'First of our kind' found in Morocco
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-06-2017, 09:32 AM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
(09-06-2017 08:31 AM)Vera Wrote:  
(09-06-2017 08:24 AM)kim Wrote:  Science magazine had a great article with a view of the back of the skull ... and a very handy reference map of African fossil finds. Thumbsup

Where I first heard about it Blush

One of the my favourite sources (together with phys.org, though they have some articles that make me roll my eyes sometimes, usually in the "social sciences" section)

I like Science mag - they at least attempt to go in-depth with their articles. And ... they do have helpful graphics for us ... uh ... people who need a picture drawn for us. Blush Laughat

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2017, 10:13 AM (This post was last modified: 09-06-2017 10:22 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
(09-06-2017 08:24 AM)kim Wrote:  I thought the differences were astounding, as well. Did you notice that elongated skull in the back? Wow! To me that says either, it is an early version of Homo sapiens OR a different version of Homo sapiens. Consider But with that much time ... could it not be both? When it is that far back, so much is up for speculation & scrutiny.

Science magazine had a great article with a view of the back of the skull ... and a very handy reference map of African fossil finds. Thumbsup

Wow... so the skull is slightly elongated, but the occipital bun is not nearly as pronounced. Also, the chin shows the pointed tip that we have. So that's clearly an early Homo sapiens, as none of the other hominids appear to have developed those traits.

And yet, seriously, LOOK at those pronounced orbital/supraorbital ridges, mid-angle slope to the forehead, and reduced forehead height!

This is one of the clearest transitional fossils I could have hoped to see.

Edit to Add: For visual comparison, a modern skull in profile (top), and the new find (below).

[Image: f738e5551fe6544e1dd2442d9903e59f.jpg]

[Image: homosapiens_0607_main.jpg]

Second edit: And for visual comparison of chin, occipital bun, and orbits, a diagram of Homo erectus, the likely candidate for our predecessor species.

[Image: aHR0cHM6Ly9pLmltZ3VyLmNvbS94OXlyQ0lsLnBuZz8x]

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
09-06-2017, 10:25 AM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
Holy shit... I just noticed something I had not, before. This new find has the remnants of a cranial keel, which we have lost entirely. You can just see it in the scanned image on the left (the 3/4th view) as a barely-noticeable ridge. (It may be a trick of light-and-shadow in the rendering; I will wait for a chance to read a better analysis of the skull, following CT scans, etc.)

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
09-06-2017, 04:27 PM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
Ooh - I'd love to see CT scans of this! Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
10-06-2017, 02:45 PM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
Apparently that image is the CT scan.

This blog post from Discover magazine contributor Gemma Tarlach covers the find (there were several, not just one) and the implications with outstanding clarity:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/deadth...n-thought/

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
10-06-2017, 03:15 PM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
(08-06-2017 07:30 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Why he would say we thought modern humans "suddenly" appeared is bizarre, as that isn't how evolution works.

Because Modern Humans did "suddenly" appear.

(08-06-2017 12:05 PM)tomilay Wrote:  How reliable is the idea that a Neanderthal was something else and not just what we would today typically refer to as a race?

I don't know, but there is a problem in that both Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens could speak. Did they evolve that way, or did Neanderthals inherit speech through inter-breeding with Homo Sapiens?

The enemy numbered six hundred - including women and children - and we abolished them utterly, leaving not even a baby alive to cry for its dead mother. This is incomparably the greatest victory that was ever achieved by the Christian soldiers of the United States. -- Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2017, 03:48 PM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
(10-06-2017 03:15 PM)Mircea Wrote:  
(08-06-2017 07:30 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Why he would say we thought modern humans "suddenly" appeared is bizarre, as that isn't how evolution works.

Because Modern Humans did "suddenly" appear.

No, we simply don't have fossils (or didn't, until this recent find) for Homo sapiens ancestors prior to 200,000 years ago, even though the genetics shows that we split from the Neandertals well over half a million years ago. We did not "suddenly" appear, and the term gives the wrong impression. We were always there, slowly evolving in a different direction from our last common ancestor with the Neandertals (which as I have said I think is clearly Homo erectus or some very near cousin to H.erectus), after their ancestors left Africa to colonize Eurasia.

This is just the first fossil evidence of the existence of those many, many generations of transitional humans and, amazingly but should-not-be-surprisingly, they show many of the morphological characteristics left over from the pattern found in H. erectus, while also showing many of the current ones. They show us transitioning from what we were to what we are, and yet the new skulls are within the range of measurements that can be found among modern humans, today, though most of us show more modern features like significantly reduced brow ridges/shelf.

It's like the common claim made by Creationists, about the "sudden appearance" of new phyla in the Cambrian Explosion... but the reality is that it still took place over about 20 million years (and was followed by another 70 million years of rapid change), and we have proved it. To call a period of 20 million years a "sudden appearance" is misleading and lends itself to misinterpretation by laypersons and misuse by Creationists.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
10-06-2017, 03:59 PM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
(10-06-2017 03:48 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  It's like the common claim made by Creationists, about the "sudden appearance" of new phyla in the Cambrian Explosion... but the reality is that it still took place over about 20 million years (and was followed by another 70 million years of rapid change), and we have proved it. To call a period of 20 million years a "sudden appearance" is misleading and lends itself to misinterpretation by laypersons and misuse by Creationists.

Given that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old, "sudden" is a relative term. Twenty million years, in geologic time, could be considered "sudden" - it's only 0.44% of the age of the earth - but it's a far cry from the use of the term in one's everyday lexicon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Heath_Tierney's post
11-06-2017, 09:05 AM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
(10-06-2017 02:45 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Apparently that image is the CT scan.

This blog post from Discover magazine contributor Gemma Tarlach covers the find (there were several, not just one) and the implications with outstanding clarity:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/deadth...n-thought/

Yabut, I want to see it rotate and view all the angles. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
13-06-2017, 02:09 PM
RE: 'First of our kind' found in Morocco
Apologies for polluting the nice science thread, but I was wrong. Ham didn't take the Twitter approach I anticipated:

Quote:Evolutionists continue to change details of their religion that life arose through evolutionary naturalism

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Shai Hulud's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: