Australopithecus sediba is one of the most recently discovered human fossils. In this paper I will discuss this fossil and its estimated age, its discovery, its interpretation by scientists and its coverage in the popular media. I will also compare its coverage in scientific articles versus its coverage in popular media.
The first specimens of Australopithecus sediba, a fossilized jawbone and a collarbone was first discovered by Matthew Berger, son of paleoanthropologist Lee Berger at the site of, Malapa, South Africa on August 15, 2008. Since then Lee Berger and his team of researchers have found much more of the skeleton and analyzed it. The remains were too old to be dated directly therefore their ages were estimated from dating the uranium-rich flowstone that surrounded them. The ages of the fossil has been estimated approximately 1.97 million years ago.
In the article by Lee Berger and his team titled ‘Australopithecus sediba: A New Species of Homo-Like Australopith from South Africa’ they describe the analysis of the newly found fossil.
Discovered in 2008, the discovery of the fossil was only announced in April, 2010. This is the time when the discovery was spoken about in popular media. In April
…show more content…
2010, the discovery of this new species was the breaking news of every source of public media. From newspapers to news channels and from internet sources to radio, all were talking about the discovery of A. sediba. An article dated April 8, 2010 in The New York Times, titled ‘New Hominid Species Discovered in South Africa’ covered this discovery.
According to the article, the discovered specimens were a distinct mixture of primitive and advanced anatomy and were thus named a new species of hominid - Australopithecus sediba. The species is said to be a mixture of primitive and advanced anatomy because it not only stood upright on longs legs with human shaped hips and pelvis but also climbed on trees with ape like arms. It is also said to have small teeth and a modern, more human like face, but relatively primitive feet and a small brain like that of Australopithecus. The article also covered the disapproval of the fossil as new species by scientist not involved in the
research. On September 8, 2011, BBC news published an article titled ‘African fossils put new spin on human origins story’ that covered the in-depth analysis of the fossil by the team behind the discovery. According to this article, the features seen in brain, pelvis, hand and feet of A. sediba suggested that Homo sapiens directly evolved from this species.
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...
A study performed by Martin Hausler and Peter Schmid of the University of Zurich, Switzerland, appeared in the October 1995 issue of Journal of Human Evolution, igniting controversy over the 1974 Australopithecus discoveries in Hadar, Ethiopia. The most famous of the Hadar specimens is the 3-million-year-old skeleton, “Lucy,” who was recovered by paleoanthropologist, Donald Johanson. In his article, Shreeve presents the methods and findings of Hausler and Schmid’s study as well as some counter arguments from other scientists in the field.
“Analyses of the hominid indicate that they belonged to a previously unidentified species, which anthropologist Yohannes Haile-Selassie of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History and his colleagues are calling this species Ardipithecus Kadabba. Previous fossil finds from the identical genus has suggested that hominids called kadabba were instead a subspecies of the only other known Ardipithecus species, Ardipithecus ramidus”(Bower 2004). This new hominid is being addressed presently as Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba. “While Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba is not the sought-after link—the yet-undiscovered creature that lived at the cusp of the evolutionary division between man and chimp—Yohannes Haile-Selassie, also a doctoral candidate at the University of California at Berkeley, said the hominid certainly is very close to the branching point.” (Rickman 2001)
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.
Arguably the most remarkable thing about Homo naledi is how and where it was found. Back in 2013, two eagle-eyed cavers spotted human remains in a remote cavern deep inside the Rising Star cave system, just outside of Johannesburg, South Africa. The chamber, dubbed the Denaledi Chamber ("chamber of stars"), is about 30 meters below the surface and accessible only via more than 80 meters of often extremely narrow passages. Berger himself was too large to access the fossils, so he gathered a team of scientists small and limber enough to make the arduous descent. Berger 's team found there was the largest and most varied assemblage of hominin fossils ever found in Africa. Homo naledi
In the year 2002 a bizarre looking theropod dinosaur fossil was found in China (Xu). It challenges the way researchers have been thinking of theropods and other dinosaurs for a long time. In the Sahara desert, the oldest hominid skull in the world was found that same year. These are just two of many discoveries that have challenged the way we perceive the ancient world.
As archeological discoveries of bone fragments and fossils continue to support the existence of homo-sapiens
Feder and Park present a list of traits that are used by paleoanthropologists to distinguish the appearance of skeletal features and characterize these changes over time. Th...
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.
The discovered fossils of the dramaeosaurid M. gui form of a nearly complete skeleton, and it’s been compared with a similar, previously discovered Microraptor skeleton. The place of M. gui’s discovery was Dapingfang, Chaoyang County in western Liaoning, China, also known as the Jiufotang Formation_. Xu and colleagues declare the fossils to be dated from the early Cretaceous period (about 124 - 128 million years ago_)_ through others’ radiometric dating and biostratagraphical correlations of that region_. Interestingly, the closest ancestors of many of the dinosaurs found within this area of China are believed to have lived not during the early Cretaceous, but the late Jurassic_. Paleogeographers have theorized that this area was thoroughly isolated during the very late Jurassic and into the early Cretaceous_. With paleontologists theorizing that Archaeopteryx came into existence 25 million years before the dated existence of these M. gui fossils_, M. gui is still believed to be a basal dromaeosaurid, meaning that it’s one of the earliest of this type of theropod, maintaining that these fossils are of an ancestor to Archaeopteryx and all birds.
Paleoanthropology: Pliocene and Pleistocene Human Evolution. Paleobiology, 7:3:298-305. Frayer, David W. and Milford Walpoff 1985 Sexual Dimorphism. Annual Review of Anthropology, 14:429-473 Key, Catherine A. 2000 The Evolution of Human Life History.
Throughout the long winding road that is human evolution; many species have helped shape who we are today. There was the early Australopithecus africanus which began to walk bipedally-upright with two feet and the Homo habilis which drastically developed the construction of handmade tools. But there is one species who is to be credited for the most critical advancements in human evolution; Homo erectus. Not only did Homo erectus advance us the most biologically, but also the most geographically.
Strait, David S. "The Feeding Biomechanics and Dietary Ecology of Australopithecus Africanus." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 12 Dec. 2008. Web. 19 Nov. 2015. .
According to Britannica Encyclopædia, Australopithecus anamensis lived in Kenya between 4.2 million and 3.9 million years ago. A. afarensis lived in eastern Africa between 3 and 4 million years ago. This australopithecine had a brain size a little larger than chimpanzees. Some had canine teeth more sticking out than those of later hominines. No tools of any kind have been found with A. afarensis fossils.
Salisbury says that these fossils could represent evidence of a unique group of sauropods (Huge Dinosaur 2001). It was thought that these remains belonged to a group that was spread throughout Gondwana, however now it could be a unique set of sauropods centered in Australia. Elliot belongs to a group of sauropods that were long-necked herbivores, and could grow up to 21 meters in length. These dinosaurs had small heads and legs that could be the size of tree trunks (Huge Dinosaur 2001).