Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 142 posts

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#61

Post by Scriptor »

coldtea wrote: post #33
bnegreve wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where else could you find commenters that know better than the scientists authoring the Nature article in question, They don't know better, they try to understand better. Why not?

Does the comment strike you as "understanding" or even "trying to understand"? It paints a blanket picture, with no qualifications (read a few articles at best), and belittles what the scientists in general "do".

Also the point the commenter thinks they're original in making is the main point of the actual article.

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#62

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Closeness' (whatever you mean by that) doesn't really imply ancestry without some hefty presuppositions.

> 'Closeness' (whatever you mean by that) doesn't really imply ancestry without some hefty presuppositions Of course it does. It doesn't prove ancestry. But genetic similarity implies proximate shared ancestry. We can take microbes (or fruit flies), subject them to stress, let the survivors reproduce, and watch the genotypes branch into a diverse population. We can then take the observed path of genetic variation and…

You're making a whole lot of unfounded and unproven assumptions here!

For example: what if the current genetic diversity on Earth is the result of genetic engineering by ancient aliums?

That's a facile example, but there are serious deeper issues here. The mechanisms of gene transfer are too complex for us to explain presently, including things like viruses, horizontal transfer, etc.

You're assuming a simplistic darwinist model that we already know isn't true.

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#63

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

siempreb wrote: post #32
vasama wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean as opposed to humans and contemporary apes sharing common ancestors?

I mean we are a very different species, we have not evolved from apes, nor have apes evolved from fish. It is an idiot theory that doesn't serve us at all. These apes are not our ancestors fortunately, we are very fortunate to be real humans. I believe all species DNA are designed by our true ancestors. Imagine what is possible if technology evolves another 1000 years what we would be capable of! And it is incredibly…

It's a shame that you're being downvoted, although I'm hoping it's more because of your tone and language than for discussing alternative viewpoints.

The fact of the matter is that the theory of evolution is the best fit for the evidence we currently have available. It doesn't mean that it's "true", and of course scientific theories have been overturned in the past as new evidence has become available. So while the theory you put forward is certainly possible, I'm not familiar with any actual evidence for it. Can you point us to any?

(I'm genuinely curious and trying not to come across as facetious - apologies if it seems that way)

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#64

Post by [deleted] »

coldtea wrote: post #33
bnegreve wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where else could you find commenters that know better than the scientists authoring the Nature article in question, They don't know better, they try to understand better. Why not?

Does the comment strike you as "understanding" or even "trying to understand"? It paints a blanket picture, with no qualifications (read a few articles at best), and belittles what the scientists in general "do".

[deleted]

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#65

Post by mkl »

dahves wrote: post #47

Prof Haile-Selassie? Is Haile-Selassie a common last name or has he anything to do with the other Haile Selassie?

The parts of the name seem relatively common. There's a distance runner Haile Gebrselassie [1], and a soccer player Theodor Gebre Selassie [2], and others with no obvious connection to Haile Selassie.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haile_Gebrselassie

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Gebre_Selassie

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#66

Post by craigsmansion »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #62
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 'Closeness' (whatever you mean by that) doesn't really imply ancestry without some hefty presuppositions Of course it does. It doesn't prove ancestry. But genetic similarity implies proximate shared ancestry. We can take microbes (or fruit flies), subject them to stress, let the survivors reproduce, and watch the genotypes branch into a diverse population. We can then take the observed path of genetic variation and…

You're making a whole lot of unfounded and unproven assumptions here! For example: what if the current genetic diversity on Earth is the result of genetic engineering by ancient aliums? That's a facile example, but there are serious deeper issues here. The mechanisms of gene transfer are too complex for us to explain presently, including things like viruses, horizontal transfer, etc. You're assuming a simplistic darw…

> what if the current genetic diversity on Earth is the result of genetic engineering by ancient aliums?

What if? Obviously they must have engineered it such that current evolution theories have the best predictive value for their achievement. A clever bunch, no doubt, but unfortunately outside of the realm of science because it can't be falsified.

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#67

Post by GuiA »

throw0101a wrote: post #46

How do {archaeologists?, paleoanthropologists?} even know where to look for these things? "There's a whole bunch of land, let's dig... [throws dart at map] here."

The corollary of this is pretty awe inspiring - we find only a fraction of a percent of the fossil record that exists, and the fossil record that exists is only a fraction of a percent of everything that happened, all the species that existed, etc.

The fact that we can still derive meaningful knowledge out of that compounded fraction of fraction of a percent is amazing; and the quantity of mind blowing things that happened that we will never get to know because they weren't "recorded" is humbling.

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#68

Post by Yajirobe »

linnaeus wrote: post #57
Yajirobe wrote: post #56

How did they determine its age?

> A fossil hominin cranium was discovered in mid-Pliocene deltaic strata in the Godaya Valley of the northwestern Woranso-Mille study area in Ethiopia. Here we show that analyses of chemically correlated volcanic layers and the palaeomagnetic stratigraphy, combined with Bayesian modelling of dated tuffs, yield an age range of 3.804 ± 0.013 to 3.777 ± 0.014 million years old (mean ± 1σ) for the deltaic strata and the…

ELI5

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#69

Post by OJFord »

CathedralBorrow wrote: post #20
vfc1 wrote: post #2

Why does it have to be only one ancestor ape, and not several that evolved human-like features simultaneously in the same environment? We have Neanderthal DNA, that we inherited through interbreeding. Why can't both we and the Neanderthals be descendent from a varied group of very similar apes that interbred as well? Isn't this the most likely scenario? Sometimes I think scientists fall for the same simplistic patter…

HN is such an amazing community. Where else could you find commenters that know better than the scientists authoring the Nature article in question, and can then identify exactly why their own thinking is so much deeper than of most other people?

Every online newspaper's comment section?

Re: 3.8M-year-old skull of an early ape-like human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

#70

Post by JumpCrisscross »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #62
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 'Closeness' (whatever you mean by that) doesn't really imply ancestry without some hefty presuppositions Of course it does. It doesn't prove ancestry. But genetic similarity implies proximate shared ancestry. We can take microbes (or fruit flies), subject them to stress, let the survivors reproduce, and watch the genotypes branch into a diverse population. We can then take the observed path of genetic variation and…

You're making a whole lot of unfounded and unproven assumptions here! For example: what if the current genetic diversity on Earth is the result of genetic engineering by ancient aliums? That's a facile example, but there are serious deeper issues here. The mechanisms of gene transfer are too complex for us to explain presently, including things like viruses, horizontal transfer, etc. You're assuming a simplistic darw…

> what if the current genetic diversity on Earth is the result of genetic engineering by ancient aliums? [sic]

For purposes of explaining the last 4 million years of human evolution, it’s irrelevant whether conscious or unguided phenomena created forms even as recent as mammals.

> You're assuming a simplistic darwinist model that we already know isn't true

No, nobody is.

Retroviral horizontal transfer is fascinating, but it’s one of many mutation vectors. At the scale of speciation, the specific way a mutation arises can be largely ignored. (Creationism aside.)

Post reply on HN