Started By
Message
Scientists find 800,000-year-old footprints in UK
Posted on 4/5/15 at 11:37 pm
Posted on 4/5/15 at 11:37 pm
LINK
quote:
They were a British family on a day out — almost a million years ago.
Archaeologists announced Friday that they have discovered human footprints in England that are between 800,000 and 1 million years old — the most ancient found outside Africa, and the earliest evidence of human life in Northern Europe.
A team from the British Museum, London's Natural History Museum and Queen Mary college at the University of London uncovered imprints from up to five individuals in ancient estuary mud at Happisburgh on the country's eastern coast.
British Museum archaeologist Nick Ashton said the discovery — recounted in detail in the journal PLOS ONE — was "a tangible link to our earliest human relatives."
Preserved in layers of silt and sand for hundreds of millennia before being exposed by the tide last year, the prints give a vivid glimpse of some of our most ancient ancestors. They were left by a group, including at least two children and one adult male.
They could have been be a family foraging on the banks of a river scientists think may be the ancient Thames, beside grasslands where bison, mammoth, hippos and rhinoceros roamed.
The researchers said the humans who left the footprints may have been related to Homo antecessor, or "pioneer man," whose fossilized remains have been found in Spain. That species died out about 800,000 years ago.
Ashton said the footprints are between 800,000 — "as a conservative estimate" — and 1 million years old, at least 100,000 years older than scientists' earlier estimate of the first human habitation in Britain.
That's significant because 700,000 years ago, Britain had a warm, Mediterranean-style climate. The earlier period was much colder, similar to modern-day Scandinavia.
Natural History Museum archaeologist Chris Stringer said that 800,000 or 900,000 years ago Britain was "the edge of the inhabited world."
"This makes us rethink our feelings about the capacity of these early people, that they were coping with conditions somewhat colder than the present day," he said.
"Maybe they had cultural adaptations to the cold we hadn't even thought were possible 900,000 years ago. Did they wear clothing? Did they make shelters, windbreaks and so on? Could they have they have the use of fire that far back?" he asked.
Scientists dated the footprints by studying their geological position and from nearby fossils of long-extinct animals including mammoth, ancient horse and early vole.
John McNabb, director of the Center for the Archaeology of Human Origins at the University of Southampton — who was not part of the research team — said the use of several lines of evidence meant "the dating is pretty sound."
This post was edited on 4/5/15 at 11:39 pm
Posted on 4/6/15 at 12:34 am to hawgfaninc
Well the world has only been around 6,000 years so is venture to say that's purposely skewed data
Posted on 4/6/15 at 12:43 am to hawgfaninc
It's fascinating to think that H. antecessor might have been the species that gave rise to H. neanderthalensis in Europe.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:34 am to hawgfaninc
Just looks like a big ole pile of shite with a gatorade bottle cap in it
Posted on 4/6/15 at 4:13 am to blue_morrison
quote:
Just looks like a big ole pile of shite with a gatorade bottle cap in it
or canon camera lens
Posted on 4/6/15 at 7:33 am to ehole
[/quote]
or canon camera lens
[/quote]
I didn't know they had cameras back then.
or canon camera lens
[/quote]
I didn't know they had cameras back then.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 8:07 am to hawgfaninc
Scientists seem to get dumber every year
Posted on 4/6/15 at 8:41 am to hawgfaninc
quote:
"Maybe they had cultural adaptations to the cold we hadn't even thought were possible 900,000 years ago. Did they wear clothing? Did they make shelters, windbreaks and so on? Could they have they have the use of fire that far back?" he asked.
Scientists dated the footprints by studying their geological position and from nearby fossils of long-extinct animals including mammoth, ancient horse and early vole.
John McNabb, director of the Center for the Archaeology of Human Origins at the University of Southampton — who was not part of the research team — said the use of several lines of evidence meant "the dating is pretty sound."
I'm not a die-hard young-world creationist, but I've never found the dating methods we use for anything past about 2-10 thousand years to be particularly convincing as far as hard science. There's a lot of Kentucky-windage they speculate with, in addition to assuming decay at a constant rate without some kind of outside intervention (radiation changes, etc etc).
Just because the current alternative is 'god created everything 10,00 years ago' doesn't mean carbon dating or other current methods are accurate at all.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 8:47 am to cokebottleag
They aren't, that's why scientists keep rewriting their research.
We found a skull and it's 100,000,000 years old!!!! Hooray!!!
Three years later buried in the back back of some journal........
The skull found three years ago was revealed to be from a construction worker that has been missing since 1942
We found a skull and it's 100,000,000 years old!!!! Hooray!!!
Three years later buried in the back back of some journal........
The skull found three years ago was revealed to be from a construction worker that has been missing since 1942
Posted on 4/6/15 at 9:32 am to hawgfaninc
quote:
That's significant because 700,000 years ago, Britain had a warm, Mediterranean-style climate.
Global warming?
Posted on 4/6/15 at 12:56 pm to hawgfaninc
Don't look a day over 675,000 years old.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 9:58 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
They aren't, that's why scientists keep rewriting their research.
I'd rather they do that than just assume events occurred because they're written in a very old book.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:15 pm to Old Sarge
You guys are so cute when you try to talk science
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:18 pm to ISEN_AG
quote:
a very old book.
an old book that has been proven right by science many times.
what's really amusing is when science has to correct itself to what has been in that old book all along.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:19 pm to ehole
quote:Bet you thought you got him good.
or canon camera lens
It's a canon camera lens cap
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:19 pm to MIZ_COU
"You guys"?
Dating methods are highly suspect and flawed. Most scientists agree with this.
Dating methods are highly suspect and flawed. Most scientists agree with this.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:40 pm to genro
quote:
Bet you thought you got him good.
ability to read > knowing the name of camera parts so i'm ok with my mislabeling of a camera piece. plus i'm pretty damn sure gatorade caps are orange.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:44 pm to ehole
This post was edited on 4/6/15 at 10:45 pm
Posted on 4/6/15 at 10:47 pm to ehole
Silly cave people and their darn cameras
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News