Evidence of stone tool use a million years before Darwinists had assumed. How many advanced spaceage civilizations rose and fell within that million years of unaccounted for technological development?
Science Daily: Oldest Evidence of Stone Tool Use and Meat-Eating Among Human Ancestors Discovered: Lucy's Species Butchered Meat.
ScienceDaily (Aug. 11, 2010) — The evolutionary stories of the Swiss Army Knife and the Big Mac just got a lot longer. An international team of scientists led by Dr. Zeresenay Alemseged from the California Academy of Sciences has discovered evidence that human ancestors were using stone tools and consuming meat from large mammals nearly a million years earlier than previously documented. While working in the Afar Region of Ethiopia, Alemseged's "Dikika Research Project" team found fossilized bones bearing unambiguous evidence of stone tool use -- cut marks inflicted while carving meat off the bone and percussion marks created while breaking the bones open to extract marrow.
The bones date to roughly 3.4 million years ago and provide the first evidence that Lucy's species, Australopithecus afarensis, used stone tools and consumed meat. The research is reported in the August 12 issue of the journal Nature.
"This discovery dramatically shifts the known timeframe of a game-changing behavior for our ancestors," says Alemseged, Curator of Anthropology at the California Academy of Sciences. "Tool use fundamentally altered the way our early ancestors interacted with nature, allowing them to eat new types of food and exploit new territories. It also led to tool making -- a critical step in our evolutionary [sic] path that eventually enabled such advanced [sic] technologies as airplanes, MRI machines, and iPhones."
-759725.jpg){kind=link}
10 comments:
If the dating is accurate, it doesn't harm evolution in any way. It's probably not accurate, the evidence is kinda sketchy.
Technology evolves due to trade and the sharing of ideas, should I not conclude that self replicating genes evolve?
Stone tool use cannot possibly have evolved in 2 million B.C. because it already preexisted in time in 3 million B.C.
Technology evolves due to trade and the sharing of ideas, should I not conclude that self replicating genes evolve?
Those are two different things. Biological evolution, gives rise to creatures that are more and more capable of manipulating the environment in an efficient manner.
Technological evolution arises from requirements like imagination, forethought, material science and other factors. There are animals today that make tools, but none that can "see" an axhead inside a rock. That's a big leap.
If Lucy's people could make stone tools, then let's see them. They haven't found any, just scrape marks on bones. I'd like some physical proof.
Stone tool use cannot possibly have evolved in 2 million B.C. because it already preexisted in time in 3 million B.C.
So you agree with this new study?
Why?
This study provides evidence that contradicts the false evolutionary claim that stone tool use evolved in 2 million B.C.
Furthermore the article provides yet another million years of advanced technological development to human history that is unaccounted for and ignored by the Darwinist fairy tale myth.
Again, science is self-correcting. Why is it that I keep running into folks who do not understand this? Nothing in science is held as absolute fact.
Evolution is true, but how did it happen, and when did major events take place.
Do you want folks to apologize when new facts are brought to light?
SFX: phone ringing
"Um... look, Brian, we had that one thing wrong with the stone tools and the apes and we just wanted to say we were wrong about it. It was a really strange time, and I had a grant to write and papers to grade, and I just don't know where my head was at... are we good now? Great. I gotta go make 6.5 billion more phone calls..."
Not gonna happen. Get the fuck over it. This discovery will be shown right or wrong one way or another and science will move on, absorbing this new knowledge and building on it.
You want to think of it as dogma, but it isn't. You can sit there in the dark and howl with demialist glee every time science moves forward, or you could write a paper, think an original thought for once in your life...get published and take criticism, review and maybe you'll advance science just a teensy bit.
But that's not gonna happen either.
I love how you use the Latin [sic] trailing sciency words like evolution as if you are qualified to do so.
It really highlights your bullshit victimized denialist agenda.
What's next?
"HIV is the cause of AIDS [sic]"
Myth may also be a reality. Mythological facts are not averse to scientific investigation. We know that some solar systems other than ours have binary star (Sun). Ours has only one Sun. But there may be a possibility that our solar system might also have binary star some millions or billions year ago. It is written in Hanuman Chaleesa:”Bal samay Ravi bhaksh liyo tab teenahu lok bhayo andhiyaro” in English it mean that during his childhood Hanumanji had gobbled up Sun and darkness spread in entire universe. But this is cosmological phenomena. This not possible for some super natural power who assumes physical frame on this Earth Planet to gobble up Sun. The other Sun(?) might have met Its natural death. Hanumanji is believed as the Incarnation of Lord Rudra. According to Hindu Mythology Lord Rudra is the God of Destruction or God of Annihilation.
Post a Comment