Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scientists Show We've Been Losing Face For 10,000 Years
The Times (UK) ^ | 11-20-2005 | Jonathan Leake

Posted on 11/20/2005 1:21:49 PM PST by blam

The Sunday Times November 20, 2005

Scientists show we’ve been losing face for 10,000 years

Jonathan Leake, Science Editor

THE human face is shrinking. Research into people’s appearance over the past 10,000 years has found that our ancestors’ heads and faces were up to 30% larger than now. Changes in diet are thought to be the main cause. The switch to softer, farmed foods means that jawbones, teeth, skulls and muscles do not need to be as strong as in the past.

The shrinkage has been blamed for a surge in dental problems caused by crooked or overlapping teeth.

“Over the past 10,000 years there has been a trend toward rounder skulls with smaller faces and jaws,” said Clark Spencer Larsen, professor of anthropology at Ohio State University.

“This began with the rise in farming and the increasing use of cooking, which began around 10,000 years ago.”

His conclusions are based on measurements from thousands of teeth, jawbones, skulls and other bones collected from prehistoric sites around the world.

Skulls from the site of a 9,000-year-old city in Turkey — thought to be the world’s oldest — show that the faces of city-dwellers had already begun to shrink compared with contemporaries who had not settled down.

Details will be reported at a forthcoming conference on the global history of health. Larsen will suggest that a typical human of 10,000 years ago would have had a much heavier build overall because of the hard work needed to gather food and stay alive.

He said: “Many men then would have had the shape of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s head while women might have looked more like Camilla [the Duchess of Cornwall]. By contrast, Tony Blair and George Bush are good examples of the more delicate modern form.”

Other studies are confirming Larsen’s findings. George Armelagos, professor of anthropology at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, has made extensive measurements on people from Nubia in modern Egypt and Sudan to see how their appearance has changed.

He found that the top of the head, or cranial vault, had grown higher and more rounded, a pattern also seen in human remains found at sites in other parts of the world.

Charles Loring Brace, professor of anthropology at the University of Michigan, said: “Human faces are shrinking by 1%-2% every 1,000 years.

“What’s more, we are growing less teeth. Ten thousand years ago everyone grew wisdom teeth but now only half of us get them, and other teeth like the lateral incisors have become much smaller. This is evolution in action.”

Softer food may not be the only cause. Some scientists blame sexual selection — the preference of prehistoric people for partners with smaller faces.

Dr Simon Hillson, of the Institute of Archaeology at University College London, has studied humans living from 26,000 years ago to about 8,000 years ago. He measured 15,000 prehistoric teeth, jaws and skulls collected by museums around the world and found the same pattern of shrinking faces.

He said: “The presumption is that people must have chosen mates with smaller, shorter faces — but quite why this would be is less clear.”


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 10000; anthropology; been; face; godsgravesglyphs; losing; neandertal; neandertals; neanderthal; neanderthals; pelosi; science; scientists; show; years
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 421-436 next last
To: Pablo64

Nah, you'll look like a lamprey.


361 posted on 11/21/2005 9:00:02 AM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

I think she's in love with you.


362 posted on 11/21/2005 9:01:57 AM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws

She's possessed!

363 posted on 11/21/2005 9:18:25 AM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

I think that it's a defense mechanism, trying to justify the sight of so many people who clearly don't agree with them and trying to justify the fact that their "logic" never seems to convince anyone. Years ago there was a similar claim made about atheists in the newsgroup alt.atheism.


364 posted on 11/21/2005 9:22:07 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

It's interesting that Darwin put off publishing for twenty years because he anticipated people like our creos who would judge the merits of the idea by its imagined consequenses.


365 posted on 11/21/2005 9:22:09 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: balrog666; Dimensio

Demented. Maybe she's perfect for Dimensio? :-O


366 posted on 11/21/2005 9:50:00 AM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws

Nah. Dimensio actually comes from the word "Dimension". I used to go by that handle on IRC, but one day I accidentally left off the 'n' and it stuck.


367 posted on 11/21/2005 9:56:40 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
While he didn't reveal their identities publicly, he did do so privately. It was two of the more notorious, if not infamous, anti-Evo posters on FR at the time.

Not real hard to figure out. And one of them is rather proud of it.

368 posted on 11/21/2005 10:09:45 AM PST by dread78645 (Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

Sure. And we're supposed to believe that. Are you sure you didn't mean ICR?

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.


369 posted on 11/21/2005 10:36:03 AM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: Sofa King; Wonder Warthog; Ichneumon
Die-hard creationists who refuse to listen to anything you try to explain to them are nothing but timesinks.

Spot on!

370 posted on 11/21/2005 10:45:42 AM PST by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The really laughable thing is that the handful of evos here are constantly trying to forge a link between evolution and biology, which is absurd on it's face since biology is all about what is really alive, not what someone chooses to imagine once was alive.

What a pant load.

371 posted on 11/21/2005 10:51:49 AM PST by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
What a pant load.

Consider the source - more like a diaper load.

372 posted on 11/21/2005 11:05:09 AM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
Not real hard to figure out. And one of them is rather proud of it.

Well done!

So I was half right; one of the two was subsequently banned, the other hasn't posted in several years....

373 posted on 11/21/2005 11:10:00 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws
The problem with that scenario is the number of progeny produced by any segment of humans. In our current mobile interacting society, very few people whether ugly like me or handsome like everyone else reproduces and passes on their genes. I'd hazard a guess that ugly people have as many or more children than the lookers in society. If you factor in the cheaters that have their teeth fixed during childhood so their spouses have no idea that they have the crooked tooth gene until they see it in their own children, it is my humble opinion that the ugly people are winning the war of sexual selection.
374 posted on 11/21/2005 11:27:36 AM PST by b_sharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: dread78645

I'm surprised effdot managed to remember which side he was voting for. The voices must have been taking a break that day.


375 posted on 11/21/2005 11:54:48 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp

David Steinberg used to do a routine about Jewish people and nose jobs. Something like "Great big eyes, great big cheekbones and a little teenie nose. And then they have a baby with a nose like a macaw. It's God's way of going Booga, Booga, booga" (Quote not accurate but close enough).

If you have time to dig out these symmetry studies, they are quite interesting.


376 posted on 11/21/2005 12:40:16 PM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
What a pant load.

LOL!

377 posted on 11/21/2005 12:57:25 PM PST by FOG724 (http://gravenimagemusic.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws
"David Steinberg used to do a routine about Jewish people and nose jobs. Something like "Great big eyes, great big cheekbones and a little teenie nose. And then they have a baby with a nose like a macaw. It's God's way of going Booga, Booga, booga" (Quote not accurate but close enough).

Proof positive I am right.

"If you have time to dig out these symmetry studies, they are quite interesting."

Any idea where I start looking?

378 posted on 11/21/2005 1:06:57 PM PST by b_sharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp

Here's another:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10828557&query_hl=2

When you go there ask it to display "Related Articles" and check out the citations.

20 years ago there was one guy in New Mexico talking about this and now there's hundreds. I don't know what you have available. I've seen articles in Science News and Science about this.


379 posted on 11/21/2005 1:31:13 PM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: blam
Some scientists blame sexual selection — the preference of prehistoric people for partners with smaller faces.

Then why do we still have TEETH!?

;^)


380 posted on 11/21/2005 1:48:29 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 421-436 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson