[Edited for clarity]
Prehistoric skull found in dump may (opinion) be missing common ancestor of apes & humans
The Guardian ^ | Monday November 7, 2005 | Dale Fuchs in Madrid
Palaeontologists excavating a dump outside Barcelona have found a skull dating back 14m years that could (opinion) belong to a common ancestor(opinion) of apes and humans.
The nearly intact skull, which has a flat face, jaw and teeth, may (opinion) belong to a previously unknown species of great ape, said Salvador Moya, the chief palaeontologist on the dig. "We could (opinion) find a cradle of humanity in the Mediterranean," he said.
A routine land survey for a planned expansion of the Can Mata dump in Els Hostalets de Pierola turned up the first surprise in 2002: a primate's tooth.
Since then, scientists from the Miquel Crusafont Institute of Palaeontology in Sabadell have unearthed nearly 12,000 fossils of primates and other animals that lived during the Middle Miocene era - between 14m and 8m years ago - when the area was covered by tropical rainforest and populated by the precursors of today's elephants, antelopes and monkeys.
Last year, the team found a 13m-year-old partial skeleton, also believed (opinion) to be a common ancestor of apes and humans - a male fruit-eater, nicknamed Pau.
"If there is a place in the world where it is possible (opinion) to find an entire skeleton of a common ancestor (opinion) to the great apes and humans, it is Hostalets de Pierola," Mr Moya told El País newspaper. "In few places [will] you uncover (opinion) so many connected vertebrae in such good condition."
The Can Mata dump sits above clay soil in which animal remains became trapped and well-preserved.
You should act as editor for other science articles, too, so you can remind us all that current explanations behind gravity are also only "opinion".
Are you aware that experts (for example, scientists) are allowed to give opinions in court testimony, but that laymen are not?
Can you think of any reason that this might be the case?
Well, you state the obvious very well in your edit. But, the qualifying words were already in there. Nobody's claiming that these fossils ARE a common ancestor. The claim is that they MAY BE.
We can all read just fine. Qualifying words are used when they are needed, especially by scientists. And there they are in the article, for everyone to see.
You seem to be surprised that such words are used, and seem to feel the need to point them out to us. Why is that? Do you suppose we cannot read?