Posted on 07/10/2002 11:51:16 AM PDT by Mr.Clark
It's the most important find in living memory.
It was found in the desert in Chad by an international team and is thought to be approximately seven million years old.
"I knew I would one day find it... I've been looking for 25 years," said Michel Brunet of the University of Poitiers, France.
Scientists say it is the most important discovery in the search for the origins of humankind since the first Australopithecus "ape-man" remains were found in Africa in the 1920s.
The newly discovered skull finally puts to rest any idea that there might be a single "missing link" between humans and chimpanzees, they say.
Messy evolution
Analysis of the ancient find is not yet complete, but already it is clear that it has an apparently puzzling combination of modern and ancient features.
Henry Gee, senior editor at the scientific journal Nature, said that the fossil makes it clear how messy the process of evolution has been.
"It shows us there wasn't a nice steady progression from ancient hominids to what we are today," he told BBC News Online.
"It's the most important find in living memory, the most important since the australopithecines in the 1920s.
"It's amazing to find such a wonderful skull that's so old," he said.
What is the skull's significance?
The skull is so old that it comes from a time when the creatures which were to become modern humans had not long diverged from the line that would become chimpanzees.
There were very few of these creatures around relative to the number of people in the world today, and only a tiny percentage of them were ever fossilised.
So despite all the false starts, failed experiments and ultimate winners produced by evolution, the evidence for what went on between 10 and five million years ago is very scarce.
Grandparent, great uncle, great aunt?
There will be plenty of debate about where the Chad skull fits into the incomplete and sketchy picture researchers have drawn for the origins of the human species.
"A find like this does make us question the trees people have built up of human evolution," Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum told the BBC.
Sahelanthropus tchadensis, as the find has been named, may turn out to be a direct human ancestor or it may prove to be a member of a side branch of our family tree.
The team which found the skull believes it is that of a male, but even that is not 100% clear.
"They've called it a male individual, based on the strong brow ridge, but it's equally possible it's a female," said Professor Stringer.
Future finds may make the whole picture of human evolution clearer.
"We've got to be ready for shocks and surprises to come," he said.
The Sahelanthropus has been nicknamed Toumai, a name often given to children born in the dry season in Chad.
Full details of the discovery appear in the journal Nature.
Evidence, please.
So, you want them to deny the evidence of a bone?
Yes, why reason? We must first presuppose that logic and reason are true. But we cannot see reason; we must believe it to be true. Where did it come from? How about the laws of the universe, how did they get there? We must presuppose order or our philosophy is untenable. Yet if logic is universally true when correctly applied it creates a dilemma for those who insist on science as the highest source for their epistemology. Reason and logic can’t be proved. The Christian however believes that logic and reason work because God made them. The atheist must borrow the energy – matter, physical laws, and rules of logic from God before he set out to replace him. I only need presuppose God.
That would be fun. But most of them don't go quite that far.
I do agree with the creationists on one point. We often make wild assumptions based on small amounts of data. If scientists in 5 million years come down, find only the elephant man's remains, they will have a very strange view of what human's were like. Sometimes the guesses are very educated, other times, later discoveries prove them wrong. But, the sticking your head in the sand and pretending that the earth is 6,000 years old crowd really is getting silly. Most christian denominations have moved beyond that, including the Catholic Church. Maybe, one day, the rest of the lot will as well.
Yah. there are a lot of premature "victories". But the good thing in that scenario is that a lot of scientists review the evidence pretty thuroughly. Even if refuted, it makes for quick and pretty solid results in the end.
EBUCK
Couldn't help but think of you.
Please take Lucy with you when you move.
Hmmm... What happened to Hudsons?
Admit their ignorance and hubris.
Tell me if I got my bold additions wrong.
No. Because even after years of refutation and conclusive evidence to the contrary they continue to spout the same garbage as if there never were. Patent dis-honesty.
Give me their theories and I'll find the refutations. And don't start with the Lucy knee-cap thing. That is one of their worst quote-mining debacles to date.
EBUCK
Yeah, well,SO?
Don't try to bring science into this thread!
Have to admit you are right. I overlooked some of the drawbacks of the test.
I will go that far! If Jesus can create loves of bread and fishes to feed the 5000, and those fishes had an appearence of a history that they did not have, why would I doubt.
The imaginations of men make a poor epistemology; I’ll take the word of the eyewitness.
Of course, when that hubris originates from profound ignorance....
Start with the catastrophic formation of the Grand Canyon, or the floating mat for the formation of coal.
I could hazard a guess. But you wouldn't want to hear it.
The imaginations of men make a poor epistemology; I’ll take the word of the eyewitness.
If charged with murder would you rather be tried on the basis of empiricle evidence or on that of some witnesses whose testimony is years old and are suspected of superstition that would make a palm reader flinch?
EBUCK
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.