This Austrolopithecus afarensis was suggested to be the intermediary species between anthropoids and man. In the beginning, people were suspicious about the Taung child because Dart was responsible for the Piltdown hoax and was quite young to be evaluating the skull. Hence, people thought he would be too inexperienced to deal with such an important fossil. Also, the location of the Taung child was inconsistent with the theories of the time. The Taung child's skull was very unique because it was complete and there were dents to the skull. Many clues and evidence led to the conclusion that the Taung child was killed by a bird of prey. As a result, this changed the notion that humans were predators, the truth is, they might have been the prey. …show more content…
Firstly, the Taung child was found in Taung, which is located in Africa (Figure 1). Europeans didn't want to believe that humans evolved from hominines in Africa due to racism. People felt uneasy accepting that humans were once small brained mammals from Africa. In fact, British authorities and some anthropology societies dismissed Dart's research discoveries (Tobias, 1984). Even Dart’s former mentor Arthur Keith, agreed that there was not enough evidence to support Dart’s claims. The Piltdown man fraud led to some distrust towards Dart. The Piltdown man was previously thought to be an early human because the large skull was of a human but the jaw was of a young chimpanzee. This hoax was called the "missing link" between apes and humans. However, the Taung child had a human sized brain and its teeth and posture were human like as well. Therefore, the Taung child could possibly be a true representation of the mammal between apes and humans. Secondly, at the time, leading paleoanthropologists Henry Osborn and Davidson Black had strong evidence to prove that humans originated from Asia. They discovered a "Java" man with human like teeth in China which connected to the Peking Man discovered in 1927 (Lewin, 1985). The location of the Taung child discoveries were geographically inconvenient for other prevailing …show more content…
Although the skull was found in a Savannah habitat, it is suggested that the Taung child's immediate habitat was likely tropical and wooded. At the time, the Chairman of Geology at the University of Witwatersrand, Robert Young, traveled to Taung to bring the skull back. Raymond Dart, was the new Chair of Anatomy at the same university and was given the huge responsibility to research and analyze the skull. At the young age of 31, Dart was inclined to scientific heresies and seemed inexperienced (Tobias, 1984). It was estimated that the Taung child was alive around two and a half million years ago. By evaluating the Taung Austrolopithecus skull, Dart approximated the weight of the Taung child to be around ten to twelve kilograms and a male aged to around three to four years old. The Taung skull was compared to a similar sized skull of a juvenile chimpanzee to estimate the weight of the Taung child. As well, the age was estimated by observations of the teeth to look at dental development, the crown formation (arc), and the length of the roots. The Taung child's gums showed that the first molars had just erupted, thus Taung child must have been between three to six years of age. In terms of facial features, Taung child’s face had a less prognathic face, a receding forehead, and he did not have a defined brow ridge. Like many other discoveries, the Taung
The skeleton had a hideous impact to the community and was predicted by local investigators to be reasonably modern. To get better understanding and avoid confusion, a bone sample was sent to a laboratory in the USA for investigation and analysation using series of scientific
...ated form” (IBT, 1). To figure things like this out and prove it, regions of genomes are compared with entire genomes. Before we are able to judge the human origins model, we need to be able to understand the coding of genes for traits of being human, etc. Paabo’s team discovered an mtDNA sequence from a finger bone they found from around 40,000 years ago, as carbon dating is one of the most commonly used methods of determining a fossil’s age. (Hammer, 70).
The partial remains of a skeleton belonging to a tiny female hominid that lived around 95K to 17Kya, was found in the Liang Bua cave on the island of Flores in Indonesia in 2003. This skeleton has unique traits. It has small body approximately 3’6” in length and an estimated body weight of 66 lbs. The 426 cc brain capacity led scientists to taxa the skeleton to a new species they called Homo floresiensis. Since the initial find, teeth and bones from as many as twelve H. floresiensis remains have been discovered at the Liang Bua cave which is the only known site where H. floresiensis has been found to date. This is the most recently discovered early human species so far. They had large teeth for their small size, they had no chins, their foreheads are receded, and they had relatively large feet in proportion to the short legs. Although they are small in body and brain size, H. floresiensis did make and use of stone tools. They hunted small elephants and large rodents. They had island predators such as giant Komodo dragons, and even may have used fire. However, arguments rising in the anthropology community and scientific world are questioning if the now nick named: “Hobbit”, of Flores Island, is the same species as modern day humans. Are they Homo species, or Homo sapiens with the medical condition called Cretinism? A severe hypothyroidism resulting in physical and mental stunting.
It was commonly believed that early hominids left the jungle to live on the open plains of Africa. Called the Savannah Theory, it was strongly promoted by Professor Raymond Dart, after he gained recognition for discovering the Taung skull in 1925. The Taung skull was the first admitted link between man and ape, and Prof. Dart based his theory on the modern location of the discovered fossils. However, a report in 2000 by Marc Verhaegen claims that a savanna evolution is extremely improbable. Based on biological and physiological data, he tries to disprove the savanna theory and suggests that our evolution would more likely occur in a humid and wet setting than the dry heat of the grasslands.
After analyzing the remaining family group, their appeared to be a difference in size among the discovered fossils. Johanson claimed that all the remains found belonged to one species; however, other anthropologists and scientists disagreed and believed that two or more were from different species. The analysis of Lucy’s knee joint indicated that cranium, mandible, dentation and postcranial skeleton contained unique characterizes, which resembled in a large degree the ones in a human being, and also indicated bipedal locomotion. After analyzing the remaining family group, their appeared to be a difference in size among the discovered fossils. Johanson claimed that all the remains found belonged to one species; however, other anthropologists and scientists disagreed and believed that two or more were from different
Australopithecus afarensis who existed 3.5 million years ago and a 4.4 million year old skeleton of an Ardipithecus ramidus are the closest science has come to discovering the human lineage. Shattered Ancestry an article written by Katherine Harmon discusses the remains of two hominids found within Ethiopia. These skeletal remains have created a huge controversy within the topic of evolution questioning many assumptions that have been made referencing the human lineage. The skeleton of the Australopithecus afarensis was named Lucy and was discovered in 1974. The evidence of her walking upright on her two feet essentially guaranteed her a spot in the human lineage line. Lucy was a chimplike ape that was said to walk upright making scientists believe the human ancestry was simple. The complete skeleton found in Ethiopia of an Ardipithecus ramidus named Ardi completely changed all assumptions made from scientists about the complexity of the human lineage. These remains have encouraged researches that the human line is not the only lineage to have evolved but the chimpanzee line has undergone drastic changes as well. There are many traits that researchers have always directly linked to the human lineage however since these discoveries occurred researchers are reconsidering. The recent discoveries that have shattered what has always suggested what linked a species to the human lineage have changed the certainty of whether it is possible to confidently identify the human’s last common ancestor. Majority of scientist had forgotten that there would have been many hominid species living together at one time. New theories have been suggested since scientists revealed that the foot of a hominid found called the Burtele site was found ju...
The species A. afarensis is one of the better known australopithecines, with regards to the number of samples attributed to the species. From speculations about their close relatives, the gorilla and chimpanzee, A. afarensis’ probable social structure can be presumed. The species was named by Johanson and Taieb in 1973. This discovery of a skeleton lead to a heated debate over the validity of the species. The species eventually was accepted by most researchers as a new species of australopithecine and a likely candidate for a human ancestor.
From the ancient bones of the Neanderthals, scientists have been able to extract small amounts of DNA. The DNA comparisons to modern humans show no relationship, implying evolutionary separation (Kunzig, 159). Some anthropologists say the small sections of DNA found are not conclusive evidence, because modern humans show just as much variation in DNA. These people point out that individuals such as the “Portugal Kid” are hybrids of Neanderthals and modern humans, showing there was gene trading. One argument against this is that there is no skull from the ‘Portugal Kid” so it is hard to compare it to Neanderthals. Also, it is known that closely related species can breed and their offspring can be fertile, but they are still separate species (Kunzig, 161).
Scientists thought that interbreeding would be a logical assumption to the Neanderthal conundrum. Unfortunately, any evidence of DNA from Neanderthals mixed with human DNA is difficult to come by because their fossils are usually tarnished upon finding. That is until Svante Paabo, and his research team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, came across the remains of twenty-four Neanderthals and forty early humans.* All of these fossils were nearly 40,000 years old and were from Germany, Russia, and Croatia. Nine of these fossils (four Neanderthal and five human)
Humanity became fascinated with the idea of evolution with the work of Charles Darwin and the Scientific Revolution. People began hunting for fossils that would prove that man had an ape derived ancestry (Weiner, 1955). After various years of searching, a piece of physical evidence was found in England that was said to confirm the theory of evolution (Weiner, 1955).This confirmation came from Charles Dawson’s discoveries from 1908, that were announced publicly in 1912 (Thackeray, 2011). Dawson was believed to have found the fossil remains of the “missing link” between ape and human evolution, the reconstructed skull of Piltdown man (Augustine, 2006). The material was found in stratigraphical evidence and animal remains that were, at the time, adequate enough to confirm the antiquity of the remains (Weiner, 1955). In 1915, another specimen, Piltdown man II, was found further proving this theory (Augustine, 2006). However, this was merely a hoax proven by fluorine relative dating in 1953; the artifacts and bone fragments discovered turned out to be altered to fit the proposed scenario (Augustine, 2006). The skull found was actually composed of a human braincase that was younger than the complimentary orangutan lower jaw (Falk, 2011). Both sections of the skull had been stained to appear to be from the same person of the same age (Falk, 2011).The perpetrator of this act was never caught and there are many theories proposed for the motive of this hoax (Augustine, 2006). Many people have been taken into consideration for this crime, such as Chardin, Woodward, Hinton, and Dawson (Augustine, 2006). Nevertheless, the evidence that proves that Dawson is guilty of this crime against anthropology is quite substantial compared to the evidence...
There is robust evidence provided into conservative and tradition belief that complex cognition began as a result of the ability of knapping stone into tools. The field of psychology has proven that it requires complex motor skills to knap stones into flints and sharp stones that were associated with Oldowan and Acheulean Traditions during a pilot study on positron emission tomography (PET). (Wynn 2002, Pg. 391) This is because the application of bilateral, three dimensional, rotational and broken symmetry all aspects which required planning beforehand and a firm understanding of the natural world and its minerals. (Wynn 2002, Pg. 395) collaboration with anthropological approaches reveals that these skills could only be replicated in bonobos after provided with direct stimuli, restriction on other methods of production and the absence of intended symmetry. (Wynn 392) Tools are fundamental to hu...
He realized that snake embryos had bumps where there should be legs. Which mean they probably evolved from a creature with legs. He noticed that whale embryos had teeth, but adult whales did not have teeth. The most shocking of his embryotic studies involved human embryos. He noted that the human embryos as slits around the neck, the same in fish. The difference is that in fish the develop into gills, and in human the become the bones of the inner ear. This showed that humans must be descended from fish. This led him to the conclusion that all species were somehow connected. He theorized that beginning with a common ancestor, species had changed dramatically over generations. Some species may add new body features, or lose them. He called this descent with
Homo erectus was the first to leave Africa, hunt, make fire, and create societies. Homo erectus lived 1.3 million years ago in the Great Rift Valley. Homo erectus evolved to have thinner arms, longer legs, and bigger brains. This is considered to be a huge evolutionary step away from ape bodies, to more human bodies. In Northern Kenya, Turkana Boy’s skeleton was found. At 5 foot 3 inches, Turkana Boy had a build closer to a human’s than to an ape’s. Turkana Boy represents the first true human. Although he was one of the first humans, he was still very primitive. Turkana Boy had a lower forehead, and a smaller brain capacity than a human.
The increase in brain size may be related to changes in hominine behavior (See figure 3). The third major trend in hominine development is the gradual decrease in the size of the face and teeth. According to the Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia ’98, the fossil evidence for direct ancestors of modern humans is divided into the category Australopithecus and Homo, and begins about 5 million years ago (See figure 1). Between 7 and 20 million years ago, primitive apelike animals were widely distributed on the African and, later, on the Eurasian continents (See figure 2). Although many fossil bones and teeth have been found, the way of life of these creatures, and their evolutionary relationships to the living apes and humans, remain matters of active discussion among scientists.