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 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 281-287 next last
To: DoughtyOne
Kinda looks like your average run-of-the-mill australopithecine to me :) Not as chunky as a robustus, but not everyone can have a sagittal crest. Be interesting to see if the new species classification holds.
81 posted on 07/10/2002 1:09:54 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
It's what happens when one is afraid that one's paradigm might shift
82 posted on 07/10/2002 1:10:31 PM PDT by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs
How about Particles?

Dunno. How many paleontologists are They Might Be Giants fans?

83 posted on 07/10/2002 1:11:00 PM PDT by Condorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: blam
FYI
84 posted on 07/10/2002 1:11:27 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Yeah, "Bob" is OK since He's the ancestor of all of us.

85 posted on 07/10/2002 1:12:13 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
The majority of 'scientists' these days have been so busy trying to make the pieces fit into a mythological picture of their own design, that they have neglected to remember that the Manufacturer sent it all in a box with a picture on it.
86 posted on 07/10/2002 1:12:14 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I've never seen so many people so desperately rejecting even the idea of a pre-human species. Of course, if pre-humans existed, someone's fairy tale would be in jeopardy, so it's much more comforting to shut your eyes, plug up your ears, and insist that the whole thing's a fraud. Or that the people who found it are fools, while those refusing to even consider its existence are really the bright guys. It's fascinating to see this stuff in action.

I can't believe the way they're scrambling here. Reminds me of a tribe of monkeys after spying out an approaching lion.

87 posted on 07/10/2002 1:12:37 PM PDT by balrog666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Of course, if pre-humans existed, someone's fairy tale would be in jeopardy,

The fairy tales that are in jeopardy are of the Darwininian kind. Another just-so story must now be contrived.

88 posted on 07/10/2002 1:13:04 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
"Kinda looks like your average run-of-the-mill australopithecine to me"

Again, from the lit:
"[differentated from Australopithecus] by a less prognathic lower face (nasospinale–prosthion length shorter at least in presumed males) with a smaller malar (infraorbital) region and a larger, more continuous supraorbital torus, a relatively more elongate braincase, a relatively long, flat nuchal plane with a large external occipital crest, non-incisiform and mesiodistally long canines, and thinner cheek-teeth enamel"
89 posted on 07/10/2002 1:14:36 PM PDT by mykej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
Strang! There's a name for the Sstonishing Skull.
90 posted on 07/10/2002 1:15:49 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Beat me to it.....
91 posted on 07/10/2002 1:16:08 PM PDT by Icthus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs
Strang! There's a name for the Sstonishing Skull.

And for the Astonishing Non-Proofreading Poster, too.

92 posted on 07/10/2002 1:17:24 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Clark
It's either another fake or another fake. The guy even goes so far as to say that he knew he was going to "find it". Just another evilutionist trying to further THE BIG LIE.
93 posted on 07/10/2002 1:17:30 PM PDT by CAPTAINSUPERMARVELMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
the Manufacturer sent it all in a box with a picture on it.

Really? What does the picture look like? And where does this skull belong in the picture?

94 posted on 07/10/2002 1:18:34 PM PDT by Condorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: CAPTAINSUPERMARVELMAN
LOL! Great moniker!
95 posted on 07/10/2002 1:18:37 PM PDT by Icthus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
It seems to not have been dated yet.

That's only because it hasn't met Bill Clinton.

96 posted on 07/10/2002 1:18:47 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
I was joking...
97 posted on 07/10/2002 1:19:38 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: mykej
As my late granny would have said: Bushwah. They've only got the one specimen. And only most of it at that. Now I'll grant you I stunk at statistics, but how do we know that the so-called new hominid in question isn't just clocking in at the end of the range of variation in the australopithecine genus?
98 posted on 07/10/2002 1:21:12 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: far sider
They have to able to pick which one that gives them the date they want.

In a previous post, I surmised that the dating had not been done. That guess appears to be correct in relation to direct dating of the fossil or the matrix. The "tentative" dating has been inferred from other fossils.

Q&A: Chad fossil discovery

Can we say anything about how this creature might have lived?

Toumai was found with a wide range of other animal fossils - the excavation site has thrown up more than 700 specimens, including fish, crocodiles and rodents. Not only have these been used to date Toumai, they have also helped to open a window on the local environment 6-7 million years ago. They suggest Toumai lived in an area with a diverse range of habitats, which included lush forest and a lake.

99 posted on 07/10/2002 1:21:16 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
The "Y-5" pattern. Only hominids have it.
100 posted on 07/10/2002 1:21:32 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 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