See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Fossil Reanalysis Pushes Back Origin of Homo sapiens
Source:
sciam
URL Source: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?ch ... DFE-C0B7-1213-80B783414B7F0000
Published: Feb 17, 2005
Author: unlisted
Post Date: 2005-02-17 05:49:36 by 2Trievers
Keywords: Reanalysis, sapiens, Fossil
Views: 2543
Comments: 185
A new analysis of human remains first discovered in 1967 suggests that they are in fact much older than previously believed. The results, published today in the journal Nature, push back the emergence of our species by nearly 35,000 years. Ian McDougall of the Australian National University in Canberra and his colleagues worked with two well-known fossil finds known as Omo I and Omo II, which were recovered from Ethiopia's Kibish Formation by Richard Leakey. The remains include two partial skulls as well as arm, leg, foot and pelvis bones for Omo I. "Anthropologists said they looked very different in their evolutionary status," remarks study co-author Frank Brown of the University of Utah. "Omo I appeared to be essentially modern Homo sapiens and Omo II appeared to be more primitive." At the time, the bones were dated to 130,000 years ago, based on radioactive decay of uranium and thorium from oyster shells found nearby. This time the scientists returned to the southern Ethiopian site and identified the resting places of both individuals. They also unearthed another part of a femur bone for Omo I that fits together with the original remains. The researchers then analyzed the volcanic ash layers above and below the river sediment that contained the fossils using argon dating. They determined that the rock just below the fossils dated to 196,000 years ago. Because the layers of the Kibish Formation formed quickly during wet seasons that inundated the area with organic matter, the team posits that the bones are only slightly younger than this underlying layer. In addition, a layer of ash more than 150 feet above the burial sites dates to 104,000 years old, putting a limit on their age. Using other evidence, which drained from the Nile and the Omo rivers onto the Mediterranean seafloor, the researchers attest that the Omo fossils are most likely no younger than 190,000 years old. Previously the oldest known traces of our species were fossils from Herto, Ethiopia, that date to about 160,000 years ago. The older age of the Omo remains is concordant with dates suggested by genetic studies for the origin of our species, says study co-author John Fleagle of Stony Brook University. He adds that "as modern human anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of the modern skeleton and 'modern' behavior."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 83.
#16. To: 2Trievers (#0)
Why can't creationists simply conclude that evolution in itself is a creation of God (but not for the purpose of deceiving the curious, that's just BS)? "Intelligent Design"? Well Natural Selection is certainly sane and common-sensical when you compare it to the repeated failed attemps of government policies and Social Darwinists. But look at it this way. If it's true that Mankind was "made in the image of God", one of the most creative impulses thruought history has been the invention of labor-saving devices. Natural Selection and Evolution are the ultimate labor-saving devices if you happen to be God. Put in a reliable power source (so no problems of "entropy" of a closed system), the Sun, and you're set to go. Whoever in the religious communty who thought it was necessary to devote their energies to such a non-issue is nothing but an asshole. So it doesn't quite jive with scriptural dogma. BFD, get over it. I can't hardly wait for these folks to start repudiating Copernicus.
If this thing is such a non-issue, what are the seculists so anxious to prove their theory of "Ma,look, our cousin, the apeman, has come to dinner?" Are these people also "assholes?"
The debate has no relevance to the teachings of Christianity. Belief in Creationism doesn't make one any better or worse a person or Christian than someone who doesn't. But it can reflect badly on pulpit preachers and the Pat Robertsons, who think that so many Sunday sermons need to focus on that (real spiritual of them there). It's a waste of your precious time on Earth to even bother with it. Pity if you feel it's that important.
Then, you feel that the creation viewpoint is not that important and it can be taught as well as the evolution theory?
Open up a school and teach whatever you want. However, don't be surprised if many employers decline to hire people taught at these schools. I might prefer that public schools not teach creationism, but at this point, the level of misinformation being spoon-fed to our kids in areas such as history and civics is so bad that in a few more years it won't really matter anymore one way or the other. Yes, let them both be taught together. It won't really matter so long as one side isn't actively trying to suppress the other. Disclaimers such as "Evolution is only a theory" is fine as long as Creationism is aknowleged as ALSO being just a theory. America is heading into the dark ages anyways. Go for the gusto.
Nope, not on my watch.... First off ANY scientific theory is "only" a theory, second of all, Creationism is NOT a theory, it is religion, a religious myth at that. There is NOTHING at all scientific about creationism, therefore, it cannot be considered a "theory". Yes, the schools are shot to hell, that is why I don't send my kids to them... This country is also shot to hell, another reason why I don't send my kids to public schools.
A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
Translation: Get rid of the smart people and indoctrinate the kids.
Still here trying to figure out the evolution of Sunday Man ... and NFL Man ... Remote Man ................
That pic is a pretty good beginning for NFL man. Man, that stuff is so boring.
You have a 4mail ...
#87. To: 2Trievers (#83)
I don't see mail.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#19. To: PnbC (#16)
Whoever in the religious communty who thought it was necessary to devote their energies to such a non-issue is nothing but an asshole.
#23. To: Don (#19)
#27. To: PnbC (#23)
Pity if you feel it's that important.
#44. To: Don (#27)
#46. To: PnbC (#44)
Disclaimers such as "Evolution is only a theory" is fine as long as Creationism is aknowleged as ALSO being just a theory.
#47. To: Aric2000 (#46)
~~ Max Planck
#50. To: 2Trievers (#47)
but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
#56. To: Don (#50)
#58. To: 2Trievers (#56)
#83. To: Don (#58)
Replies to Comment # 83.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 83.