Posted on 02/16/2005 11:01:16 AM PST by Alter Kaker
NEW YORK (AP) -- A new analysis of bones unearthed nearly 40 years ago in Ethiopia has pushed the fossil record of modern humans back to nearly 200,000 years ago -- perhaps close to the dawn of the species.
Researchers determined that the specimens are around 195,000 years old. Previously, the oldest known fossils of Homo sapiens were Ethiopian skulls dated to about 160,000 years ago.
Genetic studies estimate that Homo sapiens arose about 200,000 years ago, so the new research brings the fossil record more in line with that, said John Fleagle of Stony Brook University in New York, an author of the study.
The fossils were found in 1967 near the Omo River in southwestern Ethiopia. One location yielded Omo I, which includes part of a skull plus skeletal bones. Another site produced Omo II, which has more of a skull but no skeletal bones. Neither specimen has a complete face.
Although Omo II shows more primitive characteristics than Omo I, scientists called both specimens Homo sapiens and assigned a tentative age of 130,000 years.
Now, after visiting the discovery sites, analyzing their geology and testing rock samples with more modern dating techniques, Fleagle and colleagues report in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature that both specimens are 195,000 years old, give or take 5,000 years.
Fleagle said the more primitive traits of Omo II may mean the two specimens came from different but overlapping Homo sapiens populations, or that they just represent natural variation within a single population.
To find the age of the skulls, the researchers determined that volcanic rock lying just below the sediment that contained the fossils was about 196,000 years old. They then found evidence that the fossil-bearing sediment was deposited soon after that time.
Paul Renne, director of the Berkeley Geochronology Center, which specializes in dating rocks, said the researchers made "a reasonably good argument" to support their dating of the fossils.
"It's more likely than not," he said, calling the work "very exciting and important."
Rick Potts, director of the Human Origins Program at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History, said he considered the case for the new fossil ages "very strong." The work suggests that "we're right on the cusp of where the genetic evidence says the origin of modern humans ... should be," he said.
G. Philip Rightmire, a paleoanthropologist at Binghamton University in New York, said he believes the Omo fossils show Homo sapiens plus a more primitive ancestor. The find appears to represent the aftermath of the birth of Homo sapiens, when it was still living alongside its ancestral species, he said.
Again, that's an interesting BABYLONIAN map.
But it doesn't match the thread. I'm confused.
If they were so "informed" back then why was their perspective on the world so wrong?
Nor should you. What kind of bizarre self-importance would drive a poster to make such an absurd demand?
Oh, I do so love a truth teller with a wicked sense of humor!
Thanks for the ping, Michael (some of those duped, educated people are on this very thread).
Me too. Me too. :o)
But don't you remember, Danny. That was a 'religious' thread. LOL!
*snicker*
One skull and bones here and there does not a species make! If you found several hundred thousand, then I'd consider it as evidence.
"Researcher" was not called out for his religion but for mixing religion into science.
That would be because no one is going to knock down an established theory except with a better theory that explains everything covered by the old theory and does a better job of predicting new data. Since ID doesn't have any research goals or research programs or research concepts, it isn't going anywhere. Don't tell me it isn't funded. Any research program that could actually support ID would have lots of funding. Biological and geological research is cheap by most standards.
You disagree? Fine, what kind of research would support ID and cause problems for evolution. Let's hear about it.
Also, I will add to your argument that the theory of evolution was around way before Darwin, Darwin only wrote a book.
"There are Christians here"
Your one example totally refutes your position. Thank you.
I believe the Bible states that the Earth is round, so for over 3000 years people of faith understood this. It was not the literal creationists who thought the earth was flat...Check your facts.
"but they keep their heads low"
No it doesn't totally refute my position. My position is they didn't bar Christians on the front end, but if they let it be known, then they are out.
How did he mix religion into science? There was no mention of religion in the paper that was published. And the paper got through peer review.
But because the paper dealt with intelligent design, there was this firestorm of protest both to the paper that published it and to the smithsonian about any researchers who had provided information to Steven Meyer.
Can you give me any possible reason why people would not keep their religion to themselves while at work? Would you like to work next to a Muslim in recruiting mode? If you were in a science lab, would you like to hear about Mohamed's thoughts on the subject?
Well, I wasn't there 200,000 years ago so I really cannot comment on whether this is true, or just a possibility.
It doesn't say he was proseltysing on the job. All he did was provide some information to Steven Meyer for Meyer's paper on intelligent design.
It wasn't a Christian paper it was an ID paper.
For that the researcher was accused of being a "religious fundamentalist" which he apparently he isn't. And he's had his job threatened.
Since only a few dozen Tyrannosaurs have been discovered, are you suggesting that dinosaur fossils aren't real species?
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.