Fossils Reveal Clues on Human Ancestor (transitional fossil alert)

New York Times ^ | 20 September 2007 | John Noble Wilford

[Alter Kaker]

The discovery of four fossil skeletons of early human ancestors in Georgia, the former Soviet republic, has given scientists a revealing glimpse of a species in transition, primitive in its skull and upper body but with more advanced spines and lower limbs for greater mobility.

The findings, being reported today in the journal Nature, are considered a significant step toward understanding who were some of the first ancestors to migrate out of Africa some 1.8 million years ago. They may also yield insights into the first members of the human genus, Homo.

Until now, scientists had found only the skulls of small-brain individuals at the Georgian site of Dmanisi. They said the new evidence apparently showed the anatomical capability of this extinct population for long-distance migrations.

“We still don’t know exactly what we have got here,” David O. Lordkipanidze, the excavation leader, said Monday in an interview on a visit to New York. “We’re only beginning to describe the nature of the early Dmanisi population.”

Other paleoanthropologists said the discovery could lead to breakthroughs in the critical evolutionary period in which some members of Australopithecus, the genus made famous by the Lucy skeleton, made the transition to Homo. The step may have been taken more than two million years ago.

“The Australopithecus-Homo transition has always been murky,” said Daniel E. Lieberman, a paleoanthropologist at Harvard University. “The new discoveries further highlight the transitional and variable nature of early Homo.”

The international team led by Dr. Lordkipanidze, director of the Georgian National Museum in Tbilisi, found several skulls and stone tools at Dmanisi in the 1990s. They were dated to 1.77 million years ago and resembled Homo erectus, the immediate predecessor of Homo sapiens. The fossils were tentatively assigned to the erectus species.

[allmendream]

The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.

Saint Thomas Aquinas

I do not believe that Saint Thomas Aquinas was compromising or rationalizing. Where interpretation of scripture and reality conflict I am afraid that it is the interpretation that must really be called into question.

A being of infinite MIGHT and MAGESTY did the equivalent of a weeks worth of work and then took a day of rest when he created the universe. He created it to be defined by order and the division of things; light from darkness, day from night, sea from land. He created animals of all types and in their multitudes. He created mankind raised us up from dust and set into us a soul after HIS own image. This is the message of Genesis, it isn’t a science textbook, but it gives one the philosophical underpinnings that makes science possible, the idea that the universe is an ordered and predictable thing governed by rules.

[Sola Veritas]

“I do not believe that Saint Thomas Aquinas was compromising or rationalizing. Where interpretation of scripture and reality conflict I am afraid that it is the interpretation that must really be called into question.”

Thomas Aquinas was Roman Catholic. In my post I clearly specified “Conservative, Evangelical, and Protestant.” Not to insult Roman Catholics, but to exclude them because of the stands taken by their hierarchy. I already knew how most RCs feel, and it wasn’t my intention to quarrel with one. And it still isn’t. My post was directed at liked minded evangelicals.

[allmendream]

My point stands despite doctrinal differences. The majority of Christendom throughout history has not adopted a literal interpretation of scripture. Neither does the Jewish faith see belief in Genesis as a contradiction towards acceptance of scientific evidence about the age of the earth, the universe, life and humanity.

[TigersEye]

That thing is not human.

[Sola Veritas]

“My point stands despite doctrinal differences. The majority of Christendom throughout history has not adopted a literal interpretation of scripture. Neither does the Jewish faith see belief in Genesis as a contradiction towards acceptance of scientific evidence about the age of the earth, the universe, life and humanity.”

That just isn’t true, but I won’t argue the point. Except to say that until Roman Catholicism got a choke grip on minds in about the third century AD until the Great Reformers like Luther and Calvin were sent by God.....

Judaism is passe and doesn’t count as a “authority.”

[allmendream]

Well it was written in their language, that gives them a bit of linguistic authority at least.

But if your citing Luther as your inspiration then...

“Did you not know that a Jew is so beloved of God that every time one farts a thousand Angels dance?” Martin Luther

[Creationist]

Creationist do not have to retort, but it is interesting how those who adhere to evolution believe that a set of dead bones is proof of evolution.

Bones are not proof of any thing more than something lived and died.

There is not one shred of proof that the living organism was different than it's parents or that it had any offspring of any kind like it's self or different.

Nice try but keep the faith in your religious belief that non living matter can produce life.