Print 56 comment(s) - last by topkill.. on Aug 23 at 10:58 PM

Find could lend credence to idea that man evolved in Asia, rather than Africa

For scientists the evolution debate regarding man is far from over.  No, not that debate -- the debate among researchers largely involves where the earliest primates (which predate the hominids that surveyed the Pleistocene plains of Africa) evolved, and also where humans migrated early in their history.

A newly published study [abstract] in the prestigious peer-reviewed Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal offers both the oldest confirmed human skull fossil, and evidence of early migration from mankind's likely evolution location (in Africa) to a new home in Southeast Asia.

Researchers traveled to a cave near Tam Pa Ling in the Annamite Mountains where a 16,000-year-old human skull was discovered in the early 1900s.  Searching deeper, they found a skull that was dated (using direct uranium dating) to a maximum age of 63,000 years ago.  Combined with luminescent (which measures stored energy from solar heat/radiation in the crystalline component of soil buried in dark locations) and carbon dating of the surrounding sediments, it was determined that the individual -- whose gender was not determined in the work -- lived between 46,000 and 51,000 years ago.

Laos cave
The fossils were found in a mountainous cave in Laos. [Image Source: PNAS]

The preserved remains were likely a lucky accident, a result of the frequent deposition of sediment in the cave after rains.  Researchers believe that the individual was not living in the cave, but rather washed in post-death, based on the fact that no artifacts were discovered during the extensive excavation.

University of Illinois anthropologist Laura Shackelford, study co-worker, suggests the difference between the radioactive and sediment dating indicates the time between death and deposition in the cave may have been substantial.  She states, "Those dates are a bit younger than the direct date on the fossil, which we would expect because we don't know how long the body sat outside the cave before it washed in."

Laos fossil
The fossil skull is the oldest human remain to be found in Southeast Asia. [Image Source: PNAS]

On the importance of the find, she remarks, "It's a particularly old modern human fossil and it's also a particularly old modern human for that region.  This fossil find indicates that the migration out of Africa and into East and Southeast Asia occurred at a relatively rapid rate, and that, once there, modern humans weren't limited to environments that they had previously experienced.  We now have the fossil evidence to prove that they were there long before we thought they were there."

The study offers an intriguing premise -- primates may have evolved in Asia, eventually migrating to Africa.  There they may have slowly advanced, eventually becoming what today is known as humans.  Then they made a return to the stomping ground of their ancestors, sometime around 50,000+ years ago.

The study in PNAS had 13 other co-authors.  Fabrice Demeter, of the National Museum of Natural History in Paris, was the first author; Anne-Marie Karpoff of France's Institut de Géologie was the senior author.

The research was funded by a variety of French research organizations, the University of Illinois, the LAO federal government, and the Leakey Foundation.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Alternative hypothesis
By macdevdude on 8/21/2012 1:18:17 PM , Rating: -1
Researchers traveled to a cave near Tam Pa Ling in the Annamite Mountains where a 16,000-year-old human skull was discovered in the early 1900s. Searching deeper, they found a skull that was dated (using direct uranium dating) to a maximum age of 63,000 years ago. Combined with luminescent (which measures stored energy from solar heat/radiation in the crystalline component of soil buried in dark locations) and carbon dating of the surrounding sentiments, it was determined that the individual -- whose gender was not determined in the work -- lived between 46,000 and 51,000 years ago.
1. Or the skull is just several hundred years old, but individual died of radiation posisoning from eating something with a large amount of uranium. and the soil only appears older.

2. The skull is fake. If Hollywood can make Iron Man and the Hulk, why couldn't they simply fake this? This work was funded by the Leakeys who are well known for creating fake fossils to try to prove their inaccurate idea (evolution), which is a theory, not fact.

The Bible clearly states that man did not spread across Eurasia until after the fall of the Tower of Babel:
11 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar[b] and settled there.

3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

8 So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c] —because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By praktik on 8/21/2012 1:34:36 PM , Rating: 3

nice one! ;)

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By retrospooty on 8/21/2012 1:44:22 PM , Rating: 3
"Its just Satan trying to trick us, just like when he put all those dinosaur bones there for us to find".

- Stephen Colbert"

I really hope you are being sarcastic when you do this, because if you are serious, you are a complete moron.

It's one thing to prefer Apple products and be a nutjob about them, but to completetly ignore and misunderstand the mountains of evidence that proves we evolved is just ignorant. We have DNA evidence that proves we evolved. We have archeological evidence that proves we evolved. We have geological evidence that proves we evolved, we have 100's of thousands of fossils found documenting life path from slime to man, and there is no denying it. There isnt even a debate to be had on it, it's proven that it happened. That debate is over.

If you want to debate religion, debate that god put in the laws of physics and the universe that allowed evolution to happen with us in mind as an end result, but dont debate that it happened, you just look like an ignorant primitive uneducated moron.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By macdevdude on 8/21/12, Rating: -1
RE: Alternative hypothesis
By retrospooty on 8/21/2012 2:16:06 PM , Rating: 3
"There's nothing moronic about having faith"

I agree. The moronic part comes in when your faith interferes with facts. Creationism? Absolutely impossible. Intelligent design? At least it's possible.

"And what evidence do you have that the world wasn't just created that way?"

We have DNA evidence that proves we evolved. We have archeological evidence that proves we evolved. We have geological evidence that proves we evolved, we have 100's of thousands of fossils found documenting life's path from slime to man

"What if God made the world look older as a test of faith. What proof do you have otherwise?"
Well, when he comes down to Earth and annoounces that you let me know. Until then, I would rather not believe that God is that much of an asshole to allow that kind of ignorance to perpetuate... Not to mention Hitler, Pol Pot, millions of starving children and child molestation. If he created it all, he is responsible for those things too.

"Um last I checked scientists couldn't even agree on what a lot of genes do"
Uhh... You really need to stop looking at "christian science" as a science and check again. ALL scientists agree that life evolved on Earth over the past 4.5 billion years. There is certainly debate as to all of the details and why it happened, what kickstarted it and the exact timeline, but all scientists agree that evolution is a fact.

"Notice there aren't many human fossils? Maybe that's because they're faked."

Totally wrong. There are tons of fossils documenting our ascent from chimp like creatures to modern man. You can deny it and keep your head up your backside, but don't push your ignorance to others. It's not going to work.

"Why can't you respect my hypothesis and I'll not point out how foolish yours is."

Mine relies on mountains of evidence. Yours relies on ignoring mountains of evidence and listening to Christian science talking points that were generated specifically to try and maintain some power and credibility in the ranks. Its a total falsehood. Your whole premise is based on lies.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By praktik on 8/21/2012 3:27:10 PM , Rating: 2
ah geez, now you have to go and ruin my impression of you! Here I was, thinking you were doing a very good job of satirizing the creationist movement - BUT - you were actually serious...

...oh gawd...

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/21/2012 3:34:46 PM , Rating: 2
You should take anything he says, that he is serious. Dead as a door nail serious. Quite the pathetic human he is.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By MozeeToby on 8/21/2012 3:34:46 PM , Rating: 1
And what evidence do you have that the world wasn't just created that way? What if God made the world look older as a test of faith. What proof do you have otherwise?
I've posted this in the past, but it bears repeating:

A man dies and goes to the pearly gates.

St Peter says to him "Did you lead a moral life?"

The man says "yes, I think so. I gave to charity and worked to help the poor."

So St Peter asks "Do you accept Jesus as your savior?"

And the man responds "Of course, I've been a devout christian my whole life".

And so St Peter asks his final question, the ultimate test of faith "Do you... believe in dinosaurs!?"

And the man says "Well... yeah... there's all the fossils and bones and th-"

"Hahahahaa! You fool! Com'on man! That's the oldest trick in the book! Dinosaurs!? Haaaaahahaha. Whelp... off to hell with you then"

The point is: By your logic, the entire universe could have been created fully formed last Thursday, complete with you and I and all our memories. What proof do you have otherwise!? As human beings who live in the universe, all we can do is take what we see and experience as true, anything else is insanity.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By tng on 8/21/2012 2:25:22 PM , Rating: 2
..we have 100's of thousands of fossils found documenting life path from slime to man...
Well, technically, not yet. This article is what it is all about though. Chances are that we may never have all of the fossil evidence that traces the direct path from "slime" to modern humans. Time has probably erased most of the physical evidence from the face of the Earth, but someday genetics may be able to trace it from the simple to human.

I will say that it just blows my mind that he really thinks that the evidence may have been "faked" like some Hollywood movie and believes it. Sheds a whole new light on his sophisticated technical thinking and why he likes Apple so much.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By retrospooty on 8/21/2012 4:40:04 PM , Rating: 2
Yup... Some people are just so weak minded that they need something to cling to. A company, a primitive religion, a belief system that was drilled into their heads since they were born... It's a mark of low intellect and poor self esteem.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By cknobman on 8/21/2012 1:46:07 PM , Rating: 2
Are you being facetious?

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By retrospooty on 8/21/2012 2:04:09 PM , Rating: 2
"Are you being facetious?"

I dont think he is... He has done this before on evolution topics. If he is kidding, he doesnt ever come back and admit it, so I assume he is serious.

I find the irony of macdevdude hilarious. Its like being interrupted during a presentation at a MENSA convention by a mentally challenged child who proceeds to tell the whole room full of geniuses that they are all stupid. LOL.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By Motoman on 8/21/2012 1:56:49 PM , Rating: 4
Wow, and here I assumed your only major mental dysfunction was in regard to Apple products...but I guess religion is as religion does, and may as well ascribe to 2 of them.

Jesus Christ you're stupid.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By TSS on 8/21/2012 6:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
Well... One does not simply troll Daily Tech.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By Zaralath on 8/21/2012 8:24:56 PM , Rating: 1
So God saw people getting along together, endeavoring to build something monumental. And his first thought was 'team work' screw that $hit. <Zap> haha take that @ssholes.

What a douche

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By deadrats on 8/21/2012 11:05:06 PM , Rating: 1
The Bible clearly states that man did not spread across Eurasia until after the fall of the Tower of Babel:

want to know what else the bible says?

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way."(Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever."(Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment."(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."(Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ." (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

"Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them."(1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given."" (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

this is the book you want to base your beliefs on?

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By topkill on 8/22/2012 3:55:18 PM , Rating: 2
Dude, seriously?

You point out how silly, contradictory and even disgusting the book they base their "faith" on is and you expect people who believe in something this stupid to actually address it and speak rationally? ROFLMFAO!!!

Next, they'll be asserting you're an agent of Satan and that you used your magic Satan powers to go back in time and plant all those lines in their "holy book"! LOL

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By deadrats on 8/22/2012 9:57:57 PM , Rating: 1
the sad thing is that i've actually heard variations of this claim from christians before, and they use two passages from the bible to support their claim 1) that not all miracles are from God and 2) that satan is in charge of this world (the bible says both these things).

muslims use a similar claim, though a bit less preposterous, to counter anyone that points out the the quran explicitly says that all jews are to be put to the death, that all non muslims are to be killed, that if they repent and accept islam they are to be spared and that their prophet was a child molesting piece of shit as evidenced by the fact that he changed the law so that he could marry his 13 year old first cousin; i've actually met muslims that claim the true quran does not say any of this, that enemies of islam hired publishers and printed modified versions of the quran in an attempt to discredit islam.

of course they claimed to have a proper copy of the quran and when i offered to show them the passages in their version of the quran they refused...

organized religion, of any form, is the worst thing to ever happen to humanity, it corrodes the mind.

as i once said to a catholic: faith is what's left over when reason and intellect leave the room.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By topkill on 8/23/2012 10:28:10 AM , Rating: 1
Oh,'re right. I was making a preposterous joke, but I forget the people and intelligence level we're dealing with here.

Yeah, I've seen the most illogical, stupid arguments from religious nut jobs. I remember reading some of the versus you quoted about slaves and Christians owning slaves when I was a kid and asked them at church about it and got all kinds of strange answers trying to justify it. I kept coming back to "how can a Christian own another person?" and just got lots of uncomfortable squirming and non-answers.

Then I asked them if they really meant that a person who lived on an island and never even HEARD of Jesus had to burn in hell forever because he hadn't "accepted Jesus as his personal savior", and the answer I got back was: "yes, he had to accept Jesus". Ok, what about a newborn baby who dies before he even learns anything (I mean, that's the next logical question in my 10 year old mind). Now, there really is some uncomfortable squirming, but...."I'm afraid so,he didn't accept Jesus." At least someone else chimed in with the "well, his parents could have baptized him so that would cover it" LOL At least they left themselves an out not to seem like total monsters on that one.

Ok, I'm only 10 years old at the time, but I'm smart enough to think "wow, you people are FUCKED UP". So I just smiled because that's where my parents made me go to learn all this crazy shit, but I realized real fast that you couldn't take it too serious. Hell, you couldn't unless you were completely brain dead.

All that crap about you have to believe every word in the bible...ok, did Mary discover Jesus by herself and then see two Angels (book of John) or was it the both Mary's and one Angel (Matthew)? Or was is a group of women and NOBODY saw Jesus or Angels (Luke). Or was it the way Mark described it (where nobody saw Jesus risen around Jerusalem at all!). Or how about Paul's version (he didn't like women very much so they had no part in the story this time, only the male disciples of course) where he appeared to Peter and then to "other male disciples".

Come on folks, all versions didn't happen so which one is the truth? Remember, every word of the bible was inspired by God so you can't have contradictions and different versions of the same story.

By the way, Paul was the biggest asshole in history. He didn't like women and it showed in so many of his writings and it's why we have so many christian hangups about sex and nudity in the US. The guy was clearly gay or else a total misogynist for some reason...I wish he would have just STFU or someone would have killed his dumb ass before he wrote so much. MAN, he has EFF'ed up our society with his views.

RE: Alternative hypothesis
By topkill on 8/23/2012 10:58:32 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, I found another strange one, thanks to tonight's Tosh.O:

Ezekiel 4:12-15

New International Version (NIV)

12 Eat the food as you would a loaf of barley bread; bake it in the sight of the people, using human excrement for fuel.” 13 The Lord said, “In this way the people of Israel will eat defiled food among the nations where I will drive them.”

14 Then I said, “Not so, Sovereign Lord! I have never defiled myself. From my youth until now I have never eaten anything found dead or torn by wild animals. No impure meat has ever entered my mouth. ”

15 “Very well,” he said, “I will let you bake your bread over cow dung instead of human excrement.”

So let me get this straight: God doesn't have anything better to do than run around testing people to see if their dumb enough to cook with human feces? And people take this seriously? Wow.

"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki