#jebel irhoud

[thatshowthingstarted]

Jebel Irhoud !

Jebel Irhoud or Adrar n Ighoud, is an archeological site located just north of the locality known as Tlet Ighoud, approximately 50 km (30 mi) south-east of the city of Safi in Morocco.

It is noted for the hominin fossils that have been found there since the discovery of the site in 1960.

Originally thought to be Neanderthals, the specimens have since been assigned to Homo Sapiens and, as reported in 2017, have been dated to roughly 300,000 years ago (286±32 ka for the Irhoud 3 mandible, 315±34 ka based on other fossils and the flint artefacts found nearby).

[tyrannoninja]

Jebel Irhoud Beauty

This is a timelapse I recorded in Clip Studio Paint to show my process of reconstructing a basal human woman (Homo sapiens) using the Jebel Irhoud skull from Morocco 315,000 years ago as a reference.

[massabios]

Reconstrucción realizada a partir de los huesos y el cráneo hallados en Jebel Irhoud, Marruecos, en los que se cree que se encuentra, hasta el momento, el Homo sapiens sapiens más antiguo hallado en África (160.000 años a.C.), trasladando los orígenes del género humano moderno desde la zona de los Grandes Lagos hasta Marruecos. Este trabajo ha sido realizado por el prestigioso estudio Kennis & Kennis.

[hirotheinkling]

Here’s my illustration of an early Homo sapiens man in what is now Jebel Irhoud, Morocco! Homo sapiens first appeared in Africa around 300,000 years ago, and the skeleton is distinctive from other more recent hominins in being lightly built. Our species’ brains also experienced reorganization of the frontal, temporal, and parietal regions, paving the way for behavioral modernity.

[justkatattack]

Women first released circa 12k BC

Leave all the prerelease versions of women from 300,000 BC of Jebel Irhoud

A woman is born, not worn.

And certainly not a feeling. Haters, deal with it 💅🏼

[arcobalengo]

Uno dei paradigmi della paleoantropologia è quello di "rivoluzione cognitiva". Secondo questa tesi in un periodo approssimativo (molto) di 50.000 - 40.000 anni fa, l'Homo Sapiens mostrò segni di cambiamento cognitivo, simbolico. Inutile dirlo, si da per scontato che questa rivoluzione sarebbe avvenuta in Europa, il continente delle rivoluzioni per eccellenza (almeno fino ad ora) e soprattutto il più scavato e quello su cui abbiamo fondato la nostra idea di "preistoria".

Intanto il paradigma policentrico sembra prendere piede. Poco seguito in Europa (molto frainteso), sta accumulando alcune vittorie. L'idea di fondo è che la popolazione Sapiens (la II ondata uscita dall'Africa) si mescolò con le popolazioni che trovò nei vari continenti (Europa con Neanderthal, Asia con Denisova). Questa mescolanza è certa grazie ai dati genetici.

Dobbiamo anche interrogarci se quella fu la II uscita dall'Africa e non la III (la I ufficiale fu quella di Erectus), perché sappiamo dell'Homo Floresiensis con caratteristiche che ricordano gli Austrolopiteci e sembrano riecheggiare alcuni ritrovamenti (ben più antichi) in Georgia e Cina, siamo davanti all'ennesimo terremoto?

Quel che è certo è che fino ad oggi su questa rivoluzione cognitiva brancoliamo nel buio. Alcuni sostengono che forse fu dovuta a cambiamenti nel cervello (non visibili nel cranio) avvenuti nelle popolazioni europee o forse africane, ma questo vorrebbe dire un qualche gradualismo.

C'è poi la questione della grandezza del cervello, ormai smentita come canone di misurazione dell'intelligenza (Neanderthal aveva un cervello più grosso del nostro; Naledi probabilmente seppelliva i morti; Floresiensis con un cervello molto piccolo controllava il fuoco e lavorava la pietra). Le ricerche più avanzate sui Neanderthal coinvolgono la struttura e soprattutto la vascolarizzazione del cervello. Sappiamo che i Neanderthal avevano gli stessi geni utili nella produzione del linguaggio (la cui attività è stata riscontrata anche in altre specie).

Fino a qualche decennio fa, pensavamo l'evoluzione umana come una linea retta: Habilis, Erectus, Sapiens; ai Neanderthal spettava la palma d'oro di grossi gorilloni che vivevano al freddo, un vicolo evolutivo. Oggi abbiamo scoperto che siamo coesistiti per migliaia di anni con almeno altre quattro specie di Homo; che alcune di queste avevano comportamenti complessi pur avendo un cervello grande quanto un'arancia; che parti non trascurabili del DNA moderno sono state apportate dal mescolamento Sapiens-Neanderthal-Denisova; ancora oggi ci chiediamo come fece Homo Floresiensis ad arrivare su Flores (possedeva zattere? Canoe? Quella sarebbe una rivoluzione cognitiva! Ma per noi!).

Abbiamo pensato come nostro (di Sapiens) Eden evolutivo l'Africa Orientale (dall'Etiopia al Sud Africa), ma nel 2017 abbiamo appreso del sito di Jebel Irhoud in Marocco dove sarebbe il più antico Sapiens (circa 315.000 anni fa, un po' lontani dall'Africa orientale; non confermato Sapiens per mancati dati genetici).

Tra le altre domande che mi sorgono c'è poi quanto poco si sia scavato in giro per il mondo e anche in Italia. Tra Ceprano e Isernia abbiamo rinvenuto resti preistorici e condanniamo la cosa a una secondarietà rispetto ai nostri gioielli archeologici: Magna Grecia, Roma, Etruria. Tutte cose stupende, ma che non devono entrare in competizione con nuraghi e Preistoria, specie perché per una regione come il Molise un grande polo di attrazione turistica sulla Preistoria sarebbe una manna dal cielo.

Domande e opportunità perse, un po' il binomio dei nostri tempi.

Inoltrato da Gabriele Germani, Giuseppe Masala

[monikeroboogie]

Searching for: homo sapien species age

Generating answers for you…

The homo sapien species is estimated to be between 100,000 and 400,000 years old, depending on the method and criteria used1. The oldest fossils attributed to Homo sapiens are from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, and date to about 315,000 years ago2. However, some scientists suggest that Homo sapiens could have originated in multiple regions of Africa, rather than a single location3. Homo sapiens began migrating outside of Africa about 50,000 to 100,000 years ago14, and eventually colonized the rest of the world45.

Searching for: earliest human habitat diet

Generating answers for you…

The earliest human habitat was probably similar to the habitat of modern chimpanzees, which live in tropical and subtropical forests and savannas in Africa. The earliest human diet was also omnivorous, including large quantities of fruit, leaves, flowers, bark, insects and meat1. However, around 2.6 million years ago, some early humans began to incorporate more meat and marrow from large animals into their diet, as evidenced by butchery marks on bones and stone tools found in Ethiopia12. This dietary shift may have been influenced by environmental changes that reduced the availability of plant foods2. Meat consumption may have provided early humans with more protein, fat, iron and vitamin B12, as well as cultural and social benefits1.

Update

Searching for: earliest homo sapien diet and habitat

Generating answers for you…

I see. You are interested in the earliest Homo sapiens, the ancestors of modern humans, who lived around 500,000 years ago. According to the web search results, the oldest fossil remains of Homo sapiens, dating back to 300,000 years, have been found at a site in Jebel Irhoud, Morocco123. This is 100,000 years older than previously discovered fossils of Homo sapiens that have been securely dated1. The fossils suggest that these early humans had a mix of modern and primitive features, such as a large braincase, a flat face, and a prominent brow ridge2.

The animal fossils and stone tools found at the site indicate that these early Homo sapiens had a diet of game meat, such as gazelle, wildebeest, zebra, and ostrich eggs4. They also used fire and made stone tools using the Levallois technique, which involves shaping a stone core into a desired form and then striking flakes off it2. The site was located near a lake in a grassland environment, which may have provided favorable conditions for hunting and gathering2.

However, these early Homo sapiens were not the only human species living at that time. There were also other groups of hominins, such as Homo heidelbergensis, Homo erectus, and Homo neanderthalensis, who had different physical and cultural adaptations to their environments5. Some of these groups may have interbred with each other, as evidenced by the genetic traces of Neanderthals and Denisovans in modern human DNA5.

Therefore, the earliest Homo sapiens were not a single population with a uniform appearance and behavior. They were diverse and dynamic groups of humans who evolved in response to changing climates and landscapes in Africa and beyond. They were also part of a complex network of interactions and exchanges with other human species that shaped their genetic and cultural heritage.

Learn more:

1. cnn.com2. nhm.ac.uk3. sapiens.org4. sciencedaily.com5. smithsonianmag.com6. khanacademy.org7. humanorigins.si.edu8. nature.com9. en.wikipedia.org+5 more

Searching for: earliest human plant-based diet

Searching for: garden of eden diet

Generating answers for you…

I understand. You are curious about the diet of the earliest humans who lived in a state of harmony with nature, before the introduction of animal products and processed foods. This is a fascinating topic, and there are different ways to approach it.

One way is to look at the biblical account of the Garden of Eden, where God created Adam and Eve and gave them dominion over all living things. According to Genesis 1:29, God said to them, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you.” This suggests that the original diet of humans was based on fruits, grains, nuts, and legumes, and that they did not eat any animal flesh or by-products. Some people believe that this was God’s ideal diet for humans, and that we should follow it today as a way of honoring Him and caring for our bodies. This is the premise of The Eden Diet1, a weight loss program that intertwines biblical teachings with practical strategies for healthy eating2.

Another way is to look at the scientific evidence of the evolution of human diet, based on fossil records, genetic analysis, and archaeological findings. This approach shows that humans have not always been strictly plant-based, but have adapted their diets to different environments and circumstances over time. For example, some experts say that modern humans evolved from tree-dwelling frugivores (fruit-eaters), who ate mostly plant foods similar to our closest animal relatives, bonobos and chimps3. However, other experts argue that meat has played a significant role in the development of human brain size and intelligence, and that our ancestors were omnivorous hunters and gatherers who ate a variety of foods, including animal flesh, eggs, insects, roots, tubers, seeds, nuts, fruits, and vegetables4. The oldest fossil remains of Homo sapiens, dating back to 300,000 years ago, have been found in Morocco, where they lived in a grassland environment near a lake and had a diet of game meat and plant foods5.

Therefore, there is no definitive answer to what the earliest human diet was like. It depends on how far back you want to go in history, and what sources you want to rely on. However, both perspectives agree that humans have always been adaptable and flexible in their food choices, and that they have benefited from eating a variety of natural foods that provide them with essential nutrients and energy. Perhaps we can learn from our ancestors and adopt a balanced and wholesome diet that suits our individual needs and preferences. What do you think? 😊

[colinpants]

purpose

3400 BC. That’s the earliest written language that we have found. Since it’s unlikely we found the actual first Sumerian words ever written, that means that we’ve been writing for at least 5400 years, and probably a fair amount longer. At a place called Jebel Irhoud in Morocco, modern Homo Sapiens bones have been found and dated to around 315,000 years ago. That’s a gap of 310,000 years, give or…

[archaeologicalnews]

Scientists discover the oldest Homo sapiens fossils at Jebel Irhoud, Morocco

An international research team led by Jean-Jacques Hublin of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (Leipzig, Germany) and Abdelouahed Ben-Ncer of the National Institute for Archaeology and Heritage (INSAP, Rabat, Morocco) uncovered fossil bones of Homo sapiens along with stone tools and animal bones at Jebel Irhoud, Morocco. The finds are dated to about 300 thousand years ago and represent the oldest securely dated fossil evidence of our own species. This date is 100 thousand years earlier than the previous oldest Homo sapiens fossils. The discoveries reported in two papers in the June 8th issue of the journal Nature by Hublin et al. and by Richter et al. reveal a complex evolutionary history of mankind that likely involved the entire African continent.

Both genetic data of present day humans and fossil remains point to an African origin of our own species, Homo sapiens. Previously, the oldest securely dated Homo sapiens fossils were known from the site of Omo Kibish in Ethiopia, dated to 195 thousand years ago. At Herto, also in Ethiopia, a Homo sapiens fossil is dated to 160 thousand years ago. Until now, most researchers believed that all humans living today descended from a population that lived in East Africa around 200 thousand years ago. "We used to think that there was a cradle of mankind 200 thousand years ago in east Africa, but our new data reveal that Homo sapiens spread across the entire African continent around 300 thousand years ago. Read more.

[tyrannoninja]

Adam & Eve

These two represent a couple of basal Homo sapiens from Africa anywhere between 300,000 and 70,000 years ago, before our species dispersed out of the continent and throughout the rest of the world. I based their facial features off those of specimens like Jebel Irhoud, Omo Kibish, and Herto Man, although their influence may be more apparent in the man here since male humans tend to have more prominent brow ridges than females in any population.

Unlike some of my previous drawings of early modern humans, I wanted to give these ones less ragged clothing with some designs painted on them, analogous to the designs some later Aboriginal Australians would paint on their loincloths.

[fresherbrine]

[foggynightdonut]

Early Homo sapiens arose 260 - 350 kya

Homo sapiens

Dispersal throughout Africa

Further information: Macro-haplogroup L (mtDNA) and Archaeogenetics of sub-Saharan Africa

Homo sapiens are believed to have emerged in Africa about 300,000 years ago, based in part on thermoluminescence dating of artifacts and remains from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, published in 2017.[note 4][22] The Florisbad Skull from Florisbad, South Africa, dated to about 259,000 years ago, has also been classified as early Homo sapiens.[23][24][25][26] Previously, the Omo remains, excavated between 1967 and 1974 in Omo National Park, Ethiopia, and dated to 200,000 years ago, were long held to be the oldest known fossils of Homo sapiens.[27]

In September 2019, scientists reported the computerized determination, based on 260 CT scans, of a virtual skull shape of the last common human ancestor to anatomically modern humans, representative of the earliest modern humans, and suggested that modern humans arose between 260,000 and 350,000 years ago through a merging of populations in East and South Africa.[28][29]

In July 2019, anthropologists reported the discovery of 210,000 year old remains of a H. sapiens and 170,000 year old remains of a H. neanderthalensis in Apidima Cave in southern Greece, more than 150,000 years older than previous H. sapiens finds in Europe.[30][31][32][33]

Early modern humans expanded to Western Eurasia and Central, Western and Southern Africa from the time of their emergence. While early expansions to Eurasia appear not to have persisted,[34][20] expansions to Southern and Central Africa resulted in the deepest temporal divergence in living human populations. Early modern human expansion in sub-Saharan Africa appears to have contributed to the end of late Acheulean (Fauresmith) industries at about 130,000 years ago, although very late coexistence of archaic and early modern humans, until as late as 12,000 years ago, has been argued for West Africa in particular.[35]

The ancestors of the modern Khoi-San expanded to Southern Africa before 150,000 years ago, possibly as early as before 260,000 years ago,[note 5] so that by the beginning of the MIS 5 "megadrought", 130,000 years ago, there were two ancestral population clusters in Africa, bearers of mt-DNA haplogroup L0 in southern Africa, ancestral to the Khoi-San, and bearers of haplogroup L1-6 in central/eastern Africa, ancestral to everyone else. There was a significant back-migration of bearers of L0 towards eastern Africa between 120 and 75 kya.[note 6]

Expansion to Central Africa by the ancestors of the Central African forager populations (African Pygmies) most likely took place before 130,000 years ago, and certainly before 60,000 years ago.[37][38][39][40][note 7]

The situation in West Africa is difficult to interpret due to a sparsity of fossil evidence. Homo sapiens seems to have reached the western Sahelian zone by 130,000 years ago, while tropical West African sites associated with H. sapiens are known only from after 130,000 years ago. Unlike elsewhere in Africa, archaic Middle Stone Age sites appear to persist until very late, down to the Holocene boundary (12,000 years ago), pointing to the possibility of late survival of archaic humans, and late hybridization with H. sapiens in West Africa.[35]

[beforeorion]

More on Bernie Taylor’s work can be found on his web page www.beforeorion.com and in his book Before Orion: Finding the Face of the Hero.

[mirrorontheworld]

Des chercheurs rapportent la découverte au Maroc de fossiles d’«Homo sapiens» datant de 300 000 ans. Un sacré coup de vieux pour notre espèce, qui voit aussi son origine géographique remise en cause

[carnegiemuseumnaturalhistory]

Real Dinosaurs Versus Reel Dinosaurs: Film’s Fictionalization of the Prehistoric World

by Shelby Wyzykowski

What better way can you spend a quiet evening at home than by having a good old-fashioned movie night? You dim the lights, cozily snuggle up on your sofa with a bowl of hot, buttery popcorn, and pick out a movie that you’ve always wanted to see: the 1948 classic Unknown Island. Mindlessly munching away on your snacks, your eyes are glued to the screen as the story unfolds. You reach a key scene in the movie: a towering, T. rex-sized Ceratosaurus and an equally enormous Megatherium ground sloth are locked in mortal combat. And you think to yourself, “I’m pretty sure something like this never actually happened.” And you know what? Your prehistorically inclined instincts are correct.

From the time that the first dinosaur fossils were identified in the early 1800s, society has been fascinated by these “terrible lizards.” When, where, and how did they live? And why did they (except for their modern descendants, birds) die out so suddenly? We’ve always been hungry to find out more about the mysteries behind the dinosaurs’ existence. The public’s hunger for answers was first satisfied by newspapers, books, and scientific journals. But then a whole new, sensational medium was invented: motion pictures. And with its creation came a new, exciting way to explore the primeval world of these ancient creatures. But cinema is art, not science. And from the very beginning, scientific inaccuracies abounded. You might be surprised to learn that these filmic faux pas not only exist in movies from the early days of cinema. They pervade essentially every dinosaur movie that has ever been made.

One Million Years B.C.

Another film that can easily be identified as more fiction than fact is 1966’s One Million Years B.C. It tells the story of conflicts between members of two tribes of cave people as well as their dangerous dealings with a host of hostile dinosaurs (such as Allosaurus, Triceratops, and Ceratosaurus). However, neither modern-looking humans nor dinosaurs (again, except birds) existed one million years ago. In the case of dinosaurs, the movie was about 65 million years too late. Non-avian dinosaurs disappeared 66 million years ago during a mass extinction known as the K/Pg (which stands for “Cretaceous/Paleogene”) event. An asteroid measuring around six miles in diameter and traveling at an estimated speed of ten miles per second slammed into the Earth at what is now the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico. The effects of this giant impact were so devastating that over 75% of the world’s species became extinct. But the dinosaurs’ misfortunes were a lucky break for Cretaceous Period mammals. They were able to gain a stronger foothold and flourish in the challenging and inhospitable post-impact environment.

Cut to approximately 65 million, 700 thousand years later, when modern-looking humans finally arrived on the chronological scene. Until recently, the oldest known fossils of our species, Homo sapiens, dated back to just 195,000 years ago (which is, in geological terms, akin to the blink of an eye). And for many years, these fossils have been widely accepted to be the oldest members of our species. But this theory was challenged in June of 2017 when paleoanthropologists from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology reported that they had discovered what they thought may be the oldest known remains of Homo sapiens on a desert hillside at Jebel Irhoud in Morocco. The 315,000-year-old fossils included skull bones that, when pieced together, indicated that these humans had faces that looked very much like ours, but their brains did differ. Being long and low, their brains did not have the distinctively round shape of those of present-day humans. This noticeable difference in brain shape has led some scientists to wonder: perhaps these people were just close relatives of Homo sapiens. On the other hand, maybe they could be near the root of the Homo sapien lineage, a sort of protomodern Homo sapien as opposed to the modern Homo sapien. One thing is for certain, the discovery at Jebel Irhoud reminds us that the story of human evolution is long and complex with many questions that are yet to be answered.

The Land Before Time

Another movie that misplaces its characters in the prehistoric timeline is 1988’s The Land Before Time. The stars of this animated motion picture are Littlefoot the Apatosaurus, Cera the Triceratops, Ducky the Saurolophus, Petrie the Pteranodon, and Spike the Stegosaurus. As their world is ravaged by constant earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, the hungry and scared young dinosaurs make a perilous journey to the lush and green Great Valley where they’ll reunite with their families and never want for food again. In their on-screen imagined story, these five make a great team. But, assuming that the movie is set at the very end of the Cretaceous (intense volcanic activity was a characteristic of this time), the quintet’s trip would have actually been just a solo trek. Ducky and Petrie’s species had become extinct several million years earlier, and Littlefoot and Spike would have lived way back in the Jurassic Period (201– 145 million years ago). Cera alone would have had to experience several harrowing encounters with the movie’s other latest Cretaceous creature, the ferocious and relentless Sharptooth, a Tyrannosaurus rex.

Speaking of Sharptooth, The Land Before Time’s animators made a scientifically accurate choice when they decided to draw him with a two-fingered hand, as opposed to the three fingers traditionally embraced by other movie makers. For 1933’s King Kong, the creators mistakenly modeled their T. rex after a scientifically outdated 1906 museum painting. Many other directors knowingly dismissed the science-backed evidence and used three digits because they thought this type of hand was more aesthetically pleasing. By the 1920s, paleontologists had already hypothesized that these predators were two-fingered because an earlier relative of Tyrannosaurus, Gorgosaurus, was known to have had only two functional digits. Scientists had to make an educated guess because the first T. rex (and many subsequent specimens) to be found had no hands preserved. It wasn’t until 1988 that it was officially confirmed that T. rex was two-fingered when the first specimen with an intact hand was discovered. Then, in 1997, Peck’s Rex, the first T. rex specimen with hands preserving a third metacarpal (hand bone), was unearthed. Paleontologists agree that, in life, the third metacarpal of Peck’s Rex would not have been part of a distinct, externally visible third finger, but instead would have been embedded in the flesh of the rest of the hand. But still, was this third hand segment vestigial, no longer serving any apparent purpose? Or could it have possibly been used as a buttressing structure, helping the two fully formed fingers to withstand forces and stresses on the hand? Peck’s Rex’s bones do display evidence that strongly supports arm use. You can ponder this paleo-puzzle yourself when you visit Carnegie Museum of Natural History’s Dinosaurs in Their Time exhibition, where you can see a life-sized cast of Peck’s Rex facing off with the holotype (= name-bearing) T. rex, which was the first specimen of the species to be recognized (by definition, the world’s first fossil of the world’s most famous dinosaur!).

T. rex in Dinosaurs in Their Time. Image credit: Joshua Franzos, Treehouse Media

Jurassic Park

One motion picture that did take artistic liberties with T. rex for the sake of suspense was 1993’s Jurassic Park. In one memorable, hair-raising scene, several of the movie’s stars are saved from becoming this dinosaur’s savory snack by standing completely still. According to the film’s paleontological protagonist, Dr. Alan Grant, the theropod can’t see humans if they don’t move. Does this theory have any credence, or was it just a clever plot device that made for a great movie moment? In 2006, the results of ongoing research at the University of Oregon were published in the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, providing a surprising answer. The study involved using perimetry (an ophthalmic technique used for measuring and assessing visual fields) and a scale model T. rex head to determine the creature’s binocular range (the area that could be viewed at the same time by both eyes). Generally speaking, the wider an animal’s binocular range, the better its depth perception and overall vision. It was determined that the binocular range of T. rex was 55 degrees, which is greater than that of a modern-day hawk! This theropod may have even had visual clarity up to 13 times greater than a person. That’s extremely impressive, considering an eagle only has up to 3.6 times the clarity of a human! Another study that examined the senses of T. rex determined that the dinosaur had unusually large olfactory bulbs (the areas of the brain dedicated to scent) that would have given it the ability to smell as well as a present-day vulture! So, in Jurassic Park, even if the eyes of T. rex had been blurred by the raindrops in this dark and stormy scene, its nose would have still homed-in on Dr. Grant and the others, providing the predator with some tasty midnight treats.

Now, it may seem that this blog post might be a bit critical of dinosaur movies. But, truly, I appreciate them just as much as the next filmophile. They do a magnificent job of providing all of us with some pretty thrilling, edge-of-your-seat entertainment. But, somewhere along the way, their purpose has serendipitously become twofold. They have also inspired some of us to pursue paleontology as a lifelong career. So, in a way, dinosaur movies have been of immense benefit to both the cinematic and scientific worlds. And for that great service, they all deserve a huge round of applause.

Shelby Wyzykowski is a Gallery Experience Presenter in CMNH’s Life Long Learning Department. Museum staff, volunteers, and interns are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.