Makes sense. A bunch of libs standing around gettting pecked in the head.

Researcher: Early Man Was Hunted by Birds
Jan 12 1:27 PM US/Eastern
Email this story

By ALEXANDRA ZAVIS
Associated Press Writer


JOHANNESBURG, South Africa


A South African anthropologist said Thursday his research into the death nearly 2 million years ago of an ape-man shows human ancestors were hunted by birds.

"These types of discoveries give us real insight into the past lives of these human ancestors, the world they lived in and the things they feared," Lee Berger, a paleo-anthropologist at Johannesburg's University of Witwatersrand, said as he presented his conclusions about a mystery that has been debated since the remains of the possible human ancestor known as the Taung child were discovered in 1924.



The Taung child's discovery led to the search for human origins in Africa, instead of in Asia or Europe as once theorized. Researchers regard the fossil of the ape-man, or australopethicus africanus, as evidence of the "missing link" in human evolution.

Researchers had speculated the Taung child was killed by a leopard or saber-toothed feline. But 10 years ago, Berger and fellow researcher Ron Clarke submitted the theory the hunter was a large predatory bird, based on the fact most of the other fossils found at the same site were small monkeys that showed signs of having been killed by a predatory bird.

Berger and Clarke had until now been unable to show damage on the child's skull that could have been done by a bird.

Five months ago, Berger read an Ohio State University study of the hunting abilities of modern eagles in West Africa believed similar to predatory birds of the Taung child's era.

The Ohio State study determined that eagles would swoop down, pierce monkey skulls with their thumb-like back talons, then hover while their prey died before returning to tear at the skull. Examination of thousands of monkey remains produced a pattern of damage done by birds, including holes and ragged cuts in the shallow bones behind the eye sockets.

Berger went back to the Taung skull, and found traces of the ragged cuts behind the eye sockets. He said none of the researchers who had for decades been debating how the child died had noticed the eye socket damage before.

Berger concluded man's ancestors had to survive not just being hunted from the ground, but from the air. Such discoveries are "key to understanding why we humans today view the world they way we do," he said.

Berger's research has been reviewed by others and is due to appear in the February edition of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

There was no welfare state 2 million years ago. The kid was a conservative, perhaps the first neocon.

If he was the first then he would have been the last...wishful thinking.

There goes the theory of evolution! Oh no!

Can't be a conservative. Their leaders Grog Bushgar and Dicgar Chenroc would have allowed the corp's to destory the nesting grounds so his buddies in the business world could make more profits. The birds would have been endangered. It was definately liberals standing around with picket stones protesting right wing conservative policy while demanding protection from the birds.
Liberals where almost bred out of exhistance until man created enough wealth and lesiure time for the recessive gene to reappear. it showed up in the early part of last century and the bitoching and moaning began again at a record pace.

I think Salmo is right. Neocon parents sent the kid out to lure the bird in and be pecked to death so they could study it's methods and maybe some day figure out a way to defeat it. Anybody else would have lured it in and bashed it with a stick.

A conservative invented Kentucky fried bird.
Liberal in Indian tanslates into " can't fish can't hunt don't know [Bleeeeep!]"

Liberal in Indian tanslates into "can't fish can't hunt don't know [Bleeeeep!]"
Since there are over 250 tribes recognized by the BIA, which one is this gem from?

tk- i thought you didnt believe that humans existed back then.......way before the bible claims that they were created.....

are you now a monkey humper??????????

Lupo,

Thats why I said it was a liberal. It's an ape and claimed to be an ancestor of man. Try to keep up with the class.

Look how small the skull is it has to be a lib.

Raymond Dart and the Taung Child (Australopithecus africanus)
In 1924 Raymond Dart was presented with a tiny fossilized face from a limestone quarry in Taung, South Africa. Dart named the tiny skull Australopithecus africanus. It is better known as the “Taung Child.” In an article for Nature magazine, Dart suggested that Australopithecus africanus was an extinct ape living between anthropoids and man.54 Most evolutionists believe the Australopithecus africanus is slightly younger than the afarensis at 2.8 million years old (refer to chart on page 52). Dart’s find is also considered to be of great value to evolutionary theory because of the position of the foramen magnum. The foramen magnum is the small hole at the base of the skull where the spine connects to the head. Evolutionists use it as an indicator of posture. For example, if the foramen magnum is at central base of the skull, evolutionists see that as evidence that the creature walked upright. If it is positioned toward the back of the skull, it indicates that the posture of the creature was slouched. According to Raymond Dart the impression of the foramen magnum in the Taung fossil is very close to the central base of the skull. Therefore, Dart proclaimed that his creature walked upright.

Are there also problems with Dart’s discovery? Again, the answer is “yes.” Once again the name is an admission. Australopithecus africanus simply means “Southern African ape.” Dart did not have the courage to call it an archaic human ancestor because the evidence did not support such a designation. Additionally, even the evolutionists have bickered over whether or not Australopithecus africanus is a human ancestor. Sir Arthur Keith, an expert anatomist and evolutionist, after analyzing the Taung skull, wrote in Nature magazine:

[Dart’s] claim is preposterous. The skull is that of a young anthropoid ape...and showing so many points of affinity with the two living Africa anthropoids, the gorilla and chimpanzee, that there cannot be a moment’s hesitation in placing the fossil form in this living group.55

Even the integrity and scholarship of Raymond Dart was called into question by his colleagues. Donald Johanson and James Shreeve described Raymond Dart as “over enthusiastic for speculation.”56 Unfortunately, this is a trademark of every evolutionist’s character. It takes an incredible gap in reason and an “over enthusiastic” urge to speculate in order for one to conclude that the Taung child is a human ancestor.

Finally, the impression of the foramen magnum in the Taung skull is not as clear as Dart would have everyone to believe. In fact, many paleoanthropologists who have closely examined the skull cannot even find the foramen magnum depression that Dart bragged about. Furthermore, the foramen magnum is an unreliable means in determining the posture of a creature. Its position on the skull varies in both humans and apes. Other anatomical evidence from Australopithecus africanus remains indicates that he did not walk upright. The Taung child (Australopithecus africanus) is nothing more than what it looks like — an ape. Any other conclusion would be nothing more than unfounded speculation!

Besides,
Like the intelligent design folks say, life on earth is too complicated to have evolved. It was designed by extraterrestrials.

Created by God or created by monkey humping?

I would rather believe people were created by God. Monkeys are still monkey's. Whales had the remenants of "appendages" 28 million years ago and by george what do you know, They still have them today! we find scorpions from the cretaceous period and magically they still look the same today. The celeocanth was thought to be extinct millions of years ago, all the while scientist were speculating on what it evolved to. Low and behold some fisherman catches one off the coast of Argentina and it looks the same today as the fossil record shows! Evolution is a crock, Its the biggest f' up scientist have made. Still taught in schools but still just a hypothesis.

Ya ,ya I know the fact that God created the Earth and everything that dwells here cant be proven scientifically either but my faith lies with God not Monkey's!

Yeah, lots of folks feel that way.

Uuuuum, for some people it is truly obvious they have not evolved.

Dave D.,
Microp is actually very sharp! He has tons of potential and lots of years left to realize it. Don't give up on him.

SS will do

Many theologians see no conflict between belief in God and evolution. They propose that God is creating the heavens and the earths from the void. In this view creation is still happening, on a time scale that is eons to humans but only an eyeblink to God. With perfect knowledge, God knew that the process of evolution would produce a multitude of species, all of which were and are good in his sight. God knew that evolution on earth would, over billions of years, which is but a moment to God, produce a species which is the pinnacle of creation...Steelhead.

all that omnipotence, yet . . . billions of years . . . the pinnacle of creation: steelhead. God must have the patience of Job.

Good point suckersnagger. Why is it that people are so self centered to believe that one of Gods days is the same as one of our days. Earth one day = 24 hours . Jupiters days are what? 36 of our days? Kind of like when we believed the solar system revolved around the Earth. For a being with no end and no begining a day could be a very very long time. God did create animals first so yes you can believe that the fossil record goes back millions of years and still have faith in God. Btw I happen to collect and prepare fossils that are 28 million years old. The claws are from Calianopsis c. A relative of the Ghost shrimp.