Posted on 04/02/2007 7:09:39 PM PDT by blam
Skeleton holds key to origin of man
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
Last Updated: 2:24am BST 03/04/2007
A skeleton of a possible hybrid between modern and more ancient humans has been found in China, which challenges the theory that modern man originated in Africa.
Most experts believe that our ancestors emerged in Africa more than 150,000 years ago and then migrated around the world.
However, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Prof Erik Trinkaus and colleagues provide details of a skeleton found in 2003 from Tianyuan Cave near Beijing.
The skeleton is 42,000 to 38,500 years old, making it the oldest modern human skeleton from eastern Eurasia, and one of the oldest modern humans from the region.
Most of its features match those of modern man, though some are more like late archaic humans, including the Neanderthals. The authors conclude that, as our ancestors spread, they interbred with local, more ancient, types of human.
The researchers say it is unlikely that a simple spread of modern humans occurred east of Africa, especially because slightly younger skeletons have been found in eastern Eurasia with similar features.
"The partial skeleton from Tianyuan is an important find, since there is a dearth of material from east Asia to document how modern humans became established there," said Prof Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum.
"Radiocarbon dates place the find close in age to the earliest Homo sapiens fossils so far discovered in Europe, Lebanon, Malaysia and Australia.
"Outside of Africa, only the early modern finds from Skhul and Qafzeh [in Israel], and possibly Liujiang from southern China, are of much greater antiquity."
That’s a fact.
Here are some facts on dating. Check out these sources and get back to me:
ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth CreationistsRadiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.
Are tree-ring chronologies reliable? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
Tree Ring and C14 DatingHow does the radiocarbon dating method work? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How precise is radiocarbon dating?
Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?
Has radiocarbon dating been invalidated by unreasonable results?
Radiocarbon WEB-info Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Waikato, New Zealand.
I didn't study any of this in school but, I'm partial to it also. After all the reading I do, it just seems the most logical explanation.
You must know that DNA studies does not support this 'take' on things though.
I thought Mungo Man was the big break in the case until the date proved to be much earlier than originally thought.
Fossil Challenge To Out Of Africa Theory (Mungo Man)
I am familiar with most of this stuff.
I do not know or understand your point.
My statement stands. The earth has changed and man can only look where man has access.
No it don't.. its a Yarn, fiction, a story....
Race and Human Evolution:
A Fatal Attraction
by Milford Wolpoff
and Rachel Caspari
hardcover
Given the way that humans like to marry those like them, any inbreeding would be limited to, say. captives. So did the human race begin with slavery?
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
And they are unlikely ever to find it. It is like a crossword puzzle of ten million pieces and we have but a few thousand of them. A few bones here, a few bones there. Even if we assume that evolution took place, it is quite possible that we shall never trace it, at least on the ground. But could not the differences be simply from the splitting of groups and genetic isolation?
Thank you. Isn't that the truth.
Zecharia Sitchin has done a lot of work on translating ancient texts. Not that he is 100% accurate, but clearly, he demonstrates an approach that should be considered.
Then we can look to Immanuel Velikovski...whose work preceded Sitchin’s.
http://www.varchive.org/
Bottom line. Evolution fails. We, today, can manipulate DNA!
And DNA was manipulated in the past.
That is a FACT which cannot be denied.
What came first, the skeleton or the man?
I can hear the excuses now it was dark it was late I had a few to many to drink and we all know they look better in the dark and close to closing time!
Thank God some things never change cause the human kind would of died out long ago!
“Making this the world’s first skeleton key.”
No, this is only a skeleton of a theory with no meat on its bones.
I think the anthropologists will have to have another skull session before they can get to the marrow.
Good humerus post, but I think you're ribbin' us. But go ahead, talus all about it.
We're too busy for that skull session today but maybe we can to that on the marrow. These things need tibia scheduled, you know. How we fit everything into our busy schedules ulna ever know.
Does the Skeleton resemble Ted Kennedy?
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.
