Anthropocentric claims Lee Berger et al. 2015 4 claims justification * naledi = Homo : humanlike feet etc. * distance-runner : ‘human feet = bipedal’ * tool-maker : long thumbs etc. * buried dead in caves : ‘is the only possibility’

Are fossil-hunters biased to discover “human ancestors”?

Anthropo-centric Paleo-Anthropology Piltdown hoax Taung fossil ‘Ramapithecus’ Lucy Ardipithecus naledi ... all were called “human ancestors”. And at least 2 fossil sites are called The Cradle of Humankind : East-African fossil-hunters think Lucy was a human ancestor (Rift), South-African paleoanthropologists think Taung was our ancestor. human child Taung child bonobo child

Fossil-hunters often find ‘human ancestors’, +-never ‘chimp ancestors’. Of 5 extant species of African hominoids (= hominids : bonobo, common chimp, human, western & eastern gorilla), 4 species are traditionally believed to have 0 or 1 fossils !? and 1 species (ourselves) to have 100s of fossils !? = statistically impossible, unless there’s an enormous bias in fossilisation chances between human & ape ancestors. But Asian apes Pongo do have lots of fossil relatives ! E.African paleoanthropologists say Lucy = our ancestor, S.African fossil-hunters believe Taung = human ancestor. !!! Anthropo-centrism Anthropo-, geo-, ego-centrisms... have always hindered scientific progress (not questioning own view – thinking that humans are unlike animals – ...).

- human branch : fossils+++ - chimp, gorilla 0 or 1 fossils ?? 0 Fossil hominid skulls : African apes & humans ‘Vertical spine = bipedal = human ancestor’ ?? - human branch : fossils+++ - chimp, gorilla 0 or 1 fossils ?? 0 Curiously, +- all fossil skulls are placed in the Homo branch, +- none in the Pan or Gorilla branches ... 0 ?? 100s of fossils 0 ?? of so-called ‘human ancestors’

We have ancestors, but do fossils have descendants We have ancestors, but do fossils have descendants? Hominid fossils are no direct human ancestors : Hominid fossils are more or less distant relatives (shorter or longer side-branches) of the lines leading to extant hominids Pan, Homo & Gorilla.

We don’t descend from chimps : both humans & chimps derived from the same LCA ~5 Ma. H–P LCA ~5 Ma? Homo 0 Ma Pan As we go back in time, towards the Homo–Pan LCA, - Pan fossils show more Homo-like features, - Homo fossils show more Pan-like features (though humans are generally more derived than bonobos). IOW, generally (mosaic evolution!) we can expect that Homo-like features in Pan & fossil relatives are primitive, Pan-like features in Homo & fossil relatives are primitive.

Praeanthropus boisei afarensis Pan paniscus Gorilla gorilla female aethiopicus Australopithecus africanus East-African australopiths generally South-African australopiths resemble Gorilla more than Pan resemble Pan more than Gorilla (not due to size, Verhaegen 1994 Hum.Evol.9:121-139, 1996 ib.11:35-41)

Revision of Hominid Tree 7 Ma hominid LCA ? Sahelanthropus 6 ? Orrorin (provisory, incomplete, schematic) Marc Verhaegen 1994, 1996 Hum.Evol.9:121-139, 11:35-41 7 Ma hominid LCA ? Sahelanthropus 6 ? Orrorin 5 Homo–Pan LCA 4 anamensis aquarboreal afarensis 3 Praeanthropus Australopithecus ? naledi aethiopicus africanus 2 ? habilis boisei robustus ergaster erectus aquarboreal littoral + outside Africa 1 Gorilla Pan Homo lowland & mountain bonobo & common neandertal & modern 0 gorillas // chimps >< humans Fossils are no direct ancestors of extant spp. !! Mosaic, reverse, parallel, convergent ... evolutions.