Cut marks are seen on this early human bone recovered from southeastern Europe.
L. Crépin - S. Prat / MNHN - CNRS)
Posted on 07/10/2011 7:44:31 AM PDT by Renfield
* The earliest known modern humans from southeast Europe wore shell and mammoth jewelry. * The same early humans also likely practiced cannibalism. * The cannibalism was tied to funeral rituals, since the bones were not butchered like meat.
Early humans wore jewelry and likely practiced cannibalism, suggest remains of the earliest known Homo sapiens from southeastern Europe.
The remains, described in PLoS One, date to 32,000 years ago and represent the oldest direct evidence for anatomically modern humans in a well-documented context. The human remains are also the oldest known for our species in Europe to show post-mortem cut marks....
(Excerpt) Read more at news.discovery.com ...
Cut marks are seen on this early human bone recovered from southeastern Europe.
L. Crépin - S. Prat / MNHN - CNRS)
Paleocannibal ping.
Where did they move from? That might shine some light on their cultural practices.
Little scratch marks, bib, big conclusions.
Well today we kill millions of the most helpless of our species every year....guess we’ve regressed.
Or the person was in a fight which resulted in the cut marks.
Looks more like claw marks to me.
Two cannibals were eating a clown. One says to the other, “Does this taste funny to you?”
Could be.
Duh...We know cannibilism exists/existed all over the world at some point.
Always makes for a good story and interesting ploy for GRANT MONEY!!
Agree, could have been one of those you mess with my woman and i will hit you with a damn big rock.
Detroit.
I saw an old lady friend and remarked that she still wore bling.
My daughter straightened me out.
I just read the scientific article since I wanted to know how the researchers could conclude that the cut marks were from cannibalism.
The original article simply puts forth cannibalism as a possible explanation. The analysis does not go further than comparing that butchered animal bones were treated differently than human bones.
Just another example of poor science journalism. The journalist has taken a speculative statement from a scientific article and made it into more than what it really is. This does a great disservice to science.
As soon as I see or hear a word like “bling”, the credibility of the presenter is gone.
One cannibal takes the choice part of the kill from the other, leaving him with only scraps.
Realizing this, the second cannibal comes over and says- “I’ve got a bone to pick with you...”
Headline: July, 34012
Early humans harvested their unborn, cuts on unborn remains show
Mostly Like Early Humans Ate Their Unborn
Scientists find gruesome evidence from the 1900s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.