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

Skip to comments.

Evolutionary Theory Challenged By Fossils
CBS NEWS ^ | 08/09/2007

Posted on 09/18/2007 8:47:54 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

Surprising research based on two African fossils suggests our family tree is more like a wayward bush with stubby branches, challenging what had been common thinking on how early humans evolved.

The discovery by Meave Leakey, a member of a famous family of paleontologists, shows that two species of early human ancestors lived at the same time in Kenya. That pokes holes in the chief theory of man's early evolution — that one of those species evolved from the other.

And it further discredits that iconic illustration of human evolution that begins with a knuckle-dragging ape and ends with a briefcase-carrying man.

The old theory is that the first and oldest species in our family tree, Homo habilis, evolved into Homo erectus, which then became human, Homo sapiens. But Leakey's find suggests those two earlier species lived side-by-side about 1.5 million years ago in parts of Kenya for at least half a million years. She and her research colleagues report the discovery in a paper published in Thursday's journal Nature.

The paper is based on fossilized bones found in 2000. The complete skull of Homo erectus was found within walking distance of an upper jaw of Homo habilis, and both dated from the same general time period. That makes it unlikely that Homo erectus evolved from Homo habilis, researchers said.

It is the equivalent of finding that your grandmother and great-grandmother were sisters rather than mother-daughter, said study co-author Fred Spoor, a professor of evolutionary anatomy at the University College in London.

The two species lived near each other, but probably did not interact, each having its own "ecological niche," Spoor said. Homo habilis was likely more vegetarian while Homo erectus ate some meat, he said. Like chimps and apes, "they'd just avoid each other, they don't feel comfortable in each other's company," he said.

There remains some still-undiscovered common ancestor that probably lived 2 million to 3 million years ago, a time that has not left much fossil record, Spoor said.

Overall what it paints for human evolution is a "chaotic kind of looking evolutionary tree rather than this heroic march that you see with the cartoons of an early ancestor evolving into some intermediate and eventually unto us," Spoor said in a phone interview from a field office of the Koobi Fora Research Project in northern Kenya.

That old evolutionary cartoon, while popular with the general public, is just too simple and keeps getting revised, said Bill Kimbel, who praised the latest findings. He is science director of the Institute of Human Origins at Arizona State University and was not part of the Leakey team.

"The more we know, the more complex the story gets," he said. Scientists used to think Homo sapiens evolved from Neanderthals, he said. But now we know that both species lived during the same time period and that we did not come from Neanderthals.

Now a similar discovery applies further back in time.

For the past few years there has been growing doubt and debate about whether Homo habilis evolved into Homo erectus. One of the major proponents of the more linear, or ladder-like evolution that this evidence weakens, called Leakey's findings important, but he wasn't ready to concede defeat.

Dr. Bernard Wood, a surgeon-turned-professor of human origins at George Washington University, said in an e-mail Wednesday that "this is only a skirmish in the protracted 'war' between the people who like a bushy interpretation and those who like a more ladder-like interpretation of early human evolution."

Leakey's team spent seven years analyzing the fossils before announcing it was time to redraw the family tree — and rethink other ideas about human evolutionary history. That's especially true of most immediate ancestor, Homo erectus.

Because the Homo erectus skull Leakey recovered was much smaller than others, scientists had to first prove that it was erectus and not another species nor a genetic freak. The jaw, probably from an 18- or 19-year-old female, was adult and showed no signs of malformation or genetic mutations, Spoor said. The scientists also know it is not Homo habilis from several distinct features on the jaw.

That caused researchers to re-examine the 30 other erectus skulls they have and the dozens of partial fossils. They realized that the females of that species are much smaller than the males — something different from modern man, but similar to other animals, said study co-author Susan Anton, a New York University anthropologist. Scientists hadn't looked carefully enough before to see that there was a distinct difference in males and females.

Difference in size between males and females seem to be related to monogamy, the researchers said. Primates that have same-sized males and females, such as gibbons, tend to be more monogamous. Species that are not monogamous, such as gorillas and baboons, have much bigger males.

This suggests that our ancestor Homo erectus reproduced with multiple partners.

The Homo habilis jaw was dated at 1.44 million years ago. That is the youngest ever found from a species that scientists originally figured died off somewhere between 1.7 and 2 million years ago, Spoor said. It enabled scientists to say that Homo erectus and Homo habilis lived at the same time.

All the changes to human evolutionary thought should not be considered a weakness in the theory of evolution, Kimbel said. Rather, those are the predictable results of getting more evidence, asking smarter questions and forming better theories, he said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: evolution; fossils; godsgravesglyphs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last

1 posted on 09/18/2007 8:47:57 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; blam

FYI


2 posted on 09/18/2007 8:51:36 AM PDT by Lurker ( Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing smallpox to ebola.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump


3 posted on 09/18/2007 8:53:16 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
And it further discredits that iconic illustration of human evolution that begins with a knuckle-dragging ape and ends with a briefcase-carrying man..

When was this really ever used by scientists outside teaching kindergartners? This is more like something you'll find in a cartoon or movie. I thought the multiple branch theory has been around for at least 75 years.

4 posted on 09/18/2007 8:53:17 AM PDT by mnehring (Thompson/Hunter 08 -- Fred08.com - The adults have joined the race.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

It’s is gonna get interesting around here! 1...2...3... go!


5 posted on 09/18/2007 8:53:43 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Homo erectus reproduced with multiple partners.

"He said erectus...hehehehehe"

L

6 posted on 09/18/2007 8:54:36 AM PDT by Lurker ( Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing smallpox to ebola.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

This article exemplifies devolution of reason in journalism.


7 posted on 09/18/2007 8:56:16 AM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000', oil above 81: unexplained)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Imagine that. a branching tree rather than a beeline for the one true form. A theory in crisis.


8 posted on 09/18/2007 8:57:05 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
“Surprising research based on two African fossils suggests our family tree is more like a wayward bush with stubby branches, challenging what had been common thinking on how early humans evolved.”

I wonder if this is the first time they’ve noticed that the fossil record has presented problems to Darwin’s fantasy from the beginning. But, they might be forgiven since every time they run into an obvious problem, the evolutionists just create another tale that hasn’t yet been disproved, and therefore can be accepted as fact by those intent on “proving” to themselves that they won’t be facing any final judgment and can therefore live as if there’s no tomorrow.

9 posted on 09/18/2007 8:59:53 AM PDT by vetsvette (Bring Him Back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
The two species lived near each other, but probably did not interact, each having its own "ecological niche," Spoor said. Homo habilis was likely more vegetarian while Homo erectus ate some meat, he said. Like chimps and apes, "they'd just avoid each other, they don't feel comfortable in each other's company," he said.

Hard and fast science here, I see.

Homo habilis was likely more vegetarian while Homo erectus ate some meat, he said.

Doesn't eating some meat indicate that most of their diet was vegetarian also? IOW, their diets weren't really much different. They were both omnivores.

"they'd just avoid each other, they don't feel comfortable in each other's company," he said.

I'd like to know how he knows this. Direct observation? I Interviewing them?

Guessing?

10 posted on 09/18/2007 9:00:11 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

The evolutionists like the antiwar crowd and the global warming nuts wont let a little thing like facts get in the way of their religion.


11 posted on 09/18/2007 9:03:09 AM PDT by ODDITHER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

Scientists don’t teach kindergarten in the first place. And this is pretty much what was taught in high school biology in public schools for years.


12 posted on 09/18/2007 9:03:23 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Imagine that. a branching tree rather than a beeline for the one true form. A theory in crisis.


First sentence, “...a wayward bush with stubby branches...”


13 posted on 09/18/2007 9:03:59 AM PDT by Stark_GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

There’s no such thing as fossils.

;)


14 posted on 09/18/2007 9:04:35 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
I’ve been told recently that I’m still a knuckle-dragging ape!
15 posted on 09/18/2007 9:06:07 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ("Don't touch that thing")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vetsvette

One glaring fact about the “fossil record” is that it simply CAN’T show speciation. It can show that species existed, but it cannot show that species B’s ancestors were species A.


16 posted on 09/18/2007 9:06:10 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
shows that two species of early human ancestors lived at the same time in Kenya. That pokes holes in the chief theory of man's early evolution — that one of those species evolved from the other.

The only hole being poked is through the credibility of the person who wrote the article. Using that kind of idiot logic, everyone in England should have died the same day America declared independence. How can America evolve from England and there still be English walking around at the same time? It's amazing to ponder how dumb evolution deniers can get.

17 posted on 09/18/2007 9:06:21 AM PDT by shuckmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
There’s no such thing as fossils.

;)


Really ? Here's one for your perusal :


18 posted on 09/18/2007 9:06:42 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Stark_GOP

Bush’s fault!


19 posted on 09/18/2007 9:06:59 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The broken wall, the burning roof and tower. And Agamemnon dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%

“There’s no such thing as fossils.”

...fossils were created!


20 posted on 09/18/2007 9:08:03 AM PDT by woollyone (whyquit.com ...if you think you can't quit, you're simply not informed yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 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