Fossil Find Is Missing Link in Human Evolution, Scientists Say

National Geographic News ^ | April 13, 2006 | John Roach

[Senator Bedfellow]

When the famous skeleton of an early human ancestor known as Lucy was discovered in Africa in the 1970s, scientists asked: Where did she come from?

Now, fossils found in the same region are providing solid answers, researchers have announced.

Lucy is a 3.5-foot-tall (1.1-meter-tall) adult skeleton that belongs to an early human ancestor, or hominid, known as Australopithecus afarensis.

The species lived between 3 million and 3.6 million years ago and is widely considered an ancestor of modern humans.

The new fossils are from the most primitive species of Australopithecus, known as Australopithecus anamensis. The remains date to about 4.1 million years ago, according to Tim White, a biologist at the University of California, Berkeley.

White co-directed the team that discovered the new fossils in Ethiopia (map) in a region of the Afar desert known as the Middle Awash.

The team says the newly discovered fossils are a no-longer-missing link between early and later forms of Australopithecus and to a more primitive hominid known as Ardipithecus.

"What the new discovery does is very nicely fill this gap between the earliest of the Lucy species at 3.6 million years and the older [human ancestor] Ardipithecus ramidus, which is dated at 4.4 million years," White said.

The new fossil find consists mainly of jawbone fragments, upper and lower teeth, and a thigh bone.

The fossils are described in today's issue of the journal Nature.

Found Links

According to White, the discovery supports the hypothesis that Lucy was a direct descendent of Australopithecus anamensis.

[freedumb2003]

*Them pygmys*? I hope your posts are your version of a joke.

Must be. Everyone knows it is "them thar pigmys..."

[balrog666]

He shoulda just said he had this educated uncle (PhD², EngD, JD and LLD) that had utterly refuted evolution but was too busy to ever write it down ...

[thomaswest]

Quoting from 181: If one was to believe in evolution as well as God, God then would likely resemble a tadpole...If the bible says that God created modern man in one day, I'll buy that...

Why didn't you say "the Eagle"? The Eagle is our national symbol. You chose tadpole. I am curious--why do think tadpoles represent creationist values and you disparage the eagle?

[VadeRetro]

No I'm saying the so-called Lucy does(pygmy)...

An australopithecine and a modern pygmy? Now, I don't have a pygmy skull handy, but if it looks anything like an australopithecine--that is, if you're right--it should be--but isn't--closer to a chimpanzee than to human. Bipedalism came before most of the other changes. Lucy was fully bipedal but not very far along in the other stuff. She would have looked something like a very upright standing and naturaly bipedal chimp. The skull is very chimp-like. She was short, but would not have looked much like a pygmy in any other way. Thus, I have trouble believing there's much basis for your assertion.

Now, I don't like arguing from PC, playing the "race card." I've been on a thread where creos were asserting that Neanderthal morphology was too apelike to be human. I posted some pictures of some people somewhere (not pygmies) with small chins and distinct brow ridges. The creos hit the "abuse" button and my posts vanished.

Cool way of supressing evidence. I was only showing that Neanderthals are far closer to human than ape, not trying to argue that anyone around now is subhuman or whatever.

There's a known range of variation in H. sapiens morphology. The australopithecines are well outside of it. The pygmies are well within it and very far from Lucy.

[hosepipe]

[ *Lucy* wasn't a pygmy and didn't look anything like African pygmies. And you were likening Pygmies to baboons and gorillas. Is that right? ]

So then your are dyslexic.. pity.. I didn't say that both/either time(s).. What Lucy looked like is a story/mystery.. Even what Lucy was is a mystery.. really.. But it does make for a good story.. Humans just love a good story..

[manwiththehands]

Being the father of a gorgeous 20-something daughter myself I would make sure he put the handcuffs on before he walked in the door.

[hosepipe]

[ We'll check out the terrain and get back to you with the results. ]

Check..

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" So then your are dyslexic..."

No.

"What Lucy looked like is a story/mystery..."

Lucy had nothing to do with the post you made equating pygmies and orangs/gorillas.

So I say again, do you think that pygmies look like orangs/gorillas?

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Yes, but what is in His image?

John 24 says this

God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

I think what some of the Christians on these threads believe is that God could have done it anyway he wants to. If he wanted to create the world in the way YEC see it, he could have. If he wanted to create it the way Old Earth Creationist see it, he could have. And he could very well have done it through all, or some degree of evolution. God has at his power the very foundations for which nature works. He created this. It is possible that through creating this very foundation through which the Earth's resources, forces of nature, and the cosmos are all subject, he also created life. I'll be honest. I'm not 100 percent convinced he did it through evolution. But, it is a possibility. Think of the entire universe, how immense and awe inspiring it is! God is limitless, utterly limitless! If it did take several billion years to get to what it is now, what is that to God? It doesn't apply to him.

I have no doubt that the Bible is inspired. If the writer was trying to interpret God's creation, as awe inspiring as it is, could it even be put into words? How would one explain it to the people of the time? Even today, with all of our understanding of science, could we really begin to describe, with much accuracy, God's creation? Think about it, the size of it, the harmony of it, it's fluidity, and how it cycles, the way in which it renews itself, refines itself, and so forth. The scope of ALL of it is so undeniably amazing! It is a work of art in which we see just a little fleck of paint.

As wondrous as creation is though, it's not what salvation is not based on.

[hosepipe]

[ Everyone knows it is "them thar pigmys..." ]

The joke/gaff was on Lucys "size"... Pygmys are about that size.. Wonder how far pygmys ranged in Africa in the past.. could be they were much greater in number at "some" time..

[freedumb2003]

I think you know by now that the construction of Lucy was not the same as modern pigmies.

[hosepipe]

Actually I was commenting tongue in cheek.. but from the "Evo" response I'll give it some more thought.. Linkage between "Lucy"(size) and "pygmys"(size) could have leggs.. Not a lot of thought but some..

[dread78645]

My average and mean age is 65.

I was pretty mean at 25, but that was the liquor talking.
I've chilled and now I'm 47 (on average).

[VadeRetro]

Maybe you just got a lot of response because your idea is worthless, easily rebutted, contemptible, etc.

[Coyoteman]

Linkage between "Lucy"(size) and "pygmys"(size) could have leggs.. Not a lot of thought but some..

You would be better served by considering skeletal morphology. There are several extant human groups which are of that stature, but none have the morphology of Lucy.

There really are folks who can look at a skeleton, or even a few bones, and tell a great deal.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

lol You know when I wrote that question. I was thinking, "this doesn't sound right! Can someone be the Father of Math?" I just couldn't think of a better way to word it, but truthfully, I didn't try that hard either.

[hosepipe]

[ Lucy had nothing to do with the post you made equating pygmies and orangs/gorillas. ]

Put DOWN that guitar.. d;-)~',', and pay attention..
I said nothing ABOUT the primates you quoted, NOTHING..
I didn't imply a linkage either.. It was a reference to Lucys SIZE.. Lucys size and pygmys size..

[stands2reason]

He never said God was a myth.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" I said nothing ABOUT the primates you quoted, NOTHING.."

Sure you did. you said:

[ I don't think so. It's a hominid, not a baboon/gorilla ]

"Like a pygmy.. (Hosepipe)"

You equated a pygmy with a baboon/gorilla.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

I just wanted to ask you to take a look at post #229 since you were addressing this issue earlier.