Skip to comments.
Fossil Find Is Missing Link in Human Evolution, Scientists Say
National Geographic News ^
| April 13, 2006
| John Roach
Posted on 04/13/2006 12:18:35 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalgeographic.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ardipithecusramidus; crevo; crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 681-684 next last
To: Conservative Texan Mom
Yes...And that would not be inconsistant with the Genesis account...And would also solve a lot of evolution/creation problems...
301
posted on
04/13/2006 8:52:42 PM PDT
by
Iscool
(You mess with me, you mess with the whole trailer park...)
To: Iscool
Gotta go...Good thread...Nitey nite ladies and gents...
302
posted on
04/13/2006 8:55:45 PM PDT
by
Iscool
(You mess with me, you mess with the whole trailer park...)
To: baltoga
Yes, it could have been go out and collect the money and further the cause.
303
posted on
04/13/2006 8:56:59 PM PDT
by
jec41
(Screaming Eagle)
To: Iscool
An image is not always something you can see. It has abstract meaning as well.
im·age
n.
A reproduction of the form of a person or object, especially a sculptured likeness.
Physics. An optically formed duplicate, counterpart, or other representative reproduction of an object, especially an optical reproduction formed by a lens or mirror.
One that closely or exactly resembles another; a double: He is the image of his uncle.
The opinion or concept of something that is held by the public.
The character projected to the public, as by a person or institution, especially as interpreted by the mass media.
A personification of something specified: That child is the image of good health.
A mental picture of something not real or present.
A vivid description or representation.
A figure of speech, especially a metaphor or simile.
A concrete representation, as in art, literature, or music, that is expressive or evocative of something else: night as an image of death.
Mathematics. A set of values of a function corresponding to a particular subset of a domain.
Computer Science. An exact replica of the contents of a storage device, such as a hard disk, stored on a second storage device, such as a network server.
Obsolete. An apparition.
Same with likeness,
likeness
n 1: similarity in appearance or character or nature between persons or things; "man created God in his own likeness" [syn: alikeness, similitude] [ant: unlikeness] 2: picture consisting of a graphic image of a person or thing [syn: semblance]
The Bible does use a great deal of imagery. Think of Paul as he described putting on the armor of God.
And this wonderful depiction of God in Revelations
Rev 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
Rev 1:15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
Rev 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
His Eyes as a flame of fire, His Voice like the sound of many waters, out of His Mouth went a sharp two-edged sword. These images depict great Authority.
Please understand that I do not wish to change your mind. I know that your Faith is of th utmost importance to you. I just hope that you can realize that there are many of us of Love the Lord, but do view some things a little differently.
I think it is a blessing that the accuracy of our view of creation is not a salvation issue.
304
posted on
04/13/2006 9:00:02 PM PDT
by
Conservative Texan Mom
(Some people say I'm stubborn, when it's usually just that I'm right.)
To: Sofa King; jennyp; js1138; Alter Kaker
This is second time I've heard about this "DNA's missing link" stuff. Is this the birth of a new talking point? I asked this Darwinist to explain how Evolution could be possible in the face of "DNA's missing link", and he couldn't answer me. Praze Be!
305
posted on
04/13/2006 9:04:17 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(A pessimist is what an optimist calls a realist)
To: baltoga
To: Alter Kaker; Iscool; CarolinaGuitarman; andysandmikesmom; Conservative Texan Mom
Quoting from 255:
Look, I respect your right to believe that Jesus is the son of God. I don't, following the tenets of my faith, and I don't think theological differences over the divinity of Jesus really should have much to do with the validity of modern science. Reply: I am curious about the view that pixies make airplanes fly. Another view is that Jesus is responsible for making airplanes not falling out of the air--or causing airplane crashes. We have the elites at Boeing and Lockheed Martin--and they have their $$-interests (and families with spouses and kids) and reputation interests--but there is a faith-based view. The notion that there are man's laws in aerodynamics about heavier-than-air-craft in conflict with the Bible seems an arrogance against God. I mean, rockets go up as far as Saturn, and they never encounter heaven.
Pixies have been around for far longer than radiometric dating.
Pixies predated biblical era writers--some freepers can help me with dating. They existed long before god notions. Pixies had the decency of never condemning anyone to hell nor promising anyone to a heaven--pixies are very honest. And they keep airplanes aloft.
I mean, pixie-bashing on these threads is really upsetting. There is faith-belief that pixies do good things and make good things happen in morality.
Please do not mix up this with cult belief in psychics, astrologers, preachers, imams, dowsers, spoon-benders, or other faeries or holy scripts. It is only pixies.
307
posted on
04/13/2006 9:08:04 PM PDT
by
thomaswest
(Just curious)
To: thomaswest; CarolinaGuitarman
No, the difference is the physical evidence also includes man made objects, and too there are witness accounts, human dramas, works of man, and writings etc that there was a Rome, the Civil War etc along with the ruins and debris that are left behind.
For some reason 'your side' thinks it clever to ignore that part of the equation in the arguments as to these examples.
Then on the other end 'your side' will take some eyewitness accounts ancient / recent writings etc., as gospel, and then reject all others.
Now look, I have been reading threads a long time, so these posts are not necessarily just to you okay so its not personal here. (On that note, CG not everything is about you my feisty cantankerous friend)
So from that I will say this. It does not take 'a creo' to see all the convolutions contradictions distortions et al that 'you guys' must perform in an attempt to keep 'the platters of toe spinning'
Wolf
308
posted on
04/13/2006 9:20:46 PM PDT
by
RunningWolf
(Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
To: VadeRetro
You got off easy. I got called a RACIST for saying that black Americans vote Democrat.
309
posted on
04/13/2006 9:21:18 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(A pessimist is what an optimist calls a realist)
To: JNL
I would agree that 60yrs of age, is not that 'old' anymore...I guess,for some reason, I just dont like the sound of 60....it really did not mean much to me, when I turned 30, or 40, or 50...but somehow, turning 60 seemed to mark some event in my life...I had recently retired, my husband had recently retired, and a whole other phase of our life seemed to be arriving...we had raised our children, had worked all our lives, and now it is 'our' time...we do have many plans for many different things to enjoy...
Our biggest plan is to close up the house, jump into the RV, and beer taste our way across America, meeting new folks, eating new foods, seeing new things, just enjoying life...returning to our regular house at intervals...just long enough to re-engage with our family...then we will take off again...that is a life we intend to enjoy...
To: freedumb2003
It's Divine design vs. the THEORY of evolution. You're obviously an atheist.
Frankly, the Bible's version of creation makes more sense to me.
311
posted on
04/13/2006 9:30:16 PM PDT
by
Fruit of the Spirit
("Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images...)
To: Iscool
(Many people in that day apparently thought these things were real)
Yes they did. The Greeks had a number of mythological gods, goddesses, and divine occurrences that explained everything from creation, seasons, afterlife, spiders, personality traits and even things like an echo. Many of these beliefs were adopted by the Romans during the rise of the Roman empire. The Romans had a habit of taking on aspects of those they conquered. They would then customize it and integrate it into the Roman way of life. The gods the Greeks knew as Zues, Herra, Aphrodite, and Poseidon, became Jupiter, Juno, Venus and Neptune. Diana was a Roman adaptation of Artemis. At some point the Romans had around thirty thousand different gods and spirits they prayed to. I believe one was even for doorsteps? It took awhile, but the Roman empire eventually adopted Christianity as the state religion. Most things I've read say that Constantine did this. But, I've also read that while Constantine, who claimed to be a Christian, was the first to do that as an emperor, Theodosius was the one that made it Rome's official religion. Anyhow, the Roman empire, and the spread of Christianity are intertwined.
312
posted on
04/13/2006 9:33:45 PM PDT
by
Conservative Texan Mom
(Some people say I'm stubborn, when it's usually just that I'm right.)
To: Fruit of the Spirit
It's Divine design vs. the THEORY of evolution. Belief Vs. Theory. You do know what a theory is, right? Please tell me how, scientifically and objectively, the Christian Bible is superior to the FSM Bible. Just because you believe it doesn't provide any inherently superior status.
You're obviously an atheist.
No I am not. But I understand that theology belongs in religion and philosophy and not in science.
313
posted on
04/13/2006 9:36:40 PM PDT
by
freedumb2003
(Don't call them "Illegal Aliens." Call them what they are: CRIMINAL INVADERS!)
To: Conservative Texan Mom
I like your post #229....it shows Gods power, His inability to have limits put on Him, His immense creativity, His full force...I think you have captured, quite well, how I feel as well...I think that you make two important points...
First, that wondrous as Gods creation is, can any man put it into words?...excellent question...
But I think what really struck me was your last sentence, about creation, not being what salvation is based upon...this is a very important point....because there have been many creationists/IDers who disagree with that thought...they will come to a Crevo thread, and roundly condemn to Hell, anyone who does not believe as they do...in other words, if you dare support evolution, God will send you to Hell...and then it gets even worse, when they say, they will be up high, happy with God, laughing at all the evolution supporters being tormented in Hell...so we have folks condemning to Hell, those who support evolution, and they seem to think its an added bonus that they will get a big laugh out of the whole thing..I call that a sick thought....
On the other hand, I have had some very interesting Freepmail discussions, with more thoughtful creationists who will agree, that ones salvation does NOT depend the matter of creation...
Good post...
To: thomaswest
I keep a pixie in my pocket for comfort.
315
posted on
04/13/2006 9:37:15 PM PDT
by
jec41
(Screaming Eagle)
To: Alter Kaker
You have been watching CSI too much,
316
posted on
04/13/2006 9:39:09 PM PDT
by
RobbyS
( CHIRHO)
To: RunningWolf
So from that I will say this. It does not take 'a creo' to see all the convolutions contradictions distortions et al that 'you guys' must perform in an attempt to keep 'the platters of toe spinning' Name one. The CRIDers are the ones who keep spinning things. You have zero scientific facts on your side, so you just say "Creationism Good, Evolution Bad." When presented with fossils millions+ years old, you start spinning that would warm the cockles of BJ Clinton.
317
posted on
04/13/2006 9:39:28 PM PDT
by
freedumb2003
(Don't call them "Illegal Aliens." Call them what they are: CRIMINAL INVADERS!)
To: Alter Kaker
The theory of evolution has only been around for a few hundred years while the history of the Bible has been around for thousands of years.
While scientists are busy searching for alternatives to creation, the end will come and prove that they weren't as wise as thought they were.
318
posted on
04/13/2006 9:39:52 PM PDT
by
Fruit of the Spirit
("Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images...)
To: andysandmikesmom
319
posted on
04/13/2006 9:43:44 PM PDT
by
jec41
(Screaming Eagle)
To: RobbyS
You have been watching CSI too much,What's CSI?
320
posted on
04/13/2006 9:46:11 PM PDT
by
Alter Kaker
("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 681-684 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