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.
But when one claims to be a Christian, but doesn't believe what the Bible says, it should cause the eyebrows to raise a bit.
Wild Turkey, for your edification regarding Scripture.....
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousnes, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.........II Timothy 3: 16-17
ALL Scripture God-breathed. Men may have written it down, but God inspired it. It's fine for you to believe that it's only the words of men, but if you do, your faith is without power or meaning.
I've seen from your many posts that you have more faith in secular scientists than in God's word. That's your choice, as long as you're honest about what you've chosen to believe, and that those whom you debate here are aware of where your allegiance lies.
LOL, when I read the headline for this thread I thought, "I wonder how fast a Freeper will post a pic of that old hag"!
That doesn't mean that each word is the literal word of God.
I can say that my wife inspires me to mow the lawn but that does not mean that she pushes the lawnmower.
I have a problem with certain "Christians" that believe that they have exclusive knowledge of "God's Word".
Duh.
You correctly pointed out the misinterpretation of my words.
The irony is that, as a Christian, I believe that we are all sinners........equally guilty, none better than the other, and certainly not I........and none of us can with our own efforts, or intellect understand who God is or how magnificent is his creation.
It is not out of ego or arrogance that I want people to know about God. It is out of the extreme humility of a sinner saved by grace.
But once again, the topic goes off the issue, and onto the persons engaged in the discussion.
It's a common tactic here, and I'm sorry I digressed and fell into the trap.
Wild Turkey has still not given an answer to the question, what EVIDENCE do you have that the scientist in question (who posesses TWO doctorates in evolutionary biology) was engaged in ' religious propaganda,' and not actual scientific research?
Please give proof of your accusation.
Now please address my question, and quit changing the subject.
WHAT EVIDENCE CAN YOU PROVIDE TO SUPPORT YOUR ACCUSATION THAT THE SCIENTIST (POSESSING TWO DOCTORATES IN EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY) WAS ENGAGED IN "RELIGIOUS PROPAGANDA" AND NOT LEGITIMATE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH?
Please answer this question which I have asked at least three times, and from which you have continued to run away.
Are you by any chance Silicon based?My wife would probably say I am, but until now I've been able to explain that with my profession (software engineering).
Hehe...........
He did not follow the scientific method.
How? How do you know? Name your sources.
(He has two PhD's in evolutionary biology. Unless you also provide your own credentials and proof, I would take his word on how legitimate his research was over yours).
Who are you talking about? Meyers or Sternberg. I know of no published works by Sternberg or peer-reviewed workds of either.
Unfortunately, it is useless to ask them for their credentials. Anyone can claim great accomplishments while withholding essential information for privacy reasons. For example, I tried to convince the evos that I had 7 earned doctorates and have an entire shelf of published books. If I reveal the subject of the publications, or the universities I attended, they will be able to identify me.
There is one of them, RightWingProfessor, who was brave enough to reveal his place of work. It seems he has a PhD in chemistry though there were many who still doubted it. You can rest assured I will not reveal where you got your degrees nor will I divulge the societies to which you belong or your blood relation to GWB.
Wrong.
His work that was rejected by the Smithsonian was peer reviewed.
You have said that his work was 'religious propaganda' and I am waiting for proof of that.
You can knock off the "peer-reviewed" stuff. We all know how it works. And would you be in a position to know anyway? IOW, what professional publications would you have access to, besides the pile in the dentist's office?
Well, if I tell you who I really am, I will have to kill you......
What work? I know of no work by Sternberg that was peer reviewed and rejected.
Peer reviewed work, 2 doctorates in evolutionary biology, rejected by the Smithsonian.
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.