Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Fossils challenge old evoluton theory « previous next »
Page: 1 2



Guest
« : August 08, 2007, 08:47:49 PM »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070808/ap_on_sc/human_evolution


By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer 2 hours, 39 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - 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.
ADVERTISEMENT

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's 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 didn't 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 wasn't 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.

Susan Anton, a New York University anthropologist and co-author of the Leakey work, said she expects anti-evolution proponents to seize on the new research, but said it would be a mistake to try to use the new work to show flaws in evolution theory.

"This is not questioning the idea at all of evolution; it is refining some of the specific points," Anton said. "This is a great example of what science does and religion doesn't do. It's a continous self-testing process."

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 isn't 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 Anton. 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.



Guest
« #1 : August 08, 2007, 08:48:24 PM »

Here's why:

"And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so.  God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good." Genesis 1:24-25 NIV

That is all.

alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
« #2 : August 08, 2007, 10:05:57 PM »

Fossils challenge old evolutionary theory?

Maybe science is a belief system afterall. ;)

BucsBullsBolts

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4823
Offline
« #3 : August 08, 2007, 11:11:57 PM »

Maybe science is a belief system afterall. ;)

Still a more logical belief system than the first man being formed from a lump of dirt and the first woman being molded from a bone ....  ::)

Big_MAC_Buc

*
Starter
****
Posts : 421
Offline
« #4 : August 09, 2007, 12:11:38 AM »


Nothing to get excited about. It simply means there is another common ancestor further back on the evolutionary scale.

 A little more info.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=4877375B-E7F2-99DF-3FBF5F83DF802AB7&chanID=sa003



I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma  made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. --Umberto Eco

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28683
Offline
« #5 : August 09, 2007, 12:42:00 AM »

"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.

Remember those posters back in high school where they showed how smooth and perfect the evolution
of man was throughout time? The Neanderthal discovery and this one show how it was a bunch of
crap. There are major holes in the theory. Things just don't add up. And I'm not a Creationist.

Big_MAC_Buc

*
Starter
****
Posts : 421
Offline
« #6 : August 09, 2007, 01:51:08 AM »

"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.

Remember those posters back in high school where they showed how smooth and perfect the evolution
of man was throughout time? The Neanderthal discovery and this one show how it was a bunch of
crap. There are major holes in the theory. Things just don't add up. And I'm not a Creationist.

What is your theory, Joe?


I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma  made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. --Umberto Eco

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28683
Offline
« #7 : August 09, 2007, 02:41:17 AM »

Don't know any more. At one time in the past I thought maybe there was some outside
intervention that gave evolution a "boost" a few times along the way. The intelligent
designer would have been ET. But who knows? I just have a problem with how
different Homo sapiens are from pre-humans and how Homo sapiens just seemed
to have popped up here. You would think the final evolution into Homo sapiens
would have taken a hell of a lot longer.

It's summarized very briefly here:

http://www.lloydpye.com/flash/6-Prehumans.swf

As far as how life started on Earth? Panspermia?

escobar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4130
Offline
« #8 : August 09, 2007, 03:41:00 AM »

If evolution was the reason behind our existence then explain to me why millions of half man half apes aren't being discovered. I mean, there should be examples of evolution for every stage that took place, and not just one or two but millions of them per stage. How can they find complete dinosaurs from millions of years ago but they can't find millions of each stage of the "evolutionary" cycle. It doesn't add up, and apparently only those who believe in Christ know why.

JavaBuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28661
Offline
« #9 : August 09, 2007, 04:49:13 AM »

If evolution was the reason behind our existence then explain to me why millions of half man half apes aren't being discovered.

Maybe you've never seen ex Cub and Expo - Andre Dawson.

The Christ theory is weak.   Kind of like saying ghosts are real.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21087
Online
« #10 : August 09, 2007, 08:25:16 AM »

I'm not sure why the author called this surprising. He goes on and on about that descent of man picture we've all seen but no one really thought it was that straight forward. Scientists have long suspected that the line to homo sapiens wasn't the only hominid line and that several lines could have co-existed even before the shared time frame of Neanderthal and homo sapiens.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.
If you think Manziel is the best QB in this draft I can safely assume you are an idiot and will treat you as such.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21087
Online
« #11 : August 09, 2007, 08:31:56 AM »

If evolution was the reason behind our existence then explain to me why millions of half man half apes aren't being discovered. I mean, there should be examples of evolution for every stage that took place, and not just one or two but millions of them per stage. How can they find complete dinosaurs from millions of years ago but they can't find millions of each stage of the "evolutionary" cycle. It doesn't add up, and apparently only those who believe in Christ know why.

Sure it does, human populations were never very large. The recent genetic findings indicate that the parent population of the human species was as low as 5000 when the migrants left Africa. That's not a really big sample. Couple that number with the fact that most of our ancestors lived in arid grasslands and not marshy swamps (like the dinos) and there's not gonna be a ton of fossils. Plus, you do realize that all those dino skeletons you see in museums aren't real and are based on a find or finds?

Still, we have over 4000 hominds sitting about as of the early 90's (so there are more now) so it ain't like we've got one or two of them.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.
If you think Manziel is the best QB in this draft I can safely assume you are an idiot and will treat you as such.

BucsBullsBolts

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4823
Offline
« #12 : August 09, 2007, 09:53:42 PM »

The Christ theory is weak.   Kind of like saying ghosts are real.

Ghosts are easier to believe in than the contradictory, supposedly benevolent yet egotistical God who requires Man to kiss His ring or burn in Hell forever...

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28683
Offline
« #13 : August 10, 2007, 03:40:45 AM »

By the way, with every new discovery that may cause problems for evolutionary theory, you
will always see the supporters and mainstream guys play it down. Nothing to see here. Move
along. The real scientists know all of the answers so don't even think about questioning their
precious theories.

alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
« #14 : August 10, 2007, 09:35:34 AM »

ufojoe

Do you subscribe to a theory that humans were brought here on earth by aliens?  Similar to what Scientologists believe?

  Page: 1 2
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Fossils challenge old evoluton theory « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools