Group
On Sun, 12 Jul 1998 19:07:13 -0500, Glenn R. Morton wrote:
[...]
>>GM>The first evidence of controlled use of fire is from 1.6 myr ago
>>>at Swartkrans, SA. Amazingly the only bones found there are
>>>Australopithecine. And I have mentioned this before and you keep
>>>forgetting.
>SJ>Actually I really could not recall Glenn ever mentioning this. But I
>>checked back on my Reflector mail received for the word
>>"Swartkrans" and I found that Glenn had posted a few messages
>>mentioning fire at Swartkrans. But I found no messages from me
>>debating it. So it seems this is something I had not noticed.
>
>Stephen, is it absolutely impossible for you to admit that you were wrong
>about who is first associated fire?
I am happy to admit it when I am wrong, but I am not wrong just because
Glenn says so! The fact is that I had never AFAIK ever debated Glenn over
the earliest use of fire, so it was a gap in my knowledge. Of course if Glenn
can show that I did debate with him either: 1) the first use of fire, or 2) the
use of fire at Swartkrans then I'll admit I was wrong.
>SJ>This doesn't support Glenn's claim that "The first evidence of
>>controlled use of fire is from 1.6 myr ago at Swartkrans, SA.":
>>
>>Firstly, "Member 3" is the *latest* of the strata, dating from "1.5 to
>>1.0 myr old":
>>
>>"Such faunal comparisons suggest that Swartkrans Members 1 and 2
>>fall into the time range of about 1.9 to 1.6 myr ago, with Member 3
>>somewhat younger, around 1.5 to 1.0 myr old." (Tattersall I., "The
>>Fossil Trail," 1995, p201).
>
>First, there are anthropologists who claime the 1.6 myr age
>http://www.unc.edu/courses/anth100/acheulia.htm
No doubt. But the article Glenn cited didn't.
GM>Secondly, Stephen, let me grant your request. Let's say it is 1.5
>million years old. SO WHAT? It still is the earliest fire and it still is
>associated with Australopithecus bones, not Homo. How exactly does
>reducing this to 1.5 myr help your case?
I said that it was my *first* point.
It could have been 1.0 myr. That's 600,000 years difference from what
Glenn claimed. Glenn criticises Hugh Ross for being out by tens of
thousands of years.
>SJ>Secondly, as Glenn's own quote says, the "As to the fire
>>user...Brain..." (ie. "C. K. Brain of the Transvaal Museum", who
>>Tattersall describes as a "leader in" the "renaissance of
>>australopithecine studies in South Africa), "...is as reluctant to
>>conclude that a fire maker was involved as he is to affirm that the fire
>>was used in cooking..." (Tattersall I., "The Fossil Trail,", 1995,
>>pp199,202)
GM>But the fact is, that the earliest fire is associated with those you say
>couldn't possibly have done it.
Where did I say that Australopithecines "couldn't possibly have" made fire?
GM>By the way, the australopithecines that are associated with fire also
>had hands that were quite capable of making stone tools also!
>
>...Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New
>York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p.102
>
>... Bruce Bower, "Retooled Ancestors," Science News 133, May 28,
>1988,p. 344... 345
Change of subject from fire to tools noted! No doubt Glenn is trying to
divert attention from the latest claim that not only was the previous earliest
use of fire thought to be only 500,000 years ago, but even that younger
date is probably wrong:
"Study Could Extinguish Theory on When Fire Was First Tamed By Joby
Warrick Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 10, 1998; Page A03
Evidence from an ancient Chinese cave has cast doubt on prevailing
theories about the taming of fire by human ancestors, suggesting that the
epochal achievement occurred much later than scientists have long
believed. The findings, if confirmed, could rewrite 60 years of
anthropology textbooks and reshape the modern view of Homo erectus,
the presumed ancestor of today's humans who was believed to have used
fire to sustain migration into the colder regions of Europe and Asia.
Zhoukoudian cave, near Beijing, is widely considered to be the site of the
world's oldest known campfire, based on charred animal bones, antlers and
other artifacts from an apparent H. erectus settlement dating back nearly
500,000 years. But a new, more sophisticated analysis of cave soils turned
up no traces of wood ash or other telltale signs that fire was ever used
there, an international team of five researchers reports in today's issue of
the journal Science." (http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-
07/10/086l-071098-idx.html)
"Study Disputes Human's First Use of Fire AP 09-JUL-98
WASHINGTON (AP) Peking Man may not have built campfires in his
caves after all, according to a new study. Archaeologists have believed for
more than 50 years that a cave in Zhoudoudian, China, contained the
evidence that humans learned to control and use fire about 500,000 years
ago, the era when Homo erectus, also known as Peking Man, was the
dominant hominid. Now researchers analyzing sediments from the cave say
the specimens lack the telltale traces of wood ash needed to prove the
ancient human-like creatures used and controlled fire."
(http://customnews.cnn.com/cnews/pna.show_story?p_art_id=2728618&p
_section_name=Sci-
Tech&p_art_type=433527&p_subcat=Archeology+%26+Paleontology&p
_category=Sciences)
"Geological Analysis Damps Ancient Chinese Fires. Studies of sediments at
Zhoukoudian, China--long considered the site of the first use of fire--
suggest that any flames there were not kindled by human hands. That
means there's no strong evidence of fire use until about 300,000 years ago
and none definitively associated with Homo erectus, the hominid that began
to spread through Asia and into cold northern latitudes starting about 1.8
million years ago. Researchers must now consider that this colonization
may have happened without fire."
(http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol281/issue5374/news-
summaries.shtml )
But the fact is that primate hands are highly conserved, and even lemurs
have hands that look human:
"Left: A nearly complete hand assembled from various members of `the
first family.' (After Johanson) Right: The hand, or forepaw, of Notharctus,
a lemur that lived about fifty million years ago. Illustrated in isolation, as it
usually is, the `first family' hand looks compellingly human The comparison
with Notharctus, however, shows that vertebrate hands, or forepaws, are
extremely conservative in their skeletal morphology. Were Notharctus
known only from its hand, it too could be called `compellingly human."
(Fix W.R., "The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution," 1984, p65)
In any event, it takes more than "hands" to make "stone tools":
"Figure 7. The stonemason stands erect using tools directed by his brain.
The hominid forerunners of man had a similar body structure and the same
muscle groups. These ancestors however did not have a well-developed
cortex. It was the development of the brain which enabled man to create a
culture. Some of the muscles shown in the diagram are used to control
posture and locomotion-others, especially in the arm, are used to control
the manipulation of objects." (Allbrook D.B., "The Evolution of Man: Part
I-Origins of Man," 1975 reprint, p20)
[continued]
Steve
"Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented."
--- Dr. William Provine, Professor of History and Biology, Cornell University.
http://fp.bio.utk.edu/darwin/1998/slides_view/Slide_7.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net
3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au
Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, West Australia v "Test everything." (1Thess 5:21)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_4820800=_=_=_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Group
On Sun, 12 Jul 1998 19:07:13 -0500, Glenn R. Morton wrote:
[...]
>>GM>The first evidence of controlled use of fire is from 1.6 myr ago
>>>at Swartkrans, SA. Amazingly the only bones found there are
>>>Australopithecine. And I have mentioned this before and you keep
>>>forgetting.
>SJ>Actually I really could not recall Glenn ever mentioning this. But I
>>checked back on my Reflector mail received for the word
>>"Swartkrans" and I found that Glenn had posted a few messages
>>mentioning fire at Swartkrans. But I found no messages from me
>>debating it. So it seems this is something I had not noticed.
>
>Stephen, is it absolutely impossible for you to admit that you were wrong
>about who is first associated fire?
I am happy to admit it when I am wrong, but I am not wrong just because
Glenn says so! The fact is that I had never AFAIK ever debated Glenn over
the earliest use of fire, so it was a gap in my knowledge. Of course if Glenn
can show that I did debate with him either: 1) the first use of fire, or 2) the
use of fire at Swartkrans then I'll admit I was wrong.
>SJ>This doesn't support Glenn's claim that "The first evidence of
>>controlled use of fire is from 1.6 myr ago at Swartkrans, SA.":
>>
>>Firstly, "Member 3" is the *latest* of the strata, dating from "1.5 to
>>1.0 myr old":
>>
>>"Such faunal comparisons suggest that Swartkrans Members 1 and 2
>>fall into the time range of about 1.9 to 1.6 myr ago, with Member 3
>>somewhat younger, around 1.5 to 1.0 myr old." (Tattersall I., "The
>>Fossil Trail," 1995, p201).
>
>First, there are anthropologists who claime the 1.6 myr age
>http://www.unc.edu/courses/anth100/acheulia.htm
No doubt. But the article Glenn cited didn't.
GM>Secondly, Stephen, let me grant your request. Let's say it is 1.5
>million years old. SO WHAT? It still is the earliest fire and it still is
>associated with Australopithecus bones, not Homo. How exactly does
>reducing this to 1.5 myr help your case?
I said that it was my *first* point.
It could have been 1.0 myr. That's 600,000 years difference from what
Glenn claimed. Glenn criticises Hugh Ross for being out by tens of
thousands of years.
>SJ>Secondly, as Glenn's own quote says, the "As to the fire
>>user...Brain..." (ie. "C. K. Brain of the Transvaal Museum", who
>>Tattersall describes as a "leader in" the "renaissance of
>>australopithecine studies in South Africa), "...is as reluctant to
>>conclude that a fire maker was involved as he is to affirm that the fire
>>was used in cooking..." (Tattersall I., "The Fossil Trail,", 1995,
>>pp199,202)
GM>But the fact is, that the earliest fire is associated with those you say
>couldn't possibly have done it.
Where did I say that Australopithecines "couldn't possibly have" made fire?
GM>By the way, the australopithecines that are associated with fire also
>had hands that were quite capable of making stone tools also!
>
>...Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones Speak, (New
>York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p.102
>
>... Bruce Bower, "Retooled Ancestors," Science News 133, May 28,
>1988,p. 344... 345
Change of subject from fire to tools noted! No doubt Glenn is trying to
divert attention from the latest claim that not only was the previous earliest
use of fire thought to be only 500,000 years ago, but even that younger
date is probably wrong:
"Study Could Extinguish Theory on When Fire Was First Tamed By Joby
Warrick Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 10, 1998; Page A03
Evidence from an ancient Chinese cave has cast doubt on prevailing
theories about the taming of fire by human ancestors, suggesting that the
epochal achievement occurred much later than scientists have long
believed. The findings, if confirmed, could rewrite 60 years of
anthropology textbooks and reshape the modern view of Homo erectus,
the presumed ancestor of today's humans who was believed to have used
fire to sustain migration into the colder regions of Europe and Asia.
Zhoukoudian cave, near Beijing, is widely considered to be the site of the
world's oldest known campfire, based on charred animal bones, antlers and
other artifacts from an apparent H. erectus settlement dating back nearly
500,000 years. But a new, more sophisticated analysis of cave soils turned
up no traces of wood ash or other telltale signs that fire was ever used
there, an international team of five researchers reports in today's issue of
the journal Science." (http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-
07/10/086l-071098-idx.html)
"Study Disputes Human's First Use of Fire AP 09-JUL-98
WASHINGTON (AP) Peking Man may not have built campfires in his
caves after all, according to a new study. Archaeologists have believed for
more than 50 years that a cave in Zhoudoudian, China, contained the
evidence that humans learned to control and use fire about 500,000 years
ago, the era when Homo erectus, also known as Peking Man, was the
dominant hominid. Now researchers analyzing sediments from the cave say
the specimens lack the telltale traces of wood ash needed to prove the
ancient human-like creatures used and controlled fire."
(http://customnews.cnn.com/cnews/pna.show_story?p_art_id=2728618&p
_section_name=Sci-
Tech&p_art_type=433527&p_subcat=Archeology+%26+Paleontology&p
_category=Sciences)
"Geological Analysis Damps Ancient Chinese Fires. Studies of sediments at
Zhoukoudian, China--long considered the site of the first use of fire--
suggest that any flames there were not kindled by human hands. That
means there's no strong evidence of fire use until about 300,000 years ago
and none definitively associated with Homo erectus, the hominid that began
to spread through Asia and into cold northern latitudes starting about 1.8
million years ago. Researchers must now consider that this colonization
may have happened without fire."
(http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol281/issue5374/news-
summaries.shtml )
But the fact is that primate hands are highly conserved, and even lemurs
have hands that look human:
"Left: A nearly complete hand assembled from various members of `the
first family.' (After Johanson) Right: The hand, or forepaw, of Notharctus,
a lemur that lived about fifty million years ago. Illustrated in isolation, as it
usually is, the `first family' hand looks compellingly human The comparison
with Notharctus, however, shows that vertebrate hands, or forepaws, are
extremely conservative in their skeletal morphology. Were Notharctus
known only from its hand, it too could be called `compellingly human."
(Fix W.R., "The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution," 1984, p65)
In any event, it takes more than "hands" to make "stone tools":
"Figure 7. The stonemason stands erect using tools directed by his brain.
The hominid forerunners of man had a similar body structure and the same
muscle groups. These ancestors however did not have a well-developed
cortex. It was the development of the brain which enabled man to create a
culture. Some of the muscles shown in the diagram are used to control
posture and locomotion-others, especially in the arm, are used to control
the manipulation of objects." (Allbrook D.B., "The Evolution of Man: Part
I-Origins of Man," 1975 reprint, p20)
[continued]
Steve
"Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented."
--- Dr. William Provine, Professor of History and Biology, Cornell University.
http://fp.bio.utk.edu/darwin/1998/slides_view/Slide_7.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net
3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au
Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, West Australia v "Test everything." (1Thess 5:21)
----------------------------------------------------------------------_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_4820800=_=_=_--