BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery

Subject: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 08:56 AM

"An international team of more than 70 scientists, including UC Berkeley professors, announced yesterday the reconstruction of skeletal remains of the oldest known ancestor of modern humans.

Nicknamed Ardi, the 4.4-million-year-old partial female skeleton of Ardipithecus ramidus was constructed by the Middle Awash Project, which was co-directed by Tim White, UC Berkeley professor of integrative biology.

The announcement followed years of excavation, study and reconstruction that began with the first discovery of the hominid 17 years ago in Ethiopia. A report on the project's findings is slated to be released Friday."

For the ret of this interesting report: Click here for report!

Ardi's remains were found next to a gourd with a stick implanted in one end and several gut strings. Scientists are puzzled what the function of this tool might have been.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 09:07 AM

Scientists are like that. Duh! :)~) Prolly the first Kora.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Jack Campin
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 09:40 AM

Um, Charley made that up. If it had been for real it would have raised even more evolutionary questions , showing that banjo players had already diverged from humans 4.5 million years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 10:37 AM

Jack-

Now we do know that the "krar", a banjo-harp, is indigenous to Ethiopia: click here for report!

And here's a picture of the one that was recovered with Ardi: click here for photo

The proof is in the pudding!

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:17 AM

Doesn't the Kora precede the banjo?

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Alice
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:25 AM

Wasn't it a fossilized bodhran they found? Watch Discovery channel tonight to find out!

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Alice
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:27 AM

Ardi unveiled, Discovery program

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:30 AM

Saw this in the newspapers about an hour ago. Based on most finds for millions of years old fossils, anthropologists seem never to find male remains, I'm beginning to think Adam was really a female.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:38 AM

The males got into fights and tore each other up, and died fighting bears.... the females were more careful, and had 'gentler' fates which left them more intact.

(heck...it's a theory! Some people get PAID coming up with theories like that.)

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Alice
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:43 AM

Read about it in the news yesterday and the Discovery channel has been promoting their program that airs tonight. I'll be tuning in!

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: MMario
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 11:54 AM

heard a piece on the news last night; whoever wrote the piece certainly (I feel) showed thier ignorance because their focus was "this discovery shows apes and man evolved seperately from a common ancestor"

well, duh! Are there still people that believe evolution means "man descended from apes"?

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 12:28 PM

"Are there still people that believe evolution means "man descended from apes"? "

Of course there are...and it wouldn't help to explain it correctly to most of them. They WANT to believe that man didn't 'descend' from anything, but just appeared in the Garden of Eden.


First you throw the dart, then you draw the bullseye around it.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Alice
Date: 02 Oct 09 - 05:28 PM

Discussion on To The Point toady on NPR.
The skeleton was in a layer of earth between two volcanic ash layers, so it was rather easy to date. There were many other fossils with the skeleton, including pollens, tree, other bones... tooth analysis showed a diet mostly of fruit.

Scroll down here to reporter's notebook, and you can listen to the interview with the science writer for the Los Angeles Times.
Click Here OCT 2, To the Point, KCRW

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Barry Finn
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 01:55 AM

so if I changed to a diet of mainly fruits & played banjo I might make it with an ape & we could have a long lasting undiscovered affair?

Charley, can I borrow your banjo, I'm covered on the rest?
My wife is hairy & I raised a couple fruits

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Rapparee
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 10:44 AM

Hey man, she looks pretty good, ya know? I think I'll go over there and (heh heh) see if she's doing anything tonight. I mean, check out those...you-know-whats. Wonder if she drinks Passion Fruit...ah, that goddamn Chongo moved in on my woman! Well, shit. Gimme another whiskey, barkeep.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Alice
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 10:54 AM

Darn it, I was distracted and missed the Discovery program on this last night. Anyone see it?

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 11:00 AM

How do they know she was hairy, as repoeted in the press.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 11:41 AM

She hadn't met the serpent and discovered she was naked yet!

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Charley Noble
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 12:07 PM

Tug-

How do they know she was hairy?

I was wondering about that as well but maybe it's just an educated guess.

I'm certainly not surprised that Ardi has aroused some interest on Mudcat. Eat your hearts out! She really must have been a knock-out in her time, the diva of the entire Afar Rift Valley. The last time I was prowling around there, back in 1966 and 1967, I saw no sign of her, just much more ancient giant fossil ammonites in a riverbed.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Rapparee
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 12:19 PM

I think she was in college with me at the time, Charley.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Charley Noble
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 01:56 PM

Rapaire-

Did you ask her what her major was? Most likely Anthropology or Animal Husbandry.

She does look better than some of the women I've recently met at a high school reunion.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 07:36 PM

Apparerntly fossils were left there by God as a way of testing our faith. Apart from the few that were derived from animals too big to go in the Ark.
Oh, and Don't ask whether Adam and Eve had navels, or whether the trees in Eden had growth rings.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Oct 09 - 11:09 PM

I suspect whales had a meeting and decided to go back into the sea, because they were too big to go in the Ark. It must have been a gut-wrenching decision.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Ernest
Date: 04 Oct 09 - 01:23 PM

So the brand-name "Aria" that you often encounter on beginner-level banjos is actually a miss-spelling...

...and the reason that they always find the remains of females is a clear sign which gender did win "Dueling Banjos"...

;0)
Ernest

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Charley Noble
Date: 04 Oct 09 - 05:40 PM

Maybe no males are found as fossils because they all died hunting and were completely masticated by the resident lions

Or maybe the males just had better taste than the females.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: GUEST, topsie
Date: 04 Oct 09 - 06:23 PM

By 'had better taste' do you mean 'tasted better', therefore got eaten?

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Charley Noble
Date: 04 Oct 09 - 08:11 PM

Exactly.

Yum!

"It's best to leave sleeping lions lie."

So said the Ethiopians to the invading Italians in the 1930's.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Jos
Date: 05 Oct 09 - 06:24 PM

"whether the trees in Eden had growth rings"

See the thread on "Gay Trees".

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Oct 09 - 10:12 PM

Couldn't make any sense out of Gay Trees. It seems like a massive deforestation project to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Jos
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 05:41 AM

"Gay Trees" thread, post from Rapaire, 05 Oct 09 - 02.32 PM

"I like ginkgoes, myself. Great old (and I mean OLD) tree. So far back on the evolutionary chart they don't even have rings."

So maybe there were ginkoes growing in the Garden of Eden - maybe the smelly fruit mentioned in this thread is the apple, the source of knowledge, and of the awareness that we are naked.

Ginko is sold as a remedy for poor memory, which suggests it can affect brain function.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Stringsinger
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 03:09 PM

Banjo playing is a form of devolution. (Just kidding).

Africa had antecedent instruments as Susan has suggested. The Kora is older.
The Akonting is probably the most recent antecedent.

The "bania" and the "banjar" probably emanate from Senegambia.

The first Human Ancestor probably played the "mouth bow" which has been attributed to Neanderthal man.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: gnu
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 03:38 PM

How did this get refreshed? The last post was

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Stringsinger - PM
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 03:09 PM

But... it showed up on my screen just now???

The Dutch must be at it again.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Gurney
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 04:20 PM

JohnotSC, you may be right about Adam being female. It would explain why men have nipples. A typo, or slip-of-the-reed, could be corrected to A Dam, and all natives of the Americas have DNA from a single female. I read that somewhere.

It always puzzles me how they can decide on the 'human ancestor' bit, especially after Piltdown Man.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 04:48 PM

gnu

The post that you don't see was by Ardi herself, and the reason that you don't see it is because you are not a "true believer."

It was a personal message that she requested should not be passed on, and should have been a PM but she was unable to log on to do it properly, and Joe didn't recognize here email in time to respond (she forgot to include "mudcat" in the subject line).

While I will ask her permission to reveal the message when we meet next week, it is unlikely that permission will be given as she impled that she felt the information was "very personal."

John

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 06:38 PM

Well, has the ancestry been updated since the thread last whatever the opposite of refreshed is?

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 06:40 PM

Nope, she's still the oldest.

Then again, 2055 years ago today, we know of one thing that happened...

And I've turned 50, so there!

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Tangledwood
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 07:38 PM

Well, has the ancestry been updated since the thread last whatever the opposite of refreshed is?

Yes, Ardi is now 4,400,002 years old.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: gnu
Date: 15 Mar 11 - 07:44 PM

John?... So??? Joe fucks up every 4,400,002 years?

Not toooo bad a record I suppose. Hmmmm... he does look much younger than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Penny S.
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 02:23 PM

Do, please, avoid basing any argument on the work of that idiot, the Wizard of Sussex, Charles Dawson. Almost everything he "found" is questionable, so if you want to doubt things because of his tinkering, you'll have to rule out Roman figurines, Stone Age knapped flints, Roman tiles, Roman hipposandals... oh yes, and toads found in hollows inside flints, as well as human antecedents. Now the toads are probably well worth the doubt, but the others have plenty of confirmed evidence for their existence away from Sussex. And, a good thing arising from a bad, people will have been very, very careful in making sure that they haven't been taken in again with any of the individual skeleton material found since.

Saying that Piltdown Man undermines the whole of paleo-archeology or whatever the relevant science is called, is not sensible, and makes those who know better unlikely to treat any other argument you raise with respect.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Gurney
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 03:20 PM

That is not what I said, Penny. I merely questioned the certainty that any incomplete remains could be stated to be 'an ancestor of man,' in the light of one known deliberate fraud cobbled up out of bits of several species, and I meant particularly if those remains are found without corroborating evidence, such as a proto-banjo!

If it WAS stated. I didn't read the article. Sorry if I 'rattled your perch.'

I once found a fossil of what may have been a horse-shoe crab. I've met people whose skull looked very much like that. Maybe that was an ancestor, too. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 16 Mar 11 - 09:06 PM

I find a distinct resemblance from Ardi to some friends of mine. The acorn drops close to the oak!
      Mabou Riverdance

Subject: RE: BS: Oldest Human Ancestor Discovery
From: Penny S.
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:35 AM

Sorry Gurney, but I do get a bit peeved at one man's self seeking faking constantly being brought up to denigrate a whole field of study - which it is by a number of people.

Penny