Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Evidence Found for Earliest Modern Humans

Posted by samzenpus on from the flintstones-the-early-years dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Researchers at Arizona State University report that they have pushed back the date for the earliest modern humans to 164,000 years ago, far earlier than previously documented. Paleoanthropologists now say that genetic and fossil evidence suggests that modern human species — Homo sapiens — evolved in Africa between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago and in seeking the "perfect site" to explore for remains of the earliest populations, researchers analyzed ocean currents, climate data, geological formations and other data to pin down a location. "The world was in a glacial stage 125,000 to 195,000 years ago, and much of Africa was dry to mostly desert; in many areas food would have been difficult to acquire. The paleoenvironmental data indicate there are only five or six places in all of Africa where humans could have survived these harsh conditions," said Curtis Marean, a professor in ASU's School of Human Evolution and Social Change. Photos from the cave at Pinnacle Point in South Africa show where the team found ochre, bladelets and evidence of shellfish — findings that reveal the earliest dated evidence of modern humans."

18 of 417 comments (clear)

  1. Cavemen by Bayoudegradeable · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well hopefully the 160,000 year old cavemen lasted longer than ABC's Cavemen...

    --
    Sig Registration Form 34c_766(a) submitted to Ministry of Signature Management. Approval pending.
  2. but... but... by XTbushwakko · · Score: 1, Funny

    that's long before god created everything?

    1. Re:but... but... by theskipper · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I just received my copy of The Creationist Times and the reprinted article says "evolved in Africa between 100 and 200 years ago", well within the last 6000 years. So the article linked in the summary is obviously a misprint.

      Sheesh, don't the /. editors check anything anymore?

    2. Re:but... but... by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Funny

      God's role has always been understood as sustaining the existence of Creation. That God ultimately controls health, weather, and so forth followed from that and still does, and there's no moving target here. I'd recommend reading an introduction the philosophy of religion before you try to assert things further about a field you evidently have no training in. Swinburne's Is There a God? (Oxford University Press, 1996) is probably the easiest to find, though the writer is a theist you may want to supplement it with Mackie or early Flew for the non-theist side.

    3. Re:but... but... by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, this is a mistake of modern religion -- attaching God to the so-far missing bits of science, and turning Him into a "God of the gaps". That's far preferable to the "God of the gapes." Goatse, hello!
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    4. Re:but... but... by apparently · · Score: 5, Funny
      Swinburne's Is There a God? (Oxford University Press, 1996) is probably the easiest to find,

      Pffft. Swinburne is for community college drop-outs and pedophiles. You want a real treatise on the subject? Check out Blume's Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret." That book will knock your fucking socks off. Not wearing socks? Get some fucking socks, man; you want to catch a cold?

    5. Re:but... but... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Funny
      The creation of whom was a miraculous gift given to you from our lord

      While that may seem like the most logical explanation for parenthood on Slashdot, there are a few of us who are not, in fact, virgins.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    6. Re:but... but... by WheelDweller · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, God's pretty much holding his own...but since people are *human*, there's room for misinterpretations, misunderstandings and some people being downright rude in His name. And even more have taken up a personal vendetta to ensure the Word is mocked and discredited.

      If you were to do an actual, in-depth study of the various "Bibles", you'd find only one that has consistent credibility. It's based on something like a million documents, about 5,000 covering just the New Testament alone. Sure, the autogrypha (originals) are gone...they were probably lost with those who *died*insisting*Christ's*existance*. (Who would die for a lie?) The multitude of documents, from different places on the globe have errors, sure- but the essence is always the same, even in the Dead Sea Scrolls which were 1,000 years before the copies we had before. Study of these documents, and cross-checking them gives us a scientific basis for credibility.

      Some of the New Testament copies are from the early first century, and there's no translation-loss. There have been literally thousands of people checking and cross-checking these documents for centuries. Do you really believe so many people would dedicate their lives to quests for the truth, if it were all just made up?

      And let's not forget that in Christ's time the Hebrews were in Roman Slavery...they couldn't POSSIBLY care less about Christ, yet their journalists reported the crucifixion and the resurrection. One of them was named Juvenile (which is probably where we get that word.)

      It's been only recently that science has turned on religion; many of the names-we-know in the old days were men of God, trying to understand Him. They were paid with church money to advance. But these days it's hip to think this entire scene, as rare as it is in the universe, just *happened* to come out livable, just happened to get the myriad features right for us to live, and for so long on this planet. I'm sorry, I just don't have that kinda faith.

      For centuries church detractors chided the Bible for talking about the Hittites, believing they never existed. Then a few decades ago someone turns over a shovel in the middle east and BAM! Hittite capital. See Wikipedia for details. Similarly detractors chided the Bible for "getting the Babylonian leaders wrong", yet science has turned up that the link in the chain had TWO leaders at one time, one in the battlefield, one in the government. And the Bible called _that_ one, too.

      Other religions talked about the Earth on the back of a fish, which, when it jumps out of the water, the floods came. Still others discuss a long stream, covered in a ceiling of stars, but the Bible says it's suspended from nothing...and suggests it's north pole points to the center of the galaxy (in not so few words).

      I'm here to ask you to believe something I'm just coming to terms with: The Bible has no errors. OH, I know...everyone has a favorite chestnut, but when you study them in context, you see they're not errors at all. But of course, you _have_to_ actually decide to look.

      The Bible had the proportions for the first sea-going vessel; Noah's ark. (And, no, it *didn't* carry 16,000,000,000 species- the document's writing could be satisfied with the space of a rowboat.) It describes surgery as being 'OK' while men of the time thought it witchcraft. It has so many levels and such a delicate tapestry of prophecy and fulfillment so as to humble even Shakespeare. And when you mess with the code, trying to make it say something else, a wave of contradictions appear. It's an incredible book.

      There are a *lot* of such surprises waiting for you in the Bible. There's a lot of fury and chaff coming from many churches, but if you want the actual, stated, only-using-the-Bible understanding of the Bible, that'd be Hank Hanegraff. http://equip.org./ He has all the answers, not from attitude, not from style, but from actual scientific proof: cross-checking the Bible's many source documents. His "Bible

      --
      --- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
  3. To quote Eric Cartman... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    My mom says there's a lot of black people in Africa!

  4. This can't be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    This can't be true! The earth isn't even over 9,000 years old!!! Hello!?!?!? http://www.answersingenesis.org/

  5. caveman evidence by crabbie · · Score: 1, Funny

    So Alec Baldwin likes shellfish...

  6. They discovered... by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...a Starbucks, a Wal-Mart, a psychiatric bill, and a dogeared copy of "Being and Nothingness."

    --
    Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
  7. Aligning with Creationism by superyooser · · Score: 2, Funny

    Evolutionists will continue to push back the date for the earliest modern humans (both anatomically and behaviorally).

    Superyooser's Law of Evolutionary Dating of Humans: As scientific research continues, the probability of the date of "modern humans" equaling the date of the beginning of the Earth approaches one.

    Then the only thing left to be corrected would be the time scale, but that knowledge would be accepted in the process of "approaching one."

  8. Re:Modern Anatomy vs Behavior by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Funny
    The "acts human" date still remains circa 40,000 to 60,000 B.C. (at least last time I heard).

    Depends what you mean by "acts human".

    TFA says;

    Photos from the cave at Pinnacle Point in South Africa show where the team found ochre, bladelets and evidence of shellfish Ochre and bladelets imply tool creation and use, as well as decoration. The oysters suggest sophisticated seduction techniques which may be beyond many Slashdotters, even today.
    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  9. What Does God Have to Say About This? by WED+Fan · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, it appears God is in trouble. He is claiming to have invented Man 6000 years ago. (Al Gore made a speech earlier in which he claimed to have invented man and that certain parts of the Bible were based on his and Tipper's love affair.)

    However, it now appears that there is prior art, far predating God's claims. While no suit has been filed, experts believe God would lose handily if the originator of the earlier design can be found. God did not return any calls when a message was left with his representatives, the Vatican Cathedral and Boys Ranch (Rome), Beth-Bagel Temple (NYC), LDS Church and Wife Emporium (Salt Lake City).

    Noted patent and copyright critic, Richard Stallman, stated that this is exactly why copyright and patent laws are bad, "It is clear that God is in the same group as all other profit hungry capitalist swine, like Bill Gates and that smelly Steve Jobs. Really, man is just an idea, and believe me, I have a few ideas about a few men. Which is why I don't use Google because then most of you would know the sites I'm going to, and that would be embarrassing. But...Where was I? Oh, yeah, God is evil. I'm hearby demanding that the new discoveries be called GNU/Homos. Heh, heh, I said, 'Homo.' But, enough of that, if God thinks he can control me..." We were unable to contact Stallman after the line went dead.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
  10. Re:Different genus, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Hominini

    I had one of those at Panera Bread last night. Alright, but a bit too gristly for my tastes.
  11. Should be sufficient by xelpyj · · Score: 2, Funny

    164,000 years ought to be enough for anybody.

  12. Re:Modern human BEHAVIOR, not modern humans! by Drall · · Score: 2, Funny

    Even looking at our recent history, we see the rise of advanced civilizations (such as the Aztecs) where there was relatively primitive civilization before.
    There's some Olmecs and Mayas at the door that'd like to have a word with you..