, are people who refuse to take accept the science because they rely on the a bronze age creation myth. This is frustrating, Kipling expressed it rather well:

Take up the White Man's burden--
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard--
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light:--
"Why brought he us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?"

As to the idea that the Bronze Age Jewish myths are relaible history I would refer you to:

link

Here have encountered the fight between the rational and the irrational on a smaller scale; but biologists are on the front online of the kulturkampf. Atleast biologists don't get shot for their views by the religious fundimenats, yet.

Jupp Ken Miller, is a fine scientist and Catholic to, so threre goes the creatioist fallacy about Evolution beeing atheistc

Hi

Gun, euros have historically always found something to laugh at about americans. This falls into the common, for example, anecdotes about rude French Waiters, or humorless Norwegian bachelor farmers.

Yes, there are creationists in the US who promote that stuff. That doesn't mean "all schools, all americans" or even a majority.

And you ignore your larger theme of "stupid americans". Bringing me back to a basic problem I have with euros. I got it, we are not Europeans, but to hear you there is nothing to recommend the American experiment except some nice people live here. Before you can address bigotry, it must be recognized.

Dawkins, as I said, goes to far. He asserts "I learned the bible, the bible is wrong on evolution, therefore, there is no god". This is a classic false syllogism that you hold as well. I can and have tested for evolution, but I am unaware of a test that proves God, or disproves God. To make that final part isn't science, but faith.

I think you and the IDers are similar, gunny. There is no way to use evolution to prove or disprove God, but both extremes seem to think so.

Out of curiousity, how is norwegian education? Is the system without flaw? Are the textbooks perfect?

Rocky

And you ignore your larger theme of "stupid americans". Bringing me back to a basic problem I have with euros. I got it, we are not Europeans, but to hear you there is nothing to recommend the American experiment except some nice people live here. Before you can address bigotry, it must be recognized.

Rocky, aren't you reading abit too much into Gunfreaks comment, "Thats still better then some school books in America with the Warring "evolution is just a theory"…..". Just saying…..

That doesn't mean "all schools, all americans" or even a majority.

His quote clearly said, "some schools".

Out of curiousity, how is norwegian education? Is the system without flaw? Are the textbooks perfect?

Based on the OECD Rankings:

Norway scores slightly worse than the US in science knowledge, slightly better than the US in math skills and much better than the US in reading skills.

link

(Just doing my part for world peace)

'Dawkins, as I said, goes to far. He asserts "I learned the bible, the bible is wrong on evolution, therefore, there is no god". This is a classic false syllogism that you hold as well.'

You keep saying this. Once again, can you provide some back up that this is Dawkin's view? I have not seen anything like that in his writings. Rather, Dawkins simple asserts there is no evidence for such a being or force, and that it is not necessary to explain human evolution.

'The Bible is wrong on evolution, therefore it is not infallible' is a true statement. 'The Bible is not a science textbook so should not be used as one' is also a true statement.

But Dawkins is a scientist and would never leap from the Bible is wrong on X, therefore there is no God. To keep repeating that over and over without some sort of back up from his writings is not an honest representation of his views.

I have most of his books. A page reference would do fine.

[You will find there is an on-going arguement between myself and an Creationist about Youtube.]

Yes, I've seen the thread. But as the ID movement as a whole show NO amount of evidence is enough to convince a fanatic who believes he is fighting for God himself.

The clip posted btw does examine why IDers and Creationists take their position, with reference to a number of ID/Creationist websites. Again, it often comes down to an objection to the (perceived) implications of evolution, rather any real objection to the science.

As TJ's original post on the Darwin thread illustrates rather well, they associate Darwin's Theory with atheism, divorce, abortion, homosexuality, murder and most of society's other real or perceived problems (as if these things didn't occur before Darwin, or in religiously-oriented societies). When you believe something is inherently evil, you're not going to let a few silly things like fact and truth get in the way of your fight against it.

Personally I find peddling religion as science is evil and pernicious. And thank goodness the US courts have seen through these liars.

"Out of curiousity, how is norwegian education? Is the system without flaw? Are the textbooks perfect?

"

Nope lots of stuff wrong, in my math class 8 years ago 50% failed their exame, including me.

But we do have a big suport system for people with dyslexia, including free personal computers for them,

Our histroy classes are a joke, no real knowlage is requierd but I did have a friend who was an exchagestudient to Montana a years hand she said American highschools was a joke compeard to norwegians, but that the diffrence got canceled out by college level. Atleast if you went to a good college.

The problem ofcourse is that American text books are voted on by laypersons, this is democrecy gone to far, random parents with alterier motives should not be the ones deciding which books to use.

It should be quite obvious, of you are gonna order a new math textbooks you don't get 5 parents that failed math to decide which book to use, same with biologi, you don't let parents with no skill in science vote on which books to use.

Education is not a democracy, just as science is not a democracy.
What is right is right, what most people might think is right has no bearing on what is realy right.

Education is not a democracy, just as science is not a democracy.

Both, however, are political or at least politicised. Another subject now politicised in the US is history; with an Owellian turn where 'those who control the past, control the future.'

link

Since we seem to be back onto the subject of evolution, here is an interesting set of statisics on acceptance of evolution by country. The US only just beats out Turkey, 'Murkins look at the bottom and weep:

link

Notise how Spain and italy the most catholic countries after mabye Ireland, are high up,

And it' also weird the Estonia that is so close both politacly and geograpicaly to Sweden are far down on the list.

Hi

Ralph, I have been arguing with gunfreak for a long time, and am noting a pattern and practice. Yes, this statement in isolation isn't as portrayed, but G has a long history of "stupid american, Norway is wonderful in comparison" posts.

One issue in these things is scale. Norway is smaller in population than, say, some counties in texas around, again as an example, Houston. With a stunning education, the concept of "once is not a trend" is the issue. Thus, comparing a few million people to a country spread over several time zones with hundreds of millions isn't quite the same thing. Saying "norway is.." is just a small sample compared to all European states as a better comparison. Thus, with the comparison, I would not suggest that french neighborhood practicing Sharia Law Is "Euroope" and, therefore "norway".

Dawkins: What you keep missing the point. I am a fan of the guy and reported I think the first time his name came up that I was monitoring a presentation he made. In a question/answer portion he held forth on how he came to this position.

That the bible is not literally true is not the majority position for christians. The concept of literal truth is called "fundamentalism". Gunfreak is an ex-catholic, I believe. But the catholics have not held the bible to be anything but at best inspirational stories for a long time. So, "bible wrong…therefore…" is the issue above. I say this as a non-believer!

Rocky

….G has a long history of "stupid american, Norway is wonderful in comparison" posts.

I've been reading Gunnys posts for a while too, and I can't remember any instances.

Thus, comparing a few million people to a country spread over several time zones with hundreds of millions isn't quite the same thing.

I don't think I can buy that argument. Canada has more territory than the US with only a tenth of the population. Canada finishes #3, #5 and #2 in the OECD rankings (which, frankly, is a surprise to me!)

I think the best indicator of how well one does in these rankings is educational funding. It depends on how much of a countries GNP is spent on the education system, textbooks and supplies, infrastructure of schools, teachers pay and benefits, etc.

My $.02 USD

Ralph

[Dawkins: What you keep missing the point. I am a fan of the guy and reported I think the first time his name came up that I was monitoring a presentation he made. In a question/answer portion he held forth on how he came to this position.]

So your criticism of Dawkins is based on not anything that he has written, published or was ever recorded by anyone, but on something he just shared with you and a few others at a private Q and A? Hmmmm. I really would need more than one anecdotal account to believe something so wildly unlikely.

Frankly I do not believe that a scientist – any scientist yet alone Dawkins – would maintain as you allege that 'The Bible is wrong therefore there is no God.'

It is certainly nothing like anything I have ever read by or of him.

"but G has a long history of "stupid american, Norway is wonderful in comparison" posts.
"

I have never referd to Americans in general as stupid, but I have commented on their irrational fear of sosial justice, for no other reason then they don't think it's the "americna way"

But this is Fez stuff.

Hi

Ok. let me illustrate. Allegheny County in Pennsylvania is about the same population as Norway. Similar tax base, similar "free" health care system (actually better in that it provides more for less), similar social safety net…and similar tax rates. Except it is warmer, of course.

But recently living there, I did not hold living near Pittsburgh as being "American" and then point out how similar socialism in Europe is in failure because of the problems in Portugal

This tarring with a broad brush is the essence of these complaints here and elsewhere.

Is norway typical of Europe? That is the issue. Gunfreak compares Norway citing a few places in the US and then says "americans". As for his not being AWARE, just point to ONE positive "we should be more like the US" comment.

One will do.

Notice his follow up "irrational fear of social justice" which is an accusation not defined in any meaningful way. Who is irrational, all americans, some americans, most americans and WHAT does "social justice" mean"?

My talking about being Dawkins as a fan, listening to his off the cuff comments BY CHOICE isn't good enough if you are a true believer. I am not religious, i do not hold with any side of Doug's argument, but I still hold that Dawkins is a human being. Sorry about that.

Rocky

Rocky,

Don't be that way, man. We all love ya.

I'm sorry I can't figure out the Pittsburgh/Portugal analogy.

Gunfreak compares Norway citing a few places in the US and then says "americans".

But they are "Americans".

As for his not being AWARE, just point to ONE positive "we should be more like the US" comment.

OK, I'll make one. Norway has to go some ways to catch up to the US in science education.

Notice his follow up "irrational fear of social justice" which is an accusation not defined in any meaningful way. Who is irrational, all americans, some americans, most americans and WHAT does "social justice" mean"?

Beats me what that means too.

Ralph