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.

[mlc9852]

The Bible says it took six days. How can you think the Bible doesn't say how long? It obviously does say. You just don't believe God's word. I do.

[Tribune7]

the integrity of the public school system?

LOL. You owe me a new keyboard.

[Fruit of the Spirit]

"Is that a threat?"

No, it's a promise...from God!

[Fruit of the Spirit]

http://evolution-facts.org/Ev-Crunch/c01a.htm

here are the two premises on which the various theories of evolution are based:

1 - This is the evolutionary formula for making a universe:


Nothing + nothing = two elements + time = 92 natural elements + time = all physical laws and a completely structured universe of galaxies, systems, stars, planets, and moons orbiting in perfect balance and order.


2 - This is the evolutionary formula for making life:


Dirt + water + time = living creatures.


Evolutionists theorize that the above two formulas can enable everything about us to make itself—with the exception of man-made things, such as automobiles or buildings. Complicated things, such as wooden boxes with nails in them, require thought, intelligence, and careful workmanship. But everything else about us in nature (such as hummingbirds and the human eye) is declared to be the result of accidental mishaps, random confusion, and time. You will not even need raw materials to begin with. They make themselves too.

How did all this nonsense get started? We will begin this paperback with a brief overview of the modern history of evolutionary theory.


But let us not forget that, though it may be nonsensical, evolutionary theory has greatly affected—and damaged—mankind in the 20th century. Will we continue to let this happen, now that we are in the 21st century? The social and moral impact that evolutionary concepts have had on the modern world has been terrific.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is NOT known to be a creationist."

The FIRSt person on your list (Dr. Fleischman) was a lifelong creationist.

"Austin Clark..."

Writing before (1930) DNA sequencing.

""The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith."—*J.W.N. Sullivan, The Limitations of Science (1933), p. 95."

Written in 1933, before any work on abiogensis was done, and also outside of the realm of evolutionary theory anyway as evolution does not deal with the origins of life.

""Where are we when presented with the mystery of life? We find ourselves facing a granite wall which we have not even chipped . . We know virtually nothing of growth, nothing of life.""

Written in the first half of the 20th century, by an astronomer.

""'The theory of evolution is totally inadequate to explain the origin and manifestation of the inorganic world.' "—Sir John Ambrose Fleming, F.R.S., quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1966), p. 91 [discoverer of the thermionic valve]."

From 1905. Should be noted yet again that evolution is not about the origin or manifestation of the inorganic world. The author was a creationist:

"John Ambrose Flemming (1849-1945), was one of the fathers of modern electronics and is most known for developing the first workable electronic vacuum tube. He studied under James Clark Maxwell at Cambridge and served as a consultant for both Marconi and Edison. A former president of the Victoria Institute, he wrote many creationist books including The Intersecting Spheres of Religion and Science, and Evolution or Creation. He was also a long-age creationist and accepted microevolution."
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/CMBergman.html

""I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."—*H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138."

What this physicist also said:

"Several people have given clear indications that they do not understand Darwin's theory. The Theory does not merely say that species have slowly evolved: that is obvious from the fossil record."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part1-4.html#quote59

"David C.C. Watson..."

An avowed creationist.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v13/i1/hunting.asp

Nice quote mining! :) It made for a hilarious read! :)

[balrog666]

No, it's a promise...from God!

Which one?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"here are the two premises on which the various theories of evolution are based:

1 - This is the evolutionary formula for making a universe: "

Evolution is not and has not ever been about the origins of the universe.

"2 - This is the evolutionary formula for making life:


Dirt + water + time = living creatures. "

Evolution is not and has not ever been about the origins of life. Your example is also not what abiogenesis researchers believe either, though it does sound a little like Genesis.

Almost as funny as your quote salad! :)

[ahayes]

Bizarre Oversimplification Placemark

[Coyoteman]

If anyone is interested here are some books that I think are very thought provoking.

Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution (Paperback) by Michael J. Behe

Uncommon Dissent: Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing (Hardcover) by John Wilson (Foreword), William A. Dembski (Editor)

For your education and amusement I post the following thought provoking data:

---

Fossil: KNM-WT 15000

Site: Nariokotome, West Turkana, Kenya (1)

Discovered By: K. Kimeu, 1984 (1)

Estimated Age of Fossil: 1.6 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, faunal & radiometric data (1, 4)

Species Name: Homo ergaster (1, 7, 8), Homo erectus (3, 4, 7, 10), Homo erectus ergaster (25)

Gender: Male (based on pelvis, browridge) (1, 8, 9)

Cranial Capacity: 880 (909 as adult) cc (1)

Information: Most complete early hominid skeleton (80 bones and skull) (1, 8)

Interpretation: Hairless and dark pigmented body (based on environment, limb proportions) (7, 8, 9). Juvenile (9-12 based on 2nd molar eruption and unfused growth plates) (1, 3, 4, 7, 8). Juvenile (8 years old based on recent studies on tooth development) (27). Incapable of speech (based on narrowing of spinal canal in thoracic region) (1)

Nickname: Turkana Boy (1), Nariokotome Boy

See original source for notes:
Source: http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=38

[freedumb2003]

As with many, you confuse abiogensis with TToE.

Both of your assertions are patently false.

And no where is there any reason why TToE has "damaged" anything. Just because you say so doesnt cut it.

But those who actively try to suppress science and replace it with religious mythology DO a lot of harm.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(If you are still and Ape can you impregnate one or can one impregnate you?)

GROSS!

[jennyp]

What do your learned, scholarly scientist sources tell you is the answer to post 68?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

I found a larger quote of the H. Lipson one you used (in bold are the parts you included):

"If living matter is not, then, caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces and radiation, how has it come into being? There is another theory, now quite out of favour, which is based upon the ideas of Lamarck: that if an organism needs an improvement it will develop it, and transmit it to its progeny. I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it...I should be happy to know what my fellow physicists think of these admittedly extraordinary ideas. In putting them forward l can claim to be in good company. According to Darwin, when Newton put forward his theory of gravitation, Leibnitz accused him of introducing 'occult qualities and miracles into philosophy.' What was this gravitation? How could two inanimate bodies attract each other? Newton replied laconically 'Hypotheses non fingo'. When I am asked describe my ideas of the-Creator I also say 'Hypotheses non fingo'!" (Lipson H.S., "A physicist looks at evolution", Physics Bulletin, vol. 31, No. 4, May 1980, p138)"

It should be noted that Lipson is not a theist. His *creator* is not a personal God. As I already posted, he DID believe in evolution as evidenced by the fossil record.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(You have absolutely no idea (or proof) that any species is exclusively originated from this planet.)

I read a hypothesis about extraterrestrial amino acids being a responsible for the origins of life. Here's the link.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20031005204806data_trunc_sys.shtml

[Alter Kaker]

No, it's a promise...from God!

Do I take it you speak for Him?

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(...Flux in many fields of study, adds new knowledge to that field, makes that field more true, more beneficial to all concerned...)

For example, alpha hydroxy, and retinol in wrinkle cream. Since my age is sneaking up on me, I'm finding this very beneficial.

A bit of humor continued from last night.

[andysandmikesmom]

Very funny,..I could use some of that stuff myself, as I have many years on you....

[andysandmikesmom]

It may be veiled as a promise, but make no mistake, its a threat...as someone pointed out on either this thread or some other thread, this is the 'Al Capone' method of witnessing...

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(Interpretation: Hairless and dark pigmented body (based on environment, limb proportions)



How do limb proportions provide clues to pigmentation and hairiness? I understand the environment part, but the inclusion of limb proportions I don't.
Thank ya again!

[Conservative Texan Mom]

I don't know how well it really works, but I guess I'll find out.