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.
Please leave a comment
Please comply with our Community rules.
It should come as no surprise that a false theory (evolution) would in time find more evidential information that confuses rather than solidifies the myth of evolution. With the “millions and billions” of years worth of evidence that should remain and form an infallible fossil record, no such record exists as the theory of evolution becomes shabbier with time. Time should be on the side of the evolutionist as more empirical evidence should become available to prove their hypothesis.But time has not been kind to them as their hypothesis does nothing but crumble. Evolution remains the greatest deceit in the history of science!!
Oh, what a pity! The Drongo Squad has finally discovered COSMOS. Please go away, you silly fellow, and learn some real biology.
What a very strange comment. Just to clarify the obvious, this find in no way throws doubt on the theory of evolution by natural selection. It is simply some new evidence calling into question a small detail of the story of human evolution as it has up till now been understood. Which is great! Unlike some other methods of understanding the universe, the scientific approach expects and welcomes new information which overturns established ideas. That’s how we can learn and build on what has come before.
I would have been surprised if there had been no overlap. Indeed, the existing fossils had already indicated strongly the existence of an overlap.
The sign of a healthy science is one in which there is numerous debates.
There is *nothing* in the paper which undermines evoutionary theory. Humans share a common ancestor with chimpanzees, who are smarter than most creationists.
I second to motion for the silly fellow to please go away. You are violating the honor system by proselytizing here. This is a science related site. Please take your religion elsewhere.
To Not in Doubt- this silly fellow is not going away at your say so and be advised that I am a biologist who has worked for NASA and in R&D on artificial heart and kidney devices. Where did you learn biology? Like most of your colleagues, you too, seems obligated to resort to the insult, a poor crutch usually used when there is nothing substantive to offer!
To Emlyn- You possess the evolutionist’s ability to sweep significant evidence under the rug by relegating it to “small detail”. When, after these billions of years, will you and your kind be able to put together a believable scenario, rather than the constant influx of “new” information that adds no credible evidence to your hallowed myth of evolution. With the paucity of empirical evidence to support evolution, you are to be admired for your degree of unwavering faith in a bankrupt,hollow hypothesis.
To Mike Brass- One added overlap that might not also surprise you is in the hundreds of human footprints found in and around those of dinosaurs. It seems rather hypocritical for you to pontificate that numerous debates are a healthy sign of science and then in the next paragraph resort to the usual evolutionist tactic of insulting those who would debate.
To Joe Jenkins- It does not surprise me that you would be annoyed at anyone with the audacity to debate. You mention an honor system? Where is the honor among deceivers? On the religious angle, be advised that in the 1957 case of Washington Ethical Society vs District of Columbia, secular humanism to include evolution was declared by the Supreme Court to be a non-theistic religion within the meaning of the First Amendment. So you need to take your religion elsewhere, as well!
Evolutionists continue to astonish me at their tenacity to believe in the deceit of evolution in order to support their atheism.
You’re going to have to put up or shut up. I don’t believe a word you’ve said. No critical scientist worth the raw pulp in their degree certificate would ever consider the natural erosion among dinosaur tracks to be human footprints. What is astonishing is that such cons think that anyone takes them and their fantasies seriously
Sorry to troll, I actually believe quite strongly in the modern synthesis. Just wanted to see if everyone was awake.
What, pray tell, do I have to put up or shut up? your response is typical where you too can, in one fell swoop, attribute erosion to what has produced human footprints among dinosaur tracks. What deep scientific logic that is! Last time I checked, erosion washed detail away and did not produce it. Ah, how extensively you and your kind use the power of denial. You don’t believe anything I have said and even if you saw the footprints being made, I’m sure you would deny that too! But you haven’t offered anything of substance except denial. Is that your best shot? I have nothing but sympathy for those of you who must cling tenaciously to evolution in order to support your atheism.
To be blunt: you are a liar! You claim to have training in biology, but you fail to mention where. Did you perhaps major in biology at “Matchbook cover University?” Citing fake, or fraudulent credentials is a tried and true fundie trick. Really, Ron, you are just being lazy, as well as a liar!
YOU say that using sarcasm is a “poor crutch, usually when there is nothing to offer.” Kind of funny how that is what you yourself used, isn’t it Ron?! Seeing as how you offer nothing other than one unsubstantiated comment after another, dripping with sarcasm, does that mean that you are hypocrite, as well as a liar?!
Oh, you will reply with righteous indignation as to the authenticity of your so-called credentials, but you’ll stop short of offering any verifiable evidence, because, the fact of the matter is, you are a an angry fundamentalist creationist, who probably barely finished high school. I wouldn’t be surprised if you are the janitor at your local First Congregation of the Self-Righteous.
But then, neither will you offer any evidence to back up your claims as to evolution. You no doubt have a very, very limited understanding of biology, most likely based on a very perverted, biased education spoon fed you by another fundie creationist.
Let’s spell this out, Ron: you practice the “because I said so” argument; also known as circular reasoning. You do not wish to debate anything – you merely want to discredit that which you do not believe/understand (for you that is no doubt the same thing), followed by a demand that everyone else accept your take because you said so.
So do yourself a favor, Ron, if you insist on continuing to fill your head with s–t, you could at least flush every once inawhile!
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.
Dear Visitor, Golly it sure seems that I raised a few of your hackles. I am still licking my wounds from all the names you called me, and I’m really a nice fundie creationist who enjoys blogging with my detractors. I more enjoy blogging with intelligent people than with those whose only offerings are name calling but I take the good with the bad.
I think you called me every name in the book so it’s good that you flushed that out of your system.
I do have a degree in biology from the University of New Hampshire. I served in the USAF as a Captain. I was employed by United Technologies Corp. when they were prime contractors for several space programs, I served as a member of the NASA management team that produced the Portable Life Support System that astronauts wore on the moon and in subsequent EVA missions. I have a pretty good grasp of biology having managed several bio-medical engineering programs on artificial heart and kidney devices. I retired as executive vice president of a nationally known agency. I have never janitored. Well, there, at your behest, I have reluctantly bared my soul.
This may shock you also that I am an ex- evolutionist and have seriously studied both sides. Creationism has overwhelming evidence which gets stronger each day, while, like in the article, evolution is coming apart at the seams. That’s why I became a fundie. Like any good scientist, my decision was based on the weight of the evidence. You may not be acquainted with thinking outside the box, but give it a try if you want to be refreshed! You, too can become a fundie!
Since we have become such good pen pals, I sure would like you to reciprocate on your work history and education. You have piqued my interest.
As an aside, Joe Jenkins implies that this site is consecrated to science but I reread all of it and find little. What am I missing?
So, you’re a retired, chest-thumping bio-engineer…. You now claim that you served our country. You no doubt figure that your sarcasm has shamed any that would disagree with you.
Touting credentials is a standard fundamentalist creationist ploy. Maybe you did have the career you claimed, maybe you “borrowed” it from somebody else. This is the internet – you can claim to be anybody you wish. My advice: if you want to be taken seriously – put away the chest-thumping, and the autobiography, and offer some evidence as to why you believe that evolution is the fraud you claim it to be.
I am not shocked that you claim to be an ex-evolutionist; I just don’t believe you!
Why don’t you “think outside the box” and explain why “evolution is coming apart at the seams?!”
I’ll give you an example of what will not suffice as evidence to your claim (this IS you writing, I presume – if not, the premise is the same):
The proof of evolution
If evolution was true, the proof of its effects would be overwhelming.
The fossil record would be, as the name implies , an incontrovertible, uncontestable record of plants and animals in their varying stages of transition from something to something else.
There should be few, if any , missing links. They are called “missing links” because after tens of thousands of fossil specimens have been unearthed, the links are still missing. They are missing because they never existed in the first place and no amount of time or worn shovels will change that. Although missing links are usually referenced as regards human evolution, links are missing in all aspects of nature, insects, reptiles, birds, mammals, plants etc. With such a paucity of fossil evidence, there should be recognition that the lack of transitional fossil specimens a clue that they never existed, otherwise the fossil record would be conclusive and with room for debate or controversy.
The observation of nature today should be the crowning glory for proving evolution. Even without the fossil record or missing links, ongoing evolution should be evident, observable. recordable and collectible as we see before our very eyes something, plant or animal in some stage of the transitional process changing from something to something else. How fascinating nature would be to observe thousands of species becoming something different, a clover leaf changing into an oak tree, a gecko changing into a bobolink, a fox changing into an elk, a cat in transition to becoming a deer etc.
Bizarre and as unbelievable as these changes seem, to the evolutionist they must be believable because their tenet is that thousands of “somethings” had to change into thousands of “ something elses” by adding the magical ingredient, time. But none of them can shed any evidence on what became what and when.
So far evolutionists have sought, in vain, for the missing parts to their mythical puzzle. A tooth, a few pieces of bone, fraudulent drawings, questionable conclusions, hoaxes, doctored fossils plus a large measure of speculation are evolutionists’ concepts of what they maintain as fact and science. This is abysmally bad science and as such, the evolutionists ally of time will also be their downfall as their precious myth erodes even more, and soon into oblivion.
If that was your post, Ron, that will not convince anybody but yourself.
So, again, here’s your challenge for today: offer something other than creationist propaganda, or your own personal sarcasm to defend your position. Good luck!
Visitor, you are truly incredible and I have never met anyone so close minded and opinionated. You asked for my credentials and when offered you still don’t believe . I guess you typify evolutionists that can not or will not acknowledge the truth no matter what. Were I an evolutionist, I would disassociate with your kind. You don’t make any sense at all and the only thing you offer is denial. Not much science there! I regret having wasted my time with you.
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).
Never met anyone so close minded and opinionated? Gosh, Ron – you gotta stop looking in the mirror!
Nobody here asked for your credentials – you thumped your own and chest and proudly bleated them out.
You were asked – in very plain, easy to understand terms – to explain why you feel evolution is wrong. Cite some LEGITIMATE SOURCES, make a coherent, compelling argument….. that sort of thing. I was certainly willing to hear you out, but, like the rest of the creationist frauds, you have nothing to offer; except, that is, more tired sarcasm.
Rick Karlin wrote about you – you probably have a shrine in your “spacious a-frame” filled with such clippings – and I quote:
Rick Karlin, a staff writer for the Albany Times Union reports:
Ron Cote, who describes himself as a born-again creationist, has obtained permission to give annual guest lectures to students at the North Warren High School in the Adirondack community of Chestertown.
Cote doesn’t disagree with the idea that students should learn about Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. And he realizes that prohibitions on bringing religion into the classroom mean that he can’t talk about his evangelical Christian faith.
“I’m not there to convert people,” Cote said during an interview in the spacious hillside A-frame he shares with his wife in this rural community near the Schroon River. “I’m there to get them to think about the flip side of evolution.”
He has a bridge he wants to sell you, too.
Yep, Ron, you have quite the compelling case against evolution; so much so that you have to OBTAIN PERMISSION to talk about it at a public school.
Could that be why you are on the net, making such a nuisance out of yourself with your quackery? Is it not quite so embarrassing to make a fool out of yourself when you don’t have to ASK permission to do it?
But, like the fraud you are, you didn’t bother critiquing any troublesome points in the article to which you posted to here in Cosmos; you just came in, making the same tired creationist points of propaganda that your kind are wont to do.
You want so desperately to turn people away from legitimate science, using your own particular half-baked fundamentalism, thumping your chest bleating about your glory days as a second-rate technician slogging away for a minor NASA contractor; all the while refusing to offer anything like a compelling argument against evolution – because you don’t have one!
In short, Ron Fundamentalist, you are intellectually bankrupt, and an ethical fraud to boot. At least, given your age, we won’t have to put up with your nonsense much longer!
Hi Ron. All name calling aside I have always wanted to know how creationists explain virus strains changing. To me personally this sort of thing makes no sense without evolution, but if you have a reasonable scientific explanation I would love to hear it. I tried to see if you have answered this question before but it wasn’t really tackled in the only article I have found by you.
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.
I agree with you Ron, wholeheartedly! The amazing thing about the evolution believers is their inability to think for themselves. When I attended a lecture by Gould at the UNC campus he was very uncomfortable when asked random questions. He was asked about the 24 Chrom. (apes) vs the 23Chrom. (humans) have. The question ” which was the mistake, the human or the ape when the fusion took place that created the human?” Most wannabe ”evolutionist” haven’t a clue about that question because they simply refuse to challenge the pompus arrogance of the gang,Dawkins and the late Gould! I would be embarrassed if I were a ”believer” in the fantasy whale story or the explanations of the scientist who found the Neanderthal. The Piltdown was the tip of the iceberg as far as I’m concerned. The deceit and animosity of evolutionist must be challenged and perhaps the AAS should be investigated for it’s involvement with coersing our youth through ”science” to perpetuate the faith of scientism as a fact. You havegot to have great faith in man when you see what you see and hear what you hear, yet, deny BOTH! Creation is obvious and the bone readers are laughable, to be kind. So you arrogant ”evolution” believer’s go ahead and attack with your insults, but beware that God’s children are HIS!
He was asked about the 24 Chrom. (apes) vs the 23Chrom. (humans) have. The question ” which was the mistake, the human or the ape when the fusion took place that created the human?”
It always has to be the good and evil, right and wrong, heaven and damnation huh?
Can I answer? In a case like that, neither is a mistake. A mistake would imply there is a known end point, for if you do not know the end point how can you judge any change as a mistake?
As an analogy consider the case of tossing a coin. If it landed on heads, is that a mistake or is landing on tails the mistake? By your reasoning, one of them must be a mistake – but neither of them are, it’s just a coin toss.
The fact that you imply some magical event where the chromosome fused and from that both modern day chimpanzees and humans were formed suggests a deeply flawed, borderline juvenile (at best) understanding of evolutionary biology. I can’t see how you have the gall to be so arrogant and dismissive when you understand so little of the subject matter.
I think your god deserves you.
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.
Hi Ron ,
Do you believe the earth is around 10,000 years old ?
Thank you
Chuck Kinney
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.
Your reasoning is that there should be a clear, solid fossil record given the millions of years that evolution is supposed to have taken place. The fact is, there is such a record of fossils. The fact is, that in millions of years, most organic material decomposes. The fact is, the evidence in the article to which we both responded actually supports the idea of evolution. You seem to have both reasoning and reading comprehension impairment.
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.
Dear Ron Cote,
My first impression from reading your comment headed ‘Evolution in Doubt’ is that you have not mentioned your religious bias. You seem to confer that your comments are scientific and without an unmentioned bias.
Sir, you are a fool!
You are very careful not to mention Mr. Darwin, who was probably the greatest scientist in all history, at a level, even greater than than Newton, Maxwell, Einstein and Plank. Evolutionary biology drives medicine today and explains the resurgence of serious pathogens to humans, particularly in hospitals throughout the world.
I know that you are a fool because of your ‘millions and billions’ of years comment. Of course the world began on Monday (Not Sunday because your eternal spook took the day off), September 19, 6004 years ago, as proposed by Bishop Dickhead of the Church of England in 1792 or whenever.
As an old saying goes.. ‘there is no point in talking to a fool’ sadly you’ve got it.
Keep an open mind Ron. At this point there is no difference between what I understand of you and what you believe and the fanatic moslems who also believe what you believe. They kill people to make sure everyone has to believe the same shit.
Hey! Do the Luddites wish to rule again?
Regards,
Alec
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…..
Regretably it is a waste of time debating with “Creationists”, no matter how much evidence is presented, they “know” better because God told them so!
While I consider this an inappropriate forum for this discussion, God came down and told me “I didn’t make this place, but it looked like some fun to stir up the simple lifeforms, give them something to argue and kill each other over.”
Silly humans.
Leave a Reply