Oldest Human Skulls Found

BBC ^ | 6-11-2003 | Jonathan Amos

[exmarine]

At any rate, mitochondrial DNA of both human skeletons and Neanderthal skeletons have been studied, and researchers are sure that there are no known Neanderthal female ancestors of any known human.

Well, there could have been different branches of human DNA, could there not? Yes, there could. Just becuase DNA's do not complete match does not necessarily mean that they are different species, especially since there is still a great deal about DNA and its informational content that they do not yet know.

[exmarine]

Do you or do you not believe that all the skulls identified as Neanderthal have been deliberately modified?

After seeing the photos in the book, I believe that MANY of them were altered for sure. I do not know if all of them have.

Now, please show me the evidence used to reach the conclusions in this article.

[VadeRetro]

There have been so many frauds, paleos aren't even believable any longer.

Your allegation is ridiculous and indefensible, but somehow mainstream science isn't believable any longer?

The Neanderthals were humans. There is no evidence that says otherwise.

From A Rebuilt Neanderthal:

The Neanderthal's shoulders are wider than a human's. The pelvis is also wider, even in males. Some scientists once suspected that the wide pelvis enabled Neanderthals to carry a child longer than nine months, giving birth to larger, more developed infants. But that view is now doubted.

The Neanderthal has shorter forearms and shins, a broader trunk and virtually no waist. The rib cage is a pronounced difference; instead of tapering off, as in humans, it is large and more bell-shaped. And there is the heavy brow ridge, sloping forehead and forward-projecting face. Attached at the skeleton's neck is a small hyoid bone, which would have anchored the muscles of the tongue and other parts of a voice box apparatus.

There are instances of fossils with intermediate features, but they are the exception. One such case:

The Hybrid Child from Portugal.

Another is the Skuhl V specimen from Israel.

Neanderthal specimens are found all over Europe and much of Asia.

A regional guide.

Again, who is running around faking all that stuff? Fix your ignorance, then get back to me.

[VadeRetro]

There are two kinds of DNA, nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA.

mtDNA preserves better, as there are more mitochondria per cell than nuclei. You have far more chances. No nuclear DNA studies have been done between Neanderthals and humans so far and it's a pity.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

BS.....His father's skull is older for starters. His ancestor's skull's are a lot older.....

True enough. But those haven't been found yet have they?

They are described as the oldest known fossils of modern humans, or Homo sapiens.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

This guy is supposed to convinced me I evolved from apes?

I know it was a sarcastic remark, but if someone believes that man has evolved from apes then they don't have a proper grasp of the evolution theory.

[SauronOfMordor]

while nuclear DNA is a combination from your mother and father - they actually call it recombination, again I am not sure why "recombination" is better than "combination."

Your DNA is a combination of pairs of genes, where one side will be dominent and one side recessive (say a gene for blonde hair, and one for dark hair). In the creation of eggs and sperm, each only gets one side. When sperm and egg combine, the two halves come together in a new combination, hence re-combination.

This is how two parents with dark hair (but with a blonde recessive gene) can have a kid with blonde hair.

[CobaltBlue]

If you are really interested in the topic, I suggest that you read works by genetic researchers. A very entertaining, highly readable book is "The Seven Daughters of Eve," likely to be available at your local library.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393020185/002-2109841-8098459?vi=glance

DNA isn't random. You know that, because you know that paternity tests prove or disprove that a man is the father of a child. DNA tests can also prove that someone is related to someone else, so historians and geneticists have used DNA to prove that one of Sally Hemmings' children was fathered by someone related to Thomas Jefferson, although not necessarily Tom himself. Similarly, they've used DNA to prove that several of the bodies in a mass grave were Tsar Nicholas Romanov, Tsarina Alexandra, and three of their children, but no evidence was found for one of the daughters or the son, Prince Alexei. Among the people who contributed DNA for those tests was the Duke of Edinbrough (Prince Phillip) who is related to the late Tsarina through a maternal line.

[Just mythoughts]

Now, now, now, which Adam, those of the 6th day creation or the 8th day creation.

There are two separate days of creation Written about.

Where exactly is it written we have reached or passed 6,000 year mark?

It is genetically impossible for all races to come from two people and if that had happened it would have been a miracle and no such miracle is recorded anywhere in the Written Word.

[Consort]

They are described as the oldest known fossils of modern humans, or Homo sapiens.

I think that the oldest known fossils might be the ones that I alluded to and the oldest found fossils might be the ones that you alluded to.

[exmarine]

Your allegation is ridiculous and indefensible, but somehow mainstream science isn't believable any longer?

The materialist naturalist neodarwinian mindset is prone to fraud (and history is replete with them). Let us remember, there are no moral absolutes in naturalism, so it's not wrong to commit fraud if it pragmatically leads one to his intended objective.

Your posting on Neanderthals are all metpahysical inferences, not established scientific facts. There is no scientific certainty for these conclusions. For example, the protruding brows and thick bones are also explained by extreme longevity (e.g. 200-300 years) since facial bones continue to grow throughout life and other bones become denser and denser over time. The other physical differences do not exclude the possibility that they are human. This is consistent with biblical pre-flood accounts of long-lived humans. It's all in the presuppositions.

[VadeRetro]

... if someone believes that man has evolved from apes then they don't have a proper grasp of the evolution theory.

Yes, and no. There was a time when there was nothing more evolved in a hominid direction than apes. For that matter, there was a time when there was nothing more evolved in a hominid direction than monkeys. For that matter, there was a time when primitive insectivore mammals were as humanlike is you could find. For that matter, there was a time when amphibians were tops.

What is true is that humans did not evolve directly from any of the extant species of apes. We're pretty close cousins to the chimps, though.

[exmarine]

I do not disagree with your points, but that still does not prove that there could not be a second line of human DNA.

[CobaltBlue]

Tell me about it. Due to the wonders of heterozygosity, I have brown eyes and my husband has dark grey eyes but my younger son has blue eyes. People used to ask where he got his blue eyes, and I'd say, "the mailman", and then watch them try to puzzle that one out. -g-

[VadeRetro]

The materialist naturalist neodarwinian mindset is prone to fraud (and history is replete with them).

Your list of alledged frauds includes exactly one real fraud (Piltdown Man, found in 1912). It has one misinterpretation (Nebraska Man, 1922 or thereabouts). Peking Man and Java Man are now considered regional variants of Homo erectus. There is no fraud. You also put Neanderthal man in the fraud list, another scoop.

You basically have an alternate universe here.

[Dog Gone]

The skulls were found in fragments, at a fossil-rich site first identified in 1997, in a dry and dusty valley.

As opposed to any of those wet and dusty valleys in the region, I'm assuming.

[Porterville]

Adam and Eve were black?? Than I am hip, have rythm, and I'll try to jump the next pick up game I play.

[far sider]

This guy is supposed to convinced me I evolved from apes?

I know it was a sarcastic remark, but if someone believes that man has evolved from apes then they don't have a proper grasp of the evolution theory.

I have a very proper grasp of the theory of evolution, I just don't believe it. I suppose I should have said "...evolved from an ape-like ancestor...", but that's just nit-picking.

[CobaltBlue]

I don't think the book is closed on the connection between Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

[AdmSmith]

There are two kinds of DNA, nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA. Researchers study mitochondrial DNA, usually, not nuclear DNA, although I am not sure why.

The mitochondrion is the power central of the cell and there are varying number of them in different cell types, with more of them in muscle cells etc.

The likelihood of recovering mitochondrial DNA, mtDNA in small or degraded biological samples is greater than for nuclear DNA because mtDNA molecules are present in hundreds to thousands of copies per cell compared to the nuclear complement of two copies per cell. Thus is is easier to study and get the information from mtDNA.

However, phylogenic studies are as well done on the Y-chromosome and so you can as well find a pedigree tree on the fathers side.