Oldest member of human family found

Nature ^ | 07/11/2002 | John Whitfield

[jennyp]

So, now you've got your own board, eh? ;)

Whatever would make you say that?

[Raymond Hendrix]

The Blind Atheist

[green team 1999]

[Djarum]

If Australopithecus looks more ape-like than a much older fossil, how can it belong to the human family? "Anything with a more primitive face has to have its membership reviewed," says Wood.

[Burkeman1]

Not really up on all the "science" but could someone show me what was right before modern Humans and in between Homo Eructus (or whatever the species before Humans were) or did the mutation or change or whatever just happen? I happen to think evolution either happens much quicker and in giant leaps or it doesn't happen at all and something else must explain it (and no- that doesn't mean a God in ths Sky or green men from outer space.)

[Raymond Hendrix]

[liberallarry]

When I was in college - a long time ago - I was amazed at the conclusions that were drawn from very small pieces of evidence; in astronomy.

But look what we've accomplished! First-rate science takes great imagination and great courage. Scientists shouldn't be denigrated because an ignorant public demands certainty when there is none.

[Burkeman1]

I don't think the two disciplines are comparable. Anthropology and Paleotolongy are far more speculative. I think- though am no expert. I just take umbrage at the fact that every three years the "theory" changes in regards to Human ancestry. I am only 32 and I can tell you that the evolution I learned is utterly useless in regards to what has been seen today. I don't think they have a clue. Astronomy deals with hard math and some speculation. It seems to me that it is the other way around with the fossil hunters- they find a bone and it is all speculation. By they way- last I heard the Bing Bang theory is not exactly Gosspil any longer either.

The point I am trying to make is that evolutionist theory is still trying to fight creationists and in doing so may be holding on to some very false premises. The Earth ain't 8000 years old. But I also think evolution theory as it is now can't be supported even by the weight of it's own evidence. The theories get more convoluted every day. But then again- I am just an amateur science page reader.

[jennyp]

I've always had problems telling H. erectus apart from H. sapiens archaic. Except for the brain size - 850cc for erectus vs. 1250cc for sapiens...

The point is, the transitions at this point look very gradual to me, as along a continuum.

[Bob J]

TONIGHT (6pm pdt/9pm edt) on UNSPUN!

ANN COULTER and JESSE LEE PETERSON!

Click HERE and Listen LIVE while you FREEP!

ALSO! RadioFR's new CHAT SERVER IS UP! Come on in and CHAT!

[JZoback]

Yup, it's all real clear now that this fossil was found

Yup, until the next pseudo-man is dug up

< / sarcasm >

[liberallarry]

You're right. Astronomy is considered to be the least speculative of the sciences.
And you're right again. There are highly speculative theories in astronomy.
And right a third time. Evolutionary theory is currently a mess. So was astronomy in the time of Kepler and Galileo.

I was trying to say this is really hard stuff. A scientist looks at the new skull and tries to fit it into his existing theories. If he can't he's got to come up with new ones. The only alternative is to throw out the evidence and keep the theories. That's a real loser .

[Burkeman1]

It seems to me though that we built upon the findings of Kepler and Galileo- that there were genuine discoveries in the work of early astromeners even is other of their findings didn't hold up. Evolution is not like that as a theory- it is in utter tatters. And Modern Genetics did much to destroy it.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

Chimps, for example, have no fossil record.

huh, odd

[Paulus Invictus]

The skull simply cannot be that old! It looks just like my step aunt Minnie who disappeared on a drunken safari in Africa 20 years ago. We often wondered where she went with that "white hunter."

[bzrd]

I think part of the problem lies in the fact that the science of origins [beit cosmology or "evolution"] can only be part science, at best. That is, the scientific method relies on observation, and there is no way to observe the past, without speculating to some degree [or to a high degree as in the above article].

Personally, I think evolutionists have gotten away with unwarranted speculation for far too long. The fossil record either shows a continuous development of life from the presently extant organisms to the extinct ones of the past, or it doesn't.

If it doesn't they should just deal with it.

Simply explaining away the absence of fossil evidence in the form of transitionals or conjuring up stories to fill in the gaps is not science.

Brian.

[liberallarry]

If you're right then evolution will go the way of Freudian psychoanalysis, phlogiston, epicycles, alchemy, astrology, phrenology, and lots of other theories that didn't make it.

But if evolution is thrown out because it can't explain new evidence I very much doubt we'll return to theories that couldn't even explain the old evidence. A good theory will have to explain all the current evidence and stand up, at least for awhile, to new discoveries.

[cschroe]

Oldest member of human family found

Funny, that doesn't look like Strom.

[Physicist]

Those skulls look pretty different, IMHO. The brows are pretty different, the zygomatic arches are different, and H. erectus has a pronounced occipital bun.

Throw in a Neanderthal skull and you'll really show how tough it is to cram these fossils into a linear chain. I suspect that hundred years from now the bush of hominid evolution will appear much more overgrown than we'd ever believe now.

[bzrd]

You can throw out "evolution" today and science would be none the worse for it.

If you doubt this, consider the fact that all of the useful and practical knowledge derived from the theory [anti-microbial resistance, pesticide resistance etc] can be summarized as micro-evolution.

Micro evolution can be [and is] assimilated by either creationism or ID, so if all of the science establishment were to suddenly become born again Christians and begin to promote a young-earth world view, the sky would not fall, as medicine, biology, genetics etc., would proceed on as nothing ever happened.

Brian.