Hi, I need help with my homework, and I will put the steps for it. also, I'm going to put attaches for these steps to know how to do it. Here it goes: Understanding Modern Human Origins After reading Chapter 11 and Module 11 as well as reviewing the Discussion Essay Requirements, respond to the following: Essay 1 (Due 5/24): Describe and compare the views of human origins: regional continuity model, the replacement models, a description of the partial replacement model. The authors of the textbook on page 286, pose 4 basic questions that get at the origins of modern humans. Answer these questions with the evidence presented and conclude which model is best supported by the fossil record and other evidence. In a separate posting, Essay 2 (Due 5/26): Select a classmate's analysis of the fossil record and other evidence supporting a model of human origins (Essay 1). Summarize the classmate's conclusion, which model did they find was best supported by the evidence and what was that evidence. Do you agree with these conclusions? Explain why or why not. Next select one of the 15 Related Exhibits from the last chapter Culture of the documentary Becoming Human linked to in Module 11. Give the title and summarize the exhibit. Then explain how this information helps us understand modern humans. Becoming Human - http://www.becominghuman.org/node/interactive-documentary Discussion Essay Requirements include the following: -Each essay is to be a minimum of 3 paragraphs, each paragraph is to have at least 6 sentences. -All ideas, definitions, data, etc require citations within the body of the essay. You need to cite more than quotations. Required are citations from both textbook and module. Module:- Overview In the late Pleistocene humans became more and more modern in appearance. The trends that became evident in premodern forms nearly 500,000 years ago continued, including the changing shape of the skull, the thinning of the cranial wall, and the overall reduction in robustness relative to Homo erectus. Brain size, as measured by cranial capacity, remained roughly the same as it had been from about 200,000 years ago, but the shape of the cranium changed significantly. The oldest fossil representatives of anatomically modern humans come from Africa and the Middle East, followed by similar fossils throughout Europe, Asia, Australia, and finally the Americasthe first appearance of any hominin in the Western Hemisphere. In this section and chapter 11 we will review the fossil record of our most recent ancestors in order to understand from where we came. Objectives Upon completion of this module and chapter 11, students will be able to: Compare the three basic hypotheses for the origin and dispersal of anatomically modern humans Discuss the earliest evidence of modern humans Describe the distribution, technology, and art of modern humans Describe the cultural periods of the Upper Paleolithic When, where, and how did modern humans first appear? There are two contrasting views that attempt to answer these questions, these are the regional continuity module and the replacement modules: 1. Regional Continuity model (Multiregional Evolution) This model contends that premodern forms throughout Africa, Asia, and Europe evolved into modern humans. This model contends that archaic hominid populations in Europe, Asia, and Africa contributed, at least in part, to the evolution of their local, modern successors Explaining modern regional variation? Local selective forces (natural selection) and genetic drift explain the maintenance of regional differentiation in the model. The model does not invoke a speciation event as does the Complete Replacement model, rather modern humans are seen as only sub-specifically distinct (subspecies) from the archaic forms (e.g., H. sapiens sapiens for modern humans and H. sapiens neanderthalensis for Neanderthals) Regional Continuity would require gene flow to prevent speciation among the premodern humans (that is gene flow between populations on the three continents) Fossil evidence would need to include: transitional forms between archaic and modern H. sapiens found in Africa, Asia, and Europe the date for the earliest modern humans would be the same from the three continents No genetic evidence to date. 2. Complete Replacement model (Recent African Evolution) This model proposes that anatomically modern populations arose in Africa about 200,000 years ago, dispersed from Africa, replacing premodern populations in Asia and Europe. This model assumes that the origin of modern humans was a speciation event, so there could be no modern human/premodern human admixture. Taxonomically, this implies that all of the replaced archaic hominids represented different species from modern humans (e.g., Homo sapiens replaced Homo neaderthalensis in Europe). Fossil evidence for this model would have to include: no transitional forms from archaic to modern H. sapiens anywhere except Africa the oldest evidence for modern H. sapiens in Africa (keep in mind this would be negative data or lack of data from somewhere else and just because it hasnt been found doesnt mean it doesnt exist) The genetic data to date: mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis of recent human populations supports the model analysis of 24,000 y.o. Neanderthal mtDNA also (arguably) supports the replacement scenario Y chromosome analysis indicates humans are much less genetically variable than other primates, suggesting a small founding population, thus supporting the replacement hypothesis 2a. Partial Replacement model This model postulates that modern humans expanded out of Africa beginning before 100,000 years ago, but there was interbreeding among the modern humans and regional premodern populations. This is the in between model, suggesting that modern H. sapiens first evolved in Africa and their initial dispersal out of Africa was a gradual process. Moderns moved into Asia and Europe where there was hybridization with local archaic H. sapiens (keep in mind, in order to interbreed the populations have to be the same species) populations. Eventually, modern humans established themselves as the only hominid species through a gradual and complex interaction of hybridization and replacement. The authors of our text suggest that consensus is building on modern human origins in that the extreme models at either end of the continuum are viewed as flawed. The argument is that both complete replacement and regional continuity are less likely than a scenario that incorporates large migrations (one or more) from Africa that led to some interbreeding between African modern humans and local archaic populations. Early modern Homo sapiens in Africa and Southwest Asia made tools that were similar to those of the Neandertals and other late archaic Homo sapiens. These were mostly simple Mousterian-like Levallois flake and core tools. However, as early as perhaps 80,000 years ago in Africa and by 40,000 years ago elsewhere, modern humans began producing new kinds of artifacts that were revolutionary enough to warrant their being placed into a different Paleolithic stage--the Upper Paleolithic. This was the height of technical sophistication during the Old Stone Age. These innovative developments are most well known from European sites, but similar advances were occurring elsewhere in the Old World (Africa, Asia, Europe, and Australia) and later in the New World (the Americas) as well. Ultimately, there were a number of different regional Upper Paleolithic tool traditions. (The five described in the textbookChatelperronian, Aurignacian, Gravettian, Solutrean (example Figure 11.17b), and Magdalenianare from Western Europe.) The various Upper Paleolithic tool traditions were successful cultural adaptations to diverse environments around the world. In northern climates (temperate and subarctic regions of the northern hemisphere) humans specialized in big game hunting. However, even among the societies that focused their hunting efforts on reindeer, horses, and other large mammals, there was exploitation of vegetable foods, fish, and other small animals. Upper Paleolithic peoples, such as the Cro-Magnon (early modern Homo sapiens from Europe), became progressively more efficient at acquiring food. Small game and plant food exploitation became increasingly important to them after 15,000 years ago. This was a necessity because their populations apparently were growing rapidly and the climate was changing as the ice began to melt near the end of the last ice age. This climate related change in subsistence pattern began even earlier in the Southwest Asia and other relatively warm and dry regions. The early modern people increased their food supply by developing coordinated group hunting techniques for the killing of large herd animals. They also developed new specialized hunting weapons. The art of spear hunting was revolutionized by the invention of the spear-thrower (or atlatl) about 17,000-15,000 years ago (see Figure 11.18 and for a modern image of how the tool is used click HERE). This was a wood or bone rod with a hook on one end that fit into a socket at the base of a spear. This device was used to throw spears; it increased the range and force of impact of projectiles by essentially increasing the length of the spear thrower's arm. The net effect was that hunters did not have to get as close to prey before throwing their spears. (Spear throwers may have been made as early as 25,000 years ago in North Africa. Whether the European people independently invented this technology later or acquired it from North Africa is not known.) The bow and arrow were invented by 12,000 years ago or a bit earlier. This further increased the range of projectiles. The fact that these weapon systems were developed toward the end of the last ice age is probably not a coincidence. During the roughly 5,000 years of final glacial melt (15,000 y.a.), large game animals became progressively scarce in the northern hemisphere. As a result, human hunting success would have been rarer. The combined effect of rapidly changing climates and increased hunting by humans heavily has been hypothesized to have contributed to the extinction of a number of large animals (mostly mammals) at that time. It also was in this late period after 15,000 years ago that fishing spears, hooks, and nets became increasingly more common. The basis of many Upper Paleolithic stone tool forms was the blade flake. (See example of production figure 11.19) This is a thin, roughly parallel-sided flake that is at least twice as long as it is wide. The cross-section is usually either triangular or trapezoidal. They were made out of brittle-breaking rock materials such as flint, chert, and obsidian; all of which hold a sharp edge well. Blades were preforms for the manufacture of many different kinds of tools, such as knives, hide scrapers, spear tips, drills, awls, burins, etc. Tools made from blades were far more efficient than previous stone tool industries (Acheulian and Mousterian) in terms of maximizing the use of rock materials. (This increased efficiency can be measured roughly in terms of the amount of cutting edge that can be produced from the same amount of stone.) During the Upper Paleolithic, we see the first abundant evidence of tools for making other tools. Such things as narrow gouging chisels, known as burins (see Figure 11.17a), were used to make and shape a host of other implements out of bone, antler, and ivory. Additional tools created for the purpose of working on other implements such as spear-shaft straighteners. Among the people of the Upper Paleolithic, bone and antler progressively replaced wood and stone for many functions (see example of the harpoon with barbs in figure 11.20 from Katanda). Bone and antler are more durable than wood and more flexible than stone so they do not break as easily and yet can be used to make relatively sharp cutting edges and penetrating projectile points. These materials were at this time being employed to make long thin knives, awls, sewing needles, clothing fasteners, harpoons with barbs, and many other useful implements. One result was that tailored clothing and tents were easier to make. The first known sewing needle came from southwestern France and dates to about 25,000 years ago (click Here to see an example). Residues of animal skin pants, shirts, and shoes have been found in a 24,000 year old grave in Russia (Figure 11.16). Web Resource Revisit the interactive documentary Becoming Human. View the final segment Culture (segments can be accessed by clicking the title at the top of the page). There are three parts in this final segment of the documentary that deal with rock art. Don't forget to go through the 15 Related Exhibit at the bottom. The Upper Paleolithic people regularly decorated their tools and sculpted small pieces of stone, bone, antler, and ivory. Necklaces, bracelets, and decorative pendants were made of bones, teeth, and shells. Cave walls were often painted with naturalistic scenes of animals. Perhaps, the most prominent portable art was in the form that has become known as Venus figurines (see example of the carved female face in Figure 11.20 from Brassempouy). These are sculptures of women. They are not portraits but rather faceless idealized representations of well fed, healthy, usually pregnant nude women with exceptionally large buttocks and breasts. Because of these exaggerated sexual characteristics, they are thought by most paleoanthropologists to be ritual objects symbolizing fertility. Venus figurines were made from 27,000 years ago down to the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago. They have been found from Western Europe all of the way to Siberia. Most were small enough in size to be easily hand held. The Venus of Laussel is a rare exception: The Upper Paleolithic perhaps is most well known for paintings on the walls of caves (example seen in Figure 11.20 from Altamira). Although, this cave art is most abundant in southwest France and northern Spain, it was made elsewhere as well. Over 150 Western European caves have been found with these ice age paintings on their walls. The majority of the figures are realistic looking herd animals, many of which are shown either wounded or pregnant. A number of paleoanthropologists have suggested that the artists were most likely performing sympathetic (or imitative) hunting and fertility magic. This would have been particularly important when this art was at its peak (approximately 15,000-10,000 years ago) since at that time the last ice age was winding down and the herds of game animals were dying out or moving away to the north. (The oldest known cave art consists of charcoal drawings of bison (click Here to see) and rhinoceroses (click Here) dating to approximately 31,000 y.a. in the French cave of Grotte Chauvet.) The extraordinary advancements in Upper Paleolithic technology and art did not take place in a vacuum. They developed during a time of remarkable social changes. Those changes created the necessary environment for the cultural innovations to occur. One driving force was probably population growth. From the time of the earliest humans until around 50-40,000 years ago, the global human population experienced only very modest growth. People evidently lived in small hunting and gathering bands that rarely exceeded a few dozen individuals. Life expectancy was typically 30 years or less, often much less. Evidence from Upper Paleolithic sites has shown that beginning around 30,000 years ago there was a sharp rise in the number of people who were over 30 years old; they were living significantly longer on average. One consequence of increased longevity is that women have more reproductive years. As a result, an increase in family size and the growth of populations is almost inevitable. Likewise, the Upper Paleolithic cultural developments no doubt contributed to increased longevity, which in turn fueled the population explosion

Hi, I need help with my homework, and I will put the steps for it. also, I'm going to put attaches for these steps to know how to do it.and I need it today before 11:59pm 5/26/2017
Here it goes: Understanding Modern Human Origins

After reading Chapter 11 and Module 11 as well as reviewing the Discussion Essay Requirements, respond to the following:

Essay 1 (Due 5/24):

Describe and compare the views of human origins: regional continuity model, the replacement models, a description of the partial replacement model. The authors of the textbook on page 286, pose 4 basic questions that get at the origins of modern humans. Answer these questions with the evidence presented and conclude which model is best supported by the fossil record and other evidence.



In a separate posting,

Essay 2 (Due 5/26):

Select a classmate's analysis of the fossil record and other evidence supporting a model of human origins (Essay 1). Summarize the classmate's conclusion, which model did they find was best supported by the evidence and what was that evidence. Do you agree with these conclusions? Explain why or why not.

Next select one of the 15 Related Exhibits from the last chapter Culture of the documentary Becoming Human linked to in Module 11. Give the title and summarize the exhibit. Then explain how this information helps us understand modern humans.



Becoming Human - http://www.becominghuman.org/node/interactive-documentary



Discussion Essay Requirements include the following:

-Each essay is to be a minimum of 3 paragraphs, each paragraph is to have at least 6 sentences.

-All ideas, definitions, data, etc require citations within the body of the essay. You need to cite more than quotations. Required are citations from both textbook and module.

Module:-
Overview

In the late Pleistocene humans became more and more modern in appearance. The trends that became evident in premodern forms nearly 500,000 years ago continued, including the changing shape of the skull, the thinning of the cranial wall, and the overall reduction in robustness relative to Homo erectus. Brain size, as measured by cranial capacity, remained roughly the same as it had been from about 200,000 years ago, but the shape of the cranium changed significantly. The oldest fossil representatives of anatomically modern humans come from Africa and the Middle East, followed by similar fossils throughout Europe, Asia, Australia, and finally the Americasthe first appearance of any hominin in the Western Hemisphere. In this section and chapter 11 we will review the fossil record of our most recent ancestors in order to understand from where we came.

Objectives

Upon completion of this module and chapter 11, students will be able to:

Compare the three basic hypotheses for the origin and dispersal of anatomically modern humans
Discuss the earliest evidence of modern humans
Describe the distribution, technology, and art of modern humans
Describe the cultural periods of the Upper Paleolithic

When, where, and how did modern humans first appear?

There are two contrasting views that attempt to answer these questions, these are the regional continuity module and the replacement modules:





1. Regional Continuity model (Multiregional Evolution)



This model contends that premodern forms throughout Africa, Asia, and Europe evolved into modern humans.



This model contends that archaic hominid populations in Europe, Asia, and Africa contributed, at least in part, to the evolution of their local, modern successors

Explaining modern regional variation? Local selective forces (natural selection) and genetic drift explain the maintenance of regional differentiation in the model.



The model does not invoke a speciation event as does the Complete Replacement model, rather modern humans are seen as only sub-specifically distinct (subspecies) from the archaic forms (e.g., H. sapiens sapiens for modern humans and H. sapiens neanderthalensis for Neanderthals)



Regional Continuity would require gene flow to prevent speciation among the premodern humans (that is gene flow between populations on the three continents)



Fossil evidence would need to include:

transitional forms between archaic and modern H. sapiens found in Africa, Asia, and Europe
the date for the earliest modern humans would be the same from the three continents


No genetic evidence to date.



2. Complete Replacement model (Recent African Evolution)



This model proposes that anatomically modern populations arose in Africa about 200,000 years ago, dispersed from Africa, replacing premodern populations in Asia and Europe.



This model assumes that the origin of modern humans was a speciation event, so there could be no modern human/premodern human admixture.



Taxonomically, this implies that all of the replaced archaic hominids represented different species from modern humans (e.g., Homo sapiens replaced Homo neaderthalensis in Europe).



Fossil evidence for this model would have to include:

no transitional forms from archaic to modern H. sapiens anywhere except Africa
the oldest evidence for modern H. sapiens in Africa (keep in mind this would be negative data or lack of data from somewhere else and just because it hasnt been found doesnt mean it doesnt exist)


The genetic data to date:

mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis of recent human populations supports the model analysis of 24,000 y.o. Neanderthal mtDNA also (arguably) supports the replacement scenario
Y chromosome analysis indicates humans are much less genetically variable than other primates, suggesting a small founding population, thus supporting the replacement hypothesis




2a. Partial Replacement model



This model postulates that modern humans expanded out of Africa beginning before 100,000 years ago, but there was interbreeding among the modern humans and regional premodern populations.



This is the in between model, suggesting that modern H. sapiens first evolved in Africa and their initial dispersal out of Africa was a gradual process. Moderns moved into Asia and Europe where there was hybridization with local archaic H. sapiens (keep in mind, in order to interbreed the populations have to be the same species) populations.



Eventually, modern humans established themselves as the only hominid species through a gradual and complex interaction of hybridization and replacement.



The authors of our text suggest that consensus is building on modern human origins in that the extreme models at either end of the continuum are viewed as flawed. The argument is that both complete replacement and regional continuity are less likely than a scenario that incorporates large migrations (one or more) from Africa that led to some interbreeding between African modern humans and local archaic populations.


Early modern Homo sapiens in Africa and Southwest Asia made tools that were similar to those of the Neandertals and other late archaic Homo sapiens. These were mostly simple Mousterian-like Levallois flake and core tools. However, as early as perhaps 80,000 years ago in Africa and by 40,000 years ago elsewhere, modern humans began producing new kinds of artifacts that were revolutionary enough to warrant their being placed into a different Paleolithic stage--the Upper Paleolithic. This was the height of technical sophistication during the Old Stone Age.

These innovative developments are most well known from European sites, but similar advances were occurring elsewhere in the Old World (Africa, Asia, Europe, and Australia) and later in the New World (the Americas) as well. Ultimately, there were a number of different regional Upper Paleolithic tool traditions. (The five described in the textbookChatelperronian, Aurignacian, Gravettian, Solutrean (example Figure 11.17b), and Magdalenianare from Western Europe.)

The various Upper Paleolithic tool traditions were successful cultural adaptations to diverse environments around the world. In northern climates (temperate and subarctic regions of the northern hemisphere) humans specialized in big game hunting. However, even among the societies that focused their hunting efforts on reindeer, horses, and other large mammals, there was exploitation of vegetable foods, fish, and other small animals.

Upper Paleolithic peoples, such as the Cro-Magnon (early modern Homo sapiens from Europe), became progressively more efficient at acquiring food. Small game and plant food exploitation became increasingly important to them after 15,000 years ago. This was a necessity because their populations apparently were growing rapidly and the climate was changing as the ice began to melt near the end of the last ice age. This climate related change in subsistence pattern began even earlier in the Southwest Asia and other relatively warm and dry regions.

The early modern people increased their food supply by developing coordinated group hunting techniques for the killing of large herd animals. They also developed new specialized hunting weapons. The art of spear hunting was revolutionized by the invention of the spear-thrower (or atlatl) about 17,000-15,000 years ago (see Figure 11.18 and for a modern image of how the tool is used click HERE). This was a wood or bone rod with a hook on one end that fit into a socket at the base of a spear. This device was used to throw spears; it increased the range and force of impact of projectiles by essentially increasing the length of the spear thrower's arm. The net effect was that hunters did not have to get as close to prey before throwing their spears.
(Spear throwers may have been made as early as 25,000 years ago in North Africa. Whether the European people independently invented this technology later or acquired it from North Africa is not known.)

The bow and arrow were invented by 12,000 years ago or a bit earlier. This further increased the range of projectiles.

The fact that these weapon systems were developed toward the end of the last ice age is probably not a coincidence.


During the roughly 5,000 years of final glacial melt (15,000 y.a.), large game animals became progressively scarce in the northern hemisphere. As a result, human hunting success would have been rarer. The combined effect of rapidly changing climates and increased hunting by humans heavily has been hypothesized to have contributed to the extinction of a number of large animals (mostly mammals) at that time. It also was in this late period after 15,000 years ago that fishing spears, hooks, and nets became increasingly more common.


The basis of many Upper Paleolithic stone tool forms was the blade flake. (See example of production figure 11.19) This is a thin, roughly parallel-sided flake that is at least twice as long as it is wide. The cross-section is usually either triangular or trapezoidal. They were made out of brittle-breaking rock materials such as flint, chert, and obsidian; all of which hold a sharp edge well. Blades were preforms for the manufacture of many different kinds of tools, such as knives, hide scrapers, spear tips, drills, awls, burins, etc.
Tools made from blades were far more efficient than previous stone tool industries (Acheulian and Mousterian) in terms of maximizing the use of rock materials. (This increased efficiency can be measured roughly in terms of the amount of cutting edge that can be produced from the same amount of stone.)


During the Upper Paleolithic, we see the first abundant evidence of tools for making other tools. Such things as narrow gouging chisels, known as burins (see Figure 11.17a), were used to make and shape a host of other implements out of bone, antler, and ivory. Additional tools created for the purpose of working on other implements such as spear-shaft straighteners.


Among the people of the Upper Paleolithic, bone and antler progressively replaced wood and stone for many functions (see example of the harpoon with barbs in figure 11.20 from Katanda). Bone and antler are more durable than wood and more flexible than stone so they do not break as easily and yet can be used to make relatively sharp cutting edges and penetrating projectile points.

These materials were at this time being employed to make long thin knives, awls, sewing needles, clothing fasteners, harpoons with barbs, and many other useful implements. One result was that tailored clothing and tents were easier to make. The first known sewing needle came from southwestern France and dates to about 25,000 years ago (click Here to see an example). Residues of animal skin pants, shirts, and shoes have been found in a 24,000 year old grave in Russia (Figure 11.16).

Web Resource

Revisit the interactive documentary Becoming Human. View the final segment Culture (segments can be accessed by clicking the title at the top of the page). There are three parts in this final segment of the documentary that deal with rock art.
Don't forget to go through the 15 Related Exhibit at the bottom.




The Upper Paleolithic people regularly decorated their tools and sculpted small pieces of stone, bone, antler, and ivory. Necklaces, bracelets, and decorative pendants were made of bones, teeth, and shells. Cave walls were often painted with naturalistic scenes of animals.

Perhaps, the most prominent portable art was in the form that has become known as Venus figurines (see example of the carved female face in Figure 11.20 from Brassempouy).


These are sculptures of women. They are not portraits but rather faceless idealized representations of well fed, healthy, usually pregnant nude women with exceptionally large buttocks and breasts. Because of these exaggerated sexual characteristics, they are thought by most paleoanthropologists to be ritual objects symbolizing fertility. Venus figurines were made from 27,000 years ago down to the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago. They have been found from Western Europe all of the way to Siberia. Most were small enough in size to be easily hand held. The Venus of Laussel is a rare exception:


The Upper Paleolithic perhaps is most well known for paintings on the walls of caves (example seen in Figure 11.20 from Altamira). Although, this cave art is most abundant in southwest France and northern Spain, it was made elsewhere as well. Over 150 Western European caves have been found with these ice age paintings on their walls.

The majority of the figures are realistic looking herd animals, many of which are shown either wounded or pregnant. A number of paleoanthropologists have suggested that the artists were most likely performing sympathetic (or imitative) hunting and fertility magic. This would have been particularly important when this art was at its peak (approximately 15,000-10,000 years ago) since at that time the last ice age was winding down and the herds of game animals were dying out or moving away to the north. (The oldest known cave art consists of charcoal drawings of bison (click Here to see) and rhinoceroses (click Here) dating to approximately 31,000 y.a. in the French cave of Grotte Chauvet.)



The extraordinary advancements in Upper Paleolithic technology and art did not take place in a vacuum. They developed during a time of remarkable social changes. Those changes created the necessary environment for the cultural innovations to occur. One driving force was probably population growth. From the time of the earliest humans until around 50-40,000 years ago, the global human population experienced only very modest growth. People evidently lived in small hunting and gathering bands that rarely exceeded a few dozen individuals. Life expectancy was typically 30 years or less, often much less. Evidence from Upper Paleolithic sites has shown that beginning around 30,000 years ago there was a sharp rise in the number of people who were over 30 years old; they were living significantly longer on average.

One consequence of increased longevity is that women have more reproductive years. As a result, an increase in family size and the growth of populations is almost inevitable. Likewise, the Upper Paleolithic cultural developments no doubt contributed to increased longevity, which in turn fueled the population explosion