This morning, scientists revealed an analysis of a female skeleton that seems to be the best example of early hominids around, about a million years older than the famous Lucy specimen that has been a prime example of early humanoids for about 40 years. New species Ardipithecus ramidus, which scientists nicknamed "Ardi," lived in the woodlands of present-day Ethiopia and had a blend of human and chimplike features.
By analyzing the skeleton (which included hands, feet, limbs, pelvis, and skull), researchers estimate that she was about four feet tall and weighed about 110 pounds. She was adept at both climbing through trees (with help from opposable big toes) as well as standing on two legs.
Ardi lived 4.4 million years ago, about a few million years after the lineages of people and chips split. All in all, the research suggests that humans' and chimpanzees' last common ancestor was pretty different from current-day apes, which have gained a lot of adaptations for swinging through the trees since then. Read: You certainly did not descend from a chimp, and the thing you descended from wasn't as chimpy as you might have been picturing.
Ardi was revealed at a press conference this morning. The 11 scientific papers detailing her bones and lifestyle will be published tomorrow in the journal Science.
Would one of you journalists please do your job? Stop letting these anthropologists play you like an old set of drums. No one has EVER found a 4 million year old skeleton. They find what they believe to be are bone fragments. How do they know how old they are? For evolution to have occurred the would have to be that old based on the geological strata where they were discovered. You can not prove scientifically that anything they say is true, nor can you prove that it is false. It is all Voodoo. If you want to believe in primitive superstitions, that is your business. Just don't delude yourself that it is science.
Ahem... pssst listen there is a big secret that none of the scientists want you to know about. (Even though it is all over the internet)
Its called radiometric dating. Look it up. And dont latch onto carbon.
sweet, just saw, the daily planet episode on this, they found the skeleton 17 years ago.
Anyway, isn't it hominid and not humanoid?
firstname.lastname@example.org lol wut any bit of carbon found in the same strata can verify its age quite precisely. Even if you petrified wood you can match its rings up. Any layers containing volcanic ash can be used as reference points. If all else fails you can always ask a ouija board I'm sure your preacher would love that you religiously motivated poster you. Anyhow science is real, DNA exists, evolution happens, the world is older than 6000 years and is round. All this doesn't mean that there is no god it just means that he was kind enough to create us smart enough that could understand a little bit about how he did it. Now pull your head out of the sand and let the grownups get back to work.
She's pretty cute...
This is like, paleontologist pr0n.
thor0997, did you realize that radiometric dating was used on igneous rock known to have been formed in the 1980 Mt. St. Helens eruption was dated using radioisotopes (same thing as radiometric dating) to be between 0.5 and 2.8 million years old? That doewn't sound very accurate.
exactly! there is insufficient evidence that carbon dating is an accurate method of finding the age of a fossil.
Does no one remember that the "Lucy" specimen was proved to be a fake? It is now located in the Natural History Museum in Washington DC. And all the bones are labeled with the species and age. Most of the bones were found to be from a pig that died about 60 or so years ago. Science history has shown that if you can't prove something, then just make it up and people will believe you.......
Oh and our dating systems were created by taking an object with a known age (usually a few 100 years) and applying a linear relationship to extract an age in the millions for other objects. We have seen that initial decay is not linear, but assume that it is after a certain point because that is the best assumption at this time. So no our dating system is greatly flawed and has been proven more than once to be wrong.
Sorry, animemaster you can't just bash in the name of science and assume people are going to believe you. And so far we have NEVER seen, experienced, or proven evolution. That is why it is still the THEORY OF EVOLUTION. Sorry bud try again....
I love it. Very interesting. I also love the talk of the evolution and that fact the people freak out when the even hear the words lol. HAHAHAHAH WAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA HA HA AH AH HA A A A AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAWHAAAHWAAAAWHAAAAA The quibbling of humans is amazing! The fact that people of science argue with people of science is a a a a ahmazing. Goodday to they naysayers and hello to to ah everyone else.
DId you realize that many evolutionsary scientists aren't even sure "Ardi" is a human ancestor?
Of course, This is Fraud.
The so called "story" on CNN today stated this: "Move over Lucy, hello Ardi. Ardi is a fossil of the oldest human skeleton which is over two million years old".
Then they ended the story... Never mentioning ANY of the suspicions of fraud. And Never mentioning that "Lucy" was already found to be a fraud a long lime ago.
Why the underhandedness? ..No really, religion aside, why is the mass media biased toward the evolution CULT? And Not just once in a while either; the biased assault is constant and relentless, day in and day out.
So why all the tricks and sneaky tactics? Well, this is not too hard to figure out. You see, the 'high priest scientists' know that they are promoting a fraud. They don't care, Because the point is to "net" the opinions of people that will never investigate the fraud.
The plan is to administer an injection of an idea that will remain in their subconscious. So when ‘that person’ witnesses a challenge to the evolution cult, ‘that person’ will immediately think "Ardi" --- YES, Ardi already gave ‘me’ proof of evolution!
Lies, lies, deceptions, fraud…. And more lies. Here’s another Red Flag: Why do they care so much whether or not I believe in the evolution CULT? Obviously, they spent a lot of money, and must grease a lot of palms to get the evolution cult message ‘out there’, And worded “exactly” the way they it must be said for maximum deception and impact.
You know, I don’t even have to be religious to smell a big harry rat here.
Find another sucker.
See other ways the Evolution CULT has SOLD OUT and LIED to YOU:
i just learned today that i split from a chip. well they always told me i am what i eat! thanks susaanah
Obviously there is a lack of common knowledge about the definition of evolution. Evolution=Change over time. It's that simple. If you are saying that a species doesnt change over time take a look at bacteria and crops. There is a reason bacteria becomes resistant to drugs. The ones that survive a treatment live on to reproduce, creating more resistant strains of the bacteria. The selective breeding of domesticated crops, particularly corn, has dramatically increased the size of the plant and its yield of kernals. I would love for someone to tell me that isnt evolution.
I took the time to read through the page, take in what it had to say, and I must say, you are bats**t crazy. If anyone were looking for a website with a collection of the most asinine ideas and conspiracy theories in one place, I would gladly direct them there. But never in a million years would I direct anyone looking to use their brain to that pile of dreck.
EvolutionistCult I checked out your website, and this is the conclusion I've drawn.
You're ****ing nutz, you need heavy medication and a dose of reality. Stop gimping around on that crutch you call religion and use your ****ing brain instead of spewing out scripture some hobo's made a couple millennium ago so they could deal with the fact they lived in houses made of **** and that life sucked. Evolution is real, there's no such thing as the easter bunny, and Santa was a Greek bishop who most likely dabled in sodemy with little boys while handing out gifts to prostitutes so they didn't have to put out. ****Slap***
Wake up! Welcome to reality!
If they found Ardi 17 years ago, why are we just hearing about it now?
disclaimer-don't spell check.
Compassion, respect, we humans have some challenges ahead.
I will hurt you with my toung into submission.
For suporters of conventional religion, most of the people that work in the scientific communty have a single cause for doing so that drives them, much like doctors they want to try to protect their mom, dad, sister, brother and other loved ones, as well as yours, from the ills that we face as a people. All that have put up comments know of a family member or friend that is alive today because of so many scientific breakthroughs and it is a painful, very painful experience to persons who have dedicated their life to helping others through their research to have so many in our society that are so willing to damb them for the work they do.
Scientific communty, I will hurt you with my toung into submission.
Most of the non scientific community believe that the Bible goes hand in hand with God because, that was the path that they were introduced to God through. If you challenge the Bible then your challenging the God that they believe in. It is a painful, very painful thing to have people in the scientific communty not realize that when you challenge the bible, so too are you challenging God and so too are you challenging the very core of their existence that was built on their trust and faith in their family and friends.
We all can have great fear of the unknown.
I can assure both the scientific and non scientific alike that you are both right in many ways. For 10 years I have withheld results of my own research because I felt guilty that it would create enormous challenges for all of my loved ones and the impact it will have on all religions around the world. It is time, my conviction, no matter how painful, is for the truth.
It is my hope in the very near future to release a book on my findings. The title will likely be, " The death of mans Bible ", ( Females were first. ).
Why doesn't anyone seem to realize when you open the Bible there is no flyleaf that says it was written by God. It is a mishmash of pieces written by several people/prophets that claim to be speaking for/given instruction by God. Nowadays that gets you a quick ride to the funny farm. If it WAS "directly" from God it was written in the experience of the people doing the writing. These are words from a GOD - believe me - something was lost in translation. If you showed a cell phone and a personal computer to an ancient Roman how are they going to write about it, and I'm not talking philosophers like Socrates, Plato or Aristotle - we are talking about regular people - farmers, sheep herders, and tradesmen. 500 years from now we will be barbarians to our progeny, and anything we write today will be suspect. How we can look at a book like the Bible and not take it with a SERIOUS grain of salt I don't understand. The sacrosanct word of God? I seriously hope not, or we are in even more trouble than we thought.
Shel624, have you ever heard of the Dead Dea Scrolls? They are scrolls known to have been written at least two thousand years ago and contain, among other things, a copy of the book of Isaiah. This copy is nearly identical to the manuscripts the translations we have today were translated from. The only differences are in the spelling of certain words! That is way more consistent than any other anceint text in the world.
So we have the missing link. Evolution is now fact, religion is based on complete lies.
Didn't we know these things already?
What proof is there that this thing is actually a human ancestor?
Comments form a Bible-thumping fundamentalist.
The burden of proof is on you to show that
1) Jesus walked on water
2) Jesus came back to life after three days
3) Moses parted the Red Sea
These core tenants and others that you base your anti-evolutionary bias on are not proven. That is why they call it the Christian FAITH. (Note: these things MAY BE TRUE, but the point is that Christians haven't proven these things to themselves. They just swallow these assertions whole, uncritically, without doing the investigating to back it up. You need to back it up with facts.)
You anti-evolutionists think of your Christian lifestyle as a team sport, sort of like a tribal activity. You behave as if an anti-evolutionary perspective is something to defended, like a family. You buy 100% into assumptions that are sort of tribal chants, then you feel the need to defend the tribe. This has no place in an objective examination of evidence. You confuse science with family.
You lose the right to be taken seriously when you lack the courage to face up to your own illogic. Step up the plate and join the 21st century.
So I think this is great. I was a Biology major, and found that an iteresting book helped me out of it. ICONS OF EVOLUTION. I will not nake biblical references, so as not to confuse non belivers. But I will say that Darwin was an idiot who based all his finds on an island situation. The United States is the only country that widley excepts his findings as facts. Hello, It's a theory. We want to base so much on scientic findings but we need to keep in mind we are all humans and will bend some facts to aid ourselves. I mean it looks like Lovejoy, Leakey, and Bruce Latimer, are in "bed" together.
In the video of Ardi they couldn't even remove the hip as it would be destoryed so Lovejoy designed a copy based on his experience. I mean really.. Lets talk about perception. If someone is standing over a dead body with a bloody knife I mean they must be the killer right?? No! People are so easy to pick up an idea and just snowball it. Hey whatever you all need to believe to sleep at night go for it.. I only wish you'd let the kids have a choice instead of force feeding them this crap that there is only one way. Gesh I can't believe how much crap was wrong in my text books, that now we're going back and saying oh that was wrong... Really?!
Here pick up some decent books:
Icon's of Evolution by Jonathan Wells
The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel <-- was an Atheist