It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 1.85 million-year-old little finger bone that could rewrite human evolution: Giant human (homo)?

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Good night ya'll




posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChesterJohn
That's a quote from Aliens.

I always thought that Alien 3 should have been called "Still More Aliens." Still would have sucked as a movie, but the title would have been better.

Alien
Aliens
Still More Aliens


Alien
Aliens (hey, you idiots liked the first one and I have a yacht to feed)
Still more Aliens (Bwahaha F*** you, you'll pay to watch what I tell you to watch)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn

originally posted by: 727Sky
a reply to: Frocharocha



-May have belonged to an unknown, extremely large, human relative.
-Relative would have been 5ft 9 inches, compared to H. habilis, at 3ft tall.


Which would have made the pinky owner a giant in comparison. S&F about the only thing I have to add is a story I read many years ago where at one time in certain locations the breeding population had dropped to as few as 35 breeding pairs.. It was almost lights out for for humans in those areas and it was totally dark for others..



How could any one prove that breeding pairs dropped to 35?

No records, no evidence only hypothesis and conjecture.

Just more fairy tales from science.


I thought I read an article where they determined based on mitochondrial RNA , that variation on that RNA points to the past where at one point there were that few humans.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: pavil
The "bottleneck" theory takes it down to a few tens of thousands of humans, I think.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The post Toba bottleneck is generally considered to be around 10,000 breeding pairs with the slight possibility of as few as 1,000. I lean towards the higher end of the spectrum based on the amount of genetic diversity seen today though it would be an interesting exercise to map that out and try to trace the haplogroups backwards to their points of origin and correlate it with the time period and geography as it might help to seal the deal once and for all whether or not the Toba event was the definitive cause of the bottleneck. It's quite convenient that the Toba eruption occurred just prior but it would be much sweeter to be able to bury it out back with the ex.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar
Out of curiosity.
If it's reasonable to estimate a population for the bottleneck, is there any way to estimate the population prior?

How definitive is the bottleneck?

edit on 8/23/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Phage

Then how are they in this article coming to the conclusion of 1.8 million year old bone?



40Ar/39Ar dating was used on this site, specifically the strata within which the fossils were found in situ. It's typically used to check dates obtained by K/Ar dating.

As Phage points out, 14C is only accurate to 50KA, some will try to stretch that to 60KA but most won't go much past 40-45KA And even then, no single dating method is ever used. There are always at least 2 or 3 that are cross checked and then the dates you typically see in print are a mean that includes the margin of error.

For more info on Ar/Ar dating... en.wikipedia.org...

K/Ar dating... en.wikipedia.org...


And here's a link to the actual paper for this find... www.nature.com...


As for this phalange in question, the fact that a hand of this type was already formed at 1.83MA is the fascinating part in my opinion. The alleged height of the hominid is secondary in the grand scheme of things and to be quite honest, I think it's a little premature to get all ejaculatory just yet. The size of a phalange isn't a terribly good indicator for height. Had it been a femur, that would be a very different story because the height could be determined with a great deal of confidence. I'm rather hesitant to jump up and down just yet.

This is roughly the same age within a couple hundred thousand years, as Homo Georgicus which is the first member of our Genus to make its way into Europe. HG shares some more archaic characteristics of H. Habilis and a few of the more "modern"(in context of the geologic age in question at least) characteristics of H. Erectus so it was definitely taller than HH but not quite as tall as HE who averaged roughly 5'9".

I would like to see a comparison between HG and the OH 86 remains but there doesn't seem to be any overlap as yet. OH 86 doesn't have any more post cranial or cranial remains and HG seem to be only Skull and mandible with a limited amount of post cranial and no hand or phalanges found as yet.

Based on the limited information, I would suspect that the OH 86 find is going to be related to HG or an archaic ergaster/habilis transitional form which is essentially what HG is. The big issue for proponents of OH 86 being 5'9", if I am correct, is that while considerably taller than HH, HG has an estimated height of only 4' 11", still 10" shorter than their current estimate for OH 86. But that's just my educated guess based on the paper I just read as well as what I know of HG and the genus in general.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 02:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: peter vlar
Out of curiosity.
If it's reasonable to estimate a population for the bottleneck, is there any way to estimate the population prior?


Unfortunately, determining a pre-bottleneck population is kind of hindered by other possible bottleneck incidents prior to Toba as well as the fact that we weren't the only humans around when the bottleneck occurred. That aspect alone makes estimating populations pretty difficult. I had to look for this answer because I wasn't sure myself but there are some estimates of as low as 26,000 people 1.2MA but between then and post Toba, data seems pretty sketchy at best.


How definitive is the bottleneck?


The level of genetic diversity alone is pretty conclusive that there was a bottleneck. Whether or not Toba was the definitive factor or not is where the real question mark lies. Between the diversity issue and the coalescence of MtDNA, Y DNA and some nuclear DNA in HSS, I don't think there's really a question. There are certainly some who would argue that point but I'm inclined to disagree because it wasn't just HSS that was affected. It wasn't long after this event that HN and HA began their decline and either passed away entirely or were hybridized and absorbed into the populations of HSS moving into the Levant, Europe and W. Asia/Siberia. Chimpanzee, Orangutan, Macaque, cheetahs and tigers also faced a serious bottleneck at the same time from which they were able to recover and this event also led to the separation of Gorilla gene pools into Eastern and Western Lowland Gorillas



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: Frocharocha

Wouldn't the Smithsonians make this discovery "disappear" ? I mean they did that when they found remains of giants in North America.


Mostly likely not, at least in my believe, they would give their souls for discoveries to write their names in history.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 06:37 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn




The earth itself is much older and it outdates the current universe


So....we were here first and the Universe was created around us? Can you tell me how you know this or give a link to this special knowledge?



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChesterJohn
No. You did not read that in Omni magazine.
Omni got its science right. Also had bitchin art. I have a file folder full of it.




thanks Phage for saying that spot on ..

Im a big fan of Omni I have originals from 78 to 82

and it long gone .

as the Closest thing Ive seen , that is like the Omni magazine
a little more extreme, but with out scifi short Stories. or Art

is Called Ideas & Discoveries aka ID

any how I like the Supernatural/phenomenon/mystery/unexplained
stuff it contained and the unexplained
and the Complete Science of inventions that, that most mags wouldn't dare post
www.ideasanddiscoveries.com...

as there was a few Article talking about hominid and discoveries


anyhow

Chester John!! what Article on what Page and What Issue what year! are you claiming this !! ?

I Have them All from 1978 ( the first two ) right to 1982 ( Originals ) and the Rest in Digital PDF Format!!


Here is a Almost complete Archive of the OMNI Mags

from Archive .org

OMNI Magazine Collection


OMNI was a science and science fiction magazine published in the US and the UK. It contained articles on science fact and short works of science fiction.
archive.org...

dated from 1995 to 1978
archive.org...
as you said




a reply to: Phage Not according to omni magazine at that time that is where I read the info And then how are they saying the bone is 85 million



which issue ? im curious



Love these OMNI commercials




edit on 02015SundayfAmerica/Chicago8234 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)

edit on 02015SundayfAmerica/Chicago8234 by Wolfenz because: added omni date



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

(please note that the following is a summary of a greater work I did and it is still being worked on).

The Bible tells us so. God preserved his words in English and they are true as they are proclaimed to be in Psalm 119 and kept to all generation Psalm 12:6. and if we take them literally and in chronological order when we read Proverbs 8


Proverbs 8:22The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.


The wisdom of God is his Son, we know as Jesus Christ, and from the beginning God possessed him, set him up to be worshiped from Everlasting. this was done before there was ever an earth. If this is chronologically preserved the earth was before the depths of space we call the universe where our stars are today. The Son was brought fourth even before there were fountains abounding with water. And from that we see water was not something originated on the earth but God created fountains that abounded with it and they too were separate from the earth

When you come upon Genesis 1:2 you have an area around the earth filled with water and covering the earth. These waters left their decreed place and were allowed to flood the then earth before their were multiple heavens and before there was a universe filled with stars. there was something on the earth but it wasn't dinosaurs it was Lucifer, now known as Satan, and his angles, the earth has something to do with exalting Jesus Christ, that is one reason the Bible is said by Jesus Christ to be about him. the destruction was to the bodies of Satan, his angels and the worked they had done on the earth building a throne city.

Gen 1:3-5 Day one light is brought forth and the darkness that was there because of the fall of Lucifer as read in Isiah 14:12-14 . the current 24/7 time system is set up for preparation for man and the first day is recorded. Before this event no time was recorded it was from everlasting to everlasting, theologians call it eternity.

Vv 6-8 Day two brings the Firmament that encircles the universe and contains the darkness that Satan and his angles caused to exist. For the first time there are three heavens, as declared by Paul, one that is the atmosphere where the birds fly, one below the firmament that houses the earth and Sun, moon and all the stars, and one above the firmament known as the abode the of God. You will notice at the end of day two God does not call that day in and of itself good, Because anything that separated God from his creation is not good.

Vv 9-13Day 3 the setting forth of boundaries of the seas and the bringing forth of Mountains.

Vv 14-19 Day 4 God put the sun, moon and stars within the firmament, we call it the Universe.

Vv 20-23 Day 5 fish and sea creatures and birds are made to fill the seas and sky.

Vv 24-28 Day 6 animals and man are made.

God's word in Proverbs 8 and Genesis 1 support each other that the earth came before the heavens and the stars of our universe. The earth is much older than the young earthers of creation science will admit. The young earthers of creation science also wont admit that once man started tilling the earth rain began. There was rain before Noah's flood.

The thing is in the end of times, God rolls up the firmament burns them along with the old earth and creates a new heavens and a new earth, the new earth like the original is without seas (waters). the only water will be living water that flows from the throne of God. Revelation 21:1

This can only be accepted if we believe God preserved his words in English to this generation and that we can accept them literally at face value. But heck most of you already have in your hearts the Bible is just a fairly tale, written by mere men and has no credibility at all.

So I hoped you liked this short recording of the sequence of events seen by a man who searches for the deep things of God.

All scriptures quotes and references are from the Authorized Version.



edit on 23-8-2015 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Wolfenz

I can only tell you it was sometime between 1980 and 90.

To narrow it down it was about the time after the eruption of Mt St Helen's

I must admit I was reading lots of stuff at that time, I was high on drugs a lot during that time of my life, and not even sure where I was living at the time. I traveled around North America from Alaska to Texas from California to New Jersey.
edit on 23-8-2015 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Call me a hater but I find it disturbing your post are getting the most stars right now.

You are not offering anything to show what you are saying just calling stuff fairly tales because you don't want to accept it.

Sorry you don't understand the science got to where it is.



We understand that the science has gotten nowhere in this area, and is somehow revered just like the magical God in the sky.

Why is it so awesome too believe incomplete conjecture that is constantly changed , because it was WRONG.

Face it, it is all fantasy imagination stuff, back to religion we go !!!



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Sorry to the OP I didn't mean to go off topic but had to answer a question for one of the posters.

It would be a good thread topic but I would not want to place my whole Thesis as a thread as it is voluminous and I was already instructed by ATS not to link to any of my blog pages. I asked if I could but was denied.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO

It isn't incomplete conjecture tho...

Just because you don't understand, or want to for that matter, doesn't make it conjecture.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Fascinating find!

It's quite clear once you research human origins that main stream science takes the stance it does to conceal the actual truth,Rh negative blood origins is but one example in which science is purposely concealing the truth.

As for accurate dating? Well I've heard it said it may take 500 years to form an inch of top soil? I don't doubt this in the relatively short term..but is this idea accurate in long term?

Absolutely not! as main stream science does not except that we have cyclical pole shifts here on Earth, whereby mountain ranges are made in a matter of hours..whole continents can sink..vast layers of sediments can also be layed in this short time by tsunamis..some will say certain elements like coal will take a certain amount of years to form and this can be used as an accurate guide? I would always remain critical of any main stream talk..I mean the origins of oil? They say it's from dinosaur remnants? I support the idea and evidence that oil is actually layed down by Planet X (a brown dwarf) and B.D.s have orbiting debris fields that are comprised of petro chemicals which seep into rock layers over time once the passage of this object has finished and this mixture has fallen to the ground from the atmosphere.

Just some food for thought there..



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Frocharocha

Lol. I like how they put this finger bone, found in TANZANIA, on a white hand background for scale. Makes it more swalloable, I suppose, for those who don't believe we all (de?)volved from African descent. Haha



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Frocharocha

This might be an early ancestor of Gigantophithecus that lived in China, then moved over to the Bering ice bridge into North America.
This might lend to the "Out of Africa" lineages that travelled into the other continents.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Did you say they found a giant human homo finger? Wow FABULOUS!



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join