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.

 

10 million-year-old fossil unearths new view of human evolution

page: 1
15

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 06:48 PM
link   
I found this interesting. Maybe we evolved sooner than current science says.

Rudapithecus is way down the ancestral tree, but 10 million years ago to possibly walking upright? If this was possible, did they begin using tools and the beginnings of sentient conscience and thought , paving the way to homo sapiens?

What do you think?







Near an old mining town in Central Europe, known for its picturesque turquoise-blue quarry water, lay Rudapithecus. For 10 million years, the fossilized ape waited in Rudabánya, Hungary, to add its story to the origins of how humans evolved. What Rudabánya yielded was a pelvis—among the most informative bones of a skeleton, but one that is rarely preserved. An international research team led by Carol Ward at the University of Missouri analyzed this new pelvis and discovered that human bipedalism—or the ability for people to move on two legs—might possibly have deeper ancestral origins than previously thought.



phys.org...







posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:00 PM
link   
It looks like they're having a ball in that picture. I want to go there. That fruit must be amazing.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:02 PM
link   
You can't make those kinds of conclusions based on a pelvis. It's still an ape, classified as pithecus. Unless you find stone tools that can be placed with this thing, you can't claim that. And consciousness? Who knows what or how they thought? By itself, it does not change anything previously learned. We still have a long line of fossils that paint an interesting picture of human evolution. Where this one plugs in, we'll have to wait and see. The one thing we have learned over the last few decades is that hominim evolution was much more varied than we originally thought. It's not an unbroken line from simple to complex, but more of a broad, flat series of streams like a river delta where many different variations were tried and died off. It's a great find, nevertheless. Hopefully they find more.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
You can't make those kinds of conclusions based on a pelvis. It's still an ape, classified as pithecus. Unless you find stone tools that can be placed with this thing, you can't claim that. And consciousness? Who knows what or how they thought? By itself, it does not change anything previously learned. We still have a long line of fossils that paint an interesting picture of human evolution. Where this one plugs in, we'll have to wait and see. The one thing we have learned over the last few decades is that hominim evolution was much more varied than we originally thought. It's not an unbroken line from simple to complex, but more of a broad, flat series of streams like a river delta where many different variations were tried and died off. It's a great find, nevertheless. Hopefully they find more.


As far as tools go, we see it in certain apes today. Could be crude wood and stone tools, who is to say? Just speculation.

Our human evolution has been a refinement of several species and I feel we are not done yet. We are still evolving, ever changing as a species.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:45 PM
link   
There was another verified fossil found in Kenya dating between 5.8 and 6.2 MYA. Dentition says it was an omnivore and also walked on two hind legs as evidenced by the hip ball and socket joint. The find was around 2002 ? and the critter was given a French name of Ariel ?? or millennium man..

Tool use does not appear until around the time of Lucy or a couple of million years after this latest find. Does not mean tools were not used as apes today and even birds use tools.. A definition of a tool is an object that is acquired to make a task easier.
edit on 727thk19 by 727Sky because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 08:15 PM
link   
You might want to watch this video below. Interesting info by Michael Cremo about our ancestry.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Groot

As far as tools go, we see it in certain apes today. Could be crude wood and stone tools, who is to say? Just speculation.
Our human evolution has been a refinement of several species and I feel we are not done yet. We are still evolving, ever changing as a species.


Agreed, and so are those other successful animals, I would also add that need or even convenience, are also a driving force IMHO.
Mind over matter and it's progression, is all important,




posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Groot

originally posted by: schuyler
You can't make those kinds of conclusions based on a pelvis. It's still an ape, classified as pithecus. Unless you find stone tools that can be placed with this thing, you can't claim that. And consciousness? Who knows what or how they thought? By itself, it does not change anything previously learned. We still have a long line of fossils that paint an interesting picture of human evolution. Where this one plugs in, we'll have to wait and see. The one thing we have learned over the last few decades is that hominim evolution was much more varied than we originally thought. It's not an unbroken line from simple to complex, but more of a broad, flat series of streams like a river delta where many different variations were tried and died off. It's a great find, nevertheless. Hopefully they find more.


see it in certain apes today. Could be crude wood and stone tools, who is to say? Just speculation.


As stated above, it has long been known that apes use "tools" like stripping a branch to fish for termites. But we can get caught up in the definition here. Technically it's a "tool" because it is something in the environment that has been modified. But it's not like it is as sophisticated as a Folsom projectile point. Further, no tools of any kind have been associated with this specimen.


originally posted by: 727Sky
There was another verified fossil found in Kenya dating between 5.8 and 6.2 MYA. Dentition says it was an omnivore and also walked on two hind legs as evidenced by the hip ball and socket joint. The find was around 2002 ? and the critter was given a French name of Ariel ?? or millennium man..


You are thinking of "Orrorin tugenensis" found in 2001. At least according to the finders, it isn't even in the genus Homo, though they admit it could have walked upright and may be a competitor--in terms of lineage--with Homo aferensis (Lucy.)
edit on 9/18/2019 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: openedeyesandears
You might want to watch this video below. Interesting info by Michael Cremo about our ancestry.


I'm about 20 minutes in and this is , to say the least, very intriguing !

Think you can find any links to this as I finish watching?



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 11:23 PM
link   
If the pelvis was more human like, it is possible we evolved from a species related to that ape. We do not even share protein sugars with apes. Now, this creature they call an ape, yet there was no hair found at the site, it could have been more human like than ape like. They just found a hip.

Finding an occasional biped in history does not mean we are evolved from them, it means we might be related to them somehow. Human like beings have been around for a very long time, does it matter where we came from anyway? I just think it is premature to say we all came out of Africa, man could have evolved anywhere in the world and some may have found their way to Africa. Maybe we evolved from that continent below Europe now. We will never know for sure where we came from....and it really does not matter anyway. People want to believe what other educated people believe and some of those educated people don't actually know as much as they think they do. Consensus of the time is constantly evolving. Maybe in twenty years they will be saying that we came out of Europe....Still it does not matter, I am only losing sleep over it because I am commenting at half past twelve at night.



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Groot

I don't think it really changes the assumed dates of human appearance. I think that has been well established.

But it is interesting that there is evidence of bipedal-ism in such an early ancestor.

Also, I think that human feet are what made the whole two legged bit effective.

Since the fossil was of the pelvis, we can only make assumptions about the structure of the foot. So the picture may be entirely wrong, it is just someone's idea.



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I think its far more likely we came from aliens than apes.

There's no middle, its just.. apes then humans - where's evidence of the inbetween?

Aliens however.. I think they look just like us - only taller and thinner...

They put us here, why, I can only guess!



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 12:38 AM
link   
Central Europe.
Bipedalism could have evolved more than once. In more than one place.



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Groot

I read something fascinating about the human genome project. It turns out there are some plants that more DNA sequences than humans. And when they compare human DNA to ape DNA is doesn't really explain why humans are formed they way to do. All DNA does is create certain protein sequences. Contrary to popular delusions, DNA is not a blue print for everything needed to grow a proper human. For example, cells in the arms and legs are practically identical. There has to be some other information and controls going on that determines shape and position of what is created by DNA. I'm currently reading a book on the subject but no answer yet.



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
I think its far more likely we came from aliens than apes.

There's no middle, its just.. apes then humans - where's evidence of the inbetween?


There is plenty of evidence "in between." If you looked at an extant Homo aferensis, for example, you would say, "Oh, look. Some sort of a small ape. Looks kind of like a chimpanzee." There are any number of ape-looking creatures attributed to the Homo line. There is no gap. There is no missing link. That's 19th century thinking, before we had found the large number of fossils we know of today.

And just to add to what several other posters have said above, there is no evidence that OP's creature has anything to do with human evolution. It doesn't change a thing.




top topics



 
15

log in

join