Early clues to 'modern' humans

bbcnews.com ^ | nov-7-2001 | bbcnews

[green team 1999]

Wednesday, 7 November, 2001, 16:35 GMT Early clues to 'modern' humans

Modern humans descended from African hominids

A collection of bone tools dating back 70,000 years is raising new questions about human evolution.
The discovery suggests that our early human ancestors were far more sophisticated than previously thought.

The bone tools and flaked stone points, possibly used as spear heads, were found in a cave on the South African coast, east of Stillbaai.

Until now, it was assumed that humans were not advanced enough to make such tools until long after they had emerged from Africa and migrated into Europe.

The appearance of bone, rather than stone tools, and signs of abstract and creative thought in the form of body decoration and art works appeared in Europe about 35,000 years ago.

But according to new evidence, published in the Journal of Human Evolution, ancient humans were already making bone tools in Africa more than twice as long ago.

The implications are that humans came out of Africa with fully developed "modern" technology and modes of behaviour.

'Modern' behaviour
Royden Yates, one of the team that discovered the tools, told the BBC: "Every indication that we have been able to gather suggests that we are looking at something between 80 and 100,000 years old.

"Artefacts very similar to this occur in Europe and they are dated to about 19,000 years ago."

The collection of 28 bone tools and related artefacts were found in Blombos cave, located on a cliff overlooking the Indian Ocean at the extreme tip of South Africa.

A yellow sand layer lying above the sediment containing the tools is thought to date to 60,000-70,000 years ago. The tools were found below the sand layer and are thought to be somewhat older.

Bone tools need a high degree of skill and labour to produce, which is why archaeologists consider them a significant indicator of human development.

New horizons
According to archaeologist Christopher Henshilwood, of the Iziko-South African Museum in Cape Town, the tools show that people in Africa exhibited "modern" behaviour as far back as 80-100,000 years ago.

"What has been suggested up until now is that modern human behaviour was a very late occurrence," he said.

"The implication was that though people were anatomically modern in Africa from about 150,000 to 100,000 years ago, they remained behaviourally non-modern until about 40,000 or 50 000 years ago, when they suddenly changed and then moved into Europe and elsewhere."

There have been a few claims of equally old bone tools found at other African sites, such as in the Democratic Republic of Congo. But these have been either single finds or of doubtful authenticity.

However, while Europe has been extensively excavated, many sites in Africa have yet to be examined closely.

This find may mark the beginning of a new understanding of the human fossil record.

The main image on this page comes from the BBC's forthcoming series Walking With Beasts

for information and discusion only,not for profit etc,etc.

[green team 1999]

here we go again with evolution subject

[Hank Hill]

I got my boy Bobby here in the same room, and you post dirty pictures? Boy, I tell you what.

[ScholarWarrior]

Look, Ma---Arabs!

[Sungirl]

The Saudi Ambassador to the U.N. has just finished giving a speech, and walks out into the lobby where he meets his American counterpart.

They shake hands and as they walk, the Saudi says, "You know, I have just one question about what I have seen in America."

The American says, "Well, your Excellency, anything I can do to help you I will do."

The Saudi whispers, "My son watches this show 'Star Trek,' and in it there are Russians and Blacks and Asians, but never any Arabs. He is very upset. He doesn't understand why there are never any Arabs in Star Trek."

The American leans over, "That's because it takes place in the future, your Excellency."

>^..^<

[dubyagee]

According to archaeologist Christopher Henshilwood, of the Iziko-South African Museum in Cape Town, the tools show that people in Africa exhibited "modern" behaviour as far back as 80-100,000 years ago.

Okay, I'll bite. So these guys were intelligent enough to exhibit "modern" behavior and yet the first written forms of language date back to what? 30,000 years, maybe. What's the date on some of the earliest written communications. Why such a gap???

[dubyagee]

Hee, hee hee....

[JenB]

Just finished watching 'Enterprise' Bump!

However, as a geek, I must point out that Dr. Julian Bashir (Alexander Siddig on Deep Sapce Nine), you know, the cute one, seems to be of Arab descent....

[keithtoo]

First of all, I have an uncle who looks like that guy in the picture and he was born in 1955!

Secondly, its is amazing how scientific discoveries, whether they be of animals, humans or plants, ALWAYS tend to show that life forms appear "suddenly and essentially fully developed". HAH!!! I wonder why?

Evolution is a religion in decline, much like Episcopalianism.

[Ahban]

Hmmm. A crevo thread. Things must be getting back to normal on FreeRepublic. An excellent sign that the terrorists have lost the initiative.

I am quite skeptical of the claims of the article though. It is HIGHLY unlikely, IMHO, that there were humans running around 70K ago that had the exact same technology as those of only 19K ago. Modern humans make extrodinary advances in technology over geologically insignificant times. It is far from ironclad that these tools are even accurately dated. They could have even been buried by their makers in the sandy/silty ground. That would put them in a lower layer. There are no fossils to go with the tools- indeed there is a fossil gap around 70K ago that is striking.

The so-called moderns from 120-100K ago don't look like moderns to me. I have seen photos of the handful of skulls from that time. They are disticntly different from ours.

Add to this that even much more recent finds are from groups that have NO contribution to the modern gene pool. An article a few days ago spoke of DNA analysis on a 12,000 year old hair follicle from a dead (presumably)homo sapians. The owner was not a part of any extant human group.

Antidiluvian race? Dunno. But my point is that the case is far from ironclad that these tools were as old as they say, and even if they were no evidence to say that they were made by our ancestors.

[dadokane]

A collection of bone tools might suggest something else...

[mlocher]

if you want to believe that you evolved from one of those things, be my guest.

[exmoor]

That picture puts Sharpton to shame!

[eno_]

Probably because earlier examples have not survived. If humans were anatomically "modern" 70,000 years ago, why should you expect them to be cognitively that different? I suspect there are layers of pre-Egyptian civilizations yet to be discovered, or, at least, their presence inferred.

[dubyagee]

That's my point, I wouldn't expect them to be cognitively different. So where are the 70,000 year old cave paintings? Where are the written "words" from that far back. If tools survived, surely etchings in stone would.

I'm sure now that they surmise humans weren't that different that far back, the 70,000 year old "writings" will not be far behind.

[gcruse]

if you want to believe that you evolved from
one of those things, be my guest.

I do.  And I did.  And my kind will continue
to evolve.  How disappointing it must be to
think that you are as good as it is going to get.

[mlocher]

how disappointing it must be for you to think that you are as good as it is going to get

i was created in god's image. it doesn't get any better than that!

[gcruse]

i was created in god's image. it doesn't get any better than that!

Pity.  You know, my dog makes his own vitamin C.  Why
can't you?

[Genesis defender]

And my kind will continue to evolve.

Your kind?
And what kind would that be?

[mlocher]

i see that you are still evolving