.JPG)
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.
You claimed that I said something.
When challenged you cited a post by me which does not back up your claim. I am very careful about what I type. If I make a mistake I withdraw. You have now demonstrated on more than one occasion in this thread alone that you are not so careful in your reading.
Now you claim that you have no need to withdraw.
What kind of image of your religion do you think you are projecting?
I will not be posting to you further as you demonstrably have no interest in accuracy or the truth.
I for one am pretty sick and tired of you equating the word "Christian" with YEC/ID fundamentalism. I am pretty sick and tired of Freepers acting like democrats and whining about victimhood.
A respect for accuracy in debate? If people are allowed to make manifestly false statements and can't be called on it (which is exactly what DannyTN thought he was doing... I'm willing to concede that he probably just made a mistake) then what point is there in posting here.
Do you deny the God is the Designer? Just be honest. Don't hide your light. Is God the Designer? Yes or no.
M=No. It says the earth has four corners and if you climb a tall tree you can see all four corners.
He was questioning Darwin, and was censured for it. He has two PhD's in evolutionary biology, but he was 'called out' because he questioned Darwinian theory, and the powers that be shut him down.
It speaks volumes about the religious fervor and desire to censor differences of opinion of the evolutionists at the Smithsonian.
So ID is not about "God"? Then it must be about space aliens ...
Certainly I think God is the designer. But that doesn't matter.
The issue is whether the items being studied best demonstrate design or evolution or some other explanation.
A belief that there is no God is just as much a religious belief as a belief that there is a God. But that question can and should be separated.
ID can stand alone as science without specifying who or what the intelligence is behind the design.
Certainly I think God is the designer. But that doesn't matter.
The issue is whether the items being studied best demonstrate design or evolution or some other explanation.
A belief that there is no God is just as much a religious belief as a belief that there is a God. But that question can and should be separated.
ID can stand alone as science without specifying who or what the intelligence is behind the design.
Please ignore Wild Turkey, Wisconsin. In spite of his claims, he doesn't know what the Bible teaches, and he's proven it repeatedly.
It speaks about not mixing religious beliefs into science.
Thanks for the ping!
Doesn't matter. If the evidence points to a designer of any kind, whether or not that designer can be identified, follow the evidence.
What would you do if the evidence, hard scientific evidence, pointed to God. Would you still exclude Him as "supernatural"? Or would you follow the evidence?
If they admit ID is a valid scientific theory, then they have to admit the possibility that God actually exists, and they won't do that.
So legitimate researchers who have no religious motivation are dismissed because of fear.
These guys are just mixing your faith into the argument because it clouds the actual issue that valid research is being ignored because it doesn't fit the approved template.
Somewhere, beyond the rainbow, the Raelians are cheering.
You are completely misinformed.
No it can't, and your statement makes no sense. There is no science of ID. There is no objective procedure for detecting design, no possible designer other than God, and there is no possible way to argue that something is not designed, because God can do anything.
I have presented a number of objects on this thread and asked whether they are designed or not, and no one has responded. You and Behe claim that design is obvious.
Well guess what, it isn't obvious, and neither you nor Behe can make it obvious by waving your magic wands.
If design cannot be determined by an objective analysis of an object, then ID has no content and nothing to study.
You were misinformed if you think that it was valid research and evidence ...
Show me the proof that only a few dozen have been found. That said, they found a lot more than one skull and a few bones, in fact, complete skeletons were found. IN addition, the dinosaur bones are so species specific that it is obvious evidence. You give me a complete skeleton of transitional man, I'll put the egg on my own face.
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.