Ancient Skull Found in Georgia

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
More proof that the sole "cradle of civilization" was NOT in Africa (as expounded by the cultural Marxist psuedo-scientists)...as a 1.8 year old human skull was found in the foothills of the Caucus Mountains (in former Soviet Georgia). I guess the "we all hail from Africa" quacks are none too happy!
smiley2.gif


A skull that rewrites the history of man

It has long been agreed that Africa was the sole cradle of human evolution. Then these bones were found in Georgia...

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Wednesday, 9 September 2009

The conventional view of human evolution and how early man colonised the world has been thrown into doubt by a series of stunning palaeontological discoveries suggesting that Africa was not the sole cradle of humankind. Scientists have found a handful of ancient human skulls at an archaeological site two hours from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, that suggest a Eurasian chapter in the long evolutionary story of man.

The skulls, jawbones and fragments of limb bones suggest that our ancient human ancestors migrated out of Africa far earlier than previously thought and spent a long evolutionary interlude in Eurasia â€" before moving back into Africa to complete the story of man.

Experts believe fossilised bones unearthed at the medieval village of Dmanisi in the foothills of the Caucuses, and dated to about 1.8 million years ago, are the oldest indisputable remains of humans discovered outside of Africa.
Related articles

But what has really excited the researchers is the discovery that these early humans (or "hominins") are far more primitive-looking than the Homo erectus humans that were, until now, believed to be the first people to migrate out of Africa about 1 million years ago.

The Dmanisi people had brains that were about 40 per cent smaller than those of Homo erectus and they were much shorter in stature than classical H. erectus skeletons, according to Professor David Lordkipanidze, general director of the Georgia National Museum. "Before our findings, the prevailing view was that humans came out of Africa almost 1 million years ago, that they already had sophisticated stone tools, and that their body anatomy was quite advanced in terms of brain capacity and limb proportions. But what we are finding is quite different," Professor Lordkipanidze said.

"The Dmanisi hominins are the earliest representatives of our own genus â€" Homo â€" outside Africa, and they represent the most primitive population of the species Homo erectus to date. They might be ancestral to all later Homo erectus populations, which would suggest a Eurasian origin of Homo erectus."

Speaking at the British Science Festival in Guildford, where he gave the British Council lecture, Professor Lordkipanidze raised the prospect that Homo erectus may have evolved in Eurasia from the more primitive-looking Dmanisi population and then migrated back to Africa to eventually give rise to our own species, Homo sapiens â€" modern man.

"The question is whether Homo erectus originated in Africa or Eurasia, and if in Eurasia, did we have vice-versa migration? This idea looked very stupid a few years ago, but today it seems not so stupid," he told the festival.

The scientists have discovered a total of five skulls and a solitary jawbone. It is clear that they had relatively small brains, almost a third of the size of modern humans. "They are quite small. Their lower limbs are very human and their upper limbs are still quite archaic and they had very primitive stone tools," Professor Lordkipanidze said. "Their brain capacity is about 600 cubic centimetres. The prevailing view before this discovery was that the humans who first left Africa had a brain size of about 1,000 cubic centimetres."

The only human fossil to predate the Dmanisi specimens are of an archaic species Homo habilis, or "handy man", found only in Africa, which used simple stone tools and lived between about 2.5 million and 1.6 million years ago.

"I'd have to say, if we'd found the Dmanisi fossils 40 years ago, they would have been classified as Homo habilis because of the small brain size. Their brow ridges are not as thick as classical Homo erectus, but their teeth are more H. erectus like," Professor Lordkipanidze said. "All these finds show that the ancestors of these people were much more primitive than we thought. I don't think that we were so lucky as to have found the first travellers out of Africa. Georgia is the cradle of the first Europeans," he told the meeting.

"What we learnt from the Dmanisi fossils is that they are quite small â€" between 1.44 metres to 1.5 metres tall. What is interesting is that their lower limbs, their tibia bones, are very human-like so it seems they were very good runners," he said.

He added: "In regards to the question of which came first, enlarged brain size or bipedalism, maybe indirectly this information calls us to think that body anatomy was more important than brain size. While the Dmanisi people were almost modern in their body proportions, and were highly efficient walkers and runners, their arms moved in a different way, and their brains were tiny compared to ours.

"Nevertheless, they were sophisticated tool makers with high social and cognitive skills," he told the science festival, which is run by the British Science Association.

One of the five skulls is of a person who lost all his or her teeth during their lifetime but had still survived for many years despite being completely toothless. This suggests some kind of social organisation based on mutual care, Professor Lordkipanidze said.

***Reference article.... Edited by: DixieDestroyer
 

Bronk

Mentor
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
962
Location
Texas
DixieDestroyer said:
... found in the foothills of the Caucus Mountains ...

Hmmmmm, is that anywhere near Atlanta?
smiley17.gif


Actually a very interesting account, I doubt it'll make much of a ripple through the multiculturalist world, however.
 

white is right

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
10,143
Yeah I was expecting a photo of a guy that resembled either George Lopez or the Cleveland Indians mascot..
smiley2.gif
Seriously if there is more evidence it could become a "fact". But like nutritional knowledge it will decades before it seeps down to Joe 6 pack. To be honest many of the scientific facts are just hypothesized theories that are strong evidence but aren't more than that.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
1,248
Location
Illinois
I have never been convinced that the "Out of Africa" theory was right. At one time, they believed that China was the cradle of mankind, because the oldest bones were found there. Then they believed it was Java because older bones were found, then Africa. There are many more discoveries to be found.
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,247
Location
Michigan
This discovery shoots the 'out of africa' theory all to hell. About time! Whenever they find another fossil they rewrite the science and then declare it's final!!! Until the next major find. What a bunch of baloney.
 

Colonel_Reb

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
13,987
Location
The Deep South
jaxvid said:
This discovery shoots the 'out of africa' theory all to hell. About time! Whenever they find another fossil they rewrite the science and then declare it's final!!! Until the next major find. What a bunch of baloney.

Totally agreed!
 
Top