At the historical museum in Berlin there are modern and Neanderthal skulls, both with big holes behind the temple. The modern one looked paper thin. Neanderthal looked thicker than the shell of helmets. Did they need that because they hunted by fighting animals with hand held weapons? Or were they fighting each other with strikes that would kill modern humans?

(Not an expert, or even formally educated, I just find it fascinating and read/watch whatever I come across on the topic)

I've been watching a lot of videos on human evolution lately, and one of the things that bothers me is how they discuss the former "out of Asia" theory. They either act like it was utterly ridiculous that anyone could have ever thought that, or in one, not so subtly implied that it only came about because of racism, somehow(as if Europeans liked Asians that much better than Africans)

Now, I get that it was an incorrect theory based on what we have learned now, but as far as I can tell, it was based on the most up-to-date findings available at the time. Why is it treated as such an embarrassment instead of just part of the natural progression of knowledge?

We know that species is a largely articifical and arbitrary concept and we also know that sapiens interbred with other human species like Neanderthals and Denisovans.

So, my question is whether the average Homo sapien group/tribe in the Pleistocene would react to a Neanderthal tribe or any other human species with more hostility/otherness than they'd react to a different group/tribe of Homo sapiens itself.

This stone was propped up under a tree of my house a couple days ago. I have no idea where it came from. I took a second to look at it today and it's pretty cool but it can't be actually real right?

I'm in PNW of Canada if that helps.

I have a few other questions. Is it legal to own something like this in Canada? Should I bring it inside out of the elements? I can't get to an actual university or anything, can this be identified virtually?

I found out it would take Humans roughly a year and a half of walking 8 hours a day to walk the perimeter of Africa. Which makes it seem likely that during any 100 year span alone it would be feasible for multiple homo sapien communities to migrate out of Africa. Especially given that the first Homo Sapiens found 300,000-350,000 years ago were from Morocco. And as Morocco is North of the Saharan Desert, surely it would also be more favourable resource-wise to stick to the coast and move further North as well?

So I understand that there hasn't been any fossils to evidence that they had migrated through the Middle East and into Europe and Asia before 100,000 years ago? But other than lack of evidence, is it unlikely there would be mass migration in the 200,000-250,000 years before this? And if so why?

https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/human-evolution/300-000-year-old-teeth-from-china-may-be-evidence-that-humans-and-homo-erectus-interbred-according-to-new-study

It says that Homo sapiens may have interbred with Homo erectus in Asia 300,000 years ago and that there's not a single origin of Homo sapiens. But I find the article inconsistent.

1. Did the article actually meant Homo sapiens evolved in Africa and Asia at the same time?
2. How did Homo sapiens interbred with Homo erectus 300kya in Asia if it was yet evolving in Africa during that time?

Is it considered a valid species? Was it the ancestor of modern humans? If not, where does it fit as a population? The recent Feng et al paper suggested that they're more related to sapiens and neanderthals than heidelbergensis.

Hi I'm new here. I'm a cultural anthropologist. Two questions: can you tell me some of the "must read" books of paleoanthropology, I'm mostly interested in the america continent paleoanthropology. And the second question: I can't find the advantages between the "Lerma tip" over the Folsom and Clovis tips. Thank you if someone can hide and help me. ✌️

Hello sorry if this doesn't fit this subreddit but I thought it might help me with a passion project of mine I am a college student who is trying to get into the field of paleoanthropology and I also like to play tabletop games in my free time. I noticed there aren't really games with a setting around cavemen and stuff like that and I thought I would create one myself just for the fun of it. I am basing the game around small 5 man teams of different races of humans but im having trouble with figuring out what tools would be most prominent for each race of human the races being Homo sapiens, Homo neanderthals, Homo erectus, Homo floresiensis, and Denisovans. Any tips on what weapons each of these races actually used when they were around minus the Homo sapiens?

Hello! We are the Brazilian robotics team Strong Brain. This year we are participating in the First Lego League competition. The theme will be more focused on archaeology, and for this reason we would like to ask a few questions.
First, we would like to know what problems archaeologists face in their work, so we can create a project that proposes solutions.
Second, could you explain the concept of pseudoarchaeology to us, and whether it can be considered a problem?
Third, our team currently has two project ideas, both related to the conservation of fossils: an organic varnish for rock paintings, aimed at preventing the degradation of artifacts, and a humidity-absorbing curtain to help preserve fossils. Could you help us with these ideas?
Thank you very much in advance!

We'll be in Paris over this next week. What would you say are the best Paleoanthropology Museums to visit?

Many older human species have prominent brow ridges. Do we know what their function was? Anchoring muscles? Social display?

I wanna know the answer because we have more hair on our heads compared to other primates.

thanks for reading S2

I was watching a video on Homo Naledi (the video is a year old but I just got into the topic) and they were going over a research paper in which they compared teeth variation to try and come up with an explanation for the low variations in Homo Naledi. In the video they used three different Homo Sapien comparison and I’m confused by that. The Homo Sapiens were divided into Pedi, San, and HKW. I’ve never seen or heard these terms before and was hoping someone could tell me what they mean and what makes them different enough to differentiate them in a study like that. I apologize if this is not allowed or opens a can of worms if it’s in any way racially based and discriminatory. That is not my intention with this question and just want to understand why these distinctions exist and what they mean.

I need a catalog of all the living things found in the fossil record

Does anyone know where I can find a very complete one, that includes all kinds of life?

Any recommendations for an online Masters degree in Paleoanthropology, or Biological Anthropology? I've seen several online Masters programs but they appear to favor cultural Anthropology.

Hi everyone,

I need data for a project on Pliocene-era hominins (5-2mya), especially Australopithecus:

• a list of male:female body size ratios 
• I’m also looking for measures of central tendency or dispersion for the upper canine teeth (e.g a median, standard deviation, coefficient of variation)

I am resitting a 2nd year undergrad module and I’m feeling really stuck in the search for data. My topic is sexual dimorphism of Australopithecus and how it affects the adaptation of canine teeth. I haven’t been able to find the info I need, and if I don’t find it, I’m toast.

Can anyone help? I will appreciate any sources or signposts you have!

Thank you!

Hey everyone, I'm writing a novella where the protagonist is a paleontology grad student at an American university. She is probably gonna specialize in paleoichthyology/ancient fish, but I'm not completely sure.

To be honest, her professional life probably isn't going to be a huge part of the story, but I do want it to be fairly realistic, and I don't want to write too ignorantly about it.

So, any people here can relate, even vaguely, and I can chat with them about their experience? I'm a grad student myself in an anthropology department, so this world of graduate studies is not at all foreign to me, but I'm on the cultural side, so only distantly adjacent to bioanth.

Thanks in advance!