Earliest 'human footprints' found
pretty cool to think 1.5 million years ago there walked our ancestor.
Last edited:
Earliest 'human footprints' found
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Our ancestors walked the Earth ever since there were things that could walk.
:thumbsup:
That were humanoid in shape/build?
Yes that is true, but I was thinking that it's amazing someone 1.5 million years ago that was kind of like me and like you walked the earth. That's really cool to me. I wonder what this person thought about, what were their dreams, aspirations, did they pray to something, have a "wife" or a "husband" or even just a "mate"? Kids?
1.5 million years ago .. wow
1.5 million years ago .. wow
Earliest 'human footprints' foundpretty cool to think 1.5 million years ago there walked our ancestor.
I disbelieve your biased source. Where are the dinosaur footprints? All know that dinos walked fang-in-hand with humans. Before you respond, I warn you that I've seen 1,000,000 BC, so you can't fool me.
The term encompasses creatures that weren't humanoid.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
Anthropologists and biologists don't draw the line between "humans" and "ancestors of humans" at the same point in time. (And from what I can tell the members of either discipline may not even have a good consensus among themselves. After all, it's just words.) But there's not much disagreement over the most conservative placement of that line, which is 2MYA when genus Homo split off from an earlier genus, possibly Australopithecus but there are other candidates. (You're the career biologist here so you should be able to make more sense out of this material than I can.
) All of the species of Homo, such as habilis, erectus and neanderthalensis, are called "humans" by most writers.Some scientists use "human" as a convenient description for all species in the line that broke off from the chimpanzees, our closest relatives. I usually see that delineated around 7MYA, but the fossil evidence of the hominoids of that period is scant due to soil conditions. So not only is the date vague but there's even some controversy over the sequence of the whole Great Ape split into gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans and humans.
Well geeze girl, now you're asking about the fundamental techniques of Paleontology 101. I don't know the answer but I wouldn't be expected to since my degree is in accounting. Yours is in a science so you would at least be expected to know where to look for the answer if you were interested!
How do they determine the age of any rock? Carbon dating? Painstaking reconstruction of movements within the earth's crust? Obviously this must be a mature scientific technique since they've been dating fossils since the 19th century or maybe even the 18th. If I wanted to know, I'd ask a scientist. Fortunately we have a few among the membership.
1.5 huh? Guess they were off by 500,000years huh?
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
Other fossil evidence has been found that's older. That's how we established the species boundary at 2MYA. But even though we've got older fossilized human skeletons, this is the oldest fossilized human footprint. After all, bones are a lot sturdier than dents made in soil.
It's surprising that there are as many fossil skeletons as there are, considering the forces of nature that work against fossilization. The fact that there are any fossilized footprints at all--not to mention the occasional bits of skin, leaves and other soft tissue--is astounding.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
All human species except ours are extinct. H. neanderthalensis were the last to succumb, 20-25KYA. To the combined forces of climate change and arrival in Europe of sapiens, a species that evolved in the tropics and was therefore better suited to a temperate climate.
It's the cycle...
The young person who is in college or just graduated is SURE of everything, certainty due to the massive amount of ignorance mixed with a lack of wisdom. After all some professor who REALLY seemed to know his stuff said it was so, and there were books! They say things like "We now know X", where X=whatever theory on a topic.
The older scientist who has worked in a field and gained experience and understanding, maybe even a touch of wisdom, tends to question everything and hold things less sure. He tends to say something more like "The current thinking is X" or "We now believe X may be accurate".
I can usually tell the young and ignorant from the older and more knowledgeable pretty quickly with regards to science and theory.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard Feynman
"If you thought that science was certain - well, that is just an error on your part." - Richard Feynman
"…I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing." - Richard Feynman