Scientists Find Oldest Known Specimens of the Human Species

ANOTHER evidence of evolution.
Yes Wacko Creationists, another intermediate species.

Scientists Find Oldest Known Specimens of the Human Species
Scientists Find Oldest Known Specimens of the Human Species
Remains found in Morocco date from about 300,000 years ago, about 100,000 older than any other fossils of Homo sapiens
By Robert Lee Hotz
Wall Street Journal
June 7, 2017 1:00 p.m. ET

The bones of ancient hunters unearthed in Morocco are the oldest known specimens of the human species, potentially pushing back the clock on the origin of modern Homo sapiens, scientists announced Wednesday.

Found among stone tools and the ashes of ancient campfires, the remains date from about 300,000 years ago, a time when the Sahara was green and several early human species roamed the world, the scientists said. That makes them about 100,000 years older than any other fossils of Homo sapiens—the species to which all people today belong.

“These dates were a Big Wow,” said anthropologist Jean-Jacques Hublin at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Leipzig, Germany. He led an international team of scientists who reported the discovery Wednesday in Nature. “This material represents the very roots of our species—the very oldest Homo sapiens found in Africa or anywhere.”

Until now, most researchers believed that modern humankind emerged gradually from a population centered in East Africa around 200,000 years ago. Previous discoveries of early Homo sapiens fossils have been concentrated at sites in Ethiopia.

The fossil discovery at Jebel Irhoud near Marrakesh in North Africa, however, suggests that early humans had already spread across most of Africa by then.

“What’s really neat about this discovery is that you now have evidence of modern Homo sapiens across Africa, about as far from sites in East Africa as you can get,” said anthropologist Bernard Wood at George Washington University’s Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, who wasn’t involved in the find.

As early experiments in the human form, these ancestors had quite modern-looking facial features, but relatively primitive skulls, suggesting that the cognitive capacities of modern brains had yet to take shape, the scientists said.

Their faces were likely so contemporary in appearance that they might pass unnoticed on a crowded city sidewalk, although they might need to wear a hat to disguise their skull’s elongated shape, Dr. Hublin said.

Such combinations of traits, though, blur the differences that distinguish one human ancestor from another, making it hard for scholars to classify species accurately. In fact, several early human species, such as Neanderthals, were so closely related to Homo sapiens that they could all interbreed, modern genetic evidence shows.

But several independent experts said they agreed that the fossils most likely belonged to Homo sapiens.

“It has a modern face and a primitive brain case,” said John Fleagle, an expert on primate evolution at Stony Brook School of Medicine, who wasn’t part of the research group. “You would expect it to have a few primitive characteristics even if it is on the main line of our lineage. It shows what is probably an earlier stage of our species.”
[.....]​

 

This is way cool.

Homo Sapiens have existed for almost double the time originally thought. This discovery will spark a flurry of activity in archeology from both an "origins" and "migration" perspective. Always exciting when our knowledge and understanding of where we came from and how we arrived at where we are is expanded.

 

it looks much more like a Neanderthal than a homo sapien.

that brow ridge is HUGE and a classic Neanderthal trait

 

they seem pretty confident that its homo sapiens, photographic appearances notwithstanding.

 

The two interbred to a level, some scientists claiming traits from that failed branch of humanity still showing up in people like Donald Trump.
High forehead, small penis, messy hair and low brain capacity are traits these demi humans were known for.

 

virtually all non-African blacks have Neanderthal DNA

 

Think on. As ALL human life started in Africa, you're part black.

Get your head around that, my nugger

 

actually, my white skin was inherited from the Neanderthals.

 

As was your intelligence.

 

Hmm, sounds like the feral human population from the original Planet of the Apes

 

And an active immune gene!

Active, not just a "marker".

 

As I claimed - QED

 

if that were true, there would be ZERO intelligent black Africans.

 

And your point is?​

 

there are many highly intelligent black Africans, so clearly such a quality is not inherited solely from Neanderthals

 

But, clearly those Neanderthal hybrids created the greatest accomplishments of humanity
compared to sub Saharan Africans with no Neanderthal genome.
We no have confirmation ancient Egyptians were not Black but more related to
peoples along the Eastern Mediterranean to Anatolia.

 

we have no such confirmation.

 

Then you need to update you Science reading regardless of P.C.
Ancient Egyptians were not Black. The genome report recently came out.
Ronstar, are you aware of this report?

There is hardly a civilization that was not founded by Neanderthal hybrids.
Can you name one? Not Nubia. Too close to Egypt.
Ancient China, Sumer, Babylonia, Indus Valley, Japan, Greeks, Romans, Mongols, Ancient American civilizations, etc.

all founded by Neanderthal hybrids.​

 

post a link

 

Truly I do not believe you will follow up on it but, hey - I'm being the fool
https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=ancient+egypt+genome
You got lots to chose from.
And this link is reduced to the last week alone.
https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=ancient+egypt+genome#q=ancient+egypt+genome&tbs=qdr:w
Take you pick. Still I would bet Ronstar will not check out one article in either link above.
Ronstar, if I am wrong and you do look at an article for discussion, please link me. Gracias.

This recent study has suggested that the ancient Egyptians were closely related to the Neolithic Anatolians and early Europeans of the Balkans, which is not so surprising suggesting that those populations expanded and migrated down the Levant into Egypt, that it was not simply a case of cultural transmission that saw the Neolithic arrive in Egypt.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1173655/pg1
Don't like this reference, find a better one from the above or search y'self.

 

Hublin et al. (2017) used thermoluminescence dating to date the oldest human remains, which usually dates the last time items like ceramics were heated. Radiocarbon dating's age range stretches back to 50,000 years but thermoluminescence dating cannot be used to date items more than 10,000 years old with accuracy. The team also tried and failed to obtain DNA from the Jebel Irhoud bones. A genomic analysis could have clearly established whether the remains lie on the lineage that leads to modern humans. Facial, mandibular and dental morphology is not exact science nowadays in the era of human genetics.

 

I thought thermoluminescence dating ranged from 1000-300 to 500K years which makes the dating accurate. Do you have more recent data to refute that?

I think the dental analysis should be relatively accurate in determining the type of hominin in this case H Sapiens Archaic or perhaps they will rename it something like H sapiens morocco

 

Incredibly Obtuse, as ever.
We're also all part microbe because everything started a one cell animal
And all part the first mammal, first Primate, etc.

 

But accurate.
No matter how you try to wind the truth, you're part black.

 

And AGAIN, just as irrelevantly/obtusely, you're part first one-cell/first mammal/first primate.
Yawn.