View Full Version : How detailed do we actually know all the 'steps' from primates to humans?

09-26-2018, 03:07 PM
Quick summary: I've been searching for as detailed an account as possible about all known evolutionary steps from primates to humans, but since this isn't my field of expertise, I don't really know any proper terms I can throw at Google until it submits to my will. If I just include general terms such as 'detailed' or 'step-by-step', I still only get sources along the lines of that famous standard picture with the 6-step program from ape to human.

Hi everyone,

Like it says above, I'm looking for a detailed overview of human evolution, but I can't even properly find how detailed it even *can* get. It's for a short computer animated film I'm working on. One sequence includes human evolution (in reverse). So I create one 3d model, and while the film progresses, it slowly morphs into a 3d model of the previous step in evolution. The point is do this very slowly. People always get to see examples of evolution in big jumps, whereas the idea here is to show it very slowly and gradually, spread out over maybe 2 minutes, which I think gives a much clearer picture of the actual working of evolution. But as you might guess, the less steps I can use, the more difficult it becomes to properly animate the transitions.

I have found out that we can only trace direct lines back to primates about 65 million years ago, so I know the 'outer' limit of what I can show, but I can't really find out how many steps we know of in-between. Do we know dozens, hundreds? I'm hoping someone here might point me toward some good sources, or maybe knows some specialized lingo I can use as search terms. Thanks in advance!

09-29-2018, 03:33 PM
Try to start with https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/overview-of-hominin-evolution-89010983 and


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution Too

Your search terms will be hindering you because the most recent understanding is that there were many interactions between several type of early humans not at all the steady steps to progress to us that you are assuming

10-04-2018, 05:33 AM
What I find most fascinating and underrepresented are the pre-australopithecines that were the first ones to branch off from the ancestors of the chimpanzee line. Would graecopithecus be considered a pre-australopithecine ie. ancestral to the likes of "Lucy"? I know most people on the Internet I talk to seem to think graecopithecus is a direct ancestor of White People. Some serious theorising in this matter would be interesting instead of the identity politics charade it came out to be.

10-04-2018, 02:13 PM
Thanks a bunch, these sources already help me a lot. And yeah, seems like I'm going to have to use quite a bit of artistic liberty, but at least info like this will help the film more in the direction of sort-of-accurate instead of 'mostly science fiction'.