Skip to comments.
35,000 year old "modern human" remains Discovered!
Yahoo News ^
| Sat Mar 6,11:27 AM ET
| By ALISON MUTLER, Associated Press Writer
Posted on 03/10/2004 6:10:11 AM PST by vannrox
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-220 next last
Cool.
1
posted on
03/10/2004 6:10:11 AM PST
by
vannrox
To: vannrox
35,000 year old "modern human" remains Discovered!They found the man holding a remote?
To: vannrox
Experts analyzing remains of a man, woman and teenage boy unearthed in Romania last year are convinced that the 35,000 year-old fossils are the most complete ever of modern humans of that era They found a jaw, part of another skull, and one other bone?? A whole new meaning to the idea of "complete" for me.
3
posted on
03/10/2004 6:14:07 AM PST
by
kjam22
To: vannrox
If they were unearthed last year, then they are now 35,001 year-old fossils.
4
posted on
03/10/2004 6:15:53 AM PST
by
Consort
To: vannrox
35,000 year old "modern human" remains Discovered!Time machine accident?
5
posted on
03/10/2004 6:16:09 AM PST
by
StriperSniper
(Manuel Miranda - Whistleblower)
To: vannrox
I thought they meant Helen Thomas....
6
posted on
03/10/2004 6:16:16 AM PST
by
atomicpossum
(Fun pics in my profile)
To: vannrox
That's my Uncle Thag. Put him back in the ground or I'll sue.
CG
7
posted on
03/10/2004 6:19:42 AM PST
by
Conspiracy Guy
(Of course I'm armed. Isn't everyone?)
To: atomicpossum
Mere hanging jewelry around the neck of a featherless biped doth not a human make. What is your source for the species ID of the specimen in the picture you posted? Was a DNA test performed?
Inquiring minds want to know.
8
posted on
03/10/2004 6:21:50 AM PST
by
GladesGuru
(In a society predicated upon liberty, it is essential to examine principles - -)
To: GladesGuru
Mere hanging jewelry around the neck of a featherless biped doth not a human make. What is your source for the species ID of the specimen in the picture you posted? Was a DNA test performed? Inquiring minds want to know.
Sorry, it was just an assumption. I guess that could be a particularly ugly monkey.
9
posted on
03/10/2004 6:23:02 AM PST
by
atomicpossum
(Fun pics in my profile)
To: vannrox
The current working hypothesis is that this is a relative of Dick Clark.
10
posted on
03/10/2004 6:24:23 AM PST
by
searchandrecovery
(This tagline intentionally left blank.)
To: atomicpossum
Helen Thomas is not homo sapiens. She's a Neanderthal.
11
posted on
03/10/2004 6:25:24 AM PST
by
TheGeezer
(If only I had skin as thick as Ann Coulter, and but half her intelligence...)
To: atomicpossum
Please DO NOT do that while I'm eating breakfast...LOL
12
posted on
03/10/2004 6:34:25 AM PST
by
IAmNotAnAnimal
(1/509th Echo....Rangers lead the way)
To: kjam22
A whole new meaning to the idea of "complete" for me. Also note that based on these fragments, they "know" that these people had a religion, a well-defined social structure, and (perhaps) a real love of hopscotch.
13
posted on
03/10/2004 6:45:45 AM PST
by
ClearCase_guy
(You can see it coming like a train on a track.)
To: vannrox
the humans would have had religious beliefsUnless they also found some fossilized "beliefs" this is pure speculation.
How long ago did humans develop the abstract thinking ability which led
to supernatural beliefs, then to one of it's subsets "religion?"
14
posted on
03/10/2004 6:48:16 AM PST
by
ASA Vet
("Anyone who signed up after 11/28/97 is a newbie")
To: *balkans
>>>>>Trinkaus said the humans would have had religious beliefs, used stone tools, and a well-defined social system and lived in a period in during which early modern humans overlapped with late surviving Neanderthals in Europe, Trinkaus said.<<<<<<
In other words, 35000 years ago, Homo Sapiens lived in the Balkans while Neanderthals ruled the rest of Europe.
This may be one of the explanations why the history of the Balkans is so distorted and why the word itself has derogatory overtone in the rest of Europe.
15
posted on
03/10/2004 6:49:17 AM PST
by
DTA
(you ain't seen nothing yet)
To: vannrox
My question is, how is this date arrived? Radio Carbon dating, near other fossils, or what?
Radio Carbon dating is notoriously inaccurate, so most scientists use nearby fossils. The fossils dates are changed to fit evolutionary thinking. So the dates of this find will vary widely over time.
I would be interested in the skull shape if these were found in rock as they would be from pre-flood time. It would be very interesting to know their age upon death by growth rings. But I doubt they will be interested in that.
16
posted on
03/10/2004 6:50:46 AM PST
by
sr4402
To: TheGeezer
***Helen Thomas is not homo sapiens. She's a Neanderthal.***
Trogdolite!
To: sr4402
Radio Carbon dating is notoriously inaccurate, so most scientists use nearby fossils. I don't know where you get this from. I've always thought that carbon dating, calibrated in recent years using dendrochronology, is the standard for dating organic remains less than 40,000 to 50,000 YBP. Other index fossils are important, but how do you suppose those were dated to begin with? Carbon, of course.
To: PBRSTREETGANG
Nah, a welfare check.
To: vannrox
Jimmy Hoffa, his mistress and bastard child???
20
posted on
03/10/2004 7:21:13 AM PST
by
CommandoFrank
(If GW is the terrorist's worst nightmare, Kerry is their wet dream...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-220 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson