Posted on 03/20/2008 2:54:39 PM PDT by blam
Upright Walking Began 6 Million Years Ago
Newswise — A shape comparison of the most complete fossil femur (thigh bone) of one of the earliest known pre-humans, or hominins, with the femora of living apes, modern humans and other fossils, indicates the earliest form of bipedalism occurred at least six million years ago and persisted for at least four million years. William Jungers, Ph.D., of Stony Brook University, and Brian Richmond, Ph.D., of George Washington University, say their finding indicates that the fossil belongs to very early human ancestors, and that upright walking is one of the first human characteristics to appear in our lineage, right after the split between human and chimpanzee lineages. Their findings are published in the March 21 issue of the journal Science.
The research is the first thorough quantitative analysis of the Orrorin tugenensis fossil – a fragmentary piece of femur – which was discovered in Kenya in 2000 by a French research team. Dr. Jungers, Chair of Anatomical Sciences at SBU School of Medicine, and Dr. Richmond, Associate Professor of Anthropology at GWU and a member of GWU’s Center for the Advanced Study of Hominid Paleobiology, completed a multivariate analysis of the proximal femora shape of a young adult O. tugenensis that enabled them to pinpoint the pattern of bipedal gait for this controversial hominin. Their analysis included a large and diverse sample of apes, other early hominins, including Australopithecus, and modern humans of all body sizes.
“This research solidifies the evidence that the human lineage split off as far back as six million years ago, that we share ancestry with Orrorin, and that our ancestors were walking upright at the time,” says Dr. Richmond. “These answers were not clear before this analysis.”
“Our study confirms that as early as six million years ago, basal hominins in Africa were already similar to later australopithecines in their anatomy and inferred locomotor biomechanics,” adds Dr. Jungers. “At the same time, by way of the analysis, we see no special phylogenetic connection between Orrorin and our own genus, Homo.”
In “Orrorin tugenensis Femoral Morphology and the Evolution of Hominin Bipedalism,” the authors articulate that the analysis and morphological comparisons among femora from the fossils showed that O. tugenensis is distinct from those of modern humans and the great apes in having a long, anteroposteriorly narrow neck and wide proximal shaft. Early Homo femora have larger heads and broader necks compared to early hominins. In addition to these features, modern human femora have short necks and mediolaterally narrow shafts.
The challenge ahead, explains Dr. Jungers, is “to identify what precipitated the change from this ancient and successful adaptation of upright walking, and climbing, to our own obligate form of bipedalism.”
The Department of Anatomical Sciences at Stony Brook University School of Medicine is known internationally for the scope and significance of its research into evolutionary morphology, including paleoanthropology, field-based vertebrate paelontology and experimental functional anatomy. The department interacts with other departments in the School of Medicine, as well as those in Biological Sciences and the Department of Anthropology, through which the Interdepartmental Doctoral Program in Anthropological Sciences (IDPAS) is administered. The Stony Brook IDPAS faculty brings world-renowned strengths in functional morphology and human evolution.
“We are responsible for our lives, and whether it comes down to some court in Heavan where we have to plead our case, it really just doesn’t matter here.”
That’s just it, it does matter here. God’s Word is the absolute Truth, if there is no absolute Truth which it appears some believe, then how do you determine wrong and right. Evolution sets up a world were man does not have to answer to for his actions. So, were does one draw the line of right and wrong in a world without absolutes. I have chosen my beliefs and you have chosen yours. I cannot force my beliefs on you or on children, in the schools, but you can. My tax dollars go to teach kids a world view that I cannot agree with, that bothers me whether it is evolution, sensitivity training regarding homosexual unions or the beliefs of Islam..
Okay. Now we are getting somewhere. You just said you believe that in the beginning God created the heaven and earth. Now since that is the Word of God and true in your estimation, what do you do with the rest of the description of creation. The same God you believe created heaven and earth also said he created man on day six. He didn't create an ape that turned into man, etc. You see, its all or nothing with God's Word. I believe it all, because God said it. Your assertion that I certainly don't know the truth of how the earth came to be is negated by the fact that you believe only part of what God says of creating the heavens and the earth and then you stop there. Seems to me you need to read your Bible some more and maybe open-mindedly visit a fundamental church to learn more of the Bible. It'd be only fair since I sat through all those evolution classes.
It requires that.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
It suggests much more. Every example we have of "reverse entropy" involves a blueprint such as DNA. I grant you that over vast spans of time, our examples may be misleading. However, I believe it takes a blind faith in science to simply accept that. The "scientific method" is a man made concept, a tool that has produced incredible advances. However, it requires reproducibility. We shall not settle this on the basis of science. Moreover, arguing over it is futile.
However, by all means, continue to argue. We all need to go through that.
They digest something new. So do we, adapting does not mean evolving in your sense of the word. Fundamentally we are not a different species than our great grandparents, even though we adapt to new things.
Not a closed mind - you haven’t said anything to expand my thinking. You have not explained how evolution is a fact.
You have no fundamentally NEW enzymes that your grandparent didn't. You do not, biochemically, derive your living from a fundamentally new food source. The nylon digesting bacteria does have a new enzyme, never seen before, to digest a human made product that the earth had never seen before, and now makes its living digesting nylon. This is evolution not adaptation.
Move the goal posts much?
That is a fact jack. No faith (or “faith” if you prefer the scare quotes) involved. We know the principle of the second law of thermodynamics, and we know the earth isn't a closed system because we can MEASURE the energy coming from the sun. We can see living things use this sunlight to increase order. I guess I just have “faith” in photosynthesis.
You believe that adaptation on any level is evolution, and that is just simply inaccurate.
When you have insight about your facts that you'd like to share, and when you can give me an example of true evolution - one species over time, becoming another new species with proof, not speculation, please feel free to share that with me. Good day!
Google "ring species:"
Ring species provide unusual and valuable situations in which we can observe two species and the intermediate forms connecting them. In a ring species:
- A ring of populations encircles an area of unsuitable habitat.
- At one location in the ring of populations, two distinct forms coexist without interbreeding, and hence are different species.
- Around the rest of the ring, the traits of one of these species change gradually, through intermediate populations, into the traits of the second species.
A ring species, therefore, is a ring of populations in which there is only one place where two distinct species meet. Ernst Mayr called ring species "the perfect demonstration of speciation" because they show a range of intermediate forms between two species. They allow us to use variation in space to infer how changes occurred over time. This approach is especially powerful when we can reconstruct the biogeographical history of a ring species, as has been done in two cases. Source
Innovation in living systems is possible and has been observed.
It is there whether or not you put your fingers in your ear and go “La La La..... just adaptation.”
How would you define adaptation that is different from evolution? Adaptation is change in a living organism in response to the environment and involves how the DNA is being used, not changes in the actual DNA sequence. Evolution is a change in the DNA of a population.
The nylon digesting bacteria didn't “adapt” to exposure to nylon, their population “evolved” to utilize a new food source by incorporating the change to an esterase that made it a ‘nylonase’ into the entire population, as well as other changes.
Do you understand the difference?
That is a fact jack.
Agreed.
Evolution is a fact
In the "closed system" of your mind perhaps.
Those are the facts jack.
And if you quote me please actually quote me. I don't believe I actually said “evolution is a fact”. I would say that “change in the DNA sequence of living systems is an inescapable fact (unless you can show me a perfect replicator)” and that this fact supports the theory of evolution through natural selection.
You’re inaccurate with that - new preservatives have entered our food line in the last even 20 years. So, I digest things, that my maternal grandfather NEVER digested. He died 30 years before I was born. I am not a new species from my grandfather, even though I am able to digest different things.
The example you’ve provided simply doesn’t carry over.
Which two cases -
The source I provided lists and discusses the two cases: Ensatina salamanders and greenish warblers.
In one example we have a new DNA sequence that makes a new Enzyme that breaks down a synthetic product to produce energy. The other example is the same DNA producing the same Enzyme that breaks down a new synthetic product to get it out of your circulation.
Do you see the difference or are you being deliberately obtuse?
Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as the fossil record, except for that set of fossils that has been discovered and given a label by people.
A record is a human writing of some sort. Fossils are not dug up with written labels detailing what they are and when they existed already attached to them. Dates and classifactions of fossils are not the evidence, they are interpretations of the physical evidence.
Facts refer to real occurrences. or events and can only be true. So how varying interpretations of physical evidence such as discordant dating of fossils could only be true is beyond me. It sure doesn't sound like science.
Cordially,
It took you that long to give a straight answer, what did you have to do ask Cman privately?
Yesk but the fossil record is in fact a record. It is possible to prove quite conclusive that a particular rock layer was deposited at an earlier time that a different layer of rockl
You can then correlate on a subsurface basis all the rocks that were being deposited in a geological timeframe.
Since never have human fossils in Devonian age rocks, it’s a pretty fair conclusion to draw that humans were not present in the Devonian era. Finding even a single one would rock science on its butt.
That is but just one example. The fossil record is largely complete, and it’s always been consistent. The breakthroughs occur when a new critter is found in a rock layer where it had never been seen before.
That rewrites the timeline for that particular critter and gives us an indication of what the natural selection processes were at a given time.
If Noah’s Flood were a true story, you’d find a msassive amount of mixed fossils of all natures pretty much with in a single rock layer, with elephants, dinosaurs, trilobites, and all forms of life intermixed.
But that’s not remotely the case, and so the scientific study of the layers and their respective fossils, certainly is science.
He didn't ask me anything privately. From his posts it looks like he can think for himself.
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.