This book is divided into 5 sections: (1) What the reader needs to know about fossil humans, evolution, neoteny, genetic distance, and evolutionary psychology. (2) The traits of races of living people, their hard and soft tissue, behavior, intelligence, and accomplishments, (3) The Out-of-Africa theory of modern human origins, including fossil support, mtDNA and nuclear DNA support, and the alleged replacement of Eurasians by Africans about 65,000 years ago, (4) The Out-of-Eurasia theory of human origins, including evolution up to a bipedal ape, why man's intelligence increased until recently, Neanderthals, and the origins of Eurasians, Africans, and Asian aborigines, and (5) Policies based on the previous sections, i.e., the classification of races, miscegenation, hybrids, segregation, eugenics, the left, egalitarianism, individualism, morality, and the present situation.
--This text refers to the
Kindle Edition
edition.
Erectus Walks Amongst Us: The Evolution of Modern Humans
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
 |
| |||||||||||||||
Save up to 70% when you rent your textbooks on Amazon. Keep your textbook rentals for a semester and rental return shipping is free. |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
38 of 48 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
This debate is a very old one. I first came across it nearly a half century ago when I read Carlton Coon's first book on race. Coon pointed out that his theory was actually closely derived from that of Hans Weidenreich. Weidenreeich was before my time - about 1935.
The Widenreich theory is that the races predate the species. That is to say there were differences between East Asians and Europeans before the species Homo sapiens sapiens emerged. Widenreich and Coon believed that a Neanderthal had features that modern Europeans have - thin faces, protruding noses, etc. And that early East Asians had features that modern asians have - flat faces and shoveled teeth. Both people crossed the boundary to become modern people and kept those distinguishing characteristics.
More recently this view has been championed by Wolpoff. But about twenty years ago the multiple thread theory has been eclipsed by the Out of Africa theory. This theory traces all modern humans to a woman called Mitochrondrial Eve who lived in Africa about 150,000 to 200,000 years ago.
This theory has always had plausibility problems. One of the biggest problems is the shovelled teeth issue of asians. Out of Africa claims that about 100,000 years ago (or so) the modern africans eliminated all previous peoples in Asia and Europe. In asia the older peoples (Homo erectus) had long had shovelled teeth. OoA theory claimed that everyone of those older asians was eliminated and replaced by a modern african who then evolved shovelled teeth. Wolpoff has long argued that this and the similar issue of the european Neanderthals is too implausible to be taken seriously.
The Out of Africa hypothesis was put forth in 1987. It was the major second "genetic clock" theory to capture the public's imagination. The first had been Sarich's theory that claimed that chimps and people diverged only about half as long ago as had been previously thought. That seems to have been true so when the theory of "Mitochrondrial Eve" was presented scientists and the public were predisposed to listen.
It now seems clear that the theory of Eve in Africa was wrong. It has been shown that the computer algorithm was faulty and its original creators have disclaimed it.
Fuerle steps forward and presents an alternative theory now that the Out of Africa theory no longer can be seriously maintained by scientists or the informed public. Is he right? Who knows?
The Florensis (Hobbit) skull was found only a few years ago. No one predicted such a discovery. Ten years ago we had Kennewick Man(the one who looks like Patrick Stewart). New excavations will undoubtedly turn up more surprises.
This book is the first book I have ever read which routinely cites Wikipedia and YouTube. Is this going to be a trend? It may tend to discredit his scholarship. His gratuitous (and often funny) criticisms of black people also tend to bring his serious thinking in to disrepute. For example in a discussion of prognathism he cites Mike Tyson biting a piece out of Evander Holyfield's ear. LOL.
Fuerle is a bit of a crank. The version of Out of Africa that he attacks is is also an extreme crank theory. Responsible scientists like Cavalli-Sforza don't actually believe that all modern attributes evolved in Africa. Fuerle attacks essentially a straw man.
Main stream anthropology currently believes that there was a migration out of Africa about one or two million years ago. This first migration is not controversial. The Out of Africa theory does not refer to this migration of Home Erectus but to a more recent second migration of Homo Sapiens that took place about 100,000 years ago. That there was some sort of migration of Africans or at least African genes is also not controversial because modern humans have gracile (tropical) bodies. Neanderthals had much more robust bodies. Almost everyone attributes the long legs and light skeletons that we have today to an infusion of genes from tropical Africa around 50,000 to 150,000 years ago.
However most main stream aanthropologists recognize that the tropical body of 100,000 years ago did not bring about a modern mind. Cavalli-Sforza refers to an another event of about 50,000 years ago in the Middle East when the true modern mind emerged. Cultural artifacts suddenly arose that were clearly different from any created before in either Europe or Africa. This is the mainstream viewpoint. Fuerle misrepresents current thinking. He creates a strawman that he can demolish.
Fuerle cites many studies and presents many theories. Most of the time he is correct but at least some of the time he is flat out wrong. His discussion of Toba and ice ages is very wrong. Even Al Gore has a better grip on paleoclimate than Fuerle.
Finally Fuerle is an anti-semite. To me this is evidence of a man who is consumed by political agendas not a man who is objective. He finishes his book with a number of virtually unreadable political chapters. Far from being sensible and well reasoned ideas that proceed logically from the material in the early chapters he virtually froths at the mouth.
The Widenreich theory is that the races predate the species. That is to say there were differences between East Asians and Europeans before the species Homo sapiens sapiens emerged. Widenreich and Coon believed that a Neanderthal had features that modern Europeans have - thin faces, protruding noses, etc. And that early East Asians had features that modern asians have - flat faces and shoveled teeth. Both people crossed the boundary to become modern people and kept those distinguishing characteristics.
More recently this view has been championed by Wolpoff. But about twenty years ago the multiple thread theory has been eclipsed by the Out of Africa theory. This theory traces all modern humans to a woman called Mitochrondrial Eve who lived in Africa about 150,000 to 200,000 years ago.
This theory has always had plausibility problems. One of the biggest problems is the shovelled teeth issue of asians. Out of Africa claims that about 100,000 years ago (or so) the modern africans eliminated all previous peoples in Asia and Europe. In asia the older peoples (Homo erectus) had long had shovelled teeth. OoA theory claimed that everyone of those older asians was eliminated and replaced by a modern african who then evolved shovelled teeth. Wolpoff has long argued that this and the similar issue of the european Neanderthals is too implausible to be taken seriously.
The Out of Africa hypothesis was put forth in 1987. It was the major second "genetic clock" theory to capture the public's imagination. The first had been Sarich's theory that claimed that chimps and people diverged only about half as long ago as had been previously thought. That seems to have been true so when the theory of "Mitochrondrial Eve" was presented scientists and the public were predisposed to listen.
It now seems clear that the theory of Eve in Africa was wrong. It has been shown that the computer algorithm was faulty and its original creators have disclaimed it.
Fuerle steps forward and presents an alternative theory now that the Out of Africa theory no longer can be seriously maintained by scientists or the informed public. Is he right? Who knows?
The Florensis (Hobbit) skull was found only a few years ago. No one predicted such a discovery. Ten years ago we had Kennewick Man(the one who looks like Patrick Stewart). New excavations will undoubtedly turn up more surprises.
This book is the first book I have ever read which routinely cites Wikipedia and YouTube. Is this going to be a trend? It may tend to discredit his scholarship. His gratuitous (and often funny) criticisms of black people also tend to bring his serious thinking in to disrepute. For example in a discussion of prognathism he cites Mike Tyson biting a piece out of Evander Holyfield's ear. LOL.
Fuerle is a bit of a crank. The version of Out of Africa that he attacks is is also an extreme crank theory. Responsible scientists like Cavalli-Sforza don't actually believe that all modern attributes evolved in Africa. Fuerle attacks essentially a straw man.
Main stream anthropology currently believes that there was a migration out of Africa about one or two million years ago. This first migration is not controversial. The Out of Africa theory does not refer to this migration of Home Erectus but to a more recent second migration of Homo Sapiens that took place about 100,000 years ago. That there was some sort of migration of Africans or at least African genes is also not controversial because modern humans have gracile (tropical) bodies. Neanderthals had much more robust bodies. Almost everyone attributes the long legs and light skeletons that we have today to an infusion of genes from tropical Africa around 50,000 to 150,000 years ago.
However most main stream aanthropologists recognize that the tropical body of 100,000 years ago did not bring about a modern mind. Cavalli-Sforza refers to an another event of about 50,000 years ago in the Middle East when the true modern mind emerged. Cultural artifacts suddenly arose that were clearly different from any created before in either Europe or Africa. This is the mainstream viewpoint. Fuerle misrepresents current thinking. He creates a strawman that he can demolish.
Fuerle cites many studies and presents many theories. Most of the time he is correct but at least some of the time he is flat out wrong. His discussion of Toba and ice ages is very wrong. Even Al Gore has a better grip on paleoclimate than Fuerle.
Finally Fuerle is an anti-semite. To me this is evidence of a man who is consumed by political agendas not a man who is objective. He finishes his book with a number of virtually unreadable political chapters. Far from being sensible and well reasoned ideas that proceed logically from the material in the early chapters he virtually froths at the mouth.
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful
By Ethan
Format:Paperback
First off, let state that i am mostly African-American, with some Amerindian & white admixture. I am also a grad from UF in Florida, and have always found fault in modern "science" for the explaination of what happened to the ancient archaic peoples & where did the races come from, but thankfully this book answers those questions. It adresses almost everything "modern science" shows as evidence for their model of evolution (all the modern genetics claims, archaeological & other claims), and the writer gives a very nice model of evolution, though it is not the alternative "multi-regional theory", but a more compelling one.
Though it has some very "right wing" leanings to it, i did not find it to be overtly "racist" (as some claim... though it does get pretty close lol!), and i am proud to count Erectus, Neanderthal, etc. among my many "archaic ancestors".
In simple English folks, if your interested in the various types of men in our history, buy this book!
Though it has some very "right wing" leanings to it, i did not find it to be overtly "racist" (as some claim... though it does get pretty close lol!), and i am proud to count Erectus, Neanderthal, etc. among my many "archaic ancestors".
In simple English folks, if your interested in the various types of men in our history, buy this book!
29 of 42 people found the following review helpful
By lj009
Format:Paperback
If you have ever had doubts about "Out of Africa", this is the book for you.
I read this book from cover-to-cover over a period of three weeks, and although it is quite dense in the early chapters, the reader will not regret sticking it out. An absolutely fascinating (if somewhat confusing at first) narrative of human origins and the origins of the races is proposed, and it rings true. Everything in the book is backed up by recent published findings and is unfettered by the Political Correctness that stifles most of Academia.
A fascinating book, from which I deduct one star because of the writing style. Fuerle is technically-oriented and so his prose tends towards the textbook-ish more than necessary. Textbookish or not, this is the kind of book that gets you thinking about the fate of mankind on this planet, a quasi-spiritual experience for which I am grateful.
I should also note that the entire text is online for free at www.erectuswalksamongst.us ... The goal here is to simply present these theories to the world. Pure pursuit of truth.
I read this book from cover-to-cover over a period of three weeks, and although it is quite dense in the early chapters, the reader will not regret sticking it out. An absolutely fascinating (if somewhat confusing at first) narrative of human origins and the origins of the races is proposed, and it rings true. Everything in the book is backed up by recent published findings and is unfettered by the Political Correctness that stifles most of Academia.
A fascinating book, from which I deduct one star because of the writing style. Fuerle is technically-oriented and so his prose tends towards the textbook-ish more than necessary. Textbookish or not, this is the kind of book that gets you thinking about the fate of mankind on this planet, a quasi-spiritual experience for which I am grateful.
I should also note that the entire text is online for free at www.erectuswalksamongst.us ... The goal here is to simply present these theories to the world. Pure pursuit of truth.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
3.0 out of 5 stars
Erectus walks amongst us
Well researched but too racist (or politically incorrect) in broad sweeping statements comparing Africans with apes too often. Read more
Published 8 months ago by Elizabethcm1
1.0 out of 5 stars
Interesting but loaded with racist undertones
I typically research an author before purchasing a book; however, because the book was inexpensive and the human origins intrigue me I purchased the book without going through my... Read more
Published 13 months ago by Marco
5.0 out of 5 stars
Practical. Common sense.
The IQ charts say so very much regarding validity to racial differences today.
Simply put, the differences are so vast as to racial differences. Read more
Simply put, the differences are so vast as to racial differences. Read more
Published 15 months ago by music man
1.0 out of 5 stars
Misleading
Basically he cherry picks information to suggest that Africans are less evolved than other humans. He implies that they are not anatomically modern humans or are generally... Read more
Published 16 months ago by Death 2 Posers
1.0 out of 5 stars
Racist Rant
"Racist Rant" pretty much covers it. The title was intriguing but I should have read the reviews before I ordered it -- or asked for a "sample. Read more
Published 19 months ago by Barbara J. Beam
4.0 out of 5 stars
Some incorrect facts
I am slowly reading the entire book a chapter at a time so it is premature for me to write a full review, however he makes some very good and powerful points and its a welcome... Read more
Published 22 months ago by deltapolis
5.0 out of 5 stars
An absolute must
I have only just started reading this book but am very impressed with it. It is well presented, with many illustrations and photgraphs. Read more
Published 24 months ago by Boffin
5.0 out of 5 stars
Wonderful Book!
I had heard about this book and was going to buy the kindle version, but the "Old Anthropologist" review stopped me. Read more
Published on October 29, 2010 by P. Atwood
1.0 out of 5 stars
Know what you're in for!
Know what you're getting into!
IN this book Fuerle remarks, in passing, that "Where you end up depends on where you started. Read more
IN this book Fuerle remarks, in passing, that "Where you end up depends on where you started. Read more
Published on August 31, 2010 by Old anthropologist
1.0 out of 5 stars
Know what you're in for!
Know what you're getting into!
IN this book Fuerle remarks, in passing, that "Where you end up depends on where you started. Read more
IN this book Fuerle remarks, in passing, that "Where you end up depends on where you started. Read more
Published on August 31, 2010 by Old anthropologist
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Listmania!
|
|
