Re: Scientists Find Fossils of Man's Earliest Ancestor

From: Stephen E. Jones (sejones@iinet.net.au)
Date: Tue Dec 05 2000 - 16:23:46 EST

  • Next message: Stephen E. Jones: "Re: Daniel's 70 `weeks' #6 (was How to prove supernaturalism?)"

    Group

    Here are excerpts from recent web articles with my comments are in square
    brackets. I post these on other Lists I am on, so apologies if some of them
    have already been posted here.

    Steve

    =====================================================
    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001204/sc/fossils_find_dc_2.html ...
    Yahoo! ... December 4 ... Scientists Find Fossils of Man's Earliest Ancestor
    ... NAIROBI, Kenya (Reuters) - ... scientists have unearthed fossilized
    remains of mankind's earliest known ancestor that predate previous
    discoveries by more than 1.5 million years ... They said the discovery of
    "Millennium Man," as the creature has been nicknamed, could change the
    way scientists think about evolution and the origin of species. The first
    remains were discovered in the Tugen hills of Kenya's Baringo district ...
    Since then the scientists have unearthed distinct body parts belonging to at
    least five individuals, both male and female. "Not only is this find older than
    any else previously known, it is also in a more advanced stage of
    evolution," .... "It is at least six million years old, which means it is older
    than the (previously oldest) remains found at Aramis in Ethiopia, which
    were 4.5 million years old." "Lucy," the skeleton of Australopithicus
    afarensis found in Ethiopia in 1974, is believed to have lived around 3.2
    million years ago. An almost perfectly fossilized left femur shows the much
    older Millennium Man already had strong back legs which enabled it to
    walk upright -- giving it hominid characteristics which relate it directly to
    man. A thick right humerus bone from the upper arm suggests it also had
    treeclimbing skills, but probably not enough to "hang" from tree branches
    or swing limb to limb. The length of the bones show the creature was about
    the size of a modern chimpanzee .... But it is the teeth and jaw structure
    which most clearly link Millennium Man to the modern human. It has small
    canines and full molars -- similar dentition to modern man and suggesting a
    diet of mainly fruit and vegetables with occasional opportunistic meat-
    eating. ... Although no dating has been done on the remains just unearthed,
    strata from where the fossils were recovered have been previously proven
    ... to show an age of six million years. ...The area is rich in calcium
    carbonate and calcium phosphate that replace the organic material in bones
    to form fossils in an environment sealed by lava or volcanic ash. Pickford
    and Senut said they were confident the team would unearth even more
    remains that could help form a near-perfect picture of Millennium Man. ...
    See also: http://www.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/12/04/science.fossils.reut/
    [If this is confirmed to be much older than Lucy and yet more bipedal, the
    Australopithecines might be demoted as ancestral to humans? Also, at 6
    mya, this would be very close to the putative chimp-hominid split, so this
    would indicate a very rapid advance?]

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1036000/1036937.stm
    BBC ... 23 November, 2000 ... Feathers fly over fossil reptile
    Longisquama: Feathers or scales? A small, lizard-like creature that lived
    220 million years ago is at the centre of renewed debate over whether it
    had feathers and could fly. Canadian scientists have concluded that the
    reptile had highly modified scales, rather than feathers, and therefore could
    not have been the distant ancestor of birds. Earlier this year, a rival
    scientific team said fossil remains of the animal, Longisquama insignis,
    pointed to the presence of feathers. ... They argued that it was unlikely that
    features as complex and specialised as feathers evolved more than once.
    This theory challenges the convention that the first bird, Archaeopteryx,
    arose 75 million years later, from small, meat-eating dinosaurs. Now,
    palaeontologists ... have looked again at the fossils. They interpret what
    appear to be impressions of feathers preserved in rock as the marks left by
    long, thick scales. They wrote ... "We believe that the dorsal appendages of
    Longisquama are highly modified scales, as suggested previously, rather
    than feathers." They say Archaeopteryx remains the oldest known
    forerunner of modern day birds. ... The Longisquama specimen was
    discovered three decades ago in central Asia by a Russian palaeontologist
    [Sharov] who specialised in insects. ... he described a row of long narrow
    appendages down the animal's back, interpreting them as a frill of
    extremely long scales. ... But in June, scientists ... came up with an
    alternative theory. After examining every detail of the fossils, which include
    most of the skeleton, they said they believed the unusual appendages
    showed some of the most recognisable features of a modern-day feather.
    Longisquama probably glided, they said, rather than flew, using its long
    aerodynamic forelimbs for steering. The new analysis is unlikely to be the
    final word in the debate. No-one has yet come up with a convincing
    explanation for what the scale-like structures did. The Canadian team
    believe Longisquama could have used its scales to frighten predators or to
    attract a mate. Other experts say the appendages could have been a
    "missing link" between scales and feathers. ... [It was hoped that
    Longisquama would answer one of the valid points raised by the YECs:

            "Why does no one ever find a fossil animal with half-scales turning
            into feathers, or half forelimbs turning into wings? Such animals
            must have lived in great numbers over long periods of time, but no
            fossils of them have ever been found." (Morris H.M., "Scientific
            Creationism," 1985, pp.85-86)

    This lack of transitional *structures* (as opposed to transitional forms)
    argues for rapid and directional major transformations of individual
    structural features, rather than the slow, gradual natural selection of
    numerous successive, slight, favourable, random variations envisaged by
    Darwinism.]

    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001129/sc/life_dc_1.html ... Yahoo! ...
    November 29 ... Scientists: Land Life Began 2.6 Billion Years Ago
    LONDON (Reuters) - Life on land began more than 1.4 billion years earlier
    than scientists had thought, geologists said ... Scientists have known that
    microorganisms have lived in oceans for about 3.8 billion years, but they
    weren't sure when early life forms made the transition to land. The oldest
    proof of terrestrial life had been found in 1.2 billion-year-old fossils from
    Arizona, but scientists in South Africa and the United States have now
    discovered organic matter in 2.6 billion-year-old South African rocks.
    "This places the development of terrestrial biomass more than 1.4 billion
    years earlier than previously reported," Yumiko Watanabe ... said ....
    Knowing when microorganisms made the transition from oceans to land is
    important because it gives scientists new information about the presence of
    oxygen that is needed to sustain life and the formation of the earth's
    protective ozone shield. Hiroshi Ohmoto ... believes there are even earlier
    samples of life on land. He and his colleagues are planning to scour sites in
    Australia, Canada and elsewhere to find them. ... [Presumably because
    water could shield from UV, the presence of life on land is evidence for an
    ozone layer and hence an oxygen atmosphere? If so, this would seem to
    render less plausible oxygen as a cause of the Cambrian Explosion ~ 600
    myrs later?]

    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001201/sc/fossils_discovery_dc_1.html
    ... Yahoo! ... ... December 1 ... 'Living Fossils' Discovered Off South Africa
    Coast ... PRETORIA (Reuters) - When Pieter Venter went on a
    recreational deep dive off South Africa's northeast coast in October, he did
    not expect to come across a living fossil. "I looked at it carefully and after
    about six seconds I suddenly realized it was a coelacanth," .... A fish that
    had been swimming in the seas for some 400 million years, the coelacanth
    was believed to have been extinct for 70 million years until one was caught
    by a trawler off South Africa in 1938 and identified by a museum curator.
    ... Venter's team found three coelacanths and filmed them at a depth of 115
    meters (350 feet). ...The coelacanth -- known as "old four legs" because of
    its extra fins -- inhabits deep water caves and canyons, far from the prying
    eyes of most divers. .... "This discovery suggests that the coelacanth may
    be far more widespread than was originally believed, perhaps anywhere
    where you get these deep canyons and old reefs in tropical waters," .... The
    only other known population -- which may be a distinct sub-species -- is on
    the other side of the Indian Ocean, off Indonesia ... See also:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1049000/1049818.stm
    [More evidence of macrostasis. The Coelocanth is though not to have
    changed in 450 myrs, yet presumably it has been subject to the same
    genetic and environmental changes as its close relatives the Rhipidistians
    which went on and gave rise to all land vertebrates including amphibians,
    reptiles, mammals and birds! Darwinian evolution has no explanation. See
    tagline for Dawkins' lame excuses.]
     
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1048000/1048280.stm
    BBC ... 30 November, 2000 ... Lunar meteorites reveal life's troubles .. A
    new study of Moon meteorites provides fresh evidence that the Earth and
    its satellite underwent an intense period of cosmic bombardment just under
    four billion years ago. An analysis of four of the 20 or so known lunar
    meteorites suggests that the Moon's surface was melted by a torrent of
    impacts. It is estimated that this lunar catastrophe would have lasted only
    about 200,000 years but, in that time, nearly 2,000 large craters would
    have been formed as well as many of the Moon's giant impact basins.
    Scientists say that the Earth would have been bombarded to a far greater
    extent and that the frequent impacts could have delayed the emergence of
    life on the primitive world. ... But scientists know that these samples are
    drawn from particular places on the lunar surface that do not necessarily
    represent the Moon as a whole. ... . These would have been blasted off the
    face of the satellite by large impacts and travelled through space for about a
    million years before falling to Earth. About 20 lunar meteorites are known.
    ...Cohen and colleagues ... analysis of four lunar meteorites suggests that
    the Moon underwent a particular phase of pummelling early in its history.
    The ... samples were almost completely melted about 3.9 billion years ago.
    ... 750 million years after the Solar System was formed ... by four billion
    years ago it had started to decline. So the new data suggests that there was
    a brief period of resurgence. ... because the Earth is a bigger target than the
    Moon our planet would have sustained at least 10 times the number of
    punishing impacts. These would have melted the surface, vaporised any
    oceans that were trying to form and filled the atmosphere with superhot
    clouds of rock vapour. Any life that may have got started would have been
    destroyed. Very little evidence of this past cataclysm remains on the Earth
    ... It is only by looking at rocks from the relatively unchanging Moon that
    scientists have thrown new light on the common past of these space
    companions. ... [There are traces of advanced photosynthesising bacteria ~
    3.85 mya:
    (http://www.uta.edu/geology/geol1425earth_system/images/gaia_chapter_10/Early_Life.htm),
    and if the Earth's surface would have been melted and oceans vapourised
    repeatedly up to ~3.9 bya, that leaves only 0.05 byrs (i.e. 50 million years)
    for the Earth to cool down, life to get started and then get to the stage of
    advanced photosynthesising bacteria! Also the million-year journey from
    the moon makes panspermia less likely from Mars (see below) Maybe
    Francis Crick was nearly right, when he wrote:

            "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now,
            could only state that in some sense, the origin life appears at the
            moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which
            would have had to have been satisfied to get it going." (Crick
            F.H.C., "Life Itself," 1981, p.88)?]

    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001204/sc/space_mars_dc_3.html ...
    Yahoo! ... December 4 ... Early Mars May Have Been Land of Lakes ...
    PASADENA (Reuters) - Mars may have been a land of lakes in its earliest
    period, with layers of Earth-like sedimentary rock resembling that found in
    the Grand Canyon, NASA ... scientists said .... They added that the rocks
    might harbor fossils of ancient Martian life if any existed. NASA's Mars
    Global Surveyor spacecraft captured images ... of apparent sediments in
    craters and chasms that look very much like Earth .... Although the data
    received mixed reactions in peer reviews, it will probably alter the way
    scientists regard Mars .... The red planet will no longer be likened to a
    fossil like the Moon, but more "as a planet that may actually record in the
    layers ... (actual) fossils (of biological matter or life)," .... The sedimentary
    rock on Mars dates from the earliest span of Martian history, between 4.3
    billion and 3.5 billion years ago. These sedimentary layers appear to be
    made of fine-grained materials deposited in horizontal layers, much as
    sedimentary rock is deposited on Earth ..."These images tell us that early
    Mars ... may have been a lot more like Earth than many of us had been
    thinking," ... Other forces can produce the appearance of sedimentary
    rock, but the images show many uniformly thick layers, and this more than
    likely means water was present .... "Some of the ... images of these
    outcrops show hundreds and hundreds of identically thick layers, which is
    almost impossible to have without water," Malin said. This latest evidence
    of possible water on Mars in the past fuels interest in the planet, seen by
    many as a virtual twin to Earth. Liquid water is seen as a prerequisite for
    earthly life. "If there was life (on Mars) these are exactly the types of places
    you would go to find remnants," .... "We feel there's no argument these
    would be great candidates" for future exploration .... See also:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1054000/1054621.stm &
    http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/12/04/mars.ancient.lakes.02/index.html
    [Interesting, but it sounds like not all the peer reviewers were convinced.
    NASA has been criticised in the past for overstating its case in order to
    preserve funding. This discovery sounds suspiciously timed to coincide
    with an incoming Administration. I agree with Hugh Ross (see
    http://www.reasons.org/reasons/meteor.html) that life could have been
    created on Mars and transported to Earth (or vice-versa) by meteorite
    ejecta. The Bible does not actually say where microbial life began. But
    if it takes a million years for ejecta to get from the moon to Earth
    (see previous), a distance of only ~ 384 thousand kms, it would presumably
    take ~ 600 times as long to travel the 228 million kms from Mars to Earth,
    and against the solar wind to boot.]

    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001110/sc/european_men_dc_1.html
    ... Yahoo! ... November 10 ... European Men Descend From 10
    Forefathers - Study ... WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Virtually all European
    men descend from 10 genetic forefathers who lived tens of thousands of
    years ago in various parts of the continent, researchers reported ... They all
    seem to have been descended from men who moved to Europe from the
    Ural mountains of Central Asia and the Middle East in three successive
    waves ... [they] ... studied the Y chromosomes of 1,007 men across Europe
    and the Middle East. Only men have Y chromosomes and they are passed
    down virtually unchanged from father to son. Mutations in the Y
    chromosome can be used as a kind of molecular clock, and the researchers
    found that 95 per cent of the men's genes could be traced to one of 10
    categories. ... The genes match up nicely to what experts know about
    European society. " ... three clusters of distinct geography and culture," ...
    Basques and Western Europeans, ... Middle Eastern and the ... Eastern
    European populations from Croatia, Ukraine, Hungary and Poland." ... The
    oldest male lineage they found dates back to the Old Stone Age or
    Paleolithic period, which ended 15,000 years ago. ... These people first
    showed up in the archeological record as the Aurignacian people, who
    were known for their rock art and fine tools. Some of the genes also show
    up in Native American and Siberian people. "This observation suggests that
    M173 is an ancient Eurasiatic marker that was brought in or arose in the
    group of Homo sapiens (modern humans) who entered Europe and
    diffused from east to west about 40,000 to 35,000 years ago, spreading the
    Aurignac culture," ... Another marker, called M170, dates to about 22,000
    years ago ...and is associated with the Gravettian culture. This group was
    known for its Venus figurines, shell jewelry and for using mammoth bones
    to build homes. The third group -- about 20 percent of the men -- seem to
    date from more recent times, having come into Europe between 15,000 and
    20,000 years ago ... These men were probably the first Neolithic farmers
    who migrated from the Fertile Crescent in the Middle East ... [Interesting,
    but it doesn't make clear if the dates came from the Y-chromosome
    molecular clock or from dating archaeological artifacts.]
    =====================================================

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "So, we have stasis. What are we to make of it? How do we explain it?
    Some of us would say that the lineage leading to Latimeria [Coelacanth]
    stood still because natural selection did not move it. In a sense it had no
    'need' to evolve because these animals had found a successful way of life
    deep in the sea where conditions did not change much. Perhaps they never
    participated in any arms races. Their cousins that emerged onto the land
    did evolve because natural selection, under a variety of hostile conditions
    including arms races, forced them to. Other biologists, including some of
    those that call themselves punctuationists, might say that the lineage
    leading to modern Latimeria actively resisted change, in spite of what
    natural selection pressures there might have been. Who is right? In the
    particular case of Latimeria it is hard to know . ... Let us, to be fair, stop
    thinking in terms of Latimeria in particular. It is a striking example but a
    very extreme one ... It is conceivable that coelacanths stopped evolving
    because they stopped mutating perhaps because they were protected from
    cosmic rays at the bottom of the sea! - but nobody, as far as I know, has
    seriously suggested this ... " (Dawkins R., "The Blind Watchmaker,"
    [1986], Penguin: London, 1991, reprint, pp.246,247)
    Stephen E. Jones | Ph. +61 8 9448 7439 | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 05 2000 - 17:47:56 EST