A Skull that rewrites the History of Man!, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 62 times

Topic started on 9-9-2009 @ 04:06 AM by silo13

A Skull that rewrites the History of Man!

www.independent.co.uk

The conventional view of human evolution and how early man colonised the world has been thrown into doubt by a series of stunning palaeontological discoveries suggesting that Africa was not the sole cradle of humankind.

Experts believe fossilised bones unearthed at the medieval village of Dmanisi in the foothills of the Caucuses, and dated to about 1.8 million years ago, are the oldest indisputable remains of humans discovered outside of Africa.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:06 AM by silo13

Absolutely fabulous!

It never ceases to amaze me the more and more we learn about the evolution of humans.

How there are in-fact still *new things* to discover under our Sun!

This quote not only fascinates me, but, warms me, warms me that the old *Cave man* cliché, is just that, a cliché.

One of the five skulls is of a person who lost all his or her teeth during their lifetime but had still survived for many years despite being completely toothless. This suggests some kind of social organization based on mutual care, Professor Lordkipanidze said.

Absolutely fabulous!

It never ceases to amaze me the more and more we learn about the evolution of humans and how there are still *new things* to discover under our Sun!

This quote not only fascinates me, but, warms me, warms me that the old *Cave man* cliché, is just that, a cliché.

One of the five skulls is of a person who lost all his or her teeth during their lifetime but had still survived for many years despite being completely toothless. This suggests some kind of social organization based on mutual care, Professor Lordkipanidze said.

peace

Since my time mark still will not record my time correctly I’m posting this Rome Time 11:08 Wednesday Sept. 9th.

www.independent.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 9-9-2009 by silo13]

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:20 AM by Republican08

1,800,000 million years ago.

Still reading

For comparison Human Skull

[edit on 9-9-2009 by Republican08]

[edit on 9-9-2009 by Republican08]

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:23 AM by ItsallCrazy

reply to post by silo13

Quality, the Caucasus mountains are mentioned elsewhere as being the cradle of civilisation but I can't for the life of me remember where.

Interesting that they may have a structure similar to ours, protecting the elderly or weak, as the toothless skull shows!

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:23 AM by silo13

reply to post by Republican08

Oh! You beat me to it!

Thank you TONS!

Isn't that thing just beautiful!

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:26 AM by woodwardjnr

It's amazing, the other day I was arguing with friends about how long humans have been on the earth. I think we googled it and it was between 250 - 400 thousand years ago. It's amazing one discovery can throw all that up in the air.
Makes you wonder what else will be proved wrong in the future

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:29 AM by Republican08

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Republican08

Oh! You beat me to it!

Thank you TONS!

Isn't that thing just beautiful!

That's what makes us very different.

I find it amazingly beautiful as you do... anyone else in the streets, would look at you until they became cock eyed.

It's magnificent, i'm still reading though

The skulls, jawbones and fragments of limb bones suggest that our ancient human ancestors migrated out of Africa far earlier than previously thought and spent a long evolutionary interlude in Eurasia – before moving back into Africa to complete the story of man.

Hmm.. Interesting. Early ancestors, early at that, moved to Eurasia, then moved back... then explored later on? Still reading hypothesis.

www.independent.co.uk...

[edit on 9-9-2009 by Republican08]

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:52 AM by Humanly-Imperfect

God, if only people from 1.8 million years ago thaught to record all of this stuff then we wouldn'tr have such a job doing it now, pfft. they didn't see that one coming did they, i just supose they were a bit lazy

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 04:55 AM by Republican08

Originally posted by Humanly-Imperfect
God, if only people from 1.8 million years ago thaught to record all of this stuff then we wouldn'tr have such a job doing it now, pfft. they didn't see that one coming did they, i just supose they were a bit lazy

You serious at all in that, like even the slightest bit.

As far as I'm concerned, the low of the totem pole in our species, was equal to that of our chimpanzee brothers, not to big on thinking.

I noticed in the skulls, a smaller frontal lobe area in the skull.

Actually these ancient ancestors had a 40% smaller brain when skulls are compared.

So they'd of been the equal as to throwing poo, and wondering what to eat that day, and how to kill it, and tools, where revolutionary! Rocks, had a newfound meaning!

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 05:05 AM by silo13

reply to post by Humanly-Imperfect

IMO These people did record themselves.

I think in the very moment of man's original thought - and when the ego was born - man wanted to record who and what he/she was.

If only for their own reasons.

The problem is - the ways and means he/she recorded themselves didn’t span the test of time.

Charcoal on animal skin - on birch bark - etc.

I really truly believe they did record things - just too bad time (erosion, etc) *ate it*...

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 05:08 AM by Republican08

reply to post by silo13

Well of course!

If I had been around in primitive times, I probably wouldn't of thought of future generations of possibly thousands of years in the future! At that!

I would of written to my children and such, maybe at that, probably not even grandchildren, that would've been a stretch.

And just the vital things, like hunting, and gathering, and building. Necessities.

Once our brains evolved further, we could ponder the universe, and "time". Which we are still struggling with, and even now, we are considering the value of our children a millenia from now! Who may look back at us, thinking we were so myopic in thinking, that our recordings would ever reach them!

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 05:17 AM by VintageEnvy

Fantastic thread! I love this, it never fails to amaze me. To be able to see that skull and just try and imagine the history of it aw inspiring. This I'm sure will open up much more digs specific to this case very exciting to see what they find. star and flag.

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 05:23 AM by nixie_nox

As I always say I think we are going to find that ancient Egypt is actually middle civilization, not the earliest civilization.

Good find!

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 05:33 AM by revdrdrsunshine

Here is a video that puts a perspective on this type of thing. Well, makes you wonder at least...

Google Video Link

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 07:13 AM by HunkaHunka

Well maybe all the Caucasians originated in the Caucas areas.

Why do they think people moved out of Africa and then back in?

To me it would make more sense that Life originated in several places, or while it was fomenting in one area, parts of the gene pool moved elsewhere and fomented there for a while.

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 07:29 AM by El Davicho

Just one step closer to evidence that man originated in South America. The question is, were evidence of such a thing to come to light...would our scientists recognize, or even aknowledge it?

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 07:41 AM by Shadowflux

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the civilization of the Hittites, a contemporary to the Ancient Egyptians and in some ways more advanced, borrowed much of their culture from a civilization known as the Hurrites. The Hurrites are said to have originated in the Caucuses and moved to the general Egyptian/Hittite area.

I've always had a problem with the original "cradle of civilization" theory. It seemed far too simple and far too Victorian to be accurate. I also feel as though the archeological record would indicate a more obvious and steady advancement of civilization along the same path as the supposed "Out of Africa" exodus.

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 07:48 AM by reject

reply to post by silo13

so, is this a case of parallel evolution or did it come out of africa also?

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 09:36 AM by Solomons

reply to post by Republican08

I thought brain size did not equate to how intelligent something is? didn't our homo erectus pals have bigger brains than modern humans? Anyway good find! i watched a documentary a few years back on channel 4 called what makes us human about our intelligence,the ASPM gene was mentioned i think.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by Solomons]

reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 09:49 AM by Doc Velocity

Neanderthal had approximately the same brain volume as modern humans, yet we always characterize Neanderthal as the dumbass caveman carrying a club. But they were rather intellectually sophisticated — evidence suggests they performed ritual burials, indicating some possible belief in an afterlife.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 9/9/2009 by Doc Velocity]

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^