Philosophy Explorer wrote:I found this out about HS:
"All people today are classified as Homo sapiens. Our species of humans first began to evolve nearly 200,000 years ago in association with technologies not unlike those of the early Neandertals. It is now clear that early Homo sapiens, or modern humans, did not come after the Neandertals but were their contemporaries. However, it is likely that both modern humans and Neandertals descended from Homo heidelbergensis."
At the very start of HS, they would have the same bloodline which would hinder population growth. How HS got through that, I don't know. There would be many obstacles against population growth (for HS and many other life forms which I look upon as a miracle).
Nowadays I hear about many discoveries (e.g. Homo Naledi) and I'm certain the history books would have to be rewritten.
PhilX
Why do you say that they would have the same bloodline?
You seem to thinking that evolution is something that happens to individuals, it doesn't, it happens to populations.
And as thedoc said earlier it could have been around 10,000 individuals, surely that's enough to avoid mating with closely related individuals?
You really should read up on how evolution is supposed to work so that you can argue against what it really is instead of a misconception of it.
There would have been no time when a generation would have been unable to breed with the previous generation, or, given a time machine, 10 generations forward or back. Nor could you point to some members of the population and say "those are humans (or ancestors of humans) and the others aren't.