Fossil discovery fills gap in human evolution

Sylvester McBean

Foo Fighter
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,617
‘We just found the chain of evolution, the continuity through time’


WASHINGTON - The latest fossil unearthed from a human ancestral hot spot in Africa allows scientists to link together the most complete chain of human evolution so far.

The 4.2 million-year-old fossil discovered in northeastern Ethiopia helps scientists fill in the gaps of how human ancestors made the giant leap from one species to another. That’s because the newest fossil, the species Australopithecus anamensis, was found in the region of the Middle Awash — where seven other human-like species spanning nearly 6 million years and three major phases of human development were previously discovered.

“We just found the chain of evolution, the continuity through time,” study co-author and Ethiopian anthropologist Berhane Asfaw said in a phone interview from Addis Ababa. “One form evolved to another. This is evidence of evolution in one place through time.”
Story continues below ↓ advertisement

The findings were reported Thursday in the scientific journal Nature.

The species anamensis is not new, but its location is what helps explain the shift from one early phase of human-like development to the next, scientists say. All eight species were within an easy day’s walk of each other.

Until now, what scientists had were snapshots of human evolution scattered around the world. Finding everything all in one general area makes those snapshots more of a mini home movie of evolution.

“It’s like 12 frames of a home movie, but a home movie covering 6 million years,” said study lead author Tim White, co-director of Human Evolution Research Center at University of California at Berkeley.

“The key here is the sequences,” White said. “It’s about a mile thickness of rocks in the Middle Awash and in it we can see all three phases of human evolution.”

Modern man belongs to the genus ****, which is a subgroup in the family of hominids. What evolved into **** was likely the genus Australopithecus (once called “man-ape”), which includes the famed 3.2 million-year-old “Lucy” fossil found three decades ago. A key candidate for the genus that evolved into Australopithecus is called Ardipithecus. And Thursday’s finding is important in bridging — but not completely — the gap between Australopithecus and Ardipithecus.

Scientists work at the site in northeastern Ethiopia where the fossil discovery was made. Seven other human-like species spanning nearly 6 million years have been found in the same Middle Awash region.
In 1994, a 4.4 million-year-old partial skeleton of the species Ardipithecus ramidus — the most recent Ardipithecus species — was found about six miles from the latest discovery.

“This appears to be the link between Australopithecus and Ardipithecus as two different species,” White said. The major noticeable difference between the phases of man can be seen in Australopithecus’ bigger chewing teeth to eat harder food, he said.

While it’s looking more likely, it is not a sure thing that Ardipithecus evolved into Australopithecus, he said. The finding does not completely rule out Ardipithecus dying off as a genus and Australopithecus developing independently.

The connections between Ardipithecus and Australopithecus have been theorized since an anamensis fossil was first found in Kenya 11 years ago. This draws the lines better, said Alan Walker of Penn State University, who found the first anamensis and is not part of White’s team.

Rick Potts, director of the Smithsonian’s Human Origins Program, agreed: “For those people who are tied up in doing the whole human family tree, being able to connect the branches is a very important thing to do.”

:rolleyes1
 
And your point is what, exactly? I'm not sure, but I know it will somehow relate to you being a heathen.
:)
 
Clearly she is a heathen,because everyone knows the fossils were put there by the devil just to confuse people
 

JennyMominRI said:
Clearly she is a heathen
Sylvester is a boy, I think. I'm pretty sure, anyway. :)

He is a heathen.;) :) Ask him, he'll tell you.:)
 
MouseWorshipin said:
Sylvester is a boy, I think. I'm pretty sure, anyway. :)

He is a heathen.;) :) Ask him, he'll tell you.:)
Sorry Sylvester,LOL..The name should have given it away
 
Seriously, is there any religious group left that disputes HOW God created the planet?
 
MouseWorshipin said:
Seriously, is there any religious group left that disputes HOW God created the planet?
Yes..There are a few
 
MouseWorshipin said:
Who? kkkkkkkk
I know you think what I said on my first post on this thread was a joke,but there are Christian factions that truly believe that fossils wer eput on earth by the devil to confuse CHristians
 
JennyMominRI said:
I know you think what I said on my first post on this thread was a joke,but there are Christian factions that truly believe that fossils wer eput on earth by the devil to confuse CHristians
Who? bbbbbbb
 
MouseWorshipin said:
Who? bbbbbbb
The independant fundamental baptist church I used to belong too.. I've heard it from people online more than a few times in the past 8 years
 
the bible contradicts itself on page one. it can't be held as a credible source of the earth's history or creation.
 
Sylvester McBean said:
the bible contradicts itself on page one. it can't be held as a credible source of the earth's history or creation.
You are always saying that. Please explain (I don't read it.)
 
MouseWorshipin said:
You are always saying that. Please explain (I don't read it.)
Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 offer different accounts of creation .In Genesis one humans are created after animals,in Genesis 2, before them
 
MouseWorshipin said:
You are always saying that. Please explain (I don't read it.)

Genesis 1:1 - 2:3
The creation account in Genesis 1 conflicts with the order of events that are known to science. In Genesis, the earth is created before light and stars, birds and whales before reptiles and insects, and flowering plants before any animals. The true order of events was just the opposite.

1:3-5, 14-19) "Let there be light"
God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them?

(1:11-13)
"Let the earth bring forth grass"
Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). Notice, though, that God lets "the earth bring forth" the plants, rather than creating them directly. Maybe Genesis is not so anti-evolution after all.
 
OK.

First of all, God can do anything. He's Him. He is Who is.

Second, did you ever think some of this stuff is metaphorical? Hmm?
 
Sylvester McBean said:
Genesis 1:1 - 2:3
The creation account in Genesis 1 conflicts with the order of events that are known to science. In Genesis, the earth is created before light and stars, birds and whales before reptiles and insects, and flowering plants before any animals. The true order of events was just the opposite.

1:3-5, 14-19) "Let there be light"
God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them?

(1:11-13)
"Let the earth bring forth grass"
Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). Notice, though, that God lets "the earth bring forth" the plants, rather than creating them directly. Maybe Genesis is not so anti-evolution after all.
Not to nitpick,but that shows that the account in Genesis contradicts science not that the bible contradicts itself.
 
MouseWorshipin said:
OK.

First of all, God can do anything. He's Him. He is Who is.

Second, did you ever think some of this stuff is metaphorical? Hmm?
Persoannly,I believe it's allegory and don't look to the Tanakh for science(or history) lessons.
 
JennyMominRI said:
Persoannly,I believe it's allegory and don't look to the Tanakh for science(or history) lessons.
Jenny, you are quite right. Allegory, not metaphor. My bad.
 


Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE








DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Back
Top Bottom