Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Abramelin

Remains Of Homo Sapiens 400,000 Years ago

82 posts in this topic

The next is 'old' news, but I never heard of it before.

Many here hum the 'mantra' of modern man being around for about 200,000 years, but that might be wrong.....

Archaeologists Locate Remains Of Homo Sapiens In Israel 400,000 Years Ago

05 Jan 2011

It has long been believed that modern man emerged from the continent of Africa 200,000 years ago. Now Tel Aviv University archaeologists have uncovered evidence that Homo sapiens roamed the land now called Israel as early as 400,000 years ago - the earliest evidence for the existence of modern man anywhere in the world.

The findings were discovered in the Qesem Cave, a pre-historic site located near Rosh Ha'ayin that was first excavated in 2000. Prof. Avi Gopher and Dr. Ran Barkai of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology, who run the excavations, and Prof. Israel Hershkowitz of the university's Department of Anatomy and Anthropology and Sackler School of Medicine, together with an international team of scientists, performed a morphological analysis on eight human teeth found in the Qesem Cave.

This analysis, which included CT scans and X-rays, indicates that the size and shape of the teeth are very similar to those of modern man. The teeth found in the Qesem Cave are very similar to other evidence of modern man from Israel, dated to around 100,000 years ago, discovered in the Skhul Cave in the Carmel and Qafzeh Cave in the Lower Galilee near Nazareth. The results of the researchers' findings are being published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

(...)

According to researchers, the discoveries made in the Qesem Cave may overturn the theory that modern man originated on the continent of Africa. In recent years, archaeological evidence and human skeletons found in Spain and China also undermined this proposition, but the Qesem Cave findings because of their early age is an unprecedented discovery.

http://www.medicalne...ases/212720.php

.

Edited by Abramelin
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article with more details and... doubts:

As the authors themselves state, “Resolution of these alternative scenarios must await further discoveries of additional and more complete Middle Pleistocene remains from southwest Asia.” The identity of the Qesem Cave humans remains unclear, as do their origins. Even if they turn out to be early members of Homo sapiens, this does not automatically mean that our species evolved in Israel first. Instead, such a conclusion would raise several alternative scenarios, including the possibility that there are as-yet-undiscovered deposits of early Homo sapiens fossils in Africa which document an earlier dispersal from Africa distinct from the one around 70,000 years ago. For now, though, the identity of the Qesem Cave humans cannot be conclusively determined. All the grandiose statements about their relevance to the origin of our species reach beyond what the actual fossil material will allow.

(...)

** Given these new discoveries, we will have to reexamine how we define our species and our relationship to extinct lineages like the Neanderthals and Denisovans. At the moment, it is unclear whether these lineages should be classified as separate species, as subspecies of Homo sapiens, or in some other category. In the interest of keeping this post as accessible as possible, however, I am using Homo sapiens to refer to the lineage which split from our last common ancestor with the Neanderthals (regardless of later gene-swapping).

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/12/a-fistful-of-teeth-do-the-qesem-cave-fossils-really-change-our-understanding-of-human-evolution/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a peer reviewed paper:

I.Hershkovitz et. al. "Middle pleistocene dental remains from Qesem Cave.” American Journal of Anthropology. 23 December 2010.

Now, whether a few suffice to attribute them to a homo sapiens is questionable.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a peer reviewed paper:

I.Hershkovitz et. al. "Middle pleistocene dental remains from Qesem Cave.” American Journal of Anthropology. 23 December 2010.

Now, whether a few suffice to attribute them to a homo sapiens is questionable.

Yes, that's at the end of the article in my second post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Archaeologists Locate Remains Of Homo Sapiens In Israel 400,000 Years Ago

They had Archaeologists 400,000 years ago? (Teasing!)

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had Archaeologists 400,000 years ago? (Teasing!)

Yes, and they were also known as 'cannibals'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next is 'old' news, but I never heard of it before.

Many here hum the 'mantra' of modern man being around for about 200,000 years, but that might be wrong.....

Archaeologists Locate Remains Of Homo Sapiens In Israel 400,000 Years Ago

05 Jan 2011

It has long been believed that modern man emerged from the continent of Africa 200,000 years ago. Now Tel Aviv University archaeologists have uncovered evidence that Homo sapiens roamed the land now called Israel as early as 400,000 years ago - the earliest evidence for the existence of modern man anywhere in the world.

The findings were discovered in the Qesem Cave, a pre-historic site located near Rosh Ha'ayin that was first excavated in 2000. Prof. Avi Gopher and Dr. Ran Barkai of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology, who run the excavations, and Prof. Israel Hershkowitz of the university's Department of Anatomy and Anthropology and Sackler School of Medicine, together with an international team of scientists, performed a morphological analysis on eight human teeth found in the Qesem Cave.

This analysis, which included CT scans and X-rays, indicates that the size and shape of the teeth are very similar to those of modern man. The teeth found in the Qesem Cave are very similar to other evidence of modern man from Israel, dated to around 100,000 years ago, discovered in the Skhul Cave in the Carmel and Qafzeh Cave in the Lower Galilee near Nazareth. The results of the researchers' findings are being published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

(...)

According to researchers, the discoveries made in the Qesem Cave may overturn the theory that modern man originated on the continent of Africa. In recent years, archaeological evidence and human skeletons found in Spain and China also undermined this proposition, but the Qesem Cave findings because of their early age is an unprecedented discovery.

http://www.medicalne...ases/212720.php

.

Modern man is probably way older then this.

http://www.humanityunitedforum.com/michael%20a.%20cremo%20richard%20l.%20thompson%20-%20the%20hidden%20history%20of%20the%20human%20race%201998.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middle east ehh......... did i hear some one say adam and eve, nah... guess im hearing things lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middle east ehh......... did i hear some one say adam and eve, nah... guess im hearing things lol

More specifically: Anatolia (Göbekli Tepe, check the thread about it).

++

EDIT:

THIS thread:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=231550&st=315&p=4500177&hl=+gobekli%20+tepeentry4500177

.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More specifically: Anatolia (Göbekli Tepe, check the thread about it).

++

EDIT:

THIS thread:

http://www.unexplain...e

.

.

i love hearing about gobekli, i wish i could visit the site

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i love hearing about gobekli, i wish i could visit the site

If you are really living in "Plato's Cave", you are closer than most of us, lol.

Conspiracy Theorist

  • photo-119440.jpg?_r=1353016765
  • Member
  • bullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.png
  • 894 posts

  • Joined:04 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plato's Cave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so we're all Israelis?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting indeed. I dont follow this field all that much but it seems when I was a growing up in the 70s and 80s the thought at the time if I remember right was that man had been around for 40,000 ish years. Like I said Im not a huge archilogical buff but thats a huge step to 400,000. I look forward to hearing more about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The father of all men is 340,000 years old

06 March 2013 by Colin Barras

Albert Perry carried a secret in his DNA: a Y chromosome so distinctive that it reveals new information about the origin of our species. It shows that the last common male ancestor down the paternal line of our species is over twice as old as we thought.

One possible explanation is that hundreds of thousands of years ago, modern and archaic humans in central Africa interbred, adding to known examples of interbreeding – with Neanderthals in the Middle East, and with the enigmatic Denisovans somewhere in southeast Asia.

Perry, recently deceased, was an African-American who lived in South Carolina. A few years ago, one of his female relatives submitted a sample of his DNA to a company called Family Tree DNA for genealogical analysis.

Geneticists can use such samples to work out how we are related to one another. Hundreds of thousands of people have now had their DNA tested. The data from these tests had shown that all men gained their Y chromosome from a common male ancestor. This genetic "Adam" lived between 60,000 and 140,000 years ago.

All men except Perry, that is.

More here:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23240-the-father-of-all-men-is-340000-years-old.html

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next is 'old' news, but I never heard of it before.

Many here hum the 'mantra' of modern man being around for about 200,000 years, but that might be wrong.....

Archaeologists Locate Remains Of Homo Sapiens In Israel 400,000 Years Ago

05 Jan 2011

It has long been believed that modern man emerged from the continent of Africa 200,000 years ago. Now Tel Aviv University archaeologists have uncovered evidence that Homo sapiens roamed the land now called Israel as early as 400,000 years ago - the earliest evidence for the existence of modern man anywhere in the world.

The findings were discovered in the Qesem Cave, a pre-historic site located near Rosh Ha'ayin that was first excavated in 2000. Prof. Avi Gopher and Dr. Ran Barkai of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology, who run the excavations, and Prof. Israel Hershkowitz of the university's Department of Anatomy and Anthropology and Sackler School of Medicine, together with an international team of scientists, performed a morphological analysis on eight human teeth found in the Qesem Cave.

This analysis, which included CT scans and X-rays, indicates that the size and shape of the teeth are very similar to those of modern man. The teeth found in the Qesem Cave are very similar to other evidence of modern man from Israel, dated to around 100,000 years ago, discovered in the Skhul Cave in the Carmel and Qafzeh Cave in the Lower Galilee near Nazareth. The results of the researchers' findings are being published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

(...)

According to researchers, the discoveries made in the Qesem Cave may overturn the theory that modern man originated on the continent of Africa. In recent years, archaeological evidence and human skeletons found in Spain and China also undermined this proposition, but the Qesem Cave findings because of their early age is an unprecedented discovery.

http://www.medicalne...ases/212720.php

.

but even if u find humans remains somewhere else that doesnt proved that humans didnt evolve from africa....we do got legs if you forgot... Homo sapiens evolving from africa is jus common sense and dawin kno it with no discovered remains.

you can jussit back and look almost all the animals are from africa with evolved version scattered all over the world.

plus add in thefact that all the land was one piece with the center being africa... its safe to jump out on a limband say homo sapeins evolved out of africa....i might even say all animals evolved out africa ...or the land known as africa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

but even if u find humans remains somewhere else that doesnt proved that humans didnt evolve from africa....we do got legs if you forgot... Homo sapiens evolving from africa is jus common sense and dawin kno it with no discovered remains.

you can jussit back and look almost all the animals are from africa with evolved version scattered all over the world.

plus add in thefact that all the land was one piece with the center being africa... its safe to jump out on a limband say homo sapeins evolved out of africa....i might even say all animals evolved out africa ...or the land known as africa

"i might even say all animals evolved out africa ...or the land known as africa"

I think about every paleontologist would disagree with you.

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"i might even say all animals evolved out africa ...or the land known as africa"

I think about every paleontologist would disagree with you.

.

busy busy busy ... ya'know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any theory about where the first vegetation evolved, or is that too far back to be determined?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any theory about where the first vegetation evolved, or is that too far back to be determined?

I think it is indeed too far back to know where plants first set foot on land.

The evidence for plant evolutionary history changes dramatically in the Ordovician with the first extensive appearance of spores in the fossil record (Cambrian spores have been found, also). The first terrestrial plants appeared in the form of tiny plants resembling liverworts when, around the Middle Ordovician, evidence for the beginning of the terrestrialization of the land is found.[2] These early plants did not have conducting tissues, severely limiting their size. They were, in effect, tied to wet terrestrial environments by their inability to conduct water, like extant liverworts, hornworts, and mosses, although they reproduced with spores, important dispersal units that have hard protective outer coatings, allowing for their preservation in the fossil record, in addition to protecting the future offspring against the desiccating environment of life on land. With spores, plants on land could have sent out large numbers of spores that could grow into an adult plant when sufficient environmental moisture was present.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_plant_evolution#cite_note-2

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/pciesiel/gly3150/plant.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"i might even say all animals evolved out africa ...or the land known as africa"

I think about every paleontologist would disagree with you.

.

ok ofcourse i wouldnt kno im jus sayin it was one big land mass at first and it looks it was african before eveything broke away and cam back and broke away again...that big land mass seems to be what is know today as africa....even if u look at the map all the lands can connect with africa like a puzzle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i might even say all animals evolved out africa

The current wisdom is that marsupials originated in South America and spread from there to North America and, via a much warmer Antarctica, to Australia. The kingdom 'animal' must have started somewhere, but it was probably long before there was anything we'd call modern 'Africa'.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok ofcourse i wouldnt kno im jus sayin it was one big land mass at first and it looks it was african before eveything broke away and cam back and broke away again...that big land mass seems to be what is know today as africa....even if u look at the map all the lands can connect with africa like a puzzle

Africa was only part of that big land mass.

What makes you think animals arose in that part of the big land mass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, I always thought our species was a lot older then they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

ok ofcourse i wouldnt kno im jus sayin it was one big land mass at first and it looks it was african before eveything broke away and cam back and broke away again...that big land mass seems to be what is know today as africa....even if u look at the map all the lands can connect with africa like a puzzle

[media=]

[/media]

++++

"Out of Scotland" (lol) :

According to scientific consensus, the first verified land animal was a one-centimeter myriapod. Present-day examples of myriapods include millipedes and centipedes. This myriapod, discovered in 2003 in Scotland and named Pneumodesmus newmani, is dated to 428 million years ago. Paleontologists can tell it lived on land because its fossil shows it possessed spiracles; holes that insects, spiders, rays, and sharks use for breathing air.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-were-the-first-animals-to-walk-on-land.htm

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[media=]

[/media]

++++

"Out of Scotland" (lol) :

According to scientific consensus, the first verified land animal was a one-centimeter myriapod. Present-day examples of myriapods include millipedes and centipedes. This myriapod, discovered in 2003 in Scotland and named Pneumodesmus newmani, is dated to 428 million years ago. Paleontologists can tell it lived on land because its fossil shows it possessed spiracles; holes that insects, spiders, rays, and sharks use for breathing air.

http://www.wisegeek....alk-on-land.htm

.

LIFE SEEMS TO THRIVE THE MOST IN A TROPICAL ENVIROMENT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.