The particularly small Homo erectus skull, shown from above with a large skull of the same species (from Olduvai, Tanzania), to demonstrate the gorilla-like size variation.
Credit: National Museums of Kenya/F. Spoor and J. Reader.
PARIS: The discovery of two fossils has challenged the belief that our early human ancestor Homo erectus evolved from Homo habilis and suggests they co-existed.
The finds, on the eastern bank of Lake Turkana in Kenya – detailed today in the British journal Nature – are evidence that the two species may have intermingled for some 50,000 years in East Africa.
The team that found the remains was led by mother-daughter team Louise and Meave Leakey of the famed Kenyan anthropological family who have uncovered a host of critical human and hominid remains in east Africa.
Stirring controversy
One of the fossils is a 1.4-million-year-old upper jaw bone of H.habilis, which is the most recent fossil of the species known. The second is a remarkably well preserved skull of H.erectus, which paradoxically dates back even further, to some 1.55 million years ago.
"What is truly striking about this fossil is its size," said Fred Spoor of University College London in the U.K., and one of the paper's authors. "It's the smallest Homo erectus found anywhere in the world."
The recent discovery of the two fossils has created a stir among academics tracing humankind's roots, as it challenges the presumed evolutionary timeline of the species: H.habilis to H.erectus to Homo sapiens.
"Their co-existence makes it unlikely that Homo erectus evolved from Homo habilis," said Meave Leakey of the Koobi Fora Research Project at the National museums of Kenya in Nairobi. "The fact that they stayed separate as individual species for a long time suggests that they had their own ecological niche, thus avoiding direct competition."
H.habilis is a species of the genus Homo, which is thought to have lived from approximately 2.5 million to 1.8 million years ago.
Great variation
The name, literally "clothed man" was given because crude stone tools were found near the sites of their remains. They were thought to have been succeeded by the H.erectus, or upright man, whose remains were first found in Asia. But later their fossilised remains ranging from between 1.8- and one-million-years-old were unearthed in Africa, and Europe as well as in Indonesia, Vietnam, and China.
H.erectus is thought to be an important human ancestor because it may have been the first to leave Africa.
The weaker teeth and jawbones of H.erectus suggest a food regime including more meat, animal fat and softer food unlike the H.habilis who largely fed on nuts and tubers
The variation in the skull size of the East African H.erectus fossils – from the petite new skull to a large specimen previously discovered in neighbouring Tanzania – points to sexual dimorphism, or a large difference in form between male and female individuals of the same species.
"In gorillas, males are much larger than females and this sexual dimorphism is related to their strategy of having multiple mates," said co-author and anthropologist Susan Anton of New York University In New York City, USA."The new Kenyan fossil suggests that, contrary to common belief, this may have been true of Homo erectus as well."
The authors point out that like gorillas and chimpanzees, who currently cohabit in Africa without entering into conflict, the two genus species had likely lived side by side on the continent for nearly half a million years.


working for nasa
I certainly wouldn't at this time brag about working for NASA. The mismanagement and misdirection of this once hallowed beautiful and envied organization to a bureaucratic maze, failing like my country and going backwards so fast, I doubt they can even resurrect an ablation shield correctly. The mind of man needs unleashed to dream, not have the highest intellects blunted with the mundane. Did you know all human fossils from greater than 50,000 years can fit in one casket? By that I mean a lot of energy and man hours has gone into studying these pitiful few leavings to gain the insight we now have. One time machine back to the dinosaurs would certainly change our opinions on the dinosaurs.
False Dichotomy
I believe in God's existence and I know that Evolution is a fact.
Why must religious morons create a false dichotomy between reason and religion? God created the Universe via the Big Bang. God created the four basic forces, Weak, Strong, Gravity and Electro-Magnetic. God gave us reason which is used in the pursuit of science. Evolution and God are both real. Creationism and Scriptural Literalism are moronic and are an Offense to God.
Now look here folks The more
Now look here folks
The more information that we can gather , the more we can show these silly religious people that we have evolved . Being created just doesn't wash with me. Evolution rules.
taxonomic distinctions
Leakey's contention that this is NEW info is problematic, depending on how one analyzes the fossil material. Early African "H. erectus" has for the most part been reassigned to H. ergaster. H. ergaster specimens are known to date to at least 1.9 Myr, while "H. habilis" (may or may not include H. rudolfensis) is known from 2.2 Myr to 1.6 Myr, prior to this most recent discovery. (I haven't looked at the primary lit for several years -- my dates might be off by 100 kyr either way.)
Whether or not H. erectus and H. habilis overlap temporally depends in part on how one views the legitimacy of the H. ergaster taxon. But even if one separates H. ergaster as a distinct species, it's certainly a much better "ancestor" for H. erectus than H. habilis ever was. Thus, there's no question (and hasn't been for some time) that contemporaneous Homo species were running around E. Africa between 2 and 1.5 Myr ago. If you're a lumper, then at a minimum you have H. habilis and H. erectus coexisting, and if you're a splitter, you have H. habilis, H. rudolfensis, and H. ergaster all coexisting (If you're a splitter, I'm not sure what your earliest African H. erectus is. OH 9 maybe?).
Paleoanthropologists are always trying to make their finds more significant than they really are. E.g., Johanson claimed "Lucy" demonstrated that bipedalism evolved prior to big brains. That's absolute b.s., as it had been demonstrated 50 years prior by the finds of Dart, Broom, and later on, Louis and Mary Leakey.
The significance of Meave Leakey's discovery: H. habilis survived a few 100 kyr longer than previously thought, and "H. erectus" may have been remarkably sexually dimorphic (I say "may have been" because there are other possible interpretations of that material).
Some people like to
Some people like to continuously argue because they can't stand it when someone has an opposing viewpoint, especially when religion is involved. As far as I'm concerned Creation-Evolution debates serve no purpose as neither can scientifically PROVE their position. In the end all one has is faith...either in the cosmic craps game of evolution or a Creator.
Creation vs evolution
I think it is counter-productive for people who subscribe to scientific viewpoints to bad-mouth folks who believe in creation. OK, so you may think that creationists believe a lot of nonsense. Maybe so. But you will not make any new friends, or converts to the immense beauty and the powerful methodology of science by insulting them.
Nature is beautiful, and the study of nature using science makes it even more beautiful and fills us with wonder and awe. I don't think you will achieve much by telling people they are wrong is such a dismissive manner.
I have great respect for people like Richard Dawkins as a scientist. He tells many truths in his book "The God Delusion". Perhaps too many truths. For I believe he will not win one person who believes in creation over to science. He sells science well, only to scientists, or those already sympathetic to science. Perhaps a more diplomatic approach is needed if we are to increase rationality and tolerance in the world. Ahteists have a right to their views, and so do people who have faith, have a right to their beliefs. Yes, I am aware that some creationists [particularly of the ID type] are a threat to good science education, and perhaps public policy in science matters in general [such as the human cause of global warming], but to survive as a species, we must educate, rather than browbeat the ignorant. Remember that many literalist creationist have been conditioned from birth to hold the views that they have. Verbal violence against them is both futile and unethical.
This is great to watch...
Fundie Evolutionists Vs Fundie Creationists, has there ever been so much vitriol?
Both of you are putporting your views as 'scientific' 'accurate' and the 'truth'. Both of you, admit it!, have resorted to name calling the other. But religion should not, ever, be called science. The Bible was written, it is the truth (every single bewildering contradictory word) and must never be questioned. Every scientific discovery is relentlessly pulled apart to see it it's correct, and while there are gaping holes in evolutionary biology, godless atheists are working to fill them. You have faith, which is belief in the face of whatever is presented, and we have science, which is unrelenting questioning of the world around us. I know where I'll get my answers from.....