Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's Oldest Human Footprints

Comments Filter:
  • Well (Score:4, Funny)

    by GigsVT (208848) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @02:38PM (#5504958) Journal
    This is obviously wrong, the earth is only a little more than 5000 [creator-creation.com] years old.
    • I am not a physicist (IANAP?), but from what I do know about the subject shows that he is... well...

      fscking nuts.
    • by jsse (254124)
      This is obviously wrong, the earth is only a little more than 5000 [creator-creation.com] years old.

      This is a series of science paradox which show one scientific estimation is in contradiction with another. They may look very funny at the first glance, but they actually help us reconsider the validity of commonly adopted scientific assumptions.

      I can't really comment on the earth rotation part as I'm not expert in this field, but his comment on electromagnetic decay is already answered by recent(not re
  • by tchdab1 (164848) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @02:38PM (#5504963) Homepage
    The Onion reports the oldest evidence ever found for athlete's foot.
  • by MarvinMouse (323641) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @02:39PM (#5504971) Homepage Journal
    They found a strange building they've called "the worlds oldest Chinese Mann's Theatre", and also in the ground they found the cryptic words:

    "Charles Heston"
    and two handprints.

    Scientists are trying to decode this strange oddity.
  • Actually ... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Quixotic Raindrop (443129) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @02:41PM (#5504985) Journal
    The article points out that footprints in the 3.5 million years old range have been found, these are just the oldest footprints of Stone Age humans.
    • oops. Make that the oldest footprints ... my mistake! They were 3.5M yo., but of a pre-human species.
    • Re:Actually ... (Score:4, Informative)

      by reverseengineer (580922) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @05:07PM (#5506391)
      Well, they're footprints of a recent precursor to modern humans, Homo heidelbergensis, which is believed to be the forerunner of both H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens There are some paleoanthropologists, however, who think that H. heidelbergensis (I just love that name) might only be the direct ancestor of Neanderthals and that the break between H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens occurred earlier.

      It is also interesting to note that these footprints indicate that they were made by beings which were approximately 4.5ft (1.5m) tall, though H. heidelbergensis remains suggest that adults of the species may have been as tall as 6 feet (1.9m). Thus, as the article suggests, these footprints may have been made by children- or they made be from a completely different hominid species.

      • There are some paleoanthropologists, however, who think that H. heidelbergensis (I just love that name)

        Do you think they were great swordfighters? I mean, if they all went to Heidelberg...

  • by tellurian (90659) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @02:54PM (#5505124)

    see here [gnome.org].
  • by gnovos (447128) <.ten.deppihc. .ta. .sovong.> on Thursday March 13, 2003 @02:56PM (#5505150) Homepage Journal
    I TOLD them to keep off the lawn...
  • by ivanandre (265129) <ivan,tamayo&gmail,google,com> on Thursday March 13, 2003 @03:25PM (#5505449) Journal
    ...the equivalent of the first post!

    Who can argue with that?
  • How do they know it is from a prehuman species? Is that just speculation taken from the when they are believed to have been formed? There is nothing in the print that points to this, right?
    • Re:prehuman? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Bonker (243350) on Thursday March 13, 2003 @04:11PM (#5505882)
      You can tell a lot from the footprints, such as the shape of pelvis bones, relative age and weight of the print maker, frequently the gender of the print-maker... all from the angle of the foot prints. If the prints are the correct proportions for 'human' and have the correct angles for a human walker, then scientists can probably narrow it down to being human prints with great accuracy.
      • They said that the prints are probably of children about 4-foot-6 using the standard ratio of foot size to height. The prints done appear of good enough quality to tell any more.
      • For more on this, may I suggest any of Tom Brown Jr's books [barnesandnoble.com]? He's written both manuals (which, as you'd expect are rather dry, but highly informative) and biographical story books, which are just as educational, but also very entertaining.

        If you've never heard of him (and most people haven't) Tom Brown Jr [trackerschool.com], is one of the foremost experts on the lost art of tracking. He first started to learn the art as a young boy from his best friend's grandfather, who was a displaced Apache scout.

        Today, he's a world re
  • They knew they age of the footprint by the age of the dog crap that was stepped in.
  • You go and pour some fresh concrete or volcano mud, and some idiot goes and writes their initials in it, or steps there. It was the same then as it is now.

    Who left the 56 footprints is not clear. But their discoverers suggest either late Homo erectus or Homo heidelbergensis -- two early human species found in Europe during the Paleolithic era, also known as the Stone Age.
    When they find the guy that did it, they're going to be MAD!

    yo.

  • Slashdot title:
    World's Oldest Human Footprints

    From the article:
    Other scientists said that while the prints appear well-preserved, they add little to knowledge about human evolution, since footprints of far older human ancestors have been found.

    Seems like a contradiction to me.

    • World's Oldest Human Footprints



      Other scientists said that while the prints appear well-preserved, they add little to knowledge about human evolution, since footprints of far older human ancestors have been found.

We have a equal opportunity Calculus class -- it's fully integrated.

Working...