What a Difference 200,000 Years Makes

Scientists re-estimate the age of a group of human ancestors, leaving them out in the cold

By Molika Ashford Posted 03.17.2009 at 4:23 pm 7 Comments

Homo Erectus Wikipedia

Peking Man, a group of Homo erectus discovered in the 1920’s near Beijing (then Peking), China, has been back in the spotlight over the last few days. A new estimate from American and Chinese scientists dates the fossils (and their associated population of Peking men and women) 200,000 years older than earlier measurements. The researchers reported their finding on the cover of last week’s Nature.

Peking Man’s new age – around 750,000 years old – results from a dating method that assesses levels of radioactive aluminum and beryllium in dirt samples and tools from the discovery site, using an extremely sensitive mass spectrometer. The researchers report that earlier estimates were achieved with a less accurate measurement of uranium levels. Considering the difficulties of accurate dating, a 200,000-year mistake is understandable. Even with this new date, researchers cage their estimate within a possible margin of 50,000 years in either direction.

None of this may seem like much of a big deal. After all, what’s another 200,000 years when you’re already 500,000 years old? But it’s a significant change. 200,000 years, remember, is the length of time that modern humans have existed at all. The last 200,000 years have seen ice and heat, sea level rise and fall, and the extinction of giant beasts.

For Homo erectus, that difference of 200,000 years meant a major difference in climate. Living closer to 750,000 BCE, Peking man and his brethren would have had to brave the cold of a chillier age. That could mean that they used fire, though no clear evidence of this has been found. Or, it could just mean that they were even more badass than we previously thought.

Previous Article: Dinosaurs, and the Stories They Tell

Next Article: The Tallest Mobile Crane

Want to learn more about breakthroughs in electronics, medicine, nanotech, and more?
Subscribe to Popular Science and enter to win $5,000!

7 Comments

link to this comment

genXer

03/20/09 at 8:34 pm

Let that be a lesson on "reliable" scientific dating. I'm sure the 500,000 year date was stated as fact previously, and now we are supposed to believe this new date which is almost 50% older than before?? This area of science will always be a guessing game. There is simply no way to conduct a controlled experiment that has validity. Also, basing info. on other unproven info. does not qualify as proven fact, either. If we are honest we must come to the conclusion that there are certain things we will never know. This would be better than coming up with wild theories then teaching them to our kids, perpetuating falsehood.

link to this comment

JohnPaul1

03/21/09 at 2:15 am

Gee, genXer, based on your analogy then all the "scientific progress" over the past 2,000 (at least) years is bogus and the earth is really flat. Try taking a course in logic before you start slamming something you clearly are not equiped to discuss. There are those, including Mr. Huckabee who ran for president, that believe that this planet and everything on it is no more than 6,000 years old. You, too? Nothing in the good book defines the length of a day, so why does it have to be our 24 hrs. Maybe it's a billion years to one of His hours. No one knows. We do know that as technology improves knowledge improves and what was accurate based on previous technology gets replaced by newer knowledge based on improved technology. Every piece of knowledge developed on earth, ever, is here to promote His word, His teachings. Teachings of which will be fully explained when He says, and only he say "it's time", not some preacher.

link to this comment

patrickshaw

03/22/09 at 7:41 am

genXer...hmmm...I assume you've seen the movie 'Deliverance' yes?

In you Divine Creationist fantasy world that you live in and wish to taught to children can you please address the fact that in Genesis, the first book of the Bible, that God's creation of man and woman is only Adam & Eve and no other human creations are mentioned?

Please explain how all of present day mankind is related to a single mating pair of humans when it is widely understood and proven that inbreeding produces genetic mutations and congenial idiots. Across the globe and across the span of human history brothers, sisters, half or whole and first cousins are not allowed to marry, have sex and bear children and yet that is exactly what the only off-spring according to the Gospel of Adam and Eve were...ie brothers and sisters. So how it that humanity expanded and thrived with such a limited gene pool as professed in this creationist fantasy world you live in?

To quote you...

"This would be better than coming up with wild theories then teaching them to our kids, perpetuating falsehood."

Let me guess...you only believe in genetic science or any science when it can cure you of a deadly disease, or in DNA testing when you need cleared of a Murder One rap or when science and technology saves you a few bucks at the pump.
Then science is 'good' huh?

There is a word for that kind of stance in life...it is called being a hypocrite.

link to this comment

mwahaha

03/24/09 at 3:11 pm

I think the point that genXer is trying to make is that if you have an equation with all variables undefined, you can't possibly get an accurate solution..

link to this comment

qlmmb2086

03/24/09 at 3:30 pm

Wow... talk about jumping to conclusions. Patrick, could you please point out where, exactly, the creationist theories you are so vehemently opposed to are written in genXer's post? I must have missed reading them somewhere.

link to this comment

BraverThought

from aurora, co

03/26/09 at 2:53 am

qlmmb2086 maybe read patrickshaw post again cause he said in quote,

"To quote you..."

"<-- is a quotation mark... see how this next sentence is beginning and ending with that symbol.

"This would be better than coming up with wild theories then teaching them to our kids, perpetuating falsehood."

yea, that was the quote.

patrickshaw didn't say that genXer was saying anything about "the creationist theories"

Anyway, genXer, The article is only giving an estimate with the current technology. "Even with this new date, researchers cage their estimate within a possible margin of 50,000 years in either direction."

If you feel that god buried the group "Peking Man" to test our faith, you just go a head and believe that. But that's not something I want taught in schools. And yes SCIENCE will be accurate enough to determine these dates of things someday.

Maybe try and do some of your own research about things... like time line of inventions.

link to this comment

steven-tp

09/10/09 at 7:25 pm

The more I learn about early human evolution and how we spread across the planet learning tools and agriculture almost around same time across the planet, it continues to fascinate me. The biggest change in last 40-50 years though has to be communication. Never before in human evolution, we were able to spread the message so quick and clear across the planet.

Online http://hintcafe.com dating website