Back to Homepage

 

 

Page2 of Part4: Who were the ancestors of the Asian?

 

Ⅰ. Peking Man is not the ancestor of the Chinese people

1. Peking Man was established as the ancestor of Chinese people in this way


The first Peking Man’s skull was discovered in the suburb of Beijing on December 2, 1929. From the thickness of the skull, brain capacity size, thick protruding brow, low forehead and other characteristics, it was inferred that the evolutionary process of modern man began with the evolution of the Java Man to Peking Man, and then the evolution of Peking Man to the Neanderthal ape in Europe. 

.
The Beijing man was named "Peking Man." Exactly 26 days after December 28, 1929, the Geological Society of China held a grand celebration at the General Assembly, and announced that the fossils of the ancestors of the Chinese people had been found. Members of the Geological Society of China used the uranium-series dating method and determined that this fossil had lived between 500,000 to 400,000 years ago, whereas recent studies in the March 2009 issue of "Nature" identified the date to be as much as 770,000 years ago.  Since then, Peking Man has been indisputably established as the ancestor of Chinese people. 

 

2. Did Chinese ancestors come from Africa?

 

The emergence of the Adam and Eve theory greatly impacted paleoanthropologists around the world. In China, Dr. Wu Xinzhi, a paleoanthropologist and Chinese Academy of academician, made a counter attack with his proposal of the "multi-regional evolution theory". He claimed that in China this theory has sufficient fossil-based evidence to support it. “The main source of modern China people is ancient inhabitants who had lived here hundreds of thousands of years ago and only a small portion of them had received foreign genes.”  (Reference 1) His point is that modern Chinese people are mostly from local apes, which had evolved from Peking Man. 

.
Dr. Jin Li, a former key member of Stanford University’s Y chromosome research team, was faced this challenge head on. 
In 2000, Fudan University in Shanghai established an internal team of 22 individuals headed by Professor Jinli’s student, Ke Yuehai, a little-known newcomer. The rest of the team consisted of molecular anthropologists from well-known universities from the United States, United Kingdom and the University of Indonesia. On this research team was Dr. Peter Underhill, who once headed Stanford University’s internal research team; Professor Jin Li, who later became the vice president at Fudan University; and Dr. Spencer Wells, who is very well known for his book, "Out of Africa", as well as the current project manager of the Genographic Project for National Geographic in the United States. 

.
The research team took blood samples from 12,127 men from countries in East Asia, including Siberia, China, Taiwan aborigines, Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Guinea, Melanesia, northeastern India, etc., to study their Y chromosome DNA sequences. 

.
Their findings were published in the May 2001 issue of, “Science”, entitled: “African Origin of Modern Humans in East Asia: A Tale of 12,000 Y Chromosomes.” (Reference 2)The conclusion of this article is this: "To test the hypotheses of modern human origin in East Asia, we sampled 12,127 male individuals from 163 populations and tested for three Y chromosome markers (YAP, M89, and M130). All the individuals carried a mutation on one of the three sites. These three mutations (YAP1, M89T, and M130T) coalesce to another mutation (M168T), which originated in Africa about 35,000 to 89,000 years ago. Therefore, the data does not support even a minimal in situ hominid contribution in the origin of anatomically modern humans in East Asia.”

.
In other words, did all modern humans in East Asia originate from the descendants of Africa’s Y chromosome Adam. Chinese people are not descendants of Peking Man.  

 

 

Figure 4-2 Frequency distribution of the three Y chromosome polymorphisms in 163 populations

.
Academician Wu Xinzhi, however, still did not agree even after the results of this research were published. He said: “The sample size was too small and the descendants of local evolution might be missing from the sample”. Professor Jin Li’s response was this: “We have calculated that the probability of missing the descendants of local evolution is about one part per million.”  Since 2001, Fudan University has conducted Y chromosome DNA and mitochondrial DNA analyses of thousands of people either free of charge or paid testing and yet not a single descendant of local evolution was found. For this accomplishment, Fudan University was given the Chinese National Science and Technology Award. 

.
This was the first battle between molecular anthropology using DNA decoding and the traditional evolutionists. At the end, the molecular anthropologist won this battle brilliantly over the utter defeat of the world-class evolutionist academician Wu Xinzhi.

.
What is interesting is that the time span between the discovery of Peking Man and the confirmation that Peking Man was the ancestor of Chinese people was only 26 days. And this was all on the basis of the skull! Academician Wu refused to admit that his sample was too little. Faced with the results from 12,127 individuals from 163 ethnic group’s blood samples, he said this: This sample was just too small. It is often very difficult to view things objectively, especially if they are linked to your reputation and title. 

.
To claim that Peking Man was the ancestor of the Chinese people was not only an anthropological mistake, but also a mistake in evolutionary conclusion. Moreover, this claim pointed out the unreliability of archaeological methods based solely on skeletal anatomy. From this we can see that to use human DNA decoding to trace the origin of mankind is a more accurate approach. .


II “Liujiang Man”: The most likely ancestor of the Chinese People 

.
On September 24, 1958, in Guangxi Province, Liujiang County’s emerging penal farm, a prisoner dug the mud at the Tutain cave and found a human skull, vertebrae, ribs, pelvis, femur and other multi-blocks of fossils. From the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (IVPP) of the Chinese academy of Sciences, Professor Wu Rukang started his research and later confirmed the these fossils belong to one person, and named it the “Liujiang Man”.  

.

Figure 4-3 The fossil of Liujian cranium  

 .
1.    There is no morphological difference between the Liujiang Man and modern Chinese man
In 2006, scientists from the Chinese Academy of Paleoanthropology and Dr. Liu Wu who from City College of New York,  published an article entitled: “Some Problems for the Late Pleistocene Human Cranium Found in Liujiang of South China Based on Morphological Analysis” (Reference 3). In this article, there was a detailed comparison of the size and shape of the cranial bones of the Liujiang Man, the cave man and modern Chinese people. The first nine items are shown in the following Table: 

Figure 4-4 The cranial measurement and indices of Liujiang and modern Chinese 

.  
The other 15 parameters are also similar. The conclusion was this: The cranial bone parameters of the Liujiang Man were not only within the range of comparable parameters in modern Chinese but also close to the average value. These researchers did further comparison and analyses of the morphology of the occipital bone, the shape of the orbit, the face, etc. 

.
Their final conclusion was this: “The overall characteristics of the Liujiang Man’s cranium are exactly the same as those in modern Chinese… Based on these findings, we suggest that the cranial morphology of the Liujiang Man is very close to those of modern Chinese and very few differences exist between them.” Therefore, the morphologies of the Liujiang Man and modern Chinese are closely connected. .


2. Confirmation of the date when Liujiang Man lived

.
Confirming the date of when the Liujiang Man lived is significant in tracing the origin of Chinese people because of the similarity between the Liujiang Man’s cranium and that of modern Chinese. If the Liujiang Man lived over one hundred thousand years ago, then it is unlikely that he came from Africa. If this is the case, there exists a question: Are the modern Chinese his descendants?

.
 However, confirming the date of when the Liujiang Man lived was difficult. The estimation of the time when Liujiang Man lived is primarily dependent on the Uranium dating of the speleothems and not on the cranium fossil itself. The fossil’s location consisted of strata with layers of structure containing a sheet of carbonate mixed with soil or gravel. The three carbonate sheets closest to the cranium fossil were respectively formed 16,000,65,000 and 150,000 years ago. There is debate among experts as to how old the fossils are: the fossils could be 30,000, 40,000, 60,000, 70,000, 80,000 and up to 150,000 years old. Most experts believe the fossils are between 60,000 to 70,000 old.  

.
3. Was Liujiang Man the ancestor of the Chinese? 

.
One necessary and met condition for the Liujiang Man to be the ancestor of the Chinese is the similarity between the cranial bones of the Liujiang Man and those of the modern Chinese. If we accept the result of the aforementioned analysis based on Y chromosome, namely the DNA evidence that East Asians originated from Africa, then Liujiang Man’s Y chromosome must contain M130 or YAP or M89 genetic markers. However, the chromosomes are unobtainable from the 60,000-year-old fossils since they have already eroded. To further determine the identity of Liujiang Man, it is necessary to use data from other parts of the world.

.
From Australia, the famous archaeologist Alan Thorne has argued that “this ‘gracile or advanced’ group of Pleistocene Australians had its origins in East Asian ‘gracile forms’, like Liujiang and Upper Cave from China, which had spread south to Indonesia, Southeast Asian” (Reference 4). Dr. Thorne gave us a new clue. 

.
About 100 million years ago, Australia was separated from Eurasia. It is the only continent where large apes, chimpanzees and monkeys have never lived; no fossils have ever been found. For this reason, the aborigines could only have migrated from elsewhere. Based on carbon 14 and uranium dating methods, these aborigines lived in Australia from as early as 50,000 to 60,000 years ago. Evidence from Y chromosome research revealed that the M130 genetic marker exists in 60% of the aborigines of Australia (please see CHAPTER 5 “A magical trip to Australia”). 

.
In the southern part of China where the Liujiang Man once lived, about 2% of modern Chinese also carry the M130 genetic marker. The ancestors of modern man came from Africa. From Africa, they migrated to India, Southeast Asia and to Australia about 60,000 years ago. Thus, it is likely that they already had reached southern Asia and Liujiang about 70,000 years ago.  In the following paragraph, one can see that the immigrants from Africa came to India 80,000 years ago. This is another piece of hard evidence to support the hypothesis that the Liujiang Man came from Africa. 

.
Based on these evidences we can arrive at this conclusion: the ethnic group to whom the Liujiang Man belonged was the earliest immigrant to China from Africa also part of the ancestors of Chinese people. 

.
From “Figure 4-2 Frequency distribution of  the three Y chromosome polymorphisms in 163 populations”, one can see that most Chinese are the descendants of M89. M89’s descendants, M175, came to China tens of thousands of years later than the Liujiang Man. Other possible ancestors of the Chinese people include the Tianyuan man who lived 40,000 years ago, Upper Cave Men who lived 30,000 years ago. There is no way to tell, however, which tribes these ancient peoples belong to in the distribution table.

 

ⅠⅠⅠ. Ancient Indians Living Under the volcano Dust

.
Jwalapuram is an important archaeological site located 10 miles west of Betamcherla, a small city with 50,000 inhabitants in the southern part of India’s Andhra Pradesh region. Within a circumference of 500 meters of this site are ancient ruins consisting of strata of ancient volcano dust and stone tools from ancient people. Research on the volcanic dust confirmed that it came from the Sumatra volcano in Indonesia, which is 70,000 years old.

.
About 74,000 years ago, there was a huge eruption from the Sumatra volcano, the largest one in the last two million years. The tremendous eruption darkened the sun and caused the dust to settle as far as Greenland. This eruption even ushered in a 100 year ice age around the world.  How the ancient people survived this ice age has become a topic of interest to archaeologists. Thus, the strata of volcanic dust and stone tools found in Jwalapuram have received additional attention.  

.
In recent years, a careful excavation started at the third archaeological site in Jwalapuram (Reference 5). At this site, the volcanic dust accumulation is approximately one meter. 215 items from the Paleolithic period were found underneath the volcanic ash. Through OSL dating, it was confirmed that these stone tools were buried approximately 77,000 years ago. Above the volcanic ash, 108 stone tools were found which were also from the same middle Paleolithic period about 74,000 years ago. 

.

In a small city, Betamcherla, with 50,000 inhabitants in the southern part of India's Andhra Pradesh region, there is an important archaeological site 10 miles west of the city. The name of this site is Jwalapuram. Within a circumference of 500 meters, there are ancient ruins consisted of strata of ancient volcano dust and stone tools from ancient people. Research on the volcanic dust confirmed that it came from the Sumatra volcano in Indonesia which is 70,000 years old.   

 

 

Figure 4-5 Stone tools above and below the India's Jwalapuram volcanic ash layer

Reference :

 

1. Wu Xinzhi, modern evolutionary theory of the origin of multi-region empirical in China, Quaternary Science, Sep. 2006

2.Yuehai Ke, et. al., African Origin of Modern Humans in East Asia: A Tale of 12,000 Y Chromosomes, Science Vol 292, May 11 2001

3. Wu Liu, et. Al., :§ Some Problems for the Late Pleistocene Human Cranium Found in Lujiang of South China Based on Morphological Analysis§ , Acta Anthropologica of  Sinica, Aug. 2006

4.Peter Brown, Australian Pleistocene variation and the sex of Lake Mungo 3Journal of Human Evolution (2000)38

5. Michael Haslam,et. al., The 74 ka Toba super-eruption and southern Indian hominids: archaeology, lithic technology and environments at Jwalapuram Locality 3

 

Previous Page 1 2 3 4 Next Page    Back to Homepage