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

Skip to comments.

Time Changes Modern Human's Face
BBC ^ | 1-25-2006 | Rebecca Morelle

Posted on 01/25/2006 8:52:48 AM PST by blam

Time changes modern human's face

By Rebecca Morelle
BBC News science reporter

Our ancestors had more prominent features but lower foreheads

Researchers have found that the shape of the human skull has changed significantly over the past 650 years.

Modern people possess less prominent features but higher foreheads than our medieval ancestors.

Writing in the British Dental Journal, the team took careful measurements of groups of skulls spanning across 30 generations.

The scientists said the differences between past and present skull shapes were "striking".

Plague victims

The team used radiographic films of skulls to record extensive measurements taken by a computer.

They looked at 30 skulls dating from the mid-14th Century. They had come from the unlucky victims of the plague. The skulls had been excavated from plague pits in the 1980s in London.

Another 54 skulls examined by the team were recovered from the wreck of the Mary Rose which sank off the south coast of England in 1545.

All the skulls were compared with 31 recent orthodontic records from the School of Dentistry in Birmingham.

"This new research shows how bones... can provide more knowledge to the scientific community, and ultimately the public"

Professor Robert Foley, Cambridge University The two principal differences discovered were that our ancestors had more prominent features, but their cranial vault - the distance measured from the eyes to the top of the skull - was smaller.

Dr Peter Rock, lead author of the study and director of orthodontistry at Birmingham University, told the BBC News website: "The astonishing finding is the increased cranial vault heights.

"The increase is very considerable. For example, the vault height of the plague skulls were 80mm, and the modern ones were 95mm - that's in the order of 20% bigger, which is really rather a lot."

He suggests that the increase in size may be due to an increase in mental capacity over the ages.

Repatriating bones

The study of human remains has previously fallen into controversy, and a report commissioned by the UK government called for human remains to be repatriated where possible.

The ancient skulls used in this study, from which the radiographic films were taken, have either been reburied or are now housed in museums.

Professor Robert Foley is director of the Leverhulme Centre for Evolutionary Studies at Cambridge University, and sat on a government working group which has drawn up guidelines on working with human remains.

"The study of human remains can provide vital information about our past. There is a huge interest in our biological past - both from an evolutionary and a historical point of view - and research into human bones can tell us a great deal," he said.

"This new research shows how bones, and even the records of bones, can provide more knowledge to the scientific community, and ultimately the public."


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: changes; face; godsgravesglyphs; humans; maryrose; modern; plague; time
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 next last
To: blam
He suggests that the increase in size may be due to an increase in mental capacity over the ages.

What does he mean by "mental capacity"? Does he mean the volume of information storage capacity? If he means level of intelligence (We are smarter now!) then the evidence from ancient history does not support this.

21 posted on 01/25/2006 9:28:51 AM PST by Drawsing (The fool shows his annoyance at once. The prudent man overlooks an insult. (Proverbs 12:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

The Mary Rose was an English ship, presumably carrying English people. The London plague pits were definitely full of English people (that is to say, of Anglo-Saxon descent).

Where are they getting the skulls that they are comparing these 650 yr old skulls against? Modern Europe and modern England are all inevitably a mix of many diffferent genetic groups (Celts, Franks, Goths, etc, not to mention more recent immigrants). Why couldn't that be behind the differences?


22 posted on 01/25/2006 9:29:01 AM PST by stormlead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam; FairOpinion; Ernest_at_the_Beach; StayAt HomeMother; 24Karet; 3AngelaD; asp1; ...
Thanks Blam. You realize of course that this new study proves that everyone is descended from a small group which left Africa 50,000 years ago, right? /sarc

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

23 posted on 01/25/2006 9:30:42 AM PST by SunkenCiv (In the long run, there is only the short run.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia
Is Judge Napolitano a throwback then?

The Judge is one of the brightest and most well-read personalities on satellite. And he's a great guy! I'd love to have dinner with him sometime.

24 posted on 01/25/2006 9:41:17 AM PST by MJemison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: blam

Sorry ID people, but here is an example of evolution.


25 posted on 01/25/2006 9:53:08 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Evolution-in-action ping.


26 posted on 01/25/2006 9:58:06 AM PST by Junior (Identical fecal matter, alternate diurnal period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Well, mine sure doesn't look like it used to!


27 posted on 01/25/2006 10:00:14 AM PST by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

That's not a forehead, it's a FIVEhead! ;)


28 posted on 01/25/2006 10:01:56 AM PST by bikepacker67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Junior; blam
Blam doesn't like it when I do an evo ping to one of "his" threads, and I generally don't do it. But this is too good to pass up. I'm cranking up the ping machine ...
29 posted on 01/25/2006 10:02:32 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Wacka

Your comment suggests that evolution occurs much faster than the millions or thousands of years normally posited in the Darwinian theory that evolution works to improve the breed according to natural selection caused by adaptation to environment and/ or events.

How to account for a change of 20% in only a few hundred years? Wouldn't this be mainly due to diet improvement and simply create bigger bone structures rather than any particular increase in mental ability?


30 posted on 01/25/2006 10:03:05 AM PST by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: blam

DeEvolution


31 posted on 01/25/2006 10:03:23 AM PST by TheForceOfOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
Evolution Ping

The List-O-Links
A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 340 names.
See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped.
To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit,
and How to argue against a scientific theory.

32 posted on 01/25/2006 10:03:47 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Or that there might be a financial correlation between lowbrow-ness, and being buried in a pit, as opposed to a grave.

If you check out the portraits of English royalty, many actually were "high brow". (Of coarse they were all cousins.)

I suspect this has more to do with who was thought to be the hunks or the babes.

33 posted on 01/25/2006 10:04:49 AM PST by lizma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: blam
Oh. I thought this was about TIME magazine. It wouldn't be the first time they mess with photos to fit their agenda. :o)
34 posted on 01/25/2006 10:05:08 AM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Or, that those who have some degree of inherited reistance to the plague (as well as to cholera, typhoid, typhus, AIDS, etc.) simply have rounder, larger heads ~ rather like the heads of those in populations we know have a high incidence of such resistance ~ we could have a "replacement" situation, or simple selection.


35 posted on 01/25/2006 10:06:54 AM PST by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wacka
Sorry ID people, but here is an example of evolution.

So why aren't humans giving birth to different species!

(Remember, ID/creationists redefine evolution into something that never happens because knocking down strawmen is far easier than addressing reality).
36 posted on 01/25/2006 10:08:35 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Wacka
Onliest way you'all kin prove "evolution" is to git yerself a NEW SPECIES that cannot produce fertile offspring with the mother species.

Otherwise, you have nothing more than variation within a species.

Now what was it Darwin titled his famous book?

37 posted on 01/25/2006 10:10:29 AM PST by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: lizma

(Not just cousins ~ sometimes aunt and nephew, or uncle and niece, or even brother and sister).


38 posted on 01/25/2006 10:11:57 AM PST by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Onliest way you'all kin prove "evolution" is to git yerself a NEW SPECIES that cannot produce fertile offspring with the mother species.

Absolutely nothing in science is ever "proven". Speciation, however, has been observed.
39 posted on 01/25/2006 10:12:40 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
I thought they'd given up on the idea that plant species were comparable to animal species several years back.

In fact, there's even debate of what constitutes "a plant" ~ is it the flower, the leaves, the woody stem, etc.

In the fall, many of my neighbors consider the leaf to be a malevolent critter, for example.

The "isolated breeding group" concept (noted in that article) is the definition used by the environmental extremists to prove the existence of thousands of species of salmon ~ it is "faulty".

That's why I'm sticking with my own, and Darwin's, understanding of species ~ that you can produce fertile offspring.

40 posted on 01/25/2006 10:19:43 AM PST by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 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