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

Skip to comments.

Astonishing Skull Found in Africa
BBC ^ | 10 July, 2002 | Ivan Noble

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.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-287 next last
To: ASA Vet
A lot in common with the Evolutionists.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/713846/posts
21 posted on 07/10/2002 12:10:51 PM PDT by Khepera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Darth Reagan
The Sahelanthropus has been nicknamed Toumai

There is your nickname.

22 posted on 07/10/2002 12:10:59 PM PDT by Gaston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Darth Reagan
This guy needs a good nickname at least!

How about "Hanging Chad"? After all, that's where it was found!

23 posted on 07/10/2002 12:11:11 PM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Clark
It is interesting. It's also humorous. Every find like this is heralded as the greatest find in history. LOL. I have this scene in my minds eye that sees an anomoly, possibly a very inferior specimin that may not be representative at all. But now that it is discovered, the scientific community is all aflutter. What we may be about to base all our belief systems on could be nothing more than that day's missing link, but not ours.

What if ten thousand years from now somebody uncovers Michael Jackson? I can see it now, yep Ludwig those 21st century humanoids were a strange lot.

Remember the large dinosour that had the wrong head on it for decades? There are times when I have to wink when the scientific community pats itself on the back.

24 posted on 07/10/2002 12:11:53 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
I have examined the photograph of the skull and, after much study and research, have come to the following conclusion: There's a piece missing.
25 posted on 07/10/2002 12:11:56 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Clark
The evolutionist place all their hope on one bone, and we call that science!
26 posted on 07/10/2002 12:12:09 PM PDT by ibme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Ummm ... this is "Bob," as he appeared in "Men In Black." Doesn't look at all like the guy above.


27 posted on 07/10/2002 12:12:46 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
How about "Hanging Chad"? After all, that's where it was found!

They said they haven't determined if it is male or female!

28 posted on 07/10/2002 12:12:51 PM PDT by Darth Reagan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
And then there's Kennewick man...
29 posted on 07/10/2002 12:13:12 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
we'll know more in the future about where this skull fits

They have a piece of a jaw they think is part of the skull. Teeth are the key! Means they can link this up.

30 posted on 07/10/2002 12:13:41 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs
Ah, I forgot about that Bob. Something else, then?
31 posted on 07/10/2002 12:14:16 PM PDT by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Clark
...is thought to be approximately seven million years old.

Does anyone really believe that?

32 posted on 07/10/2002 12:14:27 PM PDT by wallcrawlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Given his/her current state, how about "Bitsy"?
33 posted on 07/10/2002 12:15:18 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr
Well, that's over twice as old as I am. But to be fair, I was in cryogenic sleep for most of that time, so it may not count.

Hey, it was a long trip...
34 posted on 07/10/2002 12:16:58 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Doug Loss
…is thought to be approximately seven million years old...

Who thinks it is 70,000,000 years old? And how did they arrive at this conclusion?

I think maybe the desperation to rationalize the evolution myth is so great that the conclusion is dating the evidence or is that predating.

35 posted on 07/10/2002 12:17:14 PM PDT by DaveyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB
We know it was seven million years old because it was in a rock that old. We know the rock was that old because it contained a seven million year old skull.

Elementary, my dear WAtson.
36 posted on 07/10/2002 12:18:59 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Clark
"..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.."

So....let me get this straight....this skull, is from a "creature" that had not even become a chimpanzee yet, much less a modern human?

37 posted on 07/10/2002 12:19:18 PM PDT by Icthus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darth Reagan
LOL, I guess they haven't.
38 posted on 07/10/2002 12:20:08 PM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
I do remember him, but remind me of the significance if you would. I don't remember the details on that one.
39 posted on 07/10/2002 12:20:40 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Icthus
This statement is really creepy. It assumes a lot of theoretical stuff as "fact."

The phrase
"it comes from a time when the creatures which were to become modern humans..."
should read
"it comes from a time when the creatures which some believe were to become modern humans...""
40 posted on 07/10/2002 12:22:09 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-287 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