200,000 year old human hair found in dung

Not sure if this thread belongs here, but it does relate to our ancestors:

Strands of hair from a human who lived 200,000 years ago have been found preserved inside fossilised hyena dung from South Africa.

This is 20 times older than the previously oldest hair sample found. What will be interesting is the scientific analysis of the hair. There is so much that can be discovered about a person and their environment based on a hair sample.

The scientists think that the hair was from a body that was scavenged by a hyena after the humans death, however, it is also possible that that the human was actually hunted and eaten by the hyena which to my mind mind adds a much more dramatic spin on the story.


Seeings as there are people in this world who believe the world is less than 10 000 years old, I would love to know how they are going to explain this one.
Creationists

Edit to Add the link to article:
Link


[edit on 12/5/2009 by deltaalphanovember]

I wonder if it will have any of those "mushrooms" in it, since I read somewhere that ancient humans taking that lead to the evolution of abstract thinking etc..

reply to post by Totalstranger

---

It's not human dung, it's human hair in hyena dung. I doubt hyena's were following any path of enlightenment, they were merely following the path to a full tummy.

I love the "photographic proof" they post under the Dinos lived with Humans section. A grainy B&W photo of a supposed dino print in the mud. It's not even centered in the shot. If I found a fresh dino print I would take more than one shot of it, and it would have been documented a bit more thoroughly.

The greatest ally evolutionists have in the battle against creationism is the creationists. Without any prompting from us they make themselves look like total buffoons.

You can, however, get an idea what a critter, even a human critter, has consumed by testing their hair. (Recreational drug users take note. The tests are already being developed.)

reply to post by Gawdzilla

---

Absolutely - a very good point. All serious drug users should shave their entire bodies to avoid detection. Lance Armstrong - take note!

Seriously, I wonder how sensitive the tests are - if they are able to detect that kind of thing from a 200 000 year old hair.

reply to post by deltaalphanovember

---

It depends on the amount of degradation, of course. I suspect there's a lively discussion about who gets how much of the hair, and a follow on as to exactly which tests will be done, and by whom. That little hair is going to be in for some interesting times. Otzi might have to share the limelight for a while if they find anything exciting.

As far as I'm aware hair samples are already used to detect long term drug use, and has been so here in Oz for at least 14 years.

Pretty sure there was a recent discovery to do with red haired homo-variants, which shows how advanced the tech is now.

reply to post by Tayesin

---

The development of "portable" testers is coming along nicely. In the not-so-distant future you might see them in use at the "registration table" for sporting events like the Tour de France, and in jails for screening prisoners. Put a hair in, get a result back PDQ.

Note:

references to illicit drugs are not only off Topic speculation, but also against the Terms And Conditions Of Use

2e.) Illicit Activity: Discussion of illicit activities; specifically the use of mind-altering drugs & substances, engaging in computer hacking, promoting criminal hate, dicussing sexual relations with minors, and furtherance of financial schemes and scams are strictly forbidden. You will also not link to sites or online content that contains discussion or advocacy of such material. Any post mentioning or advocating personal use of illicit mind-altering drugs will result in immediate account termination.

Fair warning

It seems it is in pretty bad shape. They just compared its structure with a bunch of other hair samples and said it SEEMS most likely human.

---

---

reply to post by epitaph.one

---

Ok posters, fair warning from Mods regarding off-topic and undesired subject!

Let's get back to the debate between Creationists and Evolutionists.

Are there any Creationists out there? Could you please tell me how this affects your belief system, if any?

reply to post by Sonya610

---

Sonya, absolutely correct, glad someone read the article properly. It is stirring up a lot of interest but I can only imagine how damaged the hair sample is.
I think this is going to be one of those subjects that eventually become as controversial as the Turin Shroud. Some scientists will claim X and others will claim Y.
And, on ATS someone will claim that is alien/human hybrid hair.

reply to post by deltaalphanovember

---

i'm a creationist, i belive that GOD created everything. theres just to many complex froms of life for it to just have happend out of some globs of amino acid soup. and far as the universe, it to is far to complex to have just started from a big bang that threw around a lot of matter togather and made all the planets stars and everything else in it. to many things have to work just the right way in order for it to keep going. in space or here on earth.
as for the age of things i dont know, i cant remember the chapter and verse but GOD says " my thoughts are not your thoughts and my ways are not your ways" so for me the earth could be 10,000 yrs old or maybe billions of years. the bible is not clear on this

[edit on 12-5-2009 by hounddoghowlie]

---

---

reply to post by hounddoghowlie

---

I think that the "1 day = 1 billion years for God" belief is the most acceptable for an intelligent scientifically rational Christian given the wealth of fossil evidence. I try encourage my Christian son to believe along those lines as opposed to his mother who steadfastly believes the world is less than 10 000 years.

She is of the thinking that fossils cannot be more than a few thousand years old, and is steadfast in her belief in this scientific impossibility.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie

---

Thats a pretty weird thing to say, as Im sure I have made lots of things myself.


Creationists make these strange claims, based on nothing but religious indoctrination and an extraordinary reluctance to accept reality or learn basic science. You reject reality, and instead believe scripture.

And ironically, your belief details that man created scripture while reality itself is the single purest creation of your own god. So, you are choosing man over your own god when you choose scripture over reality.

As a man of science, I wish to understand this reality you believe was created by your god. I admire that reality, I am inspired by that reality and I want to know all about it. You shun your god's own creation.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by Daniem]

reply to post by Daniem

---

Where did you get your ability to create? And your ability to reason?

Why do you think it requires any outside force? There's nothing to show that it comes from any exterior source.