1.8M-year-old skull gives glimpse of our evolution, suggests early man was single species

Oct 17, 2013 by Seth Borenstein
In this photo taken Oct. 2, 2013, in Tbilisi, Georgia, David Lordkipanidze, director of the Georgia National Museum, holds a pre-human skull found in 2005 in the ground at the medieval village Dmanisi, Georgia. The discovery of a 1.8 million-year-old human ancestor, the most complete ancient hominid skull found to date, captures early human evolution on the move in a vivid snapshot and indicates our family tree may have fewer branches than originally thought, scientists say. (AP Photo/Shakh Aivazov)

The discovery of a 1.8-million-year-old skull of a human ancestor buried under a medieval Georgian village provides a vivid picture of early evolution and indicates our family tree may have fewer branches than some believe, scientists say.

The fossil is the most complete pre-human uncovered. With other partial remains previously found at the rural site, it gives researchers the earliest evidence of human ancestors moving out of Africa and spreading north to the rest of the world, according to a study published Thursday in the journal Science.

The skull and other remains offer a glimpse of a population of pre-humans of various sizes living at the same time—something that scientists had not seen before for such an ancient era. This diversity bolsters one of two competing theories about the way our early ancestors evolved, spreading out more like a tree than a bush.

Nearly all of the previous pre-human discoveries have been fragmented bones, scattered over time and locations—like a smattering of random tweets of our evolutionary history. The findings at Dmanisi are more complete, weaving more of a short story. Before the site was found, the movement from Africa was put at about 1 million years ago.

When examined with the earlier Georgian finds, the skull "shows that this special immigration out of Africa happened much earlier than we thought and a much more primitive group did it," said study lead author David Lordkipanidze, director of the Georgia National Museum. "This is important to understanding human evolution."

For years, some scientists have said humans evolved from only one or two , much like a tree branches out from a trunk, while others say the process was more like a bush with several offshoots that went nowhere.

This photo taken Oct. 2, 2013, in Tbilisi, Georgia, shows a pre-human skull, that was found in 2005 in the ground at the medieval village Dmanisi, Georgia. The discovery of the 1.8 million-year-old human ancestor captures early human evolution on the move in a vivid snapshot and indicates our family tree may have fewer branches than originally thought, scientists say. (AP Photo/Shakh Aivazov)

Even bush-favoring scientists say these findings show one single species nearly 2 million years ago at the former Soviet republic site. But they disagree that the same conclusion can be said for bones found elsewhere, such as Africa. However, Lordkipanidze and colleagues point out that the skulls found in Georgia are different sizes but considered to be are the same species. So, they reason, it's likely the various skulls found in different places and times in Africa may not be different species, but variations in one species.

To see how a species can vary, just look in the mirror, they said.

In this photo taken Oct. 2, 2013, ancient skulls and jaws of pre-human ancestors are displayed at the Georgia National Museum in Tbilisi, Georgia. The discovery of an estimated 1.8-million-year-old skull of a human ancestor found below Dmanisi, a medieval Georgian village, captures early human evolution on the move in a vivid snapshot and indicates our family tree may have fewer branches than originally thought, scientists say. It is the earliest evidence of human ancestors moving out of Africa and spreading north to the rest of the world. (AP Photo/Shakh Aivazov)

"Danny DeVito, Michael Jordan and Shaquille O'Neal are the same species," Lordkipanidze said.

The adult male skull found wasn't from our species, Homo sapiens. It was from an ancestral species—in the same genus or class called Homo—that led to modern humans. Scientists say the Dmanisi population is likely an early part of our long-lived primary ancestral species, Homo erectus.

This 2005 photo provided by the journal Science shows a 1.8 million-year-old pre-human skull found in the ground at the medieval village Dmanisi, Georgia. It's the most complete ancient hominid skull found to date, and it is the earliest evidence of human ancestors moving out of Africa and spreading north to the rest of the world, according to a study published Thursday, Oct. 17, 2013, in the journal Science. Next to it is a large rodent tooth for comparison. (AP Photo/Courtesy of Georgia National Museum)

Tim White of the University of California at Berkeley wasn't part of the study but praised it as "the first good evidence of what these expanding hominids looked like and what they were doing."

Fred Spoor at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, a competitor and proponent of a busy with many species disagreed with the study's overall conclusion, but he lauded the Georgia skull discovery as critical and even beautiful.

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.
Credit: Georgian National Museum

In this photo taken Oct. 2, 2013, in Tbilisi, Georgia, David Lordkipanidze, director of the Georgia National Museum, holds a 1.8 million-year-old pre-human skull and jaw found in 2005 in the ground at the medieval village Dmanisi, Georgia. The discovery of a 1.8 million-year-old human ancestor, the most complete ancient hominid skull found to date, captures early human evolution on the move in a vivid snapshot and indicates our family tree may have fewer branches than originally thought, scientists say. (AP Photo/Shakh Aivazov)

"It really shows the process of evolution in action," he said.

Spoor said it seems to have captured a crucial point in the evolutionary process where our ancestors transitioned from Homo habilis to Homo erectus—although the study authors said that depiction is going a bit too far.

The researchers found the first part of the skull, a large jaw, below a medieval fortress in 2000. Five years later—on Lordkipanidze's 42nd birthday—they unearthed the well-preserved skull, gingerly extracted it, putting it into a cloth-lined case and popped champagne. It matched the jaw perfectly. They were probably separated when our ancestor lost a fight with a hungry carnivore, which pulled apart his skull and jaw bones, Lordkipanidze said.

This 2005 photo provided by the journal Science shows a pre-human skull found in the ground at the medieval village Dmanisi, Georgia. The discovery of the estimated 1.8-million-year-old skull of a human ancestor captures early human evolution on the move in a vivid snapshot and indicates our family tree may have fewer branches than originally thought, scientists say. It is the most complete ancient hominid skull found to date, as well as the earliest evidence of human ancestors moving out of Africa and spreading north to the rest of the world. (AP Photo/Courtesy of Georgia National Museum)

The skull was from an adult male just shy of 5 feet (1.5 meters) with a massive jaw and big teeth, but a small brain, implying limited thinking capability, said study co-author Marcia Ponce de Leon of the University of Zurich. It also seems to be the point where legs are getting longer, for walking upright, and smaller hips, she said.

"This is a strange combination of features that we didn't know before in early Homo," Ponce de Leon said.

Explore further: Normal wear could explain differences in hominin jaw shapes

More information: "A Complete Skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the Evolutionary Biology of Early Homo," by D. Lordkipanidze et al. Science, 2013.

Journal reference: Science search and more info website

4.7 /5 (57 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

First early human fossil found in Africa makes debut

Mar 07, 2013

Just over 90 years ago a discovery was made that started a fascinating journey exploring human evolution in Africa. The Broken Hill skull was the first early human fossil to be found in Africa and evidence ...

Fossils hint at distant cousins to our ancestors

Aug 08, 2012

Our family tree may have sprouted some long-lost branches going back nearly 2 million years. A famous paleontology family has found fossils that they think confirm their theory that there are two additional ...

New Kenyan fossils shed light on early human evolution

Oct 03, 2012

Fossils discovered east of Africa's Lake Turkana confirm that there were two additional species of our genus—Homo—living alongside our direct human ancestral species, Homo erectus, almost two million ...

Recommended for you

New hadrosaur noses into spotlight

Sep 19, 2014

Call it the Jimmy Durante of dinosaurs – a newly discovered hadrosaur with a truly distinctive nasal profile. The new dinosaur, named Rhinorex condrupus by paleontologists from North Carolina State Univer ...

Militants threaten ancient sites in Iraq, Syria

Sep 19, 2014

For more than 5,000 years, numerous civilizations have left their mark on upper Mesopotamia—from Assyrians and Akkadians to Babylonians and Romans. Their ancient, buried cities, palaces and temples packed ...

New branch added to European family tree

Sep 17, 2014

The setting: Europe, about 7,500 years ago. Agriculture was sweeping in from the Near East, bringing early farmers into contact with hunter-gatherers who had already been living in Europe for tens of thousands ...

User comments : 58

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Osiris1
1.9 / 5 (32) Oct 17, 2013
Somebody get a DNA sample and compare it with several randomly selected individuals from the Tea Party caucus, like Ryan or Paul. Anyone who would give long speeches right out of Dr. Seuss, a small child book author, about 'green eggs and ham... is truly a lower form of man. Listening, painfully and exasperatingly, to tea party monologues of stupidity and idiotic non reason back up this impression. That is to say our species is so largely populated, that statistically unlikely throwbacks to our prehistory become possible.
dogbert
1.9 / 5 (17) Oct 17, 2013
Very interesting that these hominids were living outside of Africa 1.8 million years ago.
VENDItardE
2.1 / 5 (24) Oct 17, 2013
you clearly are a moron, Osiris1
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (20) Oct 17, 2013
I like the gist of your comments,Osiris, but why presuppose that our forebears were like the unsophisticated brutes of the Tea Party? Who knows what level of culture existed among the Neanderthal. If the Tea Party were given full reign, we would see genocidal history repeat itself. It's always the gentle-natured creatures that are wiped out by the marauders.
El_Nose
3.5 / 5 (4) Oct 17, 2013
@osiris

DNA is fragile and does not last very long -- maybe 50-80k years
Urgelt
5 / 5 (6) Oct 17, 2013
"...a small brain, implying limited thinking capability..." -- Marcia Ponce de Leon

This widely-held belief was debunked long ago. Once you get a brain case as large as any member of the genus Homo possessed, even the tiny brain case belonging to Homo Floresiensis, what's critical to intelligence is corrugation in brain tissues, brain topology and connections, not volume.

Linking volume to intelligence among hominids is no more scientific than phrenology.
dtxx
1.8 / 5 (19) Oct 17, 2013
Very interesting that these hominids were living outside of Africa 1.8 million years ago.


Just more evidence to prove the existence of your magical sky wizard right?
kevin_buckeye_3
1.9 / 5 (14) Oct 17, 2013
Awesome discovery!

It's wild to know that humans branched out like a tree...Rather than a bush effect.
Different species coexisting is just mind boggling!
Shootist
2.3 / 5 (23) Oct 17, 2013
Somebody get a DNA sample and compare it with several randomly selected individuals from the Tea Party caucus, like Ryan or Paul. Anyone who would give long speeches right out of Dr. Seuss, a small child book author, about 'green eggs and ham... is truly a lower form of man. Listening, painfully and exasperatingly, to tea party monologues of stupidity and idiotic non reason back up this impression. That is to say our species is so largely populated, that statistically unlikely throwbacks to our prehistory become possible.


Ahhh, arrogance and stupidity all in the same package, how efficient of you.
verkle
1.1 / 5 (26) Oct 17, 2013
I don't believe that evolution is scientific nor true, but I do believe that we all came from a single species. I'm glad to see this study at least suggest that much.

JVK
1 / 5 (16) Oct 17, 2013
Extension of my model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution across what some people thought were different species of humans should surprise no one. Even the location where skull 5 was found will be only mildly surprising to readers of Greg Bear's science fiction novels: Darwin's Radio and Darwin's Children. His story about the evolution of a new species of human began in Georgia, like this one does. But obviously, Greg Bear was toying with his readers. He had individuals of the NEW human species from Georgia communicating with pheromones, when it has become perfectly clear that all humans have been communicating with pheromones for many years, just like every other species on the planet.

http://www.socioa...ew/20553

In case you missed it, Skull 5 is yet another refutation of mutation-initiated natural selection, since it is clear that the changes in other skulls are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled.
VendicarE
3.4 / 5 (5) Oct 17, 2013
Species Definition

a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding.

---

It follows from this definition that if two members of two different reproducing groups can not mate and produce fertile offspring then the parents are not the same species.

It follow from this that by the nature of the definition, humans must have originated from a single species.

dgreyz
5 / 5 (3) Oct 18, 2013
@VendicarE, I'm not sure what your point is, but that's not what they're trying to say. They're saying that it was thought there were many different hominid species in the past. But these new findings suggest these various hominids might actually all been the same species after all.

So, these hominids might not have spread into many sub-species (like a bush with many sub-branches) but more like a tree, having just a couple of main branches instead.

The reason for thinking there were so many sub-species was because of their differences. However the article suggests that this doesn't have to be the case, since we see huge differences in humans today while they all belong to the same species.
akaryrye
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2013
I don't believe that evolution is scientific nor true, but I do believe that we all came from a single species. I'm glad to see this study at least suggest that much.


akaryrye
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 18, 2013
And i believe unicorns from mars will be gathering their believers and leaving earth a wasteland soon. forget scientific evidence contrary to this, i have faith!

a wise man once said: "For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (13) Oct 18, 2013
I don't believe that evolution is scientific nor true

But then again: you are not part of the scientific community (nor any other community that actually benefits humanity)..so who cares what you believe? It means nothing to anyone.

For all humanity cares you could believe in something as insane as god.
EnricM
1.7 / 5 (17) Oct 18, 2013
... is truly a lower form of man.


You should be ashamed of yourself for your lack of palaeontological knowledge. There is enough proof that Teabaggers ([i]Teafautores stolidum[/i] originated during the Cambrian explosion and have not changed since !
DarkHorse66
3.4 / 5 (9) Oct 18, 2013
@El Nose
@osiris DNA is fragile and does not last very long -- maybe 50-80k years

You beat me to the punch,but you might want to stretch those figures a bit:
http://news.natio...science/
http://news.disco...ered.htm
Even the half-life of DNA appears to have been worked out:
http://www.nature...-1.11555
http://www.livesc...ife.html
I do wonder one thing though; since some claim to know that the Earth is only ca 6000years old, I wonder what a creationist version of carbon dating would look like, to fulfill the need to always arrive at a number that fits the bible..?Or do they 'just have faith' that numbers like '1.8M' are plucked out of a hat?Btw, for those who don't believe in decay rates as clock devices, nuclear decay&their1/2-lives are exactly the same thing.
CheersDH66
TransmissionDump
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 18, 2013
DH..
1.8M / 300 = 6000 years
because 300 is the magic number of spartans and therefore proves that the bible and creationism is real because the magic bit at the time of creation was being saved up for Battle of Thermopylae.

Think about it man..... it's irrefutable.
RAVaught
1 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2013
I for one am actually really glad to see this.

"Lordkipanidze and colleagues point out that the skulls found in Georgia are different sizes but considered to be are the same species. So, they reason, it's likely the various skulls found in different places and times in Africa may not be different species, but variations in one species."

It's about damn time a little common sense entered into the equation.
JVK
1 / 5 (14) Oct 18, 2013
I don't believe that evolution is scientific nor true

But then again: you are not part of the scientific community (nor any other community that actually benefits humanity)..so who cares what you believe? It means nothing to anyone.


I am part of the scientific community and care to attempt to ensure that others believe in biological facts -- not ridiculous theories that involve mutation-initiated natural selection, which eliminates the requirement for nutrient selection so that the millions of years theory can be propagated.

The single species theory evidenced by Skull 5 puts our lineage back into the context of the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution that we know occurs in every other species on the planet. Nevertheless, there are obviously people here that think believing in biological facts is somehow inappropriate. They have their theories, for comparison.
Minotaur
4.5 / 5 (8) Oct 18, 2013
I don't believe that evolution is scientific nor true, but I do believe that we all came from a single species. I'm glad to see this study at least suggest that much.



Who cares what you "believe". This is science.Not myths and fairy-tales.
Minotaur
3.9 / 5 (8) Oct 18, 2013
It's no wonder the USA is ranked really low among industrialized nations.Both,in healthcare and education.

Even the Catholic church has accepted Evolution.

Signed,a lover of science,and an atheist
JVK
1.3 / 5 (15) Oct 18, 2013
Signed,a lover of science,and an atheist


What experimental evidence do you think supports your anonymous atheistic approach? Mutation-initiated natural selection has never been experimentally demonstrated, which means mutation-driven evolution is nonsense, not science.
akaryrye
5 / 5 (4) Oct 18, 2013
sometimes i wonder to myself why we haven't advanced further as a species ... then I read the comments on phys.org and remember that we still have a long way to go.
Captain Stumpy
1 / 5 (11) Oct 19, 2013
Or do they 'just have faith' that numbers like '1.8M' are plucked out of a hat?Btw, for those who don't believe in decay rates as clock devices, nuclear decay&their1/2-lives are exactly the same thing.


cant speak for all but the few I know think scientists pull numbers out of their hat ... even with explanation and proof...

some people just will not learn because if they did, it would challenge their self delusion and would force them into reality and they would not have an excuse for their behavior. this is especially true of xtian who ont like to fact check, and prefer to just "accept" the words of the elders of the church, etc
depth12
not rated yet Oct 19, 2013

this is especially true of xtian who ont like to fact check, and prefer to just "accept" the words of the elders of the church, etc


This is true for all religions including jew, muslim etc. Why single out christian have you ever conversed with a muslim(with delusions) he is more brainwashed than any other religion.
JVK
1.1 / 5 (12) Oct 19, 2013
Nei (2013) Mutation-Driven Evolution "...natural selection is an evolutionary process initiated by mutation. It does not have any creative power..." http://www.amazon...99661731

Islamic Creationist: "Evolutionists Cannot Account for the Origin of the Sense of Smell" in "The Miracles Of Smell And Taste" http://harunyahya...ter/5050

The de novo creation of olfactory receptor genes links the sensory environment directly from the epigenetic "landscape" to the physical landscape of DNA and the de novo creation of species-specific pheromones controls reproduction.

Kohl (2012) "Olfaction and odor receptors provide a clear evolutionary trail that can be followed from unicellular organisms to insects to humans (Keller et al., 2007; Kohl, 2007; Villarreal, 2009; Vosshall, Wong, & Axel, 2000). http://www.socioa...38/20758

Experimental evidence supporting mutations theory? None
Noumenon
2.7 / 5 (23) Oct 19, 2013
I like the gist of your comments,Osiris, but why presuppose that our forebears were like the unsophisticated brutes of the Tea Party? Who knows what level of culture existed among the Neanderthal. If the Tea Party were given full reign, we would see genocidal history repeat itself. It's always the gentle-natured creatures that are wiped out by the marauders.


Perhaps the neanderthal was not as susceptible by stupidity, to be victimized by media propaganda via cartoonish caricatures, as those who are fooled to believe that 'Tea Party' people, regular Americans, who simply demand fiscal accountability in the context of a near bankrupt government, are morons and are anti-science.

Here is a liberal Yale professor who was forced by scientific analysis to conclude that he himself was such a victim of media propaganda.
arq
1 / 5 (1) Oct 19, 2013
@urgelt,

Its all of those.
Telekinetic
1.5 / 5 (16) Oct 19, 2013
If the Tea Party, a glorified lynch mob, wanted accountability, they would hang George W. Bush for his crimes of waging costly wars that benefitted his cronies while draining the U.S. Treasury. The Southern Tea Party faction is a racist mob who want to see the South "rise again" with white supremacy and segregation. Those who use the term "elite" for intellectuals, are rabble rousers that we've seen time and again during the rise of fascism.
aroc91
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 19, 2013
If the Tea Party, a glorified lynch mob, wanted accountability, they would hang George W. Bush for his crimes of waging costly wars that benefitted his cronies while draining the U.S. Treasury. The Southern Tea Party faction is a racist mob who want to see the South "rise again" with white supremacy and segregation. Those who use the term "elite" for intellectuals, are rabble rousers that we've seen time and again during the rise of fascism.


How very relevant.
Noumenon
2.8 / 5 (24) Oct 19, 2013
If the Tea Party, a glorified lynch mob, wanted accountability, they would hang George W. Bush for his crimes of waging costly wars that benefitted his cronies while draining the U.S. Treasury. The Southern Tea Party faction is a racist mob who want to see the South "rise again" with white supremacy and segregation. Those who use the term "elite" for intellectuals, are rabble rousers that we've seen time and again during the rise of fascism.


Your ignorance is rather astonishing.

-It wasn't a crime to have invaded Iraq. Congress voted to do so, including 43% of democrats. Many prominent democrats, including Clinton (both), Kerry, Pelosi, Al Gore, Albright, Ted Kennedy, Graham, Rockefeller, etc, believed Saddam to have been a potential threat with WMD's.

- Obama is responsible for adding 60% to the national debt. Obama added more to the debt in 3 years than Bush did in 8. He will double it by time he's done.
Noumenon
2.8 / 5 (24) Oct 19, 2013
The Southern Tea Party faction is a racist mob who want to see the South "rise again" with white supremacy and segregation. Those who use the term "elite" for intellectuals, are rabble rousers that we've seen time and again during the rise of fascism.


The racism charge is completely baseless and invented by anti-conservative media. There are racists in every group including liberal democrats and the NAACP, thus finding a few says nothing about the Tea Party policies and ideas. As I said, you were an easy victim of propaganda and it is clear given your over-the-top slander of them, that you have little common sense.
Telekinetic
1.3 / 5 (12) Oct 19, 2013
Moderate and Party Line Republicans are scared shitless that the Tea Party will bring the whole party down by its negative public perception. Even conservative politicians think the Tea Party members are crazy Yahoos that have to be conceded to or they'll be seen as weak and easy prey for the liberals. They'll just be an embarrassing glitch in political history like McCarthyism.
Liquid
1 / 5 (4) Oct 20, 2013
I agree with this article.

Do a google search for portraits found on floor and walls of La Marche caves, i.e., (perceptions.couk.com/real-art.html). This makes me think their hypothesis could be possible.

Its weird seeing some images of modern looking humanoids mixed in with some with very ancient looking features.
Humans like beauty and to classifiy into castes, and perhaps the features of the more ancient looking were not allowed to reproduce and were bred out.
mike3
not rated yet Oct 20, 2013
I don't believe that evolution is scientific nor true

But then again: you are not part of the scientific community (nor any other community that actually benefits humanity)..so who cares what you believe? It means nothing to anyone.

For all humanity cares you could believe in something as insane as god.


So do you think that to "actually benefit humanity" you have to be a genius?

"It means nothing to anyone" -- that "anyone" should be amended to "any *scientist* worth his/her salt". I'm sure it means a ton of a lot to anti-evolution religious fundamentalists and other anti-scientific groups. None of whom I agree with -- and I'm also a member of no groups that "actually benefit humanity" at all.

Also, a lot of people believe in God. That's not a proof or disproof of God's existence, it's just to show what "humanity" cares about.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (23) Oct 20, 2013
Moderate and Party Line Republicans are scared shitless that the Tea Party will bring the whole party down by its negative public perception.


Congressional approval rating is down across the board, and Obama's as well, down near Bush's 36% in some polls. The perception amongst voters is nearly the same, which is remarkable since most of the media paints the democrats in the best light possible,50% Consider GOP Congressional Agenda Extreme; 46% Say Same of Democrats.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (23) Oct 20, 2013
Even conservative politicians think the Tea Party members are crazy Yahoos that have to be conceded to or they'll be seen as weak and easy prey for the liberals. They'll just be an embarrassing glitch in political history like McCarthyism.


Conservatives and the Tea Party members are simpatico wrt fiscal accountability and limited government. The two groups differ only wrt political strategy. The Tea Party strategy worked in the 2010 elections, as they put the RINO's on notice and were not satisfied with the big spending Bush era republicans. It is true though that in terms of political strategy they can be self defeating.
aroc91
1 / 5 (2) Oct 20, 2013
Moderate and Party Line Republicans are scared shitless that the Tea Party will bring the whole party down by its negative public perception. Even conservative politicians think the Tea Party members are crazy Yahoos that have to be conceded to or they'll be seen as weak and easy prey for the liberals. They'll just be an embarrassing glitch in political history like McCarthyism.


I think you're a crazy Yahoo for posting irrelevant shit like this on random articles.
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (8) Oct 20, 2013
@aroc91
At least I don't resort to using sock puppets like orac and Karl Kognition, dummy. .
aroc91
1 / 5 (2) Oct 20, 2013
As if getting into completely unrelated arguments is any better than your (completely false) assertion. The fact that you still bring that up is unbelievably petty.

Karl Kognition? Why would I make a sockpuppet, use if for commenting over the course of 5 days, and desert it? Also, as I've told you before, orac and I have obvious ideological differences. I have a long history of supporting Ethelred.

Noumenon
2.8 / 5 (20) Oct 21, 2013
Skulls are gross and junk, that's what I think about it.

------------------------------
As if getting into completely unrelated arguments is any better than your (completely false) assertion. The fact that you still bring that up is unbelievably petty.

Karl Kognition? Why would I make a sockpuppet, use if for commenting over the course of 5 days, and desert it? Also, as I've told you before, orac and I have obvious ideological differences. I have a long history of supporting Ethelred.



What does the last three posts of yours have to do with the topic at hand? How would you know that "Karl Kognition" posted over the course of five days then not used again.

Also, aroc = orac^-1,.... hmmmm.
Telekinetic
1.4 / 5 (11) Oct 21, 2013
Speaking of sock puppets:

toot | VendicarH | Dalriada | TheSicilian | open

Mute cowards all.
aroc91
not rated yet Oct 21, 2013
How would you know that "Karl Kognition" posted over the course of five days then not used again.


Post history is readily visible on your profile. I seriously have to point this out?

also, aroc = orac^-1,.... hmmmm.


Telekinetic also pointed out this anagram. By his logic, that means you must be his sockpuppet.
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (10) Oct 21, 2013
Telekinetic:1.4 / 5 (9) Feb 13, 2012
"I seem to be consistently rated one star by an "orac" who, according to his profile, has yet to make a comment. Is this what's known as a sock puppet? I thought for a moment that it was an anagram of the poster named "aroc91", but then no one would be that stupid or obvious."- Telekinetic Jan.15

"That's completely beside the fact that using an obvious anagram as an alt is absolutely stupid."- aroc91/ORAC (today)

You're such a nincompoop, you don't even realize you copied my
sarcastic post word for word and are now using it to defend yourself!
scottfos
not rated yet Oct 21, 2013
"fewer branches than some believe" != "single species" people.

this skull - and some of the latest findings around Denisovan - only give us glimpses. John Hawks believes there were many overlapping human migrations, of many branches of humanoids, and most (but not all) models seem to point in that direction.

fascinating stuff
aroc91
not rated yet Oct 21, 2013
Telekinetic:1.4 / 5 (9) Feb 13, 2012
"I seem to be consistently rated one star by an "orac" who, according to his profile, has yet to make a comment. Is this what's known as a sock puppet? I thought for a moment that it was an anagram of the poster named "aroc91", but then no one would be that stupid or obvious."- Telekinetic Jan.15

"That's completely beside the fact that using an obvious anagram as an alt is absolutely stupid."- aroc91/ORAC (today)

You're such a nincompoop, you don't even realize you copied my
sarcastic post word for word and are now using it to defend yourself!


Still insistent upon that? Pathetic. Coincidental rewording of a post I hadn't seen until you brought it up = evidence? If you say so.

Paranoia: A psychotic disorder characterized by delusions of persecution with or without grandeur, often strenuously defended with apparent logic and reason.
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (10) Oct 21, 2013
Karl Kognition not rated yet Aug 09, 2012
"No one is answering my questions and so far replies are dragging the discussion further and further off topic and contribute nothing of merit."

"I think you're a crazy Yahoo for posting irrelevant shit like this on random articles." -aroc91
aroc91
not rated yet Oct 22, 2013
This is helping your cause of posting political bullshit on articles about evolution how exactly?
DarkHorse66
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 22, 2013
@aroc91 and Telekinetic:
Is your little spat about sockpuppets &similarities between usernames really worth it?Please consider &think about the possibility that between the 2 of you, you are actually feeding a troll or 2. There have already been too many past arguments in various threads about which sockpuppet is being created by whom. It wouldn't be the first time that a puppetname has been created in such a way that it could be linked back to a legitimate username.One just needs to look at various ranking pages for that to become clear. Variations on GoOtto, Vendicar, etc are some basic examples.No doubt that one or2 might be being created by somebody of a similar name, but I rather suspect that most are created by others for the specific purpose of not just ratings trolling, but to see what discord they can create &feed off.And you 2 could have just given such a troll a hearty meal.The whole point is that(with this particular type)one can never REALLY tell, only guess at.
CheersDH66
aroc91
5 / 5 (1) Oct 22, 2013
Of course not. That's precisely why I questioned why he brought it up in the first place. He's obviousky deflecting from the issue at hand.
Captain Stumpy
1 / 5 (10) Oct 22, 2013
@ depth12

This is true for all religions including jew, muslim etc. Why single out christian have you ever conversed with a muslim(with delusions) he is more brainwashed than any other religion.


i singled out xtian because i was talking about xtian sientists... i know a few. and they do pluck numbers out their ..er... hat. Met plenty of muslims, but they were not scientists, they were combatants.

but i figure ANY "religious" scientists is pretty much under the same delusion. if you have to bend your facts to fit your theory, it is wrong. there is no room for religion in science. period.
Telekinetic
1.4 / 5 (11) Oct 22, 2013
This is helping your cause of posting political bullshit on articles about evolution how exactly?

Your concern isn't about how I help my cause, your concern is how I've exposed you as a sock puppet using loser.
aroc91
not rated yet Oct 22, 2013
Something that I know is false and you can't prove even if it were true. I told you to get in touch with the site admin to check IP logs. I suppose you never got around to that?

Why would I give enough of a fuck about ratings to make Karl, use it for 5 days, and stop? Does that make any sense to you?

The extent of your victim complex is astounding.
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (10) Oct 22, 2013
Let me ask you this, then, aroc91: Have you ever used a sock puppet on this forum?
aroc91
not rated yet Oct 22, 2013
No. It's juvenile and serves absolutely no purpose.
Paul Greene
1 / 5 (12) Oct 23, 2013
It is my opinion that every single similar discovery, and there are dozens of them, proves man was always man and never an ape. More than that, it proves that the single African origin is not a valid theory. As shown in a recently released e-book called A Time of Change, we have the 1.3 million years old shoeprints at Puebla, Mexico, that were conveniently labeled as weather marks, proving man existed on this planet and lived in organized, developed community much, much earlier than the timeline created by either evolutionists or creationists. At one point we will have to reconsider our understanding of the evidence and look for a rational explanation for the nature of man and the universe, something only quantum physics can help us with, not ideological biology and genetics or religion.