Slashdot Log In
Oldest Skeleton In New World Discovered
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Thu Sep 04, 2008 11:25 AM
from the god-is-burying-tests-again dept.
from the god-is-burying-tests-again dept.
Death Metal Maniac writes "Dubbed Eva de Naharon, or Eve of Naharon, the female skeleton has been dated at 13,600 years old. If that age is accurate, the skeleton along with three others found in underwater caves along the Caribbean coast of the Yucatán Peninsula could provide new clues to how the Americas were first populated. The skeletons' skulls hint that the people may not be of northern Asian descent, which would contradict the dominant theory of New World settlement. 'The shape of the skulls has led us to believe that Eva and the others have more of an affinity with people from South Asia than North Asia,' González explained."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
this can't be right (Score:5, Funny)
Imposible, as every one in florida knows the world is only 6000 years old
Re:this can't be right (Score:4, Funny)
I recall when a excavation was taking place of some Mycenae survivals. A room was discovered. The resident archeologist was speculating that this must be a household temple similar to the Lars niche found in later Roman ruins. A worker on the site suddenly piped up: "Sure looks like a toilet to me.." And so it proved to be.
In the middle ages, fabulous tales of a kingdom in the east under the king "Prester John" were told and scoffed at till Marco Polo brought back stories far more fabulous.
Much of Antrhopology, Archeology, and History is speculation. Pure and simple.
I would not discount any story no mater how loony till it is PROVED to be false. And "proved" to me means passign the litmus test of the fellow holding the shovel, not the prestigious doctor with the fancy degree and not a lick of common sense..
Parent
Re:this can't be right (Score:4, Funny)
It's all true. Years and days were longer before. You see, the Sun started from a stand still and slowly picked up speed in it's rotation about the Earth as time went on.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps you too could show some respect for those who are diverse in their opinions and ideas
Perhaps creationists could provide an opinion to this discovery? If they did, would it be respectful?
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Informative)
You don't know Jack Chick [wikipedia.org]
Evolutionists don't go to court to get science taught in Sunday School. Creationists go to court to get their Sunday School taught in Science classes. That's pretty assholish...
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed, it is time to put an end to these barbaric religions.
I recently sent a funny email about creationist idiocy to a friend. Here's the response I got back:
==================
you kid, but we Texas people know the reality of crazed parental notions. I am reminded of my first experience in small town Texas where I was told "you don't use the rod?" and the woman proceeded to pull out a leather replica of a ruler with embossing that said "the ROD of GOD" on it.
I nearly fell out. That and the accompanying "you must spank your child until they cry with tears of repentance"
And this regarding [name of kid kept private] who was TWO at the time and reluctant to potty train. She no more knew what sin or redemption was than she could explain quantum physics. Yet I was to punish her over lack of bowel control upon demand.
===================
Really. I call for zero tolerance for "biblical" morality. You wouldn't let a kid be taught that 2 + 2 = 5, or that the earth is flat, or that the earth is the center of the solar system. Don't teach them that the bible is the full truth and spirit of an all-powerful, all-knowing being who created everything, either.
The bible is an archaic, brutal, ridiculous text of ancient folklore. Nothing else. Seriously, read it cover to cover, not in cherry-picked bits and pieces. And if you're a christian, do not park your god-given powers of reason and logic at the door. Consider the possibility that the bible itself is the work of satan, and that God gave us reason and logic in his own image. The true religious mission is to learn about the universe from the universe itself. To hell with the bible, where it belongs.
On second thought, carry on. My children will need some good, obedient servants when they get older.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Informative)
...The bible is an archaic, brutal, ridiculous text of ancient folklore...
You are obviously misinformed about the nature of this unique book. There is no other one like it.
Even if you do not accept the Bible as truth, or as God's message to mankind, you certainly should be able to consider that it is a very unusual book. Actually it is a collection of 66 books penned by 40 different writers over a time span of at least 1500 years. Yet it has a very unified central authorship and message concerning the dealings of God with mankind. Much of it depicts human history, some of it written down before it ever took place. Some of this history, written in advance, is taking place right before our very eyes in our time. We can read the content of tomorrow's newspaper headlines in some of the passages of the Bible.
For thousands of years, all human writing had to be laboriously copied by hand. When the art of printing was finally invented by Johannes Gutenberg, guess which human writing was first printed? Guess which human writing is distributed more widely than any other and translated into more languages and dialects than any other? Guess which book its enemies have endeavored to destroy more than any other? There are many religious writings, but none of them come even remotely close to the content and distribution of this remarkable book.
(..and that God gave us reason and logic in his own image..)
Exactly, and that is why we read in the Bible:
Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, says the LORD;...
It is an admirable and good goal, which is encouraged in a number of biblical passages, to study the universe which the Creator God of the Bible brought into being. It is a good thing to learn about the theories and ideas of Einstein or other great scientists, but it is quite a greater honor and higher goal to get to know such people personally and interact with them face to face.
That is the ultimate goal the Creator God of the universe has in mind for you and me. He gave us humans not only the ability to observe and learn about his creation, but wants to honor us, by inviting us into a face-to-face, one on one relationship with himself.
Jesus DEFINES eternal life to be this knowledge of God:
John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
This is not something you get after you die. You can experience it today, but only if you want to and are willing to believe.
The Bible is not about the religious trappings and rigmarole, which organized religion has brought us, but an intimate loving relationship which God desires for us humans, whom he has created in his image and likeness. If you were to dare read the Bible with that desire in your heart, it would become a new book to you.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Funny)
"hey, you really shouldn't be dating a pig!"
You should remember that Slashdot is an international community. Some of our English speaking members come from island nations where interpersonal relations of an ovine or porcine nature are not always frowned on save by the Kirk.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
My beef with (most) creationists is that they also think:
* That my girlfriend (wife, now) should really not be so uppity to believe she should have a career and exercise her mind and opinion Instead, she should be barefoot in the kitchen, continually pregnant, and look to me as head of the household as Christ is head of the church.
* That my children should not be taught to think, but rather think exactly like they do, and ignore most things that science and reasoned investigation have revealed.
* That 90% of those 6.6 billion people (i.e., the ones not like them), not to mention nearly everyone who has lived before, are going straight to hell and damnation, whether they are moral or not.
So I don't think I'll apologize and respect their diverse opinions.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
But I guess the whole study of paleontology is an ignorant falsehood. My bad. I'm probably the one off the mark here.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
Respecting someone's right to an opinion and respecting their opinion are two completely different things. I respect other peoples right to an opinion, but that doesn't mean I have to respect the opinion itself. Quite frankly, I think that people who seriously believe in creationism need to be checked into the loonie bin.
No, they just need a better understanding of what the scientific method is and how it works. In all my years of school, the vast majority of the time spent learning "science" has revolved around reading a book full of assertions, with nothing presented to the reader for the purposes of backing those assertions up.
To be clear, I'm not claiming that scientists dictate assertions to the rest of us. I now know that there is a method, with checks and balances, but the impression I got in school was always that science was a list of terms to memorize, and an occasional fact or process that needed to be explained "in your own words". In short, I wasn't learning what science is or how it works. I was seeing the product, instead of the process, and that kind of thinking is what allows creationism to flourish in, otherwise, reasonable people.
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
There are some things which aren't a matter of "opinion", and holding an opinion contrary to measurable fact is, well, senseless.
People who claim the Earth is flat may have an "opinion", but since their opinion is directly falsifiable, it's not a very good opinion. It's one they hold onto irrationally in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The people who haven't been able to adapt their view of their creator god to actually encompass reality ... well, that just makes no sense. Heck, if the Catholic Church can accept that fossils are real and actually millions of years old, anyone fanatically clinging to the notion that the Earth is 6000 years old ... well, they're not even trying to be rational. They're just holding onto a notion and saying "la la la" when someone tries to tell them truth.
This isn't about respecting differences in subjective things. This is about claiming that objective reality has been faked. That's just plain irrational.
Cheers
Parent
Re:Everyone? (Score:5, Funny)
backs away without making eye contact ... OK, sure thing there chief. Whatever works for 'ya.
Cheers
Parent
Re:this can't be right (Score:5, Insightful)
There IS evidence for creationism? Really? That IS news. You'd think if there were some actual, real, credible, verifiable, reproduceable and refutable evidence for it, it wouldn't just be a small percentage of crackpots who believe it to be true. Even the Jews, who wrote the book you believe to be inerrant, know it to be a fairy tale.
Parent
Re:this can't be right (Score:4, Insightful)
What beliefs are you talking about? The decay of radioactive isotopes is pretty much stable. There are some small derivations from the ideal geometric sequence though, but they are depending on the distance between Earth and Sun and Sun activity. They account for about 1/300th of the medium rate. So if the age of the bones is estimated at 13600 years, the small derivations of the decay rate would change this to 13600 years +/- 25 years. Not really something to lose sleep over, right?
What you probably are talking about is that the relation between C14 and C12, which was thought to be constant during history is not as constant as expected. So the estimated margin of error was larger than expected, and some dates had to be corrected up to 15%. But still: With an estimated age of 13600 years, 15% would be about +/- 2000 years. So the bones could be 15600 years old, but also 11600 years could be correct. Still, this means that the bones had to be created 6012 years ago with an age of at least 5600 years.
Parent
Oh my God! (Score:5, Funny)
Underwater for so long! Is she okay?
Ethnic group migration (Score:4, Interesting)
Isn't it at least plausible that the group "Eva" belongs to lived in Northern Asia, despite having characteristics that we would now identify with Southern Asia? Perhaps a later group migrated in that direction, driving Eva's group over the land bridge much in the way ethnic groups worked in Europe (subsequent waves tending to push preexisting ethnic groups).
40,000 year old footprints (Score:4, Insightful)
Although a slightly older skeleton is news, doesn't anyone remember in Mexico? [bbc.co.uk]
The more I read about archaeology and ancient history, the more I think that the conventional view is as Ford called it, "bunk."
Re:40,000 year old footprints (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of archaeology and ancient history is supposition in view of the facts that we do have or think we have. That is how science works, continuously reviewed and revised until no further revisions can be found.
The fossil record (such as it is) has holes in it, and it will never be as complete as the living record was. Only where evidence was preserved is there anything to use for guessing what life was like 10, 14, 20 more millenniums ago.
It's actually fair to suggest that mankind was as intelligent as we now find modern man to be, just without the same science and knowledge. I'm sure sun worshipers were as neighborhood friendly as those people that stop by to invite me to go to church with them on Sundays now. The rub is that we simply do not have records of what happened then.
Judging on the shape of the skull and other items found around the skeleton is a good guess, but hardly CSI accurate despite advances in science. Only through an abundance of evidence can we say with any veracity why a skeleton would be wearing a necklace with tiger claws on it. It's a guess. So one skeleton cannot determine how the Americas were populated, but will add fuel to the fire that says it was not simply northern Asians crossing over to Wasilla and moving on.
Then, IMO, just as now, people who move to a region do not all come from only one source region. To assume so is not fair, and shows shallow thinking as to the resourcefulness of humankind.
Parent
One Theory... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've heard one theory that the Polynesians et all actually were forced out of northern Asia to the south and the east. They walked over the bridge and floated through the oceans to all the little islands, and the New World. There, they found another people, who they had to fight to survive; being from a hostile background, they were better fighters.
So they chased the inhabitants down throughout the Americas, to the very tip of Argentina and Chile. Most of the men were killed and most of the women were taken, however several thousand took to the ocean, and floated along the West Wind Drift.. to Australia!
(The theory was based on genetic evidence that a chickens were introduced to the New World by Polynesians, and that there is a genetic trail on some human female populations in S.A. that links them to Australians.)
Dear Mom and Dad, (Score:4, Funny)
I know you don't approve of Chou because he's from the North, but I LOVE HIM and WE'RE GETTING MARRIED! I'm running away with him and his family, so by the time you learn how to read, I'll be gone. Chou's just bought a boat, and we're going to sail north until we find a New World to live in. Maybe one along the coast so we can surf, ya know?
I'll leave it up to you to tell Liam that I've gone. I couldn't marry a Celt anyway! All that red hair on his face? YUCK!
I know you wanted to me to stay and grow rice and stuff, but I really just want a life where I can soak up the sun and tell everyone to lighten up.... And who knows? Thousands of years from now, maybe they'll find my remains and it'll ROYALLY screw up their view of ethnic migrations, cause you and I KNOW that the only people who ever sail north and never come back are from the North. I mean, who'd be dumb enough to jump to a conclusion based on one person? AS IF!! Oh well -- as long as I'm famous, ya know?
Sorry about never seeing you again and stuff. Hugs and kisses!
Zang
Duh (Score:3, Interesting)
I was playing Civilization the other day, doing an earth simulation and I was playing as Japan. One of my first strategies was to research Astronomy so that I could build Galleons and go colonize the Americas before anyone else could. Having colonized all of the islands in southern Asia (and Australia) it was just obvious what I had to do next. Clearly the early south Asians were thinking along the exact same lines.
You scientists and your crazy fossil and skeleton digging. There are simpler ways people!
Re:Duh (Score:5, Funny)
I was playing Civilization the other day, doing an earth simulation and I was playing as Japan. One of my first strategies was to research Astronomy so that I could build Galleons and go colonize the Americas before anyone else could. Having colonized all of the islands in southern Asia (and Australia) it was just obvious what I had to do next. Clearly the early south Asians were thinking along the exact same lines.
"We must research Astronomy so we can build galleons and colonize the Americas!"
"Shut up, Oggthog, and stop drinking the fermented rice. We're almost out of Woolly Mammoth Burger and it's almost time for Volcano Appeasement Day."
"(grumble, grumble)...one day we'll harvest steam to power great engines and link our centers of distribution..."
"What are you talking about?"
"Nothing dear...just sharpening my spear..."
Parent
Dominant theory? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Dominant theory? (Score:5, Informative)
The predominant theory for several decades has been the Beringia model, where North Asians out of Siberia migrated across Beringia (which now sits beneath the Bering Sea), but couldn't get any further until the glaciers had sufficiently receded somewhere around 12,000 years ago to permit access into the interior of North America. This model is most certainly true, for at least those Siberian populations that came that way.
What the few finds of what appear to be non-North Asiatics suggests is that peoples out of South Asia most likely gained access to North America even during the last glacial period. These peoples may have simply boated from South Asia, skirting along the coasts. Evidence out of Alaska and British Columbia suggests that even during this period there were "oases" that were not covered in ice, where such people could have found food.
What I would suggest, however, is that such a migration path would likely be fairly limited. There wouldn't be sufficient resources to support a larger-scale migration like Clovis, and thus these South Asian migrants probably never had the population density of the later North Asian migrants, who, within a couple of thousand years, seem to have occupied virtually ever region within the Americas (suggesting larger founder populations). These people were likely, like so many small indigenous populations, sublimated into the Clovis peoples.
There are more waves than that to be sure. The Inuit arrived in the Americas somewhere around 6000 years ago, and there's some suggestion that Polynesian peoples may have made it to the Americas, though my understanding is that that's not a foregone conclusion.
Parent
Re:Dominant theory? (Score:4, Funny)
but couldn't get any further until the glaciers had sufficiently receded somewhere around 12,000 years ago
The Brain: Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
Clovis: I think so, Brain, but where are we gonna get two sticks to rub together?
(a generation passes)
Thag, son of Clovis: What are we gonna do this generation?
The Brain, son of The Brain: The same thing we do every generation, Thag. Try to take over the New World.
Parent
Wait a minute... (Score:3, Funny)
how old's old? (Score:4, Funny)
Eve of Naharon
No, just John McCain's first girlfriend. *rimshot*
Thanks for clearing that up... (Score:5, Funny)
"Dubbed Eva de Naharon..."
Huh?
"...or Eve of Naharon
Oh, ok, got it!
Crossing from South to North Asia... (Score:4, Interesting)
Crossing from South to North Asia is no more difficult, than crossing from North to South America or, indeed, from Asia to Europe — where even the recent Romans had to battle "endless" Eastern tribes.
So, the theory, that people crossed Bering's Straits into Northern America (Alaska) and then populated both continents, already assumes migrations far more distant, than a travel from Southern Asia to Norther would require...
And finally, next time you are in Cancun, ask a Yucatani Mexican, where the Mayas are from, and he'll tell you, they are related to Mongols (and by the looks of them, he may be right)... Mongolia is neither the Southern nor Northern Asia, but smack in the middle...
Wait...SOUTH ASIA?? (Score:5, Funny)
Old news (Score:5, Interesting)
The skeletons were found back in 2001 and 2002 and they were carbon dated no later than 2004, probably before that, though.
They don't say, but I suspect they're talking about the Ox Bel Ha cave system (Ox is the Mayan word for "Three" and is pronounced "Osh"), which is the largest underwater cave system in the world and it's actually something that's probably worthy of a Slashdot post in itself, if it weren't also old news.
I lived in that area for 3 years and I'm friends with 2 of the divers that discovered and mapped the Ox Bel Ha [mexicocavediving.com] system.
The Yucatan peninsula is studded with sink holes called "cenotes". They're filled with fresh water (though there are areas where the salt water comes in and creates a salt/fresh water interface called the halocline, which looks wicked cool. It's kind of like oil and water) and look like a bunch of very circular ponds, except they're often fairly deep and interconnected by caves. Skeletons are a pretty common find in them, but most are far more recent (from the Mayan period) and are largely believed to be sacrificial.
I can't find the stories now, but I recall some stories suggesting that some of the indigenous people of South America were believed to have been descendants of lost fisherman from South-East Asia. It seems plausible that there could have been groups that arrived in Mexico as well.
Re:Amazing! (Score:5, Funny)
No, they found Sarah Palin's world view.
Parent
Re:Amazing! (Score:5, Funny)
Vote McCain - Vote MILF!
Have you got MILF? Vote McCain!
My personal fantasy....
I'm McCain with a really hot MILF millionaire wife (which he already has) who wants to 'experiment'. I get a MILF of a VP and THREESOME in the Whitehouse! WoooHOOO!
Parent
Re:Amazing! (Score:4, Insightful)
If you do not believe in Science, can you really a run a country this complex?
Parent
Re:Amazing! (Score:5, Funny)
Look who's running it now. Apparently, you can.
Cheers
Parent
Re:Amazing! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Cue the /. Creationists and their rationalizati (Score:4, Funny)
This should be fun, and by fun, I mean a wholly depressing insight into the cognitive ability of some grown adults.
Let me know when you're done with this quote so I can use it as my sig. Thanks!
Parent
Re:Silly. (Score:5, Funny)
The Earth *IS* only 6,000 years old. Give or take 4.54 billion years.
Parent
Re:Silly. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Silly. (Score:5, Funny)
Scary, but that DOES go along with how I feel some Monday mornings....
Parent
Re:Well, it hasn't (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Well, it hasn't (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
kiloyears? That sounds awfully science-y to me...
He's a witch!
Re:Silly. (Score:5, Funny)
What would you be if you are atheist and not an evolutionist?
Given the body of scientific data to backup evolution theory, I believe the correct term would be "idiot".
Parent
Re:its easy to understand populating the new world (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't let facts get in your way. Such as the fact that the current Icelandic population is descended from Scandinavian roots. Never mind that your assumption of 'Asian' descent is based on 'obvious' characteristics rather than any actual information.
Parent
Re:Mormans are right! Lost tribes found (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, everyone knows the plural of Morman is Mormen.
Parent