<p>Forty years ago, protein electrophoresis and other molecular types of dating were pointing to a date of 4.5 million years BP for the separation of the hominid line from the pongid (great ape) line, but I didn't believe it at the time because it conflicted with the fossil evidence. Since then, more fossils have been found and the disparity between geological dating techniques and molecular analysis has become greater. We now have Ardipithecus kadabba, dated at 6 million years BP, and Sahelanthropus tchadensis at 7 million years BP. These were bipedal hominids which had already split off from the common ancestor of the pongid line which led to modern chimps and gorillas. These early hominids were australopithecine-type creatures, small brained and still essentially bipedal apes, but having many characteristics similar to humans.</p>

<p>Exactly when the australopithecines became brainy enough to be classed as humans is to some extent a value judgement and therefore not absolutely clear, but it is generally held that the first human was Homo habilis from Lake Turkana, Kenya, and lived about 3 million years ago. All the most important hominid fossils were found in Africa, mainly East Africa.</p>

<p>The Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic periods refer to the type of stone tools used by hominids at the relevant times. Palaeolithic tools were very primitive, and it usually takes an expert eye to identify them as tools rather than random fragments. They date from about the time of Homo habilis. It is entirely possible that some of these tools were made by Australopithecines. Mesolithic tools were a bit more sophisticated. and Neolithic tools were made comparatively recently by Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis. The bronze and iron ages belong to the last few thousand years. The Great Pyramid was built in the copper age, 4.5 thousand years ago, which preceded the bronze age. The 200,000 - 300,000-year dates you refer to are the approximate dates of the earliest Neanderthals and the migration of the first Homo sapiens from Africa into the Middle East and Asia. The first Neanderthals closely resembled the African version of Homo erectus,from which they evolved, so it takes an expert to decide which is which.</p>

<p>At the end of your question you seem to be asking when did life start. The generally accepted date is around 3.8 billion years ago, but it might have been very slightly earlier.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-08T12:06:10.267Z
@ebv You're addressing me, but I don't have the expertise to judge this answer on its merits.  If you consider it is wrong, you can vote it down and add your own answer, and/or vote up other answers.
gerrit
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-08T15:24:42.497Z
@ebv Maybe so, but I am not willing to use my moderator powers to delete an answer that is upvoted to +4, accepted, and for which I don't have the expertise to judge it on its content.  This is something the community should handle without moderator intervention.  The community can vote down the answer to -1, then 3 users with trusted user privilege (we have 30) can vote to delete it.
gerrit
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-08T16:18:46.463Z
@ebv You are right, but I am in no position to peer review the answer, and the Stack Exchange platform does not offer us a technical possibility to let those with expertise in the topic of this question weigh in more heavily than others ([except for closing questions](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/231212/172266)).  I think it would be great if those with high experience in the tags applied to the question could have a stronger impact on its score than random passers-by, but as it stands we do not have technical support for this.
gerrit
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T10:30:33.993Z
There's a lot more I could have said, but I was giving an answer, not writing a book
Michael Walsby
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T14:10:46.880Z
To be fair modern genetic studies has pushed the molecular date farther back between 7-10mya, The disparity is smaller than ever, not greater.
John
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T15:50:51.643Z
They probably had to, because they could see they were out of sync with the fossil evidence, which is likely to be pushed back even further. I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up pushing the date for a common ancestor with chimps back to 8 or 9 million years BP.
Michael Walsby
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-01T13:43:44.537Z
As an aside, there is growing debate whether *Homo habilis* should be recast into the genus *Australopithecus*. The idea behind placing *H. habilis* in genus *Homo* was that toolmaking is what should separate *Homo* species from their non-*Homo* predecessors. That idea is falling by the wayside.  As noted in the answer, that *H. habilis* was the first toolmaker may not be the case. Even worse, there are some extant monkey species that make tools just as good as those made by *H. habilis*.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-01T14:29:59.270Z
There always was some disagreement as to whether habilis should be Homo or Australopithecus. My view is that the Homo designation is justified. I think there is too much splitting and not enough lumping with hominid fossils. Every discoverer of a fossil hominid wants to claim it is a new species, when half the time it is just a race or subspecies of an already recognised species..
Michael Walsby
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T08:02:26.750Z
2019-08-30T08:02:26.750Z
Michael Walsby
<p>I am asking myself something very interesting for me (I am not an expert in this topic).</p>
<p>I read many websites about human history and every website says that there are some periods in the human history.</p>
<p>For example: <a href="https://www.inrap.fr/en/periods" rel="nofollow noreferrer">periods</a></p>
<ol>
<li><p>Paleolithic</p>
</li>
<li><p>Mesolithic</p>
</li>
<li><p>Neolithic</p>
</li>
<li><p>Bronze Age</p>
</li>
<li><p>Iron Age</p>
<p>etc.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Generally it is estimated that humans evolved on Earth between 200,000 and 300,000 years ago.</p>
<p>I know we are homo sapiens, what I am trying to understand is what is the first step for humans. I read about Australopithecus and the &quot;Australopithecus&quot; evolution of the homo on the Earth. I know they are not considered human like us, but, where and when is the first step around the Earth in history where life for humans starts?</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/world-history-beginnings/origin-humans-early-societies/a/where-did-humans-come-from" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Humans on the earth</a> (Khan Academy)</li>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Homo</a> (Wikipedia)</li>
<li><a href="http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-erectus" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Homo</a> (Smithsonian)</li>
<li><a href="https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominini" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Hominini</a> (Spanish Wikipedia)</li>
<li><a href="https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Hominidae</a>  (Spanish Wikipedia)</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T07:04:34.513Z
Welcome to ES.SE. If you could try to make your second to last paragraph more readable/understandable, that would be great.
Erik
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T07:06:54.780Z
what part do you say?  this part : I know we came from homo sapiens, while I try understand from is the first step of the humans ,I read about Australopithecus is the "Australopithecus" evolution of the homo in the earth, I know there are not consider human like us, but, where is the first step around the earth history where the live start?
simon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T07:11:56.890Z
Yeah, that one.
Erik
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-30T22:24:22.547Z
We humans didn't just come from *homo sapiens*. We **are** *homo sapiens*.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-31T04:21:45.947Z
i mean we are homo sapiens
simon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-31T04:23:12.253Z
i mean we , you and me , we come from homo sapiens i mean we are homo sapiens
simon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-01T21:14:55.613Z
Simon, you have a good answer here. Since no one has offered another answer in the last two days, the right thing to do is to accept that one. Doing so is the stack exchange way.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-02T04:35:53.303Z
ok I  understand I will going to accept that answer
simon
<evolution>
What was there before the Paleolithic and where really did life start for us humans, not like homo?
simon
# What was there before the Paleolithic and where really did life start for us humans, not like homo?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-08-30)

I am asking myself something very interesting for me (I am not an expert in this topic).

I read many websites about human history and every website says that there are some periods in the human history.

For example: [periods](https://www.inrap.fr/en/periods)

1. Paleolithic
2. Mesolithic
3. Neolithic
4. Bronze Age
5. Iron Age

   etc.

Generally it is estimated that humans evolved on Earth between 200,000 and 300,000 years ago.

I know we are homo sapiens, what I am trying to understand is what is the first step for humans. I read about Australopithecus and the "Australopithecus" evolution of the homo on the Earth. I know they are not considered human like us, but, where and when is the first step around the Earth in history where life for humans starts?

* [Humans on the earth](https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/world-history-beginnings/origin-humans-early-societies/a/where-did-humans-come-from) (Khan Academy)
* [Homo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo) (Wikipedia)
* [Homo](http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-erectus) (Smithsonian)
* [Hominini](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominini) (Spanish Wikipedia)
* [Hominidae](https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae) (Spanish Wikipedia)

**Tags:** evolution

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Welcome to ES.SE. If you could try to make your second to last paragraph more readable/understandable, that would be great.  
> **username_0**: what part do you say?  this part : I know we came from homo sapiens, while I try understand from is the first step of the humans ,I read about Australopithecus is the "Australopithecus" evolution of the homo in the earth, I know there are not consider human like us, but, where is the first step around the earth history where the live start?  
> **username_1**: Yeah, that one.  
> **username_2**: We humans didn't just come from *homo sapiens*. We **are** *homo sapiens*.  
> **username_0**: i mean we are homo sapiens  
> **username_0**: i mean we , you and me , we come from homo sapiens i mean we are homo sapiens  
> **username_2**: username_0, you have a good answer here. Since no one has offered another answer in the last two days, the right thing to do is to accept that one. Doing so is the stack exchange way.  
> **username_0**: ok I  understand I will going to accept that answer  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-08-30. Score: 5 | Accepted answer

Forty years ago, protein electrophoresis and other molecular types of dating were pointing to a date of 4.5 million years BP for the separation of the hominid line from the pongid (great ape) line, but I didn't believe it at the time because it conflicted with the fossil evidence. Since then, more fossils have been found and the disparity between geological dating techniques and molecular analysis has become greater. We now have Ardipithecus kadabba, dated at 6 million years BP, and Sahelanthropus tchadensis at 7 million years BP. These were bipedal hominids which had already split off from the common ancestor of the pongid line which led to modern chimps and gorillas. These early hominids were australopithecine-type creatures, small brained and still essentially bipedal apes, but having many characteristics similar to humans.

Exactly when the australopithecines became brainy enough to be classed as humans is to some extent a value judgement and therefore not absolutely clear, but it is generally held that the first human was Homo habilis from Lake Turkana, Kenya, and lived about 3 million years ago. All the most important hominid fossils were found in Africa, mainly East Africa.

The Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic periods refer to the type of stone tools used by hominids at the relevant times. Palaeolithic tools were very primitive, and it usually takes an expert eye to identify them as tools rather than random fragments. They date from about the time of Homo habilis. It is entirely possible that some of these tools were made by Australopithecines. Mesolithic tools were a bit more sophisticated. and Neolithic tools were made comparatively recently by Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis. The bronze and iron ages belong to the last few thousand years. The Great Pyramid was built in the copper age, 4.5 thousand years ago, which preceded the bronze age. The 200,000 - 300,000-year dates you refer to are the approximate dates of the earliest Neanderthals and the migration of the first Homo sapiens from Africa into the Middle East and Asia. The first Neanderthals closely resembled the African version of Homo erectus,from which they evolved, so it takes an expert to decide which is which.

At the end of your question you seem to be asking when did life start. The generally accepted date is around 3.8 billion years ago, but it might have been very slightly earlier.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: There's a lot more I could have said, but I was giving an answer, not writing a book  
> **username_5**: To be fair modern genetic studies has pushed the molecular date farther back between 7-10mya, The disparity is smaller than ever, not greater.  
> **username_3**: They probably had to, because they could see they were out of sync with the fossil evidence, which is likely to be pushed back even further. I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up pushing the date for a common ancestor with chimps back to 8 or 9 million years BP.  
> **username_2**: As an aside, there is growing debate whether *Homo habilis* should be recast into the genus *Australopithecus*. The idea behind placing *H. habilis* in genus *Homo* was that toolmaking is what should separate *Homo* species from their non-*Homo* predecessors. That idea is falling by the wayside.  As noted in the answer, that *H. habilis* was the first toolmaker may not be the case. Even worse, there are some extant monkey species that make tools just as good as those made by *H. habilis*.  
> **username_3**: There always was some disagreement as to whether habilis should be Homo or Australopithecus. My view is that the Homo designation is justified. I think there is too much splitting and not enough lumping with hominid fossils. Every discoverer of a fossil hominid wants to claim it is a new species, when half the time it is just a race or subspecies of an already recognised species..  
> **username_4**: @ebv You're addressing me, but I don't have the expertise to judge this answer on its merits.  If you consider it is wrong, you can vote it down and add your own answer, and/or vote up other answers.  
> **username_4**: @ebv Maybe so, but I am not willing to use my moderator powers to delete an answer that is upvoted to +4, accepted, and for which I don't have the expertise to judge it on its content.  This is something the community should handle without moderator intervention.  The community can vote down the answer to -1, then 3 users with trusted user privilege (we have 30) can vote to delete it.  
> **username_4**: @ebv You are right, but I am in no position to peer review the answer, and the Stack Exchange platform does not offer us a technical possibility to let those with expertise in the topic of this question weigh in more heavily than others ([except for closing questions](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/231212/172266)).  I think it would be great if those with high experience in the tags applied to the question could have a stronger impact on its score than random passers-by, but as it stands we do not have technical support for this.  

---

