What's up everyone. We are doing a contest with T.I. and we are giving away $1200 a day for the next 10 days. Just wanted to give you all a heads up.
https://www.allhiphop.com/ti

Researchers: Ancient human remains found in Israel

bless the child
bless the child Members Posts: 5,167 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited December 2010 in The Social Lounge
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101227/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_ancient_teeth

Israeli archaeologists said Monday they may have found the earliest evidence yet for the existence of modern man, and if so, it could upset theories of the origin of humans.

A Tel Aviv University team excavating a cave in central Israel said teeth found in the cave are about 400,000 years old and resemble those of other remains of modern man, known scientifically as 🤬 sapiens, found in Israel. The earliest 🤬 sapiens remains found until now are half as old.

Click image to see photos of the ancient tooth



AP/Oded Balilty
"It's very exciting to come to this conclusion," said archaeologist Avi Gopher, whose team examined the teeth with X-rays and CT scans and dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found.

He stressed that further research is needed to solidify the claim. If it does, he says, "this changes the whole picture of evolution."

[Related: Chinese archaeologists discover 2,400 year old soup]

The accepted scientific theory is that 🤬 sapiens originated in Africa and migrated out of the continent. Gopher said if the remains are definitively linked to modern human's ancestors, it could mean that modern man in fact originated in what is now Israel.

Sir Paul Mellars, a prehistory expert at Cambridge University, said the study is reputable, and the find is "important" because remains from that critical time period are scarce, but it is premature to say the remains are human.

"Based on the evidence they've cited, it's a very tenuous and frankly rather remote possibility," Mellars said. He said the remains are more likely related to modern man's ancient relatives, the Neanderthals.

According to today's accepted scientific theories, modern humans and Neanderthals stemmed from a common ancestor who lived in Africa about 700,000 years ago. One group of descendants migrated to Europe and developed into Neanderthals, later becoming extinct. Another group stayed in Africa and evolved into 🤬 sapiens — modern humans.

[Related: Ancient human relative roamed all of Asia]

Teeth are often unreliable indicators of origin, and analyses of skull remains would more definitively identify the species found in the Israeli cave, Mellars said.

Gopher, the Israeli archaeologist, said he is confident his team will find skulls and bones as they continue their dig.

The prehistoric Qesem cave was discovered in 2000, and excavations began in 2004. Researchers Gopher, Ran Barkai and Israel Hershkowitz published their study in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology.




LMAO at the lowly peckawoods trying to validate the bible with this 🤬 . We'll hear this story today and then it will fade out and we wont ever hear another peep about it. Just like that Shroud of Turin 🤬 . All of civilization started in Africa, not some desert goat pasture that didn't become "Israel" until the 1940's.

Comments

  • KTULU IS BACK
    KTULU IS BACK Banned Users Posts: 6,617 ✭✭
    edited December 2010
    LMAO at the lowly peckawoods trying to validate the bible with this 🤬 .
    Where does this happen in the article you posted?

    It doesn't.

    400,000 year old human remains totally contradict the Biblical timeline. Bible apologists wouldn't like this news.
    We'll hear this story today and then it will fade out and we wont ever hear another peep about it. Just like that Shroud of Turin 🤬 .
    Yeah, you never hear about the Shroud of Turin anymore.

    Except all the 🤬 time.

    But the Shroud is an obvious hoax. What we have here is fossilized human teeth, dug up by actual scientists instead of cronies of the Catholic church.
    All of civilization started in Africa, not some desert goat pasture that didn't become "Israel" until the 1940's.
    This news has nothing to do with civilization.

    Civilization didn't start until about 10,000 years ago, when the agricultural revolution was able to happen because of the warming climate. It took place in several areas around the world, mostly centering around large rivers. India, MesoAmerica, and eastern Africa all became "civilized" independently at about the same time.

    But of course, the world wasn't really "civil" at all until the white man invented rationalism, democracy, human rights, etc.

    But that's beside the point. If these 400,000 year old teeth turn out to be accurate indicators of the origin of humanity, all of the bleating racist blacks do about being the oldest humans will be hushed.

    And the feelings... oh, they will be caught.
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Man with No Fucks Given Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2010
    Right now, the find doesn't mean much. As stated in the article, teeth are unreliable when it comes to identifying species. On top of that, finding those teeth don't even contradict present theories, so the significance is being severely overstated. The theory of the migration of 🤬 Sapien out of Africa has support from more than just the bones of "Eve." There have been genetic studies and other archaelogical studies that suggest the oldest people came from Africa. Scientists date the appearance of modern man in Africa 700,000 years ago, finding 400,000 year old remnants of people in Israel doesn't go against that theory. It does throw some uncertainty in there and is cause for re-evaluation, but saying that the theory of human evolution will have to be redone is an exaggeration at this point.

    Not to mention that the other bones haven't been found. Even if we say that life started in Israel, if the skulls are found and the bones still appear to be "Negroid" then it still doesn't change the fact that black people were the first people. There is no reason to believe that won't be the case considering there are people with Negroid features who have been in that region for thousands of years. I mean, people don't really think that the Modern Israelis actually reflect the original Israelis do they?
  • whar67
    whar67 Members Posts: 542
    edited December 2010
    700,000 years ago 🤬 erectus was dominate species. That lead to modern humans and neanderthals. Modern humans arrive on the scene about 250,000 years ago. If this find proves genuine it is a stunning development in human evolution.
  • ThaChozenWun
    ThaChozenWun Members Posts: 9,390
    edited December 2010
    whar67 wrote: »
    700,000 years ago 🤬 erectus was dominate species. That lead to modern humans and neanderthals. Modern humans arrive on the scene about 250,000 years ago. If this find proves genuine it is a stunning development in human evolution.

    Not really that stunning. I think to find a skeleton or fossil of a skeleton resembling modern humans dating back to 400,000 years ago would be stunning. But finding similar teeth isn't really means to rethink human origins. The good thing is if they are finding teeth other bones are bound to be unearthed somewhere in the area shortly after.

    If you look up 🤬 antecessor, their teeth they are very very similar to ours. And that ranges from 1.2 million to 800,000 years ago. So 3-400,000 years later somewhere in that span it's not unlikely that teeth would end up similar to ours in some sections of human species.
  • whar67
    whar67 Members Posts: 542
    edited December 2010
    Not really that stunning. I think to find a skeleton or fossil of a skeleton resembling modern humans dating back to 400,000 years ago would be stunning. But finding similar teeth isn't really means to rethink human origins. The good thing is if they are finding teeth other bones are bound to be unearthed somewhere in the area shortly after.

    If you look up 🤬 antecessor, their teeth they are very very similar to ours. And that ranges from 1.2 million to 800,000 years ago. So 3-400,000 years later somewhere in that span it's not unlikely that teeth would end up similar to ours in some sections of human species.

    I did not elaborate but the 'proves genuine' part of my post meant more fossil remains. While we do not need a full skeleton we do need more than a single tooth. If they turn up more fossils, enough to show it is not as similar ancient ancestor but actually 🤬 sapien living 400,000 years ago it will be a real game changer.

    This does not undermine Africa as an origin place for man, DNA evidence still strongly supports that, but really changes the timelines pushing the human race into a much older period.
  • ThaChozenWun
    ThaChozenWun Members Posts: 9,390
    edited December 2010
    whar67 wrote: »
    I did not elaborate but the 'proves genuine' part of my post meant more fossil remains. While we do not need a full skeleton we do need more than a single tooth. If they turn up more fossils, enough to show it is not as similar ancient ancestor but actually 🤬 sapien living 400,000 years ago it will be a real game changer.

    This does not undermine Africa as an origin place for man, DNA evidence still strongly supports that, but really changes the timelines pushing the human race into a much older period.

    Oh okay I got you now. Yea, if they find other evidence to support it being actual 🤬 sapien then that would definitely change some big views.


    And smh @ spell check not having sapien nor homosapien listed in it.
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Man with No Fucks Given Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2010
    whar67 wrote: »
    700,000 years ago 🤬 erectus was dominate species. That lead to modern humans and neanderthals. Modern humans arrive on the scene about 250,000 years ago. If this find proves genuine it is a stunning development in human evolution.

    You're right, my mistake. I read it wrong.
  • DarcSkies
    DarcSkies TRUST IN ALLAH BUT TIE UP YOUR CAMEL Members Posts: 13,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2010
    If these 400,000 year old teeth turn out to be accurate indicators of the origin of humanity, all of the bleating racist blacks do about being the oldest humans will be hushed.

    And the feelings... oh, they will be caught.
    The first ppl in that region were black.

    1275501379140-dumpfm-noisia-deal-with-it-twins.gif
  • anthony7q
    anthony7q Members Posts: 782
    edited December 2010
    They're just doing what they have always done. White-washing history.
  • ThaChozenWun
    ThaChozenWun Members Posts: 9,390
    edited December 2010
    anthony7q wrote: »
    They're just doing what they have always done. White-washing history.

    This would change nothing really in terms of being beneficial to white people so how is it white washing?
  • anthony7q
    anthony7q Members Posts: 782
    edited December 2010
    This would change nothing really in terms of being beneficial to white people so how is it white washing?

    I'm sure that once they find all of the bones they will reconfigure him to be white/light skin just like what the Arabs did to King Tut.

    051005_tutsface.jpg



    king_tut.jpg



    LMAO. They made King Tut look like Boy George.
  • ThaChozenWun
    ThaChozenWun Members Posts: 9,390
    edited December 2010
    anthony7q wrote: »
    I'm sure that once they find all of the bones they will reconfigure him to be white/light skin just like what the Arabs did to King Tut.

    051005_tutsface.jpg



    king_tut.jpg



    LMAO. They made King Tut look like Boy George.

    So they are going to dig up a tooth and change it from "well all original man was dark" to "well now we think everyone was white as evident by this tooth?"

    come on son
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Man with No Fucks Given Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2010
    So they are going to dig up a tooth and change it from "well all original man was dark" to "well now we think everyone was white as evident by this tooth?"

    come on son

    The sad thing is that's not nearly as far fetched as it sounds. When you look at how for hundreds of years people who had little or no connection to Europe at all were portrayed to be lily white.
  • ThaChozenWun
    ThaChozenWun Members Posts: 9,390
    edited December 2010
    The sad thing is that's not nearly as far fetched as it sounds. When you look at how for hundreds of years people who had little or no connection to Europe at all were portrayed to be lily white.

    The difference now is that scientist (who aren't black) primarily agree that the original man in that area was not white.

    Now of course you will have your current Jewish groups and what not saying things like "see this proves it our land he's white" and so on but science laws and theories on the pigmentation of man at that time aren't going to change.