Meave leakey fossil million years dating
Tattersall continued, “And it supports the view that the early history of Homo involved vigorous experimentation with the biological and behavioral potential of the new genus, instead of a slow process of refinement in a central lineage.” Bernard Wood of George Washington University, who has studied the early Homo fossil record, wrote in a companion article in Nature, “In a nutshell, the anatomy of the specimens supports the hypothesis of multiple early Homo species.” Dr.Wood then weighed the pros and cons of placing the new fossils with the species H.A commentary in Nature Magazine by Daniel Lieberman of the Department of Paleontology, the George Washington University, says the new fossil is "presumed to have evolved…" [Nature, March 22, 2001] The Washington Post report says: "If it turns out that the newly discovered species did eventually evolve into modern humans…." That's a big "if" that will likely take years to determine.The Los Angeles Times admits: "Only about 30 fragments of skull and jaw were found, but no long bones or ribs.The 1470 specimen was two million years old; the new face and fragmentary jaw are 1.9 million to 1.95 million years old; the better-preserved lower jaw is younger still, at 1.83 million years old.
It bears a striking resemblance to the enigmatic cranium known as 1470, the center of debate over multiple lineages since its discovery in the same area in 1972.
So much about the creature is still guesswork." The Boston Globe says: "It is difficult to establish that flat-faced man was even a new species, because there are simply too few fossils available for comparison." A commentary in Nature Magazine admitted that of the 30 fossil fragments found, only 2 have been actually assigned to flat-faced man. According to the data, Flat-faced man is/isn't an ancestor of modern man?