A 3.2 Million-Year-Old Mystery: Did Lucy Fall From a Tree?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Lady Marva
    Senior Member
    • Wednesday, June 17, 2015
    • 13321

    #1

    A 3.2 Million-Year-Old Mystery: Did Lucy Fall From a Tree?

    Or did her bones get broken from the weight of sand on her................ interesting.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...b7Kz&ocid=iehp
    In 1974, the paleoanthropologist Donald C. Johanson led an expedition to Ethiopia to look for fossils of ancient human relatives.

    In an expanse of arid badlands, he spotted an arm bone. Then, in the area surrounding it, Dr. Johanson and his colleagues found hundreds of other skeletal fragments.

    The fossils turned out to have come from a single three-foot-tall female who lived 3.2 million years ago. The scientists named her species Australopithecus afarensis, and the skeleton was dubbed Lucy.

    Four decades later, Lucy remains one of the most famous discoveries in paleontology. Finding a single bone of that age would have been reason to celebrate; finding so much from a skeleton revealed a tremendous amount about Lucy — and about human evolution in general.

    Her death, on the other hand, has been a mystery. Now, after poring over the celebrated bones, a team of scientists has concluded that Lucy died most unceremoniously: killed by a long fall out of a tree.

    If they’re right, the discovery could yield an important clue to how our ancestors evolved from tree-dwelling apes into bipeds that walked the African savanna. But the new study has experts deeply divided. Some researchers are praising the research, while others, including Dr. Johanson, think the authors have failed to adequately make their case.

    The new study, published on Monday in the journal Nature, came about because Lucy’s skeleton — normally housed at the National Museum of Ethiopia — was taken on a tour of the United States in 2007. After a show at the Houston Museum of Natural Science, Lucy spent 10 days at the University of Texas at Austin, where scientists put her bones through a CT scanner.

    “We just decided, by golly, we were going to scan every little bit of Lucy because it may never be done again,” said John Kappelman, a paleoanthropologist at the university.

    Since then, Dr. Kappelman and his colleagues have painstakingly turned the scans into three-dimensional models, piecing together the virtual fragments to get a more accurate idea of their original shapes. Last December, he noticed a puzzling break in Lucy’s upper right arm.

    A look through surgical journals suggested that the break might be a so-called compressive fracture, in which a force pushes down on a bone, sometimes even driving one bone into another.

    What intrigued Dr. Kappelman was what could have caused such a compressive fracture: a fall from a great height. “It’s not something that would happen if you just tripped and fell,” he said.

    Dr. Kappelman printed out a human-sized, three-dimensional model of Lucy’s shoulder and took it to Dr. Stephen Pearce, an orthopedic surgeon at the Austin Bone and Joint Clinic. Dr. Pearce agreed that the break was a compressive fracture. Other orthopedic surgeons consulted by Dr. Kappelman made the same diagnosis.

    Dr. Kappelman and his colleagues decided to inspect all of Lucy’s bones for fractures that might have been caused by a fall. In addition to studying the virtual models, Dr. Kappelman also examined the original fossils in Ethiopia.
    continued at link
  • Novaheart
    Guardian of civilization
    • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
    • 6070

    #2
    Originally posted by Lady Marva View Post
    Or did her bones get broken from the weight of sand on her................ interesting.

    continued at link
    Of course she did
    The year's at the spring
    And day's at the morn;
    Morning's at seven;
    The hill-side's dew-pearled;
    The lark's on the wing;
    The snail's on the thorn:
    God's in his heaven—
    All's right with the world!

    Comment

    • Gingersnap
      Resident stylistic consultant
      • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
      • 24058

      #3
      Mr. Snaps watches ID TV. I'm guessing she was pushed.

      And hard.
      "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

      Comment

      • Celeste Chalfonte
        apostate
        • Saturday, October 5, 2013
        • 27897

        #4
        If the bones were of a newly dead person, autopsy could tell if they were pre-, peri- or post-mortem. In bones this old, it seems like mostly guesswork.
        "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

        Comment

        • phillygirl
          Not superior, just kind
          • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
          • 19840

          #5
          Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
          If the bones were of a newly dead person, autopsy could tell if they were pre-, peri- or post-mortem. In bones this old, it seems like mostly guesswork.
          But...SCIENCE!
          Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
          Robert Southwell, S.J.

          Comment

          • Celeste Chalfonte
            apostate
            • Saturday, October 5, 2013
            • 27897

            #6
            Originally posted by phillygirl View Post
            But...SCIENCE!
            Puhleese, Louise. Planning to take in the Ark Encounter for your next vacation?

            Some things are scientifically discoverable, even millenia after they occur. Those dependent, for example, on being able to determine if there is bruising or bleeding present are not, because blood degrades and then essentially disappears long before bone does.

            When the skeleton of a long-ago murder victim is found, it can often be conclusively determined not only that the person was murdered, but what instrument was used, because of knife marks on bone, or the size and marking on a fracture in a skull bone, etc.

            To determine whether an injury was sustained before, during or after death, even in a much more recent case, there must generally be some tissue other than bone remaining. And once the marrow rots away, as I understand it, there is essentially nothing on which to base that determination.

            So yes, science. But sometimes science can be more precise than other times.
            "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

            Comment

            • Frostbit
              But only once
              • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
              • 22330

              #7
              Scientific "guessing" to the Nth degree...

              If it pays, it stays

              Comment

              • Gingersnap
                Resident stylistic consultant
                • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                • 24058

                #8
                The Mesa Verde museum has or had several examples of Indians killed by violence by other Indians. The remains much predate any colonists or settlers by hundreds of years. In fact, the groups were dispersed or extinct long before outsiders even set foot in the area.

                Never rule out mayhem.
                "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

                Comment

                • phillygirl
                  Not superior, just kind
                  • Wednesday, October 2, 2013
                  • 19840

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
                  Puhleese, Louise. Planning to take in the Ark Encounter for your next vacation?

                  Some things are scientifically discoverable, even millenia after they occur. Those dependent, for example, on being able to determine if there is bruising or bleeding present are not, because blood degrades and then essentially disappears long before bone does.

                  When the skeleton of a long-ago murder victim is found, it can often be conclusively determined not only that the person was murdered, but what instrument was used, because of knife marks on bone, or the size and marking on a fracture in a skull bone, etc.

                  To determine whether an injury was sustained before, during or after death, even in a much more recent case, there must generally be some tissue other than bone remaining. And once the marrow rots away, as I understand it, there is essentially nothing on which to base that determination.

                  So yes, science. But sometimes science can be more precise than other times.
                  And that precision can be a little or a lot. My point has always been that we discover new things through "science" all the time. Things that people at one time thought was "incontrovertible" and "settled" one day is laughable another day. Sure, it sometimes takes a whole lot of days in between for these new discoveries. But it happens. One day leeching is in. Then it's out. Then it's in again. Those that are haughty about science are the ones that bother me the most. I am always open to science, but also open to the possibility that science is wrong. Is the earth round? Of course it is. But is it spherical? Science is a growth industry.
                  Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
                  Robert Southwell, S.J.

                  Comment

                  • Gingersnap
                    Resident stylistic consultant
                    • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                    • 24058

                    #10
                    I always laugh when people make a soft science claim. Even the hard stuff is really just more robust for the moment.

                    Sure, we think the periodic table of elements makes sense (and it does) for now. Who knows what people will discover in 300 years? What looks like a logical sequence might just be a casual relationship that is later disproved by better analysis. Who knows?

                    The rudimentary stuff we know about math and physics is probably just that - rudimentary. It serves for day-to-day uses but the principles and concepts may be far different. Ditto for much of chemistry, biology, or radiology. It certainly is true for anything softer.

                    Economics, psychology, sociology, political science, etc. We've had those as guiding lights for almost 150 years in one form or another and all important principles in those fields have been disproved, rejected, or reformatted many times.

                    Every era believed that they were at the pinnacle of knowledge for their time and place. Obviously not. We aren't edging closer to fundamental understanding, we're just doing better tech. Tech isn't understanding.

                    Tech is just tech.
                    "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

                    Comment

                    • Novaheart
                      Guardian of civilization
                      • Tuesday, October 1, 2013
                      • 6070

                      #11
                      If you are of the impression that there are many intermediate ancestors to man, take notice of the following statement by an expert in the field: “The fossils that decorate our family tree are so scarce that there are still more scientists than specimens. The remarkable fact is that all the physical evidence we have for human evolution can still be placed with room to spare inside a single coffin.
                      The year's at the spring
                      And day's at the morn;
                      Morning's at seven;
                      The hill-side's dew-pearled;
                      The lark's on the wing;
                      The snail's on the thorn:
                      God's in his heaven—
                      All's right with the world!

                      Comment

                      • Celeste Chalfonte
                        apostate
                        • Saturday, October 5, 2013
                        • 27897

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
                        The Mesa Verde museum has or had several examples of Indians killed by violence by other Indians. The remains much predate any colonists or settlers by hundreds of years. In fact, the groups were dispersed or extinct long before outsiders even set foot in the area.

                        Never rule out mayhem.
                        Didn't they find a murder victim preserved in the peat bogs of Ireland not too long ago?
                        "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

                        Comment

                        • Newman
                          Behind the Iron Curtain
                          • Friday, November 1, 2013
                          • 25814

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
                          Didn't they find a murder victim preserved in the peat bogs of Ireland not too long ago?
                          Are you thinking of the "Tollund Man"? I read a fascinating book about him a few years ago. He was thought to be a murder victim, but a sacrifice is more accurate, according to the surmising, which I s'pose is a good word for educated guessing.

                          The Tollund Man is over two thousand years old, and extremely well preserved. There are other "bog bodies" around, too.
                          • "I'm a hell of a lot smarter than most of you guys." — Joe Biden, at Jesse Jackson's funeral, March 2026.​
                          • "That's all I do in my life. I make deals. I'm really good at it." — President Donald Trump, Oct. 13, 2025.
                          • “Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out,” — David Horowitz.
                          • "We [Democrats] are all willing to work with anyone who is serious about doing the work of censoring the American people, and advancing progress."​ — Ayanna Pressley, explaining progressives.
                          • ​​"Florida is where Woke goes to die." — Ron DeSantis.
                          • "No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence." — Nancy Pelosi, explaining Lawfare.
                          • “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”​— Ben Franklin, who got it right.
                          • "The way I see it, there's always, c'mon, there's always money. It's there." — Elizabeth Warren, explaining socialism.
                          • "The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn't originally a climate thing at all.... We really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing." — Saikat Chakrabarti, then AOC's Chief of Staff.

                          Comment

                          • Lady Marva
                            Senior Member
                            • Wednesday, June 17, 2015
                            • 13321

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
                            I'm guessing she was pushed.

                            And hard.
                            By a monkey! LOLOLOL, love the theory.

                            Comment

                            • 80zephyr
                              Senior Member
                              • Saturday, January 3, 2015
                              • 19074

                              #15
                              Originally posted by phillygirl View Post
                              And that precision can be a little or a lot. My point has always been that we discover new things through "science" all the time. Things that people at one time thought was "incontrovertible" and "settled" one day is laughable another day. Sure, it sometimes takes a whole lot of days in between for these new discoveries. But it happens. One day leeching is in. Then it's out. Then it's in again. Those that are haughty about science are the ones that bother me the most. I am always open to science, but also open to the possibility that science is wrong. Is the earth round? Of course it is. But is it spherical? Science is a growth industry.
                              I have a background in building engineering. In that discipline, we know strength of materials, etc. to a very great degree. You would think it a "cut and dried" system. After the towers collapsed on 9/11, I watched a forum discussion between experts in the field where half of them claimed that the buildings would not fall straight down, and the other half said they would.

                              The things that people don't know is astounding.

                              Mark
                              Race Card: A tool of the intellectually weak and lazy when they cannot counter a logical argument or factual data.

                              "Liberals have to stop insisting that the world is what they want it to be instead of the way it is." - Bill Maher

                              Political correctness is ideological fascism. It’s the antithesis of freedom. Dr. Piper

                              Gender is not a "Social Construct", it is an outgrowth of biological reality.

                              Comment

                              Working...