Fossils Bridge Gap in African Mammal Evolution

Reuters to My Yahoo! ^ | Wed Dec 3, 2003 | Patricia Reaney

[Pharmboy]

LONDON (Reuters) - Fossils discovered in Ethiopia's highlands are a missing piece in the puzzle of how African mammals evolved, a team of international scientists said on Wednesday.

Little is known about what happened to mammals between 24 million to 32 million years ago, when Africa and Arabia were still joined together in a single continent.

But the remains of ancestors of modern-day elephants and other animals, unearthed by the team of U.S. and Ethiopian scientists 27 million years on, provide some answers.

"We show that some of these very primitive forms continue to live through the missing years, and then during that period as well, some new forms evolved -- these would be the ancestors of modern elephants," said Dr John Kappelman, who headed the team.

The find included several types of proboscideans, distant relatives of elephants, and fossils from the arsinoithere, a rhinoceros-like creature that had two huge bony horns on its snout and was about 7 feet high at the shoulder.

"It continues to amaze me that we don't have more from this interval of time. We are talking about an enormous continent," said Kappelman, who is based at the University of Texas at Austin.

Scientists had thought arsinoithere had disappeared much earlier but the discovery showed it managed to survive through the missing years. The fossils from the new species found in Ethiopia are the largest, and at 27 million years old, the youngest discovered so far.

"If this animal was still alive today it would be the central attraction at the zoo," Tab Rasmussen, a paleontologist at Washington University in St Louis, Missouri who worked on the project, said in a statement.

Many of the major fossil finds in Ethiopia are from the Rift Valley. But Kappelman and colleagues in the United States and at Ethiopia's National Science Foundation (news - web sites) and Addis Ababa University concentrated on a different area in the northwestern part of the country.

Using high-resolution satellite images to scour a remote area where others had not looked before, his team found the remains in sedimentary rocks about 6,600 feet above sea level.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Please try to make your sarcasm more entertaining.

[whattajoke]

Please try to make your sarcasm more entertaining.

Gee, thanks, Doc...you pompous ass.

Was that any better? ; )

[Tares]

Basically, you either have to accept the reality of other observers, or conclude that reality is simply a figment of your imagination and that your time might be better spent doing something other than conjuring such a complicated fantasy.

This decision cannot be made on an empircal basis, wouldn't you agree?

[bluejay]

What does intelligent design have to do with divine creation. All of the people who are in court trying to get intelligent design into the school curriculum say it has no religious implications.

Actually, I do not think that Biblical studies should be part of public school curriculum (so I have no idea about any of these cases). I think religion should be taught in Sunday school. What I find objectionable is the way evolution is presented to the public (including freshmen biology students). Evolution, itself, has a fairly narrow focus and it is a stretch to present it as an explanation (let alone the explanation) for Creation.

[js1138]

...yet the consenus now is that the basis of his theory was 180 degrees dead wrong.

Oh pure BS! Newton's equations are quite sufficient to navigate our satellites and space probes. There is nothing at all in our everyday experience that can distinguish Newtonian physics from relativity.

If you are referring to some assumptions made by Newton you might have a case, but things still behave pretty much the way Newton described them.

Moving on to evolution: it may be proven that space goats from another galaxy designed our life forms, each and every one from scratch. But evolution still occurs under our noses, and strong varieties are still capable of interbreeding, as are closely related species. The difference between so-called microevolution, which we can observe, and so-called macroevolution, is a phantom.

[Doctor Stochastic]

It's getting better, you supercilious onager.

[js1138]

Evolution, itself, has a fairly narrow focus and it is a stretch to present it as an explanation (let alone the explanation) for Creation.

I agree. Now find someone among the evolution proponents on this thread who disagree with that statement.

[Tares]

I find your reply to be a good thought provoking one. Thanks for taking the time to post it.

This is the clearest and cleanest distinction that can be made, whether a belief system can be put to the test.

This test you refer to---sounds like you've slipped the naturalist position in whole hog right there. Only empirical evidence can satisfy this test you're refering to, no?

[Dimensio]

Quite frankly, I interpret it as an attempt to reason that living creatures were not created based on divine design.

I interpret it to mean that if bat wings were specially designed, they were designed by an incompetent designer. I don't see any implication that no gods exist. You seem to be limiting the notion of "god", requiring that if a god exists, it must follow that this god specifically and individually designed each life form on the planet, thus if someone even suggests that each life form was not individually and specially created, the are effectively saying that no gods exist. Apparently the problem is in definitions, because I'm intelligent enough to realise that there are far broader definitions for "god" than what you have posited, thus ruling out special creation for each species on earth is not the same as ruling out "gods" in general.

[js1138]

sounds like you've slipped the naturalist position in whole hog right there.

Science is pretty much the assumption that natural laws don't change. There are lots of other ways of viewing the world, but that is what science is and does.

[MEGoody]

Gee, we found some fossils. How exciting!! How can we force this into our predetermined theory?

Yep, that's about how it went out at the dig.

[Tares]

Note that the Creationism-PostModernDeconstructionism philosophy seems to imply operational solipsism (not to mention solecism.)

What empirical evidence does naturalism use to escape solipsism?

[Junior]

No I wouldn't. Empiricism implies observation. I observe others exist.

[js1138]

I would have said that but I'm on a strict word count diet. ;^)

[whattajoke]

Gee, we found some fossils. How exciting!! How can we force this into our predetermined theory?
Yep, that's about how it went out at the dig.

You mean creationists made the find? I didn't realize that, thanks!

[Stultis]

The Cardiff Giant was a cheap publicity stunt.

Interesting to see what you evolutionists will say about your frauds now when you just couldn't get 'em past the public then.

Oh, brother. You're serious. Incredible.

[Tares]

Empiricism implies observation. I observe others exist.

The use of the term "others" for your observations---do you observe "others", or are you generalizing your own internal experience of consciousness to your observations and coming up with "others exist"?

[MEGoody]

"You mean creationists made the find? I didn't realize that, thanks!"

I'm sure you thought that was clever, but let me help you out - it wasn't. Keep working on that sense of humor though. (Or maybe you'll just 'evolve' one.)

[Tares]

Newton's equations are quite sufficient to navigate our satellites and space probes. There is nothing at all in our everyday experience that can distinguish Newtonian physics from relativity.

Yes. Newtonian physics is useful for now, though false.

[William Terrell]

Next to your empty glass jar for the spontaneous creation of life should be another glass jar with various elements (your choice) to watch for one celled forms being created. You may pass electricity trough the jar at intervals of your choosing.

Over the hundreds of crevo threads, both evolutionists and creationists have spent the balance of their energies proving each other wrong. They have both succeeded.

Time to theorize another explanation for life on Earth. I favor materialization of thought forms myself.