It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In 1959, in an area called Chalkidiki in Petralona, Northern Greece, a shepherd came across a small opening to a cave, which became visible when a thick covering of snow finally melted. He gathered a group of villagers to help him clear the entrance so they could go inside and explore. They found a cave rich in stalactites and stalagmites. But they also found something surprising – a human skull embedded in the wall (later research also uncovered a huge number of fossils including pre-human species, animal hair, fossilized wood, and stone and bone tools).
The ‘Petralona man’, or Archanthropus of Petralona, as it has since been called, was found to be 700,000 years old, making it the oldest human europeoid (presenting European traits) of that age ever discovered in Europe. Dr Poulianos’ research showed that the Petralona man evolved separately in Europe and was not an ancestor of a species that came out of Africa.
originally posted by: intrptr
Accurate dating is near impossible because they aren't dating the artifact itself, just the nearby "strata" which is old as the minerals themselves.
Nothing is left of the skull to date, it is long since been replaced by minerals.
Thats why the enormous controversy about how old it really is.
The isn't an argument from religious grounds, those that know my content know I have problems with both Biblical and Evolution theories.
This does not contradict the "Out of Africa" theory at all. One wonders why the authors of these articles think so. The Out of Africa theory does NOT postulate a single wave of migrations, but several over time, pushed by climate change.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: schuyler
I disagree. Out of Africa two theory does have some issues. (1) One that genetic (5) inbreading of archaic humans have been found. (2) Two the migration periods have had to be changed. (3) Three the placement of mitochondrial eve was placed in Africa in a speculative way. It could be Arabia.
We are still at the beginning of dna research. (4) We have often been wrong about our conclusions in the past.
(46 specialists from 12 separate countries), which provided further proof of Dr Poulianos’ claims, including remarkable findings like fossilized pieces of wood, an oak leaf, animal hair and coprolites, which enabled accurate dating.
originally posted by: hiddenNZ
I wonder if we will ever find the "missing link" in our fossil record that I have read about. I also think alot of how fast we evolved......and what factors contributed to it.
There are two pathways for mitochondrial eve. Eurasia is one. Africa is one.
Sure anthro 101 moat likely doesn't use the most current findings.