World’s oldest human-linked skeleton found

[HAL 9000 96]

World’s oldest human-linked skeleton found ‘Ardi’ predates Lucy by a million years, changes scientific view of originsBy Randolph E. SchmidThe Associated Pressupdated 3:06 p.m. CT, Thurs., Oct . 1, 2009 function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('633900243627970000');WASHINGTON - The story of humankind is reaching back another million years with the discovery of “Ardi,” a hominid who lived 4.4 million years ago in what is now Ethiopia.

The 110-pound, 4-foot female roamed forests a million years before the famous Lucy, long studied as the earliest skeleton of a human ancestor.

This older skeleton reverses the common wisdom of human evolution, said anthropologist C. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University.

Rather than humans evolving from an ancient chimplike creature, the new find provides evidence that chimps and humans evolved from some long-ago common ancestor — but each evolved and changed separately along the way.

“This is not that common ancestor, but it’s the closest we have ever been able to come,” said Tim White, director of the Human Evolution Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley.

The lines that evolved into modern humans and living apes probably shared an ancestor 6 million to 7 million years ago, White said in a telephone interview.

But Ardi has many traits that do not appear in modern-day African apes, leading to the conclusion that the apes evolved extensively since we shared that last common ancestor.

A study of Ardi, under way since the first bones were discovered in 1994, indicates the species lived in the woodlands and could climb on all fours along tree branches, but the development of their arms and legs indicates they didn’t spend much time in the trees. And they could walk upright, on two legs, when on the ground.

Formally dubbed Ardipithecus ramidus — which means root of the ground ape — the find is detailed in 11 research papers published Thursday by the journal Science.

“This is one of the most important discoveries for the study of human evolution,” said David Pilbeam, curator of paleoanthropology at Harvard’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology.

“It is relatively complete in that it preserves head, hands, feet and some critical parts in between. It represents a genus plausibly ancestral to Australopithecus — itself ancestral to our genus **,” said Pilbeam, who was not part of the research teams.

Scientists assembled the skeleton from 125 pieces.

Lucy, also found in Africa, thrived a million years after Ardi and was of the more humanlike genus Australopithecus.

“In Ardipithecus we have an unspecialized form that hasn’t evolved very far in the direction of Australopithecus. So when you go from head to toe, you’re seeing a mosaic creature that is neither chimpanzee, nor is it human. It is Ardipithecus,” said White.

White noted that Charles Darwin, whose research in the 19th century paved the way for the science of evolution, was cautious about the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

“Darwin said we have to be really careful. The only way we’re really going to know what this last common ancestor looked like is to go and find it. Well, at 4.4 million years ago we found something pretty close to it,” White said. “And, just like Darwin appreciated, evolution of the ape lineages and the human lineage has been going on independently since the time those lines split, since that last common ancestor we shared.”

Some details about Ardi in the collection of papers:

<li class="textBodyBlack">Ardi was found in Ethiopia’s Afar Rift, where many fossils of ancient plants and animals have been discovered. Findings near the skeleton indicate that at the time it was a wooded environment. Fossils of 29 species of birds and 20 species of small mammals were found at the site.

<li class="textBodyBlack">Geologist Giday WoldeGabriel of Los Alamos National Laboratory was able to use volcanic layers above and below the fossil to date it to 4.4 million years ago.

<li class="textBodyBlack">Ardi’s upper canine teeth are more like the stubby ones of modern humans than the long, sharp, pointed ones of male chimpanzees and most other primates. An analysis of the tooth enamel suggests a diverse diet, including fruit and other woodland-based foods such as nuts and leaves.

<li class="textBodyBlack">Paleoanthropologist Gen Suwa of the University of Tokyo reported that Ardi’s face had a projecting muzzle, giving her an ape-like appearance. But it didn’t thrust forward quite as much as the lower faces of modern African apes do. Some features of her skull, such as the ridge above the eye socket, are quite different from those of chimpanzees. The details of the bottom of the skull, where nerves and blood vessels enter the brain, indicate that Ardi’s brain was positioned in a way similar to modern humans, possibly suggesting that the hominid brain may have been already poised to expand areas involving aspects of visual and spatial perception.

<li class="textBodyBlack">Ardi’s hand and wrist were a mix of primitive traits and a few new ones, but they don’t include the hallmark traits of the modern tree-hanging, knuckle-walking chimps and gorillas. She had relatively short palms and fingers which were flexible, allowing her to support her body weight on her palms while moving along tree branches, but she had to be a careful climber because she lacked the anatomical features that allow modern-day African apes to swing, hang and easily move through the trees.

<li class="textBodyBlack">The pelvis and hip show the gluteal muscles were positioned so she could walk upright.

<li class="textBodyBlack">Her feet were rigid enough for walking but still had a grasping big toe for use in climbing.The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science and others.

[Niels Bohr 72]

HAL9000, we know that the scientists here wants to destroy GOD.

[HAL 9000 96]

HAL9000, we know that the scientists here wants to destroy GOD.

Dr Bohr... Science IS dog.

[Amby 490]

very cool

[Dakine 26]

You'd think remains of similiar "beings" would pop up in the million years between Lucy and Ardi.

Edited October 1, 2009 by Haole

[Joseph & Ana 0]

How do you know Ardi had any kids? Let alone ones that were different?

[HAL 9000 96]

Hominid fossils are super easy to find.

[Niels Bohr 72]

Just like with bacterium with every few generations, there is a few that will have different traits to the parental generation. Humans are no different. The puny human mind do not know what variations is in a geological time scale. That few bacterium or protozoa would then give new offspring which over a few generations would yield yet another set of different gene. It goes on and on.

Those changes are unnoticeable until it span a difference of a few hundred or thousand years. Maybe it took 100 generation to yeild a different gene.

Edited October 1, 2009 by Niels Bohr

[alienlovechild 75]

Hominid fossils are super easy to find.

Sure about that?

Criteria for selection of hominid sites for inscription

In the light of the current general picture of human and hominid evolution we identify the following six criteria for assessing known sites:

1 There is no substitute for good chronologies. Many of the arguments in palaeoanthropology stem from poor dating of fossils. Well dated material allows the taxonomist to sort out phylogenetic relationships and rates of evolutionary change. Dating by isotopic decay methods have revolutionized the subject

2 The numbers of fossils from a single locality or within an identifiable geological unit. If well dated, the opportunities for scientific analysis of more than one skull or skeleton are very rewarding. The advantage of large samples lies in tackling questions of population variability, the necessary condition if evolution under natural selection is to occur

3 The antiquity of the finds, is also dependent on good dating, preferably by science-based methods. While age is not a sufficient criterion by itself, it must be recognized that finds from certain periods (eg the crucial period 5-4 million years ago when hominids were splitting from the last common ancestor) are still extremely rare

4 The potential for further finds must also be recognized. Preservation conditions can be assessed and ranked from poor to exceptional. However, there will always be an element of good fortune in finding fragmentary fossil material. Hominids were never very plentiful and their remains are hard to find. For example, the find of two teeth and a tibia at Boxgrove (southern England) increases in significance because of the preservation of 20km of similar deposits along an ancient shoreline.

5 To talk of Hominid sites is increasingly a misnomer. Instead we should think of groups of closely related sites and even landscapes. What is needed in the study of human evolution are good contexts which preserve good environmental and archaeological evidence as well as hominid fossils. This is needed in order to interpret their lifestyles and capabilities.

6 A number of fossils have an important historical and even iconic position in the discovery and demonstration of human evolution. These sites, such as Olduvai Gorge and La Chapelle aux Saints, are signposts on the route to our own self-discovery of our evolutionary heritage.

http://www.icomos.org/studies/hominid.htm

[HannahP 119]

Hominid fossils are super easy to find.

Sure about that?

Criteria for selection of hominid sites for inscription

In the light of the current general picture of human and hominid evolution we identify the following six criteria for assessing known sites:

1 There is no substitute for good chronologies. Many of the arguments in palaeoanthropology stem from poor dating of fossils. Well dated material allows the taxonomist to sort out phylogenetic relationships and rates of evolutionary change. Dating by isotopic decay methods have revolutionized the subject

2 The numbers of fossils from a single locality or within an identifiable geological unit. If well dated, the opportunities for scientific analysis of more than one skull or skeleton are very rewarding. The advantage of large samples lies in tackling questions of population variability, the necessary condition if evolution under natural selection is to occur

3 The antiquity of the finds, is also dependent on good dating, preferably by science-based methods. While age is not a sufficient criterion by itself, it must be recognized that finds from certain periods (eg the crucial period 5-4 million years ago when hominids were splitting from the last common ancestor) are still extremely rare

4 The potential for further finds must also be recognized. Preservation conditions can be assessed and ranked from poor to exceptional. However, there will always be an element of good fortune in finding fragmentary fossil material. Hominids were never very plentiful and their remains are hard to find. For example, the find of two teeth and a tibia at Boxgrove (southern England) increases in significance because of the preservation of 20km of similar deposits along an ancient shoreline.

5 To talk of Hominid sites is increasingly a misnomer. Instead we should think of groups of closely related sites and even landscapes. What is needed in the study of human evolution are good contexts which preserve good environmental and archaeological evidence as well as hominid fossils. This is needed in order to interpret their lifestyles and capabilities.

6 A number of fossils have an important historical and even iconic position in the discovery and demonstration of human evolution. These sites, such as Olduvai Gorge and La Chapelle aux Saints, are signposts on the route to our own self-discovery of our evolutionary heritage.

http://www.icomos.org/studies/hominid.htm

He was being sarcastic.

[alienlovechild 75]

Hominid fossils are super easy to find.

Sure about that?

Criteria for selection of hominid sites for inscription

In the light of the current general picture of human and hominid evolution we identify the following six criteria for assessing known sites:

1 There is no substitute for good chronologies. Many of the arguments in palaeoanthropology stem from poor dating of fossils. Well dated material allows the taxonomist to sort out phylogenetic relationships and rates of evolutionary change. Dating by isotopic decay methods have revolutionized the subject

2 The numbers of fossils from a single locality or within an identifiable geological unit. If well dated, the opportunities for scientific analysis of more than one skull or skeleton are very rewarding. The advantage of large samples lies in tackling questions of population variability, the necessary condition if evolution under natural selection is to occur

3 The antiquity of the finds, is also dependent on good dating, preferably by science-based methods. While age is not a sufficient criterion by itself, it must be recognized that finds from certain periods (eg the crucial period 5-4 million years ago when hominids were splitting from the last common ancestor) are still extremely rare

4 The potential for further finds must also be recognized. Preservation conditions can be assessed and ranked from poor to exceptional. However, there will always be an element of good fortune in finding fragmentary fossil material. Hominids were never very plentiful and their remains are hard to find. For example, the find of two teeth and a tibia at Boxgrove (southern England) increases in significance because of the preservation of 20km of similar deposits along an ancient shoreline.

5 To talk of Hominid sites is increasingly a misnomer. Instead we should think of groups of closely related sites and even landscapes. What is needed in the study of human evolution are good contexts which preserve good environmental and archaeological evidence as well as hominid fossils. This is needed in order to interpret their lifestyles and capabilities.

6 A number of fossils have an important historical and even iconic position in the discovery and demonstration of human evolution. These sites, such as Olduvai Gorge and La Chapelle aux Saints, are signposts on the route to our own self-discovery of our evolutionary heritage.

http://www.icomos.org/studies/hominid.htm

He was being sarcastic.

Care to explain how you know that?

Can't he speak for himself because I know he hasn't been shy in the past especially on science issues and setting the record straight?

[Niels Bohr 72]

HAL9000 went to medical school. I have no doubt that he was being sarcastic.

However, I have to say Anthropology is not a course in the Medical College. It's generally in the Arts and Science College rather than the Medical College. If you're an undergrad in pre-med, you may be require to take a general education course in the Arts and Science College. I have taken it. Studied Anthropology. Unfortunately, I hate it because I have to write a 20 page paper on something out of my interest.

[NickD 202]

Watched that program on Discovery Science a couple of months ago, was interesting.

Don't see a problem with evolution if we are suppose to have both a body and a soul, body can evolved, but the creator can install a soul at will with always confusion as to whether our bodies were created in the image of God, or if our souls were. If we have souls. What you need is faith, accepting without proof. Life is nothing more than a test, not only at school, work, but also from God, but really no way to find out where you fit on the curve. If you think you are doing well, guess again, you are sinning with pride and way down on the curve. So maybe it's better not to think. Certainly not good to judge either.

Our souls are supposed to be joined with our bodies at the second coming that will occur at sunrise with the sun rising from the east. So only correct to be buried with your feet toward the east so when you rise, you will be facing the sun, or is that the son. In either case, have it in my will to be buried with sunglasses on.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Sweet.

Ya think they started honor killings? Ya know.. since they were SAVAGES.

[Nagishkaw 510]

Watched that program on Discovery Science a couple of months ago, was interesting.

Don't see a problem with evolution if we are suppose to have both a body and a soul, body can evolved, but the creator can install a soul at will with always confusion as to whether our bodies were created in the image of God, or if our souls were. If we have souls. What you need is faith, accepting without proof. Life is nothing more than a test, not only at school, work, but also from God, but really no way to find out where you fit on the curve. If you think you are doing well, guess again, you are sinning with pride and way down on the curve. So maybe it's better not to think. Certainly not good to judge either.

Our souls are supposed to be joined with our bodies at the second coming that will occur at sunrise with the sun rising from the east. So only correct to be buried with your feet toward the east so when you rise, you will be facing the sun, or is that the son. In either case, have it in my will to be buried with sunglasses on.

You Nick, are right thinking.