There is the Raelian theory that mankind was genetically engineered by space aliens.
Panspermia is the hypothesis that "seeds" of life exist already in the Universe, that life on Earth may have originated through these "seeds", and that they may deliver or have delivered life to other habitable bodies.
Wikipedia: Red Rain in Kerala
Another hypothesis was proposed in 2003 by Godfrey Louis and A. Santhosh Kumar, two scientists at Mahatma Gandhi University in Kottayam, Kerala. Having collected samples of the rainwater at many locations, Louis and Kumar claimed that the red particles did not look like dust but instead appeared to be biological cells. Chemical analyses indicate that they consist of organic material, and so they proposed that the particles may be microbes of extraterrestrial origin.
Enumerate and explain the two theories regarding the origin of man.?
• 1 year ago
June 05, 2007
4933 (Level 4)
• Add to My Contacts
• Block User
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
Origin of man... I assume that you are NOT reffering to the dispersal of Homo sapiens but are questioning what hypothesis there are regarding the evolutionary beginnings of hominids. In as such, there are truly NO theories to explain our orgin, just hypothesis, and there are more then two. One will not become a theory of origin until it stands the test of being empiricaly tested over time and standing up to criticism. None so far has achieved this enough to be given the status of theory.
The earliest hypothesis put forth to explain this was the savanna hypothesis, which became discredited when the archaeological record of hominids showed sites previous to the time of savannas being the primary landscape feature in Africa, namely sites that preceded 3 mya (million years ago). Archaeology at this point has even unearthed a few hominid sites that are proposing that early hominids were present even as far back as 6 mya, and if this is the case then the savanna is truly an impossible environment to have allowed our evolution. It was Raymond Dart who first proposed the savanna hypothesis and he did so because he had discovered a significan number of hominids that had lived in South Africa. The archaeological evidence for his site proposed a savanna environment. Being one of the first hominid sites to be found, he was free to conjecture whatever ideas he saw fit from his evidence and hence the birth of the savanna hypothesis. Over the last 25 years, as the savanna hypothesis has been increasingly discredited because of the discovery of sites that date back to earlier times that did not have a savanna environment.
With this fact, contemporary anthropology has more and more began to describing our evolutionionary environment as being that of a mixed hypothesis, which is a primarily arboreal environment with savanna patches between forests. As some Chimpanzee groups live in this "mixed" environment, whereas Bonobos live in a swampy/arboreal environment and display much more incidences of bipedalism, it is my humble opinion that the mixed hypothesis is also flawed in its reasoning, yet that is where anthropology stands on the subject. Other contending hypothesis for the origins of man are:
The ice age hypothesis, which states that Northern Hemisphere ice ages made the African environment drier suddenly, thus forcing the rapic evolution of our species.
The arboreal hypothesis, which states that our constant tree climbing allowed for the adoption of a more upright posture. There are a lot of arboreal monkeys/apes however which are by no means showing the same tendancy so I don't buy this one.
The hypothesis of neotony, which simply states that some undefined rapid...