Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Neandethal Bones dated 2.5 mya
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 20 (456702)
02-19-2008 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Riptowtan
02-19-2008 1:27 PM


Welcome to the fray Riptowtan,
According to this teacher he gets a hold of a lot of "underground" science stories that you can't find yet online.
Like the National Enquirer? (cue Men In Black theme). The oldest official record I could find of neander fossils was ~200,000 years ago.
This site keeps fairly up to date with new discoveries and most current thinking on relationships, and has hot links on each branch for further information
Neanderthals
quote:
Neanderthals are known from Europe and western Asia from about 200,000 years to about 30,000 years ago, when they disappeared from the fossil record and were replaced in Europe by anatomically modern forms.
Older fossils could exist, but 2.5 million years is likely either a typo or from a highly questionable source.
I also note that archaeologists are likely to have "news conferences" for new finds of special significance -- see Homo floriensis for example -- especially if they don't fit the normal picture.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Riptowtan, posted 02-19-2008 1:27 PM Riptowtan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by bluescat48, posted 02-19-2008 7:36 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 17 of 20 (456740)
02-19-2008 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by bluescat48
02-19-2008 7:36 PM


MRCA'a and genetic clocks ...
The only reference I found to anything older was a genetic article using molecular clock to put the date of divergence of H. neander DNA from H. sapiens DNA at over 300K years, but I don't trust the dates of those clocks at that kind of projection.
Just a moment...
PNAS Vol. 96, Issue 10, 5581-5585, May 11, 1999
quote:
The date of divergence between the mtDNAs of the Neandertal and contemporary humans is estimated to 465,000 years before the present, with confidence limits of 317,000 and 741,000 years.
Dates of Divergences. For the estimation of the ages of MRCAs of different groups of mtDNAs, the observed nucleotide differences were corrected for multiple substitutions by using the Tamura-Nei algorithm (17). The resulting genetic distances and the estimated age of the modern human-chimpanzee split of 4-5 million years (22, 23) were used to calculate the substitution rate of 0.94 10-7 substitutions per site per year per lineage with 5.92 10-8 and 1.38 10-7 as the lower and upper confidence limits. These estimates are in reasonable agreement with previous rate estimations for the mtDNA control region (32, 33). Using these rates, the age of the MRCA of the Neandertal and modern human mtDNAs was estimated to be 465,000 years, with confidence limits of 317,000 and 741,000 years. This age is significantly older than that of the MRCA of modern human mtDNAs, which, by the same procedure, was determined to be 163,000 years, with 111,000 and 260,000 years as confidence limits. Finally, the age of the MRCA of the mtDNAs of the seven chimpanzees and the two bonobos was calculated as 2,844,000 years (confidence limits: 1,940,000 and 4,534,000 years).
Of course that could also mean that there were one or two species and other members of the Homo clade between the common ancestor pool and either H. neander or H. sapiens, not that each species necessarily extends back that far -- for instance they imply that Homo sapiens starts at 163K years ago -- while actual fossil information pushes that to 200K:
Ethiopia is top choice for cradle of Homo sapiens : Nature News
quote:
Radioactive dating finds that fossil skulls are 195,000 years old.
Two Ethiopian fossils have been crowned as the oldest known members of our species. An estimated 195,000 years old, the pair were witness to the earliest days of H. sapiens .
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Taking this genetic information as an indication of relative dating (which is as far as I trust it, but where I think it is valid) this means that the divergence of Neander ancestors from H. sapiens ancestor occurred after hominids diverged from chimpanzees, but before H. sapiens ancestors diverged from Homo heidelbergensis
ie - that we are at least cousins once removed from H. neander relations rather than first cousins.
It would also mean that this diagram
http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/evol.html
(Last revised 08.17.2007 ” © 2007 Bruce MacEvoy)
Is more accurate than the one I posted earlier
Anthropology | Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History
(Last revised unknown)
... in this area. It also goes back to almost 400K for H. neander, but then it says the reason is:
quote:
” Time spans for modern humans, Neanderthals and archaic H. sapiens (H. heidelbergensis) have been extended back beyond accepted fossil limits to accommodate recent genetic evidence that the divergence between the Neanderthal and human lines occurred around 500,000 years ago.
Sorry, but I trust hard fossil dates much more than extrapolated genetic ones. The tree by the Smithsonian Institute appears to be based on fossils, not genetic "dates" ... which gets us back to ~200K for H. neander fossils .... sigh.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : consistent nomenclature

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by bluescat48, posted 02-19-2008 7:36 PM bluescat48 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024