New species of ancient human unearthed in Ethiopia casting doubts on Lucy as mother of mankind
A NEW species of ancient human has been unearthed, scientists report, suggesting our family tree is more complicated than was thought.
New species of ancient human unearthed ... A cast of an upper jaw fragments and teeth of Australopithecus deyiremeda, a fossil find in Ethiopia giving further evidence that the well-known "Lucy" species had company. Picture: Laura Dempsey / Cleveland Museum of Natural History via AP
IN 1974, anthropologists in Ethiopia found the astonishing fossilised remains of a human-like creature who last walked the planet some 3.2 million years ago.
Was “Lucy,” as the hominid was called, the direct ancestor of Homo sapiens? Was she “The Mother of Mankind,” as some headlines claimed?
Over the years, the dramatic assertion has come under attack by doubters, who point to ancient yet inconclusive finds in Kenya and Chad.
But a new fossil, published in the journal Nature on Wednesday, may have dealt Lucy’s claimed status an irreversible blow.Another species of hominid lived at the same time and in the same Afar region of Ethiopia, according to the paper.Named Australopithecus deyiremeda, the hominid and Lucy are probably only part of a wider group of candidates for being our direct forerunners, the finders said.“The new species is yet another confirmation that Lucy’s species, Australopithecus afarensis, was not the only potential human ancestor species that roamed in what is now the Afar,” said Yohannes Haile-Selassie of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History.“Current fossil evidence ... clearly shows that there were at least two, if not three, early human species living at the same time and in close geographic proximity.”
The find, in the Woranso-Mille area of the Afar region, comprises fossilised remains of an upper and lower jaw, dated to a range of 3.3-3.5 million years ago.
This overlaps with the range given to Lucy, of 2.9-3.8 million years ago. The bones are clearly different from Lucy’s, with teeth of different size, shape and enamel thickness and a more robust lower jaw, said the study.
They were found in March 2011 on top of silty clay in the Burtele area, about 500 kilometres (325 miles) northeast of Addis Ababa and 35km north of Hadar, where Lucy was found.
The estimated age is derived from radioactive dating of the soil and “paleomagnetic” data, which traces changes in Earth’s magnetic field, recorded in iron-bearing sediment, as a calendar.
The name “deyiremeda” means “close relative” in the language of the Afar people.
To belief in the Unseen is to believe in the existence of Dinosaurs and a 'Begotten Son' that had once walked the Earth...
Heated debate
Understanding the human odyssey has always been a fraught business, complicated by the rarity of fossil finds and sometimes fierce squabbles about where — or even if — they should be placed in the family tree.
The same team had previously found the 3.4-million-year remains of a foot in the same region, but were unable to assign the fossil to a particular hominid species.
“Some of our colleagues are going to be sceptical about this new species, which is not unusual,” Haile-Selassie admitted.
“However, I think it is time that we look into the earlier phases of our evolution with an open mind and carefully examine the currently available fossil evidence rather than immediately dismissing the fossils that do not fit our long-held hypotheses. ”Only a week earlier, anthropologists shook the coveted position held by Homo habilis, the hominid deemed to have come before Homo sapiens.
Habilis — “handy man” in Latin — has traditionally been enshrined as a benchmark of hominid smartness, endowed with a bigger brain and greater dexterity than his predecessors.
But earlier hominids may have had some of his skills, if the May 20 study is right.
It reported finding the world’s oldest stone tools in north-western Kenya. The implements date back to around 3.3 million years ago, which is some 500,000 years before Habilis emerged and 700,000 years before the first known Habilis tools.
Ancient humans had sex with a mysterious species, scientists discover
HUMAN diversity in recent past was much greater than we once expected and we weren’t opposed to intraspecies cavorting, research shows.
HUMANITY has a filthy secret: our ancestors used to have sex with members of other species.
That’s the finding in a new piece of research which suggests ancient people used to romp with a “ghost” species of proto human.
We are just one of a number of species known as hominins. Members of this family include Neanderthals and Denisovans, which are no longer found on Earth.
“It seems that interbreeding between different early hominin species is not the exception — it’s the norm,” said Omer Gokcumen, assistant professor of biological sciences at the University of Buffalo.
Gokcumen tested the DNA of humans living in Sub-Saharan Africa and found genes which were “wildly different from versions found in other modern humans”.
These genes probably trace back to prehistoric rumpy pumpy which probably took place about 150,000 years ago between our ancestors and a mysterious species.
“Based on our analysis, the most plausible explanation for this extreme variation is archaic introgression — the introduction of genetic material from a ‘ghost’ species of ancient hominins,” Gokcumen added.
“This unknown human relative could be a species that has been discovered, such as a subspecies of Homo erectus, or an undiscovered hominin.
“We call it a ‘ghost’ species because we don’t have the fossils.”
People living today would be a lot more like Neanderthals had it not been for a quirk of evolutionary fate.
If you read the Book of Genesis literally then either religion is wrong or the scientists are wrong. Both cannot be correct. So those who want both to be correct argue that you cannot read Genesis literally but must read it metaphorically. Only then would both religion and science agree.
Hence the six days of Genesis have to be interpreted in ‘God days’ and not earth days of 24-hour cycles. So one ‘God day’ could, for example, be 500 million or 1 billion years.
In that case each ‘God day’ would not be of equal length. If each ‘God day’ is 500 million or 1 billion years then this would explain the age of earth: 4.5 billion years. But then how do you explain the age of humans, which is only 3-3.5 million years old, when the day humans were supposed to have been created was 500 million or 1 billion years ago?
As you can see the maths just do not add up if we go by the Genesis account of the Creation. The ‘God days’ have to be of unequal length and the final ‘God day’ the shortest day of all.
Okay, assuming that the ‘God days’ are not the same as earth days, how then can we explain the day and night, light and darkness, that Genesis talks about when the day and night that Genesis refers to is the same day and night that we get because of the earth’s rotation, which is 24 hours?
The story of the Creation from Genesis is very crucial to Judaism, Christianity and Islam. If that Book were debunked then the very foundation that these three religions rest on would shatter. It all starts from the beginning. And if the beginning were flawed then everything that comes thereafter would not have a leg to stand on.
Anyway, the Great Flood was supposed to have occurred around 4,400 years ago. The Ice Age ended around 11,500 years ago. Around 10,000 years ago there was already a very advanced civilisation in India. There is also evidence that Hinduism already existed around 9,000 years ago.
But everything was supposed to have been wiped out 4,400 years ago and only Noah and his family existed. The evidence, however, shows that this is not so.
So what is the conclusion you can arrive at from all this? The conclusion is do not read too much. Just listen and believe without thinking. That would make your life less complicated.
How do you prove that God exists? God exists because we are here. The fact that we are here means some higher power must have created us. Hence that higher power has to be God. So, since we exist, then God must also exist. If God did not exist then we would not be here.
Does this make sense? It certainly does to those who believe in a religion.
So and so is our Prophet sent down by God. And our Prophet told us that he is the true Prophet and that his religion is the true religion. How do you know this? The Holy Book says so. Where did this Holy Book come from? It came from our Prophet and was written by the followers of our Prophet more than 100 years after he died.
Does this make sense? It certainly does to those who believe in a religion.
So you see, any argument is a good argument if you already believe in something. Your belief is intact. It does not waver. It is only that you need to justify and defend this belief. So the argument is not to help you believe. You already believe. The argument is to explain and justify your belief and make it sound sensible and credible.
You already believe in your religion. You already believe in your Prophet. You already believe that there is a God. Your arguments are to make sense of a belief that would not normally make sense unless you can argue your belief. In that same spirit, you already have a political belief. And to make sense of this political belief you also need to put forward various arguments to defend this belief.
This is called arguing in circles. Arguing in circles would be as follows. My religion is correct because my Prophet says so. My Prophet is correct because the Holy Book says so. The Holy Book is correct because it came from God through my Prophet.
We must remember that the Old Testament Bible was still being written up to 200 years before the birth of Christ (meaning they were writing the history of humankind thousands of years after the event). But then where was this source of reference? The only evidence that some of what they say happened actually did happen was not discovered until almost 2,000 years later between 1946 and 1956 in Qumran.
And the evidence to all these events, the Dead Sea Scrolls, that was discovered just 50-60 years ago, not only confirms some of these stories but also points to some flaws in what we had believed for 2,000 years.
Genesis reports that humankind started 4,000 years before the birth of Christ. However, between Genesis and Exodus there is a gap of 400 years in the story of humankind. Then there is a further gap of 400 years between the end of the Bible’s story on humankind and the birth of Christ. So there is a total gap of 800 years in the 4,000 years history of humankind (400 years between Genesis and Exodus and 400 years before the birth of Christ).
Man has certain God-given rights. And amongst those rights is the right or freedom to believe. The argument goes: if God did not want you to think, you would not have been given a more superior brain than other creations. You would act based on instinct, like animals, rather than based on rational, like humans are supposed to do.
The difference between Man and Animals is such that Men are given thoughts. A brain to think; to think what is supposed to be a myth, a truth or the reality and to differentiate those thoughts so as to adopt that thoughts as a belief.
Once you belief your faith shall not be shaken by other thoughts or ideology.
Who really shapes those puny thoughts in a Man’s brain? Is a belief based on facts or myths or is a belief a God-Will act?
Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived — OSCAR WILDE.
Give me the child for his first seven years and I will give you the man — THE JESUITS.
Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience. When submitted as evidence, such statements are called hearsay evidence. Hearsay evidence is generally not accepted in court. The general rule is that all relevant evidence are prima facie admissible, except for hearsay and opinion.
Rationale for the hearsay rule
hearsay is not the best evidence
the risk of errors in transmission (misreporting and inaccuracy through repetition)
the demeanour of the original source is lost
hearsay statements are normally not on oath
the maker of the statement cannot be cross-examined
to avoid fraud, concoction or fabrication
to save time at the trial and prevent multiplicity of issues
to avoid surprise and prejudice
the defendant's right of confrontation
Luke 1:1-2 says his story is handed down to his generation so that means he is not an eyewitness but is writing from hearsay. Matthew also lets slip that he is writing long after the event and was not a witness to the events.
Matthew quotes Jesus as telling Peter that ‘upon this rock I will build a church’. Peter must have been very confused with this statement because churches did not exist yet at that time so no one had any clue of that concept. So Matthew was not writing about the past but about the ‘present’ when churches already existed then.
Matthew 10.38 quotes Jesus as saying ‘He who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me’. However, Jesus did not know yet at that time that he would be arrested and crucified. John 10:17 then quotes Jesus as saying ‘Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it up again’ when even Jesus did not know yet that that was going to happen.
Luke 2:1-4 says Jesus was born in the year of the universal tax census when Augustus was Caesar and Quirinius was the governor of Syria. Mathew, Mark and John do not mention this, though. The error here is that Quirinius was not the governor then and he became governor in 6 CE. And, according to the Roman records, the first census was done during the reign of Vespasian in the year 74 CE.
Matthew then says that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great who died four years before Jesus was supposed to have been born and ten years earlier than what Luke reported.
Mark says that just weeks before his death Jesus travelled to Jerusalem followed by a multitude of people. He travels to Galilee, then Capernaum, crosses the Jordan River, and goes to Jericho, Bethphage and Bethany before entering Jerusalem.
John, however, says that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, ‘which caused a great sensation’, and this enraged the Chief Priest and Pharises, who then plotted to kill him. From that time on Jesus stopped travelling openly and went into hiding.
According to Mark, Matthew and Luke, Jesus died at 3.00pm on the afternoon of Passover, which is the 15th of Nisan of the Jewish calendar. John, however, says that Jesus died on the day before Passover, which is on the 14th of Nisan. However, all four Gospels ‘agree’ that it was on a Friday. So it is either Friday the 14th or Friday the 15th.
John tells us that when it was time for Jesus to be crucified he would not let anyone else carry the cross up the hill. Matthew, Mark and Luke say that Simon of Cyrene helped Jesus carry the cross.
While on the cross, John tells us that Jesus said ‘woman, behold your son’. Mark and Matthew tells us that Jesus said ‘My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?’ while Luke tells us tell us that Jesus said ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing’.
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were supposed to be Jews so that means they would know Jewish laws, customs and traditions of that time. However, according to Haim Cohn, the Attorney General of Israel who later became Justice of the Israeli Supreme Court, what the Gospels reported regarding the trial of Jesus could not have happened because it goes against the legal system of that time.
The Gospel writers also do not seem to understand Jewish politics of that time. The Pharisees and the High Priest, who was a Sadducee, would never collaborate and conspire against Jesus because they hated each other and were bitter enemies. The Pharisees, in fact, regarded the High Priest as a Roman running dog or a ‘trained monkey’.
Then the Gospels tell us that Pilate resorted to the Jewish tradition during Passover of releasing the prisoners to the crowd and let the crowd decide who they want killed — Jesus or Barabbas. However, the Jews had no such tradition and neither did the Romans.
Mark tells us that Jesus travelled on the Sea of Galilee where there were storms and high waves. Actually it is just a small fresh-water lake fed by the Jordan River and is about the same width as Lake Geneva in Switzerland and less than one-third its length — and there are no storms and high waves there either.
Mark tells us that Jesus disembarked in Gerasa, which is actually 30 miles inland. Matthew then tells us that Jesus disembarked in Gadara, which is eight miles inland. So both those places are not ports.
Je suis Nazir
“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it,” said Voltaire, the 17th-18th century French Enlightenment writer, historian, and philosopher who was famous for his attacks on the established Catholic Church, and his advocacy of freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and separation of church and state.
I would say, “Je suis Nazir.” It is time to understand and accept the meaning of freedom of opinion and freedom of expression. In a civil society there should no longer be any sacred cows that are out of bounds from comment and criticism. We should be free to express our thoughts and views.
None of the famous historians mention Jesus although they mention so many other even lesser events of the day. And even those one or two historians who were alleged to have made a passing remark about Jesus have been debunked as fakes and forgeries.
So, if you go by historical records outside the Gospels, Jesus did not exist. And if Jesus did not exist then the Bible and Christianity could not exist as well. Christianity was a fabrication over hundreds of years, created as a political tool and a means to control the population. It did not come from God. Freedom of opinion and expression means you must be allowed to say this without being threatened or accused of insulting Christianity or of attacking religion. Disagreeing is the very essence of freedom of opinion and expression. And if you have grounds for having the opposite view then you must be allowed to express them. This principle does not only apply to Christianity. It applies to all religions, Islam included. Did the Qur’an really come from God or Allah? Was the Qur’an even Arabic in the first place or was it written in some other language that was ‘Arabised’ over the centuries? Is the inscription in the Dome of the Rock really ‘Islamic’ or does it actually refer to Jesus? A reinterpretation of the inscription could point to Jesus rather than Muhammad because muhammad with a small ‘m’ would mean Jesus. Read that inscription again with muhammad as an adjective rather than a proper noun and see what you get. These are views that some people hold. And these views suggest that not only Christianity does not exist but Islam does not as well. But because Islam and Muhammad are sacred cows that attract a violent and physical response, people do not want to bother talking about their views. However, if we want a society where freedom of opinion and expression are paramount, then it has to be no holds barred. The principle should be, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Je Suis Nazir. Let us explain to those who believe in God that there is no evidence that God exists and the many religions that we fight and kill each other over are downright lies and did not come from a non-existent God.
They tell you that only the Qur’an is the true book of God and which came from God through the angel Gabriel. They tell you that the Bible is a distortion and has twisted the real teachings of Jesus. They tell you that Christianity does not exist and is an invention of Paul after Jesus had gone up to heaven. They tell you that Jesus never died on the cross or came back to life three days later. They tell you that the Trinity is a hoax and was invented more than 300 years after Jesus by a pagan, Constantine, to mislead the followers of Jesus. They tell you that the Bible is utter nonsense and is full of contradictions.
Yes, they tell you all this and more. But you have heard all this before, so many times. Yet you still attend these lectures to hear the same preachers you have heard so many times repeat the same thing you have heard so many times. You believe everything these preachers say. In fact, you have already believed this a long time ago and there is nothing new anyone can tell you to either strengthen your belief or change your belief.
(Voice of Beruk)
So is there any point in wasting your time attending lectures about what you already know and have heard so many times in the past delivered by people you have heard speak many times before and regarding issues which you believe without an ounce of doubt?
Yes, strange, is it not? Many people attend lectures (or ceramah) delivered by people they have already heard speak many times before regarding matters they have already heard mentioned many times before and about things they believe beyond any shown of doubt.
So why not seek new knowledge? Why not attend lectures by people from the ‘other side’?
In Every Action, there Is an equal and Opposite reaction... Put forth the Light For a Shadow to be form And a hidden Beast is Born!!! Between the Shadow and The Beast... Without Light there'll be no Shadow And without Darkness there'll be no Hidden Beast... A world of 2 forces coexist... In harmony and in rhythm truly.
These people will say that the Qur’an is the most ‘unreadable’ book ever published. The verses and chapters are so incoherent and not properly laid out. The Qur’an is not complete as a guide to how to become a proper Muslim that they needed to invent the Hadith to supplement the Qur’an and fill in the large gaps in the Qur’an.
The Qur’an without the Hadith is useless. It does not even teach you that Muslims must pray five times a day. You need the Hadith to teach you that. They will also tell you that if you read and understand the Qur’an then you will discover that Islam is not a religion of peace like Muslims claim but is actually a very violent religion.
These people will further tell you that Islam allows slavery and has never outlawed slavery and while Islam forbids extramarital sex and severely punishes those who indulge in adultery, even to the point of death, sex with slaves is not forbidden. Slaves are your property. So you can do whatever you like with your property, even have sex with them.
Yes, this and more will be what the ‘other side’ will tell you. So if you attend their lectures you will discover a lot of new information about Islam you have never before heard in your life. So far all the lectures you attended say wonderful things about Islam and negative things about all the other religions. But if you attend lectures by the ‘other side’ you will learn new things about Islam, negative things, which no one has told you before this.
And that is why you never attend lectures by the ‘other side’. You do not believe what they say because what they tell you are all lies. You only attend lectures by famous Muslim preachers because you only believe what these people tell you. So you do not want to hear ‘new things’ about Islam because you do not believe these ‘new things’. You only want to hear ‘old stories’ regarding Islam because you only believe these ‘old stories’.
I suppose this is a natural human trait. You already believe so you only want to listen to what you believe. And if someone tells you something that you do not believe you will refuse to listen. Truth and lies can be easily summed up as follows. Truth is what you believe and lies are what you do not believe.
And this is why we live in perpetual ignorance. Once we believe we believe and we will refuse to listen to any contradictions to these beliefs. We only want to hear the truth, which means what we believe, and will reject lies, which means contradictions to these beliefs. And that is why propaganda works — because people are prepared to believe in God even though no one has thus far proven that God exists.
In a world of belief, Is a tale and myth of a God that shall return and be arisen for the truth to reveal, in a Tale that ain't Right!!!So as To Undo the doing; To redo its makings.
Brothers against Brothers, Man against Man For there can only be ONE!!